Conscious And Unconscious

The One becomes conscious of itself many times as an organism sharing an environment with other organisms.
The One is each organism and the environment.
It becomes conscious of itself as:
sensations;
perceived objects;
self-conscious individuals;
Itself.
However, it is conscious of itself only in those parts of itself that have central nervous systems.
The environment and most organisms remain unconscious.
Consciousness depends on unconscious processes that are:
physical;
chemical;
organic;
psychological.
Consciousness is a particular kind of organism-environment interaction.
It does not permeate matter or space.

Prayer

Gods grant
Long life and
Conditions conducive to
Contemplation and liberation.

Beyond Birth And Death

The only way not to die is not to be born.
Would we exist if we were not born?
Only if we are pre-existent souls which some believe but I don't.
Materialists and Buddhists agree that there are no souls.

If you and I had not been born, then the one reality would still exist.
It would still be conscious of itself through many organisms although not through you or me.
The One would exist in a different form.
Were non-existence or unconscious being possible?

I suspect that being and nothing interact and that all potentialities are realized but who knows?
"That god who sees in highest heaven, he alone knows or perhaps he knows not." (See here.)

Advice From Zen Monks

"Can you embrace the past and let go of it?"

"Can you sit with whatever comes up in meditation?"

"There will always be natural thought. Don't add to it."

"There is a swamp inside. Drain the swamp."

Two interacting levels of consciousness:
external inputs;
inner thoughts.

The third level:
Serene Reflection Meditation.

As Within, So Without

Are mental chaos and social interactions related like quantum chaos and physical interactions?

An individual meditates, then experiences unenlightened mental states. A country has a revolution, then a reaction. If this is a yin-yang interaction, then it is a level of interaction that we need to transcend.

Outside Indian Philosophy

See recent posts.

Outside Indian philosophy, Buddhism interacts:

with Taoism as Ch'an;
with Shinto nature mysticism as Zen;
with Marxism if anyone practices both zazen and unorthodox Trotskyism.

Changing self and society has to be the ultimate Eurasian synthesis.

"The kingdom is at hand..." See Teachings.

Teachings And Indian Philosophy II

Within the framework of Indian philosophy, it is possible:

to practice in one tradition while understanding its relationships to every other tradition;

to meditate without believing in gods, souls or reincarnation;

to practice Zen without referring to rebirth.

There is something here for everyone.

Some Indian theists have introduced judgmentalism and intolerance I suspect under European influence.

Teachings And Indian Philosophy

See:

Indian Philosophy, Part III
Teachings II

Atman is Jainism and Samkhya-Yoga.
Atman-Brahman is Advaita Vedanta.
Anatta is Buddhism.

Thus, these three teachings correspond to five of the nine Indian philosophical systems.

Advaita is one interpretation of the Vedanta system. Dvaita Vedanta refers to Atman and to a personal deity: Isvara, Krishna, the Goddess etc.

Thus, the systems and their interpretations incorporate every theoretical possibility:

materialism
soul pluralism
polytheism
monotheism
pantheism
impersonalist idealism
syntheses
less definable positions

Two Syntheses
The Yoga system accepts the atheist soul pluralism of the Samkhya system but incorporates theist devotion as bhakti yoga by redefining the object of devotion as a discarnate soul.

Qualified Non-Dualism synthesizes theism with monism by regarding matter and selves as God's body.

One Less Definable Position
Buddhists:

reject souls and the creator but not gods but do not worship gods;
replace reincarnation of souls with rebirth of karmic consequences;
regard impermanence and interaction as more fundamental than mind or consciousness;
thus, agree with dialectical materialists except about gods and rebirth which, however, are not necessary for the practice of Zen.

Indian Philosophy, Part III

Indian philosophical reflection interacted with Vedic ritualist and non-Vedic meditative practices.

The orthodox philosophical systems accept the authority of the Vedas including the Upanishads, the end of the Vedas, "Vedanta."

Of the six orthodox systems:

four systematize logic, atomism, soul pluralism and ritualism, respectively;
the Yoga system synthesizes meditation with the soul pluralism of the Samkhya system;
the Vedanta system synthesizes meditation with Upanishadic theism or monism.

