How did spirituality, belief in God and the continuing search for God change you?

[Dontaskme]

Dontaskme, I wish you would just answer questions directly that are in response to what you've said... rather than flooding me with more concepts intertwined with yet more concepts and explanations... which seems like you just keep swirling things around and around, without acknowledging anything solid that you've said.

My point in asking you if YOU think there is an ultimate truth for all (as opposed to each), is because you seem to indicate that YOU know of such a thing? I'd like to know if you think there is an ultimate truth that applies to all, and if so, do you think that someone (such as yourself) can know what that is?

Yes there is an ultimate truth for ALL

Can I myself as an individual self know it? ....Yes and No

Yes because I am the ultimate truth....and No because if I know I know I am the ultimate truth this knower doesn't exist.

There is no one to know it twice. It is known only once.

[Dontaskme]

I think you look too deeply for things that are already on the surface. My main point was, there is no shared consciousness. The rest is superfluous.

There is shared awareness though,consciousness is an aspect of awareness, it comes and goes in awareness which is prior to consciousness, so in a sense you are right we don't all share the same consciousness, however, the light looking from your eye is the same light looking through mine...that is awareness. It is the witness of the conscious self.
We might be conscious of different things, have ideas about different things, but without fundamental awareness we would not be able to recognise or communicate with each other, we would all be going around ignoring each other absorbed totally in our own unique realities. And this is not how life operates...life operates as one unitary action...with conscious reactions.

Your body is different, your thoughts, feeling, emotions, beliefs, your culture, conditioning, are all different to others, but what's looking from your eye is the same one as every body else. That looker is one being the many.

That one arises when the inside subject and the outside object merge as one and nobody is witnessing and there is nothing to be witnessed. It is a pure mirror, mirroring nothing and everything as one.

The only thing I might agree on is that self-awareness is a higher level of consciousness, but it still is an aspect of the consciousness that precedes it. Think back to your remotest memory. It wasn't so much self-awareness, as fragmented consciousness. Self-awareness developed out of that.

In a sense yes I agree, although I would put it this way...Awareness is prior to consciousness.. being the highest level. But are one and the same ..As above so below.

What emerged was self consciousness...some call it self awareness....which is ok but Awareness is the permanent Self within which transitory self consciousness arises, Awareness being witness to that... Awareness is One - Consciousness is Other....but are both the same One being the Other.

Self consciousness or the sense of separate ''me'' emerges from memory...since any separate self cannot exist... Awareness is the only witness to OTHER it's one same self being two...via memory or thought, and looks on in detachment.

[ken]

Granted, however, you say you know everything i have said and there is nothing new here for you, yet you then say direct seeing and knowing is beyond the mind. This contradicts what I wrote in the I say the Mind is the One and only thing that allows direct seeing and knowing.

My use of the word wrong may sound harsh but I am not saying how you are seeing anything is wrong, what I was meaning is in you not being able to back up what you are saying with clear direct definitions is wrong.

You can not say the above, "I already know direct seeing and knowing is beyond the mind", but when another asks you to clarify what is it you actually mean when you say 'mind' and if you do not give them a direct response, then that is wrong. You have to clear up what you are saying when asked what do you mean? Instead of just repeating and re-repeating.

To clarify.

The sense of separate self ''I'' ''me'' is that which believes it is the one seeing / observing something separate from itself in the thing observed.

Direct seeing and knowing is when the observer and observed merge from subject/object duality into one /nondual. This either happens to a person or it doesn't. When it does.. here it is known and seen that there is no separate observer apart from the thing seen...what remains is the pure witness or pure awareness.

Nothing new for me to read here. Again, from direct seeing and knowing these words are completely contradictory from earlier posts.

The reason dontaskme does not stop trying to be understood through writing words is because dontaskme does not know what dontaskme is seeing. All dontaskme knows is the words dontaskme has read previously. Instead of just re-repeating the words from the books dontaskme has read previously, what would be better is if dontaskme tried to see and know by itself.

But as dontaskme sometimes, contradictorily, insist

There is no observer.

If this is dontaskme's truth, then dontaskme will never see, know, nor understand.

[ken]

ken: Now, I have been trying to help you to express clearer what it is that you are wanting and trying to say, but you do not even want to help yourself here. I can not help you if you do not want to help yourself. So, this may be the last attempt at trying to help you. I will ask of you just one question, the same one I have asked numerous times before:

I have no way of making myself clear to other people on a subjective feeling.

