Impermanent Rule - enlightenment and consciousness

[OmniYoga]

"All experienced phenomena, whether physical or mental, inner
or outer, are impermanent. This is one of the most fundamental
teachings of the Buddha and the second-to-last sentence he
uttered before he died:
All phenomena are impermanent! Work out your salvation with
diligence!" - from MTCB by Daniel Ingram

so enlightenment itself is impermanent ?
what about consciousness ? 
why the mind seems to always returns if it is impermanent, you for get about it for a moment and second later ("here I am buddy,  again " haha)
or that not include to phenomena

error 404 logic not found

[Inliytened1]

@OmniYoga all is consciousness - but form is impermanent as it never really was there in the first place.  It is just the formless taking shape as form.  The formless (pure consciousness) is eternal.

It cannot be broken, killed, or escaped because it is already nothing.

As for enlightenment, the idea of enlightenment is part of form. It is a concept in your mind ??

When all concept and thought dissolve only actuality remains.   Actual enlightenment is pure consciousness/actuality itself.

[Nahm]

13 minutes ago, OmniYoga said:

"All experienced phenomena, whether physical or mental, inner
or outer, are impermanent. This is one of the most fundamental
teachings of the Buddha and the second-to-last sentence he
uttered before he died:
All phenomena are impermanent! Work out your salvation with
diligence!" - from MTCB by Daniel Ingram

That’s just a thought. Kill em both. It is you who spoke the wisdom. 

so enlightenment itself is a thought
what about consciousness it’s a thought
why the mind seems to always returns if it is impermanent, you for get about it for a moment and second later ("here I am buddy,  again " haha) So you can create. 
or that not include to phenomena Whatever it is, it is phenomena. 

error 404 logic not found perfect!

All that is known is thought, perception, sensation - and all of those are inseparable of the knowing of them. The knowing of them is inseparable from the knowing. 

There is not a “knower”. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, OmniYoga said:

so enlightenment itself is impermanent ?
what about consciousness ?

No, because they are not phenomena.

Consciousness itself transcends all contents of consciousness in the way that a TV screen is permanent even though the content it displays is impermanent.

The mistake you're making here is thinking of enlightenment/consciousness as phenomena. They are not. That's the whole point. If they were phenomena they would not be worth pursuing.

1 hour ago, OmniYoga said:

why the mind seems to always returns if it is impermanent,

1) The mind is always changing.

2) The mind will be gone forever with death. It only seems permanent because you're judging it exclusively from inside itself, inside the context of your life. Your mind is treating your life as an absolute standard next to which everything else is judged and understood. But this is precisely backwards. You life could end in a split second at any moment and nothing of it will remain.

[Forestluv]

39 minutes ago, OmniYoga said:

so enlightenment itself is impermanent ?

Realize relative (dual) and absolute (nondual) and all questions are answered.

Relative permanence vs relative impermanence involves creation a timeline of past, present and future. As well, we need to create a thing separate from other things. Thus, past is not present is not future. And voila, no thing is past, present and future due to separation within a relative/dualistic time-space construct. Thus each thing is relatively impermanent. 

Absolute permanence is unconditional. It is not dependent on conditions such as past, present, future and perceptions of separate things. “It” is unchanging because there is no separate “it” and there is no timeline in which to change. 

As well, we can create a thing called “enlightenment” as a relative separate thing and as an unconditional absolute. 

The mind likes to perceive separation and opposition. The mind will set up a conflict between relative and absolute. The mind will want to decide which is true: relative or absolute. They appear as opposites, thus one must be true and the other false. When one attempts to transcend the duality, conflation and confusion may arise.

Nearly every human mind is conditioned to perceive dualistically. Thus, the mind does not need to realize dualism. It already has that part down. It doesn’t need to read philosophical dualistic theory to transcend dualism. The human mind is already an Olympic gold medalist at creating dualistic constructs. The realization is that of nondualusm. . . . In this case, the mind can easily perceive impermanence of a separate thing in a timeline. Last night there was a moon present. Now, there is no moon present. The mind perceives relative impermanence effortlessly. It is much harder for the mind to realize absolute permanence. . . . Realizing absolute permanence is a profound breakthrough, yet the mind will want to grasp at absolute permanence and reject relative permanence. This is also a trap since both absolute and relative are true and both have value.