GENIUS FORUMS

Sapius wrote:

Reality is an appearance that comes and goes, pure consciousness is that which witnesses this coming and going, while itself remains constant.

You mean like what we know as energy?

average wrote:

Sapius wrote:

Reality is an appearance that comes and goes, pure consciousness is that which witnesses this coming and going, while itself remains constant.

You mean like what we know as energy?

Or like a dream.

Sapius wrote:
If dream it is, then give me a reason to take your position seriously.

average wrote:
Yes in the ultimate sense it [the self] is the infinite entity.

. . .

By not identifying with any thing, in the ultimate sense, you become what you are, you destroy rebirth (although it will still happen forever - nothing begins or ends).

. . .

So rebirth happens on a relative level, while ultimately you reside in pure consciousness, pure nirvana. This is why they say nirvana is not something you attain, or you have, its not an event, its what you are.

average wrote:

Sapius wrote:
If dream it is, then give me a reason to take your position seriously.

I was referring to reality being like a dream, that comes and goes. Not pure consciousness.

Reality is an appearance that comes and goes, pure consciousness is that which witnesses this coming and going, while itself remains constant.

Personally, I am more interested in the personal story, the intuition, even the 'fantasy' about what is and what might be. But I don't have too much hope at arriving at any defined and definite understanding of...anything.

Sapius wrote:
And I was referring to “pure consciousness” which you say itself remains constant. What exactly are you referring to as 'remains constant' here...

average wrote:

Sapius wrote:
And I was referring to “pure consciousness” which you say itself remains constant. What exactly are you referring to as 'remains constant' here...

Is neither created nor destroyed.

Sapius wrote:

average wrote:

Sapius wrote:
And I was referring to “pure consciousness” which you say itself remains constant. What exactly are you referring to as 'remains constant' here...

Is neither created nor destroyed.

So again, do you mean like what we know as energy?

average wrote:

Sapius wrote:

average wrote:
Is neither created nor destroyed.

So again, do you mean like what we know as energy?

Sure.

Sapius wrote:

Fair enough. Have a nice day.
Although it doesn’t make coherent sense to me.

Does it at least make incoherent sense to you?

Sapius wrote: Although it doesn’t make coherent sense to me.

I reckon I've seen more people(usually New Agers) claim that 'pure consciousness'=energy than i've had hot dinners(to coin a phrase.)

David Quinn wrote:Here is one of the earliest forays into the subject of rebirth by the Buddha. It's actually an intelligent work.

The Questions of Kutadanta

-

Ataraxia wrote:

Sapius wrote: Although it doesn’t make coherent sense to me.

me either.

I reckon I've seen more people(usually New Agers) claim that 'pure consciousness'=energy than i've had hot dinners(to coin a phrase.)

Just once I'd love to see someone define what is 'pure consciousness' in laymans terms and in logical fashion.

My search continues it seems. :(

Here is one of the earliest forays into the subject of rebirth by the Buddha. It's actually an intelligent work.

The Questions of Kutadanta

Jamesh wrote:It reads like one has to train themselves to be satisfied. The buddhas ideas are self-defeating (ha ha) - only individual selves and ego's drive humanity to evolve or die, so if the self equals death, then enlightenment also equals death.

average wrote:Pure consciousness is an ultimate notion without duality, so it is quite a challenge to define with our regular dualistic notions.
Strictly speaking, there is nothing 'like it' or "unlike it".

The metaphor of energy and matter just tries to show consciousness having a constant nature in terms regular folks can understand; even if it appears to manifest in different forms, a dog, a human, a priest, and even if it appears to die, it is still essentially what it always was and will always be.


If you inquire about who you are deeply, you will find yourself resting in consciousness without any identity(self) or distinguishable characteristics, limits, boundaries etc. =]

average;

How can YOU “find yourself resting in consciousness”? What does that mean? If “pure consciousness” is “without any identity(self) or distinguishable characteristics, limits, boundaries etc.” how do YOU have any notion (or experience, realization, etc.) of “pure consciousness”?

clyde

James: "To me it reads like the "power of positive thinking" in the face of nilihistic causing truths. It reads like one has to train themselves to be satisfied. The buddhas ideas are self-defeating (ha ha) - only individual selves and ego's drive humanity to evolve or die, so if the self equals death, then enlightenment also equals death."

Alex: And that is an excellent point. A general reading of metaphysical ideas that came out of India indicate a conception of spirituality that is a liberation from life. The base purpose of the transcendentalist is to do and to act in certain ways that are supposed to lead one away from here. In some schools of yoga they say that when enlightenment comes 'the body falls away'. This is a basic idea in many Indian schools of philosophy, and I am not sure if there is a fundamental difference in the Buddha's teachings which arose in that context.