>>1224
If I recall correctly, Li Hongzhi called the
>size of awareness discussion
a false trail and dead end, because it's not how aware you are that matters, but your level of enlightenment to different truths.
It may sound like they're the same, but if I'm to dare doing a personal interpretation of the difference, it's that awareness is just what you have, anywhere. As a logical term it's a placeholder or parameter whose contents will change with enlightenment level, or lack thereof. So the quality of awareness is then irrelevant, you could be mostly unaware of what is going on while staying in deep trance, and you still know a higher truth than someone who's fully awake, as an example. Maybe "awareness" is better replaced with "intent" for more clarity.