A good question (as loaded as it may be), Myles; and, Fool that I Am, since you have met the aforementioned criteria (both substance and civility; Darn -- I was so looking forward to another deletion -- LOL), I shall respond.
[Rich Note; Well, it took a while, but we finally got there, Myles – a very substantive question (assuming it is honest – and I chose believe so) without any vitriol. Now you're putting that "fine intellect" to constructive versus self-destructive purposes (or at least I assume so). Along these same lines and as bit of an aside, I realized nearly 30 years ago that one could use ones capacity for intellectual discrimination "destructively" to see how things were different (or come apart), which is easy; or go against its natural grain (conservation of energy) and use it "constructively" to see how things (as in conceptual objects) are the same (or go together). Ergo: A 40 search for Truth as the Common Thread in All.]
RE: You are aware of being aware, Richard, but...but...are you AWARE of being aware of being aware?
1) This is really asking whether I Am (and You Are) the Awareness of "being aware of being aware;" or the Field of Awareness in which "being aware of being aware" arises, of which it is composed and in which it dissolves when all its energy departs? And the answer to that -- as THAT, as the Absolute, as the Absolute Changeless Reality that necessarily underlies All, is I Am (and You Are) and can never "really not be THAT," (though "We as we think We" are doing an "absolutely wonderful job" of imagining "ourselves" to be other than That.)
2) Another way of conceiving and responding to the question is to say that I Am (Ultimately, but not Absolutely) the "Looking" that embraces both the conceptual "looker" and "object of looking" [RE: the "Stick" that joins what is seen by a relative state of mind or consciousness as "polar opposites," or a "Coin," the re-cognition of which automatically (and almost magically from a lower perspective) joins previously assumed mutually exclusive opposite sides called "head and tail."]
3) THAT (which is AWARE of "Being Aware of Being aware") would be the ABSOLUTE about which there is "No Thing" to say and "No One" to say IT. In this regard, however, one might point to THAT by suggesting said Absolute is Pure Awareness (or an Eternal Field of Infinite Potential to Be Any and All in All Time and All Space, which would necessarily be "Still and Silent" and might be called The Void, as they do in the East, or Ayn, as they do in Kaballa) and that Self-Cognizing Being, Consciousness or I Amness is, in actuality, a Universally Cognizing, Vibratory State of THAT that enables "Self-Awareness" or "Being Aware of Being Aware."
4) A Really Outstanding Point, Myles (I knew you had it in you)! For to see and so recognize "two points" there must be a "third" point (which one might call a higher point of view or unitary perspective able to embrace two apparent lower perspectives simultaneously (or re-cognize so become aware that they were never truly apart except in one's mind). This was, at least to some degree, experienced actually experience during the emergency bailout I had nearly 40 years ago. There was a "me watching me" experience of a higher, calm cool and collected (almost pure witness) self and my normal "ego-centric me, myself and I self."
Here's a metaphor that introduces Chapter 4, In Spirit and Truth, of Out of My Mind and Back to My Senses' (OOMM) that has been posted previously (but which seems to fit here) that eventually fleshed out the concept with a natural metaphor:
"Truth may be likened to a mountain that offers different views from different sides and elevations. While all views are relatively true, none are absolutely true. Thus the relative merit of any particular view must be judged solely on the basis of how much mountain it is able to embrace. The wider one ranges and the higher one climbs, the broader and more encompassing individual perspectives are likely to become. Higher understanding results from higher and broader perspectives. Higher views necessarily include and transcend lower views. Only one view, however, includes and transcends all others–that of the entire mountain as seen from the summit's all-inclusive perspective."
5) This "haiku/hay-ku/hay-sh/smart bomb/whatever" actually expresses a favorite Sri Nisargadatta pointer that points beyond Being, Presence-Awareness or I Amness Itself (which one might characterized as "vibrating cognizing emptiness" Universally Aware of itself through a "0-1" Self-Mirroring Process) to the Ground of Being or Absolute (still cognizing emptiness) as the Logical Nature of All. The actual pointer was "I Am that by which I know I Am." Two others "personal favorites" of his that I seem called to share would be: (1) "Keep in mind the feeling I Am, merge in it till to mind and feeling become one"; and (2) "I can truly say I Am, the rest is conjectured." [Rich Note: The last quote may not be exact.]
6) Keeping all of the forgoing in mind, certainly "no person" (imagined or real) and not even the Unitary Level of "Pure Being, Aware-Presence or Consciousness" I Am Aware of Being Aware (which is the First Cognition of All, one step down from the Absolute, that "In the Beginning was the Word" in the Bible refers to – the Word, of course Being, I AM) can be "consciously aware of being" the Awareness that is "being aware of being aware". Alternately, one might say (from any perspective) that I Am That Pure Awareness, though I can't Be Aware or Self-Aware of That as "Ayn, The Void, Infinite, Eternal, Still, Silent, Absolute, Stateless State.
7) Scripturally (and metaphorically, of course) speaking, THAT would be the Father that is "Above All, Through All and In You All" and I Am or Consciousness of Being That would be the Son that is " the same today, yesterday and tomorrow" or is thus characterized as the "Alpha Omega."
