What if you're missing the purpose? (page 13)

Twitch

If I have learnt something from my religious experience, it is to be particularly wary of interpreters who claim not to interpret.

Twitch (of the "lost his way to understanding and enlightenment,....." klass)

quietlyleaving

cog

Seeing living examples of the breakdown of the brain's processes made me question if this "conscious awareness" of all, that we experience is the true self? Is this idea of our true nature just another artificial construct of our language based mind, as Narkissos has pointed out? When we are no longer consciously aware, when we can no longer understand or use language, when we can no longer sense the world around us, yet we still exist, who are we then? What is our purpose then?

In the above scenario its the people around him that sustain his life and identity - if he was on his own he would die.

there is purpose for an individual in such a situation through the people around him. the medical profession may be able to repair what he has lost etc. But without those functions and the people around him he wouldn't exist for very long.

cognizant dissident

Poppers, I agree, there are definitely levels of consciousness and even people with severe brain damage may have some levels of responsiveness. Yet we often say of such ones, they are not the same, they are not the person they were, they are not themselves.

I guess what I am asking is this, how much of our true self, our true nature, is really just the conditioned physical process of neurons firing in response to stimulation, including the ability to ask this question? We want our lives, ours selves to have greater meaning, greater purpose, greater levels of consciousness, other planes of consciousness, but perhaps the truth of the matter is that we are just a big tube, with three openings and we put dead plants and animals in one end and expel compost from the other. Perhaps all our senses and awareness are only to aid in this purpose and survive. When our senses deteriorate, our ability to consume and expel deteriorates until we finally die. Perhaps all the artificial constructs/beliefs of our minds are just further machinations to aid in our organisms survival. Including the belief in life after death. Our organisms drive to survive is so great that it will even imagine non-existant planes of existence where its conscious awareness will survive death in some way and then spend inordiante amounts of time trying to bring that plane into existence at all costs (ie, religiously motivated wars that kill all who do not share the vision/goal for survival). Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if our biological organisms drive to survive, is what eventually causes us all to become extinct?

LOL! I am depressing myself again with this line of reasoning!

Cog

nvrgnbk

Be happy Cog!

Find some happifying substances!

Don't you live close to tetra? LOL!

quietlyleaving

cog

I like to remain open to possibilities and there are enough mysteries to keep me seeking. I have come to love humanity and nature.

The thing about eckhart tolle that I don't like is that for me there is a ' wait on Jehovah' aspect to it.

And also witnesses like to say we can see the truth others can't - so if there is any hint of exclusive understanding/knowledge to anything I'll keep questioning.

JamesThomas

Narkissos:

James,
Is the complex questions and expositions created by the mind, a valid reason to not see for oneself?
Did I say that?
Everyone "sees" what they have to "see," everyone then interprets it as they can. And no matter what we have "seen" we can only refer to it (on this board for instance) through interpretations.
If I have learnt something from my religious experience, it is to be particularly wary of interpreters who claim not to interpret.

I agree! Nothing thought or said or posted here is what is being referred to. I often say that all thoughts and words are mere interpritations; and that nothing I say is true; and we need to look for our-selves and see first-hand. Words regarding our "true-being" (or whatever interpretive label we put on it) at best are only an enticement to look and see if there is any valid reality that the words point to. Considering what we have been through with religion, wariness of interpreters is a very healthy thing, yet it does not mean that a sign pointing to Paris is useless because it's not Paris. j

nvrgnbk

And also witnesses like to say we can see the truth others can't - so if there is any hint of exclusive understanding/knowledge to anything I'll keep questioning.

I hear you loud and clear ql.

Ironically, it's the lack of exclusivity to this way of thinking that draws me to it.

It's universal. It's real. No books or external revelations are needed to experience awareness. Tolle's book IS NOT the answer. It's just a way of explaining that which has always been there.

IMHO.

poppers

We call ourselves "human beings" - form is what we identify with, and indeed it is the form, the "human" part, we are referring to when we say "they are not themselves". Even if they could continue to think they may think that themselves. This is our lament, to regret the changing nature of our form, and when our identity is invested in the form we suffer. But the "being" part of the equation is completely overlooked and that never changes because it is no "thing" in itself, though it can be known. When we know that as our reality then the changing form no longer is a source of suffering.

What seems to be unique about the human form is its capactity to reach beyond itself and cognize the underlying consciousness. We are like an instrument for consciousness to recognize itself. When the instrument declines consciousness remains, though the capicity for self-awareness has dissolved. Where could consciousness possibly go? In that we find our salvation, our freedom, and our capacity to fully embrace manifestation without fear. At last we know what it is to be a "human being".

JamesThomas

Coggy:

I guess what I am asking is this, how much of our true self, our true nature, is really just the conditioned physical process of neurons firing in response to stimulation, including the ability to ask this question? We want our lives, ours selves to have greater meaning, greater purpose, greater levels of consciousness, other planes of consciousness, but perhaps the truth of the matter is that we are just a big tube, with three openings and we put dead plants and animals in one end and expel compost from the other. Perhaps all our senses and awareness are only to aid in this purpose and survive. When our senses deteriorate, our ability to consume and expel deteriorates until we finally die. Perhaps all the artificial constructs/beliefs of our minds are just further machinations to aid in our organisms survival. Including the belief in life after death. Our organisms drive to survive is so great that it will even imagine non-existant planes of existence where its conscious awareness will survive death in some way and then spend inordiante amounts of time trying to bring that plane into existence at all costs (ie, religiously motivated wars that kill all who do not share the vision/goal for survival). Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if our biological organisms drive to survive, is what eventually causes us all to become extinct?

There is a very important and compelling ache behind your questions. Isn't what you are asking, simply : "What am I; really; really; really?" I suggest taking the agony of your earnest and sincere desire to want to know -- within. I have experienced that it is just this hunger that is the vehicle that carries us to undeniable realization of what we seek.

j

cognizant dissident

We call ourselves "human beings" - form is what we identify with, and indeed it is the form, the "human" part, we are referring to when we say "they are not themselves". Even if they could continue to think they may think that themselves. This is our lament, to regret the changing nature of our form, and when our identity is invested in the form we suffer. But the "being" part of the equation is completely overlooked and that never changes because it is no "thing" in itself, though it can be known. When we know that as our reality then the changing form no longer is a source of suffering.

What seems to be unique about the human form is its capactity to reach beyond itself and cognize the underlying consciousness. We are like an instrument for consciousness to recognize itself. When the instrument declines consciousness remains, though the capicity for self-awareness has dissolved. Where could consciousness possibly go? In that we find our salvation, our freedom, and our capacity to fully embrace manifestation without fear. At last we know what it is to be a "human being".

I question the underlying assumption of some of these statements: for instance, does consciousness really underly the human form or is consciousness a product of the human form, specifically, the brain interpreting the signals from the nervous system? Could it be true that our forms are not an instrument for our consciousness to recognize itself but that our consciousness is but an instrument for our form to recognize itself/survive? What is the difference between consiousness and self-awareness that the former would remain when the latter has dissolved? I suggest that when our form changes, and is finally dissolved/composted that our "being", our "consciousness", our "awareness", also ceases to exist and is also dissolved. Yes, it is our lament to regret this inevitable changing of our form into non-existence along with the cosnciousness that was produced by the form. That is why so many delude ourselves that this conscious awareness takes another shape or form and continues to exist, that it is somehow apart from or greater than the form which produced it. Yet, there is no evidence for this. I submit it is also delusion.

Cog

What if you're missing the purpose?

Share this