"Enlightenment" is basically tautological as knowledge/experience. It is
basically "true" but that truth is trivial. It is like saying a dog is a dog..
To quote Nisargadatta, "There is no such thing as enlightenment, and the full
appreciation of this is, in fact, enlightenment."
There is a realization, but that realization contains no new information, only
what previously has existed. A mistake in the mind is corrected but does not
reveal anything that was expected because the mistake was just misperception of
reality.
When the mistake goes, nothing is changed, thus there is nothing to prove other
than one had been an idiot, and your friends probably knew that all along.
Consciousness results in experience, but it does not show outside of your own
mind. It does not exist as an objective substance, and thus cannot be detected.
The correlates of consciousness seem to show, and can be measured, but they do
not actually show that consciousness exists, only that certain factors
correlate with what a person says is his/her conscious experience.
Pure consciousness described as having no qualities makes it somewhat a
difficult target. To say we experience pure consciousness is probably wrong
because it implies two consciousnesses. Perhaps it is better to say it
experiences us. It would appear to be auto-informative of its own nature, but
that does not provide a hook for investigation because there are no qualities
to investigate objectively.
On Wednesday, December 13, 2017, 12:53:50 AM GMT, yifux...@yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
The answer is NO. Pure Consciousness can't be discovered through the tools of
modern science. There's no objective proof for Pure Consciousnesws and no
proof for It's 'non-existence. If it's falsifiable, lets see the research
paper (outside of the TM Org). PC can only be experienced for one''self. LThe
fact that you experience IT is insufficient evidence for IT's existence.
Similarly, lots of people experience visions of Jesus. So what? Again, not
falsifiable.
