Category Archives: KHTK

Knowing How to Know

Considerations and Free Will

Reference: The Nature of Consideration

Reference: On Will by Geir Isene

To me, the bottom line is NOTHINGNESS, and that means an absence of all considerations. Thus, there exists infinite choice at the outset. Any limitation on choice will then come from a prior consideration.

Geir defines “will” as “exercise of choices.” Thus, one would start with an infinite “will” and that “will” shall decrease inversely proportional to the number of choices that are made and kept.

“No free will” shall exist when one has chosen to agree completely with the status quo.

“Potential free will” shall be recoverable by as-ising one’s existing choices.

There is free will in this physical universe to the degree one is aware of the laws and principles that are keeping the physical structure there, and one can move within that structure. Ignorance of those laws and principles would limit that free will. As-isness of physical laws and principles is not essential to exercise free will. But knowledge of them is essential. Choices may be made only when there are options.

No option will exist when either nothing has been agreed upon, or everything has been agreed upon.

If everything can be calculated/predicted as per Steven Hawking, then one’s “free willed actions” may be predicted too, putting them in the category of “bound will.”

For “free will” to exist there must be a balance between KNOWABLE and UNKNOWABLE.

Randomness exists not in the universe but in the very idea of free will. The deterministic part is one’s agreements expressed as the universe; the random part is one’s free will.

.

The Spirit (old)

[I wrote this essay back in July 1995 and passed it on to some of my Christian friends.  This essay gave rise to a lively discussion at that time. Since then my understanding has evolved. The ability to think has evolved from some primeval impulse that has always been there.]

Spirit and Capability

The spirit is the ability to create. It is not the outcome of creation. A person thinks an idea. That idea is not the person. It is that ability to think which is the person’s beingness or spirit.

The body is an outcome of evolution. The personality is the outcome of past experiences. Like the idea they are created things but on a much more complex scale. They are the outcome of certain processes.

It is the capability that brings about these processes at the first place that constitutes the spirit. The spirit is not the processes or their outcomes. Creativity and native intelligence resides in the spirit and not in the body or personality.

Like a computer program, the body or the personality appears to display creativity and intelligence, but they are nothing more than fixed patterns. They only serve to modulate and restrict the spirit, which is animating them.

True beingness of Man is the spirit and not the body.

It is his capability to create, to observe, understand, and resolve, to feel, which defines him, and not his body or personality.

.

Spirit and Programming

The brain is a part of the body. By “programming” the brain one tries to further modulate and restrict the person. A person is not this programming. This programming only alters the basic person, which is the spirit. Hypnotism has that effect of “programming” the brain. Similar “programming” occurs through blind agreements not accompanied by any real experience and understanding.

Blind faith in religious scriptures is of the same order of “programming”. It is not accompanied by personal realization. It forms the basis of religious fanaticism. Many individuals and churches have manipulated that blind faith to further their own materialistic ends. They even deny the possibility of personal realization saying that no more “revelations” are possible.

.

Spirit and God

It is true that God has created Man in his own image. But that “image” in common is not the physical body or personality. It is the ability to be self-determined, the ability to be cause, the ability to create, which is in common with God. In God that ability is infinite.

The basic person is the spirit, which is natively creative, intelligent and constructive. He does not need “programming” or indoctrination to be good. Instead, he needs to be freed from the “programming” of the past that has restricted and molded him into the feeble, cowardly, and destructive expression he has become.

To think a person’s beingness is his body or personality is a materialistic viewpoint. Lets get rid of that false idea right now. Let us recognize the spirit that a person truly is.

 .

The Nature of Being

Please refer to The Nature of Existence.

Each human being seems to have some idea of who he or she is; this we refer to as ego or “self.” At the core of this “self” we imagine something permanent and everlasting, which we refer to as “soul.”

But is there a soul that is permanent and everlasting? We are aware of this soul whenever we are aware. But, when we are not aware, we are simply not aware, and we do not know whether soul is there or not.

