Extracts from two different Satsangs...

We are nothing. You have no reason to exist. As a matter of fact, you do not exist. (Laughter) You have never really existed. It is all a cosmic joke. There is no reason for you to be alive and to be here. This may sound like an insult – it is! (More laughter) But it is the truth and the truth hurts.

You may think you are important, that you have come to earth to accomplish great deeds, or to get enlightened. That is not true. The enlightenment is already here and it doesn't need you. You are not wanted by anything or by anybody. (Laughter) You are a complete failure. (Loud laughter)

In truth you do not exist. The illusion of your existence makes you think that you are important, that you are somebody. That is why we talk about being nobody so much; there is no body.

(It's All a Cosmic Joke, Robert Adams)

Below are extracts from the Lankavatara Sutra that are related to naïve realism, information theoretic metaphysics and self-realisation.

All that is seen in the world is devoid of effort and action because all things in the world are like a dream, or like an image miraculously projected. This is not comprehended by philosophers and the ignorant, but those who thus see things, see them truthfully. Those who see things otherwise walk in discrimination, they cling to dualism. The world as seen by discrimination is like seeing ones own image reflected in a mirror, or ones shadow, or the moon reflected in water, or an echo heard in a valley.

People grasping their own shadows of discrimination become attached to this thing and that thing and failing to abandon dualism they go on forever discriminating and thus never attain tranquillity. By tranquillity is meant Oneness, and Oneness gives birth to the highest Samadhi which is gained by entering into the realm of Noble Wisdom that is realisable only within ones inmost consciousness...  More >

My good friend Glisten was recently asked to describe the vision arising from my work in one sentence; I too gave this some thought.

The work is broad so here are five sentences that address different aspects:

• The allegedly physical universe is a construct of observable phenomena arising from a cosmic quantum computational process, and the stream of awareness that witnesses phenomena is a 'thread' of the cosmic process.

• All objects, places and events arise due to the unified cosmic process experiencing itself as it unfolds according to its nature; within that broadest context there is no separation and nothing is by chance.

• We are like virtual beings in a virtual reality simulation, where the world and the self that appear to exist are objects of perception reflected in memory, whilst the true Self of all manifest forms is the One Self, which is the unified animating process.

• Virtual reality provides a scientific / mathematical / computational analogy by which to understand the nature of reality; the cutting edge of modern science is beginning to realise this and will eventually be able to comprehend the ageless wisdom.

• The only obstacle to realising the true nature of ones Self and the cosmic Whole is naïve realism, which is a habit that operates at the root of the mind and distorts each moment of awareness; once this habit is overcome (by whatever means) awareness of reality shines through.

The distilled essence of my input to a conversation on the forum of the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE), which is still continuing so this will grow.

Within the latest SSE newsletter there is an article called "Signs of an Emerging Paradigm Shift", which is about naive realism. The newsletter can be read at: http://www.scientificexploration.org/explorer/explorer_22_3.pdf

The relevance of these issues for SSE is that naive realist assumptions are the foundation of the wall of denial that is maintained by established science. Thus by overcoming these assumptions that wall is falling apart. This has profoundly revolutionary consequences for the whole of civilisation, and SSE is in a prime position to be at the vanguard of the paradigm shift if it chooses to be.

Warning: This discussion explores an alternate paradigm that is radically different from the established paradigm. For many people the established paradigm is intrinsic to the familiar world that they have known most of their lives and within which their ego has found its comfortable and secure niche. So be warned that this subject matter can elicit an unconscious irrational ego defence mechanism within your mind. To keep an open mind one must exercise self-awareness and from this much can also be learnt.

Enter the discussion...

The general meaning of the term 'realism' is “A tendency to face facts and be practical rather than imaginative or visionary.” (ref) however it is also the name of a particular philosophical movement.

