Awarenes

[china]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times][FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Do you know what you mean by the word "aware"? Probably you use it in the sense that "I think," "I feel," and so on. It is very important to understand. The dictionary says: "the condition of being aware."But you cannot be aware of anything. Somebody has fed people with this kind of BS. You have been fed so long on this bunk that anybody saying anything on this probably creates some kind of indigestion there. You want the same thing there. What exactly do you mean by `aware'? You cannot be aware. There is no you. When there is an awareness there is no you. It is not there. It (the awareness) is aware of itself. It sounds mystical, but it is so. The anger or the feeling is aware of itself.
The `you' separates you from that. That is the movement of thought. There is nothing else other than what you are looking at.
My emphasis is that awareness cannot be separated from the activity of the brain. It cannot be used as an instrument to understand anything, much less to bring about any change.[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[MikeyDB]

Yeah sure I can see that....

If I'm aware the building I'm in is on fire....I'll just accept the fact that this mental activity that I mistakenly call "awareness" is leading me astray...again..... Get a little more comfortable and bask in the heat and smoke...aware of how foolish I actually am.

 

[#juan]

I don't see what the problem is. You could trust someone because you were not aware of that person's criminal past. You could walk into a forest though you were aware that a dangerous Grizzly Bear had been seen in the area. Being aware is not the same as being wary.

 

[scratch]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times][FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Do you know what you mean by the word "aware"? Probably you use it in the sense that "I think," "I feel," and so on. It is very important to understand. The dictionary says: "the condition of being aware."But you cannot be aware of anything. Somebody has fed people with this kind of BS. You have been fed so long on this bunk that anybody saying anything on this probably creates some kind of indigestion there. You want the same thing there. What exactly do you mean by `aware'? You cannot be aware. There is no you. When there is an awareness there is no you. It is not there. It (the awareness) is aware of itself. It sounds mystical, but it is so. The anger or the feeling is aware of itself.
The `you' separates you from that. That is the movement of thought. There is nothing else other than what you are looking at.
My emphasis is that awareness cannot be separated from the activity of the brain. It cannot be used as an instrument to understand anything, much less to bring about any change.[/FONT][/FONT]

Welcome to the wall of "Space Cadets"

You would be the one on the right. Enough awareness for you.

 

[scratch]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times][FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Do you know what you mean by the word "aware"? Probably you use it in the sense that "I think," "I feel," and so on. It is very important to understand. The dictionary says: "the condition of being aware."But you cannot be aware of anything. Somebody has fed people with this kind of BS. You have been fed so long on this bunk that anybody saying anything on this probably creates some kind of indigestion there. You want the same thing there. What exactly do you mean by `aware'? You cannot be aware. There is no you. When there is an awareness there is no you. It is not there. It (the awareness) is aware of itself. It sounds mystical, but it is so. The anger or the feeling is aware of itself.
The `you' separates you from that. That is the movement of thought. There is nothing else other than what you are looking at.
My emphasis is that awareness cannot be separated from the activity of the brain. It cannot be used as an instrument to understand anything, much less to bring about any change.[/FONT][/FONT]

"The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware." - Henry Miller

 

[thomaska]

I always enjoy Dexter Sinister's written "bitch-slappings" he usually administers to these things...But I can see why he'd forego responding. I suspect the op's awareness lvl isn't high enough to comprehend them.

 

[china]

Thanks for the above posts .These posts show that you never stop learning .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Understanding comes with the awareness of what is. There can be no understanding if there is condemnation of or identification with what is. If you condemn a child or identify yourself with him, then you cease to understand him. So, being aware of a thought or a feeling as it arises, without condemning it or identifying with it, you will find that it unfolds ever more widely and deeply, and thereby discover the whole content of what is. To understand the process of what is there must be an awareness, a freedom from condemnation, justification, and identification. When you are vitally interested in fully understanding something, you give your mind and heart, withholding nothing. But unfortunately you are conditioned, educated, disciplined through religious and social environment to condemn or to identify, and not to understand. To condemn is stupid and easy, but to understand is arduous, requiring pliability and intelligence. Condemnation, as identification, is a form of self-protection. Condemnation or identification is a barrier to understanding. To understand the confusion, the misery in which one is, and so of the world, you must observe its total process. To be aware and pursue and pursue all its implications requires patience, to follow swiftly, and to be still.
There is understanding only when there is stillness, when there is silent observation, passive awareness. Then only the problem yields its full significance. The awareness of which I speak is of what is from moment to moment, of the activities of thought and its subtle deceptions, fears and hopes.An awareness wholly dissolves our conflicts and miseries.

