awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index awakeningtothedream.com
Non Duality: The one question to all our answers.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

This animation explains it all!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index -> Awakening to the Dream
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Many Of One



Joined: 06 Dec 2006
Posts: 352
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a strong urge to delete my previous post.
The first bit seems redundant and the second is at best a matter of semantics at worst a load of crap.

Yet I haven't deleted it, I appear to be writing this instead.....

....and while all this worry and confusion are going on there seems to be a background of this..... Very Happy .....which slowly takes over until I don't care anymore....

THIS IS IT, ALREADY, EFFORTLESSLY what more could I possibly need to know?

So none of these questions and answers matter at all its just entertainment.

Laughing
_________________
Who wrote this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many Of One wrote:
I heard or read something along these lines the other day, it went something like this...

'Your' consciousness is only an appearance in 'my' consciousness.

Which would seem to imply that there is only ever one consciousness 'at a time'. If that helps....

On another matter, I still find 'choice' uncomfortable. (I don't know why )

michael wrote:

it is experienced by 'choice'...



I tend to come at it from the other way by saying that the experience is 'accepted'.

Is that the same or am I barking up the wrong tree?


Many Of One wrote:
I have a strong urge to delete my previous post.
The first bit seems redundant and the second is at best a matter of semantics at worst a load of crap.

Yet I haven't deleted it, I appear to be writing this instead.....

....and while all this worry and confusion are going on there seems to be a background of this..... Very Happy .....which slowly takes over until I don't care anymore....

THIS IS IT, ALREADY, EFFORTLESSLY what more could I possibly need to know?

So none of these questions and answers matter at all its just entertainment.

Laughing


none of these questions and answers matter at all...
its just entertainment... smile

but as the questions appear... so do the answers...

as for ‘another consciousness’ appearing in 'my consciousness'...

any 'appearance' is simply an 'appearance'...

it cannot be a 'separate consciousness' experiencing appearances of its own...

imagine if this scenario was so...

at the time I am seeing you, I am also seeing everything else - including other people...

so, as 'my bit of consciousness' contains all these other little bits of consciousness (that belong to everyone else I see - including 'your little bit') all 'floating around inside 'my bit', 'my bit' must be bigger than 'your bit'... grin

but as I see you... you see me 'at the same time'...

and so, even though 'your little bit' is inside 'my big bit', 'your little bit' contains 'my big bit' BUT as an 'apparently little bit' - along with all the other 'little bits' belonging to the 'other people you see'...

so that what appears to me, as ‘your little bit’, is really a big bit (from your perspective)... containing 'my big bit' as a ‘little bit’... grin

but if the ‘little bit belonging to me’ that is seen inside ‘your big bit’ really is conscious (inside your ‘big bit’) it must also be seeing your body containing ‘your little bit of consciousness’, which if it really is conscious must be seeing ‘my little bit’ inside it...

we could go on like this indefinitely on the assumption that each image really did contain a 'little bit of consciousness'... itself seeing images that really did contain bits of consciousness... each seeing images that really did contain bits of consciousness... each seeing...

well you get my drift... smile

consciousness is One
it is not in any way 'multiple'…

all 'multiplicity' is apparent only...

as I see you... your apparent body is a phantom...
composed entirely of colours… without 'substance'

as an image in a dream
it does not contain any consciousness...

it has no awareness of 'me', or of itself...

and as you apparently see me, the person you see is a phantom...
composed entirely of colours… without ‘substance’

as an image in a dream
it does not contain any consciousness…

consciousness alone knows the experience of 'me looking at you'...

whichever 'me'
'I seem to be'... smile

as it appears 'I am michael looking at Many of One' that is the only experience…

and

as it appears 'I am Many of One' looking at michael' that is the only experience…

two separate dreams...

not separate in space or time
but in the 'experiencing'...

as 'one' appears...
the 'other' is not.