There is a way so yes you can. By the way it is a very, very simple and easy way.

You cannot help this one here, this one here is already clear on this.

Are you absolutely positively sure of this. The way you are trying to describe what you, supposedly, are clear of is very confusing, contradictory and nonsensical.

If you were so clear, then the opposite would be true.

Every other one can be clear on this too, no other one can help them, only they can do it, they will and can do it,

Exactly how do you propose other people can and will do it, so they to can be as "clear" as you are?

From about the onset of this post I have been asking you, "How did you get to the point where you are able to see what it is, that you are now trying to explain?" I am still waiting for that answer.

If you do not know how to get "here", besides just reading what others have written, then how do you propose others will get to this point also?

it's inherent in all of us as we are all the same one.

'We', humans, are NOT all the same one. In fact we are all completely uniquely different and separate individual beings. This fact is proven already and obviously seen and known by all the separate and different individual human bodies. This fact is also seen and known by all the uniquely separate and different individual 'persons', the thoughts and feelings, within each of all those unique, separate individual human bodies.

So, we are NOT all the same one. However, we are a part of the same unique and only One. This is seen and known only by the unique and only One, i.e., The Mind.

'you', the individual separate beings, each and all only look at and see from the thoughts within each of those human bodies. If you have not yet learned what the Mind is nor how the Mind and the brain actually work, then you WILL continue to just think the exact same way dontaskme is doing here. If the individual self has not yet discovered something and thinks that no other being could uncover that also, then that means, to that individual self, that no other thing could discover, learn, see nor know 'It' also.

The Mind, however, already has ALL knowledge from and of the Universe.

The Mind already KNOWS that what dontaskme believes is unknowable.

The Mind already sees and knows what 'It' is. 'It' is The Mind. The Mind can see, and know, what Its Self is.

An individual, thinking, person exists within an individual thinking brain. A brain is visible and made up of matter.
Whereas, the One real and true, knowing, Self exists within the Mind. The Mind is invisible and immaterial.

The Mind always override the brain because the Mind knows already that a brain can only think, it knows. In some of the instances where you use the word 'It', 'It', is just a case of Mind over matter. The Mind can not be overridden.

[ken]

You never cease to surprise me dontaskme. You have the answers.

I am very interested in knowing how you got them, especially when you do not know yourself. What path were you on when you come to this realization? Hopefully, you will share with me your path in how you got here.

Deleted reply / because the content was for one showing only, and is now deemed redundant...was my opinion only and not relevant anymore.

ken: Pity you deleted your response before I had a chance to see the one showing only.

Your response may have been very helpful for me.

See what I mean about too much information being given at once. I..like you... can't digest too much at one sitting.

We need to slow down and use fewer words in order to see each others perspective clearly.

What surprises me is you have got TO the answers. What I am very curious about is HOW you go there.

In a nutshell, I got to the truth, to the answers by instinctively knowing I wasn't separate from my environment that strange place that was beaming out in front of me from my eyes.

But how did dontaskme get to instinctively knowing?

I will continue to say that you may have gotten HERE, and had a glimpse at Me, but you are not fully HERE, yet.

There is a huge difference between the (big) 'I', real true and knowing Self, of which there is ONLY One, and the many separate (little) 'i's of which there are as many of these selves as there are human bodies.

I knew that I hadn't made myself or the world I was in.

WHO knew this supposed knowledge? HOW did they know this supposed knowledge?

You are right in that 'you', the self (with the little s), has not made this self or the world you are in, that is if by 'world' you mean environment. What It is that actually does make 'you', all the selves, is the environment or Universe. Depending on the environment a human body lives within, i.e., the time and place of the Universe, this makes you, who you are. So, obviously you do not make "your" self.

But what you do actually have a huge impact on is how the world is created, that is if by 'world', we mean, the human made world, i.e., either a fighting, waring, pollution riddled world or a peaceful and harmonious world for everyone. The truth is all of us selves can in fact make the kind of world that we truly want to live in. Or, we can continue to keep making the world that we are living in, in what is generally known as 2016.

I knew it was a lie when other people believed them selves to be separate from me

Tell Me how human beings are in fact NOT separate. First you will have to define 'human beings', and then tell me what exactly is NOT separate.

...it was hard and very painful living with this knowing.

