Why is consciousness not an illusion

[arlin]

It came to my mind lately.

Consciousness by definition is "to be conscious of", that implies a subject object experience. But non duality says this is an illusion. It is not real.. 

How is consciousness real if there is no separation? Doesn't consciousness imply separation? (to be conscious of?) 

Then you say: "No but, the work we are doing here is consciousness realizing itself, becoming more conscious of itself". You see, this implies another subject-object experience but this time, you make it seem like something real justifying that it is happening within itself. Isn't this separation trying to overcome separation? 

Isn't this the answer to why you will never reach an end  to this work? 

Seems like there isn't any consciousness then. It might be the illusion. 

If you say "all there is is consciousness", It doesn't point to the fact that there is no actual real separation. (consciousness= to be conscious of= subject-object). 

You say nothing is real, but consciousness is.

so this gives the ego a sense of safety and knowing (thereby falling straight into the illusion) . But you can't use more knowing to talk about unknowing. 

It's a loop you can't escape from no matter how much of "god" you realize...

What do you think about that? 

Thanks. 

[Harmony342]

I don't understand why consciousness realising itself implies subject-object experience as one of the steps in your argument. This stuff messes with my head haha. The way I understand it is that the separation itself is an illusion so there is nothing to be done to overcome any separation but the letting go of illusions. I'm probably missing the point but I'm not surprised considering how confused I am too

[arlin]

3 minutes ago, Harmony342 said:

I don't understand why consciousness realising itself implies subject-object experience as one of the steps in your argument.

It has to split iself in the consciousness that observes, and the consciousness that is being observed but if there is no real separation (because any sort of separation is an illusion because reality is actually only ONE), any sort of consciousness realizing itself on any level must be an illusion.

 

Im so confused too. Im leaning more and more towards it's impossible to know.

 

[Chris365]

 

Consciousness is not the sense of 'being conscious of...'

It lends that sense some reality, but Consciousness itself is not that.

If I ask you 'Are you conscious/aware?', what do you say?

And where do you go to find the answer?

Consciousness does become aware of itself, no need for separation.

[Someone here]

@arlin obviously consciousness is not an illusion because here it is.

However  "you are conscious of X" subject-object is an illusion because there is no subject or object here. 

What you mean is perception is an illusion. Because perception implies a perceiver and a perceived. But those are actually one thing. 

[Bulgarianspirit]

Duality is an illusion, the self is an illusion, consciousness awareness or being is all that is.

Now fellow spiritual people, the question is how does this "mind" imagine worlds, people and experiences and they become "real"

The dream we have is the most real thing, unless you take psychedelics or meditate then you see, we are in god, looking at god experiencing god.

You see the very fabric of reality, scream fuck what is this, then see you aren't separate from anything.

Then the thought comes, if the mind was separate how would it know what is out there? Cells and electrical signals? Really science? Electricity in a meat box. We have a long way to go

[arlin]

12 minutes ago, Chris365 said:

Consciousness is not the sense of 'being conscious of...'

If i go in the dictionary this is the meaning. 

7 minutes ago, Someone here said:

obviously consciousness is not an illusion because here it is.

To be fair, i feel like im going crazy and i don't know whats real or unreal anymore. 

7 minutes ago, Someone here said:

However  "you are conscious of X" subject-object is an illusion because there is no subject or object here. 

What you mean is perception is an illusion. Because perception implies a perceiver and a perceived. But those are actually one thing. 

 

[Chris365]

6 minutes ago, arlin said:

If i go in the dictionary this is the meaning. 

What's in the dictionary under 'non-duality' ?

I'm saying for the purpose of realizing Consciousness, that definition is not useful

[Someone here]

8 minutes ago, arlin said:

To be fair, i feel like im going crazy and i don't know whats real or unreal anymore. 

17 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Real and unreal are just meaningless thoughts appearing within consciousness.  Consciousness is real and unreal simultaneously due to thoughts about real and unreal.  Sometimes you enter the unreal mode of consciousness which you are going through now. But don't worry soon you will enter back to the real mode of consciousness. 

[arlin]

@Someone herehere what i meant is that i can't rely on my eyes, senses or eyes to say that something is real. 

Its like i have no ground.

Where do i go from here? 

1 hour ago, Chris365 said:

 

56 minutes ago, Someone here said:

 

56 minutes ago, Someone here said:

 

[Nahm]

@arlin

Your experience of definitions, is actually that of connotations. 

