I was reading Krishna, who is uncommonly clear on mentation, in the Uddhava Gita last night.
Uddhava, his discipline, asked him which scientific "theory of everything" about how the universe was put together was accurate. Krishna then rather brilliantly listed about twenty different theories current at the time, in a few words each, and said that they are all true!!
Then he explained that:
- purusha looks onto prakriti, and empowers it to become real.
Hawkins uses one of these technical terms, the "purusha". Purusha is
the technical term for the "presence of God" or the "holy spirit". In Hawkins' terms the Purusha manifests in the 500s from the Kundalini and inspires vision and erases perception.
But Hawkins no-where mentions Prakriti, the technical term which
means "the pattern that the Divine makes as it manifests". And that is a great pity, because I think Krishna's quote can explain an awful lot, such as why calibrators get different results, why a piece of science can be useful in one century and useless in another, and what positionalities are.
Krishna's rhetorical mode is to include and assimilate other
traditions explicitly including the science of his time, while Hawkins is quite ambiguous about scientific knowing. One the one hand it can relieve most human suffering (Eye), and on the other it is the major
block to enlightenment in most people these days. And on still a
third hand (!) Hawkins uses nonlinear dynamics, a logarithmic scale, and quantum physics to provide explanations for his findings!
My theory is that the process of coming-to-know a thing, the
epistemological process, alters the nature of the thing itself. So when I calibrate a thing at 450, and another at below 200, we create a kind of a karmic trace that contributes in a tiny way towards the overall potential perception of his consciousness, to the potentialities
available to Kevin Williams himself (perception being a kind of
prayer that enables or disables the person perceived). The ability of perception to gloss over discrepancies in perception is made blatantly obvious by the K-test, which exposes differences in perception in the K-tester quite ruthlessly, much like an inner guru.
In a significant way, when one calibrates, the potential truth becomes actual truth, the indeterminate quantum wave of subjectivity collapsing into a simple yes-no question. The falsehood of everyday life gives way to the desire to know truth absolutely, and since the calibration itself calibrates at 600, it leaves a powerful trace behind. The karmic choice to know truth would seem to be very powerful in and of itself, which is why I feel strongly that everyone who has an interest in truth can calibrate.
Anyhow getting back to the Krishna quote: It would seem that the pattern of knowingness in the universe is only real and alive when the Presence of the
divine looks on it. Otherwise it is just a dead tissue of ideas, a positionality, and a futile mentation. This explains why so many scientists are deeply religious people. The ability to do accurate science would seem to be dependent not on one's ability to know (prakriti), but on one's ability to
perceive the Presence of the Holy Spirit (purusha).
An example of prakriti infused with purusha is the writings of the avatars which although they are often second hand recordings can frequently be luminous and inspiring. But even to hear about or read the scientists at 499 such as Freud, Einstein, Darwin and Newton can be enormously powerful and inspiring to intellectual pursuit. Darwin for all his detractors is full of the sacred wonder of life in his writing, and inspired by a desire for truth alone as
he understands it.
Hawkins has stated that truth is subjective. My feeling is that ALL truth is subjective, even his and yours and mine. So whatever shines purusha on prakriti for you is fine by me!
Uddhava, his discipline, asked him which scientific "theory of everything" about how the universe was put together was accurate. Krishna then rather brilliantly listed about twenty different theories current at the time, in a few words each, and said that they are all true!!
Then he explained that:
- purusha looks onto prakriti, and empowers it to become real.
Hawkins uses one of these technical terms, the "purusha". Purusha is
the technical term for the "presence of God" or the "holy spirit". In Hawkins' terms the Purusha manifests in the 500s from the Kundalini and inspires vision and erases perception.
But Hawkins no-where mentions Prakriti, the technical term which
means "the pattern that the Divine makes as it manifests". And that is a great pity, because I think Krishna's quote can explain an awful lot, such as why calibrators get different results, why a piece of science can be useful in one century and useless in another, and what positionalities are.
Krishna's rhetorical mode is to include and assimilate other
traditions explicitly including the science of his time, while Hawkins is quite ambiguous about scientific knowing. One the one hand it can relieve most human suffering (Eye), and on the other it is the major
block to enlightenment in most people these days. And on still a
third hand (!) Hawkins uses nonlinear dynamics, a logarithmic scale, and quantum physics to provide explanations for his findings!
My theory is that the process of coming-to-know a thing, the
epistemological process, alters the nature of the thing itself. So when I calibrate a thing at 450, and another at below 200, we create a kind of a karmic trace that contributes in a tiny way towards the overall potential perception of his consciousness, to the potentialities
available to Kevin Williams himself (perception being a kind of
prayer that enables or disables the person perceived). The ability of perception to gloss over discrepancies in perception is made blatantly obvious by the K-test, which exposes differences in perception in the K-tester quite ruthlessly, much like an inner guru.
In a significant way, when one calibrates, the potential truth becomes actual truth, the indeterminate quantum wave of subjectivity collapsing into a simple yes-no question. The falsehood of everyday life gives way to the desire to know truth absolutely, and since the calibration itself calibrates at 600, it leaves a powerful trace behind. The karmic choice to know truth would seem to be very powerful in and of itself, which is why I feel strongly that everyone who has an interest in truth can calibrate.
Anyhow getting back to the Krishna quote: It would seem that the pattern of knowingness in the universe is only real and alive when the Presence of the
divine looks on it. Otherwise it is just a dead tissue of ideas, a positionality, and a futile mentation. This explains why so many scientists are deeply religious people. The ability to do accurate science would seem to be dependent not on one's ability to know (prakriti), but on one's ability to
perceive the Presence of the Holy Spirit (purusha).
An example of prakriti infused with purusha is the writings of the avatars which although they are often second hand recordings can frequently be luminous and inspiring. But even to hear about or read the scientists at 499 such as Freud, Einstein, Darwin and Newton can be enormously powerful and inspiring to intellectual pursuit. Darwin for all his detractors is full of the sacred wonder of life in his writing, and inspired by a desire for truth alone as
he understands it.
Hawkins has stated that truth is subjective. My feeling is that ALL truth is subjective, even his and yours and mine. So whatever shines purusha on prakriti for you is fine by me!
posted by:
|
Australia
|