We cannot say with certainty if there is a permanent and everlasting soul underlying self.

Beginning talks about a cycle that begins, continues, and ends. Our awareness does follow this cycle because it begins, continues, and ends. And so, the soul may at least be seen as something that begins, continues, and ends.

Whether the soul exists beyond this cycle is unknowable.

Beingness (soul) and awareness seem to occur together. They are the essence of existence. There is no existence when there is neither beingness nor awareness. What, then, is the nature of being (self)?

A subject, such as, Physics, simply refers to a bundle of observations, ideas, conjectures, theories, principles, etc, which are related in some way. To understand physics we must understand that whole bundle. Similarly, we may regard a “being” as simply a reference to a bundle of related desires, intentions, thoughts, emotions, efforts, viewpoints, etc. To understand a being, we must understand that whole bundle.

This bundle of related desires, intentions, thoughts, emotions, efforts, viewpoints, etc., known as a being, seems to be in a flux, changing from moment to moment. What may seem to provide continuity are impressions that are changing more slowly.

A being is a bundle of related desires, intentions, thoughts, emotions, efforts, viewpoints, etc., which is manifested through a body.

The relative continuity of these impressions may seem to appear as the consciousness. This consciousness is likely to form the basis of the consideration that there is a permanent and everlasting soul. However, that would merely be a consideration.

The core of a being is a consciousness, which is made up of longer lasting impressions.

This consciousness seems to be longer lasting, though it still changes over time. Buddha regarded the consciousness that existed at the moment of death to form the basis of consciousness in another birth. But, according to Buddha, this consciousness could be extinguished within a lifetime eliminating the necessity of another birth.

The consciousness existing at the moment of death may pass into a new birth. It is possible to extinguish this consciousness. Then no more rebirths occur.

There can be many bodies, and different consciousness attached to different bodies. Thus, there are individuals with different individualities. The individuality is expressed as “I.”

.

Summary

Extinguishing consciousness is known as the state of Nirvana in Buddhism. Actually, the idea of “self,” or “being,” is quite limiting as it seems to denote a finite viewpoint.

From Karen Armstrong’s book, BUDDHA: “As long as we persist in closing our minds and hearts to the universal pain, which surrounds us on all sides, we remain locked in an undeveloped version of ourselves, incapable of growth and spiritual insight.”

.

The Nature of God

Reference: The Nature of Thought
Reference: Religion

The desire to know the unknowable produces visualization or thought. That thought manifests itself, and can be known. Thus, one seems to overcome one’s uneasiness about the unknowable to some degree; even though the unknowable still remains unknowable.

Thus, one uses the term God for unknowable, and says,

The unknowable can be known as God.

This is fine; but then someone comes along and asserts, “God is a Being, and we are created in his image.” He then projects human attributes into God to a superlative degree. This action makes one feel more comfortable about unknowable; even though the unknowable still remains unknowable.

“God is a personal being” is a speculative thought. The unknowable still remains unknowable.

There is an intense desire to know how this universe came about. The universe is manifested alright, but how it got manifested is an unknowable that makes one uncomfortable. So another thought is produced, “God created the universe.”

“God created the universe” is a speculative thought also. The unknowable still remains unknowable.

These two thoughts form the basis of Semitic religions, such as, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and other religions derived from them.

A religion is essentially a system of thought created to help a society organize itself for extended survival. A belief in the two thoughts about God as above has produced a culture in the west that is quite different historically from the culture in the east.

The Vedic religions of the east, such as, Hinduism and Buddhism do not entertain beliefs based on the two thoughts about God described above. The terms like Brahman and Nirvana are used for the unknowable, they are not associated with the idea of a personal being.

This essay simply points out that terms like YHVH, GOD, ALLAH, BRAMHAN, NIRVANA, etc., are labels for the unknowable. Some of these labels have further significances attached to them. These labels and significances are thoughts, which, by their very nature, are speculations about the unknowable. These thoughts become reality to those who believe in them.

