[davidsun]

Thank you for the comprehensive clarification of what you mean, Seeker. I still think you don't get, or at least you are choosing(?) to deflect and so avoid engaging with what I mean. Re the following snippet from your post, for example:

There being a polarity in duality ... we can however, in this seeming limitation rotate the polarity of our awareness temporarily confined in the body as in-form consciousness. We do this by resting analytical thought and encouraging intuition. The former is restricted to in-form consciousnesses or the ego, whilst intuition to Universal consciousnesses. The ego discourages us* (*pure awareness) to use intuition since intuition has no ego as doer, while fragmented analytical thought has the ego as the doer. In fact, senses too have an internal polarity but we have mostly used the pole pointed outwards ... external.

You are still perseverating in cleaving (i.e. separating) what you call 'pure' awareness from its earthly soul-presence. 'Awareness' (which, in my view is just a dynamic 'feature' of what I call 'mind', which in turn is in a faculty/power of 'soul' and so inseperable from it) is never 'pure' in the way you mean, in the sense of a 'thing' that exists or can exist by itself. It is always connected to and so 'colored' by a soul's gestalt/constellation -- initially one might say by the soul gestalt/constellation of our 'Creator' and then by its 'rays' ... the infinitely diverse, various gestalts/constellations of each and every one of our (derivative!) souls in and out of 'worldly' existence.

I hope you 'get' the fact that since this is my view, I 'see' your hanging on to the idea of 'pure' awareness as being an (childishly) 'idealistic' (false-ideal! idolatory!) clinging to something that is unreal (which can never be 'real'!), and hence an escapist (from reality) delusion. This doesn't mean that our awareness is confined to our 'bodies'. It just means that after we die, for example, our 'awareness' will still be a function of (i.e. a 'feature' of 'mind' that is deployed by) our souls which will always have a vibration/color of their 'own', just as the entirety of Creation will always be a 'feature' of Life that reflect the 'vibe' of our Creators' SOUL.

The ideal of being 'pure' is a boondoggle, IOW, Though the flavors and concentrations of 'sugar' may vary, there is only sugar-water (the sugar and the water are inseparable), IOW. This is the Oneness and the Interconcectedness of Being (all being!), which you are denying and on a Quixotic mission to 'get' 'out' of, IMO. Your response (which I deeply appreciate in genuineness of) does not (and IMO, because of your premises cannot) address this fact.

'Pure' implies that personal 'existence' on this 'plane' and/ou other 'planes' is 'impure' by 'nature', which it isn't, Bro. "There is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean." (Romans Ch.14)

Regarding your 'ranking' of logic and intuition: Intuition and logic are just different ways of accessing and processing info. 'Intuition' is also subject to being 'wrong' or 'incomplete', btw. From my book:

"One shouldn’t therefore decide it is better to just rely on what is thought of as intuition instead. Though spontaneously arising thought-feeling gestalts and prompts may frequently be totally appropriate and Life-affirming, they are often purely reflexive phenomena, like the excitement of Pavlov’s dogs upon hearing a familiar-sounding bell, heavily influenced by, if not completely a function of, prior patterns of perception and conditioning. As demonstrated by the fact that acclaimed clairvoyants also make erroneous pronouncements, intuition is not a totally trustworthy indication. Even the most impressive revelation does not derive from direct perception of Life’s actual layout, but is a subjective ‘projection’ based on what is ‘alive’ in the domain of one’s personal or group psyche at the moment."