View allAll Photos Tagged metaphysics
METAPHYSICS IS THE NOVEL OF THE SPIRIT / THE FINAL / CHRISTELLE GEISER & AEON VON ZARK / NAKED EYE PROJECT BIENNE / ALTERED STATE SERIE / THE WEIRD DREAM / PORTRAIT.
The exhibition "Picasso 1932. Erotic Year" at the Musée Picasso Paris examines the link between the artist's personal life and his creation. Pablo Picasso's creative process and daily life are followed day after day through more than one hundred and ten paintings, drawings, engravings and sculptures and a hundred archival documents..? The title of the exhibition, "Picasso 1932. Erotic Year" underlines the significance of sensual works in this year's production process. The exhibition "Picasso 1932. Erotic Year" at the Musée Picasso Paris focuses on a particularly dense year of the artist's creation through paintings, drawings, engravings and sculptures, including some major pieces from his career, and documents that place them in their biographical context. He misses the essential in the comments on his genesis but disregards the true sources of inspiration in an interpretation very much focused on the libido and often very superficial, too bad that the analyses are so simplistic ? Her quest soon took Arieans to France, the centre of the art world at the time. Via Cocteau she automatically arrived at Picasso, a central figure in the Parisian artistic environment. In order to gain more insight into the occult movements that turned out to be literally 'in fashion' in the Parisian artistic world at the beginning of the last century, she consulted a variety of connoisseurs for advice: the French centrepiece of research into the esoteric Antoine Faivre, the religious scientist Jean Pierre Laurant, who mapped out the circles of the Eglise Gnostique, and the occultism connoisseur Robert Amadou. In The Hague she went into the Alchemist’s library and joined a research group of philosophers, philosophers and art historians at the University of Amsterdam.
A 'wildly interesting' research, as she calls it, that because of its interdisciplinary approach does not confine itself to a fragment - the interpretation of one painting - but colours an entire image of a time artistically and philosophically. Arian provides detailed information about the occult currents and orders that were active in Paris around 1900 and about the magazines, such as L'Initiation, that brought esoteric ideas to the attention of a wide audience.
Of great importance was the the philosophically inspired by Order Martinist, founded in 1884 by Gérard Encausse, nicknamed Papus, one of the most influential occultists of the fin-de siècle. Because of the "chaine de silence", the chain of silence that the members of the order never break through, it is not possible to establish with certainty, but it was probably this order that Picasso was a member of during his Cubist period.
The martinists, just like the Alchemists, knew three degrees of initiation: the 'pupil', 'companion' and 'master' of the alchemists were called 'member', 'initiated' and 'initiator' among the martinists, or Superior, Inconnu, who was abbreviated to SI. These letters can be found in some of Picasso's paintings and especially in Picasso's collages,'' Ariens discovered. And there is more: some of the canvases depict black eye masks as they are worn in the martinist lodges; here and there martinist signs roam around, on the canvas La cuisine even a whole kitchen floor full. The square, the symbol of the freemasons, is also a recurring theme. One collage even shows cow letters OR MA -OR(dre) MA(rtiniste) - which prompted one of Picasso's friends to comment that the painter 'advertised order'. In addition to the martyrs, the 'Ordre kabbalistique de la Rose-Croix', which entered into organic cooperation with the martyrdom order, and the Gnostic Church, which is related to martinism, were also influential. The later recruited many of her bishops from the Order Martinist. Inspired by the circle around Picasso, Arian's roles mention the names of famous artists over each other; one appears to be even better introduced into the secrets and symbolism of occultism than the other. According to her, Picasso's main inspirators are the writer Alfred Jarry and the painters Paul Gauguin and Paul Cézanne, and his contemporaries and friends, the writers Max Jacob, Guillaume Apollinaire and André Salmon. In more than the ones picture it’s Skull and Bones that was founded in 1832 at Yale University. The order is also known as "Bones", and members are called "Bonesmen" who are some of the world's most powerful elites.
How many bones did Picasso paint in this work? Probably Picasso could be readed with two modes, one is written in the official catalog, and one other live in gnostic, probably forgotten in the blockchain of silencing? In French the word Songe give Song in English ( Songe is like visionary's dream and Song is a note of dream) The "Songe" of Ezekiel could be the roots of this painting?
In chapter 37 of Ezekiel, we have a classic metaphysical outline upon which very exciting sermons can be built. Very much the same as the David and Goliath thing. When you read that chapter of the valley of the dry bones and you're aware of metaphysical Bible interpretation, you can almost see how the author is winding it all up for you. Here's the valley, here's the dry bones, they're all dry, very disconnected, then comes the Lord and instructions and then this Ezekiel's blewing this to obey them, he obeys them and these things begin happening to the bones. It gets so far and no farther. All the connections are made, all of the shapes and forms are made, but there's one thing lacking, there's no what? There's no life, they are there in form potential, but they haven't become living actualities yet. So Ezekiel says, now what do I do? He says, "Prophesy now, not to the bones, but prophesy now to the four winds, to the all four winds and prophesy now to the winds to tell the bones to live and the bones became a living army." The prophet Ezekiel saw a vision of vast numbers of people resurrected to live again as physical human beings. What is the meaning of this mystifying vision, and what does it teach us about God's plan? The remains of human bones in a dirt grave. 123RF
Much of God’s revelation to Ezekiel revolved around the distant decendants of Israel and crucial, end-time events centuries in the future. From early youth Ezekiel had been educated and trained to be a priest in the kingdom of Judah. But his hopes and dreams had been dashed by King Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, taking him and other young Jews captive to Babylon. Now far separated from the temple in Jerusalem, how could his education and training be of any real value? There was no need to worry. God was looking after His own. The Creator had called Ezekiel to be a great prophet, ranked alongside Isaiah and Jeremiah. Christian writer Christopher Wright put it this way: “So while we can value all the positive contributions that Ezekiel’s education and training as a priest brought to his prophetic ministry, we must also appreciate the immense personal, professional and theological shock it must have been to him … [Yet] God would use all that He had built into Ezekiel’s life during his years of preparation” ( The Message of Ezekiel, 2001, p. 27). Most in mainstream Christendom erroneously believe that today is the only day of salvation. But this belief simply is not found in the Bible. When he was 30 years old, Ezekiel began to experience astonishing visions from Almighty God. Perhaps in a personal diary, he recorded the exact date on which the first vision occurred: “Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the River Chebar, that the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God” (Ezekiel 1:1, emphasis added throughout). The invisible barriers between heaven and earth were supernaturally parted for Ezekiel. But what did this prophet actually see in vision? Moving beyond the introductory revelation of the awesome angelic realm, we fast-forward to verses 26 and 28. “On the likeness of the throne was a likeness with the appearance of a man high above it… This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.”There's a beautiful ready-made outline for a metaphysical interpretation. The valley always stands for a low point in your current pathway of life. A downsy, and everybody hits them, in his pathway of life. And when you're in a downsy, and you look around you, what do you usually see all about you? Discouraging, hopeless-looking details - dry bones. Everything is wrong down there. This is a dry bone, meaning a discouraging appearance or a hopeless looking state of affairs. That's what you see in these depressions, these valley periods of your journey of life. But then, you hear the voice of the Lord, "Prophesy unto these bones, say unto them, Oh, ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord". Now, what does Unity call the word of the Lord - affirmations of Truth, declarations of Truth right in the face of the discouraging, negative, hopeless looking conditions or situations. And, as he does this, as we affirm right into the teeth - bones, get it? - of discouraging looking appearances, things begin to happen.
It says, first the bones begin to shake, and then move, and then they began to connect bone to bone. In other words, new connections are formed right in the midst of discouraging or contradictory outer appearances. In the realm of the invisible, every affirmation of Truth results in new connections for future good. This is an occult law of metaphysics. It is absolutely true, in the invisible realm, every affirmation of truth results in new connections of factors for future good. From one point of view, these factors are dry bones, but from another point of view, these factors will become living good, a living army of good, and so, he prophesies and these bones all become connected. Then everything stops ... So then, there has to be a change of the type of prophecies or affirming ... To prophesy, to declare the Truth in every possible direction, that is, let God activity enter into this as He wills, from any direction His spirit choose. Ezekiel initially reacted just like the prophet Daniel and the apostles Paul and John did later. “So when I saw it, I fell on my face, and I heard a voice of One [God] speaking. And He said to me, ‘Son of man, stand on your feet, and I will speak to you’…And He said to me; ‘Son of man, I am sending you to the children of Israel’ ” (Ezekiel 1:28; Ezekiel 2:1-3). God gave Ezekiel a great mission to accomplish. He had important announcements to make. These were intended to reach people far beyond his own time to people down through the ages. And one important vision would serve to encourage all who have ever lived in facing the same remorseless enemy—the seemingly hopeless ending of life in death. The prophet did have a comparatively small personal audience in Babylon of fellow captives from Judah (Ezekiel 3:11). But the real import of his message was not primarily for these deported, displaced prisoners who could do little about their circumstance.It’s important to understand that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah had separated after King Solomon’s death and that the people of the kingdom of Israel had already gone into captivity at the hands of the Assyrians during the latter part of the eighth century B.C.—well over a century before Ezekiel prophesied. And by the time his prophecies began, some of the inhabitants of the kingdom of Judah were likewise already in captivity, first by the Assyrians and then the Babylonians, with most of the rest soon to follow as a result of later Babylonian invasions. Careful reading of Ezekiel’s prophetic message will reveal that it was aimed mainly at the distant future, primarily directed to the end-time descendants of Israel. Much of God’s revelation to him revolved around crucial, end-time events—both positive and negative—that would take place centuries in the future. In the prophecy Jesus Christ gave on the Mount of Olives the week He died, He plainly stated regarding the end-time, “For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written [in the Old Testament prophets, including Ezekiel] may be fulfilled” (Luke 21:22). But cataclysmic occurrences at the close of man’s age are just one aspect of this overall prophetic scenario. Notice the apostle Peter’s words to the crowd gathered in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost seven weeks after Jesus’ death and resurrection: “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets [again including Ezekiel] since the world began” (Acts 3:19-21). This insightful passage depicts a future golden age brought to a suffering humanity by the returning Jesus Christ, lasting 1,000 years (see Revelation 20:1-6). Israel’s prophets aptly describe this long period of peace, prosperity and well-being. One of God’s annual festivals, the Feast of Tabernacles, corresponds directly to Christ’s coming millennial reign.
A rebellious analysts lost forever?
God continued to instruct Ezekiel: “Then He said to me, ‘Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak with My words to them’ ” (Ezekiel 3:4). Our Creator speaks to a rebellious people who have rarely been inclined to take His warning messages seriously. Their descendants down through time have most often chosen to remain in the depths of idolatry and Sabbath-breaking, two sins against God that Ezekiel emphasized (Ezekiel 14:1-6; Ezekiel 20:12-13; Ezekiel 20:16-17; Ezekiel 20:24; Ezekiel 22:3; Ezekiel 22:8). Tragically, these two trends continue unabated today. But who truly represents the “Israel” today to whom these prophecies are intended? The present tiny state of Israel consists mostly of Jews descended from those of the kingdom of Judah, so the name Israel is a misnomer. History and Bible prophecy show that the modern descendants of the other tribes of Israel stand clearly identified as the Americans, British Commonwealth and peoples of northwestern Europe. For the biblical and historical evidence, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy . You cannot truly grasp God’s prophetic message to humankind apart from the essential knowledge disclosed in this eye-opening publication. The modern descendants of Israel have been likewise rebellious against God. And all share in the same fate—national punishment and, for each individual, the ultimate penalty of sin, which is death (Romans 6:23). The prophecies of future national blessings are encouraging, but what good are they to those who have died? After the Exodus from Egypt, a whole generation of disobedient Israelites perished in the wilderness. Later, many died at the hands of ruthless Assyrian invaders. Much later, about 40 years after Christ’s death and resurrection, many died tragically as a result of the Roman invasion of Judea and the capture of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Of course, the same fate is shared by those who never had the opportunity to choose a way of life to follow. Consider all those little babies Herod cruelly killed in a failed effort to murder the Christ child. Their parents were devastated with unrelieved grief. “A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, refusing to be comforted, because they are no more” (Matthew 2:18). Are these children, then, now lost? Now, instead of affirming about things or prophesying to the bones, now he's told prophesy to and about what? The winds, all four winds. What is wind often a symbol for in the Bible? The Holy Spirit, the activity of God, the movement of God as the Holy Spirit. Now, why would he designate all four winds? Well, you're talking about the movement of God to bring changes and good into your life. To prophesy, to declare the Truth in every possible direction, that is, let God activity enter into this as He wills, from any direction His spirit chooses. North, east, south or west. Not from where I insist it's got to come from - south by southeast only! Don't we often do this? We don't realize it, but we say, all directions of the wind, wherever God chooses, in God's way, let this fulfillment come. So many people among the Israelites have died as victims of evil and injustice. Today we remember the Holocaust in which 6 million Jews were callously murdered in Central and Eastern Europe. How should we try to understand all of these tragic occurrences? Is there no hope for even innocent children who died in infancy without ever knowing why? Of course, these questions beset people of every nation—not just Israel. But God has given a special message through Ezekiel to Israel in this regard—one that holds significance for all people. The French martyrs, Rosicrucians and Gnostics of the beginning of the last century treated alchemy, kabbalah and tarot as analogous systems, which they brought together under one heading. According to art historians, this mixture of symbolism from the Kabbalah, Tarot and Alchemy, which inspired Picasso in his cubist work, is the key to the painter's true intentions in his famous painting 'Les Demoiselles d'Avignon'. André Breton, pope and surrealist ideologist, persuaded art dealer Doucet to buy the canvas. He wrote, "If this canvas escapes us, most of our mysteries will go along. But the art historians left that sentence out''.
