“Discussing and debating the primacy of consciousness or which comes first, mind or matter” is like asking which comes first, water or waves? Mind and matter, water and waves, they’re just two sides of the same, non-dual Reality. All attempts to assert one over the other or imply any separation or primacy are ludicrous, futile, and nonsensical.
No 'thing' is conscious - there are no 'things'... All there IS is experience... and not OF 'something'. - The question of whether consciousness is fundamental... loses its footing.... and doesn’t align with the direct immediacy of pure experiencing. Since consciousness is not separate from reality, then the question "Is consciousness fundamental?" presupposes a division that doesn’t actually exist.
"No 'thing' is conscious - there are no 'things'... All there IS is experience... and not OF 'something'" — this is essentially what Chris N. was saying in his comment, only he used the word consciousness instead of experience. Those words are often used synonymously. I think the tricky part here is the difference between conventional reality and absolute reality. In conventional, everyday reality (the apparently formed world), people and dogs are conscious and the kitchen table is not. And there are disagreements over what "things" are and are not conscious. Many would agree that trees have some rudimentary form of consciousness, some even say that rocks do. And people disagree about whether AI is or isn't conscious. But from the absolute perspective, there are no separate, persisting, resolvable "things" to "have" or "not have" experiences (or consciousness), there is ONLY experiencing (aka consciousness) showing up as these various apparently formed "things.".
There's only one 'thing' here (that's not a 'thing' :) ... and countless perspectives :) ... so there you have it :) Nice speaking with you, Joan (heart)
It is interesting isn’t it. Peter Brown talked about the multi dimensionality of experience.
Your article “Consciousness, Awareness, Presence, Here-Now, Attention” hit the sweet spot for me.
John Astin taught me that when these discussions start up just look/feel right here right now to see if it’s here now. That really helps me especially when the smart kids get deep. 😉
I love Darryl Bailey. My experience resonates very closely to his. Yes, he has the same talking points, but understanding his message reveals why. Also Darryl gets accused of being minimalist, but I feel the fullness of life in his message because he fundamentally clears the deck.
I am not familiar with Kevin so I am Thanking you for the link!
Thanks for the mention, Joan, and for this article, which clarifies your previous essay in a helpful manner.
I think where I fit into these matters is that I do not know what any of this is or isn't. I am not a "materialist." When working in the material world, I see it as solid. When working with ideas and images, I see them as not solid. But what I or anyone else sees is not "Truth." It's just a point of view, and that changes constantly, assuming one is not anchored to some dogma or pet theory.
I find myself here, and that's all I really know: This. That is why I have little interest in discussions about which came first, the chicken or the egg. Which came first, brains or awareness? How would I know? How would anyone know? Who is standing outside of all this with an objective perspective on it? No one.
And if something cannot be known, why waste time talking about it?
"Maybe we can live in the groundlessness of not knowing…"
Yes, yes, so long as this is not turned into a practice, as I am inclined to do. Or maybe in the early stages of seeing this it can be practiced, Joan?
I remember a Zen practice which I picked up somewhere along the many years of searching. It consists of repeating the phrase "Only don't know, only don't know" as a kind of mantra.
Ahhh....yes, I suppose that could be a good reminder, but it could also be very mechanical and effortful and rather paradoxically like trying to hold on tightly to the knowing of not knowing. 😎 I'm more inclined to encourage simply noticing the ungraspable nature of life, exploring it, looking and listening, rather than repeating mantra-like phrases. But, everyone has a different path.
“Discussing and debating the primacy of consciousness or which comes first, mind or matter” is like asking which comes first, water or waves? Mind and matter, water and waves, they’re just two sides of the same, non-dual Reality. All attempts to assert one over the other or imply any separation or primacy are ludicrous, futile, and nonsensical.
No 'thing' is conscious - there are no 'things'... All there IS is experience... and not OF 'something'. - The question of whether consciousness is fundamental... loses its footing.... and doesn’t align with the direct immediacy of pure experiencing. Since consciousness is not separate from reality, then the question "Is consciousness fundamental?" presupposes a division that doesn’t actually exist.
"No 'thing' is conscious - there are no 'things'... All there IS is experience... and not OF 'something'" — this is essentially what Chris N. was saying in his comment, only he used the word consciousness instead of experience. Those words are often used synonymously. I think the tricky part here is the difference between conventional reality and absolute reality. In conventional, everyday reality (the apparently formed world), people and dogs are conscious and the kitchen table is not. And there are disagreements over what "things" are and are not conscious. Many would agree that trees have some rudimentary form of consciousness, some even say that rocks do. And people disagree about whether AI is or isn't conscious. But from the absolute perspective, there are no separate, persisting, resolvable "things" to "have" or "not have" experiences (or consciousness), there is ONLY experiencing (aka consciousness) showing up as these various apparently formed "things.".
There's only one 'thing' here (that's not a 'thing' :) ... and countless perspectives :) ... so there you have it :) Nice speaking with you, Joan (heart)
Hola! Algo=Conciencia=Algo... Algo=Nada=Algo
It is interesting isn’t it. Peter Brown talked about the multi dimensionality of experience.
Your article “Consciousness, Awareness, Presence, Here-Now, Attention” hit the sweet spot for me.
John Astin taught me that when these discussions start up just look/feel right here right now to see if it’s here now. That really helps me especially when the smart kids get deep. 😉
I love Darryl Bailey. My experience resonates very closely to his. Yes, he has the same talking points, but understanding his message reveals why. Also Darryl gets accused of being minimalist, but I feel the fullness of life in his message because he fundamentally clears the deck.
I am not familiar with Kevin so I am Thanking you for the link!
Love..the line..when the smart kids get deep!!..Had a good laugh..have felt that feeling 4sure😍
Thank you, Joan. Listening to you the first time freed me from all the word-questions. Stop. Look. Listen. Feel.
Thank you Joan for all that you do. ❤️❤️❤️❤️
Thanks for the mention, Joan, and for this article, which clarifies your previous essay in a helpful manner.
I think where I fit into these matters is that I do not know what any of this is or isn't. I am not a "materialist." When working in the material world, I see it as solid. When working with ideas and images, I see them as not solid. But what I or anyone else sees is not "Truth." It's just a point of view, and that changes constantly, assuming one is not anchored to some dogma or pet theory.
I find myself here, and that's all I really know: This. That is why I have little interest in discussions about which came first, the chicken or the egg. Which came first, brains or awareness? How would I know? How would anyone know? Who is standing outside of all this with an objective perspective on it? No one.
And if something cannot be known, why waste time talking about it?
With love,
R.
"Maybe we can live in the groundlessness of not knowing…"
Yes, yes, so long as this is not turned into a practice, as I am inclined to do. Or maybe in the early stages of seeing this it can be practiced, Joan?
What do you mean by turning it into a practice?
I remember a Zen practice which I picked up somewhere along the many years of searching. It consists of repeating the phrase "Only don't know, only don't know" as a kind of mantra.
Ahhh....yes, I suppose that could be a good reminder, but it could also be very mechanical and effortful and rather paradoxically like trying to hold on tightly to the knowing of not knowing. 😎 I'm more inclined to encourage simply noticing the ungraspable nature of life, exploring it, looking and listening, rather than repeating mantra-like phrases. But, everyone has a different path.
Yes, thank you Joan. I can see the difference between the two approaches.
Ahhhh...perhaps..just THIS!💝🙏thx Joan
Thank you for the update and share.