Looking at the Philosophy Project

Question

This post refers to the PHILOSOPHY PROJECT.

The purpose of this post is simply to provide a holding area for ideas.

We shall be looking around at all different kind of stuff to digest it. The ideas shall first be discussed under the COMMENTS section. Anything pertinent will then be added to this post.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A self (being) seems to be simply a “center of considerations” that it holds and continually outputs.

As the perception point identifies itself with knowledge through considerations, it gets fixed in its place, and loses it fluidity. Thus,  “I,” or the self, is generated.

All knowledge, regardless of its source, should be consistent. When there is inconsistency, there must be something unresolved that is underlying that inconsistency. Spiritual progress occurs when one starts to spot inconsistencies as they come up naturally and applies mindfulness to them until they dissolve.

As one starts to look mindfully at an inconsistency, it may lead to a chain of inconsistencies. Just keep looking more closely at the inconsistency that is at the “top of the stack.” It is very important to follow the 12 points of mindfulness.

“I” generates considerations (assessment, speculations, judgments, justifications, assumptions, etc.). These considerations are capable of filtering whatever “I” looks at. Taking responsibility means not letting one’s considerations color one’s perception and seeing things as they are.

Considerations seem to bring in the factor of “preservation,” whether it is the preservation of self, or the preservation of property. Justice seems to be concerned with such preservation.

Everything about this universe is in flux. Nothing stays the same. Everything is impermanent. Yet this whole system made up of impermanence seems to be permanently there. How can this inconsistency of “impermanence being permanently there” be explained?

Perception is there as long as manifestation is there. When manifestation is not there, there is no perception either. Thus, there can never be a perception of the state of non-manifestation. We would always perceive manifestation to be there. Ha ha… Q.E.D.

.

(1) An “identity” may simply be a tight “knot” of considerations that needs to be loosened up.

(2) The self is the “center of considerations” analogous to the “center of mass.”

(3) An identity may not affect the self if it is somewhere at the periphery of considerations.

(4) If the identity is closer to the center, it may appear as if the self is stuck with it.

(5) But there are simply a bunch of considerations knotted together, which needs to be loosened up.

(6) Being stuck is simply “some considerations locked into each other.”

.

There seems to be two different levels of knowledge:

(1) A level of knowledge before SELF comes into being.

(2) Another level of knowledge, which is generated when SELF starts to react to the previous level of knowledge.

Such a reaction may occur in chain resulting in ballooning of considerations. The only way to stop and reverse such ballooning of considerations would be to look non-judgmentally and see what is actually there.

Then one is no longer reacting to what is there. Instead one is now continually realizing what is there. This starts to deflate the ballooning considerations. In other words, the ego, or self, gradually starts to dissolve.

One can never predict where this process might lead to. :)

.

At death, the body disintegrates into its particles, and the identity that was the body is dissolved. Similarly, the observing and thinking part of the person (the living soul) also disintegrates into its particles (considerations), and the identity that was the person is also dissolved. That is my current understanding.

However, the particles remain and they can recombine into another “body plus living soul” combination. There is infinity of such recombination.

What are the ultimate laws underlying this disintegration and reintegration, I don’t know the details at the moment. But this seems to be going on forever like complex cycles of some eternal wave according to Hinduism.

Nirvana is something different altogether. It happens to a live soul. In my opinion, nirvana is like exteriorization from CONSIDERATIONS. It is the separation of perception-point from all its considerations. This is called giving up of all attachment in Hinduism. One then sees things as they are without any filters as in Buddhism. There is no individuality in terms of considerations. A perception point is the same as any other perception point. It does not add anything to what is observed or experienced.

Nothing arrives at Nirvana. it is what remains after all attachments are dissolved. I call it a perception-point. But even the perception-point dissolves at parinirvana by merging into its own manifestation… something like electron merging into positron.

Parinirvana is probably what occurs at death, where the live soul, that was already reduced to a completely detached perception-point, merges back into its own manifestation, extinguishing both. The laws of disintegration and reintegration are thus bypassed. But this is only my speculation.

The basis of this speculation is removal of all inconsistencies that I am aware of at this level.

.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

Comments

  • vinaire  On January 18, 2013 at 5:37 AM

    Physical space is enveloped in metaphysical space.

    Here Metaphysics is a study of perception.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On January 18, 2013 at 7:22 AM

      Yes – no argument… Just a momentary malaise over the mysticism in our lives; more than your definition of metaphysical, which is very good.

    • Chris Thompson  On January 18, 2013 at 7:30 AM

      . . . or held in suspension within.

  • vinaire  On January 20, 2013 at 6:57 AM

    In response to http://isene.me/2012/12/30/happy-new-year/#comment-27045:

    To me, awareness implies interaction among considerations. Then there are also considerations about interactions among considerations. Then there are considerations about those considerations that are about interactions among considerations, and so on.

    So, I don’t understand why one should stop at “awareness of awareness” and not continue to more degrees as in an infinite series or a fractal!

    .

  • vinaire  On April 4, 2013 at 4:42 AM

    “Ice – water – water vapor” represent three different aspects of the same substance. This is a sort of spectrum or gradient scale. All three of these forms may co-exist.

    Similarly, “body – mind – soul” seem to represent three different aspects of some fundamental reality. This is also a sort of spectrum or gradient scale. All three of them may co-exist. Parmatman may represent a still higher aspect, and matter may represent a still lower aspect.

    • Chris Thompson  On April 4, 2013 at 9:38 AM

      Vinaire: Similarly, “body – mind – soul” seem to represent three different aspects of some fundamental reality.

      Chris: I love this analogy. I wonder if it will hold up?

      • vinaire  On April 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM

        It is consistent with Hinduism.

        .

        • Chris Thompson  On April 4, 2013 at 10:29 PM

          Vinaire: It is consistent with Hinduism.

          Chris: Your comment is particularly interesting to me this week as I am looking at the set of, and the mechanics of religion. I don’t know enough about Hinduism and so take your word for it. I am curious how that concept of body-mind-soul is analogous to the 5 states of matter?

        • vinaire  On April 5, 2013 at 12:11 PM

          Hinduism simply says that all things are manifestations of the ultimate reality… rather than creation by some God.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On April 5, 2013 at 5:39 PM

          Vinay: ” . . . of the ultimate reality.”

          Chris: Why do they need to say ultimate? That is unknowable. (you better not laugh at me!)

        • vinaire  On April 5, 2013 at 7:49 PM

          Ha ha ha ha!

          .

%d bloggers like this: