Consciousness

[atanu]

Please stop insulting my intelligence. .....

Do you mean I am insulting your physical brain?

Not sure I understand you. .....

Well. So, contradictory.

 

[sayak83]

Please stop insulting my intelligence. NO ONE is claiming that consciousness is a physical entity. That would be insane. I simply know that a dimensionless consciousness can't exist without a functioning brain. I am also NOT equating intelligence with consciousness. The former is an objective label representing how we use the knowledge gained in our conscious state. The latter is the subjective experience that is a composite representation of our sense organs, depicting our reality. Not sure I understand you. We are not conscious of our physical brain(like arms and legs), because there aren't any inputs to sensory areas coming from "brain activity", and for very good reasons. Since you are now saying that you are not talking about the conscious state of the mind, then I have no idea what you are talking about. And, you certainly haven't demonstrated the existence of this "substratum" that links the sense of "I" with dreaming, waking or sleeping.

Of course you can describe what it feels like to do the things you mentioned. Since we all have the same kind of senses, anything that is sensory related(externally generated) can be easily explained. What you are talking about are things that are internally generated(dreams, consciousness, sleeping), which can only be experienced subjectively. My dreams are very vivid and elaborate. So much so, that I try to manipulate them to bring something back. But in the end, it is only a dream, no matter what I want it to be.

He is talking about the phenomenon of subjectivity. Why is it something like being conscious. Why do a set of neural phenomena get a "subjectivity" dimension to it. So far, the only thing that has been done is to see how the subjective properties change as neural states change, based on verbal reports from subjects. However this only shows that these are connected somehow. The problem is, nobody can even frame what sort of an explanation would explain this subjective tagging of neural activities. What makes "a set of neurons firing in this or that mathematical pattern" an adequate explanation for "the subjective sense of seeing red".

 

[godnotgod]

Well, if something was completely separate from everything, we wouldn't be able to perceive it through sensory information. Likewise, if everything was so compressed together in a chaotic tangle, we wouldn't be able to discern it.

Your comment assumes that something is capable of being separated* to begin with. How is that even possible, perception or not?

Because space allows such discernment, one is fooled into thinking that objects are separated. This 'separation' occurs only in the mind. What we call 'space' and 'object' are a single reality. which is evident once the sublect/object split is healed. So not only is there never any separation from Everything, we, the 'observer of the observed', are also never separated from Everything. Not even for a nano-second, which is exactly why the Hindus say: 'Tat tvam asi'

Once it is realized that space is conceptual, what we have been calling 'space' as an object of the mind, is now understood as consciousness itself

*remember: what we call 'separation' can occur only in time and space, and if you understand space-time to be only conceptual, such 'separation' is also only conceptual.

 

[godnotgod]

Ha. Ha. Still seeing unenlightened 'others'?

Yes, I do not claim to be established in the knowledge that I am Brahman. Your pointing my ignorant status only helps to prove that jiva-s need illumination and the Vedic saying "By knowing brahman jiva becomes brahman".

But, OTOH, you affirm that you dwell in duality only, since you always see others separate from you that are hypnotised and are attached. Please preach what you actually see.

I have put you on 'ignore'.

How convenient.

I am not the one asserting 'this and that', from the dual POV: YOU are. There are no 'unenlightened others'; there is only the one Brahman playing itself as 'unenlightened others'.

We have all heard of 'becoming enlightened' as a popular idea. But the true teaching of Buddhism says that everyone is already enlightened, but most have failed to realize it as yet.

There is no such jiva that 'becomes' anything. Such 'becoming' is an illusion of the mind, and in the case of the Vedas, is simply a figure of speech. The jiva cannot become Brahman, because it is an illusion, a play, of Brahman; the finite mind cannot comprehend the Infinite Mind, so how can it 'become' That?. The jiva already IS Brahman, (just as the necklace already IS gold,) which is Brahman playing the cosmic game of Hide and Seek with itself, hiding within all of it's manifested forms, and that includes the jiva. It is not the jiva which awakens or is 'in need of illumination', but Brahman itself, awakening to it's true nature as Brahman. The jiva is simply a manifestation of Brahman lost in Identification, and as such, is fiction. So when Brahman awakens to IT's true nature, it is seen that no jiva ever existed right from the very beginning, in exactly the same way that you were never a dragon slayer in your dream of being a dragon slayer.

If you had studied Buddhism, you would know that Samsara and Nirvana are not different, and that applies to what you are referring to as 'the hypnotized' vs the 'un-hypnotized'. The hypnotized are none other than the un-hypnotized, who have forgotten that they are, in fact, hypnotized, and who think themselves fully awake. Do not be fooled into thinking 'hypnotized' and 'un-hypnotized' as a duality.

The jiva, like the ocean wave, is a total action of the entire Universe, ie; of Brahman. The wave cannot 'become' the ocean; it already IS the ocean, playing itself as 'wave'. Think 'Oneness' at all times. Then you will never be confused.

"The Universe is [none other than] The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivekenanda

 

[crossfire]

Your comment assumes that something is capable of being separated* to begin with. How is that even possible, perception or not?

I was referring to a hypothetical "something not of this universe," separate from this universe. "Everything" is a concept.

 

[godnotgod]

Knowledge is always the cure for ignorance. Without knowledge there is only belief.

Not so. You are missing something very important here. While you compare factual knowledge to belief, you ignore the pathway to another kind of knowledge, and that is the knowledge understood when just seeing, without thought, how things are. This is neither belief nor factual knowledge.

Actually, factual knowledge is not the 'cure for ignorance'; it only creates the realization that we are still ignorant of yet more knowledge. The cure for ignorance is to see things as they actually are, and that means to see into the true nature of Reality, which applies to all factual knowledge. IOW, factual knowledge is now understood in the correct light: that of Reality itself, rather than the attempt to see Reality in terms of limited factual knowledge.

 

[godnotgod]

I was referring to a hypothetical "something not of this universe," separate from this universe. "Everything" is a concept.

The Universe is Everything that exists, and as such, is not just an absolute, but The Absolute. Nothing can exist apart from The Universe, because if it did, then The Universe would not be The Absolute; it would be relative to this 'something else'.

'Everything' is a reality. Where is it conceptual? The conceptual, limited mind cannot conceive of that which is beyond it's understanding.

 

[crossfire]

The Universe is Everything that exists, and as such, is not just an absolute, but The Absolute. Nothing can exist apart from The Universe, because if it did, then The Universe would not be The Absolute; it would be relative to this 'something else'.

'Everything' is a reality. Where is it conceptual? The conceptual, limited mind cannot conceive of that which is beyond it's understanding.

I say "Absolute" (with a capital A) is just a way of saying "no" to anything else and closing ones mind. Your mileage may vary.

 

[godnotgod]

I say "Absolute" (with a capital A) is just a way of saying "no" to anything else and closing ones mind. Your mileage may vary.

Yes, it can have that meaning, but that is not the meaning I am trying to convey. I mean to say that The Absolute has no relative 'other' to which it can be compared, and in that sense, is Everything that is, or can be. That 'everything' is none other than The Universe, and by that I include space and everything contained within it, including intergalactic space and all possible multiverses. So as Everything, it includes all possibilities. A closed mind cannot contain Everything, since in this case 'Everything' has infinite possibilities.

 

[crossfire]

Yes, it can have that meaning, but that is not the meaning I am trying to convey. I mean to say that The Absolute has no relative 'other' to which it can be compared, and in that sense, is Everything that is, or can be. That 'everything' is none other than The Universe, and by that I include space and everything contained within it, including intergalactic space and all possible multiverses. So as Everything, it includes all possibilities. A closed mind cannot contain Everything, since in this case 'Everything' has infinite possibilities.

In other words, it's full of itself.

 

[godnotgod]

In other words, it's full of itself.

It's completely empty, through and through.


"Fundamentally no wisdom-tree exists,
Nor the stand of a mirror bright.
Since all is empty from the beginning,
Where can the dust alight?"

6th Zen Patriarch

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Do you mean I am insulting your physical brain?



Well. So, contradictory.

"Do you mean I am insulting your physical brain?". Now you are just insulting both our intelligence, and avoiding my points. There are many cults that promise you will see the Universe in a tiny raindrop. Or, will experience alternate realities through deep meditation. Or promise that you will find all answers, depending on how much you are willing to sacrifice. All cults, beliefs, and practices require that a person must exist first(none consists of only the dead). This is where I usually start and work my way foreword. All are subjective in nature. That is, their experiences and interpretations may differ from person to person. All try to answer questions that only a God could answer. All answers tend to be unfalsifiable, logically convoluted, or unnecessarily complex. All tend to have no practical(not emotional or psychological) purpose in our lives, and is certainly unnecessary for our survival, including the passing on of our genes. And, all are never grounded in science.

We all sleep, we all dream, we all awake, and we all become consciously aware. Most of the other animals in the animal kingdom do exactly the same thing. Does this alone suggest an organic physiological cause? Just because we don't as yet understand all aspects of this natural phenomenon, or the nature of the human condition, why the need to create pseudo-scientific explanations? I wonder if our earliest ancestors practiced this level of introspection? Maybe the kids in Brazil took time to experience their journey to Nirvana, while searching for food and avoiding the Death Squads?

