Have you ever experienced anything that was not in consciousness? The obvious answer is in the question. It’s supposed to be no I haven’t, according to Spira. Now Tim has found out that he’s been wrong all these decades in assuming that because it is not true: it is not self evident. Once you see the world in this way you can get locked into it. These ideas are NOT SELF-EVIDENT. THEY’RE THEORY-LADEN. They’re an interpretation in the moment not given in the moment. All of it. This that you’re experiencing, sensations in consciousness. That’s a theory. It’s not self-evident. I’ve assumed there’s such a thing as consciousness. That doesn’t mean that I’m conscious: that’s self-evident. There is a thing called presence or pure consciousness called consciousness. IS THERE? THAT WAS A MOMENT FOR ME! IS THERE A THING CALLED CONSCIOUSNESS? Or is that a thing called a rarefication – that means you take something that isn’t a thing and imagine it’s a thing. I think that’s what I’ve done there. I think consciousness is an activity. It’s a WAY OF EXPERIENCING. I am experiencing this consciously. I’m also experiencing a whole lot unconsciously. I am experiencing some things with my psyche. It’s a way of experiencing. That’s a verb. It’s not a thing. And from that I’ve constructed this idea that there is a thing which is itself a ground of everything and is formless. I invite you to doubt that. I’m not saying that it’s wrong although I do think it’s wrong but all I want to get across in this video is to say that it’s an interpretation. It’s a thing, a presence called consciousness and within it arises sensations. Is that true? Is this raising my hand consciousness or is it a sensory experience of my hand, which is a common sense interpretation? THIS IS NOT AN APPEARANCE IN CONSCIOUSNESS A WORLD OF WHICH I AM CONSCIOUS. Let’s leave aside for the moment whether these 2 interpretations might be right and whether there might be other interpretations, which is what I’m exploring in my forthcoming book. That these are sensations arising in consciousness is NOT SELF-EVIDENT. IT’S AN INTERPRETATION OF THE EXPERIENCE. So if you take away the theory, the question, what you’re left with is Have you ever had an experience which wasn’t a conscious experience? And the obvious answer is no! That’s self evident and that’s what’s missing. When you take pure consciousness as a concept that you’ve applied to your It could be either. There’s a materialist interpretation and an idealist interpretation of this. Spiritual versus scientific is another way of looking at it together That’s why I’m excited about what it is that I’m working on. This idea that you’ve all heard in non-dual circles and spirituality that ALL EXISTS IN CONSCIOUSNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. It’s a theory about reality to evaluate as a theory, an argument, not a given. It doesn’t show that it claims that and that’s a big difference. When I saw that I was able to extricate myself from THAT WAY OF SEEING THINGS. I’m able to see things in a new and in my opinion a much better way and that’s what I’m going to share with you in the coming months. I’ve written 35 books and what is fundamental and in my most recent I’ll share as this philosophy unfolds.