Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Neither ‘two’ nor ‘four’..... But it is 16.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Neither ‘two’ nor ‘four’..... But it is 16.


    Socrates explains: Dialectics, then, as you will agree, is the coping stone of the sciences, and is set over them; no other science can be placed higher—the nature of knowledge can no further go?”

    As when Plato narrates his great teacher Socrates, he never misses the intricacies of the four fold consciousness, which is lavishly evident in his other works; this error of considering dialectics for the two against its fourfold dimensions is happening due to the fatal neglecting of the aesthetic elements or its improper fitting into irrelevant slots.

    ===========

    "We have much trouble imagining a new dimension if we take our start from a Space with three dimensions, because experience does not show us a fourth one. But nothing is more simple if it is a Space of two dimensions to which we endow from our side this supplementary dimension. We could bring to mind plain living beings living on one surface and conferring themselves in it, knowing nothing other than two dimensions of space, one of them could have been conducted by his calculations to postulate the existence of the third dimension. Superficially in a double sense of the word, his congenital brother would refuse to follow him; he would not succeed in imagining what his understanding could have conceived. But we, who live in a Space of three dimensions would have the real perception of the fact that it would be simply represented as possible; we would take account exactly of what should have been added in introducing a new dimension. And as it would be something of the same kind that we would be doing ourselves, if we supposed, reduced into three dimensions as we already are, that we are immersed in a context of four dimensions we would be nearly imagining in this manner the fourth dimension which appeared to us in the beginning as unimaginable. It is true it would not be altogether the same thing, because the space of more than. three dimensions is a pure conception of the mind and could not correspond to any reality, while the space of three dimensions is that of our experience.
    When therefore in what follows we make use of our Space of three dimensions really perceived, to give a body to representations of a mathematician subjected to a flat universe - representations conceivable to him but not what could be imagined - that would not amount to saying that there exists or could exist a Space of four dimensions capable in its turn of being realized in a concrete form from our own mathematical conceptions when they transcend our world of three dimensions. That would be to play too well on the side of those who would interpret at once metaphysically the theory of Relativity. The device that we are going to use has for its unique object that of furnishing our imaginary support of the theory, so as to render it more clear, and by that to enable us to see better the errors into which our hasty conclusions would make us fall."

    Quoated above is Henry Bergson’s dubiousness on Einstein’s theory of Relativity.

    =======


    Einstein is a good example of how mysticism itself is being included within the scope of science, as the following quotation shows:

    "The most beautiful and most profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead.
    To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the centre of true religiousness"

    ==============

    St. Theresa of Avila (1615-1582) belongs to a group of mystics who were more profoundly steeped in contemplative mysticism. She also worked hard establishing new orders for her Carmelite nuns. Her autobiography reveals a life that alternated between two levels, one more instinctive than the other.

    She was highly capable of analyzing her own feelings and her writings therefore have a great value inasmuch as they reveal the agonies of a soul torn between a life under the sway of instincts and one on a higher level of spiritual life. Roman Catholic circles always refer to St. Theresa with great respect, as representing the highest model of mystical expression acceptable to the Church. St Theresa speaks about "serving God in justice" in the following:

    "Let everyone understand that real love of God does not consist in tear-shedding, nor in that sweetness and tenderness for which usually we long, just because they console us, but in serving God in justice, fortitude of soul and humility."

    Next, we read St. Theresa´s "Four Degrees (or Stages) of Prayer" where we can easily recognize the broad features of our own idea of structuralism. We read:

    "We may say that beginners in prayer are those who draw the water up out of the well; which is a great labour, as I have said. For they find it very tiring to keep the senses recollected, when they are used to a life of distraction.

    Let us now turn to the second method of drawing it which the Owner of the plot has ordained. By means of a device with a windlass, the gardener draws more water with less labour, and so is able to take some rest instead of being continuously at work. I apply this description to the prayer of quiet ....

    Let us now speak of the third water that feeds this garden, which is flowing water from a stream or spring. This irrigates it with far less trouble, though some effort is required to direct it to the right channel. But now the Lord is pleased to help the gardener in such a way as to be, as it were, the gardener Himself ...

    The soul does not know what to do; it cannot tell whether to speak or be silent, whether to laugh or to weep. It is a glorious bewilderment, a heavenly madness, in which true wisdom is acquired, and to the soul a fulfilment most full of delight.

    In this state (i.e. the fourth state) the soul still feels it is not altogether dead, as we may say, though it is entirely dead to the world. But, as I have said, it retains the sense to know that it is still here and to feel its solitude; and it makes use of outward manifestations to show its feelings, at least by signs.

    How what is called union takes place and what it is, I cannot tell. It is explained in mystical theology, but I cannot use the proper terms: I cannot understand what mind is, or how it differs from soul or spirit. They all seem one to me."

    ==========

    St. John of the Cross (1542-1591) also attains to a high degree of mystical awareness.

