The thingy known as Consciousness

July 28, 2003

Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,

Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as Consciousness.

Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about Consciousness.

What is Consciousness?

July 28, 2003

Nisargadatta , Sandeep Chatterjee

<sandeepc@b...> wrote:

>

> Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,

>

> Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as Consciousness.

>

> Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about Consciousness.

>

> What is Consciousness?

That from which the question arises, " What is Consciousness? "

at the very moment it is asked.

-- Dan

July 28, 2003

the question:

>>

What is Consciousness?

<<

an answer:

<<

That from which the question arises, " What is Consciousness? "

at the very moment it is asked.

<<

simplified:

That from which every moment arises or not, Dan?

sk

July 28, 2003

Nisargadatta , " skoggman " <skoggman> wrote:

> the question:

>

> >>

> What is Consciousness?

> <<

>

> an answer:

>

> <<

> That from which the question arises, " What is Consciousness? "

> at the very moment it is asked.

> <<

>

> simplified:

>

> That from which every moment arises or not, Dan?

>

> sk

Indeed, Mr. Skogg!

And that in which the human being arises to feel and perceive,

" This is my experience this moment " -- or not.

d

July 28, 2003

Your question is loaded when you say "thingy".

Consciousness is not thingy.

Consciousness is manifestation

Consciousness is appearance

Consciousness is the dreaming

-Bill

Sandeep Chatterjee [sandeepc]Monday, July 28, 2003 4:44 AMNisargadatta Subject: The thingy known as Consciousness

Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,

Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as Consciousness.

Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about Consciousness.

What is Consciousness?

**If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1Under the Message Delivery option, choose "No Email" for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes.

July 28, 2003

Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote:

> Your question is loaded when you say " thingy " .

> Consciousness is not thingy.

>

> Consciousness is manifestation

> Consciousness is appearance

> Consciousness is the dreaming

>

> -Bill

Sandeep knows all this stuff anyways, Bill.

He's just putting us through our paces,

like when you run your horses around

the track, so they get to enjoy their

exercise.

Or like someone putting out birdseed

in the backyard, for the fun of

hearing how the birds will chirp!

Laughing,

Dan

July 28, 2003

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote:

> > Your question is loaded when you say " thingy " .

> > Consciousness is not thingy.

> >

> > Consciousness is manifestation

> > Consciousness is appearance

> > Consciousness is the dreaming

> >

> > -Bill

>

> Sandeep knows all this stuff anyways, Bill.

>

> He's just putting us through our paces,

> like when you run your horses around

> the track, so they get to enjoy their

> exercise.

>

> Or like someone putting out birdseed

> in the backyard, for the fun of

> hearing how the birds will chirp!

>

> Laughing,

> Dan

I noticed you were the first horsy to jump

in the ring. Dan chasing the Guru carrot!

Brain soup stewing! Laugh.

Pete

July 28, 2003

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> Sandeep knows all this stuff anyways, Bill.

>

sure he knows his stuff but everyone is helpless when it comes to

explaining what consciousneness is. even if our modern holy

path " Science " can explain someday consciousness in objective or

quantum terms that the logical minds can agree on, i don't experience

consciousness as an object.

here is something that i read in a scientific/philosophic (sci-phi?)

book:

with the big bang not only matter was pushed away in great speed,

space was created as well. before the appearance of matter and

space, there was only consciousness, non-spatial and non-temporal

state. with the evolution of the human brains/mind, somehow this non-

spatial state and the mind interacted, which suggests that this non-

spatial state is still here/everywhere (paraphrasing...too lazy to

type it from the book, which is no longer in my possession. it was

an illustrated book about consciousness).

what i like this about this theory is that...it does not explain

consciousness only in bio-chemical/quantum terms but it also gives a

room for pre-quantum (a term i made up) state. in other words, i

have never believed " i am consciousness " or " all there is...is

consciousness " but i am fascinated with what seems to emerge/manifest

with consciousness. now you can say that this is nothing but your

paranoid mind suspecting there's something beyond what you perceive

but hey i didn't ask for this supertition to emerge in my

mind...blame evolution.

the tao that can be spoken may not be the true tao but it didn't stop

from anyone from formulating their model of reality/delusion and

these discussions groups are a proof of that.