You say you have knowing in that all the selves are not separate, but you also insist the knower can not know its self. So how can you say selves are not separate? Who is the self?

Your use of the word 'was' infers that it is now not hard and very painful living with a supposed "knowing". Is this the case that it is not hard nor painful living this way NOW?

How exactly was or is it still hard and painful living with this supposed "knowing"?

What exactly is so hard and painful?

Do you feel alone?

Do you want to share this "knowing"?

If you do want to share, then how is this ever going to be possible if you, your self, insist that it is impossible knowledge to share?

'Living', is about one of the most easiest and simplest natural things to do. There is absolutely nothing hard nor painful at all about living. But obviously this, just like every thing else is, is relative to the 'observer', the one living.

I, for One, find living very easy and simple. Never hard nor painful.

I also know what is going on for you, do you? Maybe it was the confusion itself in "your" knowing that led to the hard and very painful living for you. But only when you are ready to tell is when you will.

[ken]

I think you look too deeply for things that are already on the surface. My main point was, there is no shared consciousness. The rest is superfluous.

There is shared awareness though,consciousness is an aspect of awareness, it comes and goes in awareness which is prior to consciousness, so in a sense you are right we don't all share the same consciousness, however, the light looking from your eye is the same light looking through mine...that is awareness. It is the witness of the conscious self.
We might be conscious of different things, have ideas about different things, but without fundamental awareness we would not be able to recognise or communicate with each other, we would all be going around ignoring each other absorbed totally in our own unique realities. And this is not how life operates...life operates as one unitary action...with conscious reactions.

Your body is different, your thoughts, feeling, emotions, beliefs, your culture, conditioning, are all different to others, but what's looking from your eye is the same one as every body else. That looker is one being the many.

As I have explained previously. It all depends on where one is looking from. If an 'observer', looker for you, is looking from previously held thought, beliefs, preconceptions, etc. all of which are held within the brain, then that observer will not see what the Observer from the Mind sees and knows.

There can be as many observers as there are people OR there could be just One Observer who is ALL the observers together looking as One.

"That" looker, as you call It, who is looking from a physical eye is NOT necessarily one being many. That looker, has you continue to prove here, is just one separate self. By the way the One you are trying to refer to is NOT many. That Looker is 'ALL', Everything.

That one arises when the inside subject and the outside object merge as one and nobody is witnessing and there is nothing to be witnessed. It is a pure mirror, mirroring nothing and everything as one.

As I also previously explained a mirror will only reflect a material thing. So looking from the brain into a mirror then the view is obviously obstructed, however, looking from the Mind into a mirror the view is obviously unobstructed, thus the reason why the Mind can and does see and know every thing.

If dontaskme does not fully understand this or disagrees with this, then that is because dontaskme is looking only from the brain, and from the thoughts that are already held, within the head that dontaskme exists in.

[Dontaskme]

From about the onset of this post I have been asking you, "How did you get to the point where you are able to see what it is, that you are now trying to explain?" I am still waiting for that answer.

If you do not know how to get "here", besides just reading what others have written, then how do you propose others will get to this point also?

I've lost count how many times I've given you the answer ... so I repeat...yes I did do some reading nonduality books of course, but only to find some confirmation of what I already knew.

I knew I wasn't a separate self all my life, if you want me to tell you how I knew well I don't know how, it just happened to me, the same way the feeling of being a separate person happened to me....I felt both feelings...one of being separate, and another of knowing this was impossible...but then I realised the obviously unavoidable CONTRADICTION in this ...further realising the one led me to the other, and vice versa...which further led to me to knowing myself completely ....and that without that obvious contradiction arising within my awareness...I wouldn't have ever known my ass from my elbow so to speak.

I'm not going to give you the answer anymore now ken because this is just getting silly...that's my final answer.


In answer to all your other replies ...I agree with you.... you are telling me things I already know and understand.

It seems you haven't been able to tell from what I've written that I'm right where you are in the understanding stakes, which makes me actually doubt your ability to see other seers. I can see that you are a seer, but you don't seem to be able to see that I'm a seer.


So there is nothing I can do about that or make you see any clearer...so be it...so be it.

If you can't see by now that I too am a seer....then as far as your concerned I am not a seer full stop...and if that's what you believe to be true ...then it must be true...and I accept that....so be it.

But having said that...I don't give a toss what you believe....because your opinions are about as valuable to this one here as empty space.

[Dontaskme]

But as dontaskme sometimes, contradictorily, insist

There is no observer.