 

[L Gilbert]

Whatever. You can be unaware if you like. At the moment I am aware of someone watching tv behind me, my fingers are pecking away at the keyboard, I have an itch above my right ear, and I want something to drink. So to me, an unaware person is a senseless person.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times][FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Do you know what you mean by the word "aware"? [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times][FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times] Yes.

Probably you use it in the sense that "I think," "I feel," and so on.

No. To be aware means to know, to have knowledge, to be cognizant, to recognize.

It is very important to understand.

Agreed. You don't appear to though.

The dictionary says: "the condition of being aware.

No sensible dictionary would define aware as the condition of being aware. It might define awareness, the noun, that way, but not the adjective aware.

But you cannot be aware of anything. ... You cannot be aware.

Really? Certainly seems to me that I'm aware of a certain degree of fuzzy-minded pseudo-profundity here.

There is no you. When there is an awareness there is no you. It is not there.

Like I just said... Certainly appears to me that there's a me, I am aware of being here at my keyboard, the somatic sensations caused by my particular posture, a minor degree of either irritation or amusement, I'm not quite sure which, caused by your OP, and a variety of other things, like the sounds in other parts of the house (my wife's playing Celine Dion CDs upstairs). I think I'll decide to be amused.

My emphasis is that awareness cannot be separated from the activity of the brain.

Well of course it can't. If there's no brain activity, you must be dead.

It cannot be used as an instrument to understand anything, much less to bring about any change.

Okay, so if awareness can't be used as an instrument to understand anything, what *can* be? It would seem to me that to understand something, being aware of it is an absolute prerequisite. If you're not aware of it, by definition that means you don't know it's there, you know nothing about it.

Do you really think, as you seem to be implying, that you can understand something without being aware of it? [/FONT][/FONT]

 

[china]

Dexter Sinister ,

Do you really think, as you seem to be implying, that you can understand something without being aware of it?

Yes .Though you can,t, Dexter, you are over educated and you can only function within your crystallized knowledge.Your brain is only "yes" or "no"; and that is not according to you but to a second, third, fourth....... source .Pity, old man .

 

[scratch]

Dexter Sinister ,

Yes .Though you can,t, Dexter, you are over educated and you can only function within your crystallized knowledge.Your brain is only "yes" or "no"; and that is not according to you but to a second, third, fourth....... source .Pity, old man .

China,
You are flirting with disaster!

 

[china]

scratch

China,
You are flirting with disaster[/QUOTE

A profound statement again ;on the romantic side .You must have a special book on the "profound" sayings .

 

[karrie]

What a ridiculous notion china, that you could think to tell others what goes on in their minds, or judge it somehow inferior to what goes on in yours. Dexter is probably one of the most critical thinkers on this board, and you imply that he thinks only in terms of what he's been taught? No. I'm sorry, but no.

Have you caught on yet to the hypocrisy in expecting people to follow your way of thinking, your unique 'teachings', and criticizing them if they don't agree? You accuse them of not being free thinkers simply because they don't follow your thinking. Well, if they followed your thinking and swallowed your posts hook line and sinker, how would that make them any freer in their thought than if they listened to someone else? Incase you don't get what I'm saying... it wouldn't. It would just make them your version of brainwashed.

 

[china]

karrie

Dexter is probably one of the most critical thinkers on this board, and you imply that he thinks only in terms of what he's been taught? No. I'm sorry, but no.

It is your point of view karrie ,and I respect it .I have my own points of view.

Have you caught on yet to the hypocrisy in expecting people to follow your way of thinking, your unique 'teachings', and criticizing them if they don't agree?

