« Big waves, small waves: no difference? | Main | Jellyfish and God, the differences »

April 27, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree... BE HERE NOW.

because awareness is simply just another word for whatever is Being Here Now.

But I think that the author of the book's question:

"And if the mind isn't in the brain, then why don't the mind and body function just as well when the brain is damaged or removed?"

...is absurd. I don't think its a "great question" at all. Why doen't the body function when the brain idmaged or removed? Because the brain IS what makes the body funtion, you idiot. The author is confusing brain with mind. There is a definite difference. Therefore, I don't thibk much of the author or his reasoning.

And this answer that the author gives definitely leaves more than just a lot to be desired:

"So if it appears the state of a "body" is altered via chemical anesthesia or surgery, naturally the state of the "mind" will appear altered too, for it is all the same, one "stuff."

As Brian says: Feeling alive. Isn't this what life should be about? ... For me, this is where the feeling of increased aliveness comes from: being here and now, fully."

Awareness and whatever is happening in the moment... is the same thing. There is no awareness apart from that.

So yes yes yes.... "BE HERE NOW" ... or as as I like call it: "instant presence" (and without even thinking about it).

This post is taken from the site of Dr Avi Sion.
He is the author of what follows

Sitting in meditation, one’s “self” usually seems to be an ever present and weighty experience, distinct from relatively external mental and material experiences. But if one realizes that such self-experience is a rational (i.e. ratiocinative) product, a mental subdivision of the natural unity of all experience at any given moment, one can indeed shake off – or more precisely just drop – this sense of self, and experience all one’s experience as a unity.[8]

Note well, the task at hand is not to ex post facto deconstruct the rational act of division, or reconstruct the lost unity of self and other by somehow mentally sticking or merging them together, or pretend that the Subject or the Object does not really exist. Rather, the meditator has to place his soul in the pre-ratiocinative position, where the cutting-up of experience has not yet occurred. It is not a place of counter-comments, but a place of no (verbal or non-verbal) comment. It is the position of pristine experience, where the mental reflex of sorting data out has not yet even begun.

All things are accepted as they appear. An impression of self appears, as against an impression of other? So well and good – it need not be emphasized or noted in any way. It is just experienced. If no distinctions are made, there are no distinctions. We remain observant, that’s all. We enjoy the scenery. Our awareness is phenomenological.

In pure experience, what we call “multiplicity” may well be manifest, but it is all part and parcel of the essential “unity”. Here, essence and manifestation are one and the same. Here, Subject and Object form a natural continuum. The totality is in harmony, bubbling with life. It is what it is, whatever it happens to be.

Before getting to this stage of integral experience, one may of course have to “work on oneself” long and hard.

A young boy is given a calf on a tether. His father says, "It is now your job to take care of this calf. Do not let go of the tether."

So the boy wanders off, happy to do what boys do. He walks along the road and looks at the trees and houses. He jokes and plays with his friends. He goes to the stream and throws sticks at the fish. All the time he holds the tether, and his beast follows along.

The boy walks farther than he ever has, feeling mature in his responsibility. he wanders over the hills and along strange roads, knowing that by taking care of the calf, he is important: to the calf, to his family, to his village.

Such a long time passes while he walks that it is dark when he finds the road back home.
At the gate he turns to look a the calf on its tether, and he sees a full-grown bull. The boy is so startled, he trips backwards, hits the ground, and when he drops the tether, the bull tramples him.

Drop the tether, there is only here & now.

Just curious, all this talk of consciousness and unconsciousness;
Is there a difference between having been unconscious and having been extra consciousness - but with no memory?

After being in a state of what we call unconsciousness, is being knocked on the head with a baseball bat, could it not be that we were in fact extra conscious (or whatever term you wish to call it) but all memory of the condition being removed upon return to normal conscious state?

Just wondering if this could reasonably be considered a possibility, and if not, why not?

Hi Edward,

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.