Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is Awareness Aware of Itself?
person
Don't believe everything you thinkThe liminal space Veteran
Someone posted a video recently about awareness. At the end the question was posed to people if awareness is aware of itself. I thought this is an interesting question to ask the forum. Also give any reasons or scripture as to the why of your answer.
0
Comments
awareness, in my opinion, can be both a response and a reponse dimension, for instance, the act (response) of selectively attending upon a particular stimulus, could be considered the actual behavior of awareness
but for a response to occur, cognizant to the attending organism, makes awareness a response dimension of that behavior (ie. I spoke with awareness, similar to I spoke with low volume)
in this case, awareness cannot be attended upon in the late formless meditative states because there is a cessation of perception
Do you think there can be a state of pure awareness, not dependent upon a cognition or perception?
In mental states where there is a cessation of perception (deep formless meditative states), then there is no way to perceive one's state of awareness because there is no perception arising.
According to the suttas there most definitely is a state of awareness that continues beyond the cessation of perception and feeling. I don't think there is a mentioning of a state of awareness beyond the cessation of consciousness. Awareness (attenion) is defined as part of namarupa. According to the teachings on dependent origination consciousness and namarupa hold each other up like two stalks of wheat leaned against one another. There is no namarupa (including attention) without the arising of consciousness and there is no consciousness without the arising of namarupa.
The way to bring about the cessation of consciousness is thus:
This is consciousness
This consciousness arises dependent upon namarupa
The cessation of namarupa would bring about the cessation of consciousness
The path leading to the cessation of consciousness is the 8-fold path
"Receptive awareness is very close to the idea of a witnessing consciousness. Beginners in meditation often assume that our ability to witness means that there is someone who is witnessing; a particular, unique, and lasting subject or agent within us that is the witness. We have a strong tendency to dichotomize our world, especially between the perceived and the perceiver. Similarly, we often make a distinction between the doer and the action: I’m the doer and I am doing something, I am the speaker who is speaking. Most of us consider the idea that there is a perceiver or a doer to be simple common sense. Buddhism challenges this assumption.
These dichotomies are the cornerstone of the huge edifice of self. As soon as we have a perceiver, we have a concept of self, which becomes a magnet for all sorts of culturally conditioned ideas about what a self should be like. Our sense of self can be closely and painfully related to ideas of what is worthy, what is good, and what is required from the world around us.
Emotions can arise directly from the way we conceive our “self.” If our self-image is threatened, we can easily get angry or fearful. Guilt can come from relating a self-image to ideas of good and bad, right and wrong. Both praise and blame can energize us when they affect the way we define and represent our- selves. And when our sense of self is neither supported nor threatened, some people get bored – bored with the people they are with or bored with the situation.
Resting in receptive awareness is an antidote to our efforts of building and defending a self. As this capacity develops and we begin to trust it, the assumption that there is “someone who is aware” falls away. Self-consciousness falls away. Sometimes this is called an experience of non-dualistic awareness: the distinctions between self and other, inside and outside, perceiver and perceived disappear. There is no one who is aware; there is only awareness and experience happening within awareness.
Part of what we learn to do in practice is to steady our attention, to develop a simple, receptive awareness. We aren’t necessarily abandoning the world of ideas or even the idea of self. Instead, we learn to hold our lives, our ideas, and ourselves lightly. We rest in a spacious and compassionate sphere of awareness that knows but is not attached. In this way our response to life can arise from our direct experience rather than from our abstract ideas and attachments."
Many thanks.
"But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."
that is spot on.
Mind, no-mind... both are upaya.. skillful means. The "authorities" all say practice.
"Mind", "awareness'... like "True Nature".. can either be skillful means.. or a serious misdirection. In the hands of a good teacher.. they are skillful, on the internet they are usually something to hang on..
Many people here actually think that understanding means understanding for example
Repeated.
.....off topic though.
Hi @driedleaf
'Awareness' - if we use this word - points to the quality of awareness.
That which is aware, is aware of.
So in your example, if you become aware of a certain thought arising e.g. I am so fat -- then what you are aware of are the words, the emotions, the (apparent) sound in that etc.
What you are aware of then is those elements As Bodhimind once said, we use words to hint at the quality and experience of what is being said.
In my opinion, there is no expansion, nor contraction in the quality of awareness. What moves is not it, but it is all that.
Best wishes,
Abu
I am not sure that I can relate to these analogies.
In my opinion, genuine zazen is the epitome of clarity, awareness and insight.
Namaste,
Abu
Anyway... someone has gotten up and is putting on coffee. Today I am going with my kid for a long bike ride down to the lake shore..
A representation that says that zazen is being unaware is very odd by any book or quotation.
To suggest that clarity, awareness and stink stink is also highly misleading. You are perhaps talking about people with imagined glowing-ness and are stuck in the emptiness realm concept -- but to say that zazen is not all that suggests a high degree of unclarity there.
Perhaps it is just the use of the language, but perhaps not.
Enjoy the bike ride with your family, that sounds nice.
Best wishes,
Abu
As far as new people are concerned.. IMHO talk of "mind" and "awareness" is like offering crack cocaine to a thirst that wants something..anything or no-thing.. to hold. It is better to just talk about Dukkha.. knowing Dukkha... investigating Dukkha ...
But that is just my opinion. It is even better talk about going to a teacher , taking refuge, and doing it. It is even better still to not set ourselves up as teachers... and to defer to the skills of people who have received transmission from an uncorrupted line.
But we can still blab. I like to blab.
....and I will also enjoy this ride with my boy. Our first summery outing!
:thumbsup:
I'll respond tonight if there is something to respond to...
Enjoy the outing
Abu
As we become more experienced, we may be able to notice these mind states and differentiate between them. When we can differentiate between them, I believe this is when we become aware of another different form of awareness. Wouldn't you call this be "being aware of the awareness"?
for instance one could have an experience of openness. in the experience itself it is completely beyond what we label it. but we label it after the fact and even during. oh this is openness, which is quite different from closedness. but in direct experience there is only what is.
the dualistic mind always works in pairs. asserting one thing is asserting the other. they need each other.
on the mindfulness or awareness aspect. when there is mindfulness, you are in fact mindfulness itself. but notice how the object is made, rather than objectively coming from its own side as an object.
for instance right now i am listening to the clock. mindfulness of sound. the story about i am listening to the clock, is just a story. in direct experience there is only the sound. there would be no mindfulness if there was no sound. so mindfulness is a mental focus. thats is all.
all experiences be it normal or altered states of consciousness require some sort of focus or contact.
there is no experience without contact, thus they are interdependent.
we make the mindfulness into a subject watching the object. But in actuality or experience there is only the appearance of awareness, which requires the contact or mindfulness. so mindfulness of the body is body.
mindfulness of sound is sound.
there is no mindfulness behind watching everything.
but separate instances of mindfulness based on each sense.
Not sure if this is clear enough. But hope this makes some sense?
I don't think so, because the different states are different states. Awareness is constant. Depending on your Buddhist tradition, one could call it the ground of everything, or the deathless, the unconditioned, Buddha etc.
But as RichardH alludes to in another post, these are all tentative yardsticks only and can also tether people too much. It cannot be truly adequately explained but because interim-ly people need handholds, sometimes such things are spoken of - only as an interim encouragement.
It is best to just practice, and leave the analysis for idiots like me
Namaste,
Abu