Originally Posted by ayar415
QUOTE 463 EXCERPT:
As Krishnamurti said, "Water cannot know what water is." So, what is this "truth"? Is it another form of "Ahamkara"? This was what Greenslade alluded to.
Yes, I know what Greenslade was alluding to.
What is the truth you ask? Let's apply common sense to what consciousness and the self are, as common sense/intelligence is the least path of resistence. One is able to tell the difference between what is true and ideology and beliefs that is not true, by one using common sense.
Consciousness is conscious of/focused on the physical NOW/the NOW that is in physical form/matter at all times, automatically, without any effort. Conciousness is both personal and impersonal, personal because consciousness is an aspect of the self, and impersonal because consciousness is focused on the NOW, that the NOW manifests itself as physical form/matter. This physical form/matter includes the physical body. The physical body is an aspect of the self, just like consciousness is an aspect of the self.
All the aspects of the self, which includes consciousness and the physical body are all aspects of the NOW. So, in essence, the now becomes everything, which includes consciousness, and the physical body so the NOW is conscious of all the NOW's physical existence/creations.
Awareness and perception are personal/individual extensions of consciousness. A person's self is always conscious, within reason, but the person may not always be aware of/perceive one's self and truth correctly, as the whole picture-This is the meaning behind Krishnamurti saying, "Water cannot know what water is" (water is not conscious, aware and does not perceive like we do)-a person cannot and does not know one's self and truth, when a person is not conscious and aware of one's self and truth as a whole/completely.
Now, that I have discussed consciousness, awareness, and perception in depth, I will discuss the self in depth in both Samkhya and Advaita Vedanta philosophies, because the self are totally different in both of them.
The self in Samkhya is called Purusa, this Purusa is consciousness and is only spiritual in nature, the physical is rejected and pushed to the side. The self of Samkhya, has both legs in the spiritual, which, I dare say is not true, and is imbalanced and lets one's imagination and subjective feelings, wants, needs, desires and conditioning run wild/rampant.
The Samkhya meaning of Ahamkara is simply egotism/an inflated sense of self. An inflated sense of self is the created/invented sense of self/thing and is a false sense of self. The Ahamkara Greenslade talks about is Greenslade's personal version of Ahamkara, and he uses Jung as an expert or authority figure to give his Ahamkara spiritual/psychological weight.
Saying that there is nothing that is true, and that tuth is only created by one's agenda and mind is the same as saying that a person cannot know truth, which includes knowing one's self. This creates issues that never end. If this is true then what is the purpose of all the spiritual practices, being conscious, and aware during meditation etc etc? Is the purpose of all this, is for us to be in our heads, in subjective lala land, thinking about the spiritual, when in reality, the spiritual is right in front of our eyes?
The self of Advaita Vedanta is called Atman, this Atman is Brahman (Brahman is god, oneness, the absolute, ultimate reality etc etc, and is everything), and Brahman is Atman. Atman has one leg in the spiritual, and one leg in the physical, and is balanced, since Brahman/Atman is both the spiritual and the physical. Brahman or god, oneness, the absolute, ultimate reality etc etc are different labels for the (same exact) NOW.
When people mix beliefs of the self of Samkhya's Purusa (as you can see people do on this forum) with beliefs of the Advaita Vedanta's self of Atman, confusion, contradictions and Cognitive Dissonance about the self, and therefore about everything else, are guaranteed.
to sum up, this truth and reality is that the spiritual and physical are one and the same reality. This truth is synonymous with reality, as truth and reality do not depend on our existence for it's existence. This truth/reality is universal, meaning truth/reality applies to everyone, not to just a select few, and magic and one being in subjective lala land are not required at all.