| On The Dual Nature of the Universe Part 1 | 2 comments |
|
30 Dec 2007 @ 09:43, by John Grieve
On The Dual Nature of the Universe Part 1
Everything in the phenomenal world has a dual nature. This has long been known to mystics but has only in recent years begun seeping into general awareness. It was considered weird and paradoxical when the wave/particle duality of light was revealed to the world of science a hundred years ago. And also that matter and energy were two different aspects of the same thing associated with the theories of Einstein and nuclear physics.
In truth, everything shares this feature of a dual nature. The only exception is the Source ( sometimes termed God/dess) which is believed to be One, and therefore a Monism. The Source has all these dualities emanating from it and is thus the creator of the phenomenal world which we term reality.
If we enquire further we can see that the dualities are the same thing over and over again. The basic duality is Spirit/Matter which then takes on many different guises and suggests some interesting implications if we follow it through.
A particle (for example of light) is finite, discrete and material whereas the other aspect of light, the wave-form, is continuous, non-material and possibly infinite. I am suggesting here that the Source can be represented as a form of energy and that energy is a spiritual thing. Similarly, Einstein’s theory that matter and energy can be transformed into each other suggests the same thing that energy is a spiritual form and that matter is a non-spiritual form of God that we term material.
In Part II of this piece I will assert and try to demonstrate a further example of this basic duality which I think will surprise you, namely, that the human personality, Psyche, is a discrete, structured, almost material aspect of something, the other aspect of which we call the Soul. In the same way that matter and energy are equivalent so, I contend, are Psyche and Soul. This is not new to the science of mysticism but is relatively unknown to the materialistic, quantitative science of modern society.
This prompts me to look at, by way of introduction, what we mean by mysticism, religion, philosophy and (modern) science.
Mysticism, as I see it, consists of the common ground between all the different versions of the Perennial Philosophy. Mysticisms vary, and so do the different forms of indigenous wisdom which people call variously, perennial philosophy, wisdom teachings, first nation teachings etc. I believe they are all saying the same thing in slightly different ways, and the version I particularly follow is Taoism, which was originally native to China.
The basic idea of mysticism is that everything is One and that all the parts of that One are completely interconnected. It is a theory of Identity and also communication and intercommunication. There is a web that fills the whole universe. Everything is interconnected and alive, pulsating with energy. It is a profoundly vibrant and loving conception of the world.
I will briefly describe the ‘progress’of modes of knowledge. Thirty years ago I wrote a book and commented there that I agreed with Auguste Comte’s view of the ‘progress’of forms of knowledge via religion, philosophy and Science. I will now add to that comment and conception. I believe that the perennial philosophy/mysticism is the original template for all knowledge and that the succeeding forms are in fact only described as ‘progress’ in a qualified way, being indeed alienated steps away from the original wisdom. Religion follows mysticism and is one degree of separation or alienation from it. In religion we find many of the same things as in mysticism, but in a strange, alienated way. It does not talk about the wonders of the Universe and its oneness, but is obsessed with deities or gods. This inevitably leads through time and development to a monoculture represented by monotheism or the belief in One, all-powerful, all-knowing God.
The next form of knowledge, both historically and logically, is philosophy which is one step of separation or alienation further on. It is really an abstraction of religion; religion in a completely abstract and de-mythologised form. It tries to prove the existence of God, it does not assume it. Volumes could be written on this subject so I will not attempt to say any thing further here.
Science, the next form of knowledge in Comte’s trilogy, and according to his view and that of his contemporaries the highest form possible, is one stage of separation and alienation further on. In this version the alienation becomes unbearable. The Universe is a cold dead place, everything is separated , nothing is connected, there is no God, only cold, lifeless matter. Qualities are disregarded. Only Quantities are thought relevant and important. The most alienated society in the history of civilization produced this kind of knowledge, and used it to subjugate nature and the whole world.
It is my belief that this development of knowledge through increasingly alienated modes can be salvaged and turned into something positive. If one-sided modern science can be fused with the deep qualitative truths of mysticism, which in fact does seem to be already happening, it will produce a mystical science and a scientific mysticism and open the road to real knowledge. Not just superficial knowledge which comes from the head, the intellect, but a deep knowledge of essences, which is achieved by integration of the head and the heart, and which is truly wisdom.
|
|
Category: Philosophy
2 comments
31 Dec 2007 @ 13:46 by jmarc : Interesting
It may be that we have to seperate ourselves in these steps that you mention, to delve into the darkness,to really understand it,and in so doing, to salvage ourselves, and become reunited with the monad.
Though we are already part of it, so it would be more of a refocusing, than a reunion.
The aspects of the rational mind and the intuition require different focus.
Mankind is the belly button at which the Monad gazes?
1 Jan 2008 @ 17:33 by billellis : Duality
DesCartes, in a bread from. religion suggested a duaity of physical world and spiritual world.
Since then we have moved a long way from the realty of spirit.
Science has done a lot to explaing the evolution of ideas of spirituality from the bring/mind of humans.
We need a clearer explanation of what is meant in this duality.
IMHO
Bill Ellis
Other entries in Philosophy
3 Mar 2008 @ 12:50: Taoism and Confucianism : Part II
22 Feb 2008 @ 09:33: Edward Carpenter, Gandhi and the Politics of Identity
27 Jan 2008 @ 09:37: On Creating and Resolving Contradictions on the ChessBoard: Part I
7 Jan 2008 @ 09:41: On the Dual Nature of the Universe Part II
17 Dec 2007 @ 09:59: Superconsciousness
13 Sep 2007 @ 20:48: "Shadows in the Dark" or "Enlightenment - virtue or crime, blessing or curse"?
15 Aug 2007 @ 17:17: Our world as a simulation
9 Aug 2007 @ 14:44: Beautiful Lies, Ugly Truths and the Answer to an Age-Old Paradox
11 May 2007 @ 18:44: All Religious Writings (Bible, Koran, etc.)
1 May 2007 @ 16:35: Eureka!
|