The final part of Ariean's research, a case study in which she removes the veil of mystery, differs slightly, to put it mildly, from the reception of the canvas so far. Seen through the occult spectacles which she - with an abundance of material - shows that Picasso also had them on at the time, the canvas points Aryan in a very different way from the 'philosophical brothel' for which it was long regarded. Supported by her study of the hundreds of sketches and preliminary studies, she discovers neither 'African art' nor 'syphilis sufferers' in the painting. No 'naked bodies', but 'naked facts': signs and numbers. The order was incorporated in 1856 by General William Huntington Russell, and Alphonso Taft who became Secretary of War under President Grant in 1876. The numerical value of this year is 1+8+7+6 = 22, and the numerical motto for Skull and Bones is 322, or 3 x's 22 which you will see below is not a coincidence. 22 bones are represented in Picasso’s engraving.... In numerology, the number 22 is often called the Master Builder. The Phoenician-Hebrews possess 22 books and their alphabet is made up of 22 letters, which was created to compose the Word of God. The Kabbalah teaches us that the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are the building blocks of universe. The underlying occult scientific significance of the number 22 in science would represent the bones of the skull, of which there are twenty-two. 8 form the cranium, or braincase, and 14 are associated with the face.
Our brains are what we use to think, reason and come to know the divine or God. The 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet created to compose the Word of God is our 22 boned skull, and the place where we receive the light to become illuminated, or enlightened beings. Hence, to be like Saint John and have our own Revelation.
Portrait by Picasso of the great resurrection
Ezekiel continued to have visions throughout his prophetic ministry. The one in the 37th chapter speaks directly to the desperate plight of Israel down through the ages. Its intriguing description of the valley of dry bones was the subject of a popular song, “Dry Bones,” during the mid-1950s. No matter how many times one rereads it, this account remains both arresting and suspenseful to the converted mind. But even more important is the profound meaning for us—and for our departed loved ones, who may never have been called of God or spiritually converted during this age. This remarkable, comforting vision assures us that we will see them again! The hand of the Lord came upon me and brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord, and set me down in the midst of the valley; and it was full of bones . . . and He said to me, ‘Son of man, can these bones live?’ So I answered, ‘O Lord God, you know’ ” (Ezekiel 37:1-3). Then, what happens to those potential bones, those skeletons become a living army. In other words, the potential good which you have declared and affirmed come to your life from any direction God chooses. The static good becomes living good, which means a part of their life, a part of the goodness of their life. A living army, an army of blessings come into manifestation through prophesying according to the direction or the guidance of the Lord. God must not be underestimated. He asked the patriarch Abraham, “Is anything too hard for the Lord?” (Genesis 18:14). Centuries later He posed the same question to the prophet Jeremiah: “Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh. Is there anything too hard for Me?” (Jeremiah 32:27). Remember that one of the meanings of prophesying simply means affirming. Affirming the Truth regardless of circumstances. Weren't the prophets constantly talking about future events? So often the prophets have been interpreted as sort of fortune-tellers, or clairvoyants in all this. Well, metaphysically, this is not so. What it really means on the metaphysical level is declaring the Truth which will insure a future good outcome. Of course, the prophets also prophesy in what other manner - negative, too. Therein lies part of the problem.
Ezekiel’s vision continues: “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: ‘Surely I will cause breath to enter into you, and you shall live’ . . . Also He said to me, ‘Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, “Thus says the Lord God: ‘Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live’ ”’” (Ezekiel 37:5; Ezekiel 37:9). Physical human beings cannot live without drawing breath—the essence of our fleshly life. Even excellent swimmers, experts at holding their breath, cannot survive long without breathing air. So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived , and stood upon their feet, an exceedingly great army” (Ezekiel 37:10).. Then He said to me, ‘Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel’ ” (Ezekiel 37:11). God then summarizes what He had just described in detail. “Thus says the Lord God: ‘Behold, O My people, I will open your graves and cause you to come up from your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. Then you shall know that I am the Lord” (Ezekiel 37:12-13). Most pictured here never really knew God during their previous human lives. The closing verse of this vision reveals why God, who never does anything without purpose, has just resurrected all these people: “I will put My [Holy] Spirit in you, and you shall live” (Ezekiel 37:14). At that time all of these people will have an opportunity to be converted—that is, to repent of their sins, be forgiven and baptized, and receive God’s Holy Spirit by which they can truly be converted and receive God’s gift of eternal life. The indication of this preceding verse is that the majority of this great multitude of people will obtain everlasting life in God’s Kingdom.The New Testament also speaks to this incredible, miraculous phenomenon. The apostle Paul wrote: “And so all Israel will be saved , as it is written: ‘The Deliverer [Jesus Christ] will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob [whose name was changed to Israel ]; For this is My covenant with them [i.e., the New Covenant], when I take away their sins’ ” (Romans 11:26-27). By no stretch of the imagination is all of Israel being saved now during this present age of man. But God promises that the whole of Israel will have their opportunity for salvation in the future. Relatively few are being called now to join with the firstfruits of God’s salvation. These called-out ones, true Christians, will be resurrected to receive everlasting life when Christ returns (1 Corinthians 15:50-54; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; Philippians 3:20-21). Is this great resurrection exclusively for Israel? Or will other peoples and nations also be included? Remember that our loving Creator remains “the God of all flesh” (Jeremiah 32:27). Several passages in the Gospel accounts show that non-Israelite rulers and peoples are to be resurrected as well. The queen of the South (Sheba), the peoples of Tyre, Sidon and Nineveh (ancient nations and city-states that long predated Jesus’ human lifetime), and even the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah will be resurrected to physical life alongside Christ’s generation of Israelites (see Matthew 11:20-24; Matthew 12:41-42; Luke 10:12-14). Jesus plainly stated: “Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live . . . Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice” (John 5:25; John 5:28). Later Christ revealed to this same apostle John that “the rest of the dead”—referring to those not raised to life in this resurrection —”did not live again until the thousand years were finished” (Revelation 1:1; 20:5). This tells us that the timing of this resurrection is after the thousand-year period known as the Millennium. This verse also clearly shows that there is more than one resurrection.
Is today the only day of salvation for Picasso’s explanations?
Most in mainstream Christendom erroneously believe that today is the only day of salvation. But this belief simply is not found in the Bible. In fact the vast majority of mankind will receive their opportunity for salvation during the great resurrection to judgment that we have been reading about in Ezekiel 37:1-14. The apostle John also refers to this resurrection to temporary physical life in Revelation 20:11-13: “Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it…And I saw the dead, small and great [now resurrected], standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books [plural, the books of the Bible].” The “great white throne” judgment occurs not in an instant as people are raised from the dead, but instead over a considerable period of time. God will judge them over time, just as those called to salvation today are judged over time during this present age by this very same standard, the books of the Bible (1 Peter 4:17; 2 Timothy 3:15-17). Many Bible readers misunderstand the nature and meaning of judgment, nearly always associating the term with sentencing to condemnation—not realizing that God is a merciful judge who patiently evaluates human existence with righteous discernment. He earnestly desires to see the blood of His Son Jesus blot out the sins of as many as possible. Christ Himself firmly stated, “ And I, if I am lifted up from the earth [by crucifixion], will draw all peoples to Myself” (John 12:32). Paul writes of “God our Saviour, whose will it is that all should find salvation and come to know the truth” (1 Timothy 2:3-4, Revised English Bible). And in Ezekiel 18:32 we read, “ ‘For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies,’ says the Lord God. ‘Therefore turn [to righteousness] and live!’” This coming time of judgment will give those who never really knew God during their previous lifetime a just and fair opportunity for salvation— not a second chance. The special meaning of the biblical eighth-day festival As mentioned earlier, the Feast of Tabernacles, also known as the Feast of Ingathering, pictures Christ’s millennial reign. But immediately following this seven-day Feast is a separate one-day celebration referred to simply as “the eighth day” (Leviticus 23:34-36; Numbers 29:35; 2 Chronicles 7:9; Nehemiah 8:18). The real meaning of this celebration is rarely understood in modern theological circles. Yet it represents an essential missing piece to the puzzle of salvation. This special Holy Day directly corresponds to the Great White Throne Judgment period, during which God will give all those who have ever lived but never really understood the truth their first real opportunity for salvation. Because few people are aware of the God-ordained festivals spelled out in the Bible, few understand God’s step-by-step plan of salvation revealed through these celebrations. The meaning of the eighth day corresponds to Ezekiel’s vision of the Valley of Dry Bones, referring to a time when lost family members will be joyously joined together again to learn God’s ways while living under utopian conditions of mutual love, peace and prosperity. This Holy Day reminds us that God’s plan promises to offer every human being the opportunity to truly repent of sin and receive a permanent place in His everlasting family, the Kingdom of God. Q. Going back to the four winds idea, if we were praying for healing, instead of concentrating on the liver, for instance, we would pray for perfect and whole health. A. Right, the healing idea, the health principle, the perfect life idea and then add the extra mile to it - and however it shall come - I am completely open and willing in all four directions of the Holy Spirit. Let it come anyway that it is proper according to God's will, in this situation. You will find that when you are faithful on the metaphysical realm of thinking and believing it will become chemicalized on the physiological level, and verifiable on that level. However, there will often be a big time lapse, nevertheless, it will occur, and science is catching up. I'm very smart on this subject, aren't I, because I have John Salunek as a progress counselee.
Still in the seventies, the reddish giant sun Aldebaran, a so-called "red giant", as the astrophysical expression for it is called, with a mass of at least 2.5 times the mass of our own sun, with which, according to astrophysical calculations, Aldebaran was only granted an age of about 800 million years at best, according to astronomical reference works and tables,which practically excluded the existence of inhabitable planets, because only from 1.5 masses of sun can a sun remain stable for at least 2.5 billion years and exist altogether as sun for about 3.0 billion years, thus just long enough to enable the formation of one or some earth-like planets with at least primitive life forms on it.Only from the mid-1980s did Aldebaran appear in corresponding technical literature with around 1.15 solar masses, giving this sun at least a total age of around 6 billion years, of which the last 100 to 500 million years were from a stable "main sequence star" of spectral type F6,a yellow sun that was somewhat brighter than ours (our sun is an approximately 5 billion year old main sequence star, luminosity class 7, spectral type G2, which could remain stable for an estimated 3 billion years), expanded and became a "red giant" with the current spectrum K5. In Christmas 1943 the probably last big joint meeting of the Vril Society and Thule Society took place. The scene was the romantic beach castle in the German Baltic seaside resort of Kolberg.
