Question About Contradiction In Book

Total Posts:  1
Joined  18-03-2020
18 March 2020 14:25

Hey Everyone,

I have read Waking Up twice, and feel like I have a general understanding of the books message.
1. I am consciousness itself
2. The things that arise and fall in the plane of consciousness are not who I am
3. Looking for what you call “I”, and realizing consciousness itself does not have emotions/thoughts, helps to experience the realization that you are consciousness and not its ever changing contents.

But two parts of the book seem to be saying the opposite. I am just a little confused and hope some of you could provide some clarity.

1. On page 140, Sam writes “You will still see this book ... but it will be an appearance in consciousness, inseparable from consciousness itself.”

This sentence seems to imply that the book you are perceiving and consciousness are the same thing, inseparable. I thought consciousness was the awareness behind all sensations/perceptions, not the same thing as the sensations/perceptions themselves.

A similar statement is made on page 144, which brings me to the same question. “this luminous and absolutely pure void, which nevertheless is- rather than contains- all things”. Again I thought consciousness is the thing that is aware of, and contains all things (sensations/perceptions), rather than consciousness being the sensations/perceptions.

Some clarification or insight would be greatly appreciated!

Total Posts:  5
Joined  11-07-2017
19 March 2020 11:22

Good point, if in this condition of pure consciousness, there is “just seeing, hearing, tasting” etc., then there should be also just “thinking”. But if you are lost in thought, you are in the condition we all want to break (sometimes smile)... To me there are contradictions as well!
E.g. being lost in thought is a state where some nice ideas emerge and one is often fully devoted, pretty similar to solving a task at work. If this is then always interrupted by realising “oh I’m again lost in thought” - it feels schizophrenic to me and really doesn’t improve anything?! Another thing is the definition of the self: of course you are more or less a continuum, you will not become Einstein overnight, the way you think and connect things doesn’t change a lot - the only things that change are experience and growing older. It’s clear that there can’t be a totally fixed state, but the “self” moves in a tight corridor, doesn’t it? Hope someone finds time to respond, would help me a lot!