If this is dontaskme's truth, then dontaskme will never see, know, nor understand.

There is no observer because there is no other than the observer which is illusory. The ''other'' being illusory, not the act of ''observing'' itself.


Enlightenment is neither achieved nor realised. Enlightenment is clarity that every moment of life is non-dual but appears as dual in the mind.

And yeah one could call it contradictive...Upanishads precisely documented that enlightenment is ‘neither this nor that’ (neti neti).

Please get past this hurdle ...otherwise we have nothing further to say to each other.

[Dontaskme]

'Living', is about one of the most easiest and simplest natural things to do. There is absolutely nothing hard nor painful at all about living. But obviously this, just like every thing else is, is relative to the 'observer', the one living.

I, for One, find living very easy and simple. Never hard nor painful.

Me too,I've always been able to live life in joy and simplicity, however the pain for me was seeing others struggle to see the joy and simplicity of living, that's what pained me...i was the king of person that mirror other peoples energies....but I'm not like that now, now I am totally free from ego mind play.

Nothing pains me now, because I realised their struggle was because they were identified with separate self..ego...like I used to be, even though I knew there was no such thing as separate self, I still had to play along as if it was so.

And no I don't feel alone, I prefer solitude ...but this is not lonely, it is what the enlightened masters call bliss of being no one.

[ken]

From about the onset of this post I have been asking you, "How did you get to the point where you are able to see what it is, that you are now trying to explain?" I am still waiting for that answer.

If you do not know how to get "here", besides just reading what others have written, then how do you propose others will get to this point also?

I've lost count how many times I've given you the answer ... so I repeat...yes I did do some reading nonduality books of course, but only to find some confirmation of what I already knew.

There is the first mistake, i.e., looking for confirmation of what you already 'knew', believe is true.

I knew I wasn't a separate self all my life,

'Who' is the one in relation to "my" in 'my life'?

How long is the "all" in 'all my life'?

From when did you know I was not a separate self?

if you want me to tell you how I knew well I don't know how, it just happened to me, the same way the feeling of being a separate person happened to me....I felt both feelings...one of being separate, and another of knowing this was impossible...

Ok. Noted, you do not know how.

but then I realised the obviously unavoidable CONTRADICTION in this ...further realising the one led me to the other, and vice versa...which further led to me to knowing myself completely ....and that without that obvious contradiction arising within my awareness...I wouldn't have ever known my ass from my elbow so to speak.

You say here things led to 'you' knowing "yourself" completely. So who/what are/is the 'you'? Short and sweet response will suffice here and now.

I'm not going to give you the answer anymore now ken because this is just getting silly...that's my final answer.

Although I know exactly where you are coming from, from some other's perspectives your comments were appearing very silly from the onset. All I have done is try to help you better explain.

In answer to all your other replies ...I agree with you.... you are telling me things I already know and understand.

So you already knew and understood that you are just a set of thoughts within a brain separate from the set of thoughts within all the other brains? When you observe from this perspective you are a seer who is unable to distinguish between (what can be) known from thinking.

And, you already knew and understood that I am the ALL knowing Mind?

How long have you yourself known this?

It seems you haven't been able to tell from what I've written that I'm right where you are in the understanding stakes, which makes me actually doubt your ability to see other seers. I can see that you are a seer, but you don't seem to be able to see that I'm a seer.

I have already said numerous times that you have glimpsed the One true Observer, and as such you have had a glance, from this Seer. The difference is that 'you' and 'I' are NOT in the same understanding. 'you' can not explain clearly and distinctly what the Seer sees, nor how to even get to the Seers advantage point. 'you' still are only looking from the small observer perspective, i.e., the seer. 'I', on the other hand, CAN not only just explain extremely clearly and distinctly what the big and real true Seer sees and KNOWS I can also explain what the Seer IS, how the little pretending seers can get to HERE and NOW, where the true Seer sits AND how they all can become One with the Seer. In fact you are still in the confusion "stakes" in regards to what the Seer can and does KNOW.

So there is nothing I can do about that or make you see any clearer...so be it...so be it.

I was just trying to help you see things clearer for you, and thus also be able to explain things clearer for others.

If you can't see by now that I too am a seer....

I can see and KNOW you too are a seer, but unfortunately you only look, and observe, mostly from one separate brain only, i.e., what I call the little self, which is NOT the real and true big Self.

then as far as your concerned I am not a seer full stop...

