Reality: What is it?

[atanu]

But the question must be asked: Who, or what, is it that knows that consciousness cannot see consciousness?

It is intellect that knows this by analogy. Eye cannot see itself. And this is also known intellectually by questioning "Who will know the knower?" If we drill down to all layers of subject-object pairs, the query boils down to who is the subject of "I am"? Eventually, nothing else is there to fall back upon, only the awareness remains. This is the intellectual part.

This query, if meditated upon earnestly (by the ego-intellect itself), reveals that we are awareness itself. We are not the sense organs or the mind that are objects to an unknown subject, which cannot be known as other than self. And it is awareness itself.

Only this much I am able to say. Nothing further to add from me.

 

[Willamena]

But the question must be asked: Who, or what, is it that knows that consciousness cannot see consciousness?

Definition is the what. While "awareness" is defined in terms of sensing something other, and verb is defined in terms of a subject, there will be a subject of awareness. That's the current narrative.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is what we call 'reality' the world as we perceive it, or the consciousness with which we perceive it?

Nice topic, nice answers (I have just started with it). Why is it here? It merits a better forum, IMHO.

 

[godnotgod]

Definition is the what. While "awareness" is defined in terms of sensing something other, and verb is defined in terms of a subject, there will be a subject of awareness. That's the current narrative.

Yes, but these are all conceptual frameworks created by the subject/object split in the mind, a split which does not actually exist in nature. The 'subject of awareness' is exactly just one of those conceptual frameworks. From the POV of The Universe, does it see such a 'subject of awareness', or does it simply see pure awareness itself? As you yourself stated, the perceiver is unnecessary to the narrative. At least that is what I think you said.

 

[stvdv]

Is what we call 'reality' the world as we perceive it, or the consciousness with which we perceive it?

Reality: What is it?
"God's language is Silence: everything else is a poor translation" [Rumi]

You will never find the answer to this question by "thinking/talking about it" {if I understand Rumi correctly}.
A better question might be "Reality: What is it not?"

 

[Willamena]

Yes, but these are all conceptual frameworks created by the subject/object split in the mind, a split which does not actually exist in nature. The 'subject of awareness' is exactly just one of those conceptual frameworks. From the POV of The Universe, does it see such a 'subject of awareness', or does it simply see pure awareness itself? As you yourself stated, the perceiver is unnecessary to the narrative. At least that is what I think you said.

Then while "awareness" and verb are defined differently, the narrative is something else. We are never free from the narrative as long as there is a question to be answered.

 

[Polymath257]

So consciousness is an emergent property of brain function? How do we get from electro chemical reactions of a material nature to non-material consciousness?

Why do you assume consciousness is non-material?

So the brain creates a 'self' via electro chemical reactions, which in turn knows that it has created such a self? Is there now another self which sees this process occurring?

Answer to the first question: Yes.

Answer to the second question: No.

 

[Polymath257]

To be clear, you are saying that the reality of the world exists apart from the observer? That the perception of the observer is unnecessary to the separate reality of the world?

Yes. That is the claim.

 

[Polymath257]

Then were does it occur if not in consciousness? There must be the awareness of the perception for perception to be known as perception.

To be known as perception, someone must have observed it in some way. But to *be* a perception, all that is required is that the senses detect something, NOT that the consciousness is informed.

 

[Polymath257]

It is intellect that knows this by analogy. Eye cannot see itself.

It can with a mirror.

And this is also known intellectually by questioning "Who will know the knower?" If we drill down to all layers of subject-object pairs, the query boils down to who is the subject of "I am"? Eventually, nothing else is there to fall back upon, only the awareness remains. This is the intellectual part.

This query, if meditated upon earnestly (by the ego-intellect itself), reveals that we are awareness itself. We are not the sense organs or the mind that are objects to an unknown subject, which cannot be known as other than self. And it is awareness itself.

Only this much I am able to say. Nothing further to add from me.

And why is that a valid method for reaching the truth? Do all people, when they do this, reach the same conclusion? How do you know that this isn't just another illusion?