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
Please select the part of the post you are reporting.
Please select why you are reporting this content.
Please enter a description.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 7 ( 1 removed by Richard Hay )
http://friendsofdanh.gather.com.
Our goal is to help you further your exposure and to support other gather members.
[Rich Note; Well, it took a while, but we finally got there, Myles – a very substantive question (assuming it is honest – and I chose believe so) without any vitriol. Now you're putting that "fine intellect" to constructive versus self-destructive purposes (or at least I assume so). Along these same lines and as bit of an aside, I realized nearly 30 years ago that one could use ones capacity for intellectual discrimination "destructively" to see how things were different (or come apart), which is easy; or go against its natural grain (conservation of energy) and use it "constructively" to see how things (as in conceptual objects) are the same (or go together). Ergo: A 40 search for Truth as the Common Thread in All.]
RE: You are aware of being aware, Richard, but...but...are you AWARE of being aware of being aware?
1) This is really asking whether I Am (and You Are) the Awareness of "being aware of being aware;" or the Field of Awareness in which "being aware of being aware" arises, of which it is composed and in which it dissolves when all its energy departs? And the answer to that -- as THAT, as the Absolute, as the Absolute Changeless Reality that necessarily underlies All, is I Am (and You Are) and can never "really not be THAT," (though "We as we think We" are doing an "absolutely wonderful job" of imagining "ourselves" to be other than That.)
2) Another way of conceiving and responding to the question is to say that I Am (Ultimately, but not Absolutely) the "Looking" that embraces both the conceptual "looker" and "object of looking" [RE: the "Stick" that joins what is seen by a relative state of mind or consciousness as "polar opposites," or a "Coin," the re-cognition of which automatically (and almost magically from a lower perspective) joins previously assumed mutually exclusive opposite sides called "head and tail."]
3) THAT (which is AWARE of "Being Aware of Being aware") would be the ABSOLUTE about which there is "No Thing" to say and "No One" to say IT. In this regard, however, one might point to THAT by suggesting said Absolute is Pure Awareness (or an Eternal Field of Infinite Potential to Be Any and All in All Time and All Space, which would necessarily be "Still and Silent" and might be called The Void, as they do in the East, or Ayn, as they do in Kaballa) and that Self-Cognizing Being, Consciousness or I Amness is, in actuality, a Universally Cognizing, Vibratory State of THAT that enables "Self-Awareness" or "Being Aware of Being Aware."
4) A Really Outstanding Point, Myles (I knew you had it in you)! For to see and so recognize "two points" there must be a "third" point (which one might call a higher point of view or unitary perspective able to embrace two apparent lower perspectives simultaneously (or re-cognize so become aware that they were never truly apart except in one's mind). This was, at least to some degree, experienced actually experience during the emergency bailout I had nearly 40 years ago. There was a "me watching me" experience of a higher, calm cool and collected (almost pure witness) self and my normal "ego-centric me, myself and I self."
Here's a metaphor that introduces Chapter 4, In Spirit and Truth, of Out of My Mind and Back to My Senses' (OOMM) that has been posted previously (but which seems to fit here) that eventually fleshed out the concept with a natural metaphor:
"Truth may be likened to a mountain that offers different views from different sides and elevations. While all views are relatively true, none are absolutely true. Thus the relative merit of any particular view must be judged solely on the basis of how much mountain it is able to embrace. The wider one ranges and the higher one climbs, the broader and more encompassing individual perspectives are likely to become. Higher understanding results from higher and broader perspectives. Higher views necessarily include and transcend lower views. Only one view, however, includes and transcends all others–that of the entire mountain as seen from the summit's all-inclusive perspective."
5) This "haiku/hay-ku/hay-sh/smart bomb/whatever" actually expresses a favorite Sri Nisargadatta pointer that points beyond Being, Presence-Awareness or I Amness Itself (which one might characterized as "vibrating cognizing emptiness" Universally Aware of itself through a "0-1" Self-Mirroring Process) to the Ground of Being or Absolute (still cognizing emptiness) as the Logical Nature of All. The actual pointer was "I Am that by which I know I Am." Two others "personal favorites" of his that I seem called to share would be: (1) "Keep in mind the feeling I Am, merge in it till to mind and feeling become one"; and (2) "I can truly say I Am, the rest is conjectured." [Rich Note: The last quote may not be exact.]
6) Keeping all of the forgoing in mind, certainly "no person" (imagined or real) and not even the Unitary Level of "Pure Being, Aware-Presence or Consciousness" I Am Aware of Being Aware (which is the First Cognition of All, one step down from the Absolute, that "In the Beginning was the Word" in the Bible refers to – the Word, of course Being, I AM) can be "consciously aware of being" the Awareness that is "being aware of being aware". Alternately, one might say (from any perspective) that I Am That Pure Awareness, though I can't Be Aware or Self-Aware of That as "Ayn, The Void, Infinite, Eternal, Still, Silent, Absolute, Stateless State.
7) Scripturally (and metaphorically, of course) speaking, THAT would be the Father that is "Above All, Through All and In You All" and I Am or Consciousness of Being That would be the Son that is " the same today, yesterday and tomorrow" or is thus characterized as the "Alpha Omega."