Realism is "in philosophy, the viewpoint which accords to things which are known or perceived an existence or nature which is independent of whether anyone is thinking about or perceiving them." (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/493091/realism)

"The nature and plausibility of realism is one of the most hotly debated issues in contemporary metaphysics, perhaps even the most hotly debated issue in contemporary philosophy. The question of the nature and plausibility of realism arises with respect to a large number of subject matters, including ethics, aesthetics, causation, modality, science, mathematics, semantics, and the everyday world of macroscopic material objects and their properties." (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism/)

The aspect being discussed here is that of the "everyday world of macroscopic material objects and their properties" and the idea "that physical objects exist independently of their being perceived." (http://www.answers.com/topic/realism)

In recent conversations and on several videos on the web I have noticed that there is a tendency for minds to confuse the name of the movement with the meaning of the word. This leads them to redefine within their own minds the terms 'real' and 'reality', which leads to enormous confusion in conversations about reality (that which actually exists). For example, they say things such as “Reality doesn't "actually exist"! All Realities are illusions. They are only what we each perceive in our own minds. Realities only exist in our own minds.” This is a common colloquial use of the terms, which is directly contradictory to the standard dictionary and philosophical meanings.

If we cannot coherently work towards an understanding of reality (that which actually exists) so that we can effectively participate in reality then we may soon no longer be a part of that which exists (extinction). For this reason those who wish to converse coherently about reality should clearly distinguish between the name of a movement and the meaning of the word, and should keep to the commonly accepted definitions of 'real' and 'reality'. Arbitrarily changing the meaning of such key words creates confusion that is very harmful to coherent rational discourse.

To assist with this I include below a table with commonly accepted meanings along one dimension and different usage patterns along the other. Then I offer an explanation of why the confusion arises and some alternative ways of communicating with naïve realists. Then I also include a list of quotes from genuine realists (those who are realistic) not nominal realists (those who ascribe to a particular philosophical movement).  More >

I have been very busy lately and not posting much at all so here is a quick update...

I recently wrote an article for The Explorer, which is the newsletter of the Society for Scientific Exploration. The newsletter has yet to be published but you can read the article here:
Signs of an Emerging Paradigm Shift.

I am also writing a book. It is a detailed explanation of the core principles of my work. In style, the book is somewhere between a popular science book, an introductory textbook on advanced mathematics and an introductory treatise on abstract metaphysics. Part one is complete and the last part is coming soon. You can read part one here:
System Science of Virtual Reality: Toward the Unification of Empirical and Subjective Science.

Right now I am mostly involved in a fascinating online conversation about naïve realism, its ramifications, its role in the global systemic crisis and how to overcome it for the sake of us all... If you have an interest in this subject then check out STAR for some background information.

The essay Changing How we think for the sake of all describes my input to that conversation. The comments have been arranged and edited into a single essay that expresses the vision that I am sharing in the conversation.

Before I start I will mention that this explanation has been simplified into common sense (naïve realist) language hence it doesn't accurately convey what I think but it is adequate. The points are not random but develop in sequence.  More >

Following is a collection of quotes from leading thinkers that variously point towards an emerging paradigm that challenges many of our deepest assumptions about what is real and what is reality.  More >

Some comments inspired by two fascinating essays written by David Chalmers, The Puzzle of Conscious Experience and Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness.

The “hard problem of consciousness” is the issue of why is it that we experience anything at all, or why is it that there is something that it is like to be something? The reason why this problem is intractable to empirical science is because in its philosophical foundations empiricism takes the contents of experience (phenomena) to be the foundation of its ontology, upon which all its later knowledge depends.

However it is impossible to use the contents of experience to construct a theory of experience because, in a causal sense, experience precedes the contents of experience. Empirical science studies phenomena, their perceivable attributes, behaviours and functional relationships hence it can explain much of the functional aspects of consciousness such as how do we integrate information from many sources into a coherent knowledge base or how can we verbalise our internal states (the easy problems of consciousness) but it cannot explain experience itself (the hard problem).

