Consciousness

[Marblehead]

Oh no, man, you said the r-word

 

Yeah, I saw that and had a chuckle.

[manitou]

Still just not hearin' the love.

[Aaron]

Hello Simple Jack,

 

Thank you for the suggested readings, but I already have a clear understanding of the Buddhist idea of consciousness and awareness and I don't necessarily believe it to be an accurate assessment of what I'm talking about. Also regarding your assessment of whether or not I have been "enlightened", I would like to post the definition I use so that I can clarify what I mean by enlightened, you are enlightened when you are freed from ignorance and misinformation based on a full comprehension of the problems involved. I believe I've achieved this, you obviously don't.

 

A few things. First, was it necessary to post as many times as you have in order to express how your position is right and mine is wrong. I would recommend that rather than suggest people read up on consciousness, that you start practicing the virtues of right speech. Try to speak in a truthful non-harmful way. There's no reason to say someone isn't something.

 

I want to also ask that you not make this thread about Buddhist Consciousness, what I'm talking about isn't Buddhist consciousness and I really don't want this thread to be another thumping ground for Buddhist conversion and assimilation. If you want to talk about your own experience with consciousness or ask questions that's fine, but from your own words you have little actual experience with even the Buddhist concept of consciousness and rather are judging my own comments based on an intellectual understanding, so making an assertion that you know that someone is not "enlightened" seems a bit presumptuous. Experience it, then tell them the "truth".

 

Lastly, I do not discourage people from discourse, but I actually requested that people treat others with respect and I feel you haven't done this. If you cannot treat others with compassion and respect, I ask that you please be kind enough to exclude yourself from the conversation.

 

I appreciate that I am not enlightened by Buddhist standards, but what I can say is that I do my best to make sure that everyone around me feels comfortable and cared for. I do hope you feel cared for too, but I also hope that you do not cause strife where there need not be any.

 

Aaron

Edited March 26, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

I just want to start with saying that I agree with almost everything that you write in this forum, Aaron. I'm guessing that we have a lot in common. I am not interested in being disrespectful with you, just in holding up a mirror.

 

 

I have shared them. On your last couple threads, I've shared my arguments encouraging epistemological humility.

 

Your response to me was:

 

 

So, rather than actually responding to what I had to add, you dismissed it, by claiming (essentially): "I used to think like you, but now I know better. Why do I claim that? Because I KNOW".

 

Which, of course, is what my urgings about epistemological humility were warning against.

 

There's the danger in considering one's self "enlightened". If you already "know", how will you ever listen to someone else, who has a different point of view? What if someone else sees a piece of the puzzle that you don't, yet? How will you ever hear them, if you've already justified your own opinions as true knowledge?

 

As I mentioned before, I agree with just about everything you've written in the OP and in the Tao thread. I just balk at calling these metaphors "truth". It's not skepticism that I'm urging (a skeptic is one who doubts every belief, except his own). I am urging self-skepticism, a willingness to recognize your own epiphanies as still being stories (as opposed to "Truth"), no matter how certain they feel.

 

IME, surrendering "knowing" is at the heart of living in mystery. How can I live in "emptiness" if I am already "full" with knowing?

 

Just as the "nature of consciousness" is the epiphany you want to share with us, "epistemological humility" is the epiphany that I'm trying to share with you.

 

Peace,

 

otis

 

Hello Otis,

 

First I apologize if it seemed like I dismissed what you said, it wasn't my intention. I did hear what you said and at one time did believe the same way that you do, but now I don't. That's all I meant. It doesn't mean that believing what you believe lacks value, or that since I've changed my mind my viewpoint is better.

 

In regards to skepticism, I am very skeptical, in fact I urge everyone to never accept anything at face value. In my opinion it doesn't matter how anyone views anything, rather what's important is how we conduct ourselves with our fellow man.