July 28, 2003

Hi Hur -

> > Sandeep knows all this stuff anyways, Bill.

> >

>

> sure he knows his stuff but everyone is helpless when it comes to

> explaining what consciousneness is. even if our modern holy

> path " Science " can explain someday consciousness in objective or

> quantum terms that the logical minds can agree on, i don't experience

> consciousness as an object.

Yes, what is not an object can't be explained, because

an explanation is an object.

> here is something that i read in a scientific/philosophic (sci-phi?)

> book:

Funny -- sci-phi.

So, scientific philosophical psychology must be

sci-phi-psy -- a fraternity which I would have

joined in college, if it existed.

> with the big bang not only matter was pushed away in great speed,

> space was created as well. before the appearance of matter and

> space, there was only consciousness, non-spatial and non-temporal

> state. with the evolution of the human brains/mind, somehow this non-

> spatial state and the mind interacted, which suggests that this non-

> spatial state is still here/everywhere (paraphrasing...too lazy to

> type it from the book, which is no longer in my possession. it was

> an illustrated book about consciousness).

Yeah -- that's nice -- except for the silly assumption that

some really existing brain-thing is evolving in space and time

to communicate with what isn't a something and is the source

of everything.

Why wouldn't there be constant " communication " if you want to

call it that -- with every subatomic particle in the whole

shebang?

After all, the whole shebang got " produced " at once -- whole --

so why assume there are split-off pieces of it, like brains,

that communicate separately with it?

Of course, there is nothing preventing brains from producing

delusional thought-schemes in which the brain becomes a

someone which communicates with other separable someones.

> what i like this about this theory is that...it does not explain

> consciousness only in bio-chemical/quantum terms but it also gives a

> room for pre-quantum (a term i made up) state. in other words, i

> have never believed " i am consciousness " or " all there is...is

> consciousness " but i am fascinated with what seems to emerge/manifest

> with consciousness. now you can say that this is nothing but your

> paranoid mind suspecting there's something beyond what you perceive

> but hey i didn't ask for this supertition to emerge in my

> mind...blame evolution.

Paranoia? Hmmm ... I've heard of a thing called " paranoid insight " --

it's the moment where everything falls into place, and suddenly

the suspected conspiracy is evident -- all the pieces fit together

and it's suddenly clear how I've been tricked and who it is

that's been setting me up.

But with the right kind of insight, paranoia turns into

metanoia -- you are producing the conspiracy which has

you under observation ...

> the tao that can be spoken may not be the true tao but it didn't stop

> from anyone from formulating their model of reality/delusion and

> these discussions groups are a proof of that.

Right.

This isn't the true tao, it's just fun!

Peace on earth, good paranoias to all,

Dan

July 29, 2003

Nisargadatta , Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc@b...> wrote:

>

> Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,

>

> Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as Consciousness.

>

> Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about Consciousness.

>

> What is Consciousness?

it is the initiating energy of what IS

July 29, 2003

-

dan330033

Nisargadatta

Monday, July 28, 2003 07:41 PM

Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Nisargadatta , Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc@b...> wrote:> > Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,> > > Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as Consciousness.> > Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about Consciousness.> > What is Consciousness?That from which the question arises, "What is Consciousness?" at the very moment it is asked.

--------

And what happens to that thingy when no question arise?

July 29, 2003

-

skoggman

Nisargadatta

Monday, July 28, 2003 08:25 PM

Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

the question:>> What is Consciousness?<<an answer:<< That from which the question arises, "What is Consciousness?"at the very moment it is asked.<<simplified:That from which every moment arises or not, Dan?

-------

Sk, could you kindly expand on that?