...

as for 'choice/power'... you can't figure it out... it is not a concept

it is like trying to figure out 'seeing', or any other sense, or 'knowing'...



any apparent attempt to understand it is futile...

whether the attempt is accompanied by feelings of 'unease' depends only on the story...

if it is 'scripted'... they are felt...
if not,,, they are not

feelings of 'unease' are just feelings... labeled 'unease'...

it is impossible to ‘get’ this through words
though instantly the 'ah ha' may appear
seemingly in response to some words…

or 'practice'

but it is not 'the words', or 'the practice'
that cause the 'ah ha'...

it is by choice/power alone... smile

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring


Last edited by michael on Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:48 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McB



Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 419
Location: Geneva

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael wrote:

imagine if this scenario was so...

at the time I am seeing you, I am also seeing everything else - including other people...

so, as 'my bit of consciousness' contains all these other little bits of consciousness (that belong to everyone else I see - including 'your little bit') all 'floating around inside 'my bit', 'my bit' must be bigger than 'your bit'... grin

but as I see you... you see me 'at the same time'...

and so, even though 'your little bit' is inside 'my big bit', 'your little bit' contains 'my big bit' BUT as an 'apparently little bit' - along with all the other 'little bits' belonging to the 'other people you see'...

so that what appears to me, as ‘your little bit’, is really a big bit (from your perspective)... containing 'my big bit' as a ‘little bit’... grin

but if the ‘little bit belonging to me’ that is seen inside ‘your big bit’ really is conscious (inside your ‘big bit’) it must also be seeing your body containing ‘your little bit of consciousness’, which if it really is conscious must be seeing ‘my little bit’ inside it...

we could go on like this indefinitely on the assumption that each image really did contain a 'little bit of consciousness'... itself seeing images that really did contain bits of consciousness... each seeing images that really did contain bits of consciousness... each seeing...

well you get my drift... smile

consciousness is One
it is not in any way 'multiple'…

all 'multiplicity' is apparent only...

as I see you... your apparent body is a phantom...
composed entirely of colours… without 'substance'

as an image in a dream
it does not contain any consciousness...

it has no awareness of 'me', or of itself...

and as you apparently see me, the person you see is a phantom...
composed entirely of colours… without ‘substance’

as an image in a dream
it does not contain any consciousness…

consciousness alone knows the experience of 'me looking at you'...

as it appears 'I am michael looking at Many of One' that is the only experience…

and

as it appears 'I am Many of One' looking at michael' that is the only experience…

two separate dreams...

not separate in space or time
but in the 'experiencing'...

as 'one' appears...
the 'other' is not.

So who is talking to whom?
Is it simply Self talking to Itself?
ie whatever you do to another, you do unto yourself?
Or is talking, asking, answering simply arising to and for no-one?

Love
McB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

McB wrote:
So who is talking to whom?
Is it simply Self talking to Itself?
ie whatever you do to another, you do unto yourself?
Or is talking, asking, answering simply arising to and for no-one?

Love
McB


any apparent difference between 'Self' and 'No-one' is purely 'conceptual'...

so, 'whatever you seem to do to another', it is actually experienced by through and for Self/No-One - alone... from both perspectives (at least in 'this world story')... though not 'at the same time'...

the 'choice' to experience all perspectives is new every 'moment'...

awakening wrote:
There is only This!
But nothing wrong
with a bit
of make believe...


Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McB



Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 419
Location: Geneva

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael wrote:
the 'choice' to experience all perspectives is new every 'moment'...

Some don't like the use of the word 'choice'.
I guess because it tends to imply a 'chooser' or a reason behind the 'choice'.

Could one say instead "the experience of any perspective is randomly possible new every moment"?

In other words, do you mean by 'choice' the quantum mechanics idea of probabilistic collapse into happening?

Love
McB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

McB wrote:
Michael wrote:
the 'choice' to experience all perspectives is new every 'moment'...

Some don't like the use of the word 'choice'.
I guess because it tends to imply a 'chooser' or a reason behind the 'choice'.

Could one say instead "the experience of any perspective is randomly possible new every moment"?

In other words, do you mean by 'choice' the quantum mechanics idea of probabilistic collapse into happening?

Love
McB


nope...

I mean the 'power/choice' to manifest 'this appearance' this moment is completely 'unconditioned' by any 'concept'... including the concept of QM.

it is one with 'pure intelligence/pure knowing' and with the 'senses'...

this 'self aware intelligent power' is not 'forced' to witness some 'random show' generated by some 'other power' ('spontaneous' or not)...

this intelligent power chooses to 'experience' (or not), and 'what' to experience this apparent moment... every apparent moment...

but this 'knowing and choosing' cannot be understood (known) or sensed or controlled...

it is the 'controller' 'knower' and 'senser'...

yet

as 'seeing' cannot be seen
yet is evident in the appearance of 'color'...

so 'power/choice' is evident in the perfect concord of all sensation and meaning that manifest this experience - every apparent moment...

this power/choice is instantaneous...

it is not 'preceded' by any 'desire' or 'need' or 'thought' or 'reason'... it is completely free... unbound by 'conditions'...

