Consciousness is not a 'thing' in the conventional sense - it cannot be examined by an outside entity, for nothing lies outside of consciousness. For most, there is consciousness of 'something' - it is consciousness which illumines everything. Without consciousness nothing could be known. But consciousness can be consciously recognized when all else drops away - it is Self-evident. This is a paradox that one struggles with when attempting to explain That which is beyond concept through concepts. The mind will never understand this and will throw up one argument after another, but through direct investigation This is directly 'seen' by the seeing ItSelf.
poppers
JoinedPosts by poppers
-
106
Should Anything Exist????Says Who???Should Nothing Exist?? Says Who?
by frankiespeakin inshould anything exist?
that is a question that nobody can answer with authority.
if any one says they have the answer, i ask:"says who?
-
-
-
106
Should Anything Exist????Says Who???Should Nothing Exist?? Says Who?
by frankiespeakin inshould anything exist?
that is a question that nobody can answer with authority.
if any one says they have the answer, i ask:"says who?
-
-
poppers
There is no 'transmission' from awakened ones to unawakened ones - that implies separate entities. There are no separate entities, only awareness - there is no 'my' awareness or 'your' awareness, just awareness. What You are actually, pure awareness, always is; however, what You are is obscured by what you believe yourself to be. You are already awake but don't know it. When such a 'person' hears an awakened one speak there can be a strong resonance with what is heard - this is awareness recognizing ItSelf in an apparent 'other'. There can be dramatic shifts in perspective at this point, and the ego entity drops completely but this is rare. What usually happens is a series of brief recognitions into what you actually are followed by periods where you slip back into an ego bound perspective. When ego has been recognized as returning then awareness can be redirected back into onto ItSelf. Through regular resting in what you are, pure awareness, the ego structure is further weakened and eventually collapses. At this point, identification shifts from ego to awareness.
Ego will never be completely gone after it collapses, it just won't be believed in anymore as being who you are. It's like the ego hangs around in the background but little attention is given to it because it's known to be a ficticious entity. Just like in a dream, when you wake up in the morning the dream character loses its ability to sway you one way or another because it is seen to be a fiction of the mind that was created by the 'little me' while asleep.
Instead, awareness is in the foreground rather than being obscured by the ego. When ego resurfaces it is immediately spotted for what it is and it recedes again to the background. In this new perspective, everything is simply seen without a conceptual framework. All concepts are stored in the memory and are of the past. This perspective, however, takes place in the eternal now and is one of great peace and serenity. However, emotions and thoughts will continue as before but they will no longer be resisted, they just flow through unobstructed. The only thing which resists anything else is the ego, and since ego is no longer believed in everything is allowed to be here, now.
Those practices and incidents which you are referring to indicate the arising of brief (sometimes permanent) periods which stop the mind and ego so that what you actually are can be 'seen' - and That is always here, just waiting to be noticed. -
106
Should Anything Exist????Says Who???Should Nothing Exist?? Says Who?
by frankiespeakin inshould anything exist?
that is a question that nobody can answer with authority.
if any one says they have the answer, i ask:"says who?
-
-
poppers
Yes, what I'm talking about is awakening to what you actually are. Some call this 'enlightenment' but I don't care for that term because it carries with it a lot of conceptual baggage that people usually misinterpret. In truth, there are no 'enlightened people' - that implies a separate 'someone' who can become enlightened, when in fact there is no separate entity apart from awareness. Instead, there is a direct knowing what I actually am in reality - pure awareness, beyond space and time. That 'thing' which arises in awareness and is known as 'poppers' is just a temporary phenomenon, composed of ideas which were clung to as being 'me'. Being exists prior to 'poppers', and That's what I am, and That's what you are - this is not something I have accepted as who I am but it is the direct 'knowing' ItSelf.
poppers -
9
THE FULL MONTY! Jehovah's striptease
by Terry inif we are to believe scripture, jehovah has been performing one long striptease over the centuries.
his plan has hidden parts we all long to see.
little by little he has dropped a shoulder strap and flashed a peek with the cat and mouse of prophecy.
-
-
poppers
As usual Terry, I find your writing crisp, imaginative, and entertaining.
In another post in this thread you said, "If only we could begin life without any phoney stories!" We do, but it get systematically stripped away from us by parents and societal institutions and our heads get filled up with all sorts of nonsense. Each of us has been hood-winked into believing we are separate entities who are wrapped up in our own 'story of me', and we don't even consider the possiblity that this may not be true. Those who do the hood-winking have themselves been hood-winked, so they don't know any better.
You said, 'If only we were born with a truly fresh start!' Again, we were - and you can return to that 'fresh start' at any time. Investigate directly who it is that believes in the 'story of me' and other such phoney stories which dance in our minds and are clung to by the ego.
'Who am I?' is the question that will lead you back into the natural state you were born with. This question redirects awareness from what's outside oneself toward the 'entity' which asks the question. Try to locate this entity and see if it's real or just a matrix of ideas you have about the indentity which you cling to as 'me'. This is the question that can change how life is viewed and lived, and is the most important question one can ask if one is serious about knowing what you actually are.
