As far as I could understand it, and according to K., consciousness is linked to the material process, thought, going on in the brain and depends on the brain´s content to exist. Without content, at a psychological level, there is not consciousness either, only awareness which is beyond thought/ intellect and the same as intelligence not depending on acquired knowledge or memory to know and act, being the immediacy in knowing and acting its main feature.
For something to be considered as real, it has to exist by itself, non depending on anything to be, which is not the case regarding to consciousness and yet, being conscious of, it is also to know, to be aware.
My question is: what is this consciousness and where does it comes from? Is it related somehow to awareness?
Consciousness is the way one sees the world through his or her conditioning which is limited but awareness has no limitation and is not related to thought or memory… Consciousness as it is comes from knowledge and time where as awareness is timeless and only happens in the present.
If we can answer this question (and demonstrate that the answer is correct) - will that be a first in the history of humanity? How much is the Nobel prize worth again?
Or maybe I’m using the wrong definition of “consciousness”? If by consciousness, we mean what @Examiner said - then I suppose we’ve settled the question
Thank you. Yes, that´s how consciousness conditions us but, what is consciousness?
According to K., consciousness is created by the content which makes sense because as long as one doesn´t come across with some insult, for instance, one is not aware of it. It is only when one is insulted by someone else that awareness focuses on the insult which need not be a problem unless one mechanically reacts to it because then we are adding this insult to the content of the brain as an abstraction or thought, the whole movement of memory comes into action and awareness which, as you say, is not limited nor related to thought, gets caught in limitation or limits itself as what K calls “consciousness” which is not different from its content and, therefore, conditions the way we see the world and others from then on.
Thank you. Yes, I think that that definition of consciousness is wrong. What Examiner says is that consciousness conditions our way of seeing the world but this doesn´t define “consciousness”. What defines “consciousness” is awareness, don´t know why K. used these two words to name what is only one thing in different states, except for communication purposes. Ice is water. Is water ice?
Language is merely for communication ,it is not for anything else.
K was concerned with the transformation of the consciousness. Consciousness as it is has no value .
It was just an analogy, ice is water but water is not ice because ice has a structure that water hasn´t, it is not limited by anything whereas ice is.
Consciousness is awareness caught in certain limits but awareness is not consciousness because it is not limited.
I think that K was a great manipulator, he could because he knew pretty well brain and its functioning. We have to read between lines, otherwise reading or hearing him becomes as boring as looking at a piece of ice or even worse, we can make out of awareness a new god when, actually, it is in front of our noses, as someone put it in another threat.
I´ll take a look at it, thank you. Have a great weekend
Do you think that in this site there are those who pretend to break up these dialogues where people try to investigate consciousness and the self? I mean, what you said is an important, very significant finding. Sometimes, as listening to K´s talks, I wonder how he was allowed to say everything he said, probably because not many people could understand him or they thought nobody would understand him, but now it is different, more and more people, ordinary people, are ready to really understand which can be, for some others, a bit threatening. Don´t know, just thinking aloud.
I don’t think so because most people in this site are somewhat intelligent . We have problem with misunderstanding each other which is not unusual in chatrooms.
I think the problem , the main problem that we see in this site is not using Krishnamurti’s meanings of the important words ,that is why most of us are totally lost in this place…
Sorry, I´m new in this site. I had a quick look at the posts and I came across with some from you where you complain about this site being a difficult one, “old brains” creating confusion and so on. I might be wrong, though.
Yes, there are clever, educated people, skillful in playing with thoughts and concepts, they are the loudest too. Maybe this is the reaction of the intellect to what K had to say. It has been the king for quite a long time and now it is being dethroned and put in its place which means that intellect is pretty aware of what is going on in here, even though K didn´t talk to it but to something at a deeper level. It is interesting but not a game in any case. It is about us, our brains and lives, after all, not literature or what is commonly understood as philosophy. Piano, piano …
Right. Why should awareness be aware of itself? It is a redundancy, no need. It is and it is the very simplicity itself. It is thought what is complex and complicates everything.
Yes, because consciousness is thought. We look up to thought. We use thought to understand life. Psychologically thought is destroying everything. Thought is responsible for most of mental illnesses and depressions in this country. Unless there is a radical change in our thinking there cannot be any peace on the planet…
Exactly. That is why we have to understand our consciousness through awareness and put aside violence, fear etc to understand if there’s anything beyond our limited consciousness
