The core of awakening is the expansion of identity, which happens not through the abandonment of self-concept but through the refinement and expansion of it.
I don’t know what it’s like to be awakened, since I’m not. It feels a bit premature for me to start discussing the nature of that. I can refer to Martinus, though, and he does talk about an experience of being without concepts. That’s supposedly a kind of direct perception of the ‘I’ or the ‘divine something’. There are no concepts or ideas in that — only light. And from what I understand, there’s no distinction between ‘I’ and ‘you’.
If that’s what awakening is, then it does sound like an experience of being without concepts.
If direct perception means perception without concepts, you would have been awakened as an infant. What was your perception like? Did you experience anything? Were you even conscious?
Awakened people are wise and compassionate, right? Are infants wise and compassionate?
No, it’s not awakening, but an experience of unity with God. It’s related to awakening since, at least in Martinus’ view, awakening is an awakening to this unity — whereas here in the animal kingdom we identify with our separate bodies.
I’m not sure whether your concept of awakening is quite the same as Martinus’. He talks about ‘the great birth’, which is an initiation into ‘cosmic consciousness’. You’re right that it’s not without concepts, but it’s more a matter of having the right concepts.
According to Martinus, after the initiation the experience of unity gradually becomes stronger until it reaches its culmination in the divine kingdom.
Awakening, if it is to mean anything beyond spiritual ornamentation, must be understood as an event that reorders experience rather than abolishes it. It is not the annihilation of the ability of the consciousness to contain concept, but a transformation in their gravitational center. To say that awakening is “beyond concepts” is true only in the sense that a horizon is beyond the traveler: it is not negated by approach, but revealed as that within which movement already occurs. “Beyond” does not mean discarded, nor does it mean irrelevant. It means seen through, repositioned, relieved of the tyranny they once exercised.
Yes, quite a good explanation of the two truths about Self.
It seems to be a major theme in The Lotus Sutra, the basis for the "Wonderful Law" that all beings ultimately attain complete enlightenment and are saved from all suffering.
I don’t think we are talking about the same distinction. I talk about the distinction between self-awareness as the ego and self-awareness as the Self, both of which require reflexive capacity (representation). I don’t think self-awareness is possible without reflexive capacity.
I don’t know what it’s like to be awakened, since I’m not. It feels a bit premature for me to start discussing the nature of that. I can refer to Martinus, though, and he does talk about an experience of being without concepts. That’s supposedly a kind of direct perception of the ‘I’ or the ‘divine something’. There are no concepts or ideas in that — only light. And from what I understand, there’s no distinction between ‘I’ and ‘you’.
If that’s what awakening is, then it does sound like an experience of being without concepts.
If direct perception means perception without concepts, you would have been awakened as an infant. What was your perception like? Did you experience anything? Were you even conscious?
Awakened people are wise and compassionate, right? Are infants wise and compassionate?
No, it’s not awakening, but an experience of unity with God. It’s related to awakening since, at least in Martinus’ view, awakening is an awakening to this unity — whereas here in the animal kingdom we identify with our separate bodies.
I’m not sure whether your concept of awakening is quite the same as Martinus’. He talks about ‘the great birth’, which is an initiation into ‘cosmic consciousness’. You’re right that it’s not without concepts, but it’s more a matter of having the right concepts.
According to Martinus, after the initiation the experience of unity gradually becomes stronger until it reaches its culmination in the divine kingdom.
The Pace, Energy and Beauty in Expressing This Truth blew me away, Thank You 🤍
The Subtlety of what You Write about is Felt Deeply in the Heart..🙏
There is nothing inherently wrong with any concept..We can use them..just like we Are Right Now. We Are Always Beyond 🤍
Love Your Work.
Love You
🤍🙏🕉
Thank you for your kind words. I’m glad to hear it resonated with you. Love you too. 🤍
Awakening, if it is to mean anything beyond spiritual ornamentation, must be understood as an event that reorders experience rather than abolishes it. It is not the annihilation of the ability of the consciousness to contain concept, but a transformation in their gravitational center. To say that awakening is “beyond concepts” is true only in the sense that a horizon is beyond the traveler: it is not negated by approach, but revealed as that within which movement already occurs. “Beyond” does not mean discarded, nor does it mean irrelevant. It means seen through, repositioned, relieved of the tyranny they once exercised.
Yes, quite a good explanation of the two truths about Self.
It seems to be a major theme in The Lotus Sutra, the basis for the "Wonderful Law" that all beings ultimately attain complete enlightenment and are saved from all suffering.
https://burnteliot.substack.com/i/170529565/the-flowering-of-a-wonderful-law
I don’t think we are talking about the same distinction. I talk about the distinction between self-awareness as the ego and self-awareness as the Self, both of which require reflexive capacity (representation). I don’t think self-awareness is possible without reflexive capacity.
Yes, when I re-read it, I think you are right and I misunderstood the focus of your comment.