Beneath the distraction we call "consciousness", the underlying truth is a dimension of awareness we are terrified of coming into contact with. We know this dimension exists because we're profoundly committed to actively denying it, so terrified are we of losing our illusions, our hopes, our comforting sense of being somebody in a comprehensible world. To further comfort ourselves, we pretend to know something about the underlying truth we are so desperately in denial of. We call it "the sacred", The Mind, "love", the eternal, the infinite, the immeasurable, the limitless, and so on, all so that we can justify the continuity of consciousness by calling it "faith" or "inquiry". We cover the underlying truth with lies about the underlying truth.

Nick,

Thankyou very much for this (#1)

Best Regards,

Katy

This post was last updated by Katy Pompilis (account deleted) Mon, 11 Jan 2010.

nick carter wrote:
Beneath the distraction we call "consciousness", the underlying truth is a dimension of awareness we are terrified of coming into contact with. We know this dimension exists because we're profoundly committed to actively denying it, so terrified are we of losing our illusions, our hopes, our comforting sense of being somebody in a comprehensible world

Can someone who is living in illusion be terrified of something about the existence of which he has no understanding ? Fear of not becoming and arriving is there in all of us, but the fear of coming in contact with truth is not in the consciousness.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
but the fear of coming in contact with truth is not in the consciousness.

Anything one can be afraid of is "in the consciousness". We know we're avoiding the void, emptiness and silence, with self-consciousness. We just hate to admit it.

"We know we're avoiding the void, emptiness and silence, with self-consciousness." Post#4

How do we know that what we are avoiding is a void, or an emptiness, or a silence? Even that is an assumption. It may be a very rich and wonderful something-or-other. All we can say is that beyond consciousness we're in unknown territory.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Mon, 11 Jan 2010.

max greene wrote:
All we can say is that beyond consciousness you're in unknown territory.

Max Sir, isn't this statement also an assumption ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr Sharma,

Respectfully, I don't see how you can say anything else. It is unknown, isn't it? And consciousness is all the known that we have.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Mon, 11 Jan 2010.

nick carter wrote:
We know we're avoiding the void, emptiness and silence, with self-consciousness.

Are we knowingly avoiding the void, emptiness and silence ? Or is a statement made by somebody else is being repeated ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

max greene wrote:
Respectfully, I don't see how you can say anything else. It is unknown, isn't it? And consciousness is all the known that we have.

Sir, why should one make any statement at all about the unknown ? If one bring it to the level of known by any statement, then won' this become a hinderance to the investigation of ending the consciousness as we know it ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

max greene wrote:
How do we know that what we are avoiding is a void, or an emptiness, or a silence? Even that is an assumption. It may be a very rich and wonderful something-or-other. All we can say is that beyond consciousness we're in unknown territory.

We know because we know we are noise.

This post was last updated by nick carter Mon, 11 Jan 2010.

nick carter wrote:
We know because we know we are noise.

If someone always lived in darkness,will he necessarily know about light ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

As Nick says, we're terrified of losing our illusions, our hopes, our sense of being somebody. We are afraid of losing the known. We don't fear the unknown--we fear the loss of the security of the known.

For each one of us, our consciousness is the totality of the known. Consciousness is 100% memory and the past, and we are afraid of leaving this past. We cling to the past and drag it forward, as image, into the present. The image of the past, carried forward into the present, perpetuates the past. As the song goes, "On and on; on and on; on and on."

max

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
If someone always lived in darkness,will he necessarily know about light ?

All one needs to know is that all one knows can end, and one lives in fear of that.

max greene wrote:
We cling to the past and drag it forward, as image, into the present. The image of the past, carried forward into the present, perpetuates the past. As the song goes, "On and on; on and on; on and on."

Sir, do we have any coice in this matter of not clinging to the past,of not dragging it in to the present ? If we have no coice in this matter, then on what basis one is discussing the void or silence ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

the power to decide over the known, will never be in the hands of the known.

whatever change happens, noticeable change, will come about commanded by the non-voluntary.

one does not have command over this. imagine if we did.

"do we have any choice in this matter of not clinging to the past, of not dragging it into the present?" Post #14

We can be aware of what consciousness is as we go about our day-to-day activities. We can be aware that consciousness is totally memory, nothing more than the past. If we are alert to and aware of what consciousness is, we will be asking ourselves, "What am I doing here? Do I need the past here?" Maybe so. It might be a place where knowledge and memory are necessary.

It isn't too hard to see that consciousness is totally the known, and as such it is totally the past. Consciousness has its utility and place, but it isn't in looking at and living in the present. For this it takes only awareness. To be aware of something is to sense it, either with the physical senses or otherwise.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Tue, 12 Jan 2010.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
the fear of coming in contact with truth is not in the consciousness

are you equating truth with reality?

nick carter wrote:
Anything one can be afraid of is "in the consciousness". We know we're avoiding the void, emptiness and silence, with self-consciousness. We just hate to admit it.

