Consciousness and awareness are not two distinct things but are one and the
same. You are  conscious of something , which is the same as being aware of
something.

On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think the Banks model is trying to say that Consciousness IS.  And
> is in everyone of us, whether we are aware or unaware of it.  Our
> experience of consciousness is formed by mind and thought.
>
> On Sep 9, 5:48 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That is fundamental Vam.
> > Regardless of the degree of debilitation and rendering as socially
> > incompatible, there are those confined, institutionalized in states of
> > anger (and other).  The statement and or assessment is made from a
> > generalized view of 'whole' people, ie; best case scenario, the
> > norm.
> >
> > So regarded the statement is not totally valid.
> >
> > All consciousness is not equal.  That was my point.
> >
> > On Sep 9, 1:57 am, ashok tewari <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Slip, may I ... !
> >
> > > Any ' conscious ' phenomenon could be :
> >
> > > -  known and experientially liberating ( intellect ),
> >
> > > -  in a process between known and unknown and experientially confusing
> (
> > > mind ), and
> >
> > > -  in a state less known and more unknown and experientially binding (
> > > emotion ).
> >
> > > And, *NO ONE* " spend their entire lives entrenched " or " are born,
> live
> > > and die in a complete state of anger." There are always nine other '
> juices
> > > ' we ALL experience, more or less. Yes, more or less !
> >
> > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > but do understand that this is not a level of
> > > > consciousness for an expression of anger-mb
> >
> > > > I don't get this "anger is not a level of consciousness" when of
> > > > course it is a consciousness of anger in which some people spend
> their
> > > > entire lives entrenched in it.
> >
> > > > I think that you express out of your own personality which is the
> > > > platform from which you not only view but from which you standardize
> > > > the world and respond to it in that context, but it is not a general
> > > > rule.  You can't state as if it is fact.
> >
> > > > Some people are born, live and die in a complete state of anger.  For
> > > > some it is the extreme but still it is their level of consciousness
> > > > which they are confined to.
> >
> > > > On Sep 8, 3:18 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > got it.  My point is, we are blowing, and the wind...no
> > > > > difference...but do understand that this is not a level of
> > > > > consciousness for an expression of anger, which would be a view of
> > > > > separation, so true.  In which case...I wouldn't want any of that
> > > > > coming back to me.  I often wonder if the person acting out anger
> is
> > > > > even aware of what comes back.
> >
> > > > > On Sep 8, 3:18 pm, ashok tewari <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > * smiling *  The point, Molly, was it coming back on oneself. *
> tickled
> > > > *
> >
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Molly <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > I see your point, Vam.  I didn't think the act made that much
> > > > > > > difference, but I suppose it could!
> >
> > > > > > > On Sep 8, 2:43 pm, ashok tewari <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > " ... blowing in the wind."
> >
> > > > > > > > I suggest : ... spitting in th wind, for females. And : ...
> pissing
> > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > wind, for males !
> >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Molly <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > It is interesting, in this thread, so many have taken the
> task to
> > > > tell
> > > > > > > > > others how to express themselves.  I have not found any
> problems
> > > > with
> > > > > > > > > RPs posts (indeed, a great deal of understanding of the
> subject),
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > > like gabby, don't think anyone should have to defend him,
> is
> > > > there a
> > > > > > > > > gang forming here?  Some of us make our sufi like
> responses,
> > > > others
> > > > > > > > > make statements reflecting our views and give links with
> info to
> > > > back
> > > > > > > > > them up.  None of this is new and none of it is the basis
> for
> > > > > > > > > opposition.  We are all free to express our views in any
> post
> > > > within
> > > > > > > > > the parameters of the guidelines, and all free to choose
> not to
> > > > post.
> > > > > > > > > But unless a moderator steps in with a reminder of the
> > > > guidelines,
> > > > > > > > > anyone telling another what to say and how to act in here
> is just
> > > > > > > > > blowing in the wind.
> >
> > > > > > > > > In terms of the thread, these may be the very thoughts that
> > > > plague our
> > > > > > > > > minds obsessively that we would be better off releasing
> than
> > > > indulging
> > > > > > > > > in reaction.  Thoughts about how the world comes up short,
> is
> > > > > > > > > disappointing, how others should be are all malignant ego,
> and if
> > > > > > > > > released, leave room within us for honest self examination.
