Ananta Yoga March Week

Ananta Yoga March Week Four
Lesson Date	Title	Subject	Source
26/03/2003	The Paradox of Human Consciousness	Individual Existence	Classic
How comes then this seeming individual consciousness considering the subject of last week? It will serve little purpose to speak of the how and why of the existence of any individual beings state of consciousness, or of the nature of the species or genus of any single being either. However we will speak of that individual consciousness which would like to justify the existence of a self that is separate from the Omnipresence. First of all it can be easily seen that something looks at the thoughts, experiences or perceptions that occur at any given moment; Thoughts or events which appear in the emptiness of awareness as if by magic; thoughts the existence of which, cause the schism in The Eternal Omniscience which we call The Mind, and with it Time. (See the Time Poem.) Note: No thought can originate from mind because the mind arises with them. Mind arises after, and therefore as a result of the experience that has recently been had, thoughts then are therefore effected or displayed upon the matter/atomic structure of the physical brain and are then looked at by an conscious awareness that is separate from both the form and structure of the body. The Consciousness can therefore (in reality) never be bound to the body, but the belief is that it is, and can be. Yet when One is said to have been rendered unconscious by whatever means, it is said: "ONE IS UNCONSCIOUS" this is utterly untrue because all that has occurred is that the display mechanism of the nervous system has been impeded or otherwise temporarily rendered incapable of presenting any information to the Consciousness, which is conscious of that which perception supplies. In short perception is not working. The consciousness or unconsciousness of someone is ascertained by the existence of perception, while in the absence of perception the ascertainment of consciousness is said to be impossible because in that case a person is said to be unconscious due to the lack of response to stimuli. Perception then, (or the Mind for that matter) could conceivably be stopped by rendering ones-self unconscious. That is just the point; If one believes ones-self to be the body or even something as surreal as a presence within that body/mind labeled "I" -- or implies the existence of some form or designation of "I-Me" existing somewhere, then that existence is predicated upon and dependant upon the existence of some-where or some-when and is therefore also dependant upon some-what or some-who or One who is knowable such as "I-Me". When the body is rendered unconscious (incapable of displaying the effect of events on the nervous system) "the Consciousness itself", also appears to have become unconscious; because that which does the imagining (the mind) cannot display the attributes of perception to the Consciousness. "The True I" (the Consciousness) which notices these perceptions cannot be said to be unconscious, there is simply no perceptive process occurring. It is merely a case of cognition not happening. (in the case of the unconscious being) there is nothing of which to be conscious because the mind does not exist previous to cognition. This cannot mean that the consciousness is unconscious. It is merely a case of the Designated "I"--- "the Not-Self becoming unconscious, never the Consciousness becoming unconscious. This can easily be proven by the fact that anyone can notice that something is watching the play of the thoughts as they arise. However that watcher is never thought to be capable of awareness without the apparatus of perception: vis Mind/Senses. How absurd! However if that so-called "I"-Me, is defined as and by the existence of perception or the thought of "I-Me", then who or what is it that looks at that "I"-within Me? If I, the watcher of the mind am that which appears in the mind as well, then all is within me. On the other hand if I am not the seer of me then that which is seen in the mind is actually "Me" . Again if "I" do not exist as either the watcher or the mind itself, there always remains a seer of the seen and hence neither "I" nor the Cosmos exists, but there is always the Consciousness. There is always that which reflects or displays upon itself, that which is seen whether or not the reflection is The True Self or not. In any case "I" am designated as "I" by "I" the watcher existing within or predicated upon an "I" with form and attributes. To realize that the "I" of form and/or attributes (whether or not these attributes are mental or physical) is not separate from the external world of matter is to achieve Cosmic Consciousness. This is the First step in the realization of the Omnipresent nature of Omniscience. To realize that the formless "I" is not separate from the Void in which the Omnipresent Cosmos exists, is to lose the identity of "I-ness" as having form or attributes, it is to transcend the actual Cosmos". This is the second step in the immersion of beingness in non-being. However each of the steps mentioned above (though we may have an intellectual grasp of them due to the simplicity of their definition) must be lived and understood via a constant meditation upon these two ideas in the context of their effects upon ones belief in selfhood and individuality, regardless of the massive connotations that these ideas have to the belief in the eternal existence of the human soul. Download Lesson

Ananta Yoga March Week Four

Lesson Date

Title

Subject

Source

26/03/2003

The Paradox of Human Consciousness

Individual Existence

Classic

How comes then this seeming individual consciousness considering the subject of last week?

