Dualism1,2 as red herring3
Consider the dung beetle4 as a whole task5 completing unit. As an identified6 whole, thus single reality the dung beetle7 serves as self-regulating8 physical device that executes a specific function that changes and upgrades the world.9
To complete its task-as-function the whole unit10 of the dung beetle applies 2-to-n sub-functions, the major ones being the ‘Body’ that physically applies its whole function and a Guide & Control function (elsewhere named ‘Mind’11) that serves as self-regulation (thus navigation) system.
Depending on the development stage of the observer, the juvenile human12 selects the Guide & Control function (i.e. the ‘Mind’) as crucial and, consequently, denigrates the role of physical application (i.e. the ‘Body’).13
By contrast, the mature adult14 considers a units function-as-a-whole as crucial.15
So it is that the juvenile16 selects the Guide & Control System rather than the body17 as GOD. That’s because he/she believes, not yet being to participate in the world,18 that ‘whatever rules19 is GOD.’
And the adult,20 and who does not select because being a full participant in the world by actually shaping and so making the world (good), experiences that only he/she as whole unit completes the whole function-as-task is God.21
So it is that the adult (-as-pantheist) realises that GOD (i.e. universal rule as such) is really his/her iconised compression of the universe of all the Gods22 (as individual rules aggregate).
© 2019 by Victor Langheld
1. The notion of 2 (hence of numbers as such) is a false inference, hence a red herring. The icon 2 stands for 2 ones, hence for a minimum series. Only 1 is a true number (indeed fact as decided quantum).. All numbers stand for ever lengthening series of 1’s. Hence mathematics is a human fiction, albeit a useful one.
2. Dualism divides. Division adds rule and so gives power to the divider (to wit: ‘divide and rule’), a fact not lost on priests and who exploit division to gain power for themselves. Dualism states that there is ‘this’ and ‘that.’ Monism states that there is only ‘this’, ‘that’ emerging as variation of ‘this.’ Vedanta failed to understand the notion that ‘there is only THIS.’
3. A red (i.e. smoked) herring is used to lay a false trail that serves/functions as exciting, i.e. enlivening, thus (possibly) enlightening diversion.
4. The beetle as dynamic task completing system is identified (and named) by what it does. ‘Is’ (i.e. ‘being’) emerges (i.e. as observer response) as reified (i.e. stilled and held over) doing.
5. For ‘task’ read: function, procedure, program and so on. Liberation (from the task), Sanskrit: moksha, is achieved if and when the (indeed any) task is ended, hence when a problem is solved.
6. i.e. by its waste recycling function. Like the human, the dung beetle scavenges lower order inputs (i.e. constrained, thus ordered energy packets) to reconstruct and regenerate itself in order to survive.
7. The dung beetle here stands for all identifiable realities and their aggregate, called the world (or universe). By using the dung beetle rather than the human as reference the heat is taken out of the deliberation.
8. For ‘self-regulating’ read: self-ordering.
9. For ‘world’ read: the (or any) aggregate of alternate self or other regulated physical (i.e. real) devices.
10. A whole unit operates as (multiplex) singularity.
11. The notion of ‘mind’ is fuzzy as is the verbal icon standing for it.
12. i.e. the incomplete because immature human who yet separates (i.e. divides) the singularity into its components and by selecting the Guide & Control (i.e. regulation) function over the body (i.e. the physical application function) emerges as dualist theist.
13. i.e. the ‘body’ (or flesh), i.e. the ‘material world.’ St Paul, who sold out to Plato’s adolescent idealism and the Jewish crap about the body as repository of sin/failure (see: Genesis 2 and ‘Whereas by one man sin came into the world, and so on’) selected ‘mind over matter’ or ‘spirit over flesh’ or ‘heaven over the world (as vale of woe)’ with absolutely horrific consequences for all Christians. Idem the fanatic Catholic Descartes’ phoney dualism. Idem the dodgy ‘atheisms’ of Jainism, Samkya-yoga, Buddhism and so on.
14. i.e. the pantheist as holist. For him/her there is no division, meaning: ‘All, warts and all, is GOD’ (as universal ordering function).
15. In other words, the dualist theist (hence henotheist) selects one sub-function as crucial (i.e. ‘good’) whereas the holist pantheist considers the single outcome of a unit’s whole application function as crucial (i.e. ‘good’). Which means that for the juvenile because selective (thus dualist) theist the (wrongly universalised) Guide & Control function is paramount/good whereas for the mature pantheist the (i.e. every) singular outcome of whole application is paramount/good.
16. i.e. the human (henotheist) transiting between infancy and adulthood.
17. i.e. the allegedly ‘insensate’ matter and which he/she denigrates, disparages, indeed (fanatically) vilifies, equates with evil, sinfulness, badness and so on as did the religious fanatics St Paul, the Jains, Samkyas, Buddhists and so on.
18. And when he/she has to pay the high price for lunch, namely to live. The infant gets ‘free lunches’ for which later on the adult has to pay.
19. i.e. orders, i.e. constrains, limits, thereby creating identity.
20. i.e. as mature pantheist who contributes to the world by applying his or herself with his/her whole (i.e. complete) body and Guide & Control System.
21. And because he/she actually makes the world she experiences his/herself, that is to say, both Guide & Control System and body as good.
22. To wit, that a forest emerges as collective or aggregate of individual trees. And from which he/she deduces that GOD (i.e. the ruler, regulator, constrainer-of-energy/spirit) happens as distributed network (of Gods) and that therefore the gods and GOD are identical, i.;e. not different (Sanskrit: advaita).