user16817: In advaita vedanta, consciousness is the self. Consciousness has 2 modes: it can be pure consciousness, and it is described as "being aware of being aware" or the "I that I am knows that I am"; while the other mode of consciousness is consciousness entangled in objects, like feelings and thoughts.
Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"? Or is the unconditioned the cessation of consciousness, as Buddhism sees consciousness as impermanent and not self?
They said if consciousness was not aware of itself, none of us would know that we are aware. I have this problem, my friend had the same, so we wanted to ask you if you could help us out. 

user16323: In Advaita, pure consciousness (Turiya) is said to underlie the other three states, ie waking, dreaming and deep sleep. So pure consciousness is not involved in (waking) sense consciousness.
The Buddhist suttas only deal with waking sense-consciousness, in terms of the 6 ayatana.
Some point to "consciousness without surface" as a sort of "pure consciousness", but this interpretation appears speculative. See Sujatos blog for example:
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/vinna%E1%B9%87a-is-not-nibbana-really-it-just-isn%E2%80%99t/

user2493: Caveat:

Restricting the question to only "What is the unconditioned?", I will
offer an answer which is undoubtedly in conflict with much of
prevailing thought within the community. As such, it is likely to
offend. It is not my intention to offend. It is my intention to help
others who are suffering to attain nibbana. The total end of
suffering. I offer this answer because I have a very strong intuition
that it is true and that its consideration will help others to put an
end to suffering.
What do I mean by true?
I mean it is in accordance with an internally consistent
interpretation of the Buddha's teachings which has led this
practitioner to experience nibbana.

"Dependent origination" seems to be identical to the modern concept of "emergence".
It is a way of thinking about change in systems that is an alternative to "cause and effect".
Instead of thinking "A causes B", you think "A creates the conditions which increase the probability that B will emerge".
If B emerges, we say that B was "conditioned by A".
Here is a good description:
YouTube: Systems Innovation: Causality (Sep 25, 2016)
Consider 3 observed phenomena:

X is conditioned by A.
Y is conditioned by A.
Z is NOT conditioned by A.

One way to perceive (3) is "Z is unconditioned";
More precisely, "Z is unconditioned by A".
In this way of thinking, nothing can truly be said to be "unconditioned".
It can only be said to be unconditioned by some variable.
(I seem to recall the Buddha saying something like "Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."  This is consistent with the modern concept of "systems thinking" from which the concept of "emergence" emerged.).
For example: The Buddha cautioned us that all predictive models (saṅkhārās) should be considered to be
For example: The Buddha cautioned us that all predictive models (saṅkhārās) should be considered to be

impermanent (aniccā)
subject to the discomfort of misprediction (dukkhā) and that
the BEST predictive models


the ones which allow us to see things are they actually are (yathabhutañanadassana);
the ones which are more permanent and less subject to the suffering of misprediction;
the ones, being more accurate / less prone to misprediction; enable us to experience more certainty / less certainty; move through the world with equanimity;
the ones which enable us to move through the world with equanimity

are those that are unconditioned by "self-absorption in the narrative". (anattā)
This is the meaning I attribute to:

sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā
sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā
sabbe dhammā anattā

i.e. If you genuinely want to attain nibbana, the total end of suffering, give attention to

unconditioning the narratives you create in your mind about the world (your sensory-motor predictive model of the world) from self-absorption

and

strive instead to see things are they actually are (yathabhutañanadassana);

I have found an effective incantation for this purpose to be:

In the seen, there is only the seen.
In the heard, there is only the heard.
In the felt, there is ONLY the felt.
In the cognized, there is ONLY the cognized.

(borrowed from the Bjahia Sutta and slightly altered)
In summary,
if you make the choice to

"uncondition" the narratives you construct to describe the world
from "self-absorption" (sabbe dhammā anattā)
in favor of
striving to "see things as they actually are" (yathabhutañanadassana)
you will
cease responding to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging.