Here, Thule and Vril people from all directions should have gathered once again.Maria Orschitsch and a new medium of the Vril Society, Sigrun F., discovered by Maria Orschitsch, were also present (with respect to living relatives we do not mention the full name of Sigrun here).These two women should soon have played a leading role in this meeting.But for the time being - and we can only assume this - the war situation will have been discussed; and we can assume that in that circle, which included widely travelled world connoisseurs, little illusions will have reigned over the overall situation.The threat posed to Germany and its few allies by an enormous superiority in terms of numbers was as obvious as the increasing problem of raw materials.It was clear that Germany was facing a merciless destruction like that of Carthage, if not the very last possibilities could be exhausted to counter this intention of the Allies.The difficulties in preparing the UFOs for combat will also have been discussed.For as soon as the ("UFO" had built up its own "field", it was virtually invulnerable to attacks from outside - but just as enemy projectiles could not break through the field from outside, so the conventional weapons could not be used from inside to outside.Neither bomb drops nor gunfire were possible, because the propulsion was reduced to such an extent that not only the flight characteristics became unattractive, but also the sensitivity to bombardment existed.And the "power-jet guns" provided by the SS-E-IV, the details of which are little known, were not yet ready for use. The unconventional technology had hardly anything to offer at that time, which could have been thrown directly into the fights as a weapon. In this overall situation, the "Aldebaran perspective" came into play.In the media (so it is said) concrete connections had been established with the distant but powerful "Summi" empire of Aldebaran.And the Vril people were working at an advanced stage on a spaceship that would be "dimension channel capable" - that is, the distance to Aldebaran, which would be relatively easy and fast to cover for about 68 light years...In everything we recognise two principles that determine events: light and darkness, good and evil, creation and destruction -- as in electricity we know plus and minus. It is always: either - or."These two principles - the creative and the destructive - also determine our technical means...Everything destructive is of Satanic origin, everything creative is divine... Every technology based upon explosion or combustion has thus to be called Satanic. The coming new age will be an age of a new, positive, divine technology!..." Dr. Schumann (from SS archives). The Vril Society known as “The All German Society for Metaphysics “was formed in 1921 to explore the origins of the Aryan race. The Society allegedly taught concentration exercises designed to awaken the forces of Vril, a shaakti sexual energy force strongest in women with long hair that fed magnetic energy from the earth to the brain. Male members of the Vril Society are said to have included Adolf Hitler, Alfred Rosenberg, Heinrich Himmler, Hermann Goering, and Hitler’s personal physician, Dr. Theodor Morell. They were original members of the Thule Society which supposedly joined Vril in 1919. The NSDAP (Nazi Party) was created by Thule in 1920, one year later. Dr. Krohn, who created the Nazi flag, was also a Thulist. Maria Orsic, aka Maria Orsitsch, Marija Orsitsch, Marija Oršić - but mostly written simply as Maria Orsic. She was a famous occult medium who later became the leader of the Vril Gesellschaft - or Vril Society ... She was born in Vienna, Austria. Her father was a Croatian from Zagreb, her mother was from Vienna. Maria soon followed into the popular German nationalist movement which was popular at this time - the main goal of the movement was to annex Austria with the German Reich. In 1917 the occultist Karl Haushofer, Baron Rudolf von Sebottendorf, the WWI ace pilot Lothar Waiz, prelate Gernot of the secret “Societas Templi Marcioni” (The Inheritors of the Knights Templar) and Maria Orsic, the well known beautiful transcendental medium from Zagreb, met in Schopenhauer café in Vienna. They all had extensively studied the Golden Dawn, its teachings, rituals and especially its knowledge about Asian secret lodges. Sebottendorf and Haushofer were experienced travelers of India and Tibet and much influenced by the teachings and myths of those places. During the First World War, Karl Haushofer had made contacts with one of the most influential secret societies of Asia, the Tibetan “Yellow Hats” (dGe-lugs-pa). The contacts between Haushofer and the Yellow Hats led in the Twenties to the formation of Tibetan colonies in Germany. The four young people hoped that during these meeting in Vienna they would learn something about the secret revelatory texts of the Knights Templar and also about the secret fraternity Die Herren vom schwarzen Stein (“The Lords of the Black Stone”). Prelate Gernot was on of the “Inheritors of the Knights Templar”, which are the only true Templar society. They are the descendants of the Templars of 1307 who passed on their secrets from father to son – until today. Prelate Gernot apparently told them about the advent of a new age – the change-over from the Age of Pisces to the Age of Aquarius. In December 1919 a members of Thule, Vril and DHvSS (Die Herren vom schwarzen Stein - The Lords of the Black Stone) rented a small forester’s lodge in the vicinity of Berchtesgaden (Germany) where they met, accompanied by Maria Orsic and another medium who was only known as Sigrun. Maria claimed to have received mediumistically transmissions in a secret German Templar script - a language unknown to her - containing technical data for the construction of a flying machine. Vril documents discovered after WWII, mention these telepathic messages, which had their origin in Aldebaran, a solar system 68 light-years away in the constellation Taurus. Supposedly the documents state that she had two piles of papers: one with the Templar script, the other with a legible writing. Maria suspected the second pile would be written in an ancient eastern language and therefore she could be aided by the “Panbabylonists”, a circle close to the Thule society which was integrated by Hugo Winckler, Peter Jensen, Friedrich Delitzsch and others. It turned out that the apparently mysterious language was actually ancient Sumerian and hence the language of the ancient Babylonian culture founders. Sigrun, from the Vril gesellschaft helped translate the language and decipher the strange mental images of a circular flight machine. The concept of “other science” (or “alternative science”) matured in this time and the following years. Because of the financing difficulties it took three years until the flying machine project started taking shape. By 1922, parts for the machine began arriving independently from various industrial sources paid in full by Thule and Vril. While in Munich, Maria was in contact with the Thule Gesellschaft and soon she created her own cult 'circle' together with Traute A. from Munich and several other mediums: the “Alldeutsche Gesellschaft für Metaphysik”, official name of the Vril Gesellschaft. All of them were young educated ladies, highly opinionated on politics, among other things they were against the rising fashion of short hair-styles for women ... Both Maria and Traute A. were beautiful ladies with very long hair - Maria was blonde and Traute A. was a brunette. They both had long horse tails, a very uncommon hairstyle at that time. This became a distinctive characteristic in all the women who integrated into Vril - which was maintained until May 1945. They believed that their long hair acted as cosmic antennae to receive alien communication from beyond. In public, however, they hardly ever exhibited the hair in horse tail style. For identification, Vril members (also called “Vrilerinnen”) wore a disk which represented the two leading mediums: Marija Oršić and Sigrun. In late November 1924 Maria Orsic visited Rudolf Hess in his apartment in Munich, together with Rudolf von Sebottendorf, the founder of the Thule Gesellschaft. Sebottendorf wanted to contact Dietrich Eckart, who had deceased one year before. Eckert had translated Ibsen’s plays into German and had published the magazine “Auf gut Deutsch”; he had also been a member of the Thule Gesellschaft. To establish contact with Eckart, Sebottendorff and other Thulists (amongst them Ernst Schulte-Strathauss) joined hands around a black-draped table. Hess was irritated to watch Maria Orsic’s eyeballs rolling back and showing only whites, and to see her slumping backward in her chair, mouth agape. However Sebottendorff smiled in satisfaction as the voice of Eckart started coming out of the medium. Eckart announced that he was obliged to let someone else’s voice come through, with an important message. A weird voice then identified itself as “the Sumi, dwellers of a distant world, which orbits the star Aldebaran in the constellation you call Taurus the Bull”. Hess and Schulte-Strathaus blinked at each other in surprise. According to the voice, the Sumi were an humanoid race who had briefly colonized Earth 500 million years ago. The ruins of ancient Larsa, Shurrupak and Nippur in Iraq had been built by them. Those of them who survived the great flood of Ut-napishtim (the Deluge of Noah’s Ark) had become the ancestors of the Aryan race. Sebottendorff remained skeptical and asked for proof. While Maria was still in a trance, she scribbled several lines of queer-looking marks. Those marks turned out to be ancient Summerian characters, the language of the founders of the oldest Babylonian culture. In December 1943 Maria attended, together with Sigrun, a meeting held by Vril at the seaside resort of Kolberg. The main purpose of the meeting was to deal with the “Aldebaran project”. The Vril mediums had received precise information regarding the habitable planets around the sun Aldebaran and they were willing to plan a trip there. This project was discussed again the 22nd January 1944 in a meeting between Hitler, Himmler, Dr. W. Schumann (scientist and professor in the Technical University of Munich) and Kunkel of the Vril Gesellschaft. It was decided that a Vril 7 “Jäger” would be sent through a dimension channel independent of the speed of light to Aldebaran. According to N. Ratthofer (writer), a first test flight in the dimension channel took place in late 1944. Maria Oršić was more beautiful than any Hollywood star at that time ... Leslie Elwood Brooks says: "Oršić’s daughter is probably Yolanda Raffa (her married name). It is documented that Maria's father was from Zagreb and her mother was from Vienna - and so was the mother of her patron, Franziske Romana Oettingen. There may have been family connections, at least there probably were in Vienna. Franziske Romana, who donated the diamond tiara to help finance the original Vril Society, was born near Munich on September 28, 1884 and died March 25, 1931. Her mother was Berta Eszterhazy from Vienna, who was born September 26, 1857 in Hungary and died November 20, 1937 in Munich. And Berta Eszterhazy’s mother had been Polyxena Lobkowitz from Prague, who had been born Polyxena Lobkovice on November 21, 1830 in “Austrian” territory, and died February 3, 1913. The family connections may go back farther than that. Maria Orsic moved to Munich, where Franziske Romana lived, in 1919, the year that Franziske’s niece and namesake was born, so there was probably a plan to dedicate her niece to the Vril from the time of her birth." Maria 'Orsitsch' was first mentioned and pictured in 1967 by Bergier and Pauwels in their book "Aufbruch ins dritte Jahrtausend: von der Zukunft der phantastischen Vernunft".
Picture. After the rise of Hitler and the NASDAP Fascist Germany everything seemed possible and the Vril Society, Thule Society and many others were secreted into the departmental Ahnenerbe Bureau, either to be supervised by the Nazi Leaders, or to advance their agendas within the Nazi Military Industrial Complex umbrella. Ultimately WWII began and saw the incredible advancement of weapons and vehicles - some say 30 years ahead of any other nation - it however ended badly for Germany and Maria Orsic disappeared in 1945. On the 11th of March of 1945 an internal document of the Vril Gesellschaft was sent to all its members ... The letter ends: “niemand bleibt hier” (no one is staying here) and is signed "With Cheerful Courage" (Mit frischem Mut) by Godrun. n Norse mythology Gudrun was the sister of Gunnar, both children of Giuki – king of the Nibelungs. Sigrun (another Vril Maiden) was one of the nine daughters of Odin.This was the last announcement from Vril. It is speculated they departed to Aldebaran. .... Fueling speculation among some writers that Maria may have in fact escaped, as she claimed, to Aldebaran. A recently published "Letter of Departure" to the Young Vrilerinnen (jungen Vrilerinnen), dated March 11, 1945, mentions the "Odin Departure" (Odin-Ausflug). It refers to a temporary evacuation location with Maria, and the final departure to Aldebaran. Regardless of how much of this story is factual, and how much is modern myth, why is there nothing about this reported in the media or in mainstream WWII documentaries? Particularly in Germany, where there is freedom of the press and they declare that they only teach the truth ... surely it is reasonable to discuss the real truth now ... after 70 years ... openly without being arrested or publicly labeled a "fascist fantasist"... or a "conspiratorial history revisionist" ...During the time that I. G. Farben supported Hitler, their 'partner' Standard Oil (Rockefeller) organized the US people against the Nazi's - benefiting from both sides of the war ... Likewise Ford Motor Company made armaments for the U.S. Army, while producing Germany military vehicles for the Nazi's ... Ford and Opel (subsidiary of GM that is controlled by JP Morgan) were the two largest car manufacturers in Germany for Hitler ... The 'Union Bank Corp' was also seized and indicted under the 'Trading with the Enemy' act during WWII - as The Union Bank seemed to be owned by a Dutch Bank - but was actually owned by Nazi Party Bankster Fritz Thyssen - and its USA Directors were none other than Prescott Bush and W. Averell Harriman ... No matter the winner, Banksters and multinational corporations were clearly instigating and profiting from ALL sides of wars ...What's more, in 1946 the Rockefeller foundation paid $139,000 USD for the exclusive rights to the official 'public version' report of the History of the Second World War, which concealed all the help provided by American Bankers in financing and arming the Nazi war machine ... They also made sure to keep from the public the truth behind Admiral Byrd's mission to Antarctica immediately following WWII.It was also silent about the mystical and occult ideology behind the Nazi regime, including the Vril inspired free-energy technology, which was rumored to have been later perfected at the infamous Area 51, near the site of the Roswell incident...
A morning-glory at my window satisfies me more than the metaphysics of books.
Walt Whitman
Morning glory (also written as morning-glory[1]) is the common name for over 1,000 species of flowering plants in the family Convolvulaceae, whose current taxonomy and systematics are in flux. Morning glory species belong to many genera, some of which are:
Argyreia
Astripomoea
Calystegia
Convolvulus
Ipomoea
Lepistemon
Merremia
Operculina
Rivea
Stictocardia
Morning glory was first known in China for its medicinal uses, due to the laxative properties of its seeds.
Ancient Mesoamerican civilizations used the morning glory species Ipomoea alba to convert the latex from the Castilla elastica tree and also the guayule plant to produce bouncing rubber balls [2]. The sulfur in the morning glory's juice served to vulcanize the rubber, a process predating Charles Goodyear's discovery by at least 3,000 years.[3] Aztec priests in Mexico were also known to use the plant's hallucinogenic properties (see Rivea corymbosa).
Photo: iPhone 5 Selfie indoors with warm light.
Processing Tools: 1. Apple iPhoto 2. Ribbit Sandbox
Hypnotique Effect created by Mr Doob
Rays 2 Settings: Normal: Offsets 610x770
__________________________________
A fractal distortion field involving a lovely symbolic tesselated fractal woman's gaze...
Maurice Cornelius Escher, draftsman extradinaire, raised the essential question of how does one really represent higher dimensions, three and four specifically, on a two dimensional plane. He made use of tessellation, the filling or tiling of a plane with various shaped patterns, as a visual tool to change the perceived dimensionality of space itself.
On the other hand - pun intended - Benoit Mandelbrot computer scientist discovered objects with non-integer, fractional dimensionality! And, we suddenly see tessellation playing a key role in visual representation of certain Mandelbrot sets. -
We may ask, what is the real question? "Hands On" symbolizes the uncertainty of how we view dimensionality. Is it reasonable to work in a Physics of only finite integer dimensionality? One wonders, One may ponder - Is there a way to apply these concepts to Cosmology as well? How about Elementary Particle Physics?
And, another layer of uncertainty suddenly or spontaneously appears!!... Definitely a question for brilliant French Metaphysical Philosophers of Science to address... Most likely, they already have...;))
Self similarity crops up in many current analyses of physical objects such as coastlines and of biological forms... The length of a coastline is a function of the amount or level of detail you permit in the measurement process. Similarly, the branching of a tree follows fractal rules and is self similar no matter which scale you use to view it....
I hope everyone will find this as interesting as I do...
_____________________________________________
Maurice Cornelis Escher, extradinaire dessinateur, a soulevé la question essentielle de savoir comment peut-on vraiment représenter les dimensions supérieures, trois et quatre précisément, sur un plan bidimensionnel. Il fait usage de la tessellation, le remplissage ou le carrelage d'un avion avec divers motifs en forme, comme un outil visuel pour changer la dimensionnalité de l'espace perçu lui-même.
D'autre part - jeu de mots - chercheur Benoit Mandelbrot a découvert l'ordinateur des objets avec des non-entier, dimensionnalité fractionnaire! Et, soudain nous voir jouer tessellation un rôle clé dans la représentation visuelle de certains ensembles de Mandelbrot. -
Nous pouvons nous demander, quelle est la vraie question? «Hands On» symbolise l'incertitude de notre façon de voir la dimensionnalité. Est-il raisonnable de travailler dans une physique de la dimensionnalité entiers seulement finie? On se demande, on peut s'interroger - Yat-il un moyen d'appliquer ces concepts à la cosmologie ainsi? Que diriez-Physique des particules élémentaires?
Et, une autre couche d'incertitude soudainement ou spontanément, apparaît !!... Certainement une question pour brillants philosophes français métaphysiques de la science à l'adresse ... Très probablement, ils ont déjà ...;))
Similitude des cultures auto dans de nombreuses analyses actuelles des objets physiques tels que les côtes et des formes biologiques ... La longueur d'un littoral est une fonction de la quantité ou le niveau de détail vous autorisez dans le processus de mesure. De même, le branchement d'un arbre suit des règles fractales et est auto-similaires, peu importe où vous utilisez l'échelle pour la voir ....
