Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Eric Lanigan's avatar

“So by the activity of “itself”, this knowing, which in itself doesn’t have a self, becomes aware of this apparent self, which it is not, because it can’t be that which it knows“

“… it can’t be that which it know” -> why can’t it? Sure in the 3D material world this pattern holds true, but I’m unconvinced that consciousness isn’t arising out of a nervous system to a point where “self-awareness” arises… and this self-awareness can ONLY become aware of itself -> or rather it’s internal modeling of that which it perceive outside it.

And all the subsequent insights don’t need the assertion that “it can’t be that which it knows” -> universal oneness can be understood simply by seeing that all boundaries are drawn abstractly in concepts, you can’t take a tree out of the earth and expect it to be a tree any longer, it’s interdependent on its environment.

Further, if you place your attention (consciousness) on another human being, you experience (your model of) that other human being, and so it pretty quickly becomes evident that you can’t be fully happy until all beings are fully happy.

Expand full comment

No posts