Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2019 11:44:20 GMT -5
Exactly. And we are there in that movement. Or, that movement is within what YOU are... What you are is not a kind of container as you think. You are the perceiver, but the nature of the perceiver is often mistook because of the careless investigation. Bit of Deeper look would reveal the truth behind the perceiver. When we assume or imagine what perceiver is, we usually put the perceiver like a person who is looking at the object, usually this kind of notion comes from the idea of how perceiver would look at an object in an outer world. Now some body here started to question the validity of outer world, so they go one more level deeper as to there is no outer world and everything is appearing to this perceiver, now once again, we are falling into the same illusionary of perceiver is "looking" at the appearance, this time it's not an objective outer world object but an appearance. But we need a bit of closer look now. Perceiver is not looking at the appearance, because perceiver is KNOWING the movement of appearance within himself which means the movement of appearance is inseparable from himself because this KNOWING IS happening within himself. So there is no looking is happening here, but simply speculated. No looking, We are just consicous of "something" and that's happening within awareness(Perceiver).
Now, Question goes to deeper than we ever imagine. Okay, so this knowing or realizing the movement of appearance is happening withing the awareness and now we know this knowing is inseparable from the awareness. But the question now is, how does this awareness knows? How does this knowing happens? In what way? If we assume there is something called awareness and to which knowing is happening, then we are placing awareness as static entity. But where does such a static entity exist when awareness is part and parcel of that movement itself? So there is no such static entity called awareness exist, there is no one is there to know, there is simply knowing, there is no one is there to see, there is simply seeing, that point of perception we can take that later as someone or something but there is no such existence of such an entity behind the scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 25, 2019 12:42:47 GMT -5
Or, that movement is within what YOU are... What you are is not a kind of container as you think. You are the perceiver, but the nature of the perceiver is often mistook because of the careless investigation. Bit of Deeper look would reveal the truth behind the perceiver. When we assume or imagine what perceiver is, we usually put the perceiver like a person who is looking at the object, usually this kind of notion comes from the idea of how perceiver would look at an object in an outer world. Now some body here started to question the validity of outer world, so they go one more level deeper as to there is no outer world and everything is appearing to this perceiver, now once again, we are falling into the same illusionary of perceiver is "looking" at the appearance, this time it's not an objective outer world object but an appearance. But we need a bit of closer look now. Perceiver is not looking at the appearance, because perceiver is KNOWING the movement of appearance within himself which means the movement of appearance is inseparable from himself because this KNOWING IS happening within himself. So there is no looking is happening here, but simply speculated. No looking, We are just consicous of "something" and that's happening within awareness(Perceiver).
Now, Question goes to deeper than we ever imagine. Okay, so this knowing or realizing the movement of appearance is happening withing the awareness and now we know this knowing is inseparable from the awareness. But the question now is, how does this awareness knows? How does this knowing happens? In what way? If we assume there is something called awareness and to which knowing is happening, then we are placing awareness as static entity. But where does such a static entity exist when awareness is part and parcel of that movement itself? So there is no such static entity called awareness exist, there is no one is there to know, there is simply knowing, there is no one is there to see, there is simply seeing, that point of perception we can take that later as someone or something but there is no such existence of such an entity behind the scene.
That's pretty good, axchooly. (I also believe it's what SN was saying, as he's not big on containers.) |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Nov 25, 2019 18:01:58 GMT -5
Or, that movement is within what YOU are... What you are is not a kind of container as you think. You are the perceiver, but the nature of the perceiver is often mistook because of the careless investigation. Bit of Deeper look would reveal the truth behind the perceiver. When we assume or imagine what perceiver is, we usually put the perceiver like a person who is looking at the object, usually this kind of notion comes from the idea of how perceiver would look at an object in an outer world. Now some body here started to question the validity of outer world, so they go one more level deeper as to there is no outer world and everything is appearing to this perceiver, now once again, we are falling into the same illusionary of perceiver is "looking" at the appearance, this time it's not an objective outer world object but an appearance. But we need a bit of closer look now. Perceiver is not looking at the appearance, because perceiver is KNOWING the movement of appearance within himself which means the movement of appearance is inseparable from himself because this KNOWING IS happening within himself. So there is no looking is happening here, but simply speculated. No looking, We are just consicous of "something" and that's happening within awareness(Perceiver).
