|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 1:03:45 GMT -5
If it appears, then it has to be created, yes? otherwise where does it come from? Why does it have to be created? Who do you think is the creator?That's what he's been asking you for a while now. He clearly thinks it is Awareness. Your first question has some merit. When creation and perception are the same, creation does not precede perception. The step of creation, along with any associated creator entities, goes away. There is just the appearance appearing.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 1:18:46 GMT -5
I am pointing towards the meaning behind the word consciousness. Everybody does that. Language is the way which is used for communication, every word has the meaning, I am saying I am consciousness because I know what people mean by consciousness.
Or are you asking me how do I know I am consciousness?
I don't want pointers . You said you realized you were consciousness and then you say it's a pointer . I don't say that what you are IS consciousness or awareness, so not everyone has to point in the way that you do . I would say what I am is consciously aware ..So basically you have said you are consciousness and all there is is consciousness, but there is this 'awareness' floating about. So is awareness consciousness then? I want to know what you realized that is beyond a pointer. You could easily be referring to a person (or perhaps you are?) When you say 'there is only what I am', maybe you mean there is only Tenka? Or perhaps you're pointing to something else?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 1:41:38 GMT -5
I would say the same too! But for me, Looking is creating the looker! Not other way around. But it's tricky concept for you ! Can you answer me this?'Awareness consciousness' is a phrase you made up. Nobody can tell you what it means.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 1:51:48 GMT -5
So consciousness is aware? Yes. perfectly, It is always having something in it's focus. (C)onsciousness isn't an entity. (It's not aware)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 2:02:10 GMT -5
Everything is consciousness and consciousness is aware . Even if a tree appears in consciousness then the appearance is aware .. You have already agreed that the appearance of your daughter only came about because you did the sexy dance with your wife . What makes your appearance in consciousness potentially different from mine when all there is, aware consciousness? Appearance is not aware, Consciousness is aware. Since my daughter is appearing in my consciousness, I can't know whether she has any real view point like mine. Are you equating Consciousness to 'my consciousness'? If so, what egzakly do you mean by 'my consciousness'?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 2:04:34 GMT -5
What did you realize to be real? I exist and I am the view point of awareness. Points of perception don't independently exist. You are the one who forms the point of perception. Nothing else exists.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 3, 2019 2:11:27 GMT -5
Everything is consciousness . Everything is aware that is what you said . Now your saying not everything is aware but everything is consciousness and what we are . You are an appearance in consciousness are you not, so you are not aware? I did not say everything is consciousness, I said consciousness is aware. Where did I say everything is consciousness?
I am not an appearance in consciousness, appearances are appearing in consciousness.
You should say it then and quickly!
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 2:56:16 GMT -5
There is only what you are implies only that . Your adding unnecessary layers . Just think about it .. There is only what you are .. It doesn't matter if you point to the creator, the moon or the pink elephant, there is only what you are .. You can come up with as many theories as there are species living on this planet, it doesn't change a thing about the initial statement. That's what I'm trying to point out to you. In what way do you think you are the moon? Your doing eggsactly what Gopal did via a suggestive remark / question in that 'I AM the brain' . He is personalising everything 'that is' which includes the non personal and then changing context by associating it to something that is. Everything is consciousness is what has been suggested by you and a few other's, so it's not difficult to understand that the moon is what you are .. Don't go changing context and you will be fine .. Where have I said that I AM the moon? I have said everything is what you are .. For some reason the last time you played around with my theory you and other's made out that an individual that acted stupid mean't everyone is stupid .. You need to just sit and ponder on what I mean by there is only what you are .. I have actually gone into depths with this many times, but it's just not sinking in ..