No karrie , I haven't caught on yet to any hypocricy in stating my points of view.I don,t expect anyone to "follow my way " as you say .In fact , I hope that they don,t belive what they read but investigate the topic of the post in them selfs, and find their own Truth.As the matter of fact that is what I asked the readers in my early posts ( hey , you can check it out , I have no reservations).I can start doing that again if you think that is less "hypocritical"but would that make any difference ,karrie?
I think the question is why do my points of viev bother you and if they do ; why do you read them .

 

[karrie]

I think the question is why do my points of viev bother you and if they do ; why do you read them .

Your points of view don't bother me. Your response when people don't agree is what tends to get under my skin. The 'pity' and condescension irks. You seem at first to be opening a topic for conversation, but, anything other than glowing admiration of your posts seems to earn a degree of scorn. Perhaps this is just my perception though.

 

[scratch]

karrie



It is your point of view karrie ,and I respect it .I have my own points of view.



No karrie , I haven't caught on yet to any hypocricy in stating my points of view.I don,t expect anyone to "follow my way " as you say .In fact , I hope that they don,t belive what they read but investigate the topic of the post in them selfs, and find their own Truth.As the matter of fact that is what I asked the readers in my early posts ( hey , you can check it out , I have no reservations).I can start doing that again if you think that is less "hypocritical"but would that make any difference ,karrie?
I think the question is why do my points of viev bother you and if they do ; why do you read them .

Indoctrination does not fare well in Canada.

 

[china]

scratch

Indoctrination does not fare well in Canada.

speak for your self ,kid

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Dexter Sinister ,

Yes .Though you can,t, Dexter, you are over educated and you can only function within your crystallized knowledge.Your brain is only "yes" or "no"; and that is not according to you but to a second, third, fourth....... source .Pity, old man .

So you really are claiming that you can understand something without knowing anything about it. All you've done so far in this thread is take a perfectly good, well-understood word, "aware," redefined it to mean something it doesn't, written a couple of paragraphs of incoherent nonsense about it, and responded with derision when you're called on it. That's pretty much the pattern of most of your threads. If you actually read any of my posts except my responses to you, you'd know perfectly well that my brain is not just "yes" or "no," I frequently express ambivalence and uncertainty and doubt quite plainly. Your pity is offensive. I've thought often of just ignoring your sillier posts, but in keeping with my policy of fighting ignorance and fuzzy thinking wherever I find it, I usually respond to you.

If my knowledge is crystallized, yours must be mush. Would you, for instance, agree with this statement?

"Simply put, truth is. It needs no defense, and need not be sought. Truth will dawn upon your awareness as you lay aside the thoughts, ideas, indoctrinations and various mentations that interfere with your perception of it. Similarly, love is. Love requires neither subject nor object. Love doesn't need a "this" or a "that" for you to fixate your affections upon. Love is a state of being, and level of consciousness that is known experientially as the blocks to love's awareness are surrendered."

 

[Scott Free]

All you've done so far in this thread is take a perfectly good, well-understood word, "aware," redefined it to mean something it doesn't, written a couple of paragraphs of incoherent nonsense about it, and responded with derision when you're called on it.

In the world of paranormal exploration the dissertations are to be handled with a certain hermeneutic generosity.

I fail myself sometimes too as you might have gathered from my response to whether the soul has a sex or not. :lol:

 

[china]

Dexter Sinister ,

Would you, for instance, agree with this statement?
Simply put, truth is. It needs no defense, and need not be sought. Truth will dawn upon your awareness as you lay aside the thoughts, ideas, indoctrinations and various mentations that interfere with your perception of it. Similarly, love is. Love requires neither subject nor object. Love doesn't need a "this" or a "that" for you to fixate your affections upon. Love is a state of being, and level of consciousness that is known experientially as the blocks to love's awareness are surrendered."

Absolutely .

Truth will dawn upon your awareness as you lay aside the thoughts, ideas, indoctrinations and various mentations that interfere with your perception of it.

Therefore if there is thought (you ,I) there is no awareness.

Your pity is offensive.

.Agree, no need for it