I doubt very much that anyone is in complete unity with the cosmos, we only know very little about our own little corner never mind the rest of it. It might feel cosmic but then you get the same consciousness form psychedelic drugs, and frankly people's own experiences are subjective anyway and relative to their own agendas. As far as I can make out there is no common ground with consciousness and few of the experts can agree on the starting point.

To try to explain my own subjective understanding, consciousness is both fundamental and emergent and it comes in 'layers'. We are/have consciousness and as we chat we become conscious of what's in each other's heads, and that consciousness it different to knowledge or understanding. Within that process I become conscious that there is another 'layer' above that which becomes conscious of the process by which I become conscious. The more I delve into that the more 'layers' appear, as if every 'layer' I become conscious of creates another 'layer' above. Consciousness also encompasses, so everything I become conscious of - the 'contents' if you like - becomes my consciousness itself.

Those 'layers' are 'above' perception, mindfulness and all the rest of it. So no, 'no thing' is there and as far as trying to understand it the mind perceives it as nothing, but that's the way the Western mind works. The mind works with 'objects' or 'things' because it needs something tangible to focus on - which is the understanding behind Spiritual demons, Gods and angels. The mind simply can't grasp a something that no thing yet is everything.

The problem with Spirituality is that there are no real frameworks of understanding, 'consciousness' sounds good and everybody wants one of those because it's a status symbol that ego ego seeks. The ego is the centre of the field of consciousness, NOT the self.

Definitely merging to that sort of subconscious that has the subconscious of the me away from the I to the I’m ... has similar affects while reincarnation is in process—- as you pass from the I to the I’m to the I am has cubits left over from a central subconscious to the conscience...

If there needs to be common ground, what is mindfulness? If you are unaware of the main factors in the creation of your experience is it still mindful, and what are you mindful of? Considering you are only conscious of 5-10% of your consciousness......

We always experience and any experience is processed by the unconscious, after that it's what we become conscious of and that is 'filtered' by the ego. Mindful doesn't always mean very much to begin with.

Anything mindful is self related . It's that simples . self awareness of being present in reflection of the world .

This is why there is a big fat juicy difference between experience and knowing and concluding and realising stuff and what lies beyond that .


x daz x

You don't have to take my word for it but it's true :icon_eek: but it depends on what one references cosmic consciousness to being .

Some have asked me if I knew what everyone was thinking lol and if I knew every answer to every question, but it's not like that .

If you can imagine that one's self awareness expands beyond measure then one encompasses the awareness of the universe per se . That's why some refer to this as a universal mind experience .

Encompassing the entire mindful universe is in a way opening oneself up to what they are from a mindful perspective that brings forth a mindful realisation that one is the universe .


x daz x

Thank you neil, for all Padgett quotes.

But what is self? Because if the starting point is not self at all but ego then all you are aware of is ego and not self at all. If you don't really understand your self (as opposed to yourself AKA ego) then nothing else really counts for very much.

So you're mindful of what unconscious processes are busily at work creating what the term 'cosmic consciousness' means to you? Y'see Dazza, your unconscious is some 90-95% of your total consciousness so unless you know what's going on there, everything after that makes little sense.

The perceived is the perceiver, and the perceiver is the dream that believes itself to be the dreamer of dreams. And that's both from Spiritual and psychological perspectives.

You cannot prise ego from self as I keep saying .
There isn't just an ego starting point .
Ego is a self expression so how can you therefore have just an expression without self expressing .
The starting point is always self related . self in expression, self in awareness etc etc .

x dazzle x

But you see me old mucker, I can turn the tables and ask you the same regarding how you come to terms with what something means to you and then use that against you . That would however be counter productive .

When you experience fire and fire burns your hand, you have a direct experience of that . You don't need to know all the processes that has led one to experience what they have .

Jung can only work on the same fundamental principles as anyone else one experiences something and then concludes what that experience means to them .

Experiences of the mind that are self related is what happens from any field of experience be it materially or be it cosmically .

I am an advocate of comparisons needed in order to come to an understanding of what one is experiences .

Once one has the comparison of mind and no mind, self and no self then one can understand the differences and what those difference imply .


x dazzle x