J'espère que tout le monde va trouver ce aussi intéressant que je ne ...
You see metaphysics by looking up, while at street level mundane details are too much of a distraction.
Photographically, I mean.
Milano, April 2007
After school I run to the gym to have my pilates'class, but then I went back home and after a pasta, I ate a portion of chocolate equal to the degree of my empty soul(almost 400 calories)...and it worked to make me feel better...I'll have a very light dinner tonight.
And TGIF!
Have a great week end you all out there.
View large as this is fabulous! www.flickr.com/photos/gargantuansound/5744856772/sizes/l/...
Jean Delville's La Méduse (The Medusa) 1893 pencil, blue indian ink, colour wax based crayon, gold paint and lead pencil on yellow paper. Love this, the poppies & the "smoke" rising from them, the eyes, the plates in her hands and dripping substance & the snakes, oh yes!
A couple of quotes by Jean Delville translated from the original French:
Understood in its metaphysical sense, Beauty is one of the manifestations of the Absolute Being. Emanating from the harmonious rays of the Divine plan, it crosses the intellectual plane to shine once again across the natural plane, where it darkens into matter.
There exists somewhere, around us, without or within us, in the depths of the unseen world, spheres which are formed from the eternal images reflected in our intellects, and which the artist or poet pilfer from mystery by the magic power of their imagination that mysterious divine faculty which must be known in order to be in tune with the harmony of the world. - Wow
More info here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Delville
Official site: www.jeandelville.org/default.htm
Protected by Full Copyright: Please do not use this image without my written permission in anyway, doing so is a violation of federal law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dualism in cosmology is the moral, or spiritual belief that two fundamental concepts exist, which often oppose each other. It is an umbrella term that covers a diversity of views from various religions, including both traditional religions and scriptural religions.
Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement of, or conflict between, the benevolent and the malevolent. It simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and independent of how these may be represented. Moral opposites might, for example, exist in a worldview which has one god, more than one god, or none. By contrast, duotheism, bitheism or ditheism implies (at least) two gods. While bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, or light and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system could be one in which one god is a creator, and the other a destroyer. In theology, dualism can also refer to the relationship between the deity and creation or the deity and the universe (see theistic dualism). This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[1] Alternatively, in ontological dualism, the world is divided into two overarching categories. The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism. It is also discussed in Confucianism.
Many myths and creation motifs with dualistic cosmologies have been described in ethnographic and anthropological literature. These motifs conceive the world as being created, organized, or influenced by two demiurges, culture heroes, or other mythological beings, who either compete with each other or have a complementary function in creating, arranging or influencing the world. There is a huge diversity of such cosmologies. In some cases, such as among the Chukchi, the beings collaborate rather than competing, and contribute to the creation in a coequal way. In many other instances the two beings are not of the same importance or power (sometimes, one of them is even characterized as gullible). Sometimes they can be contrasted as good versus evil.[2] They may be often believed to be twins or at least brothers.[3][4] Dualistic motifs in mythologies can be observed in all inhabited continents. Zolotaryov concludes that they cannot be explained by diffusion or borrowing, but are rather of convergent origin: they are related to a dualistic organization of society (moieties); in some cultures, this social organization may have ceased to exist, but mythology preserves the memory in more and more disguised ways.[5]
Moral dualism[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (October 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement or conflict between the benevolent and the malevolent. Like ditheism/bitheism (see below), moral dualism does not imply the absence of monist or monotheistic principles. Moral dualism simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and—unlike ditheism/bitheism—independent of how these may be represented.
For example, Mazdaism (Mazdean Zoroastrianism) is both dualistic and monotheistic (but not monist by definition) since in that philosophy God—the Creator—is purely good, and the antithesis—which is also uncreated–is an absolute one. Zurvanism (Zurvanite Zoroastrianism), Manichaeism, and Mandaeism are representative of dualistic and monist philosophies since each has a supreme and transcendental First Principle from which the two equal-but-opposite entities then emanate. This is also true for the lesser-known Christian gnostic religions, such as Bogomils, Catharism, and so on. More complex forms of monist dualism also exist, for instance in Hermeticism, where Nous "thought"—that is described to have created man—brings forth both good and evil, dependent on interpretation, whether it receives prompting from the God or from the Demon. Duality with pluralism is considered a logical fallacy.
History[edit]
Moral dualism began as a theological belief. Dualism was first seen implicitly in Egyptian religious beliefs by the contrast of the gods Set (disorder, death) and Osiris (order, life).[6] The first explicit conception of dualism came from the Ancient Persian religion of Zoroastrianism around the mid-fifth century BC. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion that believes that Ahura Mazda is the eternal creator of all good things. Any violations of Ahura Mazda's order arise from druj, which is everything uncreated. From this comes a significant choice for humans to make. Either they fully participate in human life for Ahura Mazda or they do not and give druj power. Personal dualism is even more distinct in the beliefs of later religions.
The religious dualism of Christianity between good and evil is not a perfect dualism as God (good) will inevitably destroy Satan (evil). Early Christian dualism is largely based on Platonic Dualism (See: Neoplatonism and Christianity). There is also a personal dualism in Christianity with a soul-body distinction based on the idea of an immaterial Christian soul.[7]
Duotheism, bitheism, ditheism[edit]
When used with regards to multiple gods, dualism may refer to duotheism, bitheism, or ditheism. Although ditheism/bitheism imply moral dualism, they are not equivalent: ditheism/bitheism implies (at least) two gods, while moral dualism does not necessarily imply theism (theos = god) at all.
Both bitheism and ditheism imply a belief in two equally powerful gods with complementary or antonymous properties; however, while bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, bright and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system would be one in which one god is creative, the other is destructive (cf. theodicy). In the original conception of Zoroastrianism, for example, Ahura Mazda was the spirit of ultimate good, while Ahriman (Angra Mainyu) was the spirit of ultimate evil.
In a bitheistic system, by contrast, where the two deities are not in conflict or opposition, one could be male and the other female (cf. duotheism[clarification needed]). One well-known example of a bitheistic or duotheistic theology based on gender polarity is found in the neopagan religion of Wicca. In Wicca, dualism is represented in the belief of a god and a goddess as a dual partnership in ruling the universe. This is centered on the worship of a divine couple, the Moon Goddess and the Horned God, who are regarded as lovers. However, there is also a ditheistic theme within traditional Wicca, as the Horned God has dual aspects of bright and dark - relating to day/night, summer/winter - expressed as the Oak King and the Holly King, who in Wiccan myth and ritual are said to engage in battle twice a year for the hand of the Goddess, resulting in the changing seasons. (Within Wicca, bright and dark do not correspond to notions of "good" and "evil" but are aspects of the natural world, much like yin and yang in Taoism.)
Radical and mitigated dualism[edit]
Radical Dualism – or absolute Dualism which posits two co-equal divine forces.[8] Manichaeism conceives of two previously coexistent realms of light and darkness which become embroiled in conflict, owing to the chaotic actions of the latter. Subsequently, certain elements of the light became entrapped within darkness; the purpose of material creation is to enact the slow process of extraction of these individual elements, at the end of which the kingdom of light will prevail over darkness. Manicheanism likely inherits this dualistic mythology from Zoroastrianism, in which the eternal spirit Ahura Mazda is opposed by his antithesis, Angra Mainyu; the two are engaged in a cosmic struggle, the conclusion of which will likewise see Ahura Mazda triumphant. 'The Hymn of the Pearl' included the belief that the material world corresponds to some sort of malevolent intoxication brought about by the powers of darkness to keep elements of the light trapped inside it in a state of drunken distraction.
Mitigated Dualism – is where one of the two principles is in some way inferior to the other. Such classical Gnostic movements as the Sethians conceived of the material world as being created by a lesser divinity than the true God that was the object of their devotion. The spiritual world is conceived of as being radically different from the material world, co-extensive with the true God, and the true home of certain enlightened members of humanity; thus, these systems were expressive of a feeling of acute alienation within the world, and their resultant aim was to allow the soul to escape the constraints presented by the physical realm.[8]
However, bitheistic and ditheistic principles are not always so easily contrastable, for instance in a system where one god is the representative of summer and drought and the other of winter and rain/fertility (cf. the mythology of Persephone). Marcionism, an early Christian sect, held that the Old and New Testaments were the work of two opposing gods: both were First Principles, but of different religions.[9]
Theistic dualism[edit]
In theology, dualism can refer to the relationship between God and creation or God and the universe. This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[10][1]
In Christianity[edit]
The Cathars being expelled from Carcassonne in 1209. The Cathars were denounced as heretics by the Roman Catholic Church for their dualist beliefs.
The dualism between God and Creation has existed as a central belief in multiple historical sects and traditions of Christianity, including Marcionism, Catharism, Paulicianism, and other forms of Gnostic Christianity. Christian dualism refers to the belief that God and creation are distinct, but interrelated through an indivisible bond.[1] However, Gnosticism is a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in a belief in a distinction between a supreme, transcendent God and a blind, evil demiurge responsible for creating the material universe, thereby trapping the divine spark within matter.[11]
In sects like the Cathars and the Paulicians, this is a dualism between the material world, created by an evil god, and a moral god. Historians divide Christian dualism into absolute dualism, which held that the good and evil gods were equally powerful, and mitigated dualism, which held that material evil was subordinate to the spiritual good.[12] The belief, by Christian theologians who adhere to a libertarian or compatibilist view of free will, that free will separates humankind from God has also been characterized as a form of dualism.[1] The theologian Leroy Stephens Rouner compares the dualism of Christianity with the dualism that exists in Zoroastrianism and the Samkhya tradition of Hinduism. The theological use of the word dualism dates back to 1700, in a book that describes the dualism between good and evil.[1]
The tolerance of dualism ranges widely among the different Christian traditions. As a monotheistic religion, the conflict between dualism and monism has existed in Christianity since its inception.[13] The 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia describes that, in the Catholic Church, "the dualistic hypothesis of an eternal world existing side by side with God was of course rejected" by the thirteenth century, but mind–body dualism was not.[14] The problem of evil is difficult to reconcile with absolute monism, and has prompted some Christian sects to veer towards dualism. Gnostic forms of Christianity were more dualistic, and some Gnostic traditions posited that the Devil was separate from God as an independent deity.[13] The Christian dualists of the Byzantine Empire, the Paulicians, were seen as Manichean heretics by Byzantine theologians. This tradition of Christian dualism, founded by Constantine-Silvanus, argued that the universe was created through evil and separate from a moral God.[15]
The Cathars, a Christian sect in southern France, believed that there was a dualism between two gods, one representing good and the other representing evil. Whether or not the Cathari possessed direct historical influence from ancient Gnosticism is a matter of dispute, as the basic conceptions of Gnostic cosmology are to be found in Cathar beliefs (most distinctly in their notion of a lesser creator god), though unlike the second century Gnostics, they did not apparently place any special relevance upon knowledge (gnosis) as an effective salvific force. In any case, the Roman Catholic Church denounced the Cathars as heretics, and sought to crush the movement in the 13th century. The Albigensian Crusade was initiated by Pope Innocent III in 1208 to remove the Cathars from Languedoc in France, where they were known as Albigesians. The Inquisition, which began in 1233 under Pope Gregory IX, also targeted the Cathars.[16]
In Hinduism[edit]
The Dvaita Vedanta school of Indian philosophy espouses a dualism between God and the universe by theorizing the existence of two separate realities. The first and the more important reality is that of Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu or Brahman. Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu is the supreme Self, God, the absolute truth of the universe, the independent reality. The second reality is that of dependent but equally real universe that exists with its own separate essence. Everything that is composed of the second reality, such as individual soul (Jiva), matter, etc. exist with their own separate reality. The distinguishing factor of this philosophy as opposed to Advaita Vedanta (monistic conclusion of Vedas) is that God takes on a personal role and is seen as a real eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.[17][better source needed] Because the existence of individuals is grounded in the divine, they are depicted as reflections, images or even shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical with the divine. Salvation therefore is described as the realization that all finite reality is essentially dependent on the Supreme.[18]
Ontological dualism[edit]
The yin and yang symbolizes the duality in nature and all things in the Taoist religion.
Alternatively, dualism can mean the tendency of humans to perceive and understand the world as being divided into two overarching categories. In this sense, it is dualistic when one perceives a tree as a thing separate from everything surrounding it. This form of ontological dualism exists in Taoism and Confucianism, beliefs that divide the universe into the complementary oppositions of yin and yang.[19] In traditions such as classical Hinduism (Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika and the later Vedanta schools, which accepted the theory of Gunas), Zen Buddhism or Islamic Sufism, a key to enlightenment is "transcending" this sort of dualistic thinking, without merely substituting dualism with monism or pluralism.
In Chinese philosophy[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism, both as a philosophy and as a religion, although the concept developed much earlier. Some argue that yin and yang were originally an earth and sky god, respectively.[20] As one of the oldest principles in Chinese philosophy, yin and yang are also discussed in Confucianism, but to a lesser extent.
Some of the common associations with yang and yin, respectively, are: male and female, light and dark, active and passive, motion and stillness. Some scholars believe that the two ideas may have originally referred to two opposite sides of a mountain, facing towards and away from the sun.[20] The yin and yang symbol in actuality has very little to do with Western dualism; instead it represents the philosophy of balance, where two opposites co-exist in harmony and are able to transmute into each other. In the yin-yang symbol there is a dot of yin in yang and a dot of yang in yin. In Taoism, this symbolizes the inter-connectedness of the opposite forces as different aspects of Tao, the First Principle. Contrast is needed to create a distinguishable reality, without which we would experience nothingness. Therefore, the independent principles of yin and yang are actually dependent on one another for each other's distinguishable existence.
The complementary dualistic concept seen in yin and yang represent the reciprocal interaction throughout nature, related to a feedback loop, where opposing forces do not exchange in opposition but instead exchange reciprocally to promote stabilization similar to homeostasis. An underlying principle in Taoism states that within every independent entity lies a part of its opposite. Within sickness lies health and vice versa. This is because all opposites are manifestations of the single Tao, and are therefore not independent from one another, but rather a variation of the same unifying force throughout all of nature.
In traditional religions[edit]
Samoyed peoples[edit]
In a Nenets myth, Num and Nga collaborate and compete with each other, creating land,[21] there are also other myths about competing-collaborating demiurges.[22]
Comparative studies of Kets and neighboring peoples[edit]
Among others, also dualistic myths were investigated in researches which tried to compare the mythologies of Siberian peoples and settle the problem of their origins. Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov compared the mythology of Ket people with those of speakers of Uralic languages, assuming in the studies, that there are modelling semiotic systems in the compared mythologies; and they have also made typological comparisons.[23][24] Among others, from possibly Uralic mythological analogies, those of Ob-Ugric peoples[25] and Samoyedic peoples[26] are mentioned. Some other discussed analogies (similar folklore motifs, and purely typological considerations, certain binary pairs in symbolics) may be related to dualistic organization of society—some of such dualistic features can be found at these compared peoples.[27] It must be admitted that, for Kets, neither dualistic organization of society[28] nor cosmological dualism[29] has been researched thoroughly: if such features existed at all, they have either weakened or remained largely undiscovered;[28] although there are some reports on division into two exogamous patrilinear moieties,[30] folklore on conflicts of mythological figures, and also on cooperation of two beings in creating the land:[29] the diving of the water fowl.[31] If we include dualistic cosmologies meant in broad sense, not restricted to certain concrete motifs, then we find that they are much more widespread, they exist not only among some Siberian peoples, but there are examples in each inhabited continent.[32]
Chukchi[edit]
A Chukchi myth and its variations report the creation of the world; in some variations, it is achieved by the collaboration of several beings (birds, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator and the raven, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator alone, using the birds only as assistants).[33][34]
Fuegians[edit]
See also: Fuegians § Spiritual culture
All three Fuegian tribes had dualistic myths about culture heros.[35] The Yámana have dualistic myths about the two [joalox] brothers. They act as culture heroes, and sometimes stand in an antagonistic relation with each other, introducing opposite laws. Their figures can be compared to the Kwanyip-brothers of the Selk'nam.[36] In general, the presence of dualistic myths in two compared cultures does not imply relatedness or diffusion necessarily.[32]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualistic_cosmology
In spirituality, nondualism, also called non-duality, means "not two" or "one undivided without a second".[1][2] Nondualism primarily refers to a mature state of consciousness, in which the dichotomy of I-other is "transcended", and awareness is described as "centerless" and "without dichotomies". Although this state of consciousness may seem to appear spontaneous,[note 1] it usually follows prolonged preparation through ascetic or meditative/contemplative practice, which may include ethical injunctions. While the term "nondualism" is derived from Advaita Vedanta, descriptions of nondual consciousness can be found within Hinduism (Turiya, sahaja), Buddhism (emptiness, pariniṣpanna, nature of mind, rigpa), Islam (Wahdat al Wujud, Fanaa, and Haqiqah) and western Christian and neo-Platonic traditions (henosis, mystical union).
The Asian ideas of nondualism developed in the Vedic and post-Vedic Upanishadic philosophies around 800 BCE,[3] as well as in the Buddhist traditions.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought are found in the earlier Hindu Upanishads such as Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, as well as other pre-Buddhist Upanishads such as the Chandogya Upanishad, which emphasizes the unity of individual soul called Atman and the Supreme called Brahman. In Hinduism, nondualism has more commonly become associated with the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara.[5]
In the Buddhist tradition non-duality is associated with the teachings of emptiness (śūnyatā) and the two truths doctrine, particularly the Madhyamaka teaching of the non-duality of absolute and relative truth,[6][7] and the Yogachara notion of "mind/thought only" (citta-matra) or "representation-only" (vijñaptimātra).[5] These teachings, coupled with the doctrine of Buddha-nature have been influential concepts in the subsequent development of Mahayana Buddhism, not only in India, but also in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism, most notably in Chán (Zen) and Vajrayana.
Western Neo-Platonism is an essential element of both Christian contemplation and mysticism, and of Western esotericism and modern spirituality, especially Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, Universalism and Perennialism.Etymology[edit]
When referring to nondualism, Hinduism generally uses the Sanskrit term Advaita, while Buddhism uses Advaya (Tibetan: gNis-med, Chinese: pu-erh, Japanese: fu-ni).[8]
"Advaita" (अद्वैत) is from Sanskrit roots a, not; dvaita, dual, and is usually translated as "nondualism", "nonduality" and "nondual". The term "nondualism" and the term "advaita" from which it originates are polyvalent terms. The English word's origin is the Latin duo meaning "two" prefixed with "non-" meaning "not".
"Advaya" (अद्वय) is also a Sanskrit word that means "identity, unique, not two, without a second," and typically refers to the two truths doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, especially Madhyamaka.
One of the earliest uses of the word Advaita is found in verse 4.3.32 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (~800 BCE), and in verses 7 and 12 of the Mandukya Upanishad (variously dated to have been composed between 500 BCE to 200 CE).[9] The term appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the section with a discourse of the oneness of Atman (individual soul) and Brahman (universal consciousness), as follows:[10]
An ocean is that one seer, without any duality [Advaita]; this is the Brahma-world, O King. Thus did Yajnavalkya teach him. This is his highest goal, this is his highest success, this is his highest world, this is his highest bliss. All other creatures live on a small portion of that bliss.
— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.32, [11][12][13]
The English term "nondual" was also informed by early translations of the Upanishads in Western languages other than English from 1775. These terms have entered the English language from literal English renderings of "advaita" subsequent to the first wave of English translations of the Upanishads. These translations commenced with the work of Müller (1823–1900), in the monumental Sacred Books of the East (1879).
Max Müller rendered "advaita" as "Monism", as have many recent scholars.[14][15][16] However, some scholars state that "advaita" is not really monism.[17]
Definitions[edit]
See also: Monism, Mind-body dualism, Dualistic cosmology, and Pluralism (philosophy)
Nondualism is a fuzzy concept, for which many definitions can be found.[note 2]
According to Espín and Nickoloff, "nondualism" is the thought in some Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist schools, which, generally speaking:
... teaches that the multiplicity of the universe is reducible to one essential reality."[18]
However, since there are similar ideas and terms in a wide variety of spiritualities and religions, ancient and modern, no single definition for the English word "nonduality" can suffice, and perhaps it is best to speak of various "nondualities" or theories of nonduality.[19]
David Loy, who sees non-duality between subject and object as a common thread in Taoism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Advaita Vedanta,[20][note 3] distinguishes "Five Flavors Of Nonduality":[web 1]
The negation of dualistic thinking in pairs of opposites. The Yin-Yang symbol of Taoism symbolises the transcendence of this dualistic way of thinking.[web 1]
Monism, the nonplurality of the world. Although the phenomenal world appears as a plurality of "things", in reality they are "of a single cloth".[web 1]
Advaita, the nondifference of subject and object, or nonduality between subject and object.[web 1]
Advaya, the identity of phenomena and the Absolute, the "nonduality of duality and nonduality",[web 1] c.q. the nonduality of relative and ultimate truth as found in Madhyamaka Buddhism and the two truths doctrine.
Mysticism, a mystical unity between God and man.[web 1]
The idea of nondualism is typically contrasted with dualism, with dualism defined as the view that the universe and the nature of existence consists of two realities, such as the God and the world, or as God and Devil, or as mind and matter, and so on.[23][24]
Ideas of nonduality are also taught in some western religions and philosophies, and it has gained attraction and popularity in modern western spirituality and New Age-thinking.[25]
Different theories and concepts which can be linked to nonduality are taught in a wide variety of religious traditions. These include:
Hinduism:
In the Upanishads, which teach a doctrine that has been interpreted in a nondualistic way, mainly tat tvam asi.[26]
The Advaita Vedanta of Shankara[27][26] which teaches that a single pure consciousness is the only reality, and that the world is unreal (Maya).
Non-dual forms of Hindu Tantra[28] including Kashmira Shaivism[29][28] and the goddess centered Shaktism. Their view is similar to Advaita, but they teach that the world is not unreal, but it is the real manifestation of consciousness.[30]
Forms of Hindu Modernism which mainly teach Advaita and modern Indian saints like Ramana Maharshi and Swami Vivekananda.
Buddhism:
"Shūnyavāda (emptiness view) or the Mādhyamaka school",[31][32] which holds that there is a non-dual relationship (that is, there is no true separation) between conventional truth and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.
"Vijnānavāda (consciousness view) or the Yogācāra school",[31][33] which holds that there is no ultimate perceptual and conceptual division between a subject and its objects, or a cognizer and that which is cognized. It also argues against mind-body dualism, holding that there is only consciousness.
Tathagatagarbha-thought,[33] which holds that all beings have the potential to become Buddhas.
Vajrayana-buddhism,[34] including Tibetan Buddhist traditions of Dzogchen[35] and Mahamudra.[36]
East Asian Buddhist traditions like Zen[37] and Huayan, particularly their concept of interpenetration.
Sikhism,[38] which usually teaches a duality between God and humans, but was given a nondual interpretation by Bhai Vir Singh.
Taoism,[39] which teaches the idea of a single subtle universal force or cosmic creative power called Tao (literally "way").
Subud[25]
Abrahamic traditions:
Christian mystics who promote a "nondual experience", such as Meister Eckhart and Julian of Norwich. The focus of this Christian nondualism is on bringing the worshiper closer to God and realizing a "oneness" with the Divine.[40]
Sufism[39]
Jewish Kabbalah
Western traditions:
Neo-platonism [41] which teaches there is a single source of all reality, The One.
Western philosophers like Hegel, Spinoza and Schopenhauer.[41] They defended different forms of philosophical monism or Idealism.
Transcendentalism, which was influenced by German Idealism and Indian religions.
Theosophy
New age
Hinduism[edit]
"Advaita" refers to nondualism, non-distinction between realities, the oneness of Atman (individual self) and Brahman (the single universal existence), as in Vedanta, Shaktism and Shaivism.[42] Although the term is best known from the Advaita Vedanta school of Adi Shankara, "advaita" is used in treatises by numerous medieval era Indian scholars, as well as modern schools and teachers.[note 4]
The Hindu concept of Advaita refers to the idea that all of the universe is one essential reality, and that all facets and aspects of the universe is ultimately an expression or appearance of that one reality.[42] According to Dasgupta and Mohanta, non-dualism developed in various strands of Indian thought, both Vedic and Buddhist, from the Upanishadic period onward.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought may be found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which pre-dates the earliest Buddhism. Pre-sectarian Buddhism may also have been responding to the teachings of the Chandogya Upanishad, rejecting some of its Atman-Brahman related metaphysics.[43][note 5]
Advaita appears in different shades in various schools of Hinduism such as in Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), Suddhadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), non-dual Shaivism and Shaktism.[42][46][47] In the Advaita Vedanta of Adi Shankara, advaita implies that all of reality is one with Brahman,[42] that the Atman (soul, self) and Brahman (ultimate unchanging reality) are one.[48][49] The advaita ideas of some Hindu traditions contrasts with the schools that defend dualism or Dvaita, such as that of Madhvacharya who stated that the experienced reality and God are two (dual) and distinct.[50][51]
Vedanta[edit]
Main article: Vedanta
Several schools of Vedanta teach a form of nondualism. The best-known is Advaita Vedanta, but other nondual Vedanta schools also have a significant influence and following, such as Vishishtadvaita Vedanta and Shuddhadvaita,[42] both of which are bhedabheda.
Advaita Vedanta[edit]
Main article: Advaita Vedanta
Swans are important figures in Advaita
The nonduality of the Advaita Vedanta is of the identity of Brahman and the Atman.[52] Advaita has become a broad current in Indian culture and religions, influencing subsequent traditions like Kashmir Shaivism.
