Difference between awareness and consciousness

[Miss Hepburn]

What do you think?
It's an interesting difference...I never understood it and used to use
the words interchangeably.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

What do you think?
It's an interesting difference...I never understood it and used to use
the words interchangeably.

Miss Hepburn,

I wait to be enlightened......:) But off the top of my head, I would say that awareness precedes consciousness. Sort of like saying that awareness is everything in one's peripheral vision and consciousness is the focus on any one thing in that field of vision.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Molearner

Miss Hepburn,
I wait to be enlightened......:) But off the top of my head, I would say that awareness precedes consciousness.

Sort of like saying that awareness is everything in one's peripheral vision and consciousness is the focus on any one thing in that field of vision.

That was an excellent way to put it. Thank you!

[Unseeking Seeker]

***

Interesting thread MH ...

On my part, intuitively I tend to think of consciousness as our in-form presence, encompassing both separateness as well as unity.

Awareness, I equate with the That Oneness absolute.

(That’s the thing about language ... the word, the symbol is not the thing)

During meditation, the separateness aspect of consciousness recedes, allowing its higher vibrational enableability to seamlessly connect our presence with Universe awareness by dissolving into the divine stream of love. For reasons not known (to me), even though dissolved, becoming boundless Oneness Itself, the consciousness ... now awareness, is still distinct.

Upon reentering form, the consciousness vibrates at a higher octave but in most cases, I’d say, lower than the awareness frequency. This is the ascension process of consciousness until one day, in timeless time, to permanently become pure love awareness absolute.

Having even once merged with awareness, consciousness always knows that duality is an illusion of the ego or let us call it the separate self delusion. Being no longer deluded, consciousness recognises oneness. However, even so, recognising or knowing is not the actual becoming ... yet.

***

[God-Like]

Something I stumbled across a few months back when trying to explain this ..


The witness is not the person. The person comes into being when there is a basis for it, an organism, and a body. In it, the Absolute is reflected as awareness. Pure awareness becomes self-awareness. When there is a Self, self-awareness is the witness. When there is no self to witness, there is no witnessing either. It is very simple; it is the presence of the person that complicates. See that there is no such thing as a permanently separate person and all becomes clear. Awareness, mind, matter are of one reality in its two aspects as immovable and movable and three attributes of inertia, energy and harmony. Awareness becomes consciousness when it has an object. The object changes all the time. In consciousness there is movement; awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, here and now.


Ramana

[Miss Hepburn]

Wow, guys...Thank You for all your input!! Great stuff!

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

What do you think?
It's an interesting difference...I never understood it and used to use
the words interchangeably.

Yes, for most people they are practically synonyms. I reckon that it actually creates more unnecessary confusion to have this difference - but since it already exists here’s my take on it.

Consciousness is this common experience of self-reflective, attentive knowing/perceiving. This is disabled in deep sleep, under general anaesthetic, by drugs, by severe trauma to the brain etc.

Awareness is often used as a placeholder for the inexplicable living source, 'stuff' and totality of things.

For consciousness to present itself in any way that anyone has experience/direct knowledge of (or is in any way intelligible), some degree of sentience is required - usually involving a functioning nervous system/brain. This is not to say that a brain/nervous system creates consciousness but it could be said that consciousness is dependent on certain conditions for it to be the case. If certain areas of your brain were removed while you were reading this, pretty soon the consciousness of this page would cease to be. Also it's plainly the case that consciousness is limited in its range and in the type of frequencies that it can detect. (It doesn't matter how enlightened you are, you won't hear a 30 kHz tone, see ultraviolet rays or feel a meteorite smash into the surface of Mars.)

Some might argue at this point that it's not consciousness that has the limitation but the 'vehicle' of the body-mind/organism. This is not unreasonable. But this underlines the fact that our everyday ordinary experience cannot be said to be that of pure limitless awareness/consciousness since limitation IS involved. Perhaps it could be said to be Source/Reality (or pure awareness) presenting AS sentient limitation.

That which is the ground and be-ing of this creative play of manifestation is what the second category is pointing to. Ultimately what the true nature of this creative principle is, no one can say for sure since that which attempts to analyse and formulate it is itself a reflection contained within it.

When identity as a separate self is seen through and the vastness reveals itself, it doesn't come with a metaphysical formula. Right now, here it is - the mysterious vastness (or _____________ ) revealing itself moment by moment. Anything more is a formula, description or working hypothesis tacked onto this wordless realisation.

[iamthat]

Some interesting thoughts, and it comes down to what we understand by the terms awareness and consciousness. This understanding will be different for different people.

So some might claim that awareness precedes consciousness. Others might argue that awareness requires an object of awareness, that which we are aware of. And awareness is not possible without consciousness being present.

Or some might claim that awareness is motionless and timeless. I would consider this state as Being, which is different to both awareness and consciousness. Being itself is not aware, it simply is. There is nothing outside Being for it to be aware of.

Regarding the comment "This is not to say that a brain/nervous system creates consciousness but it could be said that consciousness is dependent on certain conditions for it to be the case. If certain areas of your brain were removed while you were reading this, pretty soon the consciousness of this page would cease to be." Reverting to the familiar analogy of a television showing a program, the program being broadcast exists whether the television is working properly or not. So consciousness exists regardless of the condition of the brain.

And we could easily substitute the word awareness for consciousness in this sentence without changing the meaning:

This is not to say that a brain/nervous system creates awareness, but it could be said that awareness is dependent on certain conditions for it to be the case. If certain areas of your brain were removed while you were reading this, pretty soon the awareness of this page would cease to be.

For me, Being individualises as consciousness, but this is not the ordinary everyday consciousness we are so familiar with. This is pure consciousness, the fourth state of Turiya, as opposed to the states of consciousness of waking, dreaming and sleep. And awareness is a product of consciousness.

But there are no right answers or wrong answers - it comes down to what we each mean by these terms.

Peace.

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by iamthat

This is not to say that a brain/nervous system creates consciousness but it could be said that consciousness is dependent on certain conditions for it to be the case. If certain areas of your brain were removed while you were reading this, pretty soon the consciousness of this page would cease to be.

Hello Iamthat

I see that you quoted part of my comment. I think that you may have missed my point - unless you actually believe that a person who has had their brain removed could be regarded as “intelligibly” conscious.

Of course the second category (which here we are calling awareness) can be said to be prior to the body-mind and brain since the organism is an expression OF it. But as I say, the true nature of this living source is inexplicable and ultimately beyond human cognition. The word ‘awareness’ is and can only be a kind of placeholder which sits alongside other placeholders such as source, oneness, reality, tao etc.

Whatever your preferred designation, I would suggest holding it lightly as they are all problematic eventually. Take awareness for instance. What do we mean by it. Is there a difference between awareness and the patterns/forms/manifestations it presents? Or is it of One Taste? If it’s the first then we have the primary duality. If it’s the second then where is the basis for insisting it is awareness (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 awareness 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 awareness… there is no awareness.

There is just ______________________

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Moondance

I see that you quoted part of my comment. I think that you may have missed my point - unless you actually believe that a person who has had their brain removed could be regarded as “intelligibly” conscious.

Again, it comes down to what we mean by consciousness.

The brain serves to receive information from the senses which the mind then interprets to understand the physical environment. If the brain is impaired then our ability to interpret our environment is impaired. If we regard consciousness as the ability to perceive and understand our environment then obviously consciousness would be impaired. If we regard consciousness as that which animates the physical form then consciousness is still present but it is operating through a faulty vehicle.

After all, if we accept the possibility of consciousness surviving physical death then the physical brain is no more, yet consciousness and intelligence are still present.

Peace.