Consciousness?

[christine.P]

Can someone help me on this please.

If human beings are made up of body, mind,and spirit", does each of these have it's own consciousness; or is the mind the only part that carries consciousness?

Thanks Bow.

[wil]

Conscious, Subconscious, SuperConscious

The mind is consciousness, the body operates subconsciously, and spirit is super conscious, that which we gather from...yes, no, maybe so?

[AletheiaRivers]

Interesting question. It's one I think about a lot (of course, I think WAY too much, which has gotten me into trouble).

My perspective is a bit weird, and it's not even a "set in stone" perspective.

I view our universe (any universe) as part of God. All matter, inanimate or animate is, for want of a simpler idea, "Godstuff."

So what makes the animate matter different than the inanimate matter?

Is a human different than say, a rock, because the human (or dog or tree) has "spirit?" What is "spirit?"

As a JW I believed that "spirit" wasn't something immaterial that lived inside of the body (and survived death), but rather the "breath of God" that animated the material stuff that makes up me (and the dog and the tree). And in some respects, I still believe that. (I think that God, ummm, vibrates our atoms differently. Heh.)

So what happens at death? I dunno. Recent metaphysical ponderings have me thinking that at death, rather than surviving as a immaterial spirit that only lived in this body for a while, that all that is "me" is changed into something different, something else. Perhaps "I" will be imprinted onto a new state of being?

So, to get back to your original question, I currently think that our conciousness is part of our mind, rather than part of "the ghost in the machine."

I'm open to other ideas though.

[taijasi]

I think this is right-on, wil. Body (even including "emotional"/astral body and lower manas ("mind")) doesn't know that it is an `Individual' - because techically, it isn't. Mind, on the other hand, (Higher Manas) - IS the seat, heart, or "home" of Consciousness (the imparter of this Aspect of our identity). The Greeks called it Augeiodes, the Hindus, `Manasaputra' - son of Mind. It is also the Agnishvatta - Lord of Fire (literally, "sweetened by the fire"). In simple terms, this is the Soul that reincarnates. It is our "superconscious."

But mind - even as Agnishvatta (immortal Soul) - is not "Eternal," for upon our individual liberation, the Soul moves on. Man, the individual, becomes what he essentially always was (in potential, in Spirit): The Spark Itself. The Superconscious Flame fans into an all-consuming FIRE ... and the barrier between God and Individual disappears. This does not equate Man with God. It simply removes the usefulness on focusing on the differences.

What remains? ... is a being that has entered the Higher Way, and consciousness, then, it is simply a matter of focus.

That's my musing at the moment ...

Love and Light,

Taijasi

[flowperson]

Hmmmm...this IS an interesting question Bow. No wonder you're an artist, you think up questions that often go to the heart of the matter.

I believe that there is a set of energies, if you will, that animate and "move" our body, mind, and soul in a synchronous mode while we are here on earth and functioning as members of humanity, simply because that's the way G-d arranged it all. Disease, and perhaps death, whether spiritual, mental, or bodily, is what happens when things get out of synchrony in our lives and environments. I believe that this happens more often in urban environments these days because they are inherently not "natural" environments for us to "live" in for extended periods of time and we, as humans, are reacting to that over the generations.

Whether this set of energies are a "breath" (pneuma) or a "fire" or a combination of both, figuratively is secondary IMHO. They may simply be a way of symbolically representing our intuitive beliefs as to the primary "movers" of life forces on the earth through the movement of sunlight and weather phenomena through our lives in the larger natural environment.

IMO consciousness is an attribute of all this that could best be defined as "awareness". I also believe that the body and spirit also participate in this awareness on subconscious levels and inform us of the ways in which we should interact with the realities that we are presented with on a moment to moment basis so that our lives might be lived in more wholistic ways.

The ancient Egyptians had a handle on this way of thinking in the past with their beliefs in the "ka" and "ba" attributes of each human's journey through life.

flow.... .

[Eudaimonist]

Speaking from a very different metaphysic, I think that human individuals have a unitary nature, and so we are whole entities that have both material and conscious aspects (or properties), and can't be bifurcated into different "parts" in this way. It seems to me that splitting up human nature creates just the sort of problem as wondering if all the various parts have their own consciousness.


eudaimonia,

Mark

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by christine.P

Can someone help me on this please.

