Take A Good Look At Me Before Pointing The Finger At You!

The Texas Aryan Brotherhood Over The Steppe 

Bring Havoc On Babylonia 2001 - 2012

"The mystical transpersonal life does not exclude religious beliefs which are in fact philosophical views shared by most religions of the world. Concerning the origins of religions, they can be appreciated academically by creditable sources with what information we can obtain from experts in the field of the philosophy of religion going back at least 5000 years."

        To me, if there is something that we can all believe in it would be the laws of physics that orchestrate our natural world. So it makes good sense that ritual grew out of events that seem to oppose the laws of physics or the natural order of things, unexplained positive events we call miracles, because they seem to be beyond the limits of human reasoning, perhaps an innate inquirer or you, what makes you you, the nature of self as reflected in my essay “Me, What Makes Me me, the Nature of Self” journal entry August 2007.
          Indo-Aryan intrusions over the steppe into ancient Babylonia around the third millennia B.C., marks a significant shift from animism, the adoration of nature, to religious patterns spirited by competing views of nature and causality. Philosophical debate is rooted in the earliest known textual expressions of the Rig-Veda and the emergence of the Upanishads of Hindu Vedanta tradition known as the Vedic Period. Over a span of two thousand years, the adoration of nature unfolded to a reverence of Brahmin, the nature of universal self (Indian xviii).
          The Vedic Period gave way to several different ideologies such as Buddhism, Jainism, Savism, and Vaisnavism. Many believe this shift from traditional Hinduism was based on opposing claims of causality; identity- the nature of self.  The debate of identity and non-identity theorems is evident throughout the Upanishads and historically remembered as the life of Gautama the Buddha. Still at a much later date, a third position of ethnicity termed ‘Ren’, self as community, developed from the teachings of Confucius which complemented Buddhism and Daoism.
          The latter Vedic Period of 300 BC to 600 B.C. is dominated by two philosophical views; the traditional Brahmin which deals with the embodiment of the unconditional self, and applied science, the birth of logic. The Upanishads migrate from the idea of a superior ruler of many gods to monism, a unified whole or universal self termed ‘Atman’.  Logic developed from competing theories of physical proofs accredited to Kana author of the vaiseskika sutra.
          The vaiseskika sutra adopts the atomic principle of immutable atoms. The vaiseskika atomic view called padarths is a six fold classification of objects of experience: substance, quality (attribute), activity, generality, particularity, and inherence (p386).  The contemporary Nyaya system of logic may be based on the vaiseskika ideology which develops much later; estimated to be two-thousand years old. Most Hindu schools of thought accept the fundamental principle of Nyaya logic; whereas, generality, particularity and inherence are logically inferred; substance, attribute, and activity possess real objective existence.
           Kupperman explains that the Buddhist philosophy sees the world as a “swirl of fragments, linked by causal relation and by other associations (p 22).” Causality for the Buddhist is a set of conditions such as striking a match must have the conditions for striking and lighting the match; an action requires conditions to act. In other words, the picture of things is lighting up of a particular combination of immutable atoms.
           The term ‘anatman’ refers to the Buddhist rejection of the traditional Hindu view, “Atman is Brahmin” the main theme of the Upanishads. “The Dhammapada”, a Buddhist text, rejects “Atman” and the notion of a “real self” (Kupperman p 22).  Although both Hinduism and Buddhism show contempt to egoism and individualism, neither denies the ego-self or a first person view of the world. Joel Kupperman explains, “The Dhammada” metaphysics is opposite to that of Hindu philosophy.  The ego-self does not exist in the absolute sense; not some permanent thing. And second, the self is just a name in the absolute sense, a convenient designation, in other words, the term ‘self” is the name designated as psychotically physical complex that exist in the absolute sense at the same time.
         The Vedic tradition is revived by Samkara a thousand years later (788-820? A.D.) The Vedanta sutra chief commentators are Samkara, Ramanuja, and Mafdhva. Samkara expresses in his introduction of the “Vendanta Sutra” an identity claim of undifferentiated consciousness unaffected by death of the physical body. Samkara supports that reality self (Atman) is existence, knowledge and bliss universal and infinite. Conversely, non-identity of two properties as defined by Nyaya logic would still require an abstract object. Samkara claims an absolute identity between Brahman and the individual self- an identity claim, the nature of self and it’s relation to the absolute. Gregg Singlar explains, “Samkara repudiates the subjectivism of the Yogacaras (Buddhist idealists). He also holds that the world is non-existent. Our ignorance is born of a confusion of the transcendental subject (Atman) with empirical existence (anatman pg 507).”
        Nevertheless, self-preservation takes precedence over any other human activity; few philosophers would defend their lives with an abstract theory, especially when we consider what is really me, what makes me me- the nature of self.  Thomas Hobbs’s would argue for freedom, an unrestrained will such as the unbridled impulse that drove the Indo-Aryans over the steppe bringing havoc to the biblical frontiers of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers some 5000 years ago. Conversely, a third concept of identity blossomed in the Far East from the teachings of Confucius, a concept of self-interest best served by serving others- the nature of self (Ren) as community (li).
         Confucius seems to think we should be concerned with what is personally satisfying because a satisfying life is living in a society or group (Ren) by way of ritual (Li). Social relations are crucial with Confucius’s ethical methodology. Confucius rejected the idea of morality as a set of rules or imperatives; if ethics is Ren by way of Li, then he cannot make a judgment on another person’s behavior or say it is morally wrong to live in a certain way.
         Both ren and li are essential to Confucius’ ethical methodology; ‘Ren’ referrers to society (man plus others), and the term ‘Li’ refers to ritual or custom. Confucius would say, ren is not easy, ren is not far away, all you have to do is desire ren (another person), be it a society or interpersonal relationship. Confucianism can be argued as an identity claim in the absolute sense here now.  Causality for Confucius is an ethical concern that leads to immortality-the nature of self in others!
Again, critical thinking never did much good in matters of the soul so  I return to Mary’s and my journal of metaphysical parables which are simply stories that may reveal a paradox or give meaning to ideologies beyond the realm of human reasoning such as “A Story of Soul and a Way to See It.”  If there is something called soul, there must be a way to see it, even if they dwell in the peripheral blind spot of social invisibility. Could it be that there is an everyday ordinary common god, outside of peripheral perception as close as the invisible nose on your invisible face, working miracles in our lives?

Whose Blog Is It Anyways? 09/03/2013 gno