(if there was a 'reason' for the choice, the reason and not this 'power' would be the determining factor)...

it is the author of all 'desires', all 'needs', all 'thoughts', all 'reasons', all 'conditions'...

it matters not whether 'thought' thinks it exists or not...

it is not a concept that can be known...
or a colour, or odour, or flavour, or feeling or sound that can be sensed...

it is like 'God' or 'Self' or 'Tao' or 'Spirit'... any concept is not it.

if you say 'I do not believe that this 'power/choice' exists'... whatever IDEA/CONCEPT you have of this 'power/choice’ (that is believed to not exist)...

I don't believe that ‘it’ (the idea/concept you have) exists either (except as an idea/concept)... smile

yet it is...

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
awakening
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 2277

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To put it bluntly Michael: I couldn't disagree more.

The whole addition of this 'choice' concept unnecessarily complicates this Open Secret., this undefinable Is-ness and even saying this is already one definition too many.

Yes, of course, just like in daily life I see apples, i see choices, as part of the appearance, but not as 'my' power.

THIS -on the other hand- is prior to any choice.
Choiceless Awareness.
It simply doesn't choose or reject anything, as IT IS everything and no-thing.


Saying that it does, is like saying that the sun chooses to give light, while it IS light.

IT is every appearance -including every appearance of choice- there is.
It does not watch helpless either
as it is the Only One.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

leo, what we are apparently disagreeing about is a concept...

yes, the sun has no 'choice' to shine... that is its nature

but what is the 'nature' of this...

as the senses are stilled and no meaning 'remembered'...
no 'things' are seen or heard or tasted or smelled or felt...

in the absence of all appearances...
in the absence of 'experiencing'…

what then is the nature of THIS...

where then is the sun?

when a dreamer awakes from his dream... where is the content...

though 'the sun' is ever 'the sun'...
(for this that is known can never become unknown)

there is no 'dream content' (including the apparent sun) until it is dreamed...



Yes, there is no 'choice' in being...

in being: seeing tasting smelling feeling hearing and knowing

nor any choice in 'what' is known... for all that is knowable (number, form and meaning) is known now... ever unchanged....

the only 'choice' is to stir the senses and the knowing 'now' (or not)…
to instantly manifest an 'experiencing'... a dream

and to 'choose' the 'content' of the dream...

from all possibilities that may be made manifest...
'this instant'...

to manifest 'life' from the perspective of leo (to dream 'I am leo writing to michael)

or, to manifest 'life' from the perspective of michael (to dream 'I am michael writing to leo)...

or, any other of the infinity of 'possible experiences'...

and to choose the instant in which the dream is switched to another 'perspective'...

there is no requirement to dream a 'life' from beginning to end... for 'this whole world story' (including the 'lifel of each apparent person in 'this world story') is already in the knowing

the 'experiencing' is purely 'sensual'... stirring the senses to accord with any 'period' of 'life' of any apparent person

as Krishna tells Arjuna... 'this is the mere occasion, I have already long ago killed these your kinsmen'.

this choice to manifest (or not) and 'what' to manifest is ‘outside’ the dream…

it cannot be sensed or known any more than this ‘consciousness’ can be sensed or known…

for it (the choosing) is one with this consciousness.

...

And, as each experience appears...
it too is one with consciousness...

there is no 'choice' in this 'oneness'
for it is in the nature of consciousness
that the experience is inseparable from it



this dream is not extended in space or time...

as a 'nightly dream' contains its own apparent space and time, so this waking dream contains its own points of reference. It may appear that it has been ‘going on’ for thousands or millions or billions of years and that it extends through untold cubic kilometers of space… but this appearance arises in a flash and in a flash it is gone…

as quickly as each apparent moment of a nightly dream in which the memory of a whole life appears to be lived…

it may be said that each dream arises 'spontaneously' within consciousness each apparent instant...

and I would agree, for

leo's 'spontaneous' is michael's 'power/choice'...

neither is an 'explanation'...

both point to the ‘ineffable’ in different ways and from different angles...

as when it is said that this is 'play'...

the One/No-One manifesting by through and for 'Self' alone...

any apparent attempt to 'conceptualise' either 'spontaneity' or 'power/choice' is not what is being 'pointed to'...

so I am happy to leave it that each 'momentary' appearance arises 'spontaneously'... in so far as the senses and the knowing are concerned...

