I, you are always here
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
what's this got to do with the stuff on the first page?
[b]Life can be simple. Look at animals and even better look at plants.
You can also live life just fulfilling your physical needs.
You can live life fulfilling your physical needs and emotional needs.
You can live life fulfilling your physical, emotional and intellectual needs.
It is all about the quality of life.
It is about the quality of existence.
Just as animals can survive without ever pondering their own existence (even better, look at plants) you can live life, with the attitude "Eat drink and make merry for tomorrow we die."
No one is stopping you. There is another way. A way where your eating, your drinking and your merry-making, yes your life is better, more fulfilling and more exciting.
There is a way whereby you can wake up every morning with a happy song in your head. You can go through life in bliss.
You will be doing what everyone is doing outwardly but it will be different because the difference is in your mind.[/b]
-
actually, absolutely nothing..... this is a typical andrew-type of prose.Originally posted by gigabyte14:what's this got to do with the stuff on the first page? 
-
Yep I guess he loves talking bullshitOriginally posted by Chin Eng:actually, absolutely nothing..... this is a typical andrew-type of prose.
What's even worse are the people who actually take his stuff seriously -
careful jf....you might be delusional...Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Yep I guess he loves talking bullshit
What's even worse are the people who actually take his stuff seriously -
Yes there is nobody there all there is is my computer monitor. Yes there are separate consciousnesses because you have your consciousness I have mine and so forth. And yes there would only be a corpse if you weren't conscious, that's why living things have a consciousness and therefore the saying I think, therefore I am. And if there is only one consciousness like you said then why am I not conscious of this? Hmmm? If there is only one consciousness then I would be able to know what every other person in the entire world and every creature is thinking. And no your consciousness is not mine because we're thinking completely different things right now and you are conscious of different things that I am. What you're relaying is just ideas through words.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:David Carse:
...Look, it's all so incredibly simple. There is no one here. This is not a figure of speech. I mean there is truly no one here, no person, no individual speaking to you. You look at me and think there is a person here talking to you, trying to tell you something. I assure you, there is not. Look at me. If there were not Consciousness streaming through this body, what would be here? What would this body be if Consciousness were not here? A corpse, of course! Dead matter. There is nothing else here. There is only the appearance of a body, and Consciousness which animates it. You, along with the rest of the world, have assumed that there is a discreet individual person here: that the Consciousness which is the animating force here is an individual consciousness, unique to this body and separate from the consciousness in other bodies.
This is based on appearances: there appear to be separate bodies, so the assumption is that there are separate consciousness-es. The belief in this assumption blinds you to seeing What Is, and is also the cause of your experience of this life as disquieting, confusing, unhappy, and generally full of fear and suffering. But it is not the case. There is in no way an individual sitting here talking to you. This body is nothing, an appearance in the dream. All there is is Consciousness, and it is Consciousness which is streaming through this appearance.
There is nothing here that exists in and of itself. What we call the human being is not an independent being, not an originating mechanism, not a transmitter. It is a relay station, a pass-through mechanism for Consciousness, the One Consciousness, All That Is. That is what I am, talking to you. And it is the same One Consciousness listening to this, looking back at me out of those eyes you call your own. What I am when I say 'I Am' is exactly the same as what you are when you say 'I Am.'.... -
Your statement implies you are merely identifying yourself with a thought-form, thought-identity... whereas AndrewPKYap shows that he is not identifying himself as a concept -- "an individual, separate and merely one out of the billions in the world" or that 'I am fundamentally a separate entity, and there is a you who is also a fundamentally separate entity from I', even though he is free to use them as relative truths/pointers.Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:
Yes there is nobody there all there is is my computer monitor. Yes there are separate consciousnesses because you have your consciousness I have mine and so forth.[/quote]
Relatively, of course, in terms of relative truths, there are separate streams of consciousness, and you are simply an individual out of the countless.
But fundamentally... truthfully... what is this 'I' you are saying? Inquire into that... Why do we mistake our self as being merely a thought and a concept in our head? That this 'I' is "merely one out of billions separate individuals in the world"? That is merely a thought.. who knows that?