 

Today I worked with six other men. Each wanted to be the person in charge and they bickered constantly. They argued about who would do the "menial" tasks. I told them I would. I actually have nearly 10 years of experience in this particular field, in fact only one other person, the owner of the company had more, but it didn't matter to me. I did the job and I finished and went home. I'm as calm now as I was then. I listened to the backstabbing and infighting, slightly amused. If this had been four or five years ago, I may very well have been the one backstabbing, but today I'm not worried about status or face, rather I'm worried about my own job. I do the best that I can do on any task I perform, not because I am required to, but because it seems like the honest thing to do.

 

I am not honest because other people tell me to be, but rather because I know that honesty is essential to having harmonious relationships with others. I also know that compassion and humility are important, not because anyone has told me, but because I know they are essential for having harmonious relations with others.

 

I am the only one on that crew that everyone likes. Why is that? It's not because I'm enlightened, it's because I care for each of them, flaws and all, equally and I don't take sides against one another. I listen and keep my mouth shut. I only speak when I feel there is a need.

 

So I guess what I'm saying is that I do understand your urge for caution, to not accept something without testing it first, but what I also understand is that prior to this experience I could never have walked through the various land mines laid out before me today without feeling anger and resentment. So even if this realization did nothing else, at least it has changed the way I behave.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

I can believe what the original poster said about consciousness, about unity, about oneness. It makes sense to me, but only on an intellectual level, not experential. It's a belief that I have: we all are one. It's common to the mystics of any religion, not just taoism.

 

However, to me it's just an intellectual belief. What I would like to do is experience this unity or this oneness. Does this happen when one experiences the bliss of spiritual awakening? My kundalini has been poking through now for 4 years. I have undergone many changes. But I cannot say that I have experienced oneness yet. Reading a wise thought on-line and believing it is one thing, but knowing that the statement is true through the eyes of experience is something entirely different.

 

Also, I wonder if this is the same oneness that Jesus spoke of. Is it the same oneness that yogis refer to. And is that the same oneness as the buddhas enlightenment. Do all spiritual paths truly head to the same place? And if so, does it really matter if I pursue shamanism or tantra or any other path?

 

Hello Ejr,

 

I'm not sure if the oneness I speak of is the same as the oneness that Jesus and others have spoke of, because I'm not them. When I experienced this oneness, it was quite sudden and it happened as a result of prior practice and study. I cannot say when this might happen for you, but I would suggest that if you are benefiting from the path you are on, stay on it, speak to those who are more advanced than you and ask them to help you. In the same way, if you are trying to achieve something, yet you are not progressing, then I would recommend that you seek other avenues of study. Keep in mind that studying and practicing are small parts to play, that in the end what is required is an acceptance of one's state and a willingness to progress beyond it. If you have each of these, then you are much more likely to achieve this oneness.

 

I would also recommend that, as Otis has said, do not accept that someone is enlightened simply because they say they are, or because others have said that they are, but rather examine these people and decide for yourself. An enlightened person draws others to them, not by their words, but by their actions. If someone is enlightened you will know.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

Hello Manitou,

 

I wanted to take the time to reply to your comments regarding my post. First, let me thank you again for the kind words. Second, I think I might have an answer for you regarding the idea that the Sun has spirits. In regards to the idea of consciousness, everything within the universe is conscious, but not everything is capable of cognition. This means that the Sun is conscious and every bit alive as you and I are, it's just not aware like you and I are. If the sun does possess consciousness, then it is easy to understand how some might say that it has "spirits".

 

I really think this reply is one of the best things I've seen anyone write on a forum. It was a real treat to read it and I'm happy that my initial comments were the result of such deep and inspiring repose. I really do hope life is treating you well.

 

Nameste,

 

Aaron

Edited March 26, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

Good post, but I have some questions for you.

 

1. What is enlightenment ?

2. Who is it that becomes enlightened ?

 

What you imply is a duality. That there is a seeker, and that which is sought.

There is no difference between samsara and nirvana.

Enlightenment is found everywhere in the most ordinary, normal mundane activities. Not as a separate blissful mind-blowing superstate, free of all worries.

