Guest guest Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 - Nirgunananda J_Krishnamurti Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:02 PM Re: [JK] choiceless awareness/to Assi Hi Siebe and Assi I was seeing yours concepts about de awareness and I would like to explain my knowledge about Self, Awareness, objective consciousness and mind/ego. The Self is knowledge of " myself " , but myself without ego, pure awareness only.The Self is self satisfied and do not need do anything. We can have the " sense " of Self when we understand that the Self is the perception of " being " in plenitude that is: to be, and have the consciousness of being forever and happiness for having the consciousness of being forever. " Sat Chitt ananda " We with de consciousness in the Self " in ourselves " without no objective consciousness is awareness, because awareness is abstract consciousness, then: Awareness is abstract consciousness: no images, no thoughts, no quality, no attachment, no identification, the only identification is with the perception of " being in plenitude " without no necessity of anything. The awarenees is the Supreme Reality. Objective consciousness Is the consciousness of the objects, images, forms that we see. When the mind sees the objects made by her, is not she that see, is the objective consciousness that see by her part named witness, because there is attention on seeing. If the object is present in the mind, but the observer " witness " no, then there is not the objective consciousness, there is only awareness that is consciousness of the being, pure being, not of that object that is within the mind. Then objective consciousness is the contact of the mind with de object within herself but, with the witness. The witness is the action of observing the objects, images, forms. Mind/ego Mind is the tool to build all the things that are ready within the Self. As all the things are ready within the Self, then the Self is self satisfied and do not need do anything. But like all the things are no ready within the mind, then the mind is not self satisfied. Ego is all the creation of the mind as thoughts, objects, images, forms. RESUME As the Self is self satisfied and do not need do anything, then in the moment that we are satisfied, we are the Self. When We are not satisfied we are in domination of the mind, We are attached by desire or fear. As we can see is very simple the play. The awareness " the consciousness in the Self " is the Supreme Reality. When we get these concepts we become the Supreme Reality and we know that in the Reality there is not to do, in the mind all appear and desappear and nothing is. If you have any questions please put it lovely. Best Regards So Ham Swami Nirgunananda - siebe groen J_Krishnamurti Tuesday, January 04, 2005 2:50 PM Re: [JK] choiceless awareness/to Assi Siebe wrote: > I believe it is more truthfull (for me, at the moment) > to say: > -what we are (the quality of our brain, nerves, senses; > the intensity behind our feelings, the quality of mental > factors (like concentration and attention), the quality of > our conciousness etc) prescripes what we 'see' (what we are > aware off). > You can notice this in your life, right? Assi * If we want to get very technical, we have to understand that the body/brain is only has a neuro-chemical interface with what ever 'is'. The sensual apparatus really acts as a 'screen' to limit the field of available data, in order for us to be able to function as physical beings and to be able to navigate 'physical reality', but it is also true that there is more to existence than 'what meets the eye'. Goodafternoon Assi, Thanks. I do not comment the above. I want to share some experiences. Experiences which illustrate awareness is not unconditioned. Some examples from life: -When i sleep bad or are tens or sad ...., this is influencing what i am aware off. The condition, mentally and fysically, prescripes what i become aware off. -When my father died, the sadness coloured my seeing very much for a long time. I see, pain is always colouring seeing. I saw this many times in my life. When pain was gone or understood, seeing changed. This pain can be very subtle. That's why i belief there can only be clear or pure seeing when we are completely free of any pain or suffering. So, in my opinion, pure awareness is like an ideal. I believe it is Nirvana. -I noticed in my life that my relationship with Krishnamurti changed. I thought all he said was true or factuall. I absorbed his teaching and it felt so true. FELT. At that moment it was. But..now..after a while...there is a different perspective. I can see why it felt true for me at that time. Now, i see it is nor true nor untrue what he said. In some sense it suited him and it suited me at that time. -the mentall factor " concentration " , directly prescripes what we are aware off. The quality of concentration can be very poor. This means attention is shifting all the time. We cannot even read a book. I experienced it. These are example why i believe, -when i change (my fysicall and mentall condition) seeing changes. Understanding changes. For me, pure awareness or pure seeing is an ideal. > Pain, suffering, intense experiences etc, are factors which > prescripes what we become aware off. The quality of our being > prescripes (the intensity of) feelings, the line of thoughts, > the stability of awareness etc. That's what I see. Assi * Then this means that you 'believe' awareness is limited to the physical senses, and to physical phenomena, right? Siebe I believe the mind itself is a sense. The quality of that mind is a very important factor in the process of seeing. A mind can be infected by hate, by desire, by passion, by ignorance. Maybe...maybe...there is pure seeing or pure awareness as a potentiall in all of us...but i belief, this does not mean, we do see pure. I belief the best guarantee to pure seeing is to be without hate, without desire, passion and ignorance. > Our difference of opinions comes down to: > -you belief awareness or seeing is (exists) uncondioned. > Its existance does not depend on anything. It is without > cause and exists unconditioned. Would its existence > depend on other factors and therefor be conditioned, you > would immediately see, its qualities depend on the quality > of its causes. * Yes, I would not limit existence or awareness to the perceptions of the sensual organs of the body/brain. Do you believe the mind is a sense? I believe it can be seen like this. ... Also, I am suggesting that 'pure awareness' is not conditioned in any way. Yes, i know you do. Krishnamurti also did. This is belief. It cannot be part of inquiry. It cannot be part of experience too, unless, there is some kind of standard we can use. I take some trust in the experience and the words of the Buddha. If there is " pure " awareness, i believe, he knew what it is from experience. I believe in this sense it is: a total understanding of ourselfs and life, to have realised Nirvana. Furthermore, I am suggesting that awareness is so basic and fundamental to 'all that is', It depends how you look upon nature. Is a flower aware of the light, when it grows to it? Is a mechanic process without any awareness of the light? What does that awareness of the flower mean? Does it see the light, does it feel the light, does is smell the light, does it taste the light? Whatever... awareness prescripes conciousness, right? that it is not in anyway dependent on phenomena, except in terms of expression. 'The whole' is not dependent on 'the part', but 'the part' is 'wholly' dependent on 'the whole' I do not see what you want to express? > -i belief awareness is conditioned. It changes while > its causes change. * 'Pure awareness' is causeless and unconditioned. It is an 'eternal constant', but it is not an 'entity', and it is not just a 'belief', and it is not in any way a product of body/brain 'impressions'. Maybe it is, maybe it is not. We cannot know, unless we know. But the question remains: -when you talk about seeing as something in your own life, are you talking about pure seeing? Have you heard that now scientist believe that the perceivable universe represents perhaps less than 3% of what's really 'out there'? ... I wonder what this means, Siebe? Have you ever considered that other people-with certain specific mental and fysicall qualities-do see more then 'we' do? Have you considered, your seeing might change one day? In Buddhism seeing is something which changes as understanding changes and therefor we change. In Suttra's there is a description how, for example, paranormal observation can be there, some day, when time is ripe. Siebe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.