SUBJECT: Re: Challenge and Response
PRIOR POST PROFILE: http://www.centerforsacredsciences.org/challenge.html
NEW DISTRIBUTION:
BLOG: blogicalthought.blogspot.com
NEWSGROUPS: alt.ucp,alt.consciousness,alt.meditation,
alt.spiritual.enhancement,alt.religion.scientology,
alt.clearing.technology,alt.self-improve
===============================
The original essay “Challenge and Response ” is hosted at:
http://www.centerforsacredsciences.org/challenge.html
It is reproduced here with my comments added.
>Challenge and Response
THANKS SO MUCH FOR
YOUR CHALLENGE! IT
HEXCITES ME GREATLY!
HERE IS MY RESPONSE!
>The Aims and Purposes of The Center For Sacred Sciences
>Copyright 1992
>The Center for Sacred Sciences
>1430 Willamette St. #164
>Eugene, OR 97401-4049
[That's the mailing address.]
>Contents:
>Introduction
>Mysticism, Science, and Religion
>A New Worldview
>A Community of Practitioners
>Our Teacher
>Our Teachings
>Our Practice
>An Invitation to Practice
>Introduction
>Ours is a unique age because it presents us with a unique challenge. The development during the last two hundred years of a rationally based science has brought about an unprecedented technological revolution, resulting in a welcomed rise in the material standard of living for much of the world’s population.
Yes, but our “rationally based science” contains
many catastrophic Errors and contradictions. It is
not “a” science, but a huge hodgepodge of vastly
different models to explain many aspects of the all.
>At the same time, however, this science has also undermined or destroyed our ancient religious traditions-traditions which, historically, have been the primary carriers of those transcendent spiritual and moral values that are as necessary to human welfare and happiness as any of the material necessities of life.
If you have your own awareness, knowledge and certainty,
you really don’t need those traditions, though they certainly
are interesting and valuable resources. Your reality creates
it’s own traditions . . . if it survives and hexpands.
>The challenge of our age in a nutshell, then, is: how to recover those transcendent values without abandoning our science or our reason?
There are several separate challenges:
OUTER VIEW:
1] Improve the science. That means not just
your mathematical equations, but the models and
ideas which generate them. Insane, illogical and
incomprehensible theories may very well generate
perfectly beautiful mathematics: which relativity and
quantum mechanics have illustrated perfectly: as they
set science back about 100 years, and counting, so far.
Note to Tom: I’m not attacking you at all. I really like you. You
are very bright and focused and a virtuoso web master. You are
obviously a genius in many fields, and I’ve read enough of your
articles to see you are not attached to any specific model. You
easily use many different models, and compare them! WOW!
You remind me of Richard McKeon, my major philosophy teacher.
I really hope we will become fast friends. I am attacking ONLY
the catastrophically psychotic models that have been foisted
on physicists for 100 years now! I hope to be there when
YOUR penny drops and you can *SEE* WHY GRAVITY IS!
I’d love to video your revelation
as a physics teaching aid! You
could outdo Feynman himself!
With a simple, understandable model,
your ability as a physicist will take a
. . . dare I say it? . . . quantum leap!
I PROMISE!
SEE FOR YOURSELF!
http://net-prophet.net/nobul/rado/rado.htm
http://www.aethro-kinematics.com/
I can loan you his books, and give
you a copy of his main book on CD.
INNER VIEW:
2] Regenerate transcendant values by
rehabilitating your transcendant sElf!
Improving your technique, if possible,
will help you make faster progress.
The same rigorous efforts of self
hexamination for scientific theory
and technique should be applied
and compared in the sElf realm.
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OR WORLD VIEW:
3] Discover a comprehensive World View which
encompasses both the inner and outer worlds.
>The Center for Sacred Sciences, founded in 1987 as a nonprofit, tax exempt organization, tries to respond to this challenge by fulfilling three major tasks:
>To demonstrate that, despite their outward diversity, all religions share a common inner or Gnostic Truth to which the mystics in every tradition testify;
Hexcellent!
Similar to Ernest Holmes’ attempt to
find the common elements of all the
world’s great historical religions, in
Science of Mind and his other work.
But I think he concentrated on beliefs
rather than enlightenment practices,
and he looked at the “mainstream”
of each religion, while you focus
exclusively on the mystics. OK!
“All religions” of course includes the Universal Conscious Practice,
["UCP"] which I am comparing to your practice as I learn more
about your beliefs and your actual methods of practice.
>and furthermore, that, although this Truth transcends the
truths of reason and science, it is not incompatible with them.
Science *IS* compatible
with Everything That IS,
including Gnostic Truth.
Occams razor dispels error
in religion as well as physics.
True Science *IS* True Religion!
Awareness can be turned both
outward and inward: on itself!
>To help foster a New World View in which both spiritual and scientific truths can be seen as different but complementary ways of describing a single, underlying Reality.
OK!
I really like the CSS!
From my viewpoint, you
are playing MY GAME . . .
with a different gambit.
And you are getting
wonderful results!
I realize I may look like a
half baked wannabe to you.
That’s OK . . . either way!
I have a globally comprehensive
yet minutely detailed *MAP* of
CONSCIOUSNESS ITSELF that has
been independently tested by
numerous seekers and found to
be hextremely accurate. It does
have relatively blank areas, slowly
being filled in, but is very accurate.
I invite you to compare it
to your own hexperience.
You might find that
hextremely useful.
I’m very curious how that
world view looks to you.
>To develop and maintain a community of spiritual practitioners for those who wish to receive teachings and instructions in various spiritual disciplines presented in a contemporary form, but adapted from the Great Traditions of the past.
I’m really impressed by how
well you have done this! The
CSS struck me immediately as
a community of PRACTITIONERS.
It’s not a nursery or a day care.
No one is there because they
grew up in the CSS. Everyone
is there to *DO* something to
raise their own awareness.
Way Cool!
That’s an astonishing achievement!
CSS people look to me like they have been
doing lots of effective work on themsElves!
In one sense, you are taking your
Five Fundamentals and Ten Precepts
as your IDEAL SCENE for yoursElf,
and COMPARING it to your NOW.
In UCP, you compare your now
to your own past and future,
rather than an image from
some one else . . . BUT we
also have the UCPlot of
awareness which lays
out much the same
scene at the top.
I encourage people to compare
where they are to the plot, but
we don’t have any precepts or
rules. UCP allows you to figure
it all out for yourself, without
even an example to follow,
except the UCPlot itself.
However, it might well be a lot easier
with lots of good examples to follow!
The UCPlot shows you the
universal stages we all must go
through to get to the eternal,
so you understand the journey
much better while traveling.
>This pamphlet spells out these tasks in more detail, and describes some of the specific services which the Center for Sacred Sciences provides both for its members and the public at large.
>Mysticism, Science, and Religion
>What separates science from religion in most people’s minds is an apparent difference in their approach to truth. Whereas science insists that any truth worthy of the name should be verifiable by experience, religion seems to demand that we accept its truths on faith alone.
I say those are bad religion and bad science.
Good science and good religion are perfectly compatible.
I further assert that good science is UNDERSTANDABLE.
It makes SENSE. You can EASILY use it to THINK with.
If a theory does not do that for you, it’s BAD SCIENCE!
>Unfortunately, this view is reinforced by the fact that many people who call themselves “religious” hold it as well. To them, religious teachings are valid simply because they have been spoken by an inspired prophet or written down in some holy book. This is enough to establish them as unquestionable dogmas, requiring no further means of verification. Faced with such an attitude it is not surprising that when those of us who reject dogmatism hear the word “religion,” we close our minds to the whole subject.
>If we take the time to examine the world’s great spiritual traditions more closely, however, we find that the same criteria which differentiate scientific from dogmatic truth also differentiate two approaches to truth within the field of religion itself-the approach of the mystic and that of the mere believer.
YESSENCE!
>Thus, while the mere believer is content to accept whatever his or her religion teaches as literally the “word of God,” the mystic understands spiritual teachings to be but crude verbal expressions of a Profound nonverbal Insight or Gnosis (direct Realization) of a Unified Reality or Consciousness which underlies all the apparent multiplicity of experience.
YESSENCE!
>Moreover, because this Gnosis is nonverbal, mystics recognize that all attempts to describe it in words (including those spoken by prophets and written in holy books) must ultimately prove inadequate.
YESSENCE!
>The real purpose of spiritual teachings, then, is not to lay down any dogmas, but to help awaken this same Insight or Gnosis in anyone who aspires to personally verify what the teachings themselves can only partially convey. “You must Realize for yourself!” declared the great Hindu sage, Shankara, a millenium and a half ago, and in one form or another this exhortation has been echoed down the centuries by the mystics of all traditions.