Now, Question goes to deeper than we ever imagine. Okay, so this knowing or realizing the movement of appearance is happening withing the awareness and now we know this knowing is inseparable from the awareness. But the question now is, how does this awareness knows? How does this knowing happens? In what way? If we assume there is something called awareness and to which knowing is happening, then we are placing awareness as static entity. But where does such a static entity exist when awareness is part and parcel of that movement itself? So there is no such static entity called awareness exist, there is no one is there to know, there is simply knowing, there is no one is there to see, there is simply seeing, that point of perception we can take that later as someone or something but there is no such existence of such an entity behind the scene.
I actually agree with most of what you have written, though no "container" was intended. The pointer was to YOU as Awareness, but yeah, I do like the idea of Consciousness being more thought of as a verb to deny the mind a toehold on some story-bound entity, as you've stated. No boundaries, no container, no self,,, until mind is touched for distinguishing what appears in/as Consciousness. Consider Consciousness as the movement within boundless Awareness. Anything created/perceived is Consciousness, including the very thoughts about such things. However, only Realization gives the taste of such a fruit that that menu of words goes on and on about. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 22:46:09 GMT -5
What you are is not a kind of container as you think. You are the perceiver, but the nature of the perceiver is often mistook because of the careless investigation. Bit of Deeper look would reveal the truth behind the perceiver. When we assume or imagine what perceiver is, we usually put the perceiver like a person who is looking at the object, usually this kind of notion comes from the idea of how perceiver would look at an object in an outer world. Now some body here started to question the validity of outer world, so they go one more level deeper as to there is no outer world and everything is appearing to this perceiver, now once again, we are falling into the same illusionary of perceiver is "looking" at the appearance, this time it's not an objective outer world object but an appearance. But we need a bit of closer look now. Perceiver is not looking at the appearance, because perceiver is KNOWING the movement of appearance within himself which means the movement of appearance is inseparable from himself because this KNOWING IS happening within himself. So there is no looking is happening here, but simply speculated. No looking, We are just consicous of "something" and that's happening within awareness(Perceiver).
Now, Question goes to deeper than we ever imagine. Okay, so this knowing or realizing the movement of appearance is happening withing the awareness and now we know this knowing is inseparable from the awareness. But the question now is, how does this awareness knows? How does this knowing happens? In what way? If we assume there is something called awareness and to which knowing is happening, then we are placing awareness as static entity. But where does such a static entity exist when awareness is part and parcel of that movement itself? So there is no such static entity called awareness exist, there is no one is there to know, there is simply knowing, there is no one is there to see, there is simply seeing, that point of perception we can take that later as someone or something but there is no such existence of such an entity behind the scene.
That's pretty good, axchooly. Thanks.
I don't think so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 22:47:41 GMT -5
What you are is not a kind of container as you think. You are the perceiver, but the nature of the perceiver is often mistook because of the careless investigation. Bit of Deeper look would reveal the truth behind the perceiver. When we assume or imagine what perceiver is, we usually put the perceiver like a person who is looking at the object, usually this kind of notion comes from the idea of how perceiver would look at an object in an outer world. Now some body here started to question the validity of outer world, so they go one more level deeper as to there is no outer world and everything is appearing to this perceiver, now once again, we are falling into the same illusionary of perceiver is "looking" at the appearance, this time it's not an objective outer world object but an appearance. But we need a bit of closer look now. Perceiver is not looking at the appearance, because perceiver is KNOWING the movement of appearance within himself which means the movement of appearance is inseparable from himself because this KNOWING IS happening within himself. So there is no looking is happening here, but simply speculated. No looking, We are just consicous of "something" and that's happening within awareness(Perceiver).
Now, Question goes to deeper than we ever imagine. Okay, so this knowing or realizing the movement of appearance is happening withing the awareness and now we know this knowing is inseparable from the awareness. But the question now is, how does this awareness knows? How does this knowing happens? In what way? If we assume there is something called awareness and to which knowing is happening, then we are placing awareness as static entity. But where does such a static entity exist when awareness is part and parcel of that movement itself? So there is no such static entity called awareness exist, there is no one is there to know, there is simply knowing, there is no one is there to see, there is simply seeing, that point of perception we can take that later as someone or something but there is no such existence of such an entity behind the scene.