If you are serious about this question you are making yourself available for the most amazing adventure.
poppers -
106
Should Anything Exist????Says Who???Should Nothing Exist?? Says Who?
by frankiespeakin inshould anything exist?
that is a question that nobody can answer with authority.
if any one says they have the answer, i ask:"says who?
-
-
poppers
Should anything exist? is the question. 'Should' is the critical word in this question. Investigate directly within yourself to locate the one who would use the word 'should' or any other concept for that matter. Who is this entity that tosses out ideas to consider? Is that entity real or just a bundle of ideas which are clung to giving oneself a sense of identity which is believed in but seldom questioned as to whether or not IT actually exists. If you can find such an entity existing in reality, rather than as a temporary idea, then the question becomes more meaningful.
Descarte's statement 'I think therefore I am' is one to consider carefully. Think about this: doesn't there need to be 'amness' before thinking can occur? Isn't there a direct 'knowing' that you exist prior to thought? There is simply a 'knowing' that you are, with no thought needed. Experiment for yourself - deny you exist by actually trying to believe 'I don't exist'. Even if you convince yourself you don't exist what is it that lets you know that you don't exist?
Reverse Descarte's statement to read 'I am, therefore I think', and then ask 'Who am I?' and the possibility for a life altering change in perspective lies at your feet.
poppers -
95
What grammatical errors bug you the most?
by poppers infor me it's the use of : .
it's as a possessive - it's means "it is", so if you don't want to say "it is" don't use the apostrophe.
there are others that bug me but this one is the worst.
-
-
poppers
Wow, thanks people for all of the replies. To update you, not that you really care, I don't have a computer so I haven't been able to keep up with new posts as they come in. So, I'll just comment on a few things that were brought up.
A couple of times the word pedant came up. Well, since I am a teacher I don't consider the topic pedantic. We try very hard to get students to communicate their ideas as precisely as possible, and good grammar aides in that endeavor. To read something which is well written is a pleasurable experience because the writer has taken the time to thoughtfully and clearly explain to his audience what he is trying to say. The same goes for listening to a speaker. It's one thing to get an idea across regardless of how it's presented and it's another to think and reflect carefully so that idea carries with it the maximum impact. Not having to wade through misspellings and improper grammar goes a long way in creating the most impact. Of course, one must take into consideration the arena in which one is communicating. There are lots of times when it doesn't matter, and in some cases it can even be more effective, but when it is clear that someone is trying to be serious it becomes distracting when poor grammar and misspelled words are used because of hastiness or lack of understanding in how to effectively communicate. Granted, some words are easily misspelled or misused, but knowing which to/two/too, their/they're/there and some of the others mentioned are not that hard to remember. To thoughtlessly use some of these puts the burden on the audience to understand what it is that you as the communicator are trying to say.
Farkel - I saw your post this morning and was struck by what you pointed out. Not being a JW myself I wasn't aware of the comma placement in the scripture cited. Indeed, such a simple thing can have a profound change in the meaning of what is written, and in this case a critical one. Thanks for pointing it out.
Quoting oneself in conversation - I've never understood why some people feel that this necessary - so irritating to listen to.
Fluff thread - to some this is fluff, to others it has meaning. It you find it fluff, so what? I've seen fluffier.
There are many on this board who are articulate communicators and I commend you all. There are many who are provocative communicators and I accept you all. There are many who are sensitive and caring and I appreciate you all. And there are many who write from the heart and you are all embraced.
poppers - of the perceived pedantic class (by some) -
95
What grammatical errors bug you the most?
by poppers infor me it's the use of : .
it's as a possessive - it's means "it is", so if you don't want to say "it is" don't use the apostrophe.
there are others that bug me but this one is the worst.
-
-
poppers
I hear you, Terry. BTW, I very much enjoy your writing style as well as your insightful posts.
-
28
What Brand of Toothpaste do you use?
by CountryGuy ini need your advice.... i've used pepsodent since i was a little boy.
however, since i have stopped shopping at walmart, i am having trouble finding it now.
i have about another week's worth left in this tube, then i'm going to have to change brands.
-
-
poppers
I really like Arm & Hammer - not any of the the gels but the original. It's like a professional cleaning and I find it very refreshing.
-
11
Creative days
by rockhound ingenesis records that on the fifth creative day, the waters of the earth would teem with living creatures, and every winged bird would fill the sky.
at the beginning of the sixth creataive day, all the creatures that move along the ground were created.
keeping these texts in mind, i'd like to share with you some of my observations about this wonderful earth that have convinced me that the creative days of genesis were far longer than the 7,000 year long periods we were taught as jehovah's witnesses.
-
-
poppers
Hi rockhound - that was simply great. Welcome to the board.
poppers -
95
What grammatical errors bug you the most?
by poppers infor me it's the use of : .
it's as a possessive - it's means "it is", so if you don't want to say "it is" don't use the apostrophe.
there are others that bug me but this one is the worst.
-
-
poppers
Your spelling looks pretty good to me Brenda. Hugs back at ya.