Guest guest Posted May 18, 2007 Report Share Posted May 18, 2007 Ok, there is conscious activity going on at this address, which is seperated from others' addresses. I can see the other addresses walking around, and I know they have conscious activity that it's centred around their head. Sorry if that sounds dumb, but this is how it seems in the objective world. I understand consciousness as awareness modulated by the body-mind. When this conscious activity is done, and lifeforce is gone, and the body decays, *where* is awareness? I do realise that I'm leaving myself WIDE OPEN for a barrage of one- line sutras. Go ahead. I don't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2007 Report Share Posted May 18, 2007 Good post, Jason. You're right. Awareness is to understand that I am not the objectified and objectifiable being that others name, communicate with, experience. Likewise, it is to know that no objectifiable and objectified being has appeared before me, regardless of the various names and addresses as you call them, and the ways that separation seems to be made real, such as by different experiences at the same time by different apparent beings (one is pleasure, one in pain, one being born, one making money, one beautiful, one ugly, one penniless, one with lukemia, etc., etc.) This awareness that does not decrease, does not increase. A body being born does not add to it. A body dying does not detract from it. It is, now, as it is after the death of your body, which also is now. It is not an it. It can't be objectified, not even as " subject " not even as " subjectivity. " It is not the consciousness going on in the brain of an individual body-mind unit. It is that which is aware of, as, and through that consciousness, and all consciousnesses. The objectifiable world is the conceptualized world is the world of time is the world constructed by use of memory. The world of awareness is not constructed, isn't touched by memory, isn't the result of something done, isn't the result of any process (such as being born and growing). To know one's own being is to give up objectification on all levels - if retained on even one level, it is retained. By levels I mean body, thought, feeling, relationship, process of becoming. Objectification can't be given up on purpose or by will - because purpose/will is objectification. Objectification is given up only when the truth of nonobjectification is immediately so - without division of the one who sees and that which is seen. There is no way to strive for this, claim it, give it, have it, embody it, or even be it. Words fail, because words are objectifications. -- D. Nisargadatta , " jason_de_donno " <jason.dedonno wrote: > > Ok, there is conscious activity going on at this address, which is > seperated from others' addresses. I can see the other addresses > walking around, and I know they have conscious activity that it's > centred around their head. Sorry if that sounds dumb, but this is how > it seems in the objective world. > > I understand consciousness as awareness modulated by the body-mind. > When this conscious activity is done, and lifeforce is gone, and the > body decays, *where* is awareness? > > I do realise that I'm leaving myself WIDE OPEN for a barrage of one- > line sutras. Go ahead. I don't care. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2007 Report Share Posted May 18, 2007 .... and I should add: Being aware does not mean divorce from the body in any sense. This awareness is what illuminates the body as body, and all things as they are. So, one's day to day life involves perceptions that change, feelings, interactions. One knows the difference between an apple and a telephone. ;-) -- Dan (nothing new below) Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Good post, Jason. > > You're right. > > Awareness is to understand that I am not the objectified and > objectifiable being that others name, communicate with, experience. > > Likewise, it is to know that no objectifiable and objectified being > has appeared before me, regardless of the various names and addresses > as you call them, and the ways that separation seems to be made real, > such as by different experiences at the same time by different > apparent beings (one is pleasure, one in pain, one being born, one > making money, one beautiful, one ugly, one penniless, one with > lukemia, etc., etc.) > > This awareness that does not decrease, does not increase. > > A body being born does not add to it. A body dying does not detract > from it. > > It is, now, as it is after the death of your body, which also is now. > > It is not an it. > > It can't be objectified, not even as " subject " not even as " subjectivity. " > > It is not the consciousness going on in the brain of an individual > body-mind unit. > > It is that which is aware of, as, and through that consciousness, and > all consciousnesses. > > The objectifiable world is the conceptualized world is the world of > time is the world constructed by use of memory. > > The world of awareness is not constructed, isn't touched by memory, > isn't the result of something done, isn't the result of any process > (such as being born and growing). > > To know one's own being is to give up objectification on all levels - > if retained on even one level, it is retained. > > By levels I mean body, thought, feeling, relationship, process of > becoming. > > Objectification can't be given up on purpose or by will - because > purpose/will is objectification. > > Objectification is given up only when the truth of nonobjectification > is immediately so - without division of the one who sees and that > which is seen. > > There is no way to strive for this, claim it, give it, have it, embody > it, or even be it. > > Words fail, because words are objectifications. > > -- D. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " jason_de_donno " > <jason.dedonno@> wrote: > > > > Ok, there is conscious activity going on at this address, which is > > seperated from others' addresses. I can see the other addresses > > walking around, and I know they have conscious activity that it's > > centred around their head. Sorry if that sounds dumb, but this is how > > it seems in the objective world. > > > > I understand consciousness as awareness modulated by the body-mind. > > When this conscious activity is done, and lifeforce is gone, and the > > body decays, *where* is awareness? > > > > I do realise that I'm leaving myself WIDE OPEN for a barrage of one- > > line sutras. Go ahead. I don't care. > > > 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.