If human beings are made up of body, mind,and spirit", does each of these have it's own consciousness; or is the mind the only part that carries consciousness?

Thanks Bow.

IMO: The body is a "machine", with the brain being the "hardware/wetware" that controls the body. The mind is the programming (some of it ROM some of it subroutines, other parts of it RAM). The Spirit, I think is the etheral essence of a human. The spirit is the end user of the body and the mind, which provides input/stimuli to the spirit, and allows the spirit to interact with the outside world.

Consciousness, is a matter of degrees of awareness (100 or more), that the "Spirit" can experience through the physical body and mental mind, that it is housed in and makes use of (while the spirit is attached to that body and has that mind to run the body with). When we "shut down" the mind, we still seem to have an awareness of self, but the edges of the boundaries as a spirit begin to blur. I believe our ability to call up and express outwardly "memories" is a function of the mind and it's influence on the body. However I also believe that memories and emotions originate from the spirit, not exclusively the mind. They are simply manifested through the mind to the body.

So, I believe that Consiousness is soley the propriatary domain of the Spirit. In short, it is one of two things one takes with them when they die. I also believe the Spirit is soley responsible for the actions of the body (under normal conditions), but I also believe there are times when the mental programming can go haywire, and the Spirit if not strong enough in will power, can't control and is not responsible for certain behaviors...

I do not believe in a "super consiousness", unless that is the conscious tapping into a cosmic consiousness. In other words, alone we have no super consiousness, rather it is a counduit to the universal consciousness we seem to sense but do not access often. As far a subconsciousness, I think that is merely the consciousness we have, at a degree lower than animation of the body, however the body and mind do have limited autonomous abilities without the guidance/input of the Spirit...a preprogramming if you will that the body and mind will carryout in absence of active spiritual control.

(for example, a sleep walker, that follows a repetitive pattern "programmed" by the spirit). There is always an underlying reason why people "sleep walk".

Now why, you might ask would we not know this if the spirit is ours to begin with? I think our spirit is made up of two parts. One is ourselves (our own entity), and the other part is something else, a power source, or a piece of "God" that makes us who we are. It is also that "sliver" of something else that gives us the potential for the concept of "immortality". As long as we have it, we exist in a living state (spritually). Should we lose it, then we are truly gone from existence. We are no more.

my "thoughts"

v/r

Q

[soma]

I feel there is one ocean of pure consciousness so everything in that ocean is and has consciousness. Spirit, super consciusness, pure consciousness, God the Father are the ocean or are aware of it 100%. The ice bergs in the ocean are creation, our bodies and minds are pure consciousness also because ice is made up of water, the same material as the ocean of pure consciousness. Therefore, I agree that the only difference is the degree of awareness.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by soma

I feel there is one ocean of pure consciousness so everything in that ocean is and has consciousness. Spirit, super consciusness, pure consciousness, God the Father are the ocean or are aware of it 100%. The ice bergs in the ocean are creation, our bodies and minds are pure consciousness also because ice is made up of water, the same material as the ocean of pure consciousness. Therefore, I agree that the only difference is the degree of awareness.

You mean, I had to write all that, to express what you did, in less than a paragraph? I must reign in my overly verbose tendancies, or in other words KISS (keep it simple, stupid).

Nicely done.

v/r

Q

[soma]

I like what you wrote it triggered my reply and my reply would not make sense without your explanations. Thanks for the support, it helps to melt the ice.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,

naturally we Buddhist types have a whole lot of literature on this specific phenomena. not to put too fine a point on it, however, this is the crux of the tradition.

in any event, i suppose that the most common understanding of consciousenss that i am aware of is this:

consciousness is a non-obstructing phenomena, it is non-material and has the quality of luminosity, that is, it reflects any object by arising in the aspect of that object.

consciousness is like a crystal stone; while the crystal is resting on a colored surface, you cannot see the real untinted clarity of the crystal, but once you take the crystal away from the colored surface, you can percieve its actual clarity.

luminosity, or the natural clarity of the mind, is something which cannot be fully explained in words. if one were to engage in the Buddhist praxis, after some attainment, you would experience and eventually be able to say "Ah, THAT is the luminous nature of mind!"

metta,

~v

[flowperson]

Namaste Vaj:

One hears a lot about the concept of "transparency' these days in the news to identify actions by governments and businesses that are intended to make them more open to public knowledge. While we are all familiar with the hypocrisy connected with that usage of the term, would you describe your usage of luminosity and crystal clarity as metaphor for the same understanding, only as applying to the mind of humans ? Are you saying that looking into a clear and luminous mind is to experience transparency ?

