Just as everything else is a thought, pure consciousness is also a thought. It is a logical inference. It is not an experience to be achieved through Yoga, etc. More below.
Here are insightful sayings by an ancient enlightened master called Rishi Vasistha and a modern enlightened master Eckhart Tolle…
Consciousness minus conceptualization is the eternal Brahman the absolute; consciousness plus conceptualization is thought. -- Yoga Vasistha
Thinking and consciousness are not synonymous. Thinking is only a small aspect of consciousness. Thought cannot exist without consciousness, but consciousness does not need thought. -- Eckhart Tolle
If consciousness was a mere thought, it would shut down completely when you stop thinking.
This is especially the case in meditation or samadhi where thought ceases to function but I could clearly see that it was not the case.
During practice of thoughtless awareness or meditation, I was able to perceive things without any thought colouring them, or habitually labelling them as ‘refrigerator’ or ‘tree’ or ‘bird’.
In fact, there is better perception and clarity of things without the habitual thought and emotion process colouring them as per the filters of past conditioning.
One accepts things as they are and generates a measured response to them rather a volatile one due to the likes and dislikes stemming from mental-emotional patterns.
And this is often a major relief for the overworked mind due to its habit of chronic thinking and emoting without knowing when to switch off , take a break or relax. In extreme cases , this habit can result in psychosomatic diseases like migraines, blood pressure, heart problems, neurosis and psychosis.
You also gain peace and bliss as a bonus.
As Ramana Maharshi stated, “
Peace is absence of disturbance. The disturbance is due to the arising of thoughts in the individual, which is only the ego rising up from pure consciousness. To bring about peace means to be free from thoughts and to abide as pure consciousness. “
Thoughts and corresponding emotions, sensations appears in the background of consciousness. They have a beginning and an end, but consciousness remains whether there are mental-emotional patterns or not.
Thoughts are excellent as an instrument in solving practical problems of material life. But it becomes an issue when it is obsessed with satisfying never-ending desires and cravings, distinguished from needs and necessities of life.
As Krishna stated in the Gita,“
"To the man thinking about the objects (of the senses) arises attachment towards them; from attachment, arises longing; and from longing arises anger. From anger comes delusion; and from delusion loss of memory; from loss of memory, the ruin of discrimination; and on the ruin of discrimination, he perishes".
When you say "perception", there is someone perceiving. When you say "reveal", there is someone to whom it is being revealed to. And in both cases, we have duality.
For me to check this out, my identity has to stay intact through the experience and I have to observe. For me to come back here and relate the experience, I should have been observing and recording. But if I am observing, there is the observed too, and therefore we have duality.
If there is no observer in this state, how are you able to remember it and how is it your experience?
“Duality is due to the ‘seer’ and the ‘seen’.” (Sri Siddharameshwar Maharaj)
Being is pure awareness free from the subject object nexus. ( Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj)
The cognizing presence or naked awareness is nondual. The mind is dualistic.
The dualistic mind translates the naked seeing into the ‘seer’ and the ‘seen’, as in ‘I’ and the ‘car’. However the ‘I’ and ‘car’ are just thought-labels born in the dualistic mind.
Belief in ‘I’, ‘me’, ‘mine’, is the reference point that ‘creates’ duality. As long as there is a thought-label called 'I', there has to be a corresponding thought-label as the object.
In witnessing or awareness, there is no sense of ‘I’ – it is only in thinking there is. The 'I' is just a thought process. Thought creates the subject or perceiver as in ‘I’ and the object or 'perceived' as in ‘this’ or ‘that’.
The subject comes in the form of
'I', 'me', 'mine' and the object in the form of
'you' , 'That', 'yours'.
( As in 'I hate you', 'That belongs to me', 'This is mine, that is yours' respectively. )
The subject and the object go together and define each other. That which recognizes both the subjective and objective without being affected by both is pure consiousness or awareness or witnessing state.
Here the ‘I’ as a mere thought is different from the
true ‘I’ which is cognizing presence or awareness.
This is also distinguished as the selfish little self and the true
Self respectively, in Vedanta.