 

 

Hello Adept,

 

Thank you for your keen observations. First I would like to point out that what I'm talking about isn't Buddhist or Taoist enlightenment, so using that definition doesn't really work. When I say someone is enlightened, what I mean is that they have been freed from ignorance and misinformation based on full comprehension of the problems involved. Anyone who achieves this, on not just an intellectual but experiential level is capable of becoming enlightened.

 

I do imply that a duality is perceived, but I don't mean to imply that it actually exists. I stated that we are born of consciousness and are conscious. The idea is that as one grows older they are taught to view themselves as being separate from the world and because of this perceived separation they are not consciously aware of their connection to the Universal Consciousness. When one once again becomes, not only intellectually aware, but also experientially aware, then they can once again understand the profound nature of their connection to everything in this universe, not just their fellow man.

 

An interesting side effect of this awareness is that my opinion of plants and trees has drastically changed. I know it sounds odd, but there are moments when I feel like trees are actually reaching out to touch something. In fact I feel a sense of awareness in them. I know, sounds crazy.

 

Anyways, I think it would be easy to make consciousness more complicated than it needs to be. Separating types of consciousness, determining aspects of consciousness vs. awareness, I'm sure are important questions, but they aren't necessarily questions I wish to answer. In that regard I appreciate your view on enlightenment and life, because it is spot on.

 

Today I went to work and emptied trash. It was an enlightening experience.

 

Anyways, thanks again for you input. I hope life is treating you well.

 

Aaron

Edited March 26, 2011 by Twinner

[Otis]

So I guess what I'm saying is that I do understand your urge for caution, to not accept something without testing it first, but what I also understand is that prior to this experience I could never have walked through the various land mines laid out before me today without feeling anger and resentment. So even if this realization did nothing else, at least it has changed the way I behave.

 

Aaron

I hear you, Aaron, and I respect your path and your growth. There is always much wisdom in what you write; I have no intent to dispute that.

 

I thank you for listening to what I have to offer, and I wish you the best on your journey.

 

With continued respect,

 

otis

[adept]

This post grabbed my attention and was thought provoking because it does not quite fit with my concept of enlightenment. I have heard the phrase before and after enlightenment "chop wood and carry water". However, I have always viewed enlightenment as a call to service (like Jesus or like buddha). If there are no fruits of enlightenment, if life just carries on the same after as before, if it does not benefit humanity in any way, then why pursue it? Couldn't all those hours spent in meditation be better spent in activities to benefit the planet or other sensient beings?

 

Would you mind providing a further explanation as to the meaning of your post?

 

Hi ejr.

I'm not sure if my words are going to be adequate in describing this but I'll have a go.

Mindfulness of each and every moment as it happens, without the mind drifting off.

A very hard thing to keep up at all times, and years of regular meditation will certainly help with this.

Enlightenment, awakening or whatever you want to call it is not some state that once you get there, you live like this the rest of your life. You will still have all your fears, worries, anger, greed, desire etc etc. It's just that you will deal with every situation in a different way than before. You will not become attached to the working of your mind because now you will see everything as change.

Temporary, transient, in a constant state of flux. From the destruction and creation of stars and galaxies, to every thought pattern that your mind produces.

Yes, life does just carry on the same as before and will continue to do so. Only you will look at it from another angle.

Nothing to pursue, it's already there before you. It just needs uncovering. The more you chase after IT, the further away IT will be.

When it's uncovered people find their own way of expressing it.

Look at the ancient Chinese landscape paintings and poems. Or the Zen gardens of Japan. Absolutely wonderful expressions of enlightenment.

As I've stated somewhere before, the great mystery is that there is no mystery.

[Marblehead]

Hello Otis,

 

First I apologize ...

 

What a wonderful and fantastic post!!!!!

[Aaron]

What a wonderful and fantastic post!!!!!

 

Hello Marble,

 

Thanks for the kind words.

 

Aaron

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Seth Ananda]

Simple Jack seems to be doing his best to replace Vajrahridaya's mysterious absence in this thread! :lol:

I wondered how long It would take for someone to try to make the thread go Buddhist

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Seth Ananda]

It seems to me that traditions can get all a bit to cavalier and 'certain' when it comes to what ever Consciousness/Awareness is.