[Someone here]

39 minutes ago, arlin said:

Here what i meant is that i can't rely on my eyes, senses or eyes to say that something is real. 

Its like i have no ground.

Where do i go from here? 

See the tricks of the mind.  Your so-called senses  are literally the only thing that you know of reality. Yet you are doubting that for the sake of a thought "what if this is not real? ".  I tell ya.. This is not "real" . There is no such thing as "real "or" unreal". These are just concepts. What's here and now can't be defined or put into categories.

  Just meditate and observe the flow of thoughts. Observe how thoughts about "unreal" are themselves the unreal that is trying to pull you away from the "real". 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Someone here

[Fran11]

2 hours ago, arlin said:

Doesn't consciousness imply separation? (to be conscious of?) 

 

The field of conciousness is self-aware.

Right now you feel like you are looking at your perceptual field like it was a TV screen, as you being something separated from it.

When your mental sense of I dissolves, you experience that actually the "screen" is self aware, and the one you thought was outside looking at it, was just a character appearing on the screen. 

There's no subject and object, it's all one piece.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Fran11

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, arlin said:

Consciousness by definition is "to be conscious of", that implies a subject object experience.

The is one of many definitions of "consciousness". As well, each definition is relative since all words and concepts are relative.

2 hours ago, arlin said:

But non duality says this is an illusion. It is not real.. 

Nonduality is "not two". There are two things here 'illusion' and 'real'

2 hours ago, arlin said:

How is consciousness real if there is no separation? Doesn't consciousness imply separation? (to be conscious of?) 

The definition of "consciousness" you are using does indeed imply separation. You are using a concept you call 'consciousness' as an entity aware of a separate object. 

2 hours ago, arlin said:

Then you say: "No but, the work we are doing here is consciousness realizing itself, becoming more conscious of itself". You see, this implies another subject-object experience but this time, you make it seem like something real justifying that it is happening within itself. Isn't this separation trying to overcome separation? 

Yes, that concept of "conscioiusness" also involves separation

2 hours ago, arlin said:

Isn't this the answer to why you will never reach an end  to this work? 

There is no end to infinity. Beginning and end is a construct of a human mind. 

2 hours ago, arlin said:

Seems like there isn't any consciousness then. It might be the illusion. 

It depends on your definitions of "consciousness" and "ISness" and "illusion". Imagine a definition of "Consciousness is anything I can sense here and now" - then there are no such thing as elephants (I don't sense any elephants here and now).

If we define "illusion" as: "Anything I can't sense here and now", then elephants are an illusion.

2 hours ago, arlin said:

If you say "all there is is consciousness", It doesn't point to the fact that there is no actual real separation. (consciousness= to be conscious of= subject-object). 

If we define consciousness as "all there is", then we need to define "IS". 

2 hours ago, arlin said:

You say nothing is real, but consciousness is.

There are assumptions of "real" and "imaginary". To get grounded, one would not to back up the bus and define "real" and "imaginary". Yet doing so gets very messy since we create category boxes called "real" and "imagined". Upon deep inspection, those boxes crumble and there is a realization that real = imagined - we create things called "real" and "imagined". This gets into areas of ambiguity, uncertainty and paradox. Most minds are very uncomfortable with this and want definitive concrete answers. Other minds are very fluid and love to explore ambiguity, uncertainty, paradox. And we create this as well.

2 hours ago, arlin said:

so this gives the ego a sense of safety and knowing (thereby falling straight into the illusion) . But you can't use more knowing to talk about unknowing. 

It's a loop you can't escape from no matter how much of "god" you realize...

It's a loop one cannot escape as long as they are immersed within the inescapable loop they created.

[SoonHei]

consciousness is what the illusions are made out of 

 

if you substitute the words
consciousness with sand

and illusions with sandcastles

 

then you is asking: why is sand not a sandcastle

 

 

so sand is prior, the first and last, the beginning and the ending of sandcastles.

[Inliytened1]

3 hours ago, arlin said:

It came to my mind lately.

Consciousness by definition is "to be conscious of", that implies a subject object experience. But non duality says this is an illusion. It is not real.. 

How is consciousness real if there is no separation? Doesn't consciousness imply separation? (to be conscious of?) 

