From: Duveyoung <[email protected]> What can I do to test these statements? Nisargadatta"The scriptures say so, but I know nothing about it. I know myself as I am; as I appeared or will appear is not within my experience. It is not that I do not remember. In fact there is nothing to remember. Reincarnation implies a reincarnating self. There is no such thing. The bundle of memories and hopes, called the 'I', imagines itself existing everlastingly and creates time to accommodate its false eternity: To be, I need no past or future. All experience is born of imagination; I do not imagine, so no birth or death happens to me. Only those who think themselves born can think themselves re-born. You are accusing me of having been born -- I plead not guilty!""By its very nature the mind is outward turned; it always tends to seek for the source of things among the things themselves; to be told to look for the source within, is, in a way, the beginning of a new life. Awareness takes the place of consciousness; in consciousness there is the 'I', who is conscious while awareness is undivided; awareness is aware of itself. The 'I am' is a thought, while awareness is not a thought, there is no 'I am aware' in awareness. Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not; one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all -- being as well as not-being."
I have no answer to the question posed at the top of this post, but I do have a couple to pose for Edg, for the newb who posts as aryavazhi, possibly for Anartaxius or Curtis, and for anyone else who earnestly ponders such issues as "is awareness the same as consciousness." These are real questions -- not putdowns, as some might interpret them -- and so if any of you have possible answers for them, I would appreciate hearing them. I'm looking to understand something I really don't "get." So, this said, my questions are: 1. What would you perceive as the value to yourself of actually finding the "answer" to abstract questions such as this, and learning the "truth" of them? 2. What would you perceive as the value *to anyone else* of actually finding the "answer" to abstract questions such as this, and learning the "truth" of them? I ask because I don't see any such value. Knowing what one considers "the truth" has IMO never in history fed and clothed a single human being, or helped him/her to feed and clothe another human being. I *understand* that some consider themselves "philosophers," and are drawn in such a way that they love to ponder abstract, non-real-world questions such as these. But *other than* liking it -- and the "narcissism payoff" provided by convincing oneself one has discovered "the truth" -- I don't see any reason to spend even a moment pondering such issues. Can you suggest one?
