/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20975402]

Books that expand consciousness?

[Anonymous No.20975409]

The Upanishads.

[Anonymous No.20975424]

>>20975402

doesn't kant set limits to consciousness though?

[Anonymous No.20975430]

>>20975402
The Beginning of Infinity. The only explanations that matter are the ones reach across the universe, despite the slowness of the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.20975436]

>>20975424
Not quite. The limits are contingent. Hence the question on whether the limits themselves can change remains open.

[Anonymous No.20975457]

>>20975402
____ __ ___ ________

[Anonymous No.20975464]

>>20975402
Husserl

[Anonymous No.20975470]

>>20975457
This anon knows

[Anonymous No.20975572]

[Anonymous No.20975617]

>>20975402
le morality goblin

[Anonymous No.20975722]

>>20975402
Recursivity and Contingency

[Anonymous No.20975833]

>>20975402
Kant, Plato, Spinoza, Kierkegaard, Tao Te Ching

>>20975409
And probably the Upanishads I never finished them

[Anonymous No.20976211]

>>20975402
The Bible
Sankara Source Book (all 6 volumes) by A. J. Alston
The Universal One by Walter Russell
The Periphysion by John the Scot Eriugena
Syrianus on Aristotles Metaphysics 3-4 and 13-14
Philosophy and Theurgy and Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth, both by Algis Uzdavinys

Basically good books regarding metaphysics. I can provide more if you are interested.

[Anonymous No.20976247]

>>20975402
The Upanishads.

[Anonymous No.20976259]

>>20976211
Go on.

[Anonymous No.20976341]

>>20976259
Full list here, up for 30 days:
https://easyupload.io/y1elzi

[Anonymous No.20976348]

>>20976341
Ok

[Anonymous No.20976387]

>>20975464
Explain?

[Anonymous No.20976695]

Picrel will show you the way

[Anonymous No.20976750]

>>20976695
Can't disagree more

[Anonymous No.20977004]

Reality Is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity

[Anonymous No.20977011]

Avatamsaka Sutra
Entry Into The Inconceivable

[Anonymous No.20977071]

>>20975402
Spinoza's Ethics
Marx's Paris Manuscripts
Probably Hegel too but I've barely begun to study him properly

[Anonymous No.20977082]

>>20975402
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

[Anonymous No.20977135]

>>20977071
Ethics is good and also good for thread

[Anonymous No.20977866]

>>20975409
Not that one.

[N E M O . !!GgBWHLRiayD No.20978505]

>>20975402


Conscioussness is expanded by affect, reason, and sense, not by books; affect expands & relevates reason, and sense, whilst reason rationalizes affect & sense, and acuminates sense.

Touch & smell are especially acuminated in Spring; smell & sight in Summer; sight & taste in Autumn; taste & hearing in Winter.

[N E M O . !!GgBWHLRiayD No.20978513]

>>20975402


Consciousness is expanded by affect, reason, and sense, not by books; affect expands & relevates reason, and sense, whilst reason rationalizes affect & sense, and acuminates sense.

Touch & smell are especially acuminated in Spring; smell & sight in Summer; sight & taste in Autumn; taste & hearing in Winter.

[Anonymous No.20978533]

>>20975402
science textbooks

[Anonymous No.20978536]

>>20975402

[Anonymous No.20978616]

All works by Jung, Heidegger, Mckenna, Carl Rogers, Marie-Louise von Franz, Allan Watts, Huxley

[Anonymous No.20978682]

>>20975402
Being and nothingness

[Anonymous No.20978689]

>>20978533
Being turned into a calculating machine is more a reduction of consciousness

[Anonymous No.20979019]

>>20976750
Why?

[Anonymous No.20979651]

>>20978682
Retard

[Anonymous No.20979675]

Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid

[Anonymous No.20979726]

>>20975402
The Critique of Pure Reason, The World as Will and Representation, On the Will in Nature

[Anonymous No.20979734]

>>20975424
You have to see the limits first and understand them fully in order to properly go beyond them

[Anonymous No.20979754]

Not a philosophical book, very scientific. Many, many cited experiments, some obvious, some outrageous. Read it in high school, you can, too.

[Anonymous No.20979769]

>>20979734
>You have to see the limits first and understand them fully in order to properly go beyond them
Nicely said.

[Anonymous No.20979944]

>>20975402
Consciousness is and always is essentially "expanded". Try this:
Place your attention an object of some kind around you, a sight, sound, sensation, whatever.
Notice the distance between you and it, you believe yourself to be limited and contained somewhere in a body or head "here" and the object somewhere "over/out there".
Then observe the object again, but this time notice the attention — which is simply focused consciousness.
And inquire, while suspending thought, "how distant is the object from the attention?"

If you didn't get the point, don't worry. This "expansion of consciousness" is a kind of removal rather than addition of knowledge. So it doesn't always click upon first try for many people.
I also know this probably isn't what you meant by "expand consciousness", but it's indispensable to know the nature of consciousness or of the mind (whatever terms are most agreeable to you) before you can approach things as they are with a truly congruent discernment.

[Anonymous No.20979949]

>>20975402
Consciousness is and always is essentially "expanded". Try this:
Place your attention on an object of some kind around you, a sight, sound, sensation, whatever.
Notice the distance between you and it, you believe yourself to be limited and contained somewhere in a body or head "here" and the object somewhere "over/out there".
Then observe the object again, but this time notice the attention — which is simply focused consciousness.
And inquire, while suspending thought, "how distant is the object from the attention?"