The oldest surviving manuscript on Advaita Vedanta is by Gauḍapāda (6th century CE),[5] who has traditionally been regarded as the teacher of Govinda bhagavatpāda and the grandteacher of Adi Shankara. Advaita is best known from the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara (788-820 CE), who states that Brahman, the single unified eternal truth, is pure Being, Consciousness and Bliss (Sat-cit-ananda).[53]
Advaita, states Murti, is the knowledge of Brahman and self-consciousness (Vijnana) without differences.[54] The goal of Vedanta is to know the "truly real" and thus become one with it.[55] According to Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is the highest Reality,[56][57][58] The universe, according to Advaita philosophy, does not simply come from Brahman, it is Brahman. Brahman is the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.[57] Brahman is also that which is the cause of all changes.[57][59][60] Brahman is the "creative principle which lies realized in the whole world".[61]
The nondualism of Advaita, relies on the Hindu concept of Ātman which is a Sanskrit word that means "real self" of the individual,[62][63] "essence",[web 3] and soul.[62][64] Ātman is the first principle,[65] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. Atman is the Universal Principle, one eternal undifferentiated self-luminous consciousness, asserts Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism.[66][67]
Advaita Vedanta philosophy considers Atman as self-existent awareness, limitless, non-dual and same as Brahman.[68] Advaita school asserts that there is "soul, self" within each living entity which is fully identical with Brahman.[69][70] This identity holds that there is One Soul that connects and exists in all living beings, regardless of their shapes or forms, there is no distinction, no superior, no inferior, no separate devotee soul (Atman), no separate God soul (Brahman).[69] The Oneness unifies all beings, there is the divine in every being, and all existence is a single Reality, state the Advaita Vedantins.[71] The nondualism concept of Advaita Vedanta asserts that each soul is non-different from the infinite Brahman.[72]
Advaita Vedanta – Three levels of reality[edit]
Advaita Vedanta adopts sublation as the criterion to postulate three levels of ontological reality:[73][74]
Pāramārthika (paramartha, absolute), the Reality that is metaphysically true and ontologically accurate. It is the state of experiencing that "which is absolutely real and into which both other reality levels can be resolved". This experience can't be sublated (exceeded) by any other experience.[73][74]
Vyāvahārika (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya,[75] consisting of the empirical or pragmatic reality. It is ever-changing over time, thus empirically true at a given time and context but not metaphysically true. It is "our world of experience, the phenomenal world that we handle every day when we are awake". It is the level in which both jiva (living creatures or individual souls) and Iswara are true; here, the material world is also true.[74]
Prāthibhāsika (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), "reality based on imagination alone". It is the level of experience in which the mind constructs its own reality. A well-known example is the perception of a rope in the dark as being a snake.[74]
Similarities and differences with Buddhism[edit]
Scholars state that Advaita Vedanta was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism, given the common terminology and methodology and some common doctrines.[76][77] Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state:
In any event a close relationship between the Mahayana schools and Vedanta did exist, with the latter borrowing some of the dialectical techniques, if not the specific doctrines, of the former.[78]
Advaita Vedanta is related to Buddhist philosophy, which promotes ideas like the two truths doctrine and the doctrine that there is only consciousness (vijñapti-mātra). It is possible that the Advaita philosopher Gaudapada was influenced by Buddhist ideas.[5] Shankara harmonised Gaudapada's ideas with the Upanishadic texts, and developed a very influential school of orthodox Hinduism.[79][80]
The Buddhist term vijñapti-mātra is often used interchangeably with the term citta-mātra, but they have different meanings. The standard translation of both terms is "consciousness-only" or "mind-only." Advaita Vedanta has been called "idealistic monism" by scholars, but some disagree with this label.[81][82] Another concept found in both Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is Ajativada ("ajāta"), which Gaudapada adopted from Nagarjuna's philosophy.[83][84][note 6] Gaudapada "wove [both doctrines] into a philosophy of the Mandukaya Upanisad, which was further developed by Shankara.[86][note 7]
Michael Comans states there is a fundamental difference between Buddhist thought and that of Gaudapada, in that Buddhism has as its philosophical basis the doctrine of Dependent Origination according to which "everything is without an essential nature (nissvabhava), and everything is empty of essential nature (svabhava-sunya)", while Gaudapada does not rely on this principle at all. Gaudapada's Ajativada is an outcome of reasoning applied to an unchanging nondual reality according to which "there exists a Reality (sat) that is unborn (aja)" that has essential nature (svabhava), and this is the "eternal, fearless, undecaying Self (Atman) and Brahman".[88] Thus, Gaudapada differs from Buddhist scholars such as Nagarjuna, states Comans, by accepting the premises and relying on the fundamental teaching of the Upanishads.[88] Among other things, Vedanta school of Hinduism holds the premise, "Atman exists, as self evident truth", a concept it uses in its theory of nondualism. Buddhism, in contrast, holds the premise, "Atman does not exist (or, An-atman) as self evident".[89][90][91]
Mahadevan suggests that Gaudapada adopted Buddhist terminology and adapted its doctrines to his Vedantic goals, much like early Buddhism adopted Upanishadic terminology and adapted its doctrines to Buddhist goals; both used pre-existing concepts and ideas to convey new meanings.[92] Dasgupta and Mohanta note that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta are not opposing systems, but "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara."[4]
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta[edit]
Ramanuja, founder of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, taught 'qualified nondualism' doctrine.
See also: Bhedabheda
Vishishtadvaita Vedanta is another main school of Vedanta and teaches the nonduality of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as "qualified monism," or "qualified non-dualism," or "attributive monism."
According to this school, the world is real, yet underlying all the differences is an all-embracing unity, of which all "things" are an "attribute." Ramanuja, the main proponent of Vishishtadvaita philosophy contends that the Prasthana Traya ("The three courses") – namely the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Brahma Sutras – are to be interpreted in a way that shows this unity in diversity, for any other way would violate their consistency.
Vedanta Desika defines Vishishtadvaita using the statement: Asesha Chit-Achit Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam – "Brahman, as qualified by the sentient and insentient modes (or attributes), is the only reality."
Neo-Vedanta[edit]
Main articles: Neo-Vedanta, Swami Vivekananda, and Ramakrishna Mission
Neo-Vedanta, also called "neo-Hinduism"[93] is a modern interpretation of Hinduism which developed in response to western colonialism and orientalism, and aims to present Hinduism as a "homogenized ideal of Hinduism"[94] with Advaita Vedanta as its central doctrine.[95]
Neo-Vedanta, as represented by Vivekananda and Radhakrishnan, is indebted to Advaita vedanta, but also reflects Advaya-philosophy. A main influence on neo-Advaita was Ramakrishna, himself a bhakta and tantrika, and the guru of Vivekananda. According to Michael Taft, Ramakrishna reconciled the dualism of formlessness and form.[96] Ramakrishna regarded the Supreme Being to be both Personal and Impersonal, active and inactive:
When I think of the Supreme Being as inactive – neither creating nor preserving nor destroying – I call Him Brahman or Purusha, the Impersonal God. When I think of Him as active – creating, preserving and destroying – I call Him Sakti or Maya or Prakriti, the Personal God. But the distinction between them does not mean a difference. The Personal and Impersonal are the same thing, like milk and its whiteness, the diamond and its lustre, the snake and its wriggling motion. It is impossible to conceive of the one without the other. The Divine Mother and Brahman are one.[97]
Radhakrishnan acknowledged the reality and diversity of the world of experience, which he saw as grounded in and supported by the absolute or Brahman.[web 4][note 8] According to Anil Sooklal, Vivekananda's neo-Advaita "reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism":[99]
The Neo-Vedanta is also Advaitic inasmuch as it holds that Brahman, the Ultimate Reality, is one without a second, ekamevadvitiyam. But as distinguished from the traditional Advaita of Sankara, it is a synthetic Vedanta which reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism and also other theories of reality. In this sense it may also be called concrete monism in so far as it holds that Brahman is both qualified, saguna, and qualityless, nirguna.[99]
Radhakrishnan also reinterpreted Shankara's notion of maya. According to Radhakrishnan, maya is not a strict absolute idealism, but "a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real."[web 4] According to Sarma, standing in the tradition of Nisargadatta Maharaj, Advaitavāda means "spiritual non-dualism or absolutism",[100] in which opposites are manifestations of the Absolute, which itself is immanent and transcendent:[101]
All opposites like being and non-being, life and death, good and evil, light and darkness, gods and men, soul and nature are viewed as manifestations of the Absolute which is immanent in the universe and yet transcends it.[102]
Kashmir Shaivism[edit]
Main articles: Shaivism and Kashmir Shaivism
Part of a series on
Shaivism
SaivismFlag.svg
Deities[show]
Scriptures and texts[show]
Philosophy[show]
Practices[show]
Schools[show]
Scholars[show]
Related[show]
vte
Advaita is also a central concept in various schools of Shaivism, such as Kashmir Shaivism[42] and Shiva Advaita.
Kashmir Shaivism is a school of Śaivism, described by Abhinavagupta[note 9] as "paradvaita", meaning "the supreme and absolute non-dualism".[web 5] It is categorized by various scholars as monistic[103] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism,[104] realistic idealism,[105] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism[105]).
Kashmir Saivism is based on a strong monistic interpretation of the Bhairava Tantras and its subcategory the Kaula Tantras, which were tantras written by the Kapalikas.[106] There was additionally a revelation of the Siva Sutras to Vasugupta.[106] Kashmir Saivism claimed to supersede the dualistic Shaiva Siddhanta.[107] Somananda, the first theologian of monistic Saivism, was the teacher of Utpaladeva, who was the grand-teacher of Abhinavagupta, who in turn was the teacher of Ksemaraja.[106][108]
The philosophy of Kashmir Shaivism can be seen in contrast to Shankara's Advaita.[109] Advaita Vedanta holds that Brahman is inactive (niṣkriya) and the phenomenal world is an illusion (māyā). In Kashmir Shavisim, all things are a manifestation of the Universal Consciousness, Chit or Brahman.[110][111] Kashmir Shavisim sees the phenomenal world (Śakti) as real: it exists, and has its being in Consciousness (Chit).[112]
Kashmir Shaivism was influenced by, and took over doctrines from, several orthodox and heterodox Indian religious and philosophical traditions.[113] These include Vedanta, Samkhya, Patanjali Yoga and Nyayas, and various Buddhist schools, including Yogacara and Madhyamika,[113] but also Tantra and the Nath-tradition.[114]
Contemporary vernacular Advaita[edit]
Advaita is also part of other Indian traditions, which are less strongly, or not all, organised in monastic and institutional organisations. Although often called "Advaita Vedanta," these traditions have their origins in vernacular movements and "householder" traditions, and have close ties to the Nath, Nayanars and Sant Mat traditions.
Ramana Maharshi[edit]
Ramana Maharshi (1879–1950) explained his insight using Shaiva Siddhanta, Advaita Vedanta and Yoga teachings.
Main article: Ramana Maharshi
Ramana Maharshi (30 December 1879 – 14 April 1950) is widely acknowledged as one of the outstanding Indian gurus of modern times.[115] Ramana's teachings are often interpreted as Advaita Vedanta, though Ramana Maharshi never "received diksha (initiation) from any recognised authority".[web 6] Ramana himself did not call his insights advaita:
D. Does Sri Bhagavan advocate advaita?
M. Dvaita and advaita are relative terms. They are based on the sense of duality. The Self is as it is. There is neither dvaita nor advaita. "I Am that I Am."[note 10] Simple Being is the Self.[117]
Neo-Advaita[edit]
Main article: Neo-Advaita
Neo-Advaita is a New Religious Movement based on a modern, western interpretation of Advaita Vedanta, especially the teachings of Ramana Maharshi.[118] According to Arthur Versluis, neo-Advaita is part of a larger religious current which he calls immediatism,[119][web 9] "the assertion of immediate spiritual illumination without much if any preparatory practice within a particular religious tradition."[web 9] Neo-Advaita is criticized for this immediatism and its lack of preparatory practices.[120][note 11][122][note 12] Notable neo-advaita teachers are H. W. L. Poonja[123][118] and his students Gangaji,[124] Andrew Cohen,[note 13], and Eckhart Tolle.[118]
According to a modern western spiritual teacher of nonduality, Jeff Foster, nonduality is:
the essential oneness (wholeness, completeness, unity) of life, a wholeness which exists here and now, prior to any apparent separation [...] despite the compelling appearance of separation and diversity there is only one universal essence, one reality. Oneness is all there is – and we are included.[126]
Natha Sampradaya and Inchegeri Sampradaya[edit]
Main articles: Nath, Sahaja, and Inchegeri Sampradaya
The Natha Sampradaya, with Nath yogis such as Gorakhnath, introduced Sahaja, the concept of a spontaneous spirituality. Sahaja means "spontaneous, natural, simple, or easy".[web 13] According to Ken Wilber, this state reflects nonduality.[127]
Buddhism[edit]
There are different Buddhist views which resonate with the concepts and experiences of non-duality or "not two" (advaya). The Buddha does not use the term advaya in the earliest Buddhist texts, but it does appear in some of the Mahayana sutras, such as the Vimalakīrti.[128] While the Buddha taught unified states of mental focus (samadhi) and meditative absorption (dhyana) which were commonly taught in Upanishadic thought, he also rejected the metaphysical doctrines of the Upanishads, particularly ideas which are often associated with Hindu nonduality, such as the doctrine that "this cosmos is the self" and "everything is a Oneness" (cf. SN 12.48 and MN 22).[129][130] Because of this, Buddhist views of nonduality are particularly different than Hindu conceptions, which tend towards idealistic monism.
In Indian Buddhism[edit]
The layman Vimalakīrti Debates Manjusri, Dunhuang Mogao Caves
According to Kameshwar Nath Mishra, one connotation of advaya in Indic Sanskrit Buddhist texts is that it refers to the middle way between two opposite extremes (such as eternalism and annihilationism), and thus it is "not two".[131]
One of these Sanskrit Mahayana sutras, the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra contains a chapter on the "Dharma gate of non-duality" (advaya dharma dvara pravesa) which is said to be entered once one understands how numerous pairs of opposite extremes are to be rejected as forms of grasping. These extremes which must be avoided in order to understand ultimate reality are described by various characters in the text, and include: Birth and extinction, 'I' and 'Mine', Perception and non-perception, defilement and purity, good and not-good, created and uncreated, worldly and unworldly, samsara and nirvana, enlightenment and ignorance, form and emptiness and so on.[132] The final character to attempt to describe ultimate reality is the bodhisattva Manjushri, who states:
It is in all beings wordless, speechless, shows no signs, is not possible of cognizance, and is above all questioning and answering.[133]
Vimalakīrti responds to this statement by maintaining completely silent, therefore expressing that the nature of ultimate reality is ineffable (anabhilāpyatva) and inconceivable (acintyatā), beyond verbal designation (prapañca) or thought constructs (vikalpa).[133] The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, a text associated with Yogācāra Buddhism, also uses the term "advaya" extensively.[134]
In the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of Madhyamaka, the two truths or ways of understanding reality, are said to be advaya (not two). As explained by the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna, there is a non-dual relationship, that is, there is no absolute separation, between conventional and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.[135][136] The concept of nonduality is also important in the other major Indian Mahayana tradition, the Yogacara school, where it is seen as the absence of duality between the perceiving subject (or "grasper") and the object (or "grasped"). It is also seen as an explanation of emptiness and as an explanation of the content of the awakened mind which sees through the illusion of subject-object duality. However, it is important to note that in this conception of non-dualism, there are still a multiplicity of individual mind streams (citta santana) and thus Yogacara does not teach an idealistic monism.[137]
These basic ideas have continued to influence Mahayana Buddhist doctrinal interpretations of Buddhist traditions such as Dzogchen, Mahamudra, Zen, Huayan and Tiantai as well as concepts such as Buddha-nature, luminous mind, Indra's net, rigpa and shentong.
