Buddhism denied the reality of self in order to emphasize an ethical attitude towards an impermanent world characterized by suffering born of ignorance. Samkhya affirmed the existence of a plurality of selves and the reality of the world for so long as spirit (purusa) remained confused with nature or original materiality (prakrti). Vedanta asserted the identity of the individual soul (atman, jivatman) with the universal soul (brahman, paramatman), while denying the reality of the phenomenal world. Yet underlying these divergent philosophies, there remained a common ground that no subtlety of argumentation could efface. This was the concrete experience of the human body… in its relation to the external world. Thus, despite the important points of divergence between the metaphysics of these three schools, the identity of microcosm and macrocosm – already evoked in brahmanic speculations of the identification of the fire altar with the body of the cosmic man (Purusa – Prajapati) and the universe – was constantly undermining the philosophical distinctions drawn between them. In the end, “wet” experience would win out over “dry” philosophical speculation.

David Gordon White

I remember all the different kinds of years.
Angry, or brokenhearted, or afraid.
I remember feeling like that
walking up the mountain along the dirt path
to my broken house on the island.
And long years of waiting in Massachusetts.
The winter walking and hot summer walking.
I finally fell in love with all of it:
dirt, night, rock and far views.
It’s strange that my heart is as full
now as my desire was then.

Linda Gregg

click to enlarge

In the other states there is identification with the modifications of the
mind.
Patañjali I, 4

Other men fail to notice what they do when they are awake, just as they forget what they do when asleep.
Heraclitus