 

[George-ananda]

OK, but is the world apart from Brahman, or is the world none other than Brahman, playing itself as 'the world' via lila and maya?

I'll go with the second option; 'the world none other than Brahman, playing itself as 'the world' via lila and maya'.

 

[godnotgod]

Reality: What is it?
"God's language is Silence: everything else is a poor translation" [Rumi]

You will never find the answer to this question by "thinking/talking about it" {if I understand Rumi correctly}.
A better question might be "Reality: What is it not?"

Yes, silence is the ultimate answer, but in navigating to that point of departure, it can be productive to use the intellect to reach that threshold as 'a finger pointing to the Moon'.

Rumi is simply noting that the description is not the described, a common error in thinking that man makes, believe it or not.

 

[godnotgod]

I'll go with the second option; 'the world none other than Brahman, playing itself as 'the world' via lila and maya'.

So, then, would you agree that you and I are included in what the world is, namely, 'Brahman'?

 

[George-ananda]

So, then, would you agree that you and I are included in what the world is, namely, 'Brahman'?

I would so agree.

The material world things are then the props of Brahman in the divine play/drama where Brahman separates Himself from Himself in Act I and returns Himself to Himself. In Act II.

 

[godnotgod]

Why do you assume consciousness is non-material?

Because that is how I experience it.

Answer to the first question: Yes.

Answer to the second question: No.

1: How?

2: Something is aware of the process. What is that? A selfless awareness?

 

[godnotgod]

I would so agree.

The material world things are then the props of Brahman in the divine play/drama where Brahman separates Himself from Himself in Act I and returns Himself to Himself. In Act II.

But the 'separation' is part of the drama. It never happened.

 

[George-ananda]

But the 'separation' is part of the drama. It never happened.

I agree. It is sparks of Brahman under the illusion of being separate.

 

[godnotgod]

To be known as perception, someone must have observed it in some way. But to *be* a perception, all that is required is that the senses detect something, NOT that the consciousness is informed.

Does perception make any sense without awareness? Something has to 'know' how to interpret what is being perceived.

 

[Polymath257]

Does perception make any sense without awareness? Something has to 'know' how to interpret what is being perceived.

Wrong. There are a great many things that are perceived without getting to consciousness. The processing of the perception is done by the brain, but is never conveyed to consciousness. For example, things like digestion, blood sugar level, and internal temperature are perceived, but generally are not part of our conscious awareness.

 

[godnotgod]

Wrong. There are a great many things that are perceived without getting to consciousness. The processing of the perception is done by the brain, but is never conveyed to consciousness. For example, things like digestion, blood sugar level, and internal temperature are perceived, but generally are not part of our conscious awareness.

According to the definition of perception, awareness is involved:

per·cep·tion
pərˈsepSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: perception; plural noun: perceptions

1. the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.
   "the normal limits to human perception"
   • the state of being or process of becoming aware of something through the senses.
     "the perception of pain"
     synonyms: recognition, awareness, consciousness, appreciation, realization, knowledge, grasp, understanding, comprehension, apprehension;
     formal cognizance
     "our perception of our own limitations"
   • a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something; a mental impression.
     "Hollywood's perception of the tastes of the American public"
     synonyms: impression, idea, conception, notion, thought, belief, judgment, estimation
     "popular perceptions of old age"
   • intuitive understanding and insight.
     "“He wouldn't have accepted,” said my mother with unusual perception"
     synonyms: insight, perceptiveness, percipience, perspicacity, understanding, sharpness, sharp-wittedness, intelligence, intuition, cleverness, incisiveness, trenchancy, astuteness, shrewdness, acuteness, acuity, discernment, sensitivity, penetration, thoughtfulness, profundity;
     formalperspicuity
     "he talks with great perception"
   • PsychologyZoology
     the neurophysiological processes, including memory, by which an organism becomes aware of and interprets external stimuli.

https://www.google.com/search?q=perception