Is consciousness 'mine'? Or are you simply THAT?
What you are has nothing to do with this concept in the head. That is why AndrewPKYap said,Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
correction on the title, it should be: "I am always here"
You are not always here but you can also say "I am always here".
So the title should be "I am always here and you can say also "I am always here".
[quote]And yes there would only be a corpse if you weren't conscious, that's why living things have a consciousness and therefore the saying I think, therefore I am.This is a misunderstanding of Descartes.
Descartes: Reviving the West's Greatest Modern Vedantist
René Descartes' famous phrase, "Cogito, ergo sum"—"I think, therefore I am"—is thought by postmodern theory to be the René Descartes' famous phrase, "Cogito, ergo sum"—"I think, therefore I am"—is thought by postmodern theory to be the essence of the modern West's anti-body, anti-earth, phallologocentric imperialistic bent. In this clip, Ken explains how the postmodern critique of Cartesian dualism only gets the story half-right, ignoring the profound contribution of a philosopher who actually linked...And if there is only one consciousness like you said then why am I not conscious of this? Hmmm? If there is only one consciousness then I would be able to know what every other person in the entire world and every creature is thinking. And no your consciousness is not mine because we're thinking completely different things right now and you are conscious of different things that I am. What you're relaying is just ideas through words.[/b]
It is not two, not one. Neither same nor different. It is not one as opposed to two. Who you are has nothing to do with these concepts...
Separation is appearance. But what is it that knows the appearance, i.e what is before appearance? Consciousness.
I think I am not you... you are jondizzle.. I'm AEN... but that is merely an appearance, a thought. What is it that knows? Consciousness.
Belief in separate individuals is merely an arising thought -- just a belief.... consciousness is primal, if you know what I mean.
Consciousness is pure emptiness, it is not individual nor collective, not one or two.
But lastly and not least... "IT" manifests itself as phenomenon existence but conceals itself.
What I am saying is in terms of the causal level... Ken Wilber further explains the 'non dual side of the equation'. -
i want to sex your monkey
-
Actually, AndrewPKYap had some transcendental experience that radically alters one's understanding of self and existence.Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Yep I guess he loves talking bullshit
What's even worse are the people who actually take his stuff seriously
-
Yeah same. It's called LSD.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Actually, AndrewPKYap had some transcendental experience that radically alters one's understanding of self and existence.
Consciousness is directly linked to thought. If you say that consciousness is not something individual nor collective then you're contradicting yourself. What is it then? It's individual because when a living being is born it gains it's own consciousness. -
Maybe you have to borrow from him and photocopy yourselfOriginally posted by Chin Eng:click APKY's link at his siggies.... all i see is a book cover design.... no purchase information, no price, no nothing....
maybe all there is, is a book cover.
Months back, he mentioned that he is authoring another book which goes something like "Perfect Bliss is Possible" (not in exact words, but something like that)
No info since also. lol -
He's an author? Hmm never knew that.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Maybe you have to borrow from him and photocopy yourself
Months back, he mentioned that he is authoring another book which goes something like "Perfect Bliss is Possible" (not in exact words, but something like that)
No info since also. lol -
Predictably, a couple of them there thinks that it is funny.Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:
Yeah same. It's called LSD.[/quote]
No LSD is needed!!
LSD can alter states of consciousness, but it is not necessarily to go through such a process. And, altered states of consciousness does not mean one can experience the transcendental. The transcendental does not need altered states. It is not apart from the ordinary.
Though I have heard that LSD can trigger peak experiences (anyway, seriously don't try this at home most likely you'll just get high, that's all), the dozen+ of those who have experienced it that I have personally known (as in those people I have personally communicated with, of cos those with transcendental insights around the world are probably uncountable), have NOT used such psychedelic.Consciousness is directly linked to thought. If you say that consciousness is not something individual nor collective then you're contradicting yourself. What is it then? It's individual because when a living being is born it gains it's own consciousness.
tsk tsk... no wonder people don't understand Andrew's first post
You just cannot go beyond the concept, can you. Concepts are just concepts!!! Who is it that knows!! Consciousness, You, knows. Feel it.
