Guest guest Posted February 6, 2006 Report Share Posted February 6, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > " omikron23 " <omikron23 > Re: Trapped in a Bubble of Consciousness... > > > > > > I may also put this differently: Why am I only aware of what I am > > > aware of, and not what you and everybody else is aware of at the > > same > > > time? > > > Hey, I found out sumthin interesting yesterday; my brow chakra calibrates > well into the range of enlightenment on the Hawkins calibration of > consciousness scale. WooHooo!! My brow is enlightened! Hehe. Oh, but........the rest of > me isn't. Oops! Hehe. > > So what's the point? Only that, if we can all agree that none of us knows > our ass from a hole in the ground, we can sit around and have some fun with > concepts that have nothing at all to do with Absolute Truth. For example, we can > ponder just what it is that Awareness is " aware of " . Hmmmm, awareness is the > totality of all that is and there is nothing but awareness. Given that > hypothetical contextual conceptualization, awareness is not " aware of " anything; > it simply IS awareness itself. > > To be 'aware of' something, one must seemingly not be that which one is > aware of. Since Awareness itself can't play that game, consciousness arises out > of awareness as the experiential aspect of God. Why do it do dat? God is > infinite potentiality, and consciousness is one of those potentialities, and > potentialities tend to actualize. IOW, it does it cause it can. > > So, what is required in order to be qualified for the job of experiential > aspect of God? Well, first you have to give up your day job as supreme, > omnipotent, omniscient Allness and become a somethingness that can sit behind the > counter and witness other bits and pieces of somethingness come in and out the > door. IOW, experiencing, by it's nature, is the experience of something that > denies the experience of everything. Experiencing is the birth of separation > and the creation of endless dualities, stuff being experienced through the > perceiving mind that identifies stuff by comparing stuff to other stuff and > figuring out what stuff it's like and what stuff it's just the opposite to, > stuff like that. > > So the silly question might arise, why can't an experiencer experience > everything that everyone else experiences since all the experiencers are just > pimples growing on the same consciousness, and consciousness is what we all > really are, rather than individual experiencers? We could say that the total > summed experience of all experiencers is equivalent to the total experiential > aspect of God, or consciousness itself, but take a gander at what that consists > of. There are 6.5 billion human experiencers alone. Although the kind of > consciousness is different, animals, plants minerals and even subatomic particles > are part of the experiential aspect of God. Multiply this by every celestial > object in every universe in every dimension throughout all time and cram that > into the single moment of Now and tell me what that experience looks like. > Damn, I have trouble slowing my own thoughts down! I'm not even gonna go > there, and God can't go there either, which is why you are here and why you will > never know the experiential reality of anybody else's experience but your own. > > God is not a concept, not a thought, not a perception, not an experience. > God IS, I AM, get over it. It's far too simple for any of us to comprehend, > which never stopped us from trying. > > Phil > > > PS, on that 'enjoying flaming others' thang, I highly recommend taking a > really close look see at that one. Phil, I really enjoyed mauling over this post of yours. I see it as one of the more interesting ones that have come in lately. The first paragraph, mentioning Dr. Hawkins' Calibration Scale of Consciousness, led me to learn a little bit about Applied Kinesiology and Ideomotor Action. I learned that although the term " Ideomotor Action " has been around for about 150 years, even many trained scientists do not know about it and get fooled by it. These same self-deluded scientists often become leading supporters of and staunch advocates for pseudoscientific theories, such as Applied Kinesiology, and mislead many into seriously believing in the very things you mention in that first paragraph of yours. Rather than taking such things with a grain of salt or viewing them in the same light as you do - simply having " fun with concepts which have nothing at all to do with Absolute Truth - many followers would stake their life savings on the supposed efficacy of such a pseudoscientific methodology as Hawkins'. I, too, enjoy playing around with the God and Awareness concepts. I have no idea why I find it fun though. Not always, however. I do get tired of playing and want nothing more than to go back in the house and watch Mother Earth bake me an Apple Pie or something. How's your mug? Throw some wood on the fire and I'll go get some more of my homemade mugwort. Plus, I think Mom's Apple Pie is just about cool enough for consumption. I like slices of cheese on mine. Do you? I'll cut some if you want. Lol. " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2006 Report Share Posted February 7, 2006 In a message dated 2/6/2006 2:29:58 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069 Re: Trapped in a Bubble of Consciousness.../Phil Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > " omikron23 " <omikron23 > Re: Trapped in a Bubble of Consciousness... > > > > > > I may also put this differently: Why am I only aware of what I am > > > aware of, and not what you and everybody else is aware of at the > > same > > > time? > > > Hey, I found out sumthin interesting yesterday; my brow chakra calibrates > well into the range of enlightenment on the Hawkins calibration of > consciousness scale. WooHooo!! My brow is enlightened! Hehe. Oh, but........the rest of > me