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring


Last edited by michael on Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gretta wrote:
There is only 'This'...indescribable...ineffable...

or

'eternal acausal' ('pure subjectivity')...

yet even these are labels-LOL

and

Yet...This... AS... apparent 'arisings' which never arise...

This as...

The 'illusion'...the phenomenal...the dream as 'space-time.'...'concepts'...apparent movement which was never born nor died...ever unchanged

This as...

ahhh apparent dream/ space-time...make believe...mind created (subject/object mind creation...duality) where there is none....


perhaps

smiles




Love


yes, to say it is simply 'spontaneous' or simply 'acausal' or simply 'power' or simply 'choice'...

limits the illimitable...

perhaps... smile

what use is argument...

other than as 'play'... smile

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gretta



Joined: 19 Nov 2006
Posts: 501

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ahhh captured ...This 'playfulness' before vanishing

Lover


tee hee


mmwwwah!


smiles


Love
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fox



Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 821
Location: Switzerland

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
He can explore it till the cows come home.

But unless you see it yourself, then all the exploration will be for it's own sake.


Do you see it for yourself, Empty-and-full?
_________________
Atheists responsible for Adolf Hitler's cruelties?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Many Of One



Joined: 06 Dec 2006
Posts: 352
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Non Duality: The one question to all our answers.


I understand this statement now.
_________________
Who wrote this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jeff j



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 2822

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="awakening"]To put it bluntly Michael:

I couldn't disagree more.

The whole...."

a-pair-ently
diagreements ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/disagree )
and concepts ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/concept )
are equivalent ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/equivalent )
in their nature(s) ( )
_________________
be yourself, the real fictional character?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
awakening
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 2277

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="jeff"]
awakening wrote:
To put it bluntly Michael:

I couldn't disagree more.

The whole...."

a-pair-ently
diagreements ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/disagree )
and concepts ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/concept )
are equivalent ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/equivalent )
in their nature(s) ( )


What to say to that...
Was it you Jeff, who posted this link once before?

no goyoutube.com/watch?v=3ayHcA_n7VY&mode=related&search=
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jeff wrote:
awakening wrote:
To put it bluntly Michael:

I couldn't disagree more.


The whole...."

a-pair-entity
disagreements ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/disagree )
and concepts ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/concept )
are equivalent ( http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/equivalent )
in their nature(s) ( )


of course...

it is impossible for any 'thing' to not exist

for a 'thing' to be said to 'not exist' it must be known...

it thus already exists in the knowing of it...

the more precise/full the description of the 'thing' said to not exist, the more precise its existence is remembered

someone may say that such a 'not existing thing' is not 'known' in the same way as, say, this computer on which these words appear is 'known'...

yet what is really being said by this,
is that the 'not existing thing' is not
seen or
tasted or
smelled or
felt or
heard...

but these sensations are not an 'object'
they are not any 'thing'...

what' they are cannot be said,
for they are not any 'concept'...

any 'thing' is 'pure concept': meaning/form/number...
known in the knowing...
defined by reference to all other 'things'

as a 'thing' said to 'not exist' is already known, it is perfectly possible for it to be manifested as a 'dreamed object'...

so that it appears as 'real' as this computer...

though there are 'things' that can be known but which cannot be manifested... such as 'electricity', or 'quantum fields'...
these are 'pure conceptions'...

in this case what is manifested is their 'known effects'...
for example the known magnetic field is experienced as 'iron filings standing on end'...

though the appearance is not caused by these conceptions

in speaking of 'power' in the 'usual sense'...
this too is a concept that cannot be directly manifested...
for example, the 'power' of an engine is seen is the apparent movement of the wheels

...

however, words may be used to indicate this ineffable...

used in this way, words are not based on any concept...

they may be looked up in dictionary, but the meaning in the dictionary is not what is being indicated

words like:
'seeing/colour', 'hearing/sound', 'dream', 'God', 'Tao', 'power/choice',
'experiencing', 'spontaneous'...

are meaningless, but profound... smile

when speaking of this...

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring


Last edited by michael on Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:20 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index -> Awakening to the Dream All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group