 

Where is the Socratic Wisdom of recognising what we do not know, and being Honest about the limits of our Knowledge?

 

I would like to propose a formula describing Consciousness which contains the Inherit Mystery of the nature of Consciousness.

 

That formula is:

? -> O

 

 

The ? represents consciousness/awareness as the mystery that it is.

 

The -> arrow represents the direction of observation

 

The letter O stands for Object or the observed.

 

 

So Mysterious consciousness observes stuff. The O or observed parts represent all perceptions, subtle or dense, all experiences spiritual or earthly, and everything that can be Known or thought or believed.

 

The Arrow, or direction of observation can not be changed. Certain Non dual teachings may give one the sense that the arrow has dissolved, leaving only ConsciousObject... and the stranger experiences that may follow, But all the Interpretation that follows is really based on nothing.

As the arrow can not be turned around no solid conclusions can be drawn about where it came from.

 

An experience no matter how 'Non dual' is still only an Object O had by ?

 

This is In no way meant to devalue the experiences had by all the ?'s of people here, as they are great. Realising that ?/you are behind everything or maybe unseperatable from all the O is great.

 

Acknowledging the Mysterious/unknowable nature of ? also leaves no room for grasping so hopefully [but unlikely] that will settle the Buddhists down.

 

Great Respek!

[lazy cloud]

Still just not hearin' the love.

I am still wondering about the consciousness Twinner if referring to?

I will think of it for now as Twinner's Consciousness

 

@Manitou, are you suggesting there may be a consciousness that equates with Love?

emoticons are contagious

Pure Consciousness = Pure Love ???

[lazy cloud]

It seems to me that traditions can get all a bit to cavalier and 'certain' when it comes to what ever Consciousness/Awareness is.

 

Where is the Socratic Wisdom of recognising what we do not know, and being Honest about the limits of our Knowledge?

 

I would like to propose a formula describing Consciousness which contains the Inherit Mystery of the nature of Consciousness.

 

That formula is:

? -> O

 

 

The ? represents consciousness/awareness as the mystery that it is.

 

The -> arrow represents the direction of observation

 

The letter O stands for Object or the observed.

 

 

So Mysterious consciousness observes stuff. The O or observed parts represent all perceptions, subtle or dense, all experiences spiritual or earthly, and everything that can be Known or thought or believed.

 

The Arrow, or direction of observation can not be changed. Certain Non dual teachings may give one the sense that the arrow has dissolved, leaving only ConsciousObject... and the stranger experiences that may follow, But all the Interpretation that follows is really based on nothing.

As the arrow can not be turned around no solid conclusions can be drawn about where it came from.

 

An experience no matter how 'Non dual' is still only an Object O had by ?

 

This is In no way meant to devalue the experiences had by all the ?'s of people here, as they are great. Realising that ?/you are behind everything or maybe unseperatable from all the O is great.

 

Acknowledging the Mysterious/unknowable nature of ? also leaves no room for grasping so hopefully [but unlikely] that will settle the Buddhists down.

 

Great Respek!

IMO Around the very first campfire in a cave in pre-historic times, the folks there wondered and questioned about consciousness. This is a subject that will always lead to more and more questions.

I have noticed one thing about Twinner, in that he does not shy away from the Big Questions. I respect that.

[Aaron]

It seems to me that traditions can get all a bit to cavalier and 'certain' when it comes to what ever Consciousness/Awareness is.

 

Where is the Socratic Wisdom of recognising what we do not know, and being Honest about the limits of our Knowledge?

 

I would like to propose a formula describing Consciousness which contains the Inherit Mystery of the nature of Consciousness.

 

That formula is:

? -> O

 

 

The ? represents consciousness/awareness as the mystery that it is.

 

The -> arrow represents the direction of observation

 

The letter O stands for Object or the observed.

 

 

So Mysterious consciousness observes stuff. The O or observed parts represent all perceptions, subtle or dense, all experiences spiritual or earthly, and everything that can be Known or thought or believed.