Pls read his first post carefully...
----------------
AndrewPKYap:
I said this in ~EH~ where non-christians go after they die [quote]Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:hahaha, you are always here, had always been here and will always be here, as far as you are concerned. No matter where you go, you are always "here". To others you go here and there but to you, there is no such thing.
I am under the impression that some people cannot see reality, cannot know reality when reality in hidden behind the obvious.
They take words and the human language as precise, accurate and conceptually perfect.
Think what happens when "no words can describe it"
Even better, think what happens when not just you but the whole of humanity have no idea about the existence (things, concepts, ideas, words) of something.
Not only "no words can describe it" but humanity does not even know that "it" exists. Just like, "I cannot give it a name" but what happens when you do not even know "it" and nobody in this world ever the thought of giving "it" a name because nobody ever knew of its existence.
Please don't make this topic into a cimbo game. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Ok like what he said how I'm always 'here'. Of course I'm always here! The word 'here' implies the exact location I am now. It is impossible not to be 'here' unless it is someone else's 'here' and then it'll be your 'there'. How did a discussion about consciousness turn into a debate on location?
Predictably, a couple of them there thinks that it is funny.
[b]I am under the impression that some people cannot see reality, cannot know reality when reality in hidden behind the obvious.
They take words and the human language as precise, accurate and conceptually perfect.
Think what happens when "no words can describe it"
Even better, think what happens when not just you but the whole of humanity have no idea about the existence (things, concepts, ideas, words) of something.
Not only "no words can describe it" but humanity does not even know that "it" exists. Just like, "I cannot give it a name" but what happens when you do not even know "it" and nobody in this world ever the thought of giving "it" a name because nobody ever knew of its existence.
Please don't make this topic into a cimbo game. [/b] -
i dont brake for fat chicks
-
Read this. This is very well written.
There are many things that I can doubt, but I cannot doubt my own consciousness in this moment. My consciousness and even if I tried to doubt it, it would be my consciousness doubting. I can imagine that my senses are being presented with a fake reality – say, a completely virtual reality or digital reality, which looks real but is merely a series of extremely realist images. But even then, I cannot doubt the consciousness that is doing the watching…
The very undeniability of my present awareness, the undeniability of my consciousness, immediately delivers to me a certainty of existence in this moment, a certainty of Being in the now-ness of this moment. I cannot doubt consciousness and Being in this moment, for it is the ground of all knowing, all seeing, all existingÂ…
Who am I? Ask that question over and over again, deeply. Who am I? What is it in me that is conscious of everything?
If you think that you know Spirit, or if you think you donÂ’t, Spirit is actually that which is thinking both of those thoughts. So you can doubt the objects of consciousness, but you can never believably doubt the doubter, never really doubt the Witness of the entire display. Therefore, rest in the Witness, whether it is thinking that it knows God or not, and that witnessing, that undeniable immediacy of now-consciousness, is itself God, Spirit, Buddha-mind. The certainty lies in the pure self-felt Consciousness to which objects appear, not in the objects themselves. You will never, never, never see God, because God is the Seer, not any finite, mortal, bounded object that can be seenÂ…
This pure I AM state is not hard to achieve but impossible to escape, because it is ever present and can never really be doubted. You can never run from Spirit, because Spirit is the Runner. To put it very bluntly, Spirit is not hard to find but impossible to avoid: it is that which is looking at this page right now. CanÂ’t you feel That One? Why on earth do you keep looking for God when God is actually the Looker?
Simply ask, Who am I? Who am I? Who am I?
I am aware of my feelings, so I am not my feelings – Who am I? I am aware of my thoughts, so I am not my thoughts – Who am I? Clouds float by in the sky, thoughts float by in the mind, feelings float by in the body – and I am none of those because I can Witness them all.