Still floundering with the "arising moment from"

Since you are defining Consciousness with the help of that which emerges from it, ......an arising moment having duration, are you saying Consciousness is a thingy with duration?

July 29, 2003

- dan330033

Nisargadatta

Monday, July 28, 2003 09:00 PM

Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Nisargadatta , "skoggman" <skoggman> wrote:> the question:> > >> > What is Consciousness?> <<> > an answer:> > < That from which the question arises, "What is Consciousness?"> at the very moment it is asked.> <<> > simplified:> > That from which every moment arises or not, Dan?> > > sk :)Indeed, Mr. Skogg!And that in which the human being arises to feel and perceive, "This is my experience this moment" -- or not.

---------

Dan, your last ..........."or not"............did you mean to say ........"in that in which the human being arises....or not arises?

Since arising has to exist with declining or de-rising, .............is Consciousness supposed to be that Holy Grail of constancy, against which change is recognized as "change"?

If that is what you meant to convey, .......the Holy Grail constancy, is contrasted against what, ..............for it to be affirmed as a constancy or as the Absolute Truth?

Taking your definition of arising, ........the very question on Consciousness itself being an arising, ...........as much as any answer being an arising ...

...how can Consciousness be affirmed (or negated)?

But Nisargadatta, Ramana, Ramesh and scores of the Advaitic dude, swear by Consciousness, while negating all the arisings, ...don't they?

For any issue, .............the neat bromide offered by these dudes, is "it's not you which has the issue, it's Consciousness which has that issue".........( whether the issue is seeking solace for constipation or seeking enlightenment)

Earnestly awaiting enlightenment.

July 29, 2003

Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

Sk, could you kindly expand on that?

Still floundering with the "arising moment from"

Since you are defining Consciousness with the help of that which emerges from it, ......an arising moment having duration, are you saying Consciousness is a thingy with duration?

Hi Sandeep,

That from which every instant arises. Is that Better? It took my whole life to write down this affirmation; every expansion on that would be therefore experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion of duration.

sk

July 29, 2003

sk,

re: Consciousness as...That from which every instant arises.

The trouble with your term "arises" (it seems to me) is that it implies a "rising up",a beginning, middle, end sort of thing.

Consider the "totality of phenomenal appearance". Referring to such totality as"Appearance", then Appearance is Now, or What Is. Appearance is undifferentiated.Appearance has no apparent subject, for if a subject were "apparent" it would be included in Appearance itself. Note that there are not separate "moments" or"instants" of Appearance.

I suggest that Consciousness *is* Appearance, that Appearance is not *in* Consciousness, but that Appearance itself *is* Consciousness.

Or, in other terms, as I stated before, Consciousness = Manifestation.

If a *subject* of experience is posited then Consciousness is carved into a *this* and a *that*. Appearance is realized only on dissolution of experientialsubject-object.

Experiential subject-object appears as "fact" and uncontestable until dissolution ofsuch, whereupon such fact is realized as only psuedo-fact and not real.

-Bill

skogen [skoggman]Monday, July 28, 2003 10:37 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

Sk, could you kindly expand on that?

Still floundering with the "arising moment from"

Since you are defining Consciousness with the help of that which emerges from it, ......an arising moment having duration, are you saying Consciousness is a thingy with duration?

Hi Sandeep,

That from which every instant arises. Is that Better? It took my whole life to write down this affirmation; every expansion on that would be therefore experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion of duration.

sk

July 29, 2003

-

skogen

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, July 29, 2003 11:06 AM

Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

Sk, could you kindly expand on that?

Still floundering with the "arising moment from"

Since you are defining Consciousness with the help of that which emerges from it, ......an arising moment having duration, are you saying Consciousness is a thingy with duration?

Hi Sandeep,

That from which every instant arises. Is that Better?

Not exactly,..... as the term "moment" replaced by the term "instant", is the same hoopla.

It took my whole life to write down this affirmation;

That is the very point.

Any affirmation being yet another arising instant, .........can any affirmation, even if you are clever enough to couch it as "that",..........can any affirmation, be anything more than a hoopla?