I certainly have no problems with meditation. For me, it is a form of introspection and self-examination. It is a relaxation exercise that focuses my mind towards reaching clarity through emptiness. I also get the same relaxation results from a "granny nap" and "daydreaming". But I don't create a quasi-religion around them.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Not so. You are missing something very important here. While you compare factual knowledge to belief, you ignore the pathway to another kind of knowledge, and that is the knowledge understood when just seeing, without thought, how things are. This is neither belief nor factual knowledge.

Actually, factual knowledge is not the 'cure for ignorance'; it only creates the realization that we are still ignorant of yet more knowledge. The cure for ignorance is to see things as they actually are, and that means to see into the true nature of Reality, which applies to all factual knowledge. IOW, factual knowledge is now understood in the correct light: that of Reality itself, rather than the attempt to see Reality in terms of limited factual knowledge.

You are correct. There is no cure for willful and determined ignorance.

 

[atanu]

"Do you mean I am insulting your physical brain?". Now you are just insulting both our intelligence, and avoiding my points.

So, the insult is not to your physical brain? Then to whom?

.I certainly have no problems with meditation. ...But I don't create a quasi-religion around them.

Both are excellent.

 

[godnotgod]

You are correct. There is no cure for willful and determined ignorance.

So why do you refuse to venture outside your Plato Cave Comfort Zone of Facts and Data? I promise, your Holy Facts will still be there when you return, dancing around on the cave walls, hypnotizing you into a deep, deep trance in the sacred rites of Holy Thienthe, an elaborate variation of the story of the 3 blind men and the elephant:

"Ah, so THIS is the elusive particle we have been searching for!"

"No, no! That's not it! Not it at all! It now appears that what we heretofore only BELIEVED to be a solid particle, is, in FACT (ha ha), a STANDING WAVE! There are no particles! We have nothing to sink our teeth into. Our science is the science of ...... NO-THING-NESS! Materialism is DOOMED!"

 

[Truly Enlightened]

So, the insult is not to your physical brain? Then to whom?



Both are excellent.

So, is being facetious and flippant the only way you can avoid responding to my concerns? Or, do you really believe that a physical brain can be insulted? I'm certain that you know exactly what the "whom" is that is being insulted, no matter how desperately you try to conflate the obvious with your "rabbit-hole" pseudo-sophistry. If your experiences makes you feel good, enjoy it and share it with others. Just don't sell it as science.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

So why do you refuse to venture outside your Plato Cave Comfort Zone of Facts and Data? I promise, your Holy Facts will still be there when you return, dancing around on the cave walls, hypnotizing you into a deep, deep trance in the sacred rites of Holy Thienthe, an elaborate variation of the story of the 3 blind men and the elephant:

"Ah, so THIS is the elusive particle we have been searching for!"

"No, no! That's not it! Not it at all! It now appears that what we heretofore only BELIEVED to be a solid particle, is, in FACT (ha ha), a STANDING WAVE! There are no particles! We have nothing to sink our teeth into. Our science is the science of ...... NO-THING-NESS! Materialism is DOOMED!"

Spare me your hypocrisy oh wise one. You not only live in that same "Plato Cave Comfort Zone of Facts and Data", but you are also totally dependent on its fruits and wares for your survival. Metaphysical enlightenment is an exercise for an idle mind. The metaphysical mind is a selfish, escapist, and self-absorbed mind. It creates its own fluid logic, by manipulating and inventing new meanings to well-established terms. Its experiences will always be subjective, and restricted to the immaterial zero-dimensional realm of human thought.

What I don't understand is the why? There is so much more to life than just experiencing the limits of oneself. Isn't the search for answers to 4 dimensional natural phenomena enough enlightenment? Why not jump on that bandwagon and make a real contribution?

You are truly an example of how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

 

[godnotgod]

Spare me your hypocrisy oh wise one. You not only live in that same "Plato Cave Comfort Zone of Facts and Data", but you are also totally dependent on its fruits and wares for your survival. Metaphysical enlightenment is an exercise for an idle mind. The metaphysical mind is a selfish, escapist, and self-absorbed mind. It creates its own fluid logic, by manipulating and inventing new meanings to well-established terms. Its experiences will always be subjective, and restricted to the immaterial zero-dimensional realm of human thought.

What I don't understand is the why? There is so much more to life than just experiencing the limits of oneself. Isn't the search for answers to 4 dimensional natural phenomena enough enlightenment? Why not jump on that bandwagon and make a real contribution?

You are truly an example of how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Actually, what I have been pointing to is beyond knowledge; beyond wisdom. Pure Consciousness is fundamental to both.

Because you are still attached to the world of factual knowledge, and only see reality in those terms, you make the mistake of interpreting my position as being metaphysical, when I thought I had made clear that what I have been pointing to is beyond metaphysics, metaphysics being the domain of the mind, and the experience of Pure Consciousness that which is in place prior to the emerging of mind and its thought process.