Moreover, I can doubt that clouds exist, I can doubt that feelings exist, I can doubt that objects of thought exist – but I cannot doubt that the Witness exists in this moment, because the Witness would still be there to witness the doubt.
I am not objects in nature, not feelings in the body, not thoughts in the mind, for I can Witness them all. I am that Witness – a vast, spacious, empty, clear, pure, transparent Openness that impartially notices all that arises, as a mirror spontaneously reflects all its objects…
You can already feel some of this Great Liberation in that, as you rest in the ease of witnessing this moment, you already feel that you are free from the suffocating constriction of mere objects, mere feelings, mere thoughts – they all come and go, but you are that vast, free, empty, open Witness of them all, untouched by their torments and tortures.
This is actually the profound discovery of… the pure divine Self, the formless Witness, causal nothingness, the vast Emptiness in which the entire world arises, stays a bit, and passes. And you are That. You are not the body, not the ego, not nature, not thoughts, not this, not that – you are a vast Emptiness, Freedom, Release, and Liberation.
With this discoveryÂ… you are halfway home. You have disidentified from any and all finite objects; you rest as infinite Consciousness. You are free, open, empty, clear, radiant, released, liberated, exalted, drenched in a blissful emptiness that exists prior to space, prior to time, prior to tears and terror, prior to pain and mortality and suffering and death. You have found the great Unborn, the vast Abyss, the unqualifiable Ground of all that is, and all that was, and all that ever shall be.
But why is that only halfway home? Because as you rest in the infinite ease of consciousness, spontaneously aware of all that is arising, there will soon enough come the great catastrophe of Freedom and Fullness: the Witness itself will disappear entirely, and instead of witnessing the sky, you are the sky; instead of touching the earth, you are the earth; instead of hearing the thunder, you are the thunder. You and the entire Kosmos because One Taste – you can drink the Pacific Ocean in a single gulp, hold Mt. Everest in the palm of your hand; supernovas swirl in your heart and the solar system replaces your head…
You are One Taste, the empty mirror that is one with any and all objects that arise in its embrace, a mindlessly vast translucent expanse: infinite, eternal, radiant beyond release. And youÂ… areÂ… ThatÂ…
So the primary Cartesian dualism – which is simply the dualism between… in here and out there, subject and object, the empty Witness and all things witnessed – is finally undone and overcome in nondual One Taste. Once you actually and fully contact the Witness, then – and only then – can it be transcended into radical Nonduality, and halfway home becomes fully home, here in the ever-present wonder of what is…
And so how do you know that you have finally and really overcome the Cartesian dualism? Very simple: if you really overcome the Cartesian dualism, then you no longer feel that you are on this side of your face looking at the world out there. There is only the world, and you are all of that; you actually feel that you are one with everything that is arising moment to moment. You are not merely on this side of your face looking out there. “In here” and “out there” have become One Taste with a shuddering obviousness and certainty so profound it feels like a five-ton rock just dropped on your head. It is, shall we say, a feeling hard to miss.
At that point, which is actually your ever-present condition, there is no exclusive identity with this particular organism, no constriction of consciousness to the head, a constriction that makes it seem that “you” are in the head looking at the rest of the world out there; there is no binding of attention to the personal bodymind: instead, consciousness is one with all that is arising – a vast, open, transparent, radiant, infinitely Free and infinitely Full expanse that embraces the entire Kosmos, so that every single subject and every single object are erotically united in the Great Embrace of One Taste. You disappear from merely being behind your eyes, and you become the All, you directly and actually feel that your basic identity is everything that is arising moment to moment (just as previously you felt that your identity was with this finite, partial, separate, mortal coil of flesh you call a body). Inside and outside have become One Taste. I tell you, it can happen just like that!
