Question about Vijnana and the correct view of Nama and Rupa So I understood Vinana to be activated only when there is an object present to be aware of, and I think that is why in dependent origination it is said Vijnana conditions nama rupa and nama rupa conditions vijnana. 

In other words without an object that we can be aware of with name and form (nama rupa) there cannot be consciousness. 

Based on this, it is clear that consciousness is an activity (of cognizing an object), not an entity that can "cognize" itself. Therefore I am confused in the Jhana about infinite consciousness, because it says consciousness is conscious of consciousness. 

How is that possible when consciousness only can be aware of an object, and not itself (because it is an activity, and not an entity as Vedanta says)?

Also, please correct me if the meaning of nama rupa that I gave (name and form) is not correct in Buddhism. This is the Vedanta view that I have read about. Can someone describe the difference between the Vedanta view of nama rupa and the Buddhist view of nama rupa?
The mind can only become aware of the mind in a subsequent moment. We get angry, and then know so. In moment 1, vinyana arises along with anger and delusion, aware only of the story. In moment 2, for a mindfulness practitioner, the vinyana arises with mindfulness and samadhi, abandoning the anger, unbonded to thought. 
In the infinite consciousness jhana there is only vinyana in its  unbonded state (bare and separate awareness). In the next moment, it is aware of itself from the previous moment. In the next moment it is aware if itself again. It is infinite it the moment to moment unended reflection, not the sense of its size.  Hope that helps!  Oh and yes there are tiny spaces of nothing between angry and mindful of it, but those are very hard to see. Once you can, you are well into vipassana, seeing there is no continuity or prevailing consciouness (anatta).