Madhyamaka[edit]
Main articles: Madhyamika, Shunyata, and Two truths doctrine
Nagarjuna (right), Aryadeva (middle) and the Tenth Karmapa (left).
Madhyamaka, also known as Śūnyavāda (the emptiness teaching), refers primarily to a Mahāyāna Buddhist school of philosophy [138] founded by Nāgārjuna. In Madhyamaka, Advaya refers to the fact that the two truths are not separate or different.,[139] as well as the non-dual relationship of saṃsāra (the round of rebirth and suffering) and nirvāṇa (cessation of suffering, liberation).[42] According to Murti, in Madhyamaka, "Advaya" is an epistemological theory, unlike the metaphysical view of Hindu Advaita.[54] Madhyamaka advaya is closely related to the classical Buddhist understanding that all things are impermanent (anicca) and devoid of "self" (anatta) or "essenceless" (niḥsvabhāvavā),[140][141][142] and that this emptiness does not constitute an "absolute" reality in itself.[note 14].
In Madhyamaka, the two "truths" (satya) refer to conventional (saṃvṛti) and ultimate (paramārtha) truth.[143] The ultimate truth is "emptiness", or non-existence of inherently existing "things",[144] and the "emptiness of emptiness": emptiness does not in itself constitute an absolute reality. Conventionally, "things" exist, but ultimately, they are "empty" of any existence on their own, as described in Nagarjuna's magnum opus, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK):
The Buddha's teaching of the Dharma is based on two truths: a truth of worldly convention and an ultimate truth. Those who do not understand the distinction drawn between these two truths do not understand the Buddha's profound truth. Without a foundation in the conventional truth the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught. Without understanding the significance of the ultimate, liberation is not achieved.[note 15]
As Jay Garfield notes, for Nagarjuna, to understand the two truths as totally different from each other is to reify and confuse the purpose of this doctrine, since it would either destroy conventional realities such as the Buddha's teachings and the empirical reality of the world (making Madhyamaka a form of nihilism) or deny the dependent origination of phenomena (by positing eternal essences). Thus the non-dual doctrine of the middle way lies beyond these two extremes.[146]
"Emptiness" is a consequence of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising),[147] the teaching that no dharma ("thing", "phenomena") has an existence of its own, but always comes into existence in dependence on other dharmas. According to Madhyamaka all phenomena are empty of "substance" or "essence" (Sanskrit: svabhāva) because they are dependently co-arisen. Likewise it is because they are dependently co-arisen that they have no intrinsic, independent reality of their own. Madhyamaka also rejects the existence of absolute realities or beings such as Brahman or Self.[148] In the highest sense, "ultimate reality" is not an ontological Absolute reality that lies beneath an unreal world, nor is it the non-duality of a personal self (atman) and an absolute Self (cf. Purusha). Instead, it is the knowledge which is based on a deconstruction of such reifications and Conceptual proliferations.[149] It also means that there is no "transcendental ground," and that "ultimate reality" has no existence of its own, but is the negation of such a transcendental reality, and the impossibility of any statement on such an ultimately existing transcendental reality: it is no more than a fabrication of the mind.[web 14][note 16] Susan Kahn further explains:
Ultimate truth does not point to a transcendent reality, but to the transcendence of deception. It is critical to emphasize that the ultimate truth of emptiness is a negational truth. In looking for inherently existent phenomena it is revealed that it cannot be found. This absence is not findable because it is not an entity, just as a room without an elephant in it does not contain an elephantless substance. Even conventionally, elephantlessness does not exist. Ultimate truth or emptiness does not point to an essence or nature, however subtle, that everything is made of.[web 15]
However, according to Nagarjuna, even the very schema of ultimate and conventional, samsara and nirvana, is not a final reality, and he thus famously deconstructs even these teachings as being empty and not different from each other in the MMK where he writes:[41]
The limit (koti) of nirvāṇa is that of saṃsāra
The subtlest difference is not found between the two.
According to Nancy McCagney, what this refers to is that the two truths depend on each other; without emptiness, conventional reality cannot work, and vice versa. It does not mean that samsara and nirvana are the same, or that they are one single thing, as in Advaita Vedanta, but rather that they are both empty, open, without limits, and merely exist for the conventional purpose of teaching the Buddha Dharma.[41] Referring to this verse, Jay Garfield writes that:
to distinguish between samsara and nirvana would be to suppose that each had a nature and that they were different natures. But each is empty, and so there can be no inherent difference. Moreover, since nirvana is by definition the cessation of delusion and of grasping and, hence, of the reification of self and other and of confusing imputed phenomena for inherently real phenomena, it is by definition the recognition of the ultimate nature of things. But if, as Nagarjuna argued in Chapter XXIV, this is simply to see conventional things as empty, not to see some separate emptiness behind them, then nirvana must be ontologically grounded in the conventional. To be in samsara is to see things as they appear to deluded consciousness and to interact with them accordingly. To be in nirvana, then, is to see those things as they are - as merely empty, dependent, impermanent, and nonsubstantial, not to be somewhere else, seeing something else.[150]
It is important to note however that the actual Sanskrit term "advaya" does not appear in the MMK, and only appears in one single work by Nagarjuna, the Bodhicittavivarana.[151]
The later Madhyamikas, states Yuichi Kajiyama, developed the Advaya definition as a means to Nirvikalpa-Samadhi by suggesting that "things arise neither from their own selves nor from other things, and that when subject and object are unreal, the mind, being not different, cannot be true either; thereby one must abandon attachment to cognition of nonduality as well, and understand the lack of intrinsic nature of everything". Thus, the Buddhist nondualism or Advaya concept became a means to realizing absolute emptiness.[152]
Yogācāra tradition[edit]
Asaṅga (fl. 4th century C.E.), a Mahayana scholar who wrote numerous works which discuss the Yogacara view and practice.
Main article: Yogacara
In the Mahayana tradition of Yogācāra (Skt; "yoga practice"), adyava (Tibetan: gnyis med) refers to overcoming the conceptual and perceptual dichotomies of cognizer and cognized, or subject and object.[42][153][154][155] The concept of adyava in Yogācāra is an epistemological stance on the nature of experience and knowledge, as well as a phenomenological exposition of yogic cognitive transformation. Early Buddhism schools such as Sarvastivada and Sautrāntika, that thrived through the early centuries of the common era, postulated a dualism (dvaya) between the mental activity of grasping (grāhaka, "cognition", "subjectivity") and that which is grasped (grāhya, "cognitum", intentional object).[156][152][156][157] Yogacara postulates that this dualistic relationship is a false illusion or superimposition (samaropa).[152]
Yogācāra also taught the doctrine which held that only mental cognitions really exist (vijñapti-mātra),[158][note 17] instead of the mind-body dualism of other Indian Buddhist schools.[152][156][158] This is another sense in which reality can be said to be non-dual, because it is "consciousness-only".[159] There are several interpretations of this main theory, which has been widely translated as representation-only, ideation-only, impressions-only and perception-only.[160][158][161][162] Some scholars see it as a kind of subjective or epistemic Idealism (similar to Kant's theory) while others argue that it is closer to a kind of phenomenology or representationalism. According to Mark Siderits the main idea of this doctrine is that we are only ever aware of mental images or impressions which manifest themselves as external objects, but "there is actually no such thing outside the mind."[163] For Alex Wayman, this doctrine means that "the mind has only a report or representation of what the sense organ had sensed."[161] Jay Garfield and Paul Williams both see the doctrine as a kind of Idealism in which only mentality exists.[164][165]
However, it is important to note that even the idealistic interpretation of Yogācāra is not an absolute monistic idealism like Advaita Vedanta or Hegelianism, since in Yogācāra, even consciousness "enjoys no transcendent status" and is just a conventional reality.[166] Indeed, according to Jonathan Gold, for Yogācāra, the ultimate truth is not consciousness, but an ineffable and inconceivable "thusness" or "thatness" (tathatā).[153] Also, Yogācāra affirms the existence of individual mindstreams, and thus Kochumuttom also calls it a realistic pluralism.[82]
The Yogācārins defined three basic modes by which we perceive our world. These are referred to in Yogācāra as the three natures (trisvabhāva) of experience. They are:[167][168]
Parikalpita (literally, "fully conceptualized"): "imaginary nature", wherein things are incorrectly comprehended based on conceptual and linguistic construction, attachment and the subject object duality. It is thus equivalent to samsara.
Paratantra (literally, "other dependent"): "dependent nature", by which the dependently originated nature of things, their causal relatedness or flow of conditionality. It is the basis which gets erroneously conceptualized,
Pariniṣpanna (literally, "fully accomplished"): "absolute nature", through which one comprehends things as they are in themselves, that is, empty of subject-object and thus is a type of non-dual cognition. This experience of "thatness" (tathatā) is uninfluenced by any conceptualization at all.
To move from the duality of the Parikalpita to the non-dual consciousness of the Pariniṣpanna, Yogācāra teaches that there must be a transformation of consciousness, which is called the "revolution of the basis" (āśraya-parāvṛtti). According to Dan Lusthaus, this transformation which characterizes awakening is a "radical psycho-cognitive change" and a removal of false "interpretive projections" on reality (such as ideas of a self, external objects, etc).[169]
The Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra, a Yogācāra text, also associates this transformation with the concept of non-abiding nirvana and the non-duality of samsara and nirvana. Regarding this state of Buddhahood, it states:
Its operation is nondual (advaya vrtti) because of its abiding neither in samsara nor in nirvana (samsaranirvana-apratisthitatvat), through its being both conditioned and unconditioned (samskrta-asamskrtatvena).[170]
This refers to the Yogācāra teaching that even though a Buddha has entered nirvana, they do no "abide" in some quiescent state separate from the world but continue to give rise to extensive activity on behalf of others.[170] This is also called the non-duality between the compounded (samskrta, referring to samsaric existence) and the uncompounded (asamskrta, referring to nirvana). It is also described as a "not turning back" from both samsara and nirvana.[171]
For the later thinker Dignaga, non-dual knowledge or advayajñāna is also a synonym for prajñaparamita (transcendent wisdom) which liberates one from samsara.[172]
Other Indian traditions[edit]
Buddha nature or tathagata-garbha (literally "Buddha womb") is that which allows sentient beings to become Buddhas.[173] Various Mahayana texts such as the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras focus on this idea and over time it became a very influential doctrine in Indian Buddhism, as well in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddha nature teachings may be regarded as a form of nondualism. According to Sally B King, all beings are said to be or possess tathagata-garbha, which is nondual Thusness or Dharmakaya. This reality, states King, transcends the "duality of self and not-self", the "duality of form and emptiness" and the "two poles of being and non being".[174]
There various interpretations and views on Buddha nature and the concept became very influential in India, China and Tibet, where it also became a source of much debate. In later Indian Yogācāra, a new sub-school developed which adopted the doctrine of tathagata-garbha into the Yogācāra system.[166] The influence of this hybrid school can be seen in texts like the Lankavatara Sutra and the Ratnagotravibhaga. This synthesis of Yogācāra tathagata-garbha became very influential in later Buddhist traditions, such as Indian Vajrayana, Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism.[175][166] Yet another development in late Indian Buddhism was the synthesis of Madhymaka and Yogacara philosophies into a single system, by figures such as Śāntarakṣita (8th century). Buddhist Tantra, also known as Vajrayana, Mantrayana or Esoteric Buddhism, drew upon all these previous Indian Buddhist ideas and nondual philosophies to develop innovative new traditions of Buddhist practice and new religious texts called the Buddhist tantras (from the 6th century onwards).[176] Tantric Buddhism was influential in China and is the main form of Buddhism in the Himalayan regions, especially Tibetan Buddhism.
It is out of this understanding of rebellion as salvation for all that the most courageous acts of solidarity are born. One is reminded of Simone Weil, whom Camus lauded as “the only great spirit of our times” and who, as she lay dying of tuberculosis, defied her doctors’ orders by refusing to eat more than the rations her compatriots in Nazi-occupied France were given. Invoking such heroes, Camus writes:
This insane generosity is the generosity of rebellion, which unhesitatingly gives the strength of its love and without a moment’s delay refuses injustice. Its merit lies in making no calculations, distributing everything it possesses to life and to living men. It is thus that it is prodigal in its gifts to men to come. Real generosity toward the future lies in giving all to the present. […] Rebellion proves in this way that it is the very movement of life and that it cannot be denied without renouncing life. Its purest outburst, on each occasion, gives birth to existence. Thus it is love and fecundity or it is nothing at all. At the end of this tunnel of darkness, however, there is inevitably a light, which we already divine and for which we only have to fight to ensure its coming. All of us, among the ruins, are preparing a renaissance beyond the limits of nihilism. But few of us know it. In a sentiment of especial poignancy today, as Europe struggles to welcome the world’s refugees and displaced families so ungenerously referred to as a “crisis,” Camus adds:
In the light, the earth remains our first and our last love. Our brothers are breathing under the same sky as we; justice is a living thing. Now is born that strange joy which helps one live and die… With this joy, through long struggle, we shall remake the soul of our time, and a Europe which will exclude nothing.
