A Powerful Lesson

https://youtu.be/kHRmFtzoaYg?t=260

Here's my experience about one's true nature and keeping mind centered on It.

It's not necessary and in fact keeping one's mind centered on awareness defeats the purpose of meditation. It's the classic observer trap and just a more benign version of ego.

I like the way I once heard Jon Kabat-Zinn describe it as resting in awareness. That was quite a while back, probably 6 years, and I didn't understand its real significance then but it stuck with me and I incorporated that technique into my formal practice.

https://youtu.be/5TeWvf-nfpA?list=PL...PNokg&t=117 8

If practiced properly and to some degree mastered it is experiencing non-dual awareness. It's escaping mind, ego and meditation's observer trap and is in fact the sought-after meditative state.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

If practiced properly and to some degree mastered it is experiencing non-dual awareness. It's escaping mind, ego and meditation's observer trap and is in fact the sought-after meditative state.

This may seem to be an impossibility to you because so many (including you?) axiomatically assume and believe it to be absolutely true, but have you thought about the 'what if' possibility that you call "awareness" or "non-dual awareness" isn't the 'core' or 'base' state of Atman (or Brahman or God or Being)?

I mean, what if (any kind of) "awareness" is just a feature, i.e. a 'faculty' or 'power', of Brahman (the Soul of the Self of (all) Being?

The way I 'see' IT, the core Essence of Brahman (God, Soul, whatever you want to call IT) is Creativity (anything and everything, 'you' included, is a 'manifestation' of Creativity), and Creativity is functionally co-activated by the 'operation' of Mind and Spirit - analogous to the way that 'manifestations' of Light, or Light Rays, are functional expression of an an electromagnetic 'wave', a coordinated wave of Electricity and Magnetism.

Just as there can't be 'Light', or a Light Wave, without the co-active Presence of Electricity and Magnetism, there can't be Brahman or Being without the co-active Presence of Mind and Spirit.

If I am correct about this (note: I acknowledge that I might not be!), then your, or anyone else (such as those in your video), axiomaticallly assuming and thereby making "awareness" (or "non-dual awareness") a fundamental, core or base, 'pillar' of your philosophy and thinking that you can therefore just dispense with 'mind' or an 'observer' positionality doesn't make sense.

Though, as in the case of any other experienced 'state', it may of course be subjectively projected and so 'hypnogogic-ally' experienced (see https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321070.php), it strikes me as being a questionable proposition in terms of the actual truth, to say the very least.

Originally Posted by davidsun

This may seem to be an impossibility to you because so many (including you?) axiomatically assume and believe it to be absolutely true, but have you thought about the 'what if' possibility that you call "awareness" or "non-dual awareness" isn't the 'core' or 'base' state of Atman (or Brahman or God or Being)?

I mean, what if (any kind of) "awareness" is just a feature, i.e. a 'faculty' or 'power', of Brahman (the Soul of the Self of (all) Being?

The way I 'see' IT, the core Essence of Brahman (God, Soul, whatever you want to call IT) is Creativity (anything and everything, 'you' included, is a 'manifestation' of Creativity), and Creativity is functionally co-activated by the 'operation' of Mind and Spirit - analogous to the way that 'manifestations' of Light, or Light Rays, are functional expression of an an electromagnetic 'wave', a coordinated wave of Electricity and Magnetism.

Just as there can't be 'Light', or a Light Wave, without the co-active Presence of Electricity and Magnetism, there can't be Brahman or Being without the co-active Presence of Mind and Spirit.

If I am correct about this (note: I acknowledge that I might not be!), then your, or anyone else (such as those in your video), axiomaticallly assuming and thereby making "awareness" (or "non-dual awareness") a fundamental, core or base, 'pillar' of your philosophy and thinking that you can therefore just dispense with 'mind' or an 'observer' positionality doesn't make sense.

Though, as in the case of any other experienced 'state', it may of course be subjectively projected and so 'hypnogogic-ally' experienced (see https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321070.php), it strikes me as being a questionable proposition in terms of the actual truth, to say the very least.

Well, this is the core of non-dualism. Also luminaries in philosophy of mind such as David Chalmers (he coined "The Hard Problem" of consciousness) and physics such as Sir Roger Penrose believe consciousness is fundamental.

So you can theorize all you want but to be perfectly frank it doesn't hold the tiniest drop of water compared to thousands of years of philosophy dedicated to the subject, and I find it odd you are constantly attacking it, almost like it's a threat to your own belief.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Well, this is the core of non-dualism. Also luminaries in philosophy of mind such as David Chalmers (he coined "The Hard Problem" of consciousness) and physics such as Sir Roger Penrose believe consciousness is fundamental.

So you can theorize all you want but to be perfectly frank it doesn't hold the tiniest drop of water compared to thousands of years of philosophy dedicated to the subject, and I find it odd you are constantly attacking it, almost like it's a threat to your own belief.

Thousands of years? People thought that pleasing 'God' required 'sacrifices' for thousands of years. Give me a break in terms of logic! You want to label a challenging question and philosophical disgreement as an 'attack'? That's on you, fella.

P.S. In case I didn't make the implications of the logic of my proposed world-view completely clear, according to that world-view, there could/would be no awareness (of any kind)unless a 'mind' or mental faculty was pre-operative.

Originally Posted by davidsun

P.S. In case I didn't make the implications of the logic of my proposed world-view completely clear, according to that world-view, there could/would be no awareness (of any kind)unless a 'mind' or mental faculty was pre-operative.

I get it all to well. You reject the cosmos and settle for crumbs and hang it all on your treatise. That's fine for you but I'm not interested in that debate or attempting to convince you otherwise.

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Well, this is the core of non-dualism. Also luminaries in philosophy of mind such as David Chalmers (he coined "The Hard Problem" of consciousness) and physics such as Sir Roger Penrose believe consciousness is fundamental.