Attaching such significances to the unknowable and acting on them, unfortunately, has contributed to deadly conflicts in the past and also in the present. There is nothing wrong with the belief in YHVH, GOD, or ALLAH as long as we understand that the true significance underlying such belief is unknowable by its very nature.

May the understanding of “God as unknowable” help bring about cessation of conflicts around the world!

That is my hope.

.

Can God be Defined?

meet12

Reference: Religion

[I wrote this essay back in July 1995 in response to a Christian colleague of mine who asked me,
“Must all Hindus believe that there is one god, and not the many that are worshipped and served? In all Hindus minds, are all the gods nothing more than symbolic representations of the ultimate reality? If not, why not? Do the gods exist the same way that humans exist?”
Since then I have had further realizations on this subject. God is looked upon as a Being in Semitic religions. However, in Vedic religions, the ultimate reality is thought to be unknowable. We can only speculate on that unknowable and, maybe come up with our own gods. See The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda.
The original essay is republished here with some minor touch ups.]
 .

A Hindu does not believe that the physical image he is worshipping is God. To him a physical image only serves to focus his attention while he is seeking the experience of God. Once he attains that experience, he can throw away all the images and still be a Hindu.

A Hindu does not have beliefs like a Christian does. To him knowledge comes from actual experience, and not from a belief in some agreed-upon doctrine. A person may “believe in Love” but he is in for a big surprise when he falls in love for the first time. A “belief in God” does not mean that one understands God. That understanding comes from the experience of God. A belief to a Hindu is like an initial assumption with which to start on a spiritual search. It can change as the knowledge unfolds itself.

Authoritarian doctrines only enforce beliefs. They do not provide a way to experience God. Such doctrines primarily end up providing the justification to the ego: “I am right because I believe, and you are wrong for not believing.” A person holding such an attitude, unfortunately, has grossly been misled. To a Hindu the scriptures are merely a guide. He follows them to attain the experience of God. He does not use them to make himself right and others wrong.

Are there one or many gods? To a Hindu this question is misleading. “Can you argue if Love is one or many?” He asks, “How do you quantify something which is not physical?” The numerous manifestations of Love may be counted but it is absurd to quantify Love itself. God is a spiritual reality much deeper than Love. Its manifestation is the whole universe and everything in it. When somebody argues, “God is One” or “God is many,” he is confusing God with God’s manifestation.

A person believing in “one God” is likely to hold a mental “image” for that God. He is worshipping that image believing it to be God. In this frame of mind he looks at someone who is worshipping a physical image, and condemns him for doing so. It never occurs to him that the physical image may just be a prop in one’s effort to experience God. The idea, “God is One,” thus, misleads the “believer” into thinking that God must have an identity. It further serves to generate the claim, “My God is true, your god is false.” This claim provides a wonderful excuse to the ignorant to indulge in violent and barbaric crimes. To a Hindu, the idea of quantifying God by giving it an identity is misleading in the first place. It is a result of ignorance.

The question, “Do the gods exist the same way that humans exist?” highlights the assumption of an identity for God. To a Hindu it is like asking, “Does Love exist the same way as humans exist?” Love is an aspect of spirituality which is expressed through the infinitely diverse activities of life. It does not have a separate identity of its own, but it is readily recognizable to those who have experienced love. God is more than an aspect of spirituality. God is spirituality itself. God does not have an identity, yet it is recognizable to those who have experienced that ultimate reality.

Reading the scriptures of many religions, it appears as though God has an identity, for God is referred to as “He” who “speaks” and “commands”. But this is a breakdown of human communication to express spiritual experiences. Prophets who experienced God had to resort to poetic language to communicate that experience. Experience of God is much more intense than the experience of Love. After that experience one’s viewpoint does not assume a fixed identity for God.