An affirmation will need the affirmer to be separate from the affirmed, would it not?

And since you say every instant arises from "that", ...............the "affirmer" being an instant, .........the affirmer along with the affirmed, would be both arisings in duration, would it not?

To state Consciousness is......... "that", from which..............

......or.......

.............. Consciousness, is such and such......

..., would it not need a position separate from Consciousness, in order to make that affirmation?

If all positions, are nothing but arisings of Consciousness, can there be an answer to the question, an answer which in essence,... is not a conditioned hoopla?

For example, the conditioning in the affirmation "That from which every instant arises", being......... there is something which arises.

And that's a cop-out,...... which says, the answer is non-verbalized, it has to be experienced in the silence of the heart in the right side of the chest, or whichever part of the body.

For any experience is once again an arising instant, isn't it sk? :-)

So,.....Nisargadatta, Ramana and Ramesh were/are bullshitters of the highest class?

A young, innocent mind not yet corrupted by all the Advaitic stuff, never read any N/R/R,........asks this question,.....

....What is Consciousness.......

every expansion on that would be therefore experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion of duration.

You mean peeing dogs don't have birthdays.

And thus not agonizing over mid-life crisis's, they don't get driven to start searching for the meaning of Life and Consciousness et al?

A nice coloured hydrant to pee upon, .... is Nirvan,.... doggy style?

Hmmmmm

July 29, 2003

Hi Bill,

Or, in other terms, as I stated before, Consciousness = Manifestation.

sk: That's what I meant now expressed and simplified to an equation! But not exactly...let me see, how is that:

"ConMasciousnifesnesstation" (reductio at hoppla)

sk

July 29, 2003

Beautifully put Bill!

Consciousness is somethingness appearing out of nothingness. It is that which

is created from nothingness folding back on itself. As Nisargadatta put it,

" Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of

duality. " Or " Whenever a form is infused with life, consciousness appears by

reflection of awareness in matter. "

Toby

>

> Bill Rishel [sMTP:plexus]

> Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:32 PM

> Nisargadatta

> RE: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

>

> sk,

>

> re: Consciousness as...That from which every instant arises.

>

> The trouble with your term " arises " (it seems to me) is that it implies a

" rising up " ,

> a beginning, middle, end sort of thing.

>

> Consider the " totality of phenomenal appearance " . Referring to such totality

as

> " Appearance " , then Appearance is Now, or What Is. Appearance is

undifferentiated.

> Appearance has no apparent subject, for if a subject were " apparent " it would

be

> included in Appearance itself. Note that there are not separate " moments " or

> " instants " of Appearance.

>

> I suggest that Consciousness *is* Appearance, that Appearance is not *in*

> Consciousness, but that Appearance itself *is* Consciousness.

>

> Or, in other terms, as I stated before, Consciousness = Manifestation.

>

> If a *subject* of experience is posited then Consciousness is carved into a

> *this* and a *that*. Appearance is realized only on dissolution of

experiential

> subject-object.

>

> Experiential subject-object appears as " fact " and uncontestable until

dissolution of

> such, whereupon such fact is realized as only psuedo-fact and not real.

>

> -Bill

>

> skogen [skoggman]

> Monday, July 28, 2003 10:37 PM

> Nisargadatta <Nisargadatta >

> Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

>

> Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc

<sandeepc> wrote:

>

> Sk, could you kindly expand on that?

>

> Still floundering with the " arising moment from "

>

> Since you are defining Consciousness with the help of that which emerges from

it, ......an arising moment having duration, are you saying Consciousness is a

thingy with duration?

>

> Hi Sandeep,

>

> That from which every instant arises. Is that Better? It took my whole life

to write down this affirmation; every expansion on that would be therefore

experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration

deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we

project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by

the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other

species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion

of duration.

