Triple singularity

[tsuki]

When questioning of a perspective becomes relentless enough, one may see that perspectives are interconnected.
What is the world other than our scientific understanding of it?

• From within the perspective of the mind, scientific theory is nothing else than a set of facts that predetermine our perception of the world.
• From within the perspective of the world however, the mind is subjected to experimental results that are being described.

This is a seemingly unresolvable paradox when we think of it this way. These two statements exclude each other simply because we're trying to explain one in terms of the other from both directions simultaneously. What we need to do instead is to produce a third perspective, which is not [mind > world], or [mind < world], but a [mindworld]. From the perspective of the mindworld, the substance of the mind (facts) and the substance of the world (matter) are the same substance. The question is: what are the properties of the mindworld and which parts of it correspond to the perspective of the mind and perspective of the world?

Edited July 1, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

Quote

Cartesians view the mind as being wholly separate from the corporeal body. Sensation and the perception of reality are thought to be the source of untruth and illusions, with the only reliable truths to be had in the existence of a metaphysical mind. Such a mind can perhaps interact with a physical body, but it does not exist in the body, nor even in the same physical plane as the body. The question of how mind and body interact would be a persistent difficulty for Descartes and his followers, with different Cartesians providing different answers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesianism

[tsuki]

I'm bringing the Cartesianism at this point to contrast it with the idea of the mindworld.
Cartesianism is characterized by differentiating two disjoint dimensions of reality: the mind and the world. These two dimensions have troubling property of identifying the self in the dimension of the mind and questioning its relationship with the world.
The trouble comes from Descartes' method, which involves introduction of an imaginary demon that creates illusion within the senses. In order to find reliable basis for identity, Descartes arrives at cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am).

The uninspected assumptions of Cartesianism are:

1. there needs to be a reliable basis for identity
2. the demon may create illusions within the senses, and not within thoughts themselves

The mindworld perspective is different in that it assumes that the the two dimensions of reality (the mind and the world) are:

1. Disjoint, but sharing an empty boundary (obviousness)
2. The substance of reality is common to the world and to the mind.
3. It does not identify as either of the dimensions.

In this perspective, the world and the mind are interconnected perspectives within the mindworld. 
The following category illustrates its structure:

[Zweistein]

Uhhh, I love this stuff! How about drawing this as win-win-win circles (Eben Pagan style)? It was the first video Leo posted in the stage yellow Megathread.

[Zweistein]

@tsuki

Sorry, I hope I didn't interrupt your flow here with my comment ?

Please ignore it and just keep going! ?

[tsuki]

@Zweistein It is really encouraging to see people engaged in my explanations, but frankly - I'm stuck here and you did not interrupt me at all.
For now, I'm hunkering down and waiting for things to come to me. Thank you for your kind words.

Lately, I've been interested in Ken Wilber and I saw that there may be a connection between his AQAL and my diagrams.
Without any deep inspection, it seems like his intersubjective and interobjective categories are what the world from my understanding is split into.

It suggests that this tripartite structure of the bodyminworld is arbitrary and this whole exploration is simply an exercise in enlightenment.
This is why I'm not as invested in this subject as much any longer.

It sometimes seems to me like I'm thinking new things faster than I can explore them, or note them down.
There is always this meta-movement of trying to see how they fit into greater scheme of things that captures their essence as incidental (and therefore uninteresting). What I ultimately want to arrive at, is the essence of this meta-movement that generalizes concrete examples into categories.
I want to see it clearly. This is why I'm exploring things at this level.

I simply chased my own tail so much, that I became a helicopter.

[Zweistein]

Yeah, having patience is so hard sometimes...

My brain is also "digesting" Ken Wilber's knowledge tree at the moment and I feel like a Brachiosaurus that is about to get hit by a huge asteroid. Not sure if I should keep eating the leaves or run for my life. 

 

[tsuki]

On 27.06.2018 at 8:24 AM, tsuki said:

This journal will be a discussion of the above graph. The graph summarizes my experience of the world from the non-dual perspective.

Today, I understood that the diagram maps onto Enneagram.
9: Body, 6: Mind, 3: World

Enneagram is samsara expressed in terms of personality.

 

[tsuki]

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

A month ago I finished a group reading and study of Beelzebub's Tales To His Grandson. This Law of three is connected with us being what he called 3 brained beings or 3 centered beings. Intellect and feeling, grounded in sensation of body.

The human condition Gurdjieff taught is that we are unbalanced and always rely on our strong suit,,, our comfort zone in terms of how we exist when we're on 'autopilot'. Either overweighted in intellect, emotion or preoccupied with the physical body. 

If we don't channel kundalini through a balanced 3 centered awareness, the result is (Kundabuffer) imagination run amuck. We get all big eyed and full of shit about everything, especially oneself. I wish I had known of Leo's - Mankind Is The Bullshitting Animal, to share with the other members of the reading group, which I watched this morning. Leo describes perfectly what Gurdjieff was trying to teach.

For whatever it's worth, my formula at the conclusion of 'The Tales' -

Kundalini = chi = Prana = Kundabuffer = imagination 
Kundalini + 3 Centered Awareness = Holy Prana 

Holy Prana leads to higher understanding.

Gurdjieff used the term Holy Prana in 'The Tales' but he composed the book in a confusing and difficult style to read forcing the reader to work at untangling it all.

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Zigzag Idiot