> > > >  Levels of
> > > > > > > > > consciousness filled with thoughts of fear, anger,
> resentment etc
> > > > > > > > > multiply these thoughts exponentially and uncontrollably
> until
> > > > our
> > > > > > > > > minds cannot turn off from them.  Levels of consciousness
> filled
> > > > with
> > > > > > > > > peace and quiet, compassion, love and gratitude allow us to
> > > > better
> > > > > > > > > witness the process of thought and mind in consciousness.
>  This
> > > > kind
> > > > > > > > > of self examination cannot occur in the first mentioned
> level,
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > > will inevitably occur in the second.  Truth is, even the
> mystics
> > > > will
> > > > > > > > > admit that it is human to move from state to state, and
> many
> > > > suggest a
> > > > > > > > > spiral dynamic to the movement.
> >
> > > > > > > > > On Sep 8, 12:05 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Seems my vegetarian humor differs quite a bit from yours,
> > > > Allan. ;-)
> > > > > > > > > > See what I was going to reply to Darkwater:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > I don't know why you are doing this, but I think RP can
> speak
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > himself. Or shall I say: Let him speak for himself!?
> Watering
> > > > down
> > > > > > > > > > everything to Ken Wilbur does not help to build the arc
> in
> > > > time. He
> > > > > > > > > > says, his words are meant for people who want to
> understand
> > > > them.
> > > > > > > Fair
> > > > > > > > > > enough. Take what you get and leave the rest behind is my
> > > > advice to
> > > > > > > > > > you, Darkwater.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > On 8 Sep., 17:16, iam deheretic <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > LOL  Oddly I know exactly what he is saying from
> different
> > > > sources.
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > > > > > been rumbling around fo eons,, does not make it true
> and
> > > > because
> > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > make something dogma and doctrine  of their beliefs
> still
> > > > does not
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > true. Some things are interesting to look at but then
>  you
> > > > let them
> > > > > > > go.
> > > > > > > > > To
> > > > > > > > > > > me far to many beliefs are based promoted and twisted
> by
> > > > people to
> > > > > > > meat
> > > > > > > > > > > their own needs.
> > > > > > > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:43 PM, DarkwaterBlight <
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]>wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Oddly, I understand much of what RP is trying to
> express
> > > > but it
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > only on account of my relentless research into the
> subject
> > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > thread. Culturaly, here in the west, it is not
> generaly
> > > > > > > understood
> > > > > > > > > > > > that there are two truths, relative and ultimate.
> Relative
> > > > truth
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > > > be described by means of science and assetions can be
> made
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > something is true or false under the conditions
> assigned.
> > > > > > > However, RP
> > > > > > > > > > > > speaks of ultimate truth and non dual spirit and in
> doing
> > > > so,
> > > > > > > enters
> > > > > > > > > > > > into the realm of contradiction as the ultimate is
> empty of
> > > > > > > qualities
> > > > > > > > > > > > and categorizations. Ken Wilbur describes this as
> "The Two
> > > > Truths
> > > > > > > > > > > > Doctrine"
> >
> > > >http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/kosmos/excerptG/part1.cfm
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 8, 5:04 am, iam deheretic <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Words hold so much truth and what we say is but the
> > > > reflection
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > who we
> > > > > > > > > > > > are
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:20 AM, RP Singh <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My words are meant for people who want to
> understand
> > > > them ,
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > others
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of your ilk they are just ramblings of a madman
> and so
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > this leaves me laughing and gives a smile
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I learned a long time ago from Kipling and others
>  to
> > > > even
> > > > > > > listen
> > > > > > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > dull and ignorant for they to have their stories.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gruff , I ask you again to be happy as I did the
> last
> > > > time when
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > clashed
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > with me.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:21 AM, gruff <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> "... On Sep 7, 9:33 pm, RP Singh <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > ..."
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > By using words like  ' I believe'  etc.
> doesn't make
> > > > one
> > > > > > > 's
> > > > > > > > > words
> > > > > > > > > > > > less
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > arrogant. It is the content which matters. If
> you
> > > > have
> > > > > > > made up
> > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > > mind
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > find fault in me you will continue to do so on
> one
> > > > pretext
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > other.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder and so
> does
> > > > all
> > > > > > > else.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> It is hoped that by use of such phrases over
> time a
> > > > true
> > > > > > > respect
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> others will develop in other dimensions of your
> being.
> > > > > > > Your
> > > > > > > > > words do
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> not show any such respect for anyone elses words
> but
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป

Reply via email to