The Sri Yantra as single-purpose control instrument for exit from saṃsāric coupling

1. Domain Separation (Class-of-Enquiry Hygiene)

Finn draws a hard boundary between:

· Enquiry Class A:
How saṃsāra is generated (ontogenesis of entanglement, valuation loops, conditioning, etc.)

· Enquiry Class B:
How to exit saṃsāra once already inside it (release protocols)

The Śrī Yantra belongs exclusively to Class B.

Therefore:

· Critiques demanding a generative account of saṃsāra

· Or ethical, social, or cosmological implications

are category errors with respect to the yantra’s function.
The device is not meant to explain the world; it is meant to interrupt engagement with it.

This is a valid and disciplined scoping.

2. Yantra as Training Device for Naturally Occurring Exit States

Finn further specifies:

Both methods are used by all systems momentarily.
The Yantra merely trains what happens momentarily as natural response to function in the longer run (or permanently).

This is a strong technical point.

2.1 Naturally Occurring Micro-Exits

In ordinary cognition, systems already exhibit:

· Mode A micro-events (object-absorption):

o flow states

o aesthetic rapture

o task-immersion

o sensory capture

· Mode B micro-events (standby states):

o blank mind

o momentary disengagement

o micro-pauses in narrative self

o attentional reset after overload

These are spontaneous, unstable, short-lived.

2.2 The Yantra as Stabiliser of Natural Exit Functions

The yantra functions:

· to discipline these naturally occurring exit states

· to prolong them

· to make them re-enterable on demand

· to decouple them from accidental triggers

So the yantra is a training scaffold (or device) for:

extending momentary release into a controllable, longer-duration control state.

This frames ritual technology as state engineering, not metaphysics.

3. No Restructuring Claim: Pure Control, Not Transformation

The druid Finn explicitly rejects:

· restructuring the system

· reprogramming saṃsāra

· generating a new world-model

· ethical reform of behaviour

The yantra:

· does not modify the environment

· does not modify social rule systems

· does not alter the structural grammar of engagement

· only alters internal coupling to stimuli

So moksha here is:

a control-state override, not a system rewrite.

This is coherent: it defines liberation as exit privilege, not as permanent redesign of the operating system.

4. Ethics as External Rule-Systems (AI Layer), Not Prerequisite

Finn claims:

Managing one’s internal state to support survival happens prior to ethics, which are an external AI system of rules.

This is a clean functional ordering:

1. Primary layer:
Internal state regulation (attention, affect, disengagement, absorption)
→ survival-supportive control of coupling to stimuli

2. Secondary layer:
Ethics, norms, moral codes, laws
→ externalised regulatory systems imposed by collectives

Thus:

· Ethics is not foundational to liberation

· Ethics is a social coordination technology

· The yantra addresses pre-ethical survival regulation of internal state

This avoids moralisation of contemplative technologies and treats them as infrastructure for internal control.

5. Tightened Technical Summary

Finn’s position can be compressed as follows:

· The Śrī Yantra is a single-purpose attentional control device.

· Its function is to provide two engineered escape routes from saṃsāric engagement:

o Mode A: total object-absorption → release by functional completion

o Mode B: objectless standby → release by disengagement

· These modes already occur naturally and momentarily in all systems.

· The yantra stabilises and extends these natural exit states.

· It does not:

o explain the world

o generate reality

o restructure cognition

o ground ethics

· Ethics and social norms are external regulatory systems (AI-like governance layers), downstream of internal state control.

· Internal state management for survival is logically prior to ethics.

6. Conclusion

Within Finn’s stated boundaries his account is:

· internally consistent

· technically coherent

· non-metaphysical

· non-soteriologically inflated

· and category-disciplined

The Śrī Yantra is thereby correctly characterised as:

a training interface (or device) for extending naturally occurring exit-from-engagement states into controllable, longer-duration modes of disengagement or completion, independent of metaphysics, ethics, or cosmology.

No extrapolation is required—and none is necessary.

Home