YESSENCE!
UCP is a path of continuous realization.
>Yet even if we recognize that mystics are no less insistent than scientists on the necessity for personal verification of their teachings, our difficulties in trying to understand these teachings are not at an end.
Since that’s just one of the required clues!
>Because most of us have been raised in a scientific culture, the truth claims of science sound to our ears quite plausible (even if we ourselves have never bothered to verify them.) The truth claims of mystics, on the other hand, can seem, well, quite mystifying.
YES! But the scientists have that disease much worse!
The claims of the relativists and the quantum mechanics
are not just mystifying, they are obvious absurd nonsense.
We have been raised in a PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC culture, as
well as PSUE-DOUGH RELIGIONS! “Scientists” have become
the new priests of officially sanctified Jumbo mumbo-jumbo!
>What, for example, are we to make of the traditional Hindu assertion that you and I and every other apparently individual ‘self’ are, in reality, identical to Brahman, the Absolute and Unqualified Ground of all Being?
How might the “Absolute and Unqualified
Ground of all Being” relate to the aether?
Remember, waves only exist in a medium!
Or the representation
of chakras as vortexes?
Maybe the ancients knew
something we forgot?
>Or the Buddhist claim that nothing-including your ‘self’-actually exists? Or Jesus’ repeated admonition that we must ‘die’ to our mundane selves in order to become “one with the Father?” Such baffling statements certainly seem incompatible with our everyday experiences. Consequently, we are apt to dismiss them as being, if not completely mad, at least quite unintelligible.
Unless you have a background or
context which gives them meaning.
Aether theory gives a much better
interpretation of scriptural creation
than relativity or quantum mechanics.
>But what about the following?
[missing illustration of Schrodinger Equation.
This must be a simplified version: I'm sure I
remember a lot more snakes at that orgy]
>To most of us this scribble is far less intelligible than the pronouncement of any mystic. In fact, it is Schrodinger’s equation which, according to quantum mechanics, describes the behavior of all unobserved matter and, thus, represents one of the most comprehensive truth claims of modern science.
Quantum Mechanics does NOT represent one of the
most comprehensive truth claims of modern science.
On the contrary, it is a bizarrely insane theory
invented to explain perfectly good mathematics,
which can be easily derived from a simple
understandable model of the universe.
Quantum Mechanics is just as bizarre as the
deus hex machina of salvation by lamb’s blood
revealed through bent space and erratic time.
BOTH need to be replaced by something
simple, understandable, and observable.
Fortunately, that model is available now!
>The problem is that only someone trained in the disciplines of science can understand what this equation means, let alone personally verify whether or not it is true.
But anyone who can read this post
can compare quantum mechanics
theory with other theories, which
produce exactly the same math!
Quantum mechanics think they have
hexplained the universe by saying it
makes no sense, and we should simply
stop trying to make sense out of it and
keep cranking those complex equations.
They are the new priests of the
new world order who talk to the
universe for you because you are
not smart enough to do it yourself.
It’s their role to hexplain to you that
you can’t understand it because they
are much smarter than you, and they
don’t have a clue either! Physicists are
the mundane priests talking to [their]
god on “your” behalf. DO IT YOURSELF!
>And just how does one get such training? First, one must apply to a school staffed by qualified teachers (those who have themselves mastered the disciplines of science.)
And all the Errors embodied
in theory, ritual, history, etc.
Plus what *NEVER* to say or,
be hexpelled from the group.
Rado never went to school to
study physics. He simply read
the entire history of physics at
home, after work, for fifty years,
after learning english as a middle-
aged refuge in a new country.
His book dissects the history
of physics from the beginning.
Teachers are Way Cool!
Errors are still contagious.
Error-free teachers are
few and far between.
Occam’s razor
shaves so close!
>Next, one must study appropriate textbooks which explain scientific truth claims, define the terms in which they are expressed, and describe the procedures by which great scientists of the past have verified them.
Yes.
And take them apart to make
them answer your questions.
Scrutinize them for ERRORS!
Just as you would
spiritual teachings.
There are plenty of errors
to be found in plane sight!
Overlooked by physicists
for 100 years already!
