Spiritual notes
|
One could be excused for assuming that poverty is the normal state of affairs if everyone were poor, but there's no escaping the fact that there's something very wrong with the world when there's literally billions of people on the brink of starvation, and yet we see huge abundance available to the few. So we understand that we have to do something about the wrong, but what? Most people choose denial or ignorance not because they're immoral or lazy, but because they've fallen prey to the overwhelming force of futility.
The futility is there because we don't know how to make a difference. Not that there aren't plenty of answers around, but really that we just don't know which ones are making a difference. And further more, how much of a difference? Or maybe some are doing good in one area but are unaware of the problems they're causing in other areas. Without feedback all paths are hidden, there's enough sight to see that damage is being done, but not enough to see where one is going. Without informed decision, nearly all energy is invested into the expanding futility. All we know for sure is that all the good things we're doing at the moment aren't working anywhere near well enough. An enlightened civilisation is the only solution to the continuance of the Human race.
I have been involved in an intense study of the nature of space and time for ten years. This path has lead through many disciplines such as physics, quantum mechanics, calculus, biology, complexity theory and self-organising-systems to name a few. I did not pursue my search using the usual western approach however, as I have studied within the context of eastern philosophy (Taoism and Vedanta). This may seem like rather a contradiction considering that both of those philosophies stress the uselessness of knowledge, as it severely inhibits self-realisation (enlightenment) because the true state is Unity, whereas all knowledge is duality.
Because Enlightenment is non-dual, many great Masters such as Dakshinamurti and Sri Ramana Maharshi say the highest level of teaching is communicated with silence, they would radiate such calmness that those around them could feel Reality, and would often become enlightened merely by being in their presence. The problem with this approach however, is that it is inaccessible to those who have minds that are too busy with the content their own thoughts to perceive the radiated tranquillity. But those in such a disharmonious state are the ones suffering most and thereby needing help the most, so some Masters have devised methods of teaching for them using words within a context which they actually consider to be entirely false, with the purpose of using the false to remove the false, finally revealing the truth which was there all along but too subtle to perceive initially. The Western mind however, has continued in this direction of false knowledge and taken it to such depths that nowadays the Western mind will not accept anything as truth which cannot be expressed in a formal language (symbolic logic, mathematics or algorithms), making the ultimate truth even more difficult to propagate.
Thousands of people around the world are realising the true nature of the reality, the one spiritual truth (that which is directly experienced) and trying to propagate the word. But word of mouth through websites and seminars is not effective enough, and the inherent nature of words themselves is problematic, in that words can only "point" to things but not embody. Apart from not spreading effectively, these methods do not address the fact that an enlightened society still requires an organisational structure, and all we have at the moment is the competitive profit model. That's why we see many enlightened Gurus with online shops, and multi-thousand dollar courses at their retreats!
Contents
- 1 Are you suggesting there is a better way to get things done?
- 2 What's this spiritual model like?
- 3 How do you know it's the best way?
- 4 You said Reality was non-dual and so couldn't be described in Logic?!
- 5 Consciousness explained
- 6 But why does science say it's so much more complex?
- 7 So has God been reduced to a formula (again)?
- 8 How can you be sure it's right?
- 9 Naming
- 10 See also
Are you suggesting there is a better way to get things done?
The Western mind just cannot accept it when a Guru says that we are all the Source of the universe and that space and time and the world are within us, not the other way around as generally perceived. The main reason this can't be accepted is because all our science says that the universe is objective and enormous and that we're tiny specks inside it, lasting for only an infinitesimal instant within its huge age. We're taught to rely heavily on the concept of linear time, past and future when really only the now is real and past and future are purely conceptual. The spiritual Masters find it difficult to answer questions like "who are my ancestors then, if there's no past?" in a way which can satisfy a logical mind.
There are two main ideas behind this project. One is to create a new formal "scientific" model which demonstrates that space and time and the Source are in fact within us all, which is complete and exhibits no contradictions and is defined in symbolic logic. The second idea is to use this approach as a new basis for modelling our processes and systems, so that we can maintain our current level of scale and complexity in our organisations while moving beyond the competitive profit model which is exceedingly inefficient in terms of the way it employs resources and time.
What's this spiritual model like?
It's a network architecture describing a means for people, computers, processes and organisations to connect in a unified (non-fragmented) way. Every node (person, computer, process etc) which is part of the network adds a small amount of space and time resource to the whole; space is like physical resources or hard-drive space and time is ability to change things like man-hours or computer processing time.
How do you know it's the best way?
This isn't simply a new networking method which has been invented to try and solve these problems, it's a direct description of the one spiritual truth. It's not anything new, but rather the oldest way of all. Only the seed principle is defined, all else emerges within and constantly orients towards perfection. This orientation toward perfection can be seen as two emergent principles. One is "think global, act local" which means that all processes can only change themselves and are used by the whole based on their efficiency in terms of energy. Second is "all aspects changeable" meaning that nothing within the space (which includes its own definition) is fixed, so that opportunities to move closer to perfection (as decided by the first principle) are never missed.
These axioms are basic truths for all beings; the best way to help the world is to change oneself in accord with the needs of the whole, don't try changing others or the world. And, let go of ego which is attachment to the unreal.
To the second question; it's only this single way that solves the key problems which have prevented all other ways from fully succeeding. So it doesn't matter how many implementations of it there are, or which ones gain more support, they all benefit and support each other. The key is to know how to determine how closely something is working in this way. Currently in IT everything isn't working very closely to it at all because they don't share information allowing them to make their decisions in accord with the whole picture. The problems that need to be overcome for this to work can only be solved by a solution which satisfies specific criteria.
It's these very criteria that define a class of possible solutions which are all seeds. Everything that grows from these seeds is mutually beneficial and sustainable, they do not compete for survival but rather support each other in growth. Everything born of the seeds has the potential to grow independent and bear fruit containing more seeds. All things born of the seeds grow together and co-evolve forever on their path toward perfection.
You said Reality was non-dual and so couldn't be described in Logic?!
The logical definition shows that the Source (God, the Creator, Self, the "I am" etc) is unity which is therefore beyond description (since all description requires the splitting of the whole into subject and object), but the way of perception and creation of space-time within the source are describable. It's similar to the idea that our brains can process information in ways that can't be described with symbolic logic, and yet we use symbolic logic to simulate neural networks to solve that same class of problem.
It's the same concept that's been taught by the spiritual masters right from the start, but they've just never had powerful enough languages to describe it without loss of conceptual integrity.
Consciousness explained
Every object exhibits both a spatial aspect which is the material of which it is composed occupying space, and the temporal aspect is the energy of its motion occupying spectrum. The material of an organism is arranged such that the energy can flow within-ward while remaining harmonically organised. When matter is organised this way, consciousness spontaneously arises within, it essentially becomes an "interface" for the I-Am. The Node class in the network is defined such that processes within it are organised in this way.
Although this seems like a leading edge technological claim, it is in fact very old. Every enlightened being is fully aware of the way Reality actually is and the all Beings work this way. It's just that it's exceedingly difficult to explain, instead of using technological terms they have always said simply that the Source of all space and time is at the centre of every one of us. Science just hasn't realised it yet, but maybe if we can start to build up the truth about reality in terms which science can accept, then we will start to see a wide spread shift in human consciousness.
But why does science say it's so much more complex?
Quantum mechanics, physics, molecular biology etc seek to describe reality by observing the contents of space-time and then creating algorithms which can predict the observed phenomena, but those disciplines rarely question whether or not this is the best approach. Space-time and its contents are the product of perception, and it's the mechanism of perception which should therefore be observed and modelled. Trying to describe reality in terms of the perceiver or the perceived rather than perception leads to enormous complexity involving relations which can only be described as infinite series.
So has God been reduced to a formula (again)?
No. All this shows that the Source is beyond, unknowable, infinite and eternal but at the centre of every being. It shows that the space, time and even consciousness can be logically described but the Source of it cannot, and that the purpose of this whole project is merely a means to help those who have become blinded by logic to return to the one unified spiritual truth.
The root, or source is self-containment, or awareness of awareness. When perception is modelled, the self-reference appears as the axiom allowing logic to deal with all else, while leaving the Source implied and unknown. When attempting to model a system on the perceiver or the perceived, the self-reference crops up within and therefore the incompleteness of the logic becomes an unresolvable issue, raising infinities and contradictions. Suffering comes from mistaking the mind and the body for the Self, and going too deeply into the mind can lead to mental illness.
How can you be sure it's right?
The state of Samhadi is the same non-dual state of realising the self, but is not maintainable while receiving sensory input, i.e. it's a state attainable during meditation. This state gives me faith in the I-Am throughout the day.
The reason I became so obsessed with this project in the first place was that I have seen the fully enlightened state many times throughout the years when I have spontaneously had seizures. Each time a seizure happened I would become disconnected from my mind and body – or to be more accurate, I spontaneously disconnected from my mind and body, and the mind and body not having learned how to operate on its own went into seizure. During seizure I am able to witness the content of the mind and energy cycles operating within the body and world, it's these experiences which have made me realise that everything is perfectly simple and logical, including consciousness.
It was after seeing how things worked first hand, that I realised that all the religions were saying the same thing, that there was actually only one spiritual truth. I had thought they were all rather esoteric at first, but when I began re-reading some Taoist texts with this new outlook on life, I realised that they were not esoteric at all, it's just that they didn't have a powerful enough language to talk about it without loss of conceptual integrity. This is the real purpose of joining East with West.
Naming
So many religions argue on the basis of names, but names are just pointers in the material world meant to guide us to the real truth which can only be found within and has no name. For the truth to descend to earth we must understand it without names, only by pure receptivity and genuine investigation can we find it.
To believe that someone is not on the true spiritual path, the path to true Self Realisation because he uses the words and names of his culture and not yours is certainly not in accord with the true Way.
Those who follow the truth most closely have no need for words, silence is their realm... when their bodies/minds speak, it is for the benefit of others, and all words, names, metaphors, contexts etc. are chosen for optimal conceptual understanding by the listener in their context.
How optimal this propagation of concepts is depends on the cultural knowledge stored in the body and mind of the Sage, the conceptual richness of the culture the conversation is within, and the receptivity of the listener to truth.
In our age, the richness of the cultural knowledge is extremely high. Formal languages can capture concepts perfectly and are accessible and understandable by hundreds of millions of people.