Of the three unorthodox systems:

Jainism formulates meditation as soul pluralist asceticism;
Carvaka is materialist and hedonist;
thus, they are a thesis and its antithesis;
Buddhism synthesizes meditation with a philosophical critique of souls and presents a middle way between asceticism and hedonism;
thus, it synthesizes aspects of Jainism and Carvaka.

I accept:

philosophical reflection
meditation
logic
modern atomic theory
monism
philosophical materialism
Buddhist "no soul" teaching and middle way

and reject:

ritualism
soul pluralism
theism
asceticism
hedonism

Indian Philosophy, Continued

The Three Pairs of Orthodox Systems
Logic and atomism.
Soul pluralist theory and practice.
Ritualism and mysticism.

The Unorthodox Systems
Soul pluralist asceticism.
Materialist hedonism.
The no-soulist middle way.

The four meditative traditions:

Yoga
Vedanta
Jainism
Buddhism

- are highlighted.

Indian Philosopy

Indian philosophy comprises:

three unorthodox systems;
three pairs of orthodox systems;
three main interpretations of the main orthodox system.

Orthodoxy is acceptance of the Vedas.
The Upanishads are the end of the Vedas, "Vedanta."

There are two orthodox and two unorthodox formulations of the ancient tradition of meditative practice.

Yoga formulates meditation and accepts the Vedas. Vedanta synthesizes meditation with the Upanishads.

Jainism and Yoga are soul pluralist.
Buddhism is no-soulist.
Advaita Vedanta is monist.

The three interpretations of Vedanta are Dualism, Non-Dualism and Qualified Non-Dualism, i.e., theism, monism and monistic theism.

Perspective And Practice

Acceptance of responsibility for the consequences of actions is a perspective.
Meditation is a practice.
The perspective preexists the practice or exists without it.
With neither, we are motivated only by greed, hate and delusion.

Teachings II

Atman: each organism has an individual soul.

Brahman-Atman: each individual soul is identical with the one transcendent reality.

Anatta: there are no individual souls.

Each teaching follows after the previous one although the third contradicts the first! The second and third teachings deny separate selfhood whereas the first might seem to imply it.

The three teachings are different narratives about consciousness whereas meditation is an experience, not a narrative.

Teachings

Krishna: karma yoga (nonattached action);

the Buddha: meditation;

Jesus: the kingdom (a new society and a new consciousness).

Krishna is an Indian god.

Jesus was a new god in the Roman Empire.

Mythologically, the Buddha is a teacher of gods and men.

We approach a new society through karma yoga and a new consciousness through meditation.

False And Truer Gods

False gods are projected from greed, hate and delusion.
A bigot's god saves only the bigot and his co-believers.
The bigots' heaven would be hell for anyone else.
However, heavens and hells are myths.

Truer gods are projected from aspiration and compassion.
They reflect reality and express transcendence.
False and truer gods can have the same names.

Beginnings

The First Book of Moses, Genesis, begins:

"In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth..."

The Fourth Gospel, John's, begins:

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

The Yoga Sutras begin:

"This is the beginning of instruction in yoga.
"Yoga is control of thoughts."

Patanjali begins with meditation, not with God.

In order to formulate a theoretical basis for meditative practice, Patanjali adopted a philosophical system that was neither monist nor no-soulist but atheist and soul-pluralist. However, also wanting to incorporate devotional theism as a kind of meditation, he defined God not as a Creator but as a discarnate soul. Ingenious.

The philosophical system that I accept, dialectical materialism, incorporates monism and no-soulism without rebirth -

monism: being is one;
materialism: it became conscious;
no-soulism: consciousness is not separate.

Change And Transcendence

A random genetic combination followed by specific organism-environment interactions generates a distinct personality very early in the life of each human being. Each of us can transcend our personality only if the potential for transcendence was present from the beginning and also if that potential is strong enough to overcome mental inertia and the psychological self-defense mechanisms of the personality.

Inertia and self-defense are unconscious and conscious levels of resistance to change. However, existence is interaction between change and resistance to it. Much change and transcendence have occurred and more can. On the other hand, deep personal change is rare.

Here And Now

Here and now:

the One is;

It is conscious of Itself in and through this organism;

the organism perceives and thinks;

thought obscures the One, impedes unitive consciousness and generates separative delusion.

Therefore:

let random thoughts pass;
do not prolong them unnecessarily.

