|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2013 10:02:58 GMT -8
Hencely, in the normal waking state and dream state you are aware of something (consciousness present). In deep sleep you are not aware of something (consciousness absent) but you are still awareness. Nothing is registered in awareness because consciousness must be present, but awareness is fully present and fully alert. It's that same alertness that is here in between the thoughts. Heh, I think I've had this convo with you enigma probably a half dozen times. Thanks for your patience and willingness to hash it out. It's a puzzler for me, maybe a koan of sorts. CWAO/Awareness can also be called nonconceptual awareness. I just don't get how it isn't conjecture, inference. The absence of objects, appearances-of-any-kind, memory-making ability, ability to experience, etc -- anything that we could talk about, even inarticulately -- there is nothing left. The only single thing I have to go on is people like you and a scattered few others that reassure the world that such Awareness or CWAO is real. To me it smacks of just another God argument. For consciousness to appear (ie birth or waking from sleep) and disappear (death and deep sleep) there must be something that this 'occurrs on' or appears to or whatever. But that's just an if-then statement. And the only thing that can be done with this is to (1) believe it, or (2) realize it, or (3) ignore it, or (4) put shoe on head and walk out the room. Lacking 2, not wanting 1, unable to 3... So you're saying this is an inference or a conclusion? Actually, it's a realization, and so however much it looks like logic, no logic is required. Whatever you are must be here first before anything can appear, and must remain after everything disappears or you couldn't know about this appearance and disappearance. This is all inclusive. Time appears to timelessness or you couldn't know of time. Space appears to spacelessness or you couldn't know of space. Movement appears to stillness or you couldn't know of movement. Everything arises and falls before you and you remain as you are; eternal, infinite, still, or in negating terms; timeless, spaceless, stillness. Without birth or death, beginning or end. YOU cannot appear, and so YOU cannot have a name, you cannot have a form, but YOU are the one who gives birth to the world now, and now. |
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 23, 2013 10:30:39 GMT -8
Heh, I think I've had this convo with you enigma probably a half dozen times. Thanks for your patience and willingness to hash it out. It's a puzzler for me, maybe a koan of sorts. CWAO/Awareness can also be called nonconceptual awareness. I just don't get how it isn't conjecture, inference. The absence of objects, appearances-of-any-kind, memory-making ability, ability to experience, etc -- anything that we could talk about, even inarticulately -- there is nothing left. The only single thing I have to go on is people like you and a scattered few others that reassure the world that such Awareness or CWAO is real. To me it smacks of just another God argument. For consciousness to appear (ie birth or waking from sleep) and disappear (death and deep sleep) there must be something that this 'occurrs on' or appears to or whatever. But that's just an if-then statement. And the only thing that can be done with this is to (1) believe it, or (2) realize it, or (3) ignore it, or (4) put shoe on head and walk out the room. Lacking 2, not wanting 1, unable to 3... So you're saying this is an inference or a conclusion? yes. that's how it seems to me. Why? Why couldn't whatever I am be "co-instanced"? or why couldn't it seem to be steady to whatever appears but is actually just relative? For example, the sun appears and disappears but actually we revolve around the sun and the sun revolves around a mega black hole and the Milky Way zooms on out....But it seems like what appears, appears to something that remains steady. Same thing. Why can't this be an assumption? Yes it all seems inferred based on assumptions. Could be right, mind you. But that would have to be 'realized' or require something extra, don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2013 11:02:09 GMT -8
So you're saying this is an inference or a conclusion? yes. that's how it seems to me. Why? Why couldn't whatever I am be "co-instanced"? or why couldn't it seem to be steady to whatever appears but is actually just relative? For example, the sun appears and disappears but actually we revolve around the sun and the sun revolves around a mega black hole and the Milky Way zooms on out....But it seems like what appears, appears to something that remains steady. Same thing. Why can't this be an assumption? Yes it all seems inferred based on assumptions. Could be right, mind you. But that would have to be 'realized' or require something extra, don't know. I understand. The potential logical arguments against any realization are endless because it's just a matter of imagining a new contradicting scenario, which is why I don't usually follow the logic folks down that bunny hole. Best to keep it simple. Everything that appears, appears to you. You can never appear. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jan 23, 2013 12:52:37 GMT -8
If E and I have hashed stuff out a number of times, it is probably due to our own individual comprehension and use of certain terms. I can say that we're always conscious, or more accurately that consciousness is always there, even in sleep; he uses 'awareness', which, to me is synonymous with 'consciousness', but that's okay, as that's what he uses to express his point, which is what I'm really after--not to pick a fight over terminology. Yanno, it doesn't seem very long ago, that I could have said the same thing--that 'the only single thing I have to go on is people like you and a scattered few others that reassure the world that such Awareness or CWAO is real.' But, I went through, and had to go through a really radical change in the way I understood ... what I am. As that took root, it all makes perfect sense. Sounds like your radical change was what I was referring to as realization. Was that via inquiry -- attending to 'I Am' -- or via forum discussion or pebbles hitting bamboo or all of the above? Or is it just refining understanding? I heard recently from someone who seems to know more about vedic scripture yada yada than I (not a big hurdle) that some babas or lamas or whatever said that the final threshold to awakening was 'understanding.' Actually, if I am what I seek, and the truth is always here now, everpresent, maybe understanding is all it takes. What do you actually need to understand? Surely understanding whether you're there in deep sleep is not actually crucial to any part of your life. So what is that movement that needs to understand and what's the ulterior motive going on there? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 23, 2013 21:41:38 GMT -8