>

> sk

>

July 29, 2003

Hi Sandeep,Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

-

skogen

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, July 29, 2003 11:06 AM

Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

Not exactly,..... as the term "moment" replaced by the term "instant", is the same hoopla.

sk: hoopla!

And since you say every instant arises from "that", ...............the "affirmer" being an instant, .........the affirmer along with the affirmed, would be both arisings in duration, would it not?

sk: why did you ask "What is consciousness?",if you want everything but an answer?

To state Consciousness is......... "that", from which..............

......or.......

.............. Consciousness, is such and such......

..., would it not need a position separate from Consciousness, in order to make that affirmation?

sk: Yes and no! The separation is virtual.

If all positions, are nothing but arisings of Consciousness, can there be an answer to the question, an answer which in essence,... is not a conditioned hoopla?

sk: no; again, why did you ask?

For any experience is once again an arising instant, isn't it sk? :-)

sk: for whom?

So,.....Nisargadatta, Ramana and Ramesh were/are bullshitters of the highest class?

sk: Perhaps! Like we all, who presume to capture "Truth" in words and concepts.

A young, innocent mind not yet corrupted by all the Advaitic stuff, never read any N/R/R,........asks this question,.....

....What is Consciousness.......

sk: You don´t seem to me uncorrupted

every expansion on that would be therefore experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion of duration.

You mean peeing dogs don't have birthdays.

sk: I dont know, ask a peeing dog!

And thus not agonizing over mid-life crisis's, they don't get driven to start searching for the meaning of Life and Consciousness et al?

sk: I don´t know what you mean here!

A nice coloured hydrant to pee upon, .... is Nirvan,.... doggy style?

sk: Should I say something? Why should I say something?

Hmmmmm

sk: Hmm...hoopla is a great term!

sk

**If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1Under the Message Delivery option, choose "No Email" for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes.

July 29, 2003

Nisargadatta , Sandeep Chatterjee

<sandeepc@b...> wrote:

>

> Hiya learned Gurus and Masters on this List,

>

> Please do advise,....... what is this thingy known as

Consciousness.

>

> Nisarga, Ramesh, Ramana, they all go on about

Consciousness.

>

> What is Consciousness?

THIS

July 29, 2003

Hi sk

-

skogen

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, July 29, 2003 02:19 PM

Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Hi Sandeep,Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

-

skogen

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, July 29, 2003 11:06 AM

Re: Re: The thingy known as Consciousness

Sandeep Chatterjee <sandeepc wrote:

Not exactly,..... as the term "moment" replaced by the term "instant", is the same hoopla.

sk: hoopla!

And since you say every instant arises from "that", ...............the "affirmer" being an instant, .........the affirmer along with the affirmed, would be both arisings in duration, would it not?

sk: why did you ask "What is consciousness?",if you want everything but an answer?

eh?

You gave an answer, I am trying to grasp it, by unravelling the strands on which it appears to be based upon.

To state Consciousness is......... "that", from which..............

......or.......

.............. Consciousness, is such and such......

..., would it not need a position separate from Consciousness, in order to make that affirmation?

sk: Yes and no! The separation is virtual.

If the separation is virtual,sk .......then that afirmation after a life-long,......would it not be a virtuality?

If all positions, are nothing but arisings of Consciousness, can there be an answer to the question, an answer which in essence,... is not a conditioned hoopla?

sk: no;

OK, give an example which is not so.

The implicit conditioning in your previous answer....was that seen?

again, why did you ask?

To see whether there is an unconditioned hoopla.

For any experience is once again an arising instant, isn't it sk? :-)

sk: for whom?

For the same who posits "arising instants" and then posits a "that" from which the instants, arise.

So,.....Nisargadatta, Ramana and Ramesh were/are bullshitters of the highest class?

sk: Perhaps! Like we all, who presume to capture "Truth" in words and concepts.

So, are you saying N/R/R was just doing that?

Reams of paper with captured words, appears to have been endorsed by them.