    "Upon a gloomy night,
    With all my cares to loving ardours flushed,
    (O venture of delight!)
    With nobody in sight
    I went abroad when all my house was hushed.


    In safety, in disguise,
    In darkness up the secret stair I crept,
    (O happy enterprise!)
    Concealed from other eyes,
    When all my house at length in silence slept.

    Upon a lucky night
    In secrecy, inscrutable to sight,
    I went without discerning
    And with no other light
    Except for that which in my heart was burning.

    It lit and led me through
    More certain than the light of noonday clear
    To where One waited near
    Whose presence well I knew,
    There where no other presence might appear.

    Oh night that was my guide!
    Oh darkness dearer than the morning's pride,
    Oh night that joined the lover
    To the beloved bride
    Transfiguring them each into the other.

    Within my flowering breast
    Which only for himself entire I save
    He sank into his rest
    And all my gifts I have
    Lulled by the airs with which the cedars wave.

    Over the ramparts fanned
    While the fresh wind was fluttering his tresses,
    With his serenest hand
    My neck he wounded, and
    Suspended every sense with its caresses.

    Lost to myself I stayed
    My fate upon my lover having laid
    From all endeavour ceasing:
    And all my cares releasing
    Threw them among the lilies there to fade."
    ================
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  2. #2
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Re: Neither ‘two’ nor ‘four’..... But it is 16.

    What more do we have?


    In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad under reference honey is the most central of values. Honey is horizontally gathered by bees from many flowers and when so gathered the value can be represented as a unitive factor on a vertical axis in cosmological, psychological, theological or even political contexts. The total range of necessary and contingent values can be comprised within its scope in a certain methodological and epistemological order. A scrutiny of the verses that follow reveals its poetic form which does not mar its fully scientific status. We read :



    "This earth is honey for all creatures, and all creatures are honey for this earth. This shining, immortal Person who is in this earth, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is in the body - he, indeed, is just this Soul (atman), this, Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    These waters are honey for all things, and all things are honey for these waters. This shining, immortal Person who is in these waters, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is made of semen - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    This fire is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this fire. This shining, immortal Person who is in this fire, and with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is made of speech - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    This wind is honey for all things and all things are honey for this wind. This shining, immortal Person who is in this wind, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is breath - he is just this Soul, this Immortal this Brahma, this All.


    This sun is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this sun. This shining, immortal Person who is in this sup, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is in the eye - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    These quarters of heaven are honey for all things, and all things are honey for these quarters of heaven. This shining, immortal Person who is in these quarters of heaven, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is in the ear and in the echo -- he is just this Soul, this Immortal this Brahma, this All.


    This moon is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this moon. This shining, immortal Person who is in this moon, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person consisting of mind - he is just this Soul, this Immortal,, this Brahma, this All.


    This lightning is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this lightning. This shining, immortal Person who is in this lightning, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who exists as heat - he is just this Soul this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.



    This thunder is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this thunder. This shining, immortal Person who is in thunder, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is in sound and in tone - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    This space is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this space. This shining, immortal Person who is in this space, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who is in the space in the heart - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    This Law (dharma) is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this Law, This shining, immortal Person who is in this law, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who edists as virtuousness - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma, this All.


    This Truth is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this Truth. This shining, immortal Person who is in this Truth, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who exists as truthfulness - he is just this Soul, this Immortal, this Brahma this All.


    This mankind (manusha) is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this mankind. This shining, immortal Person who is in this mankind, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who exists as a human being - he is just this Soul this Immortal, this Brahma, this All,


    This Soul (atman) is honey for all things, and all things are honey for this Soul. This shining, immortal Person who is in this Soul, and, with reference to oneself, this shining, immortal Person who exists as Soul - he is just this Soul? this Immortal, this Brahma, This All.


    Verily, this Soul is overlord of all things, the king of all things. As all the spokes are held together in the hub and felly of a wheel, just so in this Soul all things, all gods, all worlds, all breathing things, all these selves are held together."
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  3. #3
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Re: Neither ‘two’ nor ‘four’..... But it is 16.

    This is not an act of disapproving the above theories except the upanishds; it is not a clever performance of any kinds refutation either.

    All theories quoted above are consistent with the power to uplift the spirits of any man of curiosity, whether he is scientific or mystical, and these also have the capability to easily make an ordinary man a life-long happier.

    So the task undertaken here is nothing but awareness only; as it is the mother of every existing theory, the immediate requirement to retrieve and uphold, the ancient Indian tradition of the Upanishads with its antiquity, scientific validity and uniqueness of its own is an herculean task, which cannot be brushed aside. And this is only applied to whom those who would think we may regret in the future on the sacrilege of our ancient dharma.


    Why references from the theories of the west alone?

    It is because the present day Indian have the habit of learning everything from the west.

    Should we wait for the westerns to come and teach us what our past teachers have taught them hitherto?

    =========================

    I dont expect any replies to these post as I am convinced of it.

    Thank You all and Love
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •