winterknight

When I say a "human is conscious" I mean subject-object consciousness. If I use a capitalized word like Consciousness, I mean something which is beyond subject-object consciousness.

Well, the second follows from the first, really, "things" being a category.

All the categories -- mind, rock, tree, awareness, consciousness -- are illusory. In reality there are no categories and no one to talk about them and figure them out. It's true from a certain perspective. I'd rather only answer questions that relate to your search, though. Does this relate to your search, and if so, how?

Well, not all therapy is the same -- far from it. Psychoanalysis is not ordinary therapy, for example, though people think it is. Psychodynamic therapy is not the same as, say, cognitive-behavioral therapy either. The actual therapist also matters, and your match with them. Unfortunately people have very little knowledge of these distinctions. They just lump everything all together. It's not their fault. There's very poor education on these topics.

I don't know, I don't use that term. That which cannot be spoken about accurately If you have to ask, it's not consciousness knowing itself. Consciousness knowing itself does not result in knowledge you can put in philosophical sentences like that. That's the mind. Still, it might be a little glimpse -- the mind's way of translating That. I have my guidelines here. Biggest guideline is to discover and be honest about and pursue what you really want. Discovery happens through a combination of introspection, expression of your emotions in writing/drawing/etc., psychoanalytic/psychodynamic therapy, and action. Enlightenment experiences may or may not slow your mind down, depending on what other conditioning it has. That's why it's important to deal with other aspects of quieting your mind (e.g. psychological). Sure, it's true that the idea of something/someone being conscious is illusory. I use awareness & consciousness as the same thing, but some people use them to mean different things. I don't relate to what Esman says, but perhaps that's some kind of siddhi. What the sages mean by being aware in deep sleep and asleep in waking is that they no longer identify with the individual mind and its different states, but with the Consciousness that transcends those states. Yes, the unmanifest is fine, and in fact probably better than saying that it experiences unconsciousness. In deep sleep, Consciousness can be said to perceive or reflect the causal body (as opposed to the subtle or gross bodies), or pure ignorance, or any number of other theoretical/philosophical terms. Best not to take it too seriously, because actually there can't be said to be a deep sleep state, or really any state, in the final analysis. These are all illusory terms, said only for the sake of discussion. Ananda is simply the sense of total completeness. We know it in our daily experience as the happiness we get from fulfilling desires -- these are glimpses of the bliss of the Self contrasted with pain on either side of the experience. The actual bliss of the Self is not a contrasting experience like that kind of happiness. It is beyond dualities and thus beyond description. It is the subtlest experience -- akin to being absent. It is not a feeling or sensation in the body. It can and cannot be said to be "awareness of" the Absolute; the Absolute cannot be an object of knowledge. Still, yes, we say the Absolute knows itself by itself because there's no other way to talk. And yes, that bliss is part of that. I don't think it'd be helpful to answer this sort of question. Do you have a question that relates to your own search?

Yes, no, maybe so, depending on how you view the matter. This kind of theoretical discussion is not really the best thing for this thread. I'm staying with questions that relate to the Search.

In a nutshell, because machines are programmed (even if they are programmed via neural networks or whatever), whereas consciousness requires an openness to something more than programming: something spontaneous and creative that goes beyond any conceivable set of coded rules.

I don't prefer these practices, but maybe, if you do them with great intensity and concentration. The really important rule is that you sincerely do what you really feel like doing in your heart. That will eventually lead you to the Truth, one way or the other. No, but don't care to get into a debate in this thread about it.

They're for seekers to reassure themselves

No. That's just your sense that you are the attention-paying mind. Anything where you feel that "I can do this" (like "I can widen the light) -- is not the true Self. Headaches? You need to stop trying to get new "insights." You are fighting like hell to keep thinking -- to stop seeing the most obvious and simple thing, which is what remains when you stop thinking. Stop trying to "think" about what the I is and just hold the feeling of the I... when I say that, I just mean -- literally say "I" to yourself and whatever that feels like, stop thinking about what it is. Concentrate on that feeling without thinking anymore.

It's just like deep sleep. The Self is experiencing -- experiencing unconsciousness. That is what it is perceiving.

Emotions come up during self-inquiry because self-inquiry threatens your sense of identity.

Sorry, but that's an extremely dangerous and misguided position.

You are inquiring into the I, but that does not strengthen the ego. It weakens it, because it shows it does not exist.

Why would you think that it does?

3 episodes of psychosis and a year of depression? You need psychoanalytic/psychodynamic therapy if you want to move forward. Expect to put a lot of time and effort in to heal. It will help you on your spiritual path. Google "psychoanalytic institute <your city>" and call them and ask for a referral -- PM me if you need more help with this.

It is not your feelings & senses which create your ego, but your thoughts about your feelings and senses, the thoughts that hide your true Self from yourself. Follow the links I gave above if you want to see my views on how to find this for yourself.

There's no single view on these phenomena. It depends on context. Why is answering this question important to your spiritual search? Why is a scientific answer not enough?

What kind of answer are you looking for to these questions?

There is no "you" and no "body." Follow the path and do self-inquiry and find this out for yourself.

I'll paraphrase Ramana Maharshi and say that the real suicide is not knowing who you really are.

If it's all just maya, isn't my communication also just maya? Less fear than the average person, but probably still some residual animal fear You don't know what I you are referring to because you are trying to think your way to it. When you say "I" -- it is pointing to something that cannot be thought. If you try to think about it, the very effort to think your way to it will prevent your seeing it. When you wake up in the morning and there's a moment just before you remember who you are -- that split second of blank awareness -- that's the I. Just stop thinking. That silence that seems like nothing at all, that feels totally insignificant and unexciting? That's I. actually in mythology and scripture there are records of animals getting enlightened, so maybe

Yes, feel free This question is due to the identification of me with the mind. It is not I who must make that speech. That’s the mind, and it is the mind who is in peaceful places or in unpeaceful ones while making it. I AM the peaceful space in which nervousness or fear may or may not appear. The appearance of the nervousness does not affect the peacefulness of the space anymore than the reflection of lightning hurts a lake. Actually in that space, neither fear nor the absence of fear appear.

Why does one want to surrender all these "good" things? Only for the sake of peace. Which implies that there is un-peace. Which means that these good things aren't so good as they seem. So long as there is a desire for liberation, there is the sense of un-peace, one way or another... attachments to love, joy, and happiness are problematic because these things are partial, prone to loss... which means they have poison in them.

What is liberation if not also self-seeking relief? The very idea of liberation is based in the concept of bondage, which is an egoic concept. That means both liberation and bondage are egoic concepts. Hopefully as seeking matures, the other, "lesser" desires for money, power, status, sex, etc. gradually weaken, and a single overpowering desire becomes stronger and stronger -- that wish for liberation. That's why I always encourage people to be honest about their desire. The faster they are honest about their desire, the faster they can pursue them, and then see how empty they are, and their desire can evolve -- to a taste for something that lasts. Now obviously, as one becomes a more mature seeker, one experiences longer periods of peace. That desire won't be there during those times of peace. That's what peace means. But if it falls away, the intensity of the desire to get back to that peace -- again, the desire for liberation -- will be fierce. The deeper and longer that peace lasts, the fiercer desire to get back there if it seems to disappear. Then eventually that state of Peace simply is recognized to be one's unchanging nature, and the desire for Liberation is realized to have been impossible & incoherent.