Secondly, are you saying that "Truth" (in this case the answer to the question), can be captured in the "wordless", in the "concept-less"

A young, innocent mind not yet corrupted by all the Advaitic stuff, never read any N/R/R,........asks this question,.....

....What is Consciousness.......

sk: You don´t seem to me uncorrupted

No?

Aw shucks

every expansion on that would be therefore experienced as a compression by me. Laugh! I avoided the terms time and duration deliberately. Duration and time are, IMHO, biological filters through which we project an individual reality based on a collective validation internalized by the evolutional process of our species (doesn't this sound intelligent?). Other species perhaps just experience rythm, changes of repetition without a notion of duration.

You mean peeing dogs don't have birthdays.

sk: I dont know, ask a peeing dog!

And thus not agonizing over mid-life crisis's, they don't get driven to start searching for the meaning of Life and Consciousness et al?

sk: I don´t know what you mean here!

A nice coloured hydrant to pee upon, .... is Nirvan,.... doggy style?

sk: Should I say something? Why should I say something?

You can always go woof, woof, woof, to signify the three states of waking, dreaming and deep-sleep and wag something to signify the Turiya.

ROFL.

Sorry, sk, couldn't help that.

Back to serious business, ....What is Consciousness..

Hmmmmm

sk: Hmm...hoopla is a great term!

Yes.

Could it be that the key lies in that term?

I wonder.

sk

July 29, 2003

> > What is Consciousness?

>

> That from which the question arises, " What is Consciousness? "

> at the very moment it is asked.

>

> --------

> And what happens to that thingy when no question arise?

Nothing ever happens to it.

July 29, 2003

Hi San!

> > >>

> > What is Consciousness?

> > <<

> >

> > an answer:

> >

> > <<

> > That from which the question arises, " What is Consciousness? "

> > at the very moment it is asked.

> > <<

> >

> > simplified:

> >

> > That from which every moment arises or not, Dan?

> >

> > sk

>

> Indeed, Mr. Skogg!

>

> And that in which the human being arises to feel and perceive,

> " This is my experience this moment " -- or not.

>

> ---------

>

> Dan, your last ........... " or not " ............did you mean to

say ........ " in that in which the human being arises....or not arises?

Yes.

> Since arising has to exist with declining or de-

rising, .............is Consciousness supposed to be that Holy Grail

of constancy, against which change is recognized as " change " ?

Consciousness seemingly creates change,

when it differentiates through perception,

that which changes, and that which doesn't change.

Change arises with changelessness, and vice versa.

Nothing has changed for Consciousness, yet the changing

is as much Consciousness as the unchanging -

which properly speaking is neither changing nor

unchanging -- is prior to being, time and contrast, yet " how "

being, nonbeing, time and contrast appear to happen.

> If that is what you meant to convey, .......the Holy Grail

constancy, is contrasted against what, ..............for it to be

affirmed as a constancy or as the Absolute Truth?

Well, hopefully I clarified what I meant to convey.

I don't believe in an absolute truth, as any absolute truth

that can be expressed or believed, isn't absolute by virtue

of neither expression nor belief being absolute.

So, Consciousness has limits as a pointer, because it tends

to be taken as an absolute that can be believed in or spoken

about, that has qualities, such as staying always the same.

> Taking your definition of arising, ........the very question on

Consciousness itself being an arising, ...........as much as any

answer being an arising ...

Yes, we get into conundrums, because anything said is an arising.

So, if I say, " Consciousness, " saying that is an arising, and

can't really say anything about " this " which is prior to

any arising, including the arising of time.

> ..how can Consciousness be affirmed (or negated)?

It can't. There is no affirmer or negator apart from it,

to affirm or negate it, and no one to whom it can be

affirmed or negated.

> But Nisargadatta, Ramana, Ramesh and scores of the Advaitic dude,

swear by Consciousness, while negating all the arisings, ...don't

they?

Good point. That tends to happen.

And of course, they themselves and their audience are arisings.

So, they are negating themselves, their audience, and anything

they have said.

Which means, they haven't arisen, nor said anything, nor

has anyone received anything from them.

> For any issue, .............the neat bromide offered by these

dudes, is " it's not you which has the issue, it's Consciousness which

has that issue " .........( whether the issue is seeking solace for

constipation or seeking enlightenment)

Yes, which ends up with: nothing is happening, nothing

was created or destroyed.

And as a bromide, that's useless to most folks, who say, it

doesn't help me if I'm starving, or my wife has cancer,

or I have bills to pay and lost my job -- and you say none

of this is happening.

Usually, teachers create " levels " and have teachings for

people at different levels, or bromides for different

levels of understanding. So, they may advocate " compassion "

at one level, or " devotion, " and " acting without being

attached to consequences, " and then for someone who is

" ready " -- offer: nothing has ever happened.

> Earnestly awaiting enlightenment.

I'll just bet you are <s>

You already are the enlightenment you are awaiting.

Peace,

John Q. Consciousness

July 29, 2003

Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote:

> sk,

>

> re: Consciousness as...That from which every instant arises.

>

> The trouble with your term " arises " (it seems to me) is that it

implies a

> " rising up " ,

> a beginning, middle, end sort of thing.

>

> Consider the " totality of phenomenal appearance " . Referring to such

totality

> as

> " Appearance " , then Appearance is Now, or What Is. Appearance is

> undifferentiated.

> Appearance has no apparent subject, for if a subject

were " apparent " it

> would be

> included in Appearance itself. Note that there are not

separate " moments " or

> " instants " of Appearance.

>

> I suggest that Consciousness *is* Appearance, that Appearance is

not *in*

> Consciousness, but that Appearance itself *is* Consciousness.

>

> Or, in other terms, as I stated before, Consciousness =

Manifestation.

>

> If a *subject* of experience is posited then Consciousness is

carved into a

> *this* and a *that*. Appearance is realized only on dissolution of

> experiential

> subject-object.

>

> Experiential subject-object appears as " fact " and uncontestable

until

> dissolution of

> such, whereupon such fact is realized as only psuedo-fact and not

real.

>

> -Bill

Hi Bill --

That's well-described.

However, if appearance is consciousness, and doesn't

appear in anything, and any subject is itself

appearance -- then how do you know anything appeared

at all?

Is there any appearance ever?

What are we talking about?

-- Dan

July 29, 2003

Hi San --

I like what you have to say on this subject.

If you're going to assert:

> To state Consciousness is......... " that " , from

which..............

>

> .....or.......

> ............. Consciousness, is such and such......

>

> .., would it not need a position separate from Consciousness,

in order to make that affirmation?

a statement with which I agree,

and this:

> If all positions, are nothing but arisings of Consciousness,

can there be an answer to the question, an answer which in

essence,... is not a conditioned hoopla?

which, indeed, follows,

then, when you say:

> For example, the conditioning in the affirmation " That from

which every instant arises " , being......... there is something which

arises.

you've discounted your own statements (which, if not arising, can't

be read or responded to)

> And that's a cop-out,...... which says, the answer is non-

verbalized, it has to be experienced in the silence of the heart in

the right side of the chest, or whichever part of the body.

but then, your statement also is a cop-out, because it has

to arise to pronounce that another statement is a cop-out

> So,.....Nisargadatta, Ramana and Ramesh were/are bullshitters

of the highest class?

If so, then how do you rank your bullshit in respect to theirs?

And this last part is cute -- it reminds me of a poem Judi

has posted frequently, in which Walt Whitman describes

what he prefers about the company of animals to humans <s>.

Peeing peace without agonizing,

Dan

> You mean peeing dogs don't have birthdays.

>

> And thus not agonizing over mid-life crisis's, they don't get

driven to start searching for the meaning of Life and Consciousness

et al?

>

> A nice coloured hydrant to pee upon, .... is Nirvan,....

doggy style?

>

> Hmmmmm

Sign In

The thingy known as Consciousness

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest