Pure Presence is not "appearance-thinking"

Take an even closer look at what seems to go on, so as to not be fooled. Again, all there is, is Consciousness as discussed in previous posts. If one were to speak of “things” or appearances, all there would be to them is “mental stuff” or thought—for there are no actual objects apart from thought.

Now watch closely what seems to go on “within yourself.” Starting as 100% Pure Awareness (which, Itself, has no appearance), you would have to first ignore or “let go of” this Pure Awareness You are, in order to entertain any appearance, or give attention (thought) to an appearance.

In other words, to even say that an appearance is appearing, what has to happen? It seems to you, or to your attention, that, “There is an appearance here, too.” This may seem to occur so fast and so subtly that there may not be additional thought about the appearance. However, the appearing “thing” still seems to get attention or is “noticed” or “witnessed”–otherwise it would not/could not be mentioned. But you first would have to leave being 100% busy as Pure Awareness, Present Being, to even do that noticing. It requires time to notice–even if it’s a nanosecond, that’s time–which is not the Present. It could be the appearance of a tree outdoors, or it could be a thought of what you’d like for dinner—both would be appearances.

The point is, all there would be to that appearance is that very thought of it, or better said, the thought as it. This is a huge point. There isn’t the thought of the appearance and an appearance. Thinking never is thinking of something else–as if there were also an object separate from the thought–some thing that the thought is thinking about. Human ignorance assumes there are two separate things, but there aren’t.

The thought is the appearance; the thinking is all there is of the “thing itself.” And as you actually are Pure Consciousness, the only One existent, it would be you alone who seemingly has “allowed” that thought/thing to arise.

It seems to occur due to first having ignored the 100% Pure Consciousness, Formless Infinity, that the Real You is. The arising or appearing, which requires time (what-is-not-being), seems to occur thanks to not being Your own Being.

When one is 100% busy being Pure Consciousness only, there is nothing else, only the Actuality of Presence. There is nothing “superimposed”; nothing else of a seeming nature occurs that could get attention. Only when it seems there has been a “mental wandering” from Pure Conscious Being, this instantly creates the false “you” that is now noticing, and vouching for, an appearance.

Real You can’t do any of this, though it seems to occur, as if there were a movie being superimposed on You. It seems to occur solely through this ignore-ance, or ignorance. It seems to be a super-fast flitting of attention, one of being Being, then of not-being Being. As it says in CIA, “You seem to leave Awakeness and start to dream.”

Check this out for yourself—apart from this seeming ignore-ance, there is no other evidence for appearances anywhere throughout one’s entire existence as Awareness. (see CIA p. 228)

If anyone can find an appearance separate from the thought of it, please email it to me, so it can be displayed on this site and we’ll eat our words. Better yet, take a video, and we’ll make a Youtube of it for the entire world to see!

The thought may come, “Aha! There’s a way around this. By taking a video, there’s a permanent record of the appearance in the camera, so it does have some existence separate from the thought of it.” Wait a minute. Where only would that “video camera” be, or the “thing” you say has been put on video? Are they “out there” as objects separate from thought? Does any of that stuff have any existence apart from the very dream-thought that now seems to be entertaining it? No. On the same basis, of what would all Youtubes consist (even the ones of “Peter”) and everything else in the would-be appearing world? The same mere dream-thought—seemingly arising solely due to ignore-ance of Pure Aware Being.

This so-called ignoring or ignore-ance is all there would be to the entire so-called phenomenal world of appearances whether called “mental” or “material.” It is what is mistakenly assumed to be physical time and space when mistakenly seen as material (an even greater degree of ignore-ance, seemingly), which was discussed in the earlier posts. Most emphatically, there is nothing wrong or bad about them, for that would be personal judgment. This is just “telling it like it is” (or rather, isn’t). This “wandering” from Timeless Being is all there would be to the entire so-called world of manifestation and creation. It has NO prior existence, but seems to be “mentally created” right there on the instant.

The very attempt to account for appearances is to be thinking in terms of them, or as them–for again, there are no appearances apart from that very thought. It literally is appearance-thinking. And it would be only this same appearance-thinking (not You as Pure Infinity) that would try to say, “You’ve got to include appearances—otherwise you’d be doing away with me!” It only would be the so-called appearance trying to say that–trying to account for itself.

There’s an even deeper point about thinking in terms of appearances, or appearance-thinking. It would be another so-called “hangover notion” as discussed in CIA in chap 15. It’s this: Even when one likes to assume one is now “being spiritual” or “is clear,” one still may assume, “Okay, I seem to be aware of appearances. It is I who seem to be thinking of them; it is I who am thinking about or experiencing the appearances.” Or, this “I ” may even try to say, “There really is no ‘I,’ so it must be Awareness that is thinking of or experiencing appearances.”