How do you perceive something that has no identity or form? Let us take a number, such as 3. Do we see the number 3 when we look at three objects? No. We perceive ‘3’ as an abstract pattern common to three occurrences of an object. Do we see the relation A + B = B + A when we add two quantities? No. It is self-evident in the process of addition. Do we see the Law of Gravity when we see an apple fall from the tree? No. It is a principle which we know from experience by seeing all heavy objects fall toward earth. Do we really see Love when we see a mother nourishing her baby? No. It is an aspect of spirituality inherent to all Life that we can become aware of.

These are things one grasps mentally as being common to many physical observations. We recognize this process as abstraction. As one moves deeper into abstraction one encounters fewer denominators but each of which is capable of explaining greater number of physical observations. Some people have a hard time understanding Mathematics and Physics because they fail to make the mental jump from visible examples to the underlying abstract relationships.

The subject of Religion poses similar difficulties. Religion goes deeper into abstraction than Mathematics and Physics as it attempts to understand the denominator of infinite manifestations that exist. Spirituality lies in the dimension of abstraction. As a person dives deeper into spirituality he experiences the shedding away of “identities” and a restoration of greater awareness. He becomes more “alive” and capable of influencing larger strata of life and physical phenomena.

To a Hindu mind, God is the essence of all existence. It is the key to a complete understanding of the infinite “relationships” which make up the physical universe of space-energy-matter and time, and the play of life within it. The search for God is inward, toward more abstraction, and not outward in the physical universe of visible manifestations. God being the denominator of all existence is the deepest of all abstractions.

The certainty that one KNOWS, exists neither in space-energy-matter and time, nor in the reflection of them in the mind. One must dive deep into abstraction to gain that certainty of complete understanding. There is nothing wrong with using images and symbols to get at the deeper meaning. But one must discriminate between the image and the experience it symbolizes. Mathematics uses symbols to gain insights. Language uses symbols to communicate. Religion uses all physical manifestations to experience its source. All knowledge has been gained through the observation of physical phenomena. It is rare that one can experience knowledge directly in a single step.

So, a Hindu symbolizes the various aspects of existence and spirituality to arrive at the deeper understanding of God. BRAHMA symbolizes creation, VISHNU symbolizes survival, and MAHESH (or SHIVA) symbolizes dissolution. Together, this TRINITY describes the cycle of existence: Beginning, Continuation, End. This is the great abstraction which the Hindu mind reached about ten thousand years ago. These symbols and idols in Hinduism are nothing in themselves. They are there to remind certain abstractions underlying all life. To a Hindu, all such symbols and idols are “educational aids.” They drop into relative insignificance to the degree one gains an awareness of God.

Most religions allude to beings without human bodies, such as angels and devas, and to miracles which surpass human understanding. They ascribe such phenomena directly to God. But, truly speaking, all phenomena are attributable to God. There may be beings with identities finer than physical bodies or miracles yet to be fully understood by man. But they are part of existence like any thing else. Religious authorities have declared many such phenomena miraculous and divine when it has given hope for better survival. But such viewpoints have changed as mankind has matured. What has not changed is the fact that God is the common denominator of all phenomena miraculous or otherwise.

To a Hindu, the physical existence is the surface manifestation of an infinitely deep reality referred to as God. The existence of God does not depend on the existence of the physical phenomena. In fact, all physical phenomena extend from the reality of God. A symbol or “identity” requires space-energy-matter and time, to exist. Thus, no identity can be God itself. No image, mental or physical, can substitute for God. God exists like LOVE exists; like CREATIVITY, INTELLIGENCE and ETHICS exist. All these are different aspects of spirituality which lie in the dimension of abstraction. God is ultimate in spirituality. Nay, God is spirituality itself. God cannot be defined in terms of any identity. God can only be experienced.  As a person becomes aware of the identities he has unwittingly assumed and gives them up, he regains his basic essence. And in doing so he moves closer to the experience of God.

.