If you didn't get the point, don't worry. This "expansion of consciousness" is a kind of removal rather than addition of knowledge. So it doesn't always click upon first try for many people.
I also know this probably isn't what you meant by "expand consciousness", but it's indispensable to know the nature of consciousness or of the mind (whatever terms are most agreeable to you) before you can approach things as they are with a truly congruent discernment.

[Voluntary Fool No.20980433]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM

[Anonymous No.20980463]

>>20975402
The Marriage of Heaven and Hell by William Blake
Les Chants de Maldoror by Comte de Lautreamont
All Things Are Possible by Lev Shestov
The Fragments of Heraclitus

[Anonymous No.20980475]

>>20975402
The Bible

[Anonymous No.20980577]

>>20979949
That is a really cool thought, I have never thought about that.
But to be honest it sounds like something you'd just say to sound intelligent, nothing that bears on the real world.
>This "expansion of consciousness" is a kind of removal rather than addition of knowledge.
Bingo, but thanks for posting this, it's still really cool.
>it's indispensable to know the nature of consciousness or of the mind
This is a keen observation, but again, I see little applicable value. However I still might not understand.

[Anonymous No.20980616]

>>20975402
It's an epiphenomena of no real interest in itself, start with physics

[Anonymous No.20980627]

>>20975572
UPDOOTED!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.20980806]

>>20980577
It's not so much a thought, but one of many ways of pointing to a kind of experience or shift in perception. I assume from your reply that you didn't quite "get it" clearly, and I don't say that with any arrogance or condescension. But a clear glimpse/insight into the "non-dual" and "non-self" nature of consciousness is usually a very profound experience, and is usually a deeply peaceful or even blissful "state".
And for what it's worth, while I absolutely am not claiming to be fully "enlightened" or some shit as in Buddhism etc, I am speaking from experience.
>But to be honest it sounds like something you'd just say to sound intelligent, nothing that bears on the real world.
>I see little applicable value.
It may not seem to have much direct value on the world but it can have immense value for our experience of the world, which is all we ever know, and how we function in the world. I will take back "indispensable" though, might be a little overkill.
>However I still might not understand.
It can only be truly understood by realizing the nature of that "I" that doesn't understand. This is also partly what I mean by the "removal" of knowledge. I can say that the ego/self is an illusion and consciousness is unlimited etc etc, and you can believe all that and conceptualize it but that probably won't do anything. What actually happens is that the thoughts, beliefs, memories, etc that construct an "I" and a seemingly contracted consciousness drop away or are seen through, leaving just consciousness as it really is. This might sound kinda spooky or whatever not knowing what "you'll be like" in that state but what I'm talking about is actually already the case, all that happens is the recognition of it.

[Anonymous No.20981074]

>>20980806
>Then observe the object again, but this time notice the attention — which is simply focused consciousness.
I believe the focused consciousness is perception, I understand that it would be very hard to explain this if this isn't the case.
>"how distant is the object from the attention?"
When you say "attention" are you talking about the perception of the object? Or the perceiver? Or something entirely different?
Are you explaining the "attention" given to an object as an object itself, giving it a definite location, or point of emittance?
>"non-dual" and "non-self" nature of consciousness
Sorry for so many questions, I am desperately trying to understand what you mean. But, when you say "non-dual" "non-self" are these two states of perception? I.E. non-dual refers to a state wherein you view the world from the point of self (direct interaction) and non-self refers to a state wherein you perceive the object, and thus your perception changes into (object interacting with you)
This is extremely interesting, though, I feel like I am on the precipice of a new understanding, anon.

[Anonymous No.20981145]

>>20978689
There isn’t a single calculation in an anatomy textbook

[Anonymous No.20982078]

>>20981074
Apologies for the long reply, it's about as concise as I can be.
What I meant by attention is the awareness/knowing/experiencing of any particular object(s) — like the focus on these words, and by "noticing the attention" I mean becoming aware of that awareness/knowing/experiencing of the object. What can then happen is a kind of "collapse" of the subject-object distinction, the sense of perceiver and perceived falls away and all that's present is perceiving. In other words, that which is perceived perceives itself.

The usual apparent experience is like our attention kind of beams or stretches out from back here where we are somewhere behind our eyes in our heads over to the object out there, whether sight, sound, sensation, thought, etc, and there appears to be a kind of boundary. What I'm getting at is that the boundary and "beaming" or "stretching" of attention from "here to there" is an illusion. Attention/awareness/consciousness and the object(s) aren't discrete, the attention is actually "out there" as the object, everything appears "in" consciousness/awareness — this is the non-dual part. And the supposed individual "I" we normally think we are that claims to own that attention is also an illusion — this is non-self, the ego/self/I isn't a discrete entity but a reification of and misidentification with thoughts and feelings, i.e. there's only attention, there's no "my" attention. Seeing, hearing, feeling, thinking etc, continues to happen as it always did, it just doesn't happen to or for the imaginary "I". So there's no seer seeing or hearer hearing etc, there's just seeing and hearing. All of this is already your experience, it's just obscured.

Feel free to ask more questions. The thread might die before I get time to reply though. Unfortunately my knowledge on this is from all over, so I can't think of the right book to recommend to you. An anon recommended Nonduality by David Loy above. I haven't read it but it could be a decent place to start. I can perhaps recommend Rupert Spira's new book "You Are the Happiness You Seek" as an easy introduction, but it's not technical or analytical, you may have to wade through and suspend judgement on some of his terminology and vibe if you dislike spiritual language. I'm not a big fan of Sam Harris generally but this talk is a good concise overview in a modern secular context if you'd prefer something like that: https://youtu.be/0PTAc4WqZAg?t=193