Proof of my previous sentence is in this statement you just wrote. You jumped to a conclusion without any evidence. This happened because you are seeing only from the thoughts, which are from within one separate brain. You are looking separately and not universally as One. You started believing, and thus then only began looking from one perspective only and only looking for what you believe. That belief stops you from hearing and seeing the real Truth. No person is able to find and see, i.e., uncover and discover, Truth whilst having a belief. The belief system works in a way of blinding a seer from seeing, understanding and thus knowing Truth.

What one separate observer actually sees can be and usually is completely different from what another observer sees. Actually what one separate observer actually sees can be and usually is completely different from what the One real and true Observer sees. ALL observers, by definition see, therefore, every observer obviously is a seer, dontaskme included. You are observing these words so you are a seer. So, you are a seer. I know this, but unfortunately 'you' are one of these individual separate seer who looks mostly from the wrong perspective. Your perspectives of what you have seen, which are clearly written here, is evidence of this. Again you have had the slightest glimpse from the One true Seer, but that is all you have seen. You are still a long way of fully seeing and knowing, and thus being able to answer, 'Who 'I' am'?

inand if that's what you believe to be true ...then it must be true...and I accept that....so be it.

I have already stated that I do not believe (in) anything, except in the Self. Therefore I could not believe that what you are suggesting here.

Trying to put words into "my mouth" will not achieve anything. What you write regarding what you think I see or do not see can be verified by all I have written previously. This is now HERE for all to see.

[quote="Dontaskme"But having said that...I don't give a toss what you believe....[/quote]

Again I do NOT believe (in) anything, except in Self. I do NOT disbelieve (in) anything also. I hope I do not have to repeat that again for you.

If you do not give a toss about the One true united Self, then so be it.

because your opinions are about as valuable to this one here as empty space.

Fair enough if that is what that one sees and wants to see.

I expect that sort of comment from a separate seer, who looks at others as being separate.

The One united Seer would not and does not talk, to Its Self, like that.

[ken]

Truth is ONLY known by ALL. Truth is certainly not known by just any number less than ALL. There is just way to many "mistakes" to point out in this one paragraph alone to go through all of them right now. You obviously are stuck behind your own beliefs. You have the innate knowing, the same as every one else has but you have only had a glimpse of It and as such are not able to explain It, in any clear detail whatsoever. In fact your language only turns others away.

I wasn't trying to explain it in that last post, I was simply saying every one can reach direct seeing and knowing of the witness state.

Simply saying 'every one' here implies separate selves, which you say also simply does not exist. Your language again is contradictory this is what leads to others turning away.

[quote="Dontaskme"And whether my language turns others away is for them to decide not you. [/quote]

I never said i decide what happens. I was just saying what has happened.

What I said in my last post is correct, it doesn't matter that we cannot explain it in words,...words never compensate for direct seeing of the tacit self..aka the witness.

Direct seeing does not need compensating, but words can and will show people how they can get to and have direct seeing.

Again your language here is contradictory. You say here that direct seeing comes from the 'tacit self', aka the witness, AND direct seeing of this self, i.e., the witness being able to see itself. But from the onset you have said this IS NOT possible. Another contradiction here is you call the tacit self, the witness. To be a witness something needs to be observed. A witness observes and as such a witness is an observer. You have said that there is NO observer. And another contradiction in of itself is you insist all of this can not be explained in words and that that does not matter but you consistently persist to explain in words what it is that you say can not be explained.

This is just three contradictions in only one of your sentences. Imagine how much more contradiction is in all of what you have said so far? But I guess from your own separate view and belief this does not matter.

The merging into witness state can be reached by all without ever uttering a word....

Maybe, but I wonder if you could have merged into witness state without words. 'Witness state', itself, is actually made up of two words. Without these two words, or any other words, what do we have? Try and answer this one, at least.

Without either word you would have merged into a witness or into a state. I know what some people say is the case.

If there was no language thus no words within the brain, how could knowing and sharing anything exist?

Also, the One Witness needs the evolving human being, more importantly the Witness needs the human brain and the words held within all of those brains, to be able to learn, understand, reason and thus see and know what the Mind is, i.e., what It Its Self is.

I also thought you insisted and persisted that there is no merging into ... [anything]. Is there not only just One and we are all already in that (witness) state?

so what does it matter whether or not that person who has reached witness state can explain it or not? .....it's irrelevant.