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:09:05 GMT -5
I don't have any problems with trees growing by their own creational accord without the need of being created via my perception . I don't have a problem with trees that existed before my physical birth . A tree can appear because a seed finds it's way deep within the soil and eventually takes root and sprouts above ground level . It has got now't to do with my perception capabilities but it has got everything to do with what we all are . Your world is one of natural laws and stuff and time and space. And yet you say that is all what you are. I'm just scrutinizing your ideas to see if they hold up, so please explain. Again you are mixing concepts up. You speak about 'my' world and then speak about natural laws and time and space . From a personal perspective they are not my laws nor am I the creator of time and space .. Sort out your contexts and then see if my theory holds up .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:14:17 GMT -5
Intelligence would therefore be the entity that embodies the physical experience .. We can't just say there is 'intelligence' and no entity, when 'intelligence' as a given example would be what you are .. Intelligence that can do what eggsactly? Make tea, have babies? feel happy and sad and perceive the moon? Sounds like an entity of sorts .. It's not an entity in it's own right. It does not have it's own existence. Otherwise, there would be what you are, and also entities that exist apart from what you are. I say your theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Firstly you made up something about something that isn't something and then speak about it in ways where you know of it .. What aspect of my theory doesn't add up in reflection of your knowings here that have no foundation? It's like you have made up a theory and then used it against my theory in a way to make your made up theory correct lol . I haven't said that what we are is intelligence, awareness, or consciousness .. I have said that what we are is intelligent, conscious and aware .. I hope you can see the difference .. In this respect, I can say what we are is all there is .. This includes the moon the elephant and the ocean ... it includes the personal and the non personal, form and no form .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:21:18 GMT -5
What is confused? Something that is not what you are? Do you believe that there is only what you are? And if there is only what you are how can there be confusion and clarity at the same time?And yet there is confusion and clarity in the world. How does your model explain that? Each individual can entertain an array of thoughts and emotions for there isn't just one set thought or emotion lol . This is why you can have Self realized peeps and unrealized peeps, happy and sad peeps . In Gopal's instance, he is supposedly clear as a bell but has these ridiculous quandaries . It doesn't add up to be both as clear as a bell and yet so ignorant and confused at the same time .. Do you want to have another go at trying to bring my model down?
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:25:58 GMT -5
By your own theory you can't know that hehehe .. You can't know anything about 'another' right? The point of perception is not an entity. (it's a point of perception) Whatever Gopal refers himself to being, can't know what he refers to as another as being . This is his foundation . Forget about points of perception and what constitutes an entity just stick to his foundation .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:30:28 GMT -5
How did you know what you know? Did the word consciousness come to you directly somehow .. How do you know that you are consciousness? If you had never heard of the word before are you saying you would still of had a realization of the word consciousness given to you in someway? I have realized what I AM so to speak and not once was there the mention or the thought that I AM consciousness .So I am dying to hear about your consciousness realization. Did the phrase 'I AM' come to you? If so, how? I have a reference for I AM of this world . Beyond the thought of I AM there is no thought of I AM .. So obviously no, I didn't have a phrase of I AM beyond mind .. I had to state I AM in my reply to Gopal because otherwise it would make no sense to whom or what as an individual has transcended mind .. i have to talk in the present tense, in I AM awareness . I can say I AM without any problem at all . The problems arise, when peeps say they have realized what they are as being consciousness .. as we all have witnessed here on the forums .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:42:26 GMT -5
I don't want pointers . You said you realized you were consciousness and then you say it's a pointer . I don't say that what you are IS consciousness or awareness, so not everyone has to point in the way that you do . I would say what I am is consciously aware ..So basically you have said you are consciousness and all there is is consciousness, but there is this 'awareness' floating about. So is awareness consciousness then? I want to know what you realized that is beyond a pointer. You could easily be referring to a person (or perhaps you are?) When you say 'there is only what I am', maybe you mean there is only Tenka? Or perhaps you're pointing to something else? What I am is experiencing life as a human being . What that entails has personal traits and characteristics and one cannot separate what we are from them or anything . If peeps want to destroy the thought of a there being a self or a person by replacing that thought with there is only consciousness, then as said before, all one is doing is personalising consciousness .. it's silly to do so .. The same goes for awareness .. one sticks two fingers up at the person and then personalises awareness .. You can sit here for a while trying to pick and separate the meat from the bone in order to try and find something that doesn't add up with what I have said, but please, stick to what I have said .. What we are 'as all there is' encompasses the experience of a personal touch without being separate from all there is and without there being the need for there being a personal experience that reflects that as being the sole creator of time and space and natural laws .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 3, 2019 3:57:36 GMT -5
'Awareness consciousness' is a phrase you made up. Nobody can tell you what it means. I asked Gopal the question ''So is awareness consciousness then" because he used both world references . So I asked Gopal what he mean't by what he said . Is that okay with you or do I need the Matron's permission?
|
|