Cognition: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
see [[shes pa]] | see [[shes pa]] | ||
In it's utimate aspect cognition is limitless due to it's being synonymous with pure awareness, nonconceived and without particulars of | In it's utimate aspect cognition is limitless due to it's being synonymous with pure awareness, nonconceived and without particulars of concepts or, discursive thinking. As such, this unlimited aspect ''as'' cognition is still not changed as a result of discursive thought, conceptuality or its particulars, suffering/not-suffering, [[samsara]] and [[nirvana]] notwithstanding as is recognized by their actual inseparability ([[dbyer med]]). This pure [[cognizance]], then, comes to be termed ''re''-cognition as it becomes reflective of it's own innate purity, and re-cognizes - of it's own inherent potentiality as particulars, or - all things. Nonetheless, all things...each and every single 'thing' whatsoever...are as spontaneous and nameless within and as themselves as they are even in their recognition as particulars, each with an infinite array of attributes or aspects which come to be defined as a direct result of such re-cognition and reflections. [[RWB]] | ||
Latest revision as of 12:35, 18 April 2007
see sems
see shes pa
In it's utimate aspect cognition is limitless due to it's being synonymous with pure awareness, nonconceived and without particulars of concepts or, discursive thinking. As such, this unlimited aspect as cognition is still not changed as a result of discursive thought, conceptuality or its particulars, suffering/not-suffering, samsara and nirvana notwithstanding as is recognized by their actual inseparability (dbyer med). This pure cognizance, then, comes to be termed re-cognition as it becomes reflective of it's own innate purity, and re-cognizes - of it's own inherent potentiality as particulars, or - all things. Nonetheless, all things...each and every single 'thing' whatsoever...are as spontaneous and nameless within and as themselves as they are even in their recognition as particulars, each with an infinite array of attributes or aspects which come to be defined as a direct result of such re-cognition and reflections. RWB