I actually agree with most of what you have written, though no "container" was intended. The pointer was to YOU as Awareness, but yeah, I do like the idea of Consciousness being more thought of as a verb to deny the mind a toehold on some story-bound entity, as you've stated. No boundaries, no container, no self,,, until mind is touched for distinguishing what appears in/as Consciousness. Consider Consciousness as the movement within boundless Awareness. Anything created/perceived is Consciousness, including the very thoughts about such things. However, only Realization gives the taste of such a fruit that that menu of words goes on and on about. That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
|
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Nov 28, 2019 10:17:56 GMT -5
I actually agree with most of what you have written, though no "container" was intended. The pointer was to YOU as Awareness, but yeah, I do like the idea of Consciousness being more thought of as a verb to deny the mind a toehold on some story-bound entity, as you've stated. No boundaries, no container, no self,,, until mind is touched for distinguishing what appears in/as Consciousness. Consider Consciousness as the movement within boundless Awareness. Anything created/perceived is Consciousness, including the very thoughts about such things. However, only Realization gives the taste of such a fruit that that menu of words goes on and on about. That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
Right, Awareness is more like a pointer to "prior to mind". It is not to be considered and/or labeled as "something". The suffix "-ness" refers to a quality/state, whereas Awareness points to "somenothing" prior to quality/state. As such, Consciousness, in how I'd talk about it is the movement, which is prior to the movement of mind known as thought. Thoughts are conditioned, so it gets a little tricky and people tend to get it backasswards (slang) because they are conditioned to think a certain way, and then become sensitive to when that's pointed out. To touch emptiness (i.e., Awaken and/or at least begin to stir in one's dreaming sleep) will set in motion the movement of more consciously meeting the previous conditioned-based thoughts and discerning them from the more contemporarily forming thoughts. The fact that nothing is truly known, except that Existence Is, does throw a monkey wrench into the previously conditioned machinery of thought. That doesn't mean that one can't talk about other stuff, nor that one can't interact with forms as they come into consciousness, but there's much more of a "universal" sense about those movements in the dream. Oh, and feelings of amazement, awe, or woweezoweeness (slang) tend to arise more often than before, too, but they seemingly tend to arise at very ordinary moments and/or when adrift in enlightened thoughts. The feelings tended to arise more, at least in this story, when life became simpler and less clouded by certain trappings that called on the previously conditioned thought patterns to act. Anyway, the clarity of those moments might give rise to a desire to share or express an idea/pointer in some way, and it can be a beautiful thing. I'd dare to say that if one just sees the world as a personal story, such feelings can be more fleeting, if ever, and then they usually get translated into the conditioned self's finite sense of what those movements are. Some of the discussions that happen here on ST highlight a lot of the dynamics mentioned above. No biggie; it's just life in the dream. Big Love. Dream on. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 28, 2019 11:53:50 GMT -5
That's pretty good, axchooly. Thanks.
I don't think so.
Trust me, Some Nothing does not believe he is some Awareness thing. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 28, 2019 12:28:07 GMT -5
I actually agree with most of what you have written, though no "container" was intended. The pointer was to YOU as Awareness, but yeah, I do like the idea of Consciousness being more thought of as a verb to deny the mind a toehold on some story-bound entity, as you've stated. No boundaries, no container, no self,,, until mind is touched for distinguishing what appears in/as Consciousness. Consider Consciousness as the movement within boundless Awareness. Anything created/perceived is Consciousness, including the very thoughts about such things. However, only Realization gives the taste of such a fruit that that menu of words goes on and on about. That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
I assume you mean 'Consciousness isn't something that happens inside awareness'? Ultimately, Consciousness and Awareness are just conceptual categories used as pointers and fodder for conversation, but all of it collapses into the infamous little greasy spot, and calling it 'THIS' or '______' just starts up the lying all over again. There is no Consciousness or Awareness. Talking like there is is unavoidable, and if you think you've got the correct verbiage to describe that which cannot be described with verbiage, you're mistaken. That said, my preference is Intelligence. Perhaps it is less prone to objectification. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 12:40:38 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
I assume you mean 'Consciousness isn't something that happens inside awareness'? Ultimately, Consciousness and Awareness are just conceptual categories used as pointers and fodder for conversation, but all of it collapses into the infamous little greasy spot, and calling it 'THIS' or '______' just starts up the lying all over again. There is no Consciousness or Awareness. Talking like there is is unavoidable, and if you think you've got the correct verbiage to describe that which cannot be described with verbiage, you're mistaken. That said, my preference is Intelligence. Perhaps it is less prone to objectification. Silence, is also helpful to a mind that is prone to looking outwards. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 28, 2019 12:48:29 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