Hi JASG

I’m enjoying many of your posts here. But I would take issue with the statement that ‘consciousness is fundamental’ is the core tenet of non-dualism. True enough, it IS the core of Advaita Vedanta. Understandably people often assume that Advaita and non-duality are synonyms (a-dvaita literally means non-duality.) Yet although Advaita certainly IS non-dualism, non-dualism is not necessarily Advaita Vedanta. The term (non-duality) can be applied to a wider domain of traditions, sub-traditions and philosophical perspectives.

A nondualist/absolute monist outlook is simply to attribute Oneness/not-two-ness or singleness to reality (it’s not necessarily to formulate what the ’substance’ or essence of that Oneness is.) Pantheism, for instance, is the view that everything is God/Nature. Buddhist, Madhyamaka describes the nature of reality as Emptiness - which is inseparable from all conceivable forms and conditions. This is sometimes interpreted as a monist view although Buddhist deny any form of ultimate reality. Taoism is similar to Pantheism in that it describes the primacy of a singular unifying force. Nondualistic thought can be found in much Christian mysticism and Neoplatonism. Even materialism can be described in nondualistic (or absolute monist - ultimately the same thing) terms:

“Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist. This concept directly contrasts with idealism, where mind and consciousness are first-order realities to which matter is subject and material interactions are secondary.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

Originally Posted by Moondance

Hi JASG

I’m enjoying many of your posts here. But I would take issue with the statement that ‘consciousness is fundamental’ is the core tenet of non-dualism. True enough, it IS the core of Advaita Vedanta. Understandably people often assume that Advaita and non-duality are synonyms (a-dvaita literally means non-duality.) Yet although Advaita certainly IS non-dualism, non-dualism is not necessarily Advaita Vedanta. The term (non-duality) can be applied to a wider domain of traditions, sub-traditions and philosophical perspectives.

A nondualist/absolute monist outlook is simply to attribute Oneness/not-two-ness or singleness to reality (it’s not necessarily to formulate what the ’substance’ or essence of that Oneness is.) Pantheism, for instance, is the view that everything is God/Nature. Buddhist, Madhyamaka describes the nature of reality as Emptiness - which is inseparable from all conceivable forms and conditions. This is sometimes interpreted as a monist view although Buddhist deny any form of ultimate reality. Taoism is similar to Pantheism in that it describes the primacy of a singular unifying force. Nondualistic thought can be found in much Christian mysticism and Neoplatonism. Even materialism can be described in nondualistic (or absolute monist - ultimately the same thing) terms:

“Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist. This concept directly contrasts with idealism, where mind and consciousness are first-order realities to which matter is subject and material interactions are secondary.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

Point taken although when I think it through I'm hard-pressed to find a unifying One outside of pure being, and that seems to point to some fundamental consciousness or awareness. Even the mystics of many traditions speak of looking within and identifying the core of their being as the Divine, and I'm fairly certain that is awareness/consciousness.

It's interesting because what led me down this path was not spirituality per se, but philosophy of mind and physics. Advaita Vedanta came along about nine years after that journey began and I had already come to that conclusion in my own mind.

I'd also suggest Buddhist emptiness is that state of consciousness, choiceless awareness, pure experience minus anything to be experienced (maya).

EDIT: And yes, it's a bold statement and to me why it contains so much power. It's a tangible unifying aspect between the finite and the Infinite. Something that cannot only be understand but also experience.

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Point taken although when I think it through I'm hard-pressed to find a unifying One outside of pure being, and that seems to point to some fundamental consciousness or awareness. Even the mystics of many traditions speak of looking within and identifying the core of their being as the Divine, and I'm fairly certain that is awareness/consciousness.

It's interesting because what led me down this path was not spirituality per se, but philosophy of mind and physics. Advaita Vedanta came along about nine years after that journey began and I had already come to that conclusion in my own mind.

I'd also suggest Buddhist emptiness is that state of consciousness, choiceless awareness, pure experience minus anything to be experienced (maya).

EDIT: And yes, it's a bold statement and to me why it contains so much power. It's a tangible unifying aspect between the finite and the Infinite. Something that cannot only be understand but also experience.

In a profound kensho shift (of just over twenty years ago) I became utterly convinced of the incomprehensibility of separation. At that time I had no interest in spirituality and had never heard of non-duality or Advaita and was therefore free of any spiritual conditioning. The kensho ‘incident’ didn’t come with a ’all is consciousness/subjective’ or ‘all is energy/objective’ option. It was simply the sense of the absoluteness and sovereignty of THIS, this something-ness (whatever THIS might be.)

Now I’m not necessarily disagreeing with what we might speculate as the fundamental ‘essence’ of reality - I don’t really know. So I’m fairly neutral about it - I’ve found that when we deeply dig into it, our concepts eventually start to fail us. Take consciousness for instance. What do we mean by it. Is there a difference between consciousness and the patterns/forms/manifestations it presents? Or is it of One Taste? If it’s the first then it is clearly not non-dual. If it’s the second then where is the basis for insisting it is consciousness (as opposed to what??)

Can you see what I’m getting at here. If all is of One taste - if it’s just SO - then to call it EITHER consciousness (OR energy or whatever else) is arbitrary - it simply IS.

Here’s a kind of koan to ponder: Imagine that everything in the cosmos is yellow. Every object, form, process and event is yellow. Every thought, memory, idea and story is yellow. EVERYTHING is yellow with no exceptions…

There would be NO yellow.

If everything is consciousness… there is no consciousness.

There is just ______________________

[Unseeking Seeker]

***

Let us not look at consciousness as static.

Recognise it as a vibration, a pulse, in incessant dynamic stillness.

***