It will serve little purpose to speak of the how and why of the existence of any individual beings state of consciousness, or of the nature of the species or genus of any single being either. However we will speak of that individual consciousness which would like to justify the existence of a self that is separate from the Omnipresence.

First of all it can be easily seen that something looks at the thoughts, experiences or perceptions that occur at any given moment; Thoughts or events which appear in the emptiness of awareness as if by magic; thoughts the existence of which, cause the schism in The Eternal Omniscience which we call The Mind, and with it Time. (See the Time Poem.)

Note: No thought can originate from mind because the mind arises with them.

Mind arises after, and therefore as a result of the experience that has recently been had, thoughts then are therefore effected or displayed upon the matter/atomic structure of the physical brain and are then looked at by an conscious awareness that is separate from both the form and structure of the body. The Consciousness can therefore (in reality) never be bound to the body, but the belief is that it is, and can be.

Yet when One is said to have been rendered unconscious by whatever means, it is said: "ONE IS UNCONSCIOUS" this is utterly untrue because all that has occurred is that the display mechanism of the nervous system has been impeded or otherwise temporarily rendered incapable of presenting any information to the Consciousness, which is conscious of that which perception supplies. In short perception is not working.

The consciousness or unconsciousness of someone is ascertained by the existence of perception, while in the absence of perception the ascertainment of consciousness is said to be impossible because in that case a person is said to be unconscious due to the lack of response to stimuli. Perception then, (or the Mind for that matter) could conceivably be stopped by rendering ones-self unconscious.

That is just the point; If one believes ones-self to be the body or even something as surreal as a presence within that body/mind labeled "I" -- or implies the existence of some form or designation of "I-Me" existing somewhere, then that existence is predicated upon and dependant upon the existence of some-where or some-when and is therefore also dependant upon some-what or some-who or One who is knowable such as "I-Me".

When the body is rendered unconscious (incapable of displaying the effect of events on the nervous system) "the Consciousness itself", also appears to have become unconscious; because that which does the imagining (the mind) cannot display the attributes of perception to the Consciousness.

"The True I" (the Consciousness) which notices these perceptions cannot be said to be unconscious, there is simply no perceptive process occurring. It is merely a case of cognition not happening. (in the case of the unconscious being) there is nothing of which to be conscious because the mind does not exist previous to cognition. This cannot mean that the consciousness is unconscious. It is merely a case of the Designated "I"--- "the Not-Self becoming unconscious, never the Consciousness becoming unconscious.

This can easily be proven by the fact that anyone can notice that something is watching the play of the thoughts as they arise. However that watcher is never thought to be capable of awareness without the apparatus of perception: vis Mind/Senses. How absurd!

However if that so-called "I"-Me, is defined as and by the existence of perception or the thought of "I-Me", then who or what is it that looks at that "I"-within Me?

If I, the watcher of the mind am that which appears in the mind as well, then all is within me. On the other hand if I am not the seer of me then that which is seen in the mind is actually "Me" . Again if "I" do not exist as either the watcher or the mind itself, there always remains a seer of the seen and hence neither "I" nor the Cosmos exists, but there is always the Consciousness.

There is always that which reflects or displays upon itself, that which is seen whether or not the reflection is The True Self or not. In any case "I" am designated as "I" by "I" the watcher existing within or predicated upon an "I" with form and attributes.

To realize that the "I" of form and/or attributes (whether or not these attributes are mental or physical) is not separate from the external world of matter is to achieve Cosmic Consciousness. This is the First step in the realization of the Omnipresent nature of Omniscience.

To realize that the formless "I" is not separate from the Void in which the Omnipresent Cosmos exists, is to lose the identity of "I-ness" as having form or attributes, it is to transcend the actual Cosmos". This is the second step in the immersion of beingness in non-being.

However each of the steps mentioned above (though we may have an intellectual grasp of them due to the simplicity of their definition) must be lived and understood via a constant meditation upon these two ideas in the context of their effects upon ones belief in selfhood and individuality, regardless of the massive connotations that these ideas have to the belief in the eternal existence of the human soul.

Download Lesson