Wait a minute. Are you sure? Or is it the other way around? As the only You (Self) there is, is Pure Infinity, how could You know about finite appearances? Real You doesn’t. The appearance seems to have cooked up its own sense of an “I”—and that would be the one that’s thinking about or vouching for an appearance. The appearance literally seems to be thinking about itself. Thus the one saying, “I have to honor appearances,” still would be the appearance itself trying to talk, not You. But that isn’t known by it, because the only stuff to all of it would be ignorance, or ignore-ance.

The so-called body-you that appears to be part of the appearance is inseparable from all the thinking that seems to go on. Since the body can’t be separated from the appearance, doesn’t all that body’s thinking actually have to belong to the appearance, too? Of course.

What’s the point of allowing appearance-thinking to drive the bus—when it’s not even Yours?!

Again, Pure Infinity can’t think, can’t know time or change—then could You (Infinity, Awareness) really know of appearances, time and change, and be the one thinking about them? No. But this does NOT mean that Self, Life, This Present Being, ever has a sense of not honoring something–for there is only Itself, being 100% consistent with Its Total Perfection, Oneness, Love–which is true “honoring.” Self’s complete “honoring” of Its Perfection truly is all that exists!

There is much more to come: on how time, and therefore thoughts, memory and and forms, are “precluded” by the allness, the only-ness of the Present–leaving only un-aged, “newly fresh” Life as All, eternally…

To comment on this post, or to view comments, click on the word “comments,” below.

8 thoughts on “Pure Presence is not "appearance-thinking"

  1. Quote: “The arising or appearing, which requires time (what-is-not-being), seems to occur thanks to not being Your own Being.

    When one is 100% busy being Pure Consciousness only, there is nothing else, only the Actuality of Presence. There is nothing “superimposed”; nothing else of a seeming nature occurs that could get attention.” Unquote.

    As far as your message is concerned, there are no qualms, for that is the essence of Vedanta in depth.

    You must, however, obviously be including our respiration too as a ‘thought’. But does not the body-consciousness of breathing in and breathing out rudely jerk us out of that sort of ‘sleep state’ even if one is not conscious of all sensations etc.? Does the breath stop or one is not just conscious of it? After all, breath does take place in ‘time’.

    thanks and regards

  2. Certainly Infinity, Being, Self, does not depend on breathing by way of a body, or a body-thought. As one “stays busier and busier” as this Pure Now, Pure Aware Being, the entire sense of a body, sensations and time will seem to fade, not just breathing. But at this point one is so “consciously busy” being Pure Being, there is no notice of breathing one way or the other, or when it may seem to have “stopped.” This sounds relative, as if there is another who can breathe or eventually stop breathing. From Reality’s perspective there is only Infinity–and right now, not in a future.

  3. If you don’t take it to be impudent or disrespectful (surely I am NOT), may I ask if it is just ‘theory’ or your actual experience (about breath too)?

    There are two reasons for this question.
    i) Incessant debates go on at some advaita fora (yahoo forums) about the existence of the world/mind for a Jivanmukta from his own perspective.

    ii) Your own statement in Part 3: “So, from here, it’s not enough, not accurate, to say there is an appearance, even though it may be insubstantial or unreal. One HAS to say the picture or appearance doesn’t exist at all—not even as a mere illusion.”

    The usage of the word HAS (capitalized by me) above sounds that it is more of a ‘politically’ correct stand to be taken from the stance of Absolute Presence rather than being an actuality in experience.

    Thanks and regards

  4. Peter,

    being able to articulate this unfathomable subject to take “us” closer to the point of view of Consciousness requires great clarity of spirit and much talent.

    Installing a blog in order to be challenged and “put” it to the test is courageous.

    This reality check is just great!

    All the best,

    D

  5. Good Morning Peter,

    It is such a treat to re-read these wonderful posts. A nice way to sharpen your pencil so to speak. CIA’s perspective is most appreciated, you can’t paint it into a corner. Which is consistent with the essence of Being Itself.

    For this Julian body/mind it’s all still a mystery. However I do enjoy the wonderful, beautiful insights expressed in these posts and the nourishment they provide!

    Hymns To Absolute Reality

  6. Hello D,

    Thanks for the kind words!

    Actually, any “clarity of spirit” or “talent” that appears here would be thanks to an absence of Peter!–but it is “appreciated” nonetheless. “Peter” would be merely a thought-appearance, while You, Self, are the Only One Aware, “giving” what is said here to Yourself! My, my–aren’t You nice to Yourself!

  7. Thank you, this helps clear up some of the confusion, that the body does think or at least appears to. According to ACIM, the body doesn’t think, which confused me, because if it wasn’t the body/mind that was thinking all these crazy thoughts, then what was? Nice to hear that Abosolute Infinity, doesn’t think.
    Thanks again

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete this to submit.

*