However, empirical science is not the whole of science. There are rationalist methods which, as quantum physics shows, can be very accurate (quantum physics is by far the most accurate science ever developed and it has rationalist rather than empiricist foundations). Rationalist approaches must eventually connect with, and be verified by their correspondence with the objects of experience, however these are not their starting point. They take a rational theoretical model as their ontological foundation and only when this foundation later connects with experience are they considered to be verified. It is conceivable that a rationalist theory could overcome the limitations of empiricism and provide a scientific explanation of conscious experience.  More >

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Simplified Anatomy of the
Global Systemic Crisis and
How to Heal Civilisation

The crisis can be briefly described as systemic, self-perpetuating, persistent illusion, suffering & destruction.

This analysis describes some salient features of the anatomy of the global systemic crisis, introducing the anatomy stage by stage then discussing how best to initiate a process of holistic healing that can result in lasting peace and creative flourishing.

Brief Summary

Just as life arises from self-perpetuating creative feedback loops (autocatalytic sets) so too does the global systemic crisis arise from self-perpetuating destructive feedback loops. Fundamental illusions give rise to entrenched delusions, which result in suffering and destruction, which are interpreted and responded to in delusional ways, thus reinforcing a destructive feedback loop of delusion, suffering and destruction. The illusions arise from a single source but give rise to many stages of interlocking feedback loops that form a feedback network.

In theory it is possible that if any single stage can be totally healed and kept healthy then this will feed-through the entire feedback network but in practice this is extremely difficult because all other stages will seek to undermine the healthy stage or will compensate to exclude the healthy stage from the network therefore maintaining the overall destructive feedback network.

To heal the whole feedback network the most effective approach is to identify many stages where positive influence can effectively be applied and heal these as much as possible thereby diminishing the destructive feedback and augmenting the creative feedback. This will begin a healing process and the situation will change slightly, whereon we must iterate this again by identifying many stages where positive influence can be applied and healing these as much as possible. As this process is applied again and again the whole system will go through many phases of a healing process that will diminish the overall destructive feedback and augment to overall creative feedback.  More >

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Naïve Realism, Empirical Science
and Transcendent Science

Naïve realism has a tendency to trap our minds within the empirical world of the senses but we can overcome the cultural effects of this in a rigorous scientific manner. The main topics covered in this article are:

Semiotic nature of language and thought,
Overcoming the limitations of empiricism via abstraction,
Transcendent conceptual languages,
Transcendent scientific methodology  More >

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

The Gaian-Ego Hypothesis

This book was started over a year ago but was put aside, however now it feels like the right time to finish it off and publish it. It is mostly finished and will be complete in a couple of weeks. Read it online at www.anandavala.info/GaianEgo/.

Here is a quote of the brief version of the central idea:

“The ecosystem consists of all organisms including ourselves. It is the body of a planetary super-organism that some call Gaia and we organisms are cells within that body, just as organisms are cellular ecosystems. The large scale ecological dynamics involving climate, forests, mountain ranges and oceans comprise the overall physiological processes of that super-organism. The interactions between individual organisms comprise the detailed biochemical processes analogous to those between cells within an organism.

However we humans are rather specialised organisms because our interactions channel information and are therefore analogous to neurological processes. Our human interactions create society and culture which give rise to the mind of Gaia. Our informal culture, composed of individual communication and interaction, is Gaia's subconscious mind. Our power structures and the public discourse, composed of legislation, institutions, mass media and academia, are the conscious mind of Gaia. Mass media, diplomatic channels and telecommunications are the conduit of conscious thought for Gaia.

The feedback loops between mass communication and individual communication form the space in which culture resonates and comes to experience itself. Within this cultural/macro-cognitive scenario a collective ego has arisen that experiences itself as an individual being and uses society as “its body”. Just as within human organisms, which possess a complex self-reflective mind, an ego arises that experiences itself as an individual being and uses the organism as “its body”.