To not respond to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging is to end suffering.
Why Is this true?
Suffering is the choice to cling to a predictive model of the world which the misprediction signal has informed us to be incorrect.
Pain is inevitable but suffering is a choice.
What choice?
The choice to cling to a view of the world we know to be false.
The choice to lie to ourselves.
Suffering is a word we use to describe the internal conflict we feel between

The part of us that wants to know the truth and
The part of us that wants to cling to the lie.

if we make the choice to

"uncondition" the narratives we construct to describe the world
from "self-absorption" (sabbe dhammā anattā)
in favor of
striving to "see things as they actually are" (yathabhutañanadassana)
we will
not respond to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging.
AND
We will, instead,
accept and embrace the truth that

I. all predictive models are impermanent. They are subject to change if they fail to accurately predict sensory experience.
II. the first arrow (misprediction) is a notification that our predictive model is incorrect
Instead of clinging, we will respond to the first arrow by

Naming it “misprediction”
and
Responding to “misprediction” by seeking to investigate with the intention of finding the error and correcting it. i.e. seeking “insight”

By unconditioning "narrative construction" from "self-absorption" in this fashion, the first arrow (whose name is “misprediction”) will never again be followed by the second arrow (whose name is avijjā)
Recall that avijjā (the choice to ignore/avoid unpleasant truths) is the foundational condition for the 12 links of dependent origination.
When avijjā ceases, the entire chain which sustains suffering collapses.
Again. This interpretation is “internally consistent”.
This is why nibbana is sometimes called "the unconditioned".
Nibbana is what we experience when we choose to uncondition the narratives we construct from the "self-absorption" which gives rise to the cloud of delusion which prevents us from seeing the world the way it actually is.

user471: 
OP: Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"? Or is the unconditioned
the cessation of consciousness, as Buddhism sees consciousness as
impermanent and not self?

The short answer is NO.
In MN 38, the Buddha explained that there are only six types of consciousness dependent on the six sense media and their sense objects. There's no other type of consciousness beyond this. And they are all conditioned.
In this question, the notion of "consciousness without surface" (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ - MN 49) or some kind of pure consciousness beyond the six sense media, was debunked as a mistranslation. It actually refers to Nibbana, the unconditioned.
All types of consciousness and even the "luminous mind" (pabhassara citta - AN 1.51-52) - the fundamental pure state of mind, are all conditioned and impermanent. Please see this question on whether "luminous mind" is conditioned or unconditioned.
According to SN 35.23, the six sense media and their sense objects is called "The All", and there's nothing beyond this range. Please see this question on "The All".
According to SN 35.205, the lute makes nice music. But when you break it down to its constituent parts, you cannot find music. Similarly, the self is just a mental idea that arises when the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, consciousness, mental formations) work together. When you break the five aggregates down to its constituent parts, the self cannot be found. This is completely opposite to Advaita which states that in the wake state, dream state and deep sleep state of many beings, you have the same one "I", eternal witness, true self, pure consciousness (see Advaita text Aparokshanubhuti 31-32, 56-58).
Nibbana is that which the mind experiences when it is free of defilements. It is not a state of mind or consciousness. It is certainly not a self or a witness. AN 9.34 states that nothing is felt or sensed about Nibbana and that's precisely why it is blissful. The absence of suffering (dukkha) is blissful. This answer explains more on Nibbana and bliss. This question asks whether Nibbana lies within "The All".
According to Iti 44, Nibbana-element without residue left describes the Arahant after passing away, based on Ven. Thanissaro's footnote. This means that all five aggregates, including consciousness, stop operating completely. And from "The All", we know that there's no other consciousness than the ones arising dependent on the six sense media and their sense objects (MN 38).
Nibbana-element with residue left refers to the living Arahant whose five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, consciousness, mental formations) are functioning without craving, clinging and defilements. The flames of passion, aversion and delusion are no more burning for the living Arahant. But the five aggregates function without clinging, like glowing embers, for the living Arahant. This question discusses clinging aggregates vs. non-clinging aggregates. When the Arahant passes away, the glowing embers are put out (Nibbana-element without residue left).

user295: 
OP: In advaita vedanta, consciousness is the self.