>Finally, one must repeatedly practice these procedures in a laboratory, learning first hand how to carry them out. Only after one has gained some minimum proficiency in these disciplines will one be in a position to understand and test the truth claims of science for oneself.
On the other hand, any simpleton like me, who
can only compare one thing with another, can
easily compare two theories producing hexactly
the same mathematics, to easily decapitate one
with occams razor, leaving the other quite intact!
Anyone who tells you
it is far too complex for
you to understand . . .
does not understand,
and is not your friend!
I can also compare one
meditation technique
with another, as to
aspirations, goals,
techniques and
actual results.
Way Cool!
I believe physics is of
the same order of
complexity as
awareness.
If you can master one . . .
you can master the other.
You just need a few keys!
I believe your postulated integrated
world view is attainable in short order!
We have many of the clues between us!
>The same principle applies to the truth claims of mystics. If one wishes to understand and test mystical teachings, one must avail oneself of a qualified teacher (a mystic),
Although I agree a good teacher is a
wonderful aid and motivator, I don’t
believe he is necessary IF you have
the proper clues and understanding
of what to do, and you actually DO.
Captain Frank never needed anything
but 15 pages of “N-Lightnment Now!”
and the UCPlot. He took off on his
own and hit stable non-duality in
about 800 hours over four years.
He just had to know WHAT TO DO!
Then he did it more rigorously than I.
Now he chides me for lethary! :-)
A qualified teach is simply one who knows
the few critical clues and has done enough
work on herself to KNOW *HOW* to change.
Qualified teachers are super groovy!
But good teaching is enough for some
people to walk the whole path alone.
Teachings can be rapidly disseminated,
while it takes longer to grow a teacher!
That’s a great source of opportunity!
>study appropriate texts, and train in those procedures (spiritual practices) by which the great mystics of the past have verified these teachings. In other words, like the physical sciences, mystical traditions not only insist on the possibility of a personal verification of their claims, they also have well-defined methodologies for accomplishing it. For this reason, mystical traditions have rightly been called “sciences of the sacred.”
HEXACTLY!
UCP is a scientific study, which
has been independently tested
and verified globally by many
for over twenty years now.
Most of the activity started
in 1999, with the web site.
The *ONLY* really necessary texts are
“N-Lightenment Now!” a ten page paper,
and the UCPlot, a large chart that prints
on two or three pages. There are also
50+ short TECHTALK articles on how and
why UCP works, how to do it, etc., but
they are not essential. There are also
thousands of session reports, kommented
by me or the other hexperienced UCPeons.
There IS a large detailed body of work, but
you ONLY *NEED* one article and one chart.
>Presenting this view of religion as a sacred science to the general public constitutes one of the major aims of the Center for Sacred Sciences.
Yessence!
That’s another reason I
am so interested in you!
I really love your logo:
it has the ourobouros,
but he is no longer
eating his own tale,
the cobra, swans,
and the beloved
phoenix, rising
from his own
ashes to sing
again eternally!
As well as the fire of
eye burning brightly!
Way Cool!
>To this end we maintain a library of mystical teachings selected from all spiritual traditions, host speakers, show videos, and provide a regular series of Sunday talks.
A quite impressive library
and outreach program!
>Through such educational programs we hope to show that, while the ultimate insights of religion do indeed transcend the reaches of science, they do not stand in opposition to it or its demand for well-defined verification procedures.
I find this proposition *IS TRUE!*
However, there are other physics
theories which support it *MUCH*
better than quantum mechanics,
which I see as a 100 year disaster
to our UNDERSTANDING in physics.
Rado’s enhanced aether theory
makes physics understandable!
And reveals hidden
truth in scriptures!
>A New Worldview
>To point out certain similarities between the physical and sacred sciences, however, is not to imply that they are identical. There are major differences, not the least of which is the focus of their respective investigations. Whereas the physical scientist tries to understand the objects perceived in consciousness, the sacred scientist (or spiritual seeker) concentrates on the subject to consciousness-i.e., the ‘self’ or ‘I’ that is doing the perceiving. Because the ‘self’ or ‘I’ is more elusive than any physical phenomena, spiritual investigation is, in some ways, more demanding than the investigations of physical science.
On the other hand, the “sElf” or “Aye”,
goes through scientifically documented
stages as it enlightens itself with UCP.
The stages comprise the UCPlot, and are
analogous to the wavelengths of light.
>On the other hand, because the ‘self’ or ‘I’ is a more or less constant component of all our experience, spiritual seeking is generally far more accessible to the average person than a career in physical science.
One of the most impressive things to me about the CSS
is interest in both the inner world [meditation] and the
outer world [physics]. Both are necessary to a complete
world view. And when you Understand the physical world,
things about the esoteric or spiritual world make more sense.
WHY is it, for instance, that the chakras have often been
represented as spirals, whirlpools or vortexes? A sensible
physics theory would hexplain that instantly and easily.
>A scientist, for example, usually requires a laboratory full of expensive equipment, but the spiritual seeker’s laboratory may consist of nothing more than a meditation pillow.
A REALLY BRIGHT physicist, named Steven Rado,
possessing NO laboratory beyond his own mind,
could read the entire history of physics, and thus
USE *ALL* the equipment of *ALL* the physicists in
recorded history to *UNDERSTAND* the physical
world, while reclining on his meditation pillow.
GOD BLESSED US ALL!
He took 50 years
and did just that!
Then wrote it up!
*YOUR* LUCKY DAY!
He’s still alive!
You can thank him!
If you learn quickly
. . . and act soon!
SEIZE YOUR DAY!
>And while a scientist may have to travel long distances to conduct a particular experiment (say, to observe a solar eclipse), the spiritual seeker’s experiments are fashioned out of the material of his or her everyday life. Thus, though few of us may have the resources to become scientists, virtually everyone has the potential to follow a spiritual path if so inspired.
The resourses to become a scientist
are the same required of a seeker: a
desire to understand, an active mind,
and communication from othersimilar.
With the internet, the information
you need can come right at you!
HERE IS SOME NOW!
>For those who are so inspired, the next question is: which path should I choose?
Hexcellent Question!
To answer it, we would optimally
research known paths by TESTING
and COMPARING them to each other.
Gosh!
That’s a practice in itself!
We call it “UCP”!
We might also try to
develop new practices
to compare to the old!
Gosh!
That’s part of UCP too!
>This question can be especially puzzling in our own time when so many different paths seem available.
Yessence!
Fortunately, the practice which
compares one practice to another
also directly raises your awareness
by comparing your . . . thoughts!
So when you get your comparing
really going on what you need to
focus on, it takes you to non-duality.
After that, you are on our own! :-)
>It is not too difficult for anyone living in a western country today to find teachers representing a variety of authentic mystical disciplines-Hindu, Buddhist, Christian or Islamic. And while some people will be quite comfortable following any one of these traditional paths, others will not.
>This is due in part to the fact that most traditional paths were developed in prescientific cultures.
Or perhaps in fact in highly scientific cultures
who understood some things much better than
we do now. Chakras as vortexes, for instance.
>Consequently, many of their teachings are expressed in terms of cosmologies or worldviews which we no longer find relevant. Semimagical rites, miracle tales, dress and dietary codes, for example, may seem quite out of place in a science-oriented society, and those who adopt them often end up leading a kind of schizophrenic existence.
Yes.
>They rely on a scientific worldview for the conduct of their daily affairs, but look to a different, perhaps contradictory worldview to guide their spiritual life. The question then naturally arises: Is it possible to incorporate both science and mysticism into a single, coherent worldview?
First of all your science would have to be a coherent world view.
Relatively and quantum mechanics don’t even qualify for a laugh!
. . . when you finally have a sane model to compare them to!
>We believe that it is, and this for three reasons.
>The first is that up until the first quarter of the twentieth century science was wedded
to a materialist philosophy which was inherently antagonistic to all forms of religious insight.
I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THAT!
True materialism is not at all antagonistic to true religious insight.
False materialism and false religion are antagonistic to understanding.
>With the advent of quantum physics, however, this materialist philosophy has become scientifically untenable.
I strongly disagree. My viewpoint is that
with the advent of a simple understandable
visualizable classical model that produces
ALL the correct equations, relativity and
quantum mechanics are total bullshit.
THE PARADIGM JUST SH*IF*TED!
That pair a dimes became a
quarter, due to your interest.
>That is, the evidence of science itself contradicts a purely materialistic account of the universe.
That so-called “evidence”
is the badly misinterpreted
theories of a pseudo-science.
You can assume a materialistic model
or a non-materialist model. You MUST
assume SOME model in order to talk.
You cannot prove any model. However,
you CAN use the results of one model
to check another. If you don’t like
materialist models, just come up with
a non-materialist model that works
better than the materialist one.
But that seems separate from
the question of consciousness.
>Something else must be taken into consideration: the role of consciousness. More specifically, according to quantum physics, it is no longer possible to conceive of the objects of consciousness as being fundamentally separable from the subject which observes them.
Yes. Just one of the many absurdities
enshrined in quantum mechanics: *YOU*
only hexist when *I* think about you!
Otherwise you are just a potential
wave function waiting to be activated
by my enabling consciousness! You
can’t remember not existing, except
when I think about you, because
you obviously didn’t even exist!
Don’t ask me to hexplain that:
you are obviously not smart enough,
or you would be reflexively imagining
my own painful demise right now!
But I have pre-emptively counter-
attacked by thinking of ice cream,
so you safely stopped hexisting.
One sees how that works.
Understandable is a
big plus for theories!
>This situation has led to a series of paradoxes at the very heart of modern scientific thought.
Hexactly! Schizophrenic whacked-out ronsense
about the entire universe being in zero space and
time . . . and then hexploding all over everywhere.
An entire universe which only exists
when *YOU* are inspecting it closely!
YOU ARE GOD!
You created the entire unverse,
including myself and everyone else,
but you don’t know it, can’t remember
doing it, and can’t stop doing it compulsively.
Occam shaves much closer than that . . .
without removing his razor from its case!
>As a result, science has had to abandon its materialist philosophy and is currently in search of some other explanation for its own findings.
“Science”, as you term it, made a whole
lot of catastrophic ERRORS and blundered
so far into the swamp of Hallucination, it
can’t even hear the voice of reason calling.
I suspect it was done deliberately,
to keep us from developing any
advanced public technology,
but that’s another story.
>This does not mean, of course, that science presently supports a mystical worldview. It does not. What it does mean, however, is that science can never return to the naive materialism upon which it once relied;
Materialism has saved Understanding from
relativity and quantum mechanic nonsense!
Rejoice! You can have your equations, and
UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY REPRESENT TOO!
>thus, a major obstacle to any rapprochement between science and mysticism has been effectively removed.
I don’t see there ever was one.
A lot of people made a lot of Errors.
We are slowly recovering from them.
>The second reason is that, in the past, religions themselves often have been antagonistic to each other, each claiming that its own particular expression of Spiritual Truth was the sole legitimate one. But this situation, too, is changing. Over the last several decades, religious scholars and translators have made available an increasingly large body of original texts drawn from various spiritual traditions. From the “global perspective” afforded us by comparative studies of these texts we can begin to see that, beneath the superficial debates of the theologians, there has always been a remarkable undercurrent of unity-both of gnostic insight and methodological procedures-running through all religions.
Way Cool! I’d love to read the analysis!
Especially of methodological procedures!
>Most remarkable of all, however, is that the starting point of virtually every mystical tradition has been precisely that paradox which so plagues modern science-namely, the relationship of the observer to the observed, of the ‘I’ to the ‘other’, of self to world. In fact, it is just the mystery of this relationship which mystics of all traditions claim is resolved in Gnosis: The knower and the known, the seeker and the sought, the Father and the son are Realized to be not two, but One!
The Univeral Conscious Practice is associated with
the Universal Conscious Plot, which is the map of
consciousness, which details how the “I” changes
as it raises it’s awareness, much as the eye changes
when you raise the frequency of light illuminating it.
The harmonics seen in frequencies of music or
light are analogous to the states of awareness.
The top of the chart is recognized as non-duality.
However, the method of UCP, COMPARING, stops
working when you arrive there . . . in oneness.
Then the wave-function of UCP defaults to
it’s first and only stage: hexamine your now!
>Thus, where scientific inquiry ends in the riddle of the relationship between subject and object, mystical inquiry begins.
I don’t think the scientific inquiry of
“subject” is fairly well started yet.
Mystical inquiry always begins
. . . right where you are now!
>And it is here, at this very juncture, that a hidden continuity between these seemingly disparate disciplines starts to reveal itself. Once this is grasped, the problem of constructing a new worldview reduces essentially to the question of precise formulation. Can this continuity between science and mysticism be expressed in a language satisfactory to both?
The UCPlot is a scientific map of consciousness.
Repeated testing has shown us that everyone
actually DOING UCP moves UP the plot, starting
wherever they are. The UCPractice spits you
out somewhere in the eternal + everywhere
quadrant of conscious, where past and
future are meaningless to you and
you are just hexploring your now.
Repeated testing by independent practitioners
has confirmed both the practice and the plot:
whoever actually DOES UCP reliably raises
their awareness on the UCPlot. They
and others can agree on where they
are per a universal reference.
And they always move up . . .
until, as we found out recently
from now-former UCP-practitioner,
Captain Frank, UCP GOES TO NON-DUALITY.
He got over past and future to hexplore now.
Since UCP, comparing past and future to now,
was no longer useful to him, he gave up on it
as a practice and started looking for more
information on non-duality, which is how he
found the CSS site, and I showed up there!
That’s an elegant full circle!
>This brings us to the third and final reason for believing that such a worldview is possible. There is, indeed, a language which can express this continuity-a language which was originally developed for just this purpose by a lineage of Greek mystics stretching from Pythagoras to Plato, and which (although it has subsequently lost sight of its own mystical origins) has already become the universal language of modern science. We are, of course, referring to the language of mathematics.
Yes. But math is just one mode of description
and prediction. ALL the modes must be cross
checked against each other or you get insane
theories patched onto elegant mathematics.
You MUST ASSUME something to have or use
models at all. There are four basic types of
model, which are used in four basic process.
You can assume any model.
You can never prove any model.
All are valid. All are hexclusive.
And yet they are all useful.
If you want a non-materialist model,
you are welcome to any you like.
However, to be useful, it must
hexplain the universe as well as
the materialist model: the Correct
Materialist model, not some inept
straw man set up to knock down.
>In fact, a very promising start in using the language of mathematics to unite science and mysticism has already been made by G. Spencer-Brown in his book Laws of Form.
Way Cool!
I checked it out of your most hexcellent library,
. . . but had to return it due to time limitations.
I hope to get it again and get further on it.
It IS VERY tantalizing to me right now.
>Through a “calculus of indications” Spencer-Brown has demonstrated how all forms may be seen to arise from a formless “void”, evolving naturally and logically into a vast dynamic display of complexity of the kind we witness everywhere in nature.
This is hugely interesting to me.
I’ll take a wild guess that this is an
abstract symbolic representation of
what Rado knowticed about form
arising from chaos in the classical
ideal-gas aether model. Brownian
motion plus cosmospheric pressure
gives rise to . . . EVERYTHING ELSE!
I look forward to reading more of
Laws of Form, but this article is
more important to me right now.
>If this calculus can be extended to cover the mathematics which govern modern physics (as other mathematicians are currently in the process of doing), then both science and mysticism will have been brought within the purview of a common language that can form the spine of just the sort of worldview we have in mind. In such a worldview the truths of science would flow seamlessly from the deeper truths of religion, while the various religious traditions themselves would be seen as but branches of a single Great Tradition which has been nourishing the whole of humanity with its indispensable moral and spiritual fruits since the dawn of our species.
But the integration of symbolic representations
is of secondary importance to the actual raising
of ones own awareness through known levels.
>Helping to create such a worldview is the second major purpose for which the Center for Sacred Sciences was founded. We do this primarily through offering educational programs to the general public and by encouraging our own members to become familiar with pertinent developments in science, mathematics, and related fields. However, we are under no illusion that a new worldview can be fully constructed or widely disseminated overnight. The fulfillment of such a vision is a historical task which may take generations to complete.
OUR LUCKY DAY!
>A Community of Practitioners
>In the meantime, what about today’s spiritual seeker-the person who is intrigued by mystical teachings but finds many of the traditional forms in which they are expressed obsolete? Serving the needs of a seeker in this position constitutes the third and most important function of the Center for Sacred Sciences.
In my estimation, you are
performing a unique and
very valuable service!
I my estimation,
I am also, and I
see a great deal
of similarity in
our paths.
I suspect impending
cross fertilization.
>To do this we have over the past several years developed a community of practitioners (or Practitioners’ Group) for individuals who are ready to make a strong personal commitment to leading a disciplined spiritual life but have not found any of the traditional paths suitable.
Way Cool!
>Our Community rests on three pillars: teacher, teachings, and practice.
I believe that once you have the clues,