The Rebel is a magnificent and acutely timely read in its totality. Complement it with Susan Sontag on courage and resistance and Nietzsche on what it really means to be a free spirit, then revisit Camus on strength of character, happiness, unhappiness, and our self-imposed prisons, the art of awareness, and the touching letter of gratitude he sent to his childhood teacher shortly after winning the Nobel Prize.
Building on Nietzsche’s ideas about the fine line between constructive and destructive rebellion — ideas Camus sees as “born of abundance and fullness of spirit” — he summarizes this orientation of mind: One must accept the unacceptable and hold to the untenable… From absolute despair will spring infinite joy, from blind servitude, unbounded freedom. To be free is, precisely, to abolish ends. The innocence of the ceaseless change of things, as soon as one consents to it, represents the maximum liberty. The free mind willingly accepts what is necessary. Nietzsche’s most profound concept is that the necessity of phenomena, if it is absolute, without rifts, does not imply any kind of restraint. Total acceptance of total necessity is his paradoxical definition of freedom. The question “free of what?” is thus replaced by “free for what?” Liberty coincides with heroism. It is the asceticism of the great man, “the bow bent to the breaking-point.” In a passage of remarkable resonance today, when we are confronting a wave of violence so strangely divorced from everything the past has taught us — those countless bloody lessons in the perennial fact that violence is always without victors — Camus considers the only adequate role of history:
History … is only an opportunity that must be rendered fruitful by a vigilant rebellion. “Obsession with the harvest and indifference to history,” writes René Char admirably, “are the two extremities of my bow.” If the duration of history is not synonymous with the duration of the harvest, then history, in effect, is no more than a fleeting and cruel shadow in which man has no more part. He who dedicates himself to this history dedicates himself to nothing and, in his turn, is nothing. But he who dedicates himself to the duration of his life, to the house he builds, to the dignity of mankind, dedicates himself to the earth and reaps from it the harvest that sows its seed and sustains the world again and again. More than half a century before Rebecca Solnit’s electrifying case for the vital difference between blind optimism and hope as an act of rebellion, Camus writes: The words that reverberate for us at the confines of this long adventure of rebellion are not formulas for optimism, for which we have no possible use in the extremities of our unhappiness, but words of courage and intelligence which, on the shores of the eternal seas, even have the qualities of virtue. No possible form of wisdom today can claim to give more. Rebellion indefatigably confronts evil, from which it can only derive a new impetus. Man can master in himself everything that should be mastered. He should rectify in creation everything that can be rectified. And after he has done so, children will still die unjustly even in a perfect society. Even by his greatest effort man can only propose to diminish arithmetically the sufferings of the world. But the injustice and the suffering of the world will remain and, no matter how limited they are, they will not cease to be an outrage. Dimitri Karamazov’s cry of “Why?” will continue to resound; art and rebellion will die only with the last man.
[…]
Then we understand that rebellion cannot exist without a strange form of love. Those who find no rest in God or in history are condemned to live for those who, like themselves, cannot live: in fact, for the humiliated. The most pure form of the movement of rebellion is thus crowned with the heart-rending cry of Karamazov: if all are not saved, what good is the salvation of one only?
Why rebel if there is nothing permanent in oneself worth preserving? And yet true rebellion, Camus argues, is an act motivated by concerned with the common good rather than by self-interest: The affirmation implicit in every act of rebellion is extended to something that transcends the individual in so far as it withdraws him from his supposed solitude and provides him with a reason to act. […] An act of rebellion is not, essentially, an egoistic act. Of course, it can have egoistic motives… The rebel … demands respect for himself, of course, but only in so far as he identifies himself with a natural community. […] When he rebels, a man identifies himself with other men and so surpasses himself, and from this point of view human solidarity is metaphysical. With an eye to the osmotic relationship between construction and destruction, Camus adds: Rebellion, though apparently negative, since it creates nothing, is profoundly positive in that it reveals the part of man which must always be defended. While this essay is a particularly spirited expression of his lifelong mission to defeat nihilism, Camus uses the writings of Nietzsche — who proclaimed himself “the first perfect nihilist of Europe” — as a springboard for exploring the constructive potentiality of rebellion. He writes: Because his mind was free, Nietzsche knew that freedom of the mind is not a comfort, but an achievement to which one aspires and at long last obtains after an exhausting struggle. He knew that in wanting to consider oneself above the law, there is a great risk of finding oneself beneath the law. That is why he understood that only the mind found its real emancipation in the acceptance of new obligations. The essence of his discovery consists in saying that if the eternal law is not freedom, the absence of law is still less so.
[…]
The sum total of every possibility does not amount to liberty… Chaos is also a form of servitude. Freedom exists only in a world where what is possible is defined at the same time as what is not possible. Without law there is no freedom.
Despair, like the absurd, has opinions and desires about everything in general and nothing in particular. Silence expresses this attitude very well. But from the moment that the rebel finds his voice — even though he says nothing but “no” — he begins to desire and to judge… Not every value entails rebellion, but every act of rebellion tacitly invokes a value… Awareness, no matter how confused it may be, develops from every act of rebellion: the sudden, dazzling perception that there is something in man with which he can identify himself, even if only for a moment.
“You say you want a revolution,” the Beatles sang in 1968 as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was erecting the pillars of nonviolence on the other side of the Atlantic, “Well, you know / We all want to change the world… But when you talk about destruction / Don’t you know that you can count me out… If you want money for people with minds that hate / All I can tell you is brother you have to wait.”
Perhaps such is the curse of our species: Only in violent times do we remember, in our bones and our sinews, that hate is not a weapon of rebellion but of cowardice; that no true revolution is achieved through destruction and nihilism; that the only way to change the world is through constructive and life-affirming action. No one has made this point more persuasively and elegantly than Albert Camus (November 7, 1913–January 4, 1960) in his sublime and sublimely timely 1951 book The Rebel: An Essay on Man in Revolt (public library).The Rebel (French: L'Homme révolté) is a 1951 book-length essay by Albert Camus, which treats both the metaphysical and the historical development of rebellion and revolution in societies, especially Western Europe. Camus relates writers and artists as diverse as Epicurus and Lucretius, Marquis de Sade, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Friedrich Nietzsche, Max Stirner, André Breton, and others in an integrated, historical portrait of man in revolt. Examining both rebellion and revolt, which may be seen as the same phenomenon in personal and social frames, Camus examines several 'countercultural' figures and movements from the history of Western thought and art, noting the importance of each in the overall development of revolutionary thought and philosophy. This work has received ongoing interest, influencing modern philosophers and authors such as Paul Berman and others.
Fred Rosen has examined the influence of ideas of Simone Weil on Camus' thinking in The Rebel. George F Selfer has analysed parallels between Camus and Friedrich Nietzsche in philosophical aesthestics
One of Camus' primary arguments in The Rebel concerns the motivation for rebellion and revolution. While the two acts - which can be interpreted from Camus' writing as states of being - are radically different in most respects, they both stem from a basic human rejection of normative justice. If human beings become disenchanted with contemporary applications of justice, Camus suggests that they rebel. This rebellion, then, is the product of a basic contradiction between the human mind's unceasing quest for clarification and the apparently meaningless nature of the world. Described by Camus as "absurd," this latter perception must be examined with what Camus terms "lucidity." Camus concludes that the absurd sensibility contradicts itself because when it claims to believe in nothing, it believes in its own protest and the value of the protester's life. Therefore, this sensibility is logically a "point of departure" that irresistibly "exceeds itself." In the inborn impulse to rebel, on the other hand, we can deduce values that enable us to determine that murder and oppression are illegitimate and conclude with "hope for a new creation."
Another prominent theme in The Rebel, which is tied to the notion of incipient rebellion, is the inevitable failure of attempts at human perfection. Through an examination of various titular revolutions, and in particular the French Revolution, Camus argues that most revolutions involved a fundamental denial of both history and transcendental values. Such revolutionaries aimed to kill God. In the French Revolution, for instance, this was achieved through the execution of Louis XVI and subsequent eradication of the divine right of kings. The subsequent rise of utopian and materialist idealism sought "the end of history." Because this end is unattainable, according to Camus, terror ensued as the revolutionaries attempted to coerce results. This culminated in the "temporary" enslaving of people in the name of their future liberation. Notably, Camus' reliance on non-secular sentiment does not involve a defense of religion; indeed, the replacement of divinely-justified morality with pragmatism simply represents Camus' apotheosis of transcendental, moral values.
A third is that of crime, as Camus discusses how rebels who get carried away lose touch with the original basis of their rebellion and offer various defenses of crime through various historical epochs.
At the end of the book, Camus espouses the possible moral superiority of the ethics and political plan of syndicalism. He grounds this politics in a wider "midday thought" which opposes love of this life, and an unrelativisable normative commitment to fellow human beings, against ideological promises of the other world, end of history, or triumph of an alleged master race.
Copyright © Alessandro Signore - www.alessandrosignore.it.
Please don't use my photos without permission.
Existential planes are not given conditions but levels of intensity of metaphysical seeing (sanskrit vidya).
The wisdom of non-differentiation is superior to the wisdom of differentiation, but it could not be achieved without the wisdom of differentiation. Therefore the wisdom of differentiation should precede the wisdom of non-differentiation.
5. How can it be imagined about the one who is unable to surmount his own education and the effects of his family, schooling and mass communication that he can surmount that which will arise as ontic bondage on his spiritual way?
6. To eliminate his defective judgements of value man should attend to a process of radical autocorrection in the course of which every earlier view should be rejected, and then that which stands the test of the new view should be reaccepted.
9. Not only a view but a way of looking; not only a view of the world but a way of looking at the world; not only a Weltanschauung (world view) but world contemplation; not only structure and frame but a living process…
32. Spiritual and theistic Weltanschauungs should be markedly different from materialistic and atheistic ones in each aspect of life: in eating, sleeping, walking but first of all in their views.
39. There is but one true normality: the normality of the centre.
40. If the knowledge related to the centre is lacking, then in fact the knowledge related to the periphery is lacking as well.
52. Beyond a certain level there can not be external or internal any more. There is no external or internal - for in relation to the limit of consciousness everything is inside and in relation to the centre of consciousness everything is outside.
53. Existential planes are not given conditions but levels of intensity of metaphysical seeing (sanskrit vidya).
56. The wisdom of non-differentiation is superior to the wisdom of differentiation, but it could not be achieved without the wisdom of differentiation. Therefore the wisdom of differentiation should precede the wisdom of non-differentiation.
57. Things can only be united if they have previously been separated.
62. Earth can essentially be in touch with Heaven (the Motionless Mover) only where it is not in motion - i. e. at the poles.
64. In the cosmos the spirit manifests itself as light. When Christ says that »I am the light of the cosmos«, it means that He is the light of the cosmos which is beyond the cosmos - that is to say, He is the spirit of the cosmos but this spirit is beyond the cosmos.
65. The material world is essentially a spiritual world. What does »spiritual« mean? Does that mean that it is more subtle than material? It also means that but the main point is something else. The world is spiritual if the fact that it is in the consciousness becomes evident.
-----
Metaphysical aphorisms by András László
www.tradicio.org/english/solumipsum.htm
-----
Painting by Giovanni di Paolo
Danubiana Meulensteen Art Museum is a Slovak-Dutch museum of post-war visual art situated on the Danube river outside Bratislava, established in 2000
painter Daniel Brunovský (1959 Bratislava)
from the text of the art historian about Daniel Brunovský: Melancholy (intellectual contemplation), nostalgia (consolation with verified values) and metaphysics (what is hidden behind the deceptive face of visible reality) remain the key terms. Maybe alchemy too.
Pure "dogmatism" and mere "speculation", many may say. This in fact is the problem: a metaphysical exposition appears as a purely mental phenomenon, when one does not know that its origin is not a mental elaboration or an attitude of soul, but a vision which is completely independent of opinions, conclusions and creeds, and which is realized in the pure Intellect - through the "Eye of the Heart".
A metaphysical exposition is not true because it is logical (in its form it could also not be so), but it is in itself logical, that is to say, well-founded and consequential, because it is true. The thoughtprocess of metaphysics is not an artificial support for an opinion that has to be proved, it is simply description that has been adapted to the rules of human thinking; its proofs are aids, not ends in themselves.
St. Thomas Aquinas said that it was impossible to prove the Divine Being, not because it was unclear, but, on the contrary, because of its "excess of clarity". Nothing is more foolish than the question as to whether the supra-sensory can be proved: for, on the one hand, one can prove everything to the one who is spiritually gifted, and, on the other, the one who is not so gifted is blind to the best of proofs.
Thought is not there in order to exhaust reality in words (if it could do this, it would itself be reality, a self-contradictory supposition), but its role can only consist in providing keys to Reality; but the key is not Reality, nor can it wish to be so, but it is a way to it for those that can and will tread that way; and in the way there is already something of the end, just as in the effect there is something of the cause.
That modern thought, still wrongly called "philosophical", distances itself more and more from a logic which is deemed to be "scholastic", and more and more seeks to be "psychologically" and even "biologically" determined, does not escape our notice, but this cannot in any way prevent us from thinking or being in the manner that the theomorphic nature of man, and hence the sufficient reason of the human state, demand.
One speaks much today of the "man of our time" and one claims for him the right to determine the truth of this "time", as if man were a "time", and as if truth were not valid for man as such; what in man is mutable does not belong to man as such; what constitutes the miracle of "man" is not subject to change, for, in the image of God, there can be neither decrease nor increase. And that man is this image follows from the simple fact that he possesses the concept of the Absolute. In this one primordial concept lies the whole essence of man and therefore also his whole vocation.
----
Frithjof Schuon: Sophia Perennis