Consciousness

When I think about spirituality, or any topic for that matter, at some point I need to consider the question: what is most fundamental, the foundation upon which everything rests? Asking this question I realize that as human beings in whichever culture we live, we make a lot of assumptions. And these assumptions are hidden in plain sight. By that I mean, there is no one actively hiding anything, and if I pay attention to certain details, these assumptions become obvious right away. But no one ever questions them. At least not in everyday life. That's why I say they are "hidden".

For example, consider the existence of people. It's taken for granted. If we ask ourselves the question, "what is a person?", then it's assumed that the answer is rather obvious, and every culture that I know of will have more or less the same answer. And if I ask this question sincerely, I will be considered an "odd person". But is the "obvious" answer actually true? It's only "true" when we make some assumptions.

For example, we assume that when "thinking" happens, that it belongs to someone. Or when a body is "seen", that something actually exists, and it naturally belongs to a person. We believe that the impressions we experience are due to "our senses", which belong to our bodies, and hence to us. Or that "memories" actually depict "past events", which are woven into a story of "me", "you", and "them". I could go on and on. In every one of these cases, the conclusions rest on a mountain of assumptions.

In every situation I've listed, we don't actually "know" much at all. Yes, there is an impression ("experience"), and it is registered ("awareness"). It may or may not be registered by "something", but we don't actually know. That's about it. Other than that, what is certain? Nothing.

What is a "thought"? There is an impression, which is then associated by some process to "memory", which by further association is linked to words, images, sounds that we then associate with a meaning. But in fact, none of this is for certain, except for the original impression. Any process of association utilizes a large set of assumptions. Even the association process itself is only impression/registration.

We might convince ourselves that these associations and assumptions have a coherence, because they can be reliably repeated - for example, by using the scientific method - and thus this apparent coherence makes them true. But the whole process of establishing coherence is reliant upon memory (past "experiments"), and whatever assumptions we have about the impressions associated to it. Assumptions layered upon assumptions, it's "turtles all the way down", as the old saying goes.

What is consciousness?

When examined further, it can be seen that impression and registration (experience and awareness) also cannot be separated. There isn't one without the other. Actually, I need to clarify slightly. When there is "no impression", there is also "no registration". So we can say that impression/no impression and registration/no registration always go together. This phenomenon (in its totality) is what I call "consciousness".

Thus, I must conclude by simple empirical observation and a bit of logic that "there is only consciousness". This is something I've read that the sages say. And a lot of people repeat it. But I doubt many of those repeaters have contemplated very deeply about it.

It reminds me of an old meditation technique. It can be labeled by several different names, depending on the spiritual tradition and whatever variation of the practice is followed by its practitioners, but it goes something like this ...

A person sits quietly and after a period of allowing the mind to settle into a state of calm tranquility, begins to direct the focus of attention to the processes of awareness itself. By this I mean, one observes without judgment the series of moments of impression/registration as they occur. If done properly, even the experience of "time" disappears. This practice, when effective, can lead to great openings of insight and unexpected breakthroughs. In light of the discussion above, one could call it, "consciousness is conscious of consciousness". In any case, perhaps the reason for its effectiveness as a practice is that it cuts straight to the root of reality itself.

For more on that, I'll move on to the next topic.