JK wrought a war against self-consciousness?

max greene wrote:
How do we know that what we are avoiding is a void, or an emptiness, or a silence?

nice! typical - atypical; gnostic - agnostic; void - avoid (the absence of absence)

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
If we have no choice in this matter, then on what basis one is discussing the void or silence ?

max greene wrote:
For this it takes only awareness

only! If by awareness you do not mean a meditative state, isnt it only self-consciousness?

max greene wrote:
It isn't too hard to see that consciousness is totally the known, and as such it is totally the past.

WROUGHT is the past & past participle conjugation of WORK, as far as I can tell, JK is still working.

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

"only! If by awareness you do not mean a meditative state, isnt it only self-consciousness?" Post #17

Why make a big deal out of awareness? To be aware of something is merely to come into contact with it. To sense it. We are made aware physically through the five senses. We are made aware psychologically by paying attention to something. Looking at it. Why get metaphysical about awareness?

max

nick carter wrote:
All one needs to know is that all one knows can end, and one lives in fear of that.

Death brings an end to whatever one knows.There is another kind of ending psychologically but mind is not thinking in those terms. It is not the psychological ending that troubles the mind but the fear and pain of not achieving, not arriving, not fulfilling etc.So, one wastes a lot of energy in becoming something psychologically.one is actually not at all aware that the self fears its ending.One may have read a lot about the self coming to an end, but it remains an intellectual understanding.The self can not be afraid of coming in contact with the truth as it has no relationship with the dimension that is truth.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
It is not the psychological ending that troubles the mind but the fear and pain of not achieving, not arriving, not fulfilling etc.

"The fear and pain of not achieving, not arriving, not fulfilling etc.", is psychological.

Therese Okamoto wrote:
are you equating truth with reality?

My understanding is like this-( K has also said the same somewhere )

Fact + thought = reality

Fact + silent mind = actuality.

Truth is the creative movement about which nothing can be said.

nick carter wrote:
Beneath the distraction we call "consciousness", the underlying truth is a dimension of awareness we are terrified of coming into contact with.

Nick had posted the above in his post no.1.I had replied that the untransformed human mind is not aware of the dimension of truth and so, can not be terrified of coming in contact with it.I hope this answers your question.-Regards.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

nick carter wrote:
"The fear and pain of not achieving, not arriving, not fulfilling etc.", is psychological.

This is correct and the mind gets immediately ready to conceive more ways of achieving, arriving, fulfilling.Its interest is not in ending these psychological reactions.Its escapes are also related to Truth as they are related to name, fame and money etc.These escapes are the reason behind the fear and terror and not its contact with Truth.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Truth is the creative movement about which nothing can be said.

If that was true we'd have no K quotes to bandy about.

nick carter wrote:
If that was true we'd have no K quotes to bandy about.

Quotes are only pointers and not the Truth.Words are not the thing.Part can never represent the whole.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Truth is the creative movement about which nothing can be said.

Why, then, doctor, do you have so much to say?

nick carter wrote:
Why, then, doctor, do you have so much to say?

Surely one does not have to justify to anyone else what one says or for what reason.

nick carter wrote:
Why, then, doctor, do you have so much to say?

When I post something here, it is either to share my understanding with others or to bring more clarity for myself about the issue.It is never to teach or improve others.

By the way I am stil waiting for your response to my post no.22.If you are not replying to posts,what is the use of starting the new topic?-Regards.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

max greene wrote:
Why make a big deal out of awareness?

Max Sir,to be in touch or taste pure awareness is a big deal.

max greene wrote:
We are made aware physically through the five senses.

I feel it is the other way around. It is the awareness that makes the sense organs come alive.The awareness makes attention possible and the later makes possible the comprehension of sensory information.The level of pure awareness is not reachable by the untrnsformed mind.-Regards.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
By the way I am stil waiting for your response to my post no.22.If you are not replying to posts,what is the use of starting the new topic?

Not all posts are worthy of response, but since you insist, I don't presume to know anything about "Truth", as you put it. I started this topic to talk about the noise of consciousness hiding and denying an underlying truth we'd rather not come into contact with.

nick carter wrote:
I started this topic to talk about the noise of consciousness hiding and denying an underlying truth we'd rather not come into contact with.

You know nothing about 'Truth" because nothing can be said about this creative movement(post no.21).
Let me now try to understand the'truth', as you put it.If the noise of consciousness is hiding and denying an underlying truth, then on what basis its existence is being stated? How can one refuse coming in contact with something about the existence of which one is ignorant? Can you also explain as to why you have replaced the
'terrified of coming in contact' with 'rather not come in contact with'in this post?

Reply only if you want to.-Regards.

FLOW WITH LIFE!