In Buddhism, it is considered all conditioned and unconditioned is not-self/non-self. "


sabbe dhammā anattā


Therefore, there nothing that can be identified as a self. Not even Nirvana.

OP: Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"?

No. In Buddhism consciousness is just to knows what is felt.


Then there remains only consciousness, purified and cleansed.What does one know [cognize]with that consciousness?
One knows, „It is pleasant.‟
One knows. „It is painful.‟
One knows, „It is neutral.‟


Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta. See below for a full quote of the section on consciousness.
What is unconditioned in Nirvana.


"There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned."
— Ud 8.3


Source: Nibbana

OP: They said if consciousness was not aware of itself, none of us would know that we are aware.

In Buddhism, consciousness is part of the 6 sense bases. It knows what you have come in contact with. 


On account of a contact that is felt ... conditioned by that contact ...


Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta. See the full section quoted below.


(iv) The six groups of contacts are to be understood, thus it is said, and in what connection is this
    said?
Dependent on eye and forms,
    eye-consciousness arises. When the three meet, there is contact.
Dependent on ear and sounds,
    ear-consciousness arises. When the three meet, there is contact.
...
The six groups of contacts are to be understood, thus it is said, and it is said in this connection.


Cha Chakka Sutta



The consciousness element
Then there remains only consciousness, purified and cleansed.What does one know [cognize]with that consciousness?
One knows, „It is pleasant.‟
One knows. „It is painful.‟
One knows, „It is neutral.‟
On account of a contact that is felt as pleasant, there arises a pleasant feeling.
When one feels a pleasant feeling one understands, „I feel a pleasant feeling.‟
    One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as pleasant,
    the pleasant feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟
On account of a contact that is felt as painful, there arises a painful feeling.
When one feels a painful feeling one understands, „I feel a painful feeling.‟
One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as painful, the painful
    feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟
On account of a contact that is felt as neither pain nor pleasure, there arises a neutral feeling.
When one feels a neutral feeling one understands, „I feel a neutral feeling.‟
One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as neither painful nor
    pleasant, the neutral feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟


Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta

16817: <p>In advaita vedanta, consciousness is the self. Consciousness has 2 modes: it can be pure consciousness, and it is described as "being aware of being aware" or the "I that I am knows that I am"; while the other mode of consciousness is consciousness entangled in objects, like feelings and thoughts.</p>

<p>Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"? Or is the unconditioned the cessation of consciousness, as Buddhism sees consciousness as impermanent and not self?</p>