Thus:

I see the sun;
I remember an unhappy sunny day in childhood;
I let the memory pass or
I start to think about it;
I realize that I am thinking about it;
I let it pass.

This practice weakens the grip of thought and of the illusory separate self.

The One is here and now.

Borrowed Ideas

"Every religion in Earth's past, no matter how exclusive in theory, had had influential thinkers who were willing to borrow ideas from contemporary rivals."
-Poul Anderson, "The Three-Cornered Wheel" IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, 2009), pp. 199-261 AT VI, p. 251.

Mani claimed to synthesize three traditions. See here.
The Fourth Evangelist borrowed the Logos from Greek philosophy.
Zen synthesizes Buddhism and Taoism.

Ideas also proliferate. See Enforced Uniformity Or Continued Diversity for arguments that 1+1=3 or even that 1+1=7.

Like the Jesuit in Anderson's "The Word to Space," Martin Schuster in "The Three-Cornered Wheel" aims to subvert a theocracy by inciting:

reinterpretations;
reformations;
counterreformations;
revelations;
new doctrines;
fundamentalist reactions;
etc.

Aycharaych also aimed to build such divisions into a new jihad.

I think that the heirs of any tradition can:

conserve their idea of the tradition but in a changing context, thus changing the tradition without realizing it;

reinterpret the tradition which means rejecting conservative interpretations and even sometimes the essence of the tradition;

reject the tradition although they remain influenced by whatever they reject.

In all cases, continuity and change are combined.

There is continuity of monarchy in "The King is dead; long live the King" and continuity of ordered society in "The office of King is abolished; long live the Republic."

Introducing The Kabbalah

In Poul Anderson's "The Three-Cornered Wheel," Master Merchant Martin Schuster, seeking to sabotage the Ivanhoan theocracy, begins to introduce the Kabbalah to an intelligent and inquisitive Consecrate called Hertaskor but the latter is led by the nose far too easily.

Schuster argues:

God is unbounded in every way;
therefore, He must have eternally pre-existed the world;
He is above everything finite;
but thought and existence are finite.

Herkastor agrees with this last proposition, adding:

"'Thought and existence as we know them, anyhow.'"
-Poul Anderson, "The Three-Cornered Wheel" IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, 2009), pp. 199-261 AT VI, p. 251.

However, Schuster is not talking about thought and existence as we know them. He is talking, to a fellow monotheist, about God. They have just agreed that God's existence is unbounded and eternal, not finite, so it will not do simply to state that all existence is finite, then to qualify that by referring to existence as we know it, thus not to all existence. Immediately, a distinction has to be made between the infinite existence of God and the finitude of existence as we know it.

A text-book on Hegelian philosophy presented the argument that to be is to be one thing, not another, therefore that to be is to be limited. However, there is no agreed terminology in these matters. I remember the same text-book as applying the word "existence" to things which exist only by virtue of their relationships to other things and the word "being" to the absolute totality that is independent of any external relationships. Such technical distinctions are helpful as long as they are clearly defined and adhered to.

Schuster goes on to argue that a pre-creation God Who was neither comprehended by thought nor described in words would in some sense not exist. This is nonsense. God, assuming the premise of monotheism, would exist in the fullest sense, would comprehend Himself and would not need words.

The Chief Consecrate might show from scripture, tradition or reasoning that a new teaching contradicts the Word of God. So far, this is exactly the position of Catholic Christians on Earth except, of course, that they have different scriptures and traditions. Full-rank Consecrates may dispute freely within doctrinal limits. Thus, unlike the Bishop of Rome, the Chief Consecrate cannot define doctrines infallibly. Science replaces scriptures and traditions with observations and thus has immensely expanded knowledge of the universe.

What I Value

The understanding and practice both of meditation and of unorthodox Trotskyism.
An understanding of the origin of Christianity.
A lay person's knowledge of scientific cosmogony and Darwinism.
Training in logic and analytic philosophy.
Knowledge of world religions and mythologies.
Imaginative and speculative fiction.

Light And A Man

In Buddhism, a man is enlightened.
In John's Gospel, the light becomes a man.
Are these the same process, differently described?

The Cosmic Buddha of the Mahayana Sutras,
the Incarnate Word of the Fourth Gospel and
the cosmic form of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita -

- each transcend an original human being.