Surfing the Nachiketas fire, or sampradaha as metaphor of the intellect

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

And thanks for the heads up regarding the Shani prayer. We shall see if I get my

wish.

 

Let me begin by noting that when we speak of evolution, the entire conception is

contingent upon the mind's ability to maintain an idea, and hold it in contrast

to some other idea. This very ability is duality. Evolution, when considered in

this context, has no meaning. The duality of preservation versus destruction is

itself an illusion, but whence does this illusion arise? And does the very

pageantry of images which we call phenomena come from the same source? If

universal collective consciousness (if such a thing even exists) is in the habit

of flexing in order to gain the stamina to hold a conception of its own

evolution long enough to recognize it as a desirable state, then some kind of

universal harmony can be seen as a result of awareness or self-knowledge, order

out of chaos. However, the concern that this state is in and of itself the

ultimate problem, or cause of suffering, is formidable. But here we would be in

U.G. Krishnamurti territory, seeing the pursuit of enlightenment itself as

problem, entertaining the possibility that the mind is more than myth. But I

don't want to go down that road, at the moment.

 

I am, rather, presently interested in the mind's ability to establish

non-syntactical positive conditioning, which is less analagous to favorably

programming computer to complete a task, than a streaming mass of assorted

stimuli which somehow have positive or pleasurable effects. Since syntax itself

is the recognizablly built-in problem of most models of consciousness, due to

its linearity, and since most non-linear theories of consciousness, such as

synchronicity, magical thinking, etc, are not highly regarded in mainstream

circles, merely gaining access to the body of thought relative to this subject

is no easy task, even with the internet. Moreover, if the understanding of the

dynamics of kundalini itself, for instance, were to emerge as " the

answer " to humanity's problems, such an understanding might even prove to be

impossible to communicate syntactically, due to the experiential nature of

kundalini. The problem is almost like that of 19th century German philosophy's

simulataneous praise of Upanishadic pantheistic imagination along with the

assessment of the naivete of the authors. Because phenomenology must categorize,

it will fail to revel in the ecstasy of Upanishadic imagination. Phenomenology

may inform the Zeitgeist, and at ever-increasing speed, but it may always lag

behind, in terms of immediacy of impact, the ecstatic experience itself, which

often glimpses unclaimed/uncategorized territory.

 

Both evolutionary theory and phenomenology both suffer from some degree of

linearity, whereas a system such as Tarot does not. The latter may be seen as a

system of space/time localization or assumption of identity, which hinges on the

power of the imagination along with the ability of the body to hold certain

types of energy in order to execute the role which the mind has conceived. The

ability to conceive relations between various simulataneous roles or players in

a state of harmonious energy exchange is to move toward a theory of Atman,

whereas the inability or unwillingness to do so is Anatman. Both processes are

driven by desire, however. It is as if Anatman theory is panning for gold in the

stream while Atman theory takes what pieces are found and builds temples, which,

of course, Anatman theory may or may not recognize.

 

Thanks,

 

Jeff Berger