Going Back To Some Basics part 2
Master Nome
In the former & 1st installment, we touched
on the basic Duality of "Self"
& "Other", diverting to that one bit of "Other" that we
so often take to be the "I", take to be oneself, namely, the
Body. Before continuing that thread,
another is now introduced, namely the actually "Space" – idea
within which the Body appears, along with Mind & World, those key ideas we
take up after looking again further at the Body.
But initially, surrounding the vague sense of "Other", conceived as different
from one’s Self, the feeling that "there seems to be something"
coalesces, as previously stated, with some kind of location, some size or
extent, some "substance" constituting this "something". But
what seems to be this "other" ?
In a way, this can be said to be a kind of "pure extent" or
Space. Seldom formalized, this universal
sense of Space was simply systematized by Rene Descartes as mathematical
Coordinate Space, familiar to grade school students as "graphs". Now there is no pretense that such formal
ideas crystallize in the initial sense of "Other" as Space, but
adopting this device simplifies our discussion.
In essence the idea of Space is that of a Container, one
that is formless, boundless, with no edge or boundary, empty of texture,
unchanging, & vast when we so consider it. One aspect of this idea of Space
is Dimension, a bit of form if you will, first formalized by Descartes in the
manner of rulers or knotted ropes first borrowed by the Egyptians from fishing
nets. The two-dimensional simplification
used by Descartes had appeared among the Greeks as Latitude & Longitude in
Geodesy. Such a concept was preserved by
Arab philosophers during Europe’s Dark Ages. Leaking back of these ideas from
Islam-conquered Spain to Italy prompted Perspective Drawing, Scaling, & the
Architecture that allowed the Renaissance & later on, Analytical Geometry
& ultimately Computer Science. Greek mathematics of Conic Sections played a
major role in Descartes’ Coordinate Space as well.
While Descartes’ "graphs" are two-dimensional or
2-D, our everyday sense of Physical Space & the World are 3-D. And yet, we
start next time to formalize the sense of "Other" this way, including
the Body, by initially looking at 0-D & 1-D Spaces of Ego, Now, Here, &
God for 0-D, followed by Time, & Mind in 1-D. For now though, we continue with another
installment on the Body idea by again quoting from Master Nome, disciple of Sri
Ramana Maharshi:
The Self is non–objective & ever the
knower. The Body is objective & always only the known. How, therefore, can the Self’s Existence be
equated with the Body ?
Basically, like all the rest of the World, the Body is
"out there" while one’s Self, the primordial Consciousness called
"I" that knows of it sown Existence, that Self is
"inside". Terms like "out
side" & "inside" take on more formal definition later in
this series. "Objective" refers to the "objects" that are
"outside", the "objects" that are known by
"Perception" [physical objects] or "Conception" [subtle
mental objects]. The Knower, the
Consciousness is "Non-objective",
Only if we accept a Duality of Knower & Known, then do we similarly
refer to the Duality of Subject & Object.
In that case we can somewhat equate "Non-objective" with
"Subjective", but until then, "Non-objective" is more
generally applicable.
The Self is attributeless Existence. The Body is known
by its perceived attributes, apart from which there is no Body. How, therefore, can the Self’s Existence be
equated with the Body ?
"Attributes" are the specific qualities by which
individual gross Perceptions or subtle Conceptions are distinguished, one from
the other. Being "Non-objective", the Self has n attributes while the
Body, an Object, does have attributes,
The Self is continuous. It does not commence at birth,
& it does not cease at Death.
Existence does not have the attribute of “living” or “dead.” Existence & the Knowledge of Existence
are full & not partial. Knowledge of
Existence is not sporadic & does not move about to different parts.
Non-Duality characterizes the "substance" of the
Self, while particular details characterize the body & other Objects. This
applies to Continuity in Time, or its opposite, in the case of the Body.
The Existence of the Self is the constant background
of the Body’s appearance &
disappearance, & likewise, of the Waking
& other states of Mind. The Body is discontinuous in several ways.
For the Body, there is Life & Death. The experience of the Body is sporadic
in Perception, with only one, or a few parts or senses experienced at any one
time. Never is one aware of all of it
at once. The Body appears only in the Waking state of Mind. How, therefore, can
the Self s Existence be equated with the Body?
Just at the Body is only known through Perception, so to is
each Perception partial. For those from the Vedas through philosopher George
Berkeley through modern Islamic author Harun Yahya, the World is Unreal. When
perceiving the Leg, the Arm just isn’t there. Earlier quotes about how the Body
"appears only in the moments of
perception" is a caution that applies piece by piece. We only experience a Body, or a Universe, one
thin slice at a time. Mentally we "fill-in" the rest just as does the
Optical system in vision.
Next time we continue with the model of Coordinate Space on
the one hand, & the comments of Master Nome on the Body & the Self as
well.
No comments:
Post a Comment