 

The Arrow, or direction of observation can not be changed. Certain Non dual teachings may give one the sense that the arrow has dissolved, leaving only ConsciousObject... and the stranger experiences that may follow, But all the Interpretation that follows is really based on nothing.

As the arrow can not be turned around no solid conclusions can be drawn about where it came from.

 

An experience no matter how 'Non dual' is still only an Object O had by ?

 

This is In no way meant to devalue the experiences had by all the ?'s of people here, as they are great. Realising that ?/you are behind everything or maybe unseperatable from all the O is great.

 

Acknowledging the Mysterious/unknowable nature of ? also leaves no room for grasping so hopefully [but unlikely] that will settle the Buddhists down.

 

Great Respek!

 

 

Hello Seth,

 

I can understand what you're saying. I do think for many people consciousness and awareness are a mystery, but I don't think it has to be. There are parts of us that we are aware of, then parts we are not. What you're referring to as the parts that we are aware of I think of as the ego, that part of us that we construct in order to interact with society. This ego is the identity that we create for ourselves based on social mores and values. The important thing to remember is that the ego is not the entirety of our existence, but rather it's like an island within with an ocean. What I am saying is that we can become aware of the consciousness that we are not immediately aware of and by understanding this we can gather a greater understanding of the world.

 

Now if you keep in mind the ocean metaphor, I also believe that this ocean does not have a boundary, rather it permeates everything and that individually we are just small islands within that ocean, not realizing that we are connected and that the land we've built does not exist. We have tricked ourselves into believing we are standing on land and that we can only go so far as the beach, when in fact we are really swimming within that ocean, we just don't know it.

 

Anyways, thanks for your comments. Very well put.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I did want to point out that I agree with you, the arrow, or ego cannot be dissolved. For me it's not about dissolving the ego, but rather understanding what exists beyond the ego. When you realize this, then your understanding of your ego and your true nature become much clearer.

Edited March 27, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

I am still wondering about the consciousness Twinner if referring to?

I will think of it for now as Twinner's Consciousness

 

 

Hello Lazy Cloud,

 

Well it is my consciousness, but it's your consciousness as well. Really much of what I am explaining comes from Vendanta Hinduism, only with some twists. The difference being, since I am not a "spiritual" man, I've decided to try and understand it for what it is, without those things that I think are superstitious (and mind you they are only superstitious to me, for others they are quite real so I'm not dismissing them, just explaining why I did this).

 

So far as answering the big questions, I don't think there are big questions, only questions and answers and if we truly wish to understand, then we must both ask the question and when we know the answer, be willing to answer it. True compassion is sharing our knowledge with others, whether it's teaching someone how to copy and paste a file, tie a hook to their fishing line, or explaining the nature or reality. Of course the trick is to remember that there really is no such thing as a stupid question, so when someone asks a question, treat them with as much respect as if they were asking you for food for their starving child. If you have no food, apologize and suggest where they can find it, but if you do have food, then share it with them.

 

Aaron

Edited March 27, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

Twinner: I apologize (seriously) if in my posts it seemed like I was attacking you or deliberately trying to undermine you.

 

I wasn't trying to convert you to anything as I stated in my earlier post. I just thought I'd post some articles that could (I thought) take your insight further. That was all I was trying to do; nothing more, nothing less. In fact I don't care either way whether you or anyone accepts or rejects my posts.

 

As to the other stuff: Other than the posts responding too Erj1064, Vortex, and Marblehead; Those posts (kates post influenced it too) were geared towards helping you in some way. I thought I'd clear up some misconceptions I thought you had concerning Buddhism. I was wrong. I wasn't trying to turn this into a "thumping ground for Buddhist conversion." Admittedly I got carried away though. For that I apologize. :wub:

 

Did you notice that I used emoticons? Lolz just kidding.

 

P.S. I hope you don't mind I make a few more posts. After that I promise I won't post in this thread.

 

Hello Simple Jack,

 

You are free to share whatever you want as much as you want. My only request, and this is for anyone that wishes to contribute to this thread, is that we treat each other with respect. You didn't offend me in any way. I do care about your opinion, I was just suggesting that there may be a more compassionate way to express it.