You also misunderstand my view of the world of factual knowledge: I am not abandoning it; I fully accept it, but only within the larger context of Reality. That there are many fruits to be enjoyed as a result of its exploration is not to be denied. But I do not accept it as the key to the understanding of the nature of Reality. One must venture outside it's cave in order to get a glimpse of what science is still only scratching the surface of, and I think any good scientist would admit that. So while I accept factual knowledge as utility in the world we live in, I am not attached to it in the way that you are. Sure, I use it every day, but it is not the Gold Standard for me. Consciousness is fundamental to the conceptual mind; without it, there is no world of factual knowledge. Your are conscious first, and THEN you think.

Factual knowledge is not enlightenment. And stop trying to pretend that your avatar is just a whim. You really do think you are 'truly enlightened', but you're not fooling the rest of us. A sure sign that someone is still nibbling around the edges is when someone comes along and makes the claim that he is 'truly' enlightened, as compared to those who only imagine themselves to be.

 

[godnotgod]

... do you really believe that a physical brain can be insulted? I'm certain that you know exactly what the "whom" is that is being insulted....

According to you, your brain creates your reality, including who you are, right? So, essentially, you are your brain. Is that correct?

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Actually, what I have been pointing to is beyond knowledge; beyond wisdom. Pure Consciousness is fundamental to both.

Because you are still attached to the world of factual knowledge, and only see reality in those terms, you make the mistake of interpreting my position as being metaphysical, when I thought I had made clear that what I have been pointing to is beyond metaphysics, metaphysics being the domain of the mind, and the experience of Pure Consciousness that which is in place prior to the emerging of mind and its thought process.

You also misunderstand my view of the world of factual knowledge: I am not abandoning it; I fully accept it, but only within the larger context of Reality. That there are many fruits to be enjoyed as a result of its exploration is not to be denied. But I do not accept it as the key to the understanding of the nature of Reality. One must venture outside it's cave in order to get a glimpse of what science is still only scratching the surface of, and I think any good scientist would admit that. So while I accept factual knowledge as utility in the world we live in, I am not attached to it in the way that you are. Sure, I use it every day, but it is not the Gold Standard for me. Consciousness is fundamental to the conceptual mind; without it, there is no world of factual knowledge. Your are conscious first, and THEN you think.

Factual knowledge is not enlightenment. And stop trying to pretend that your avatar is just a whim. You really do think you are 'truly enlightened', but you're not fooling the rest of us. A sure sign that someone is still nibbling around the edges is when someone comes along and makes the claim that he is 'truly' enlightened, as compared to those who only imagine themselves to be.

Let me make it clear to the "rest of us" that you claim I am trying to fool. I am NOT TRULY ENLIGHTENED as my tag(not avatar) might suggest. But I do like ribs as my avatar suggests. I actually made these ribs in the physical world, and they taste as good as they look. I'd like to think of myself as a philosophical pragmatist. I am driven by all things that work, or have some practical purpose. Since you haven't established the relevancy or the practicality of metaphysical philosophy in everyday life, I see no reason to venture outside of my rational cave. Other than to learn how to manipulate logic to give a false perception of rationality.

Let me clear up a few things. There are only two kinds of realities. One that exists outside of the mind(physical construct), and one that exists inside of the mind(mental construct). The reality that exists outside of the mind does not require a brain or our existence to exist. It exists whether we're here or not, and will always be guided by the laws of physics, chemistry, and nature. The reality that exist inside of the mind is totally dependent on a working physical brain, and working physical sense organs. Without either, there IS NO internal reality. The internal reality is NOT bound by any natural laws at all. Anything and everything is possible within this subjective internal reality. The apple that you see on the table does not physically exist inside of your brain. It is simply the representation of a firing pattern of neurons. Just as smell and tastes are the firing patterns of neurons, that are stimulated by a few molecules.

Sense you avoided answering my question as to WHY, I can only assume that the path you have chosen for your enlightenment, is just another fancy version of escapism. No matter where you take your mind or consciousness, to glimpse at what science is still struggling to conceive, your physical body will still be stuck in the same materialistic, physical world like the rest of us. Imagine what we could do if we could mentally control every atom and cell in our bodies? Imagine if we could mentally control all the natural forces in nature? Imagine if we could control our own internal processes, or the thoughts of others? Imagine if we could control even time itself. Oh well, I suppose we can imagine anything with a conscious mind.

I suppose that some of us can even create our own logic, and our own language to imply that we can do all these things. But first, we must abandon the world of factual knowledge and scientific validation, and embrace the world of pure consciousness. This is a world where nothing is true, and nothing is false. Everything is just relative. Maybe it is you that misunderstood me. If you enjoy seeing the entire Universe on the tip of a pin, it is none of my business, but it is just NOT science.