I have always believed that "transparent change" denotes good actions, and "opaque repetition" denotes bad actions. It would seem that the concept of "clarity" vs. "opacity" are critical touchstones when we critically and objectively examine the world and other beings in it as it/they appear to be to us.

I believe that this would also connote the Hindu concept of "maya" or illusion. A very good illusion would appear to have luminosity and clarity and be transparent in its nature, but continued critical observation might prove it to be otherwise. Or are you saying that the clarity and luminosity attributes are only internal to the mind, and not attributes that might attach to objective realities?

Hope I didn't make my questions too confusing, but that's the sort of traps one falls into when addressing subject/object issues.

Peace...flow....

[Vajradhara]

Namaste flow,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by flowperson

Namaste Vaj:

One hears a lot about the concept of "transparency' these days in the news to identify actions by governments and businesses that are intended to make them more open to public knowledge. While we are all familiar with the hypocrisy connected with that usage of the term, would you describe your usage of luminosity and crystal clarity as metaphor for the same understanding, only as applying to the mind of humans ?

not really as it isn't really a matter of public knowledge. the metaphor is meant to be indicating the nature or essence of consciousness, as near as i can make out

I believe that this would also connote the Hindu concept of "maya" or illusion. A very good illusion would appear to have luminosity and clarity and be transparent in its nature, but continued critical observation might prove it to be otherwise.

interestingly, this is what humans are, in our view

Or are you saying that the clarity and luminosity attributes are only internal to the mind, and not attributes that might attach to objective realities?

in this metaphor it is limited to the nature or essense of consciousness. the "mind" has a bit of a broader understanding in our tradition to include the fields of sense consciousness and so forth.

Hope I didn't make my questions too confusing, but that's the sort of traps one falls into when addressing subject/object issues.

Peace...flow....

there needs to be a common framework of understanding in such discussions so as not to get trapped by the words used to communicate the ideas. to paraphrase an old Buddhist adage:

rabbit traps are to catch rabbits.
when you catch the rabbit the trap is forgotten.

fish traps are to catch fish.
when you catch the fish the trap is forgotten.

words are to communicate ideas.
when the idea is grasped the words are forgotten.

show me someone who has forgotten words,
for that is a person with whom i'd like to speak.

metta,

~v

[Caimanson]

Originally Posted by christine.P

Can someone help me on this please.

If human beings are made up of body, mind,and spirit", does each of these have it's own consciousness; or is the mind the only part that carries consciousness?

Thanks Bow.

Not sure I'm threading on the right path with this, here I go.
One thing I realised not that long ago is that you feel with your body, not your head, incuding emotional feelings.
Some modern psychotherapies, acknowledge that we communicate with our bodies, and that mental and physical disorders are intimately interrelated, so you can work with the body to treat the mind and vice versa. For example they go to the extent of saying that if your emotional self awareness is limited then most probably your body awareness will also be restricted.
Is not unusual that physical disciplines like Taichi or Feldenkrais which put a lot of emphasis on body awareness, end up enhancing the mind-body planes of awareness into a single whole (spirit too?).

On a different line, I recently saw a documentary about various heart transplant recipients that adopted parts of the personality of the donor, without previously knowing anything about the donor! So something in the heart seems to have memory and intention.
Some scientists that are taking this phenomena seriously, are investigating the nature of the heart beyond a pump. They have realised that it has a very complex nervous system, and the strongest electromantic field in the body behind the brain, and tested that for certain stimuli (for example disgusting images) the heart seems to react before the brain, and in fact trigger a response in the brain.
Part of the argument is the age old use of the heart as a metaphor for love, passion, etc. suggests it could be evidence of what we intuitively know.
It could be phoney research, but it shows that we still know very little about the mind.

Alvaro

[flowperson]

Namaste Vaj:

Thank you for the wisdom which proverbs and poetic phrasings always say best.

peace...flow....