(Source: Boomeritis, Sidebar E: “The Genius Descartes Gets a Postmodern Drubbing: Integral Historiography in a Postmodern Age”. More to be found in The Simple Feeling of Being, a collection of Ken Wilber’s inspirational, mystical and instructional passages drawn from his publications, based on his experiences.) -
Don't get you. So someone else is 'there', but you're still here, right?Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Ok like what he said how I'm always 'here'. Of course I'm always here! The word 'here' implies the exact location I am now. It is impossible not to be 'here' unless it is someone else's 'here' and then it'll be your 'there'. How did a discussion about consciousness turn into a debate on location?
BTW, It is not about a matter of location. Here is not 'here' as opposed to 'there'.
What AndrewPKYap is saying is that to YOU, there is no 'there' or 'location'. There is only Being Here, your present awareness... 'location' is in the objective world. But You, Subject, Seer, is only the undeniability of your present awareness, nothing to do with objects and locations.
Who You Are is NOT any object that moves here and there... You are the unmoving awareness/Seer. (though, at the higher level of non-dual realisation/no-self, even the Seer is dissolved into the Seen, where all manifestation are realised to be self-luminous, self-shimmering, self-knowing, i.e Manifestation is the Source.. i.e there is no hearer, the hearing hears, no seer, the seeing sees, everything is there by itself, self-luminous)
BTW, you can't conceptualise what it means by being here... anything you conceptualise just misses the mark.
'Here' doesn't have a fixed shape and form, objects or location... it is empty. If you conceptualise 'here' as having this or that, the next moment passes and it's gone. You can only feel it and go with the flow.
Past mind is ungraspable, present mind is ungraspble, future mind is ungraspable. ~ Diamond Sutra -
--------
-
Consciousness is directly linked to thought. If you say that consciousness is not something individual nor collective then you're contradicting yourself. What is it then? It's individual because when a living being is born it gains it's own consciousness.
I think I misread what you meant.
But this is not what I am talking about..
The word 'Consciousness' is very confusing and can mean many things. I'm not talking about the development or maturity of an individual consciousness...
I am talking about the very fundamental awareness inherent in all beings. -
what the...........its the berlin wall of text
-
Ohh....right. Btw, I've always thought of what the article questions ever since I was little. I was about 8 when I realised that we don't have a direct connection to reality and our reality is defined and presented to us through our senses and we form a simulacrum of reality in our minds and it scared the sh*t out of me. So yeah AndrewPKYap does make sense I guess but he's just not very eloquent and not very good at communicating what he's trying to say.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:I think I misread what you meant.
But this is not what I am talking about..
The word 'Consciousness' is very confusing and can mean many things. I'm not talking about the development or maturity of an individual consciousness...
I am talking about the very fundamental awareness inherent in all beings.
Yeah I've always believed in the existence of a soul because that is what we are. We're not merely made up of thoughts because thoughts are just electrical signals in our brains and we wouldn't be any different than a computer with very advanced artificial intelligence.
So I guess I've known this whole time but couldn't understand what you were trying to tell me -
Just updated my other message above. Pls read my reply.Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Ohh....right. Btw, I've always thought of what the article questions ever since I was little. I was about 8 when I realised that we don't have a direct connection to reality and our reality is defined and presented to us through our senses and we form a simulacrum of reality in our minds and it scared the sh*t out of me. So yeah AndrewPKYap does make sense I guess but he's just not very eloquent and not very good at communicating what he's trying to say.
Yeah I've always believed in the existence of a soul because that is what we are. We're not merely made up of thoughts because thoughts are just electrical signals in our brains and we wouldn't be any different than a computer with very advanced artificial intelligence.
So I guess I've known this whole time but couldn't understand what you were trying to tell me
What you said is getting there... But actually, even to say there is a soul misses the mark... because we imagine there is a formless entity called self.. that is not the case. Formless does not mean a ghostly entity residing in the body somewhere that has no form. Your awareness cannot be reduced to an objective reality, whether form or formless. Means you cannot see 'consciousness' as an object -- because the moment you see it as whatever, a soul, what you are seeing is an object, not the Seer! Any image we form about that, is not it, is merely an object.
Now you know why, Consciousness is not individual or collective, or whatever. You cannot see 'self' or 'consciousness' as an object! It is only because you see 'consciousness' as an object, you see yourself as an individual apart from billions of others. But consciousness is not an object, it is the Seer, pure objectless emptiness consciousness.
But even that is not ultimate yet! This is only the description of the causal, the Witness. Only when one realises Non-Dual, No-Self, that is true enlightenment. I just wrote recently in Are they still Buddhists without Karma and other fantastics?:
---------
BTW for a more integral perspective concerning consciousness and psychology (and anything!) I would recommend reading Ken Wilber's book, such as The Integral Vision: A Very Short Introduction to the Revolutionary Integral Approach to Life, God, the Universe, and EverythingOriginally posted by ilangobi:bohiruci: Actually my position is not to say that spiritual explanations are wrong. Personally I am open to the possibility. I won't assume that science can explain the spiritual, rather, I will continue to search for the answers within science. And yes, I may fail.
An Eternal Now: Ah yes. Guilty as charged, I definitely did not read through your posts in detail. I just wanted to point out parts of what you cited which are inconsistent with what academics would believe today.
Ok i read through the interview part which you posted. This is what I think it's saying (correct me if I'm wrong):
Modern scientific approach today will fail in finding the seat of consciousness, because the approach itself involves the very consciousness it tries to seek.
Yes that does make sense, and it is a problem for anyone who wants to rationalize consciousness. Of course, if the problem wasn't difficult, it wouldn't be exciting either. Well, thank you for sharing![/b][/quote]
Close. You are almost right
As Indian mystic Sri Ramana Maharshi said, ...Because you seek consciousness. Where can you find it? Can you reach it externally? You have to find it internally. Therefore you are directed inward. Again the 'Heart' is only the seat of consciousness or the consciousness itself...
Throughout the world, Mystics and Contemplatives are walking an inward journey to touch the deepest levels of Consciousness (the mystics who experience his own Presence calls it 'I AM' or God, etc, which is the seat of consciousness), and this can only be dealt by spiritual approach, and can only be understood intuitively and experientially. It is a form of 'touch'. Such peak experiences, transpersonal realisations, also being studied in 'transpersonal psychology'.
However, the emptiness nature of Consciousness must also be known (a higher level of realisation)... after which Consciousness is then realised to be non-dual (no subject-object separation), non-local, filling all spaces (the intuitive insight that all there is is consciousness, but there is no 'seat' of consciousness). Thusness said 2 years ago,
[quote]Originally posted by Thusness:
Hi longchen,
It is ungraspable not because the Ultimate Object cannot be the subject of observation; but rather there is really no such ‘ultimate object’ hiding behind anywhere. A ‘someone’ inside somewhere is from the very beginning a mistake. True authenticity comes when we realized that any form of ‘centricity’ is illusionary.
To experience the Pure Presence of Isness, “I AMness” must completely dissolve. The Pure Presence you experienced is non-local and has no-center. It becomes an ‘I AM’ due to linear mode of analysis. If you have time do explore into insight meditation and the essence of ‘Emptiness’
Regards,
Thusness -
Yes but when I say soul I don't mean the traditional religious idea of a spirit. I refer to the unexplainable awareness we possess.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:BTW for a more integral perspective concerning consciousness and psychology (and anything!) I would recommend reading Ken Wilber's book, such as The Integral Vision: A Very Short Introduction to the Revolutionary Integral Approach to Life, God, the Universe, and Everything -
OkOriginally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:Yes but when I say soul I don't mean the traditional religious idea of a spirit. I refer to the unexplainable awareness we possess. Words are just pointer 
May you and all beings attain enlightenment quickly... -
That might work too, introducing a "Heavenly Father". Introducing a "Heavenly Father" into the picture changes nothing, except that it makes people feel better.Originally posted by Chin Eng:“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feed them. Are much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?”
Matthew 6:25-27 -
Unfortunately while it makes people feel better, it is not reality and whatever is not reality slips easily into delusion.