I assume you mean 'Consciousness isn't something that happens inside awareness'? Ultimately, Consciousness and Awareness are just conceptual categories used as pointers and fodder for conversation, but all of it collapses into the infamous little greasy spot, and calling it 'THIS' or '______' just starts up the lying all over again. There is no Consciousness or Awareness. Talking like there is is unavoidable, and if you think you've got the correct verbiage to describe that which cannot be described with verbiage, you're mistaken. That said, my preference is Intelligence. Perhaps it is less prone to objectification. That's also a category |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 22:34:28 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
Right, Awareness is more like a pointer to "prior to mind". It is not to be considered and/or labeled as "something". The suffix "-ness" refers to a quality/state, whereas Awareness points to "somenothing" prior to quality/state. As such, Consciousness, in how I'd talk about it is the movement, which is prior to the movement of mind known as thought. Thoughts are conditioned, so it gets a little tricky and people tend to get it backasswards (slang) because they are conditioned to think a certain way, and then become sensitive to when that's pointed out. Okay, that makes sense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 22:38:21 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
Right, Awareness is more like a pointer to "prior to mind". It is not to be considered and/or labeled as "something". The suffix "-ness" refers to a quality/state, whereas Awareness points to "somenothing" prior to quality/state. As such, Consciousness, in how I'd talk about it is the movement, which is prior to the movement of mind known as thought. Thoughts are conditioned, so it gets a little tricky and people tend to get it backasswards (slang) because they are conditioned to think a certain way, and then become sensitive to when that's pointed out. To touch emptiness (i.e., Awaken and/or at least begin to stir in one's dreaming sleep) will set in motion the movement of more consciously meeting the previous conditioned-based thoughts and discerning them from the more contemporarily forming thoughts. The fact that nothing is truly known, except that Existence Is, does throw a monkey wrench into the previously conditioned machinery of thought. That doesn't mean that one can't talk about other stuff, nor that one can't interact with forms as they come into consciousness, but there's much more of a "universal" sense about those movements in the dream. Oh, and feelings of amazement, awe, or woweezoweeness (slang) tend to arise more often than before, too, but they seemingly tend to arise at very ordinary moments and/or when adrift in enlightened thoughts. The feelings tended to arise more, at least in this story, when life became simpler and less clouded by certain trappings that called on the previously conditioned thought patterns to act. Anyway, the clarity of those moments might give rise to a desire to share or express an idea/pointer in some way, and it can be a beautiful thing. I'd dare to say that if one just sees the world as a personal story, such feelings can be more fleeting, if ever, and then they usually get translated into the conditioned self's finite sense of what those movements are. Some of the discussions that happen here on ST highlight a lot of the dynamics mentioned above. No biggie; it's just life in the dream. Big Love.
Dream on. From what I understood, you are seeing 'conditioned thought patterns' are the only problem. But you are completely missing the creator who is creating the entire story including what you consider as your inner thoughts and outer world movement. He could create anything he wants. Everything lies on the story which is unfolding infront of your eyes. If story is bad, then you feel bad, your feelings follows the story. If you have to suffer, then nothing else can make you suffer except the story, Story is the only thing that exist for you perceive, Said that what other things that can make you suffer? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 22:38:38 GMT -5
Thanks.
I don't think so.
Trust me, Some Nothing does not believe he is some Awareness thing. Okay. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 22:41:42 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
Ultimately, Consciousness and Awareness are just conceptual categories used as pointers and fodder for conversation, but all of it collapses into the infamous little greasy spot, and calling it 'THIS' or '______' just starts up the lying all over again. There is no Consciousness or Awareness. Talking like there is is unavoidable, and if you think you've got the correct verbiage to describe that which cannot be described with verbiage, you're mistaken. That said, my preference is Intelligence. Perhaps it is less prone to objectification. I am sorry If I have worded wrongly. I meant to say KNOWING is happening within awareness, and this knowing is inseparable from what we call awareness. Awareness is not a kind of static entity which is looking at what's unfolding. That's what I meant to say in my aforementioned line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 22:42:40 GMT -5
That's what I am saying it's not. Conscious is something that happens inside awareness. It's not looking, So putting one as unchanging and another one as changing wouldn't work here.
I assume you mean 'Consciousness isn't something that happens inside awareness'? Ultimately, Consciousness and Awareness are just conceptual categories used as pointers and fodder for conversation, but all of it collapses into the infamous little greasy spot, and calling it 'THIS' or '______' just starts up the lying all over again. There is no Consciousness or Awareness. Talking like there is is unavoidable, and if you think you've got the correct verbiage to describe that which cannot be described with verbiage, you're mistaken. That said, my preference is Intelligence. Perhaps it is less prone to objectification. That makes it perfectly clear, yes, that's what I meant to say! |
|