 

Be careful of materialistic definitions.  Remember science today does not yet grasp that Consciousness is fundamental and that brains exist within consciousness not vice versa.  Science has yet to catch up.  And it could be hundreds of years 

Next - Consciousness is Infinity.  Meaning infinity is all possibilities - which means it ultimately negates itself.  And you get a Mind for reality.

So Infinity itself is not an illusion as it is unlimited and eternal.  What appears within infinity - or the limited parts within infnity - is the illusion - or you could say - what is imagined by Inifnity. 

Waking up is when what is being imagined by Infinity realizes it is in fact the whole thing, and so it becomes the whole thing.   You can see the twisted paradoxical nature here.   The serpent eating its own tail.

 

 

[arlin]

2 hours ago, Forestluv said:

The definition of "consciousness" you are using does indeed imply separation. You are using a concept you call 'consciousness' as an entity aware of a separate object. 

But then what is consciousness? Why do you keep saying that the point of life is for consciousness to become aware of itself when this implies separation? 

Wouldn't it be better if we said that all there is is the wall? Because it wouldn't make any difference. Actually in a way it would be more correct because consciousness implies to be conscious of and so separation. 

But even if you say the point of life is for reality to become aware of itself this is still separation. As though reality can split itself to look at itself (this is illusion, there is not two). 

Also, becoming aware and conscious implies knowing. And this is not about knowing... 

1 hour ago, SoonHei said:

consciousness is what the illusions are made out of 

Yes but you can replace that with everything. You can say that a chair is what illusions are made out of, and wouldn't change anything. Saying consciousness is chair, or that a wall is a chair, or you are the chair makes no difference. Everything is everything. Problem is when you begin saying that consciousness can know itself, then becomes a duality so it's an illusion. Like above, doesn't matter if you use the word consciousness. You can say that a chair becomes aware of itself. This is still illusion because it implies separation. Everything that implies separation is illusion. Isn't this the whole point of non duality?

 

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

So Infinity itself is not an illusion as it is unlimited and eternal. 

We can say it is pure isness?

Problem is when you say that infinity can be aware or conscious of itself, this implies separation. All separation is illusion. 

How can infinity realize what it is if he can't split itself apart from itself? As though it can be an obect to itself. Isn't that what the experience of separation is? Which is of course illusion. 

Edited October 6, 2020 by arlin

[Inliytened1]

15 minutes ago, arlin said:

 

We can say it is pure isness?

Yes.

15 minutes ago, arlin said:

How can infinity realize what it is if he can't split itself apart from itself? As though it can be an obect to itself. Isn't that what the experience of separation is? Which is of course illusion. 

It can because it is Infinite.  Whatever perspective it takes is what it is.   It is realizing that it is itself which is enlightenment.

[arlin]

30 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

It can because it is Infinite.  Whatever perspective it takes is what it is.   It is realizing that it is itself which is enlightenment.

But when the body dies, it realizes that is itself? 

Or is this something that can be done only when you are alive? Since in death there is no one to have that realization. 

32 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Yes.

But how can i be sure that everything is at all? Maybe it isn't.   After all im going to die and nothing will remain. 

[VeganAwake]

Non-duality isn't about metaphorically smashing everything into one...its not like saying 'I' am the body here, and simultaneously a race car in a Japanese shop... sure you could say all of this matter is interconnected energetically or something like that.

But if you look, there IS apparent separation. 

There appears to be a body here and a pine tree over there.

Non-dual awareness is pointing to the recognition that the experience of the separate individual within the body is completely illusory.

" the separation never occurred"

-- A Course in Miracles

See Boundless Energy being that it's infinite and boundless can also appear restricted within the body and create the illusion of the 'ME' character experiencing itself here and the world and universe out there.(it turns all apparent happenings into a self-centered experience)

When this 'self' illusion collapses it's simultaneously recognized it never existed in the first place... making Awakening a non happening... so in a sense you could say Awakening is only real within the dream of the separate individual that believes it will one day become awakened....  hence the phrase "you are already enlightened" seems nonsensical within the dream.

So what recognizes this?

You could call it consciousness, you could say no-thing recognizes it, you could say the recognition itself is illusory, you could say it's a Dream Within A Dream Within A Dream.

What was recognized here is it simply doesn't matter... nothing does!!

It's pure unequivocal freedom for No One. ❤ which was always the case.