Whilst there are individuals and elites seeking to dominate and exploit, things aren't that simple, they are the most conditioned by the collective ego, which is manifesting through them the most strongly. There is a deeper reason why whole populations allow themselves to be oppressed and have done so for thousands of years. The ego within each of us oppresses ourselves and forms into a collective ego that oppresses us all. This is an emergent systemic phenomenon that is far older and more powerful than anything any small group of humans could create and sustain. All the conspiracies and politics are just symptoms of this phenomenon and not its real cause. Civilisation has gone through cycle after cycle of regimes and revolutions, with great suffering and destruction, and this is perhaps our last chance to break out of that loop and move on to something new.

The more control that the collective ego gains over “its body” the more we organisms become enslaved in a subtle yet all pervasive totalitarian regime. It imposes its perspective and drives the situation in pursuit of its agendas, thereby destroying the fabric of both the society and the ecosystem. Just as the human ego conceives of the ramifications of its abuses as 'ill-health' and 'ageing', so too does the collective ego fail to comprehend the true cause and only seeks to eradicate the symptoms in order to continue pursuing its agendas.

As cells within this collective organism our interactions are its metabolic processes, which make it what it is. If we are unconsciously manipulated we serve the collective ego but if we are aware we support the health of the super-organism. Through communicating our awareness we share it with others and spread the light of awareness. This casts out the shadows of ignorance, which returns the entire system to a state of balance and holistic health.”

Read it online at www.anandavala.info/GaianEgo/

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Is there a world beyond the mind?

Your body, other people, places, objects, planet Earth, the physical universe, the sciences, the perennial wisdom, all the traditions old and new and the whole of history and future hopes, do you not experience them or come to know of them only through the mind? Could you ever know these things other than through the mind? You may believe there is a world beyond the mind or someone or some text may say there is, but that belief, person and text, are they not only experienced through the mind? If you realised who you truly are here and now, would the contents of the mind still enthral you?

Without understanding the mind can you truly understand anything?

If you unconsciously assume that there is a world beyond the mind and you also unconsciously assume that you are an individual being within that world. Given these assumptions, questions such as those above cannot be seen as anything other than solipsism.

But what if there is no world beyond the mind and you are not the worldly being that you have assumed that you are? What if there is only an unconsciously intersubjective co-creation of a collective 'dream' that gives rise to occasions of experience by seemingly individual, ego-oriented conscious minds? Naïve realism leads us to assume the unequivocal reality of the world that is portrayed by the contents of the mind, but if we do away with this naïve assumption and remain truly sceptical, what can we know about the world? The most direct way is to come to know yourself because that is the only part of reality that you have direct access to. Hence “Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside, awakes.” (Carl Jung). This is the path of yoga and all forms of mysticism. But there are other approaches...  More >

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Thoughts on the Outline of a Unified Science

Firstly, what does “unified science” mean?

Unified: (1) formed or united into a whole ... (2) operating as a unit; e.g. "a unified utility system" [1]

Science: (from the Latin scientia, 'knowledge'), in the broadest sense, refers to any systematic knowledge or practice...

The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from the Latin word scientia for knowledge, which in turn comes from scio. 'I know'. The Indo-European root means to discern or to separate, akin to Sanskrit chyati, he cuts off, Greek schizein, to split, Latin scindere, to split. From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge. Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning. [2]

Thus “unified science” refers to “any systematic knowledge or practice” that is “formed or united into a whole” and “operating as a unit”.

How does this relate to empirical science?  More >

Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.

Virtual Reality Analogy Alongside Science and Mysticism

For some background context see the articles: Computational Metaphysics and Vedic Metaphysics,   Hiranyagarbha,   Scientistic Heresy,   Reclaiming Genuine Religion for Humanity,   Thoughts on the Outline of a Unified Science and also see Metaphysical Context.

I very briefly describe some aspects of the virtual reality analogy and then give quotes from sources of scientific and mystic wisdom that can be seen in a new light when interpreted through this analogy. I will leave the interpretation up to you.  More >