 

Aaron

[Seth Ananda]

Hello Seth,

 

I can understand what you're saying. I do think for many people consciousness and awareness are a mystery, but I don't think it has to be. There are parts of us that we are aware of, then parts we are not. What you're referring to as the parts that we are aware of I think of as the ego, that part of us that we construct in order to interact with society. This ego is the identity that we create for ourselves based on social mores and values. The important thing to remember is that the ego is not the entirety of our existence, but rather it's like an island within with an ocean. What I am saying is that we can become aware of the consciousness that we are not immediately aware of and by understanding this we can gather a greater understanding of the world.

 

Now if you keep in mind the ocean metaphor, I also believe that this ocean does not have a boundary, rather it permeates everything and that individually we are just small islands within that ocean, not realizing that we are connected and that the land we've built does not exist. We have tricked ourselves into believing we are standing on land and that we can only go so far as the beach, when in fact we are really swimming within that ocean, we just don't know it.

 

Anyways, thanks for your comments. Very well put.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I did want to point out that I agree with you, the arrow, or ego cannot be dissolved. For me it's not about dissolving the ego, but rather understanding what exists beyond the ego. When you realize this, then your understanding of your ego and your true nature become much clearer.

Thanks Twinner

To continue with my Formula, I do not see how consciousness/awareness can ever be anything but a Mystery. How can you Know what it is, when Knowing itself is an event that happens within it?

 

or, Can a person with zero consciousness ever known something?

 

Consciousness/awareness are the single prerequsite for all knowledge and experience.

You can not become conscious of consciousness. What you can do, is take more notice of the objects and events within consciousness, including noticing in greater detail that you are 'aware' of stuff.

 

Even If you Have Great realisations [like me ] of the Oneness that is consciousness behind/within everything those are still experiences within Consciousness or ?, not ? It self.

 

Consciousness is an experiencing thing, and that is about all we can say about it.

 

Also In the ? -> O I have to point out that -> is not the Ego, Its just a way of describing that ? experiences O, and not the other way around.

If anything Ego is in the realm O or Object, as It is an observable phenomona.

 

Have Fun

[Birch]

Simple Jack seems to be doing his best to replace Vajrahridaya's mysterious absence in this thread! :lol:

I wondered how long It would take for someone to try to make the thread go Buddhist

It ain't that mysterious ;-)

[lazy cloud]

Hello Lazy Cloud,

 

Well it is my consciousness, but it's your consciousness as well. Really much of what I am explaining comes from Vendanta Hinduism, only with some twists. The difference being, since I am not a "spiritual" man, I've decided to try and understand it for what it is, without those things that I think are superstitious (and mind you they are only superstitious to me, for others they are quite real so I'm not dismissing them, just explaining why I did this).

 

So far as answering the big questions, I don't think there are big questions, only questions and answers and if we truly wish to understand, then we must both ask the question and when we know the answer, be willing to answer it. True compassion is sharing our knowledge with others, whether it's teaching someone how to copy and paste a file, tie a hook to their fishing line, or explaining the nature or reality. Of course the trick is to remember that there really is no such thing as a stupid question, so when someone asks a question, treat them with as much respect as if they were asking you for food for their starving child. If you have no food, apologize and suggest where they can find it, but if you do have food, then share it with them.

 

Aaron

Howdy Aaron,

 

If I look back to where I first read about this Connected Consciousness, it probably would have been in Marcus Aurelius' Meditations.

I still look at this as a very diverse subject. Thus lending itself to alot of Subjectivity.

I think you have given me the green light to ask questions

This consciousness that we are sharing, is it a Human consciousness,or a Larger consciousness?

Forgive me if I have no understanding about Vendanta Hinduism.

So, if you could describe the Features of the consciousness we are discussing here on this thread, that would be helpful for me.

Is this consciousness an Entity?

Is it life based or more based on electro-magnetic fields?

What are its features?

I feel if we can establish this foundation it will keep our conversation from sprawling to the nether-realms.