The purpose after full comprehension of itself?

[j000rmas]

Just finished reading Rationalist Spirituality, what a crazy ride, loved it.

My confusion is regarding this;

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.

Are we talking about the present purpose and after this current ongoing purpose is complete there will arise new purposes that can be answered there and at that point?

Is it more like a cycle like in hinduism (Yuga cycle)?

Can awareness full comprehension of itself be wiped clean and start over again?

[Lou Gold]

Just finished reading Rationalist Spirituality, what a crazy ride, loved it.

My confusion is regarding this;

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.

Are we talking about the present purpose and after this current ongoing purpose is complete there will arise new purposes that can be answered there and at that point?

Is it more like a cycle like in hinduism (Yuga cycle)?

Can awareness full comprehension of itself be wiped clean and start over again?

Judging from past responses this may not help one who is committed to mentalism but I like to differentiate between comprehension (grasping intellectually) and understanding (standing under). The challenge is to not get hooked on grasping which produces dogmatic clinging to solutions and instead to surrender to the alchemy of awareness which will transform you via better and better questions. Some call this the "path of heart" or "not knowing" but the intellectual clingers flush with the more immediate myths of success will resist.

[AshvinP]

Just finished reading Rationalist Spirituality, what a crazy ride, loved it.

My confusion is regarding this;

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.

Are we talking about the present purpose and after this current ongoing purpose is complete there will arise new purposes that can be answered there and at that point?

Is it more like a cycle like in hinduism (Yuga cycle)?

Can awareness full comprehension of itself be wiped clean and start over again?

I don't remember how it was addressed in the book, but I think BK has generally remained agnostic about what happens to Self-aware consciousness after dissolving of current 'alter' boundaries. His analytical view does not necessitate either Eastern or Western conceptions, although he clearly has a personal preference for the former.

[Eugene I]

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.
Can awareness full comprehension of itself be wiped clean and start over again?

It is even unknown whether the boundless awareness has any purpose at all. It may or may not, we don't know it.

But here is how you might look at it. Our individual awareness is of the same nature as the boundless awareness, so you can actually experience and know it directly. So if you look at it directly, can you find or experience any purpose in it? The only thing it is doing is simply being aware without differentiation of anything unfolding within it. It is aware and it accepts everything with no purpose whatsoever. Now, among other things, the forms unfolding in awareness include individuated conscious activities (individual minds), possibly including the "big minds" of Gods, and those can make up purposes for themselves or for other minds that subdue to them. But all such purposes would be of an emerging and mind-created nature.

[SanteriSatama]

So if you look at it directly, can you find or experience any purpose in it? The only thing it is doing is simply being aware without differentiation of anything unfolding within it. It is aware and it accepts everything with no purpose whatsoever. Now, among other things, the forms unfolding in awareness include individuated conscious activities (individual minds), possibly including the "big minds" of Gods, and those can make up purposes for themselves or for other minds that subdue to them. But all such purposes would be of an emerging and mind-created nature.

As an uniquely experiencing part of a larger whole, if we try to look at the whole without including our unique experiences in the whole, we are doing the same rookie mistake as physicalists.

The self-evident purpose, revealed in self-inclusive awareness in and about larger inclusive whole, is the ability to experience uniquely while staying also aware of participatory relation with larger whole. Hence, it can be inferred that each unique has inherent value in the purpose and process of of Divinely Integrated Differentiation.

[Eugene I]

The self-evident purpose, revealed in self-inclusive awareness in and about larger inclusive whole, is the ability to experience uniquely while staying also aware of participatory relation with larger whole. Hence, it can be inferred that each unique has inherent value in the purpose and process of of Divinely Integrated Differentiation.

For that to happen, the wholeness of the Divinely Integrated Differentiation needs to have an ability to have a global subjective perspective. However, it is unknown whether such global subjective perspective even exists. There are versions of idealism posing that it indeed exists, and there are versions posing that it does not. In the former variants (which are the "theistic" ones) such global subjective may indeed have a purpose and a process for the wholeness. But I keep reminding on this forum that this is not the only possibility within idealism, and that theistic variants of idealism should not claim to be the only true and the only possible variants of it.

[SanteriSatama]

For that to happen, the wholeness of the Divinely Integrated Differentiation needs to have an ability to have a global subjective perspective.

Why subjective perspective? I don't follow your argument.

What exactly is necessary on the holistic level to make this version of DID work? That's actually an interesting question. If you can up with some good answer, how would that relate to asubjective holistic level?

However, it is unknown whether such global subjective perspective even exists. There are versions of idealism posing that it indeed exists, and there are versions posing that it does not. In the former variants (which are the "theistic" ones) such global subjective may indeed have a purpose and a process for the wholeness. But I keep reminding on this forum that this is not the only possibility within idealism, and that theistic variants of idealism should not claim to be the only true and the only possible variants of it.

I'm not a supporter of that form of metaphysical solipsism, so the origination and motivation of my teleological formulation does not come from that.

[Lou Gold]

My thought is that Divinely Integrated Diversity co-arises interdependently with creativity, change and checks-and-balances and this requires only that God love God, which may be entirely instinctual. An entity at any level need not be metacognitive to will continuing creativity or to respond to a tummy ache. Subjective sentience called Love is all that is required. God is Love. Hate is not the opposite of Love, Fear is. God does not fear.

[Lou Gold]

This morning at church...

[Shaibei]

The idea that consciousness develops, especially on the historical plane, is familiar to me from Western idealism and not from Eastern. As far as I can remember I read that Sri Aurobindo held similar conception of development but he probably influenced by Hegel.
Nonetheless, there is an understanding in the East that self-reflection is created when there is a separation between the thinker and the thought, and this understanding can advance us beyond Hegel's reason and Steiner's thinking.