What do you actually need to understand? Surely understanding whether you're there in deep sleep is not actually crucial to any part of your life. So what is that movement that needs to understand and what's the ulterior motive going on there? You don't understand, the intermediary just HAS TO understand everything. And when the intermediary is done with understanding everything then there's also beyond everything and prior to everything that has to be understood. As they say, knowledge is infinite. But the intermediary is finite. Perusing the infinite with the finite is  . |
|
|
|
Post by beingist on Jan 24, 2013 5:45:55 GMT -8
Perusing the infinite with the finite is . Like watching a sunset with a microscope. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2013 6:32:30 GMT -8
Like watching a sunset with a microscope. That's a good one, too. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jan 24, 2013 7:27:11 GMT -8
What do you actually need to understand? Surely understanding whether you're there in deep sleep is not actually crucial to any part of your life. So what is that movement that needs to understand and what's the ulterior motive going on there? You don't understand, the intermediary just HAS TO understand everything. And when the intermediary is done with understanding everything then there's also beyond everything and prior to everything that has to be understood. As they say, knowledge is infinite. But the intermediary is finite. Perusing the infinite with the finite is . Hehe, yea I like the term intermediary. Don't forget that everything that's paradoxiaclly also something else in the 5th dimension to be understood. |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 24, 2013 9:16:24 GMT -8
There is no firm object nor firm individual, both are just universal change. "I" and "All That Is" both are alternation. While I change my focus to object1,my focus is becoming object1.When I change my focus to object2, object1 remains in my awareness, but this awareness also has it's own consciousness in it's own level.In this way whole is circumscribed in awareness part. So every boundary crosses by the definition of boundary, So we have the relation to the infinity.So I am not single focus, but I am an ever changing focus, So I am nothing but Alternation in the first instance, if this alternation("I") is able to alternate then freewill becomes real, If not freewill is illusion.
Raj
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2013 10:17:50 GMT -8
There is no firm object nor firm individual, both are just universal change. "I" and "All That Is" both are alternation. While I change my focus to object1,my focus is becoming object1.When I change my focus to object2, object1 remains in my awareness, but this awareness also has it's own consciousness in it's own level.In this way whole is circumscribed in awareness part. So every boundary crosses by the definition of boundary, So we have the relation to the infinity.So I am not single focus, but I am an ever changing focus, So I am nothing but Alternation in the first instance, if this alternation("I") is able to alternate then freewill becomes real, If not freewill is illusion. Raj Howdy, Raj. |
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 24, 2013 11:14:23 GMT -8
Sounds like your radical change was what I was referring to as realization. Was that via inquiry -- attending to 'I Am' -- or via forum discussion or pebbles hitting bamboo or all of the above? Or is it just refining understanding? I heard recently from someone who seems to know more about vedic scripture yada yada than I (not a big hurdle) that some babas or lamas or whatever said that the final threshold to awakening was 'understanding.' Actually, if I am what I seek, and the truth is always here now, everpresent, maybe understanding is all it takes. What do you actually need to understand? Surely understanding whether you're there in deep sleep is not actually crucial to any part of your life. So what is that movement that needs to understand and what's the ulterior motive going on there? Well that's a good question. The ulterior motive is founded on skepticism about the claim that CWAO is present in deep sleep. Just as I'm skeptical of the claim that CWAO is present even absent a body (aka: dead). If it is true, I'd like to know it as well, so that's partly the motive. Also I wonder if the belief in CWAO being unconditionally present (or Awareness or whateveryoucallit) -- whether true or not -- is helpful for ending the seeking game and realizing truth. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2013 17:16:16 GMT -8
What do you actually need to understand? Surely understanding whether you're there in deep sleep is not actually crucial to any part of your life. So what is that movement that needs to understand and what's the ulterior motive going on there? Well that's a good question. The ulterior motive is founded on skepticism about the claim that CWAO is present in deep sleep. Just as I'm skeptical of the claim that CWAO is present even absent a body (aka: dead). If it is true, I'd like to know it as well, so that's partly the motive. Also I wonder if the belief in CWAO being unconditionally present (or Awareness or whateveryoucallit) -- whether true or not -- is helpful for ending the seeking game and realizing truth. Noticing what's being pointed to is obviously useful. Understanding in order to verify the claim is not. So, there isn't an understanding dynamic here that is useful. |
|