isn't. Oops! Hehe. > > So what's the point? Only that, if we can all agree that none of us knows > our ass from a hole in the ground, we can sit around and have some fun with > concepts that have nothing at all to do with Absolute Truth. For example, we can > ponder just what it is that Awareness is " aware of " . Hmmmm, awareness is the > totality of all that is and there is nothing but awareness. Given that > hypothetical contextual conceptualization, awareness is not " aware of " anything; > it simply IS awareness itself. > > To be 'aware of' something, one must seemingly not be that which one is > aware of. Since Awareness itself can't play that game, consciousness arises out > of awareness as the experiential aspect of God. Why do it do dat? God is > infinite potentiality, and consciousness is one of those potentialities, and > potentialities tend to actualize. IOW, it does it cause it can. > > So, what is required in order to be qualified for the job of experiential > aspect of God? Well, first you have to give up your day job as supreme, > omnipotent, omniscient Allness and become a somethingness that can sit behind the > counter and witness other bits and pieces of somethingness come in and out the > door. IOW, experiencing, by it's nature, is the experience of something that > denies the experience of everything. Experiencing is the birth of separation > and the creation of endless dualities, stuff being experienced through the > perceiving mind that identifies stuff by comparing stuff to other stuff and > figuring out what stuff it's like and what stuff it's just the opposite to, > stuff like that. > > So the silly question might arise, why can't an experiencer experience > everything that everyone else experiences since all the experiencers are just > pimples growing on the same consciousness, and consciousness is what we all > really are, rather than individual experiencers? We could say that the total > summed experience of all experiencers is equivalent to the total experiential > aspect of God, or consciousness itself, but take a gander at what that consists > of. There are 6.5 billion human experiencers alone. Although the kind of > consciousness is different, animals, plants minerals and even subatomic particles > are part of the experiential aspect of God. Multiply this by every celestial > object in every universe in every dimension throughout all time and cram that > into the single moment of Now and tell me what that experience looks like. > Damn, I have trouble slowing my own thoughts down! I'm not even gonna go > there, and God can't go there either, which is why you are here and why you will > never know the experiential reality of anybody else's experience but your own. > > God is not a concept, not a thought, not a perception, not an experience. > God IS, I AM, get over it. It's far too simple for any of us to comprehend, > which never stopped us from trying. > > Phil > > > PS, on that 'enjoying flaming others' thang, I highly recommend taking a > really close look see at that one. Phil, I really enjoyed mauling over this post of yours. I see it as one of the more interesting ones that have come in lately. The first paragraph, mentioning Dr. Hawkins' Calibration Scale of Consciousness, led me to learn a little bit about Applied Kinesiology and Ideomotor Action. I learned that although the term " Ideomotor Action " has been around for about 150 years, even many trained scientists do not know about it and get fooled by it. These same self-deluded scientists often become leading supporters of and staunch advocates for pseudoscientific theories, such as Applied Kinesiology, and mislead many into seriously believing in the very things you mention in that first paragraph of yours. Rather than taking such things with a grain of salt or viewing them in the same light as you do - simply having " fun with concepts which have nothing at all to do with Absolute Truth - many followers would stake their life savings on the supposed efficacy of such a pseudoscientific methodology as Hawkins'. I, too, enjoy playing around with the God and Awareness concepts. I have no idea why I find it fun though. Not always, however. I do get tired of playing and want nothing more than to go back in the house and watch Mother Earth bake me an Apple Pie or something. How's your mug? Throw some wood on the fire and I'll go get some more of my homemade mugwort. Plus, I think Mom's Apple Pie is just about cool enough for consumption. I like slices of cheese on mine. Do you? I'll cut some if you want. Lol. " Silver " I'll take cheese on absolutely anything, thanks. Bring it on over to the cliff and we'll dangle our feet over the edge and guzzle the mugwort. The view is magnificent! Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2006 Report Share Posted February 7, 2006 > I'll take cheese on absolutely anything, thanks. Bring it on over to the > cliff and we'll dangle our feet over the edge and guzzle the mugwort. The view > is magnificent! > > Phil Could be dangerous, Phil. It's pretty potent stuff. We might fall over!! It's all fun and games until someone's eye gets poked out. That's what Mom says. Hehe. " Silver " > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2006 Report Share Posted February 7, 2006 In a message dated 2/7/2006 11:56:13 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069 Re: Trapped in a Bubble of Consciousness.../Phil > I'll take cheese on absolutely anything, thanks. Bring it on over to the > cliff and we'll dangle our feet over the edge and guzzle the mugwort. The view > is magnificent! > > Phil Could be dangerous, Phil. It's pretty potent stuff. We might fall over!! It's all fun and games until someone's eye gets poked out. That's what Mom says. Hehe. " Silver " True........Okay, make some room on that log. Not a good time to play fast and loose with the void. ~ Phil 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.