DANCING WITH MAYAFRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -iii- -iii-Figure 1 Spirits Through Time, Oil...

DANCING WITH MAYA

EMBRACING THE POWER OF

NON-CERTAINTY

BETWEEN

FREEDOM AND ILLUSION

! THE CREATION AND TRANSFORMATION OF REALITIES THROUGHTHINKING. ! INDIAN MAYA, TIBETAN TANTRA, AND QUANTUM THEORY:METAPHORS OF DIALECTIC HARMONY. ! SENSUALITY AND SPIRITUALITY: SHIVA-SHAKTI, YAB-YUM, YIN-YANG.

FIFTH, REVISED EDITION

by

FRITZ WILHELM, Ph.D.

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -ii-

-ii-

Copyright by Fritz Wilhelm, Ph.D. 2002

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any formor by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any informationand retrieval system, without permission in writing from the author.Requests for permission to make copies should be addressed to:

ZERO & ONE1298 Windermere Way

Concord, California 94521Phone: (925) 671-7309

Fax: (925) [email protected]

ISBN 0-9669544-2-4

mailto:[email protected]

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -iii-

-iii-

Figure 1 Spirits Through Time, Oil Painting By M. Heising

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSAbove all I wish to thank my wife Margrete Heising, who has been an untiring

inspiration in discussing the various ideas of this book, for her support and encouragementduring its genesis. I thank her also for providing photos of a painting and the prints "LOVE,"which in many respects are modern versions of the Yab-Yum idea of Tibet, and are central tomy discussions.

Another person who was immeasurably important for the development and guidanceof my own thinking was the German philosopher Karl Jaspers, whose writing truly opened upmy mind to the great philosophers of East and West. What Karl Jaspers did in terms ofWestern philosophy, Heinrich Zimmer did in terms of Indian and Buddhist philosophy andreligion.

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -iv-

-iv-

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTESI was born in West Germany where I received my basic education. I obtained my Bachelor

of Science degree at the Sorbonne, my Master and Ph.D. degrees in Theoretical Physics at theUniversity of Karlsruhe, Germany. I have lived in Mexico and Guatemala for a year. In the summerof 1975, in Saanen, Switzerland, I met the Indian philosopher J. Krishnamurti and the physicistDavid Bohm. We soon became friends, and in 1977 I accepted an invitation by J. Krishnamurti tocome to the United States.

In 1980, I moved to the San Francisco Bay Area, where I have worked as a physics professorat Diablo Valley College since 1986. I have been able to combine my physics teaching with mywork in philosophy and mythology, thus giving my audience a much richer experience in learningabout reality.

In 1982 I published a book of poetry and art "Next Step" together with my wife MargreteHeising, an artist painter, who created the linoleum block prints “Love” on page iii and the painting“Spirits Through Time” on page V.

To see more of her paintings and prints visit her website at:

http://heisingart.com

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -v-

-v-

Figure 2LOVE, Linocut by Margrete Heising.Eternal Love, Maya’s Mystery

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -vi-

-vi-

PRONUNCIATION OF SANSKRIT TERMS

I have used a simplified transliteration commonly used in the non-scholarly literature.For pronunciation, the following simplified rules can serve as a guide:

Vowels are pronounced like in German or Italian:a is pronounced like u in buti like i in picku like u in rulee like e in theyo like o in goai like ai in aisleau like au in how.

A consonant followed by “h” indicates aspirated pronunciation; the “h” is audible, like inBuddha. Exceptions are “ch” and “sh”, which are pronounced as in English.

CONVENTIONS

Key notions which have an uncommon meaning will be in this italics typeface, whenever thedifference is of crucial importance.Notions and expressions which I want to emphasize will be typed in boldface. If both characteristics apply, I will use boldface and italics.

I put words between 'apostrophes' when I refer to their common usage which I consider to bewrong or misleading.

Words in a foreign language and direct quotations appear between quotation marks. To facilitate the approach to this book an extensive index is provided at the end. A collection

of the basic definitions and Sanskrit terms can be found in a glossary starting on page 513.References to literature in footnotes are abbreviated, for example KV stands for Immanuel

Kant, “Kritik der reinen Vernunft.” All references can be found in the bibliography, appendix Band C, starting on page 520, tabulated according to authors and abbreviations.

DESCRIPTION OF THE FRONTISPIECE

We see the Goddess Maya in her form as Avalokiteshvara on top of a Shri Yantra, thesymbolic representation of an enfolding-unfolding eternal movement of the universe and beyond.

The four equations are, in clockwise fashion, starting at the top left corner: Heisenberg’suncertainty relationship ()x A)p $ S/2), the Schrödinger equation, the de Broglie formula linkingthe momentum p of a particle to its wave behavior (k is the wave number) p = Sk, and Einstein’s“mass equals energy” equation E = mc2. The underlying ideas of the spiritual and mathematical symbols are revelations of the amazinghuman mind, the universe, the unknowable mystery of What Is. This whole book tries tocommunicate some insight into this mystery.

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -vii-

-vii-

LIST OF FIGURES AND ILLUSTRATIONSAll photographs and illustrations are by F. Wilhelm, and M. Heising, unless abbreviations ofreferences are given as below:AOI: Sivaramurti, Calambur, The Art Of India, Harry Abram, New York, 1977.PRT: Phillip Rawson: Tantra, Thames & Hudson Ltd., London, 1973 (in German), by Droemer

Verlag, Munich, 1974.PY: Pandit, M.P.: Kundalini Yoga, Ganesh & Co., Madras, India, 1972.TAN: Sinha, Indra: The Great Book Of Tantra, Destiny Books, Rochester, Vermont, 1993. YAN: Khanna, Madhu: Yantra, Thames and Hudson Ltd., London, 1979.ZAIA: Zimmer, Heinrich: The Art Of Indian Asia, volumes I and II. New York, Bollingen Series,

Princeton University Press, 1955.

Fig#1 Spirits Through Time, Oil Painting by M. Heising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -iii-Fig#2 Love, Linocut by Margrete Heising. Eternal Love, Maya’s Mystery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -v-Fig# 3 Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, Bronze, 16" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -xx-Fig#4 Chintamani Avalokiteshvara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 2Fig#5 Green Tara, Standing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 4Fig#6 Vajradhara and Vajradhari, Brass, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 18Fig#7 Green Tara, Mudra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 20Fig#8 Kali in Her Wrathful Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 23Fig#9 Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri Black Bronze, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 34Fig#10 Shiva-Nataraja, 1, Bronze 14", 20th Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 60Fig#11 Amitabha Buddha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 69Fig#12 Triadic Model of Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 73Fig#13 Descent of the Ganges; Mahabalipuram, 7th Century. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 85Fig#14 Descent: Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 86Fig#15 Sarasvati, the Goddess of the Creative Arts, Bronze, 14", 20th Century . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 96Fig#16 Vajrakila, 1, the Wrathful Aspect of the Buddhas in Yab-Yum, Bronze, 17" Ch. 2 Pg. 104Fig#17 I Ching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 126Fig#18 Yin-Yang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 127Fig#19 Vahni Triangles, Shri-yantra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 131Fig#20 Vajra-chopper, Ego-flayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 148Fig