Maybe it is irrelevant to you, but it is not irrelevant to Me.

You are a person who has reached that state, although very fleetingly, I do not deny this, but by your very own behaviors of consistently wanting to be heard and understood contradicts every word you have just said here.

The witness state is in constant flow...words only obscure the flow,The witness state is in constant flow...words only obscure the flow, and I always tend to forget what's been said anyway as soon as it's spoken since it's past tense and dead....the flow is always alive and that's all that matters, that's all that is relevant.

If the flow is always alive, and that is all that matters, and words only obscure the flow, then why do you continue to use words? Are you trying to obscure the flow? This certainly appears to be the case with some of your writings. Just one of the many examples of this is when you wrote, "The witness state is in constant flow...words only obscure the flow", How can a constant flow actually be obscured? Especially when you contradictorily also say that explaining witness state with words is irrelevant. Your contradictions are appearing more commonly and growing increasingly.

Maybe your "tend to forget" might actually be a case of 'to hard to keep up with one's own contradictory views and beliefs'.

[ken]

ken: That is the reason I say you have the answers but you can not explain how you got them, and therefore you are unable to make yourself clearly understood .

But this is never about whether other people understand what I say or not.

What matters is that I understand.

Matters to who, dontaskme only?

Extremely separated, self-ish and self-centred talk.

The One united Self would never talk like that because that 'I' shares everything's interests equally. By the way this 'I' can and actually is Self centered that is because every thing actually centers around Thee 'I'. 'I' am because of every thing and 'I' exist for every thing.

How can you or others prove I do not understand - how can I prove to others that I do?

Through the use of the right 'words', language, that is how.

How do all people prove anything?

How did e=mc2 get proven?

How has all the things that have been proven been relayed to others?

I understand that from belief to clarity is the realisation that there is nothing more to understand.

[/quote]

I have no idea what this means.

[ken]

Truth is not the province of the few but of the many.

Is there an ultimate truth for all?

Can anyone know what it is?

Or might there be ever-evolving levels and facets of truth for each, never reaching the end (as the Moody Blues would say)?

The search for truth wouldn't even arise without the demand for it. Truth already stands with or without the demand for it. You are already timeless truth right now as aware aliveness. No human can create awareness, but it can discover it because it is it. The truth to be discovered is already here....Not really any facets of truth, truth is ever truth. The human who lives in time and space in it's search for timeless truth can be at different levels of discovering truth depending on their willingness to drop their sense of separate self, this can be done instantly and effortlessly in a moment or it can take until you are on your death bed...when separate self is dropped completely they are in ultimate truth that of the eternal witness....aka aware aliveness.

I say eternal because even a finite experience within awareness is equal to eternity.

So all people can actually get to 'witness state' by just dropping separated self. Is this like when some people say "letting go" of yourself?

I knew you would answer my questions somewhere in here. In direct relation to my question would have made it easier for me to find but anyway that was one of the answers I was hoping you would provide.

[ken]

I think you look too deeply for things that are already on the surface. My main point was, there is no shared consciousness. The rest is superfluous.

There is shared awareness though,consciousness is an aspect of awareness, it comes and goes in awareness which is prior to consciousness, so in a sense you are right we don't all share the same consciousness, however, the light looking from your eye is the same light looking through mine...that is awareness. It is the witness of the conscious self.
We might be conscious of different things, have ideas about different things, but without fundamental awareness we would not be able to recognise or communicate with each other, we would all be going around ignoring each other absorbed totally in our own unique realities. And this is not how life operates...life operates as one unitary action...with conscious reactions.

Your body is different, your thoughts, feeling, emotions, beliefs, your culture, conditioning, are all different to others, but what's looking from your eye is the same one as every body else. That looker is one being the many.

That one arises when the inside subject and the outside object merge as one and nobody is witnessing and there is nothing to be witnessed. It is a pure mirror, mirroring nothing and everything as one.

The only thing I might agree on is that self-awareness is a higher level of consciousness, but it still is an aspect of the consciousness that precedes it. Think back to your remotest memory. It wasn't so much self-awareness, as fragmented consciousness. Self-awareness developed out of that.

Do you have self-awareness? If so, how much do you have?

[Dalek Prime]

Enough to dwell on my eventual demise. How much more do I need? (Actually, I have been told by people who do know, that I am the most self-aware person they know of.)