<p>They said if consciousness was not aware of itself, none of us would know that we are aware. I have this problem, my friend had the same, so we wanted to ask you if you could help us out. </p>
 16323: <p>In Advaita, pure consciousness (Turiya) is said to underlie the other three states, ie waking, dreaming and deep sleep. So pure consciousness is not involved in (waking) sense consciousness.</p>
<p>The Buddhist suttas only deal with waking sense-consciousness, in terms of the 6 ayatana.
Some point to &quot;consciousness without surface&quot; as a sort of &quot;pure consciousness&quot;, but this interpretation appears speculative. See Sujatos blog for example:
<a href="https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/vinna%E1%B9%87a-is-not-nibbana-really-it-just-isn%E2%80%99t/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/vinna%E1%B9%87a-is-not-nibbana-really-it-just-isn%E2%80%99t/</a></p>
 2493: <p>Caveat:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Restricting the question to only &quot;What is the unconditioned?&quot;, I will
offer an answer which is undoubtedly in conflict with much of
prevailing thought within the community. As such, it is likely to
offend. It is not my intention to offend. It is my intention to help
others who are suffering to attain nibbana. The total end of
suffering. I offer this answer because I have a very strong intuition
that it is true and that its consideration will help others to put an
end to suffering.</p>
<p>What do I mean by true?</p>
<p>I mean it is in accordance with an internally consistent
interpretation of the Buddha's teachings which has led this
practitioner to experience nibbana.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>&quot;Dependent origination&quot; seems to be identical to the modern concept of &quot;emergence&quot;.</p>
<p>It is a way of thinking about change in systems that is an alternative to &quot;cause and effect&quot;.</p>
<p>Instead of thinking &quot;A causes B&quot;, you think &quot;A creates the conditions which increase the probability that B will emerge&quot;.</p>
<p>If B emerges, we say that B was &quot;conditioned by A&quot;.</p>
<p>Here is a good description:<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_ykeBfd5ds&amp;t=525s" rel="nofollow noreferrer">YouTube: Systems Innovation: Causality (Sep 25, 2016)</a></p>
<p>Consider 3 observed phenomena:</p>
<ol>
<li>X is conditioned by A.</li>
<li>Y is conditioned by A.</li>
<li>Z is NOT conditioned by A.</li>
</ol>
<p>One way to perceive (3) is &quot;Z is unconditioned&quot;;</p>
<p>More precisely, &quot;Z is unconditioned by A&quot;.</p>
<p>In this way of thinking, nothing can truly be said to be &quot;unconditioned&quot;.</p>
<p>It can only be said to be unconditioned <em><strong>by some variable.</strong></em></p>
<p>(I seem to recall the Buddha saying something like &quot;Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else.&quot;  This is consistent with the modern concept of &quot;systems thinking&quot; from which the concept of &quot;emergence&quot; emerged.).</p>
<p>For example: The Buddha cautioned us that all predictive models (saṅkhārās) should be considered to be</p>
<p>For example: The Buddha cautioned us that all predictive models (saṅkhārās) should be considered to be</p>
<ol>
<li>impermanent (aniccā)</li>
<li>subject to the discomfort of misprediction (dukkhā) and that</li>
<li>the BEST predictive models</li>
</ol>
<ul>
<li>the ones which allow us to see things are they actually are (yathabhutañanadassana);</li>
<li>the ones which are more permanent and less subject to the suffering of misprediction;</li>
<li>the ones, being more accurate / less prone to misprediction; enable us to experience more certainty / less certainty; move through the world with equanimity;</li>
<li>the ones which enable us to move through the world with equanimity</li>
</ul>
<p>are those that are <em><strong>unconditioned</strong></em> by &quot;self-absorption in the narrative&quot;. (anattā)</p>
<p>This is the meaning I attribute to:</p>
<ol>
<li>sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā</li>
<li>sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā</li>
<li>sabbe dhammā anattā</li>
</ol>
<p>i.e. If you genuinely want to attain nibbana, the total end of suffering, give attention to</p>
<ol>
<li><em><strong>unconditioning</strong></em> the narratives you create in your mind about the world (your sensory-motor predictive model of the world) from self-absorption</li>
</ol>
<p>and</p>
<ol start="2">
<li>strive instead to see things are they actually are (yathabhutañanadassana);</li>
</ol>
<p>I have found an effective incantation for this purpose to be:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the seen, there is only the seen.<br />
In the heard, there is only the heard.<br />
In the felt, there is ONLY the felt.<br />
In the cognized, there is ONLY the cognized.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(borrowed from the Bjahia Sutta and slightly altered)</p>
<p>In summary,
if you make the choice to</p>
<ol>
<li>&quot;uncondition&quot; the narratives you construct to describe the world
from &quot;self-absorption&quot; (sabbe dhammā anattā)
in favor of</li>
<li>striving to &quot;see things as they actually are&quot; (yathabhutañanadassana)<br />
you will</li>
<li>cease responding to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging.</li>
</ol>
<p>To not respond to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging is to end suffering.</p>
<p><em>Why Is this true?</em></p>
<p>Suffering is the choice to cling to a predictive model of the world which the misprediction signal has informed us to be incorrect.</p>
<p>Pain is inevitable but suffering is a choice.</p>
<p><em>What choice?</em></p>
<p>The choice to cling to a view of the world we know to be false.</p>
<p>The choice to lie to ourselves.</p>
<p>Suffering is a word we use to describe the internal conflict we feel between</p>
<ol>
<li>The part of us that wants to know the truth and</li>
<li>The part of us that wants to cling to the lie.</li>
</ol>
<p>if we make the choice to</p>
<ol>
<li>&quot;uncondition&quot; the narratives we construct to describe the world
from &quot;self-absorption&quot; (sabbe dhammā anattā)
in favor of</li>
<li>striving to &quot;see things as they actually are&quot; (yathabhutañanadassana)
we will</li>
<li>not respond to the first arrow (misprediction) by clinging.
AND
We will, instead,</li>
<li>accept and embrace the truth that</li>
</ol>
<p>I. all predictive models are impermanent. They are subject to change if they fail to accurately predict sensory experience.</p>
<p>II. the first arrow (misprediction) is a notification that our predictive model is incorrect</p>
<p>Instead of clinging, we will respond to the first arrow by</p>
<ol>
<li>Naming it “misprediction”<br />
and</li>
<li>Responding to “misprediction” by seeking to investigate with the intention of finding the error and correcting it. i.e. seeking “insight”</li>
</ol>
<p>By unconditioning &quot;narrative construction&quot; from &quot;self-absorption&quot; in this fashion, the first arrow (whose name is “misprediction”) will never again be followed by the second arrow (whose name is avijjā)</p>
<p>Recall that avijjā (the choice to ignore/avoid unpleasant truths) is the foundational condition for the 12 links of dependent origination.
When avijjā ceases, the entire chain which sustains suffering collapses.</p>
<p>Again. This interpretation is “internally consistent”.</p>
<p><em><strong>This is why nibbana is sometimes called &quot;the unconditioned&quot;.</strong></em></p>
<p>Nibbana is what we experience when we choose to <em><strong>uncondition</strong></em> the narratives we construct from the &quot;self-absorption&quot; which gives rise to the cloud of delusion which prevents us from seeing the world the way it actually is.</p>
 471: <blockquote>
<p><strong>OP:</strong> Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the &quot;unconditioned&quot;? Or is the unconditioned
the cessation of consciousness, as Buddhism sees consciousness as
impermanent and not self?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The short answer is NO.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 38</a>, the Buddha explained that there are only six types of consciousness dependent on the six sense media and their sense objects. There's no other type of consciousness beyond this. And they are all conditioned.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30691/471">this question</a>, the notion of &quot;consciousness without surface&quot; (<em>viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ</em> - <a href="https://suttacentral.net/mn49/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 49</a>) or some kind of pure consciousness beyond the six sense media, was debunked as a mistranslation. It actually refers to Nibbana, the unconditioned.</p>
<p>All types of consciousness and even the &quot;luminous mind&quot; (<em>pabhassara citta</em> - <a href="https://suttacentral.net/an1.51-60/en/thanissaro" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 1.51-52</a>) - the fundamental pure state of mind, are all conditioned and impermanent. Please see <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/25210/471">this question</a> on whether &quot;luminous mind&quot; is conditioned or unconditioned.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 35.23</a>, the six sense media and their sense objects is called &quot;The All&quot;, and there's nothing beyond this range. Please see <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30382/471">this question</a> on &quot;The All&quot;.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 35.205</a>, the lute makes nice music. But when you break it down to its constituent parts, you cannot find music. Similarly, the self is just a mental idea that arises when the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, consciousness, mental formations) work together. When you break the five aggregates down to its constituent parts, the self cannot be found. This is completely opposite to Advaita which states that in the wake state, dream state and deep sleep state of many beings, you have the same one &quot;I&quot;, eternal witness, true self, pure consciousness (see Advaita text <a href="http://www.shankaracharya.org/aparokshanubhuti.php" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Aparokshanubhuti 31-32, 56-58</a>).</p>
<p>Nibbana is that which the mind experiences when it is free of defilements. It is not a state of mind or consciousness. It is certainly not a self or a witness. <a href="https://suttacentral.net/an9.34/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 9.34</a> states that nothing is felt or sensed about Nibbana and that's precisely why it is blissful. The absence of <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/41062/471">suffering (<em>dukkha</em>)</a> is blissful. <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/45283/471">This answer</a> explains more on Nibbana and bliss. <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/31046/471">This question</a> asks whether Nibbana lies within &quot;The All&quot;.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.042-049x.irel.html#iti-044" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Iti 44</a>, Nibbana-element without residue left describes the Arahant after passing away, based on Ven. Thanissaro's <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.028-049.than.html#fn-044.2" rel="nofollow noreferrer">footnote</a>. This means that all five aggregates, including consciousness, stop operating completely. And from &quot;The All&quot;, we know that there's no other consciousness than the ones arising dependent on the six sense media and their sense objects (<a href="https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 38</a>).</p>
<p>Nibbana-element with residue left refers to the living Arahant whose five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, consciousness, mental formations) are functioning without craving, clinging and defilements. The flames of passion, aversion and delusion are no more burning for the living Arahant. But the five aggregates function without clinging, like glowing embers, for the living Arahant. <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/31154/471">This question</a> discusses clinging aggregates vs. non-clinging aggregates. When the Arahant passes away, the glowing embers are put out (Nibbana-element without residue left).</p>
 295: <blockquote>
  <p><strong>OP: In advaita vedanta, consciousness is the self.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>In Buddhism, it is considered all conditioned and unconditioned is not-self/non-self. "</p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>sabbe dhammā anattā</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>Therefore, there nothing that can be identified as a self. Not even Nirvana.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>OP: Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"?</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>No. In Buddhism consciousness is just to knows what is felt.</p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>Then there remains only consciousness, purified and cleansed.What does one know [cognize]with that consciousness?</p>
    
    <p>One knows, „It is pleasant.‟</p>
    
    <p>One knows. „It is painful.‟</p>
    
    <p>One knows, „It is neutral.‟</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.17-Dhatu-Vibhanga-S-m140-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta</a>. See below for a full quote of the section on consciousness.</p>

<p>What is unconditioned in Nirvana.</p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>"There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned."</p>
    
    <p>— Ud 8.3</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca3/nibbana.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Nibbana</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>OP: They said if consciousness was not aware of itself, none of us would know that we are aware.</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>In Buddhism, consciousness is part of the 6 sense bases. It knows what you have come in contact with. </p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>On account of a contact that is felt ... conditioned by that contact ...</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.17-Dhatu-Vibhanga-S-m140-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta</a>. See the full section quoted below.</p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>(iv) The six groups of contacts are to be understood, thus it is said, and in what connection is this
    said?</p>
    
    <p>Dependent on eye and forms,
    eye-consciousness arises. When the three meet, there is contact.</p>
    
    <p>Dependent on ear and sounds,
    ear-consciousness arises. When the three meet, there is contact.</p>
    
    <p>...</p>
    
    <p>The six groups of contacts are to be understood, thus it is said, and it is said in this connection.</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/26.6-Chachakka-S-m148-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cha Chakka Sutta</a></p>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p><strong>The consciousness element</strong></p>
    
    <p>Then there remains only consciousness, purified and cleansed.What does one know [cognize]with that consciousness?</p>
    
    <p>One knows, „It is pleasant.‟</p>
    
    <p>One knows. „It is painful.‟</p>
    
    <p>One knows, „It is neutral.‟</p>
    
    <p>On account of a contact that is felt as pleasant, there arises a pleasant feeling.</p>
    
    <p>When one feels a pleasant feeling one understands, „I feel a pleasant feeling.‟
    One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as pleasant,
    the pleasant feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟</p>
    
    <p>On account of a contact that is felt as painful, there arises a painful feeling.</p>
    
    <p>When one feels a painful feeling one understands, „I feel a painful feeling.‟</p>
    
    <p>One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as painful, the painful
    feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟</p>
    
    <p>On account of a contact that is felt as neither pain nor pleasure, there arises a neutral feeling.</p>
    
    <p>When one feels a neutral feeling one understands, „I feel a neutral feeling.‟</p>
    
    <p>One understands, „With the cessation of that same contact that is felt as neither painful nor
    pleasant, the neutral feeling conditioned by that contact ceases, it is stilled.‟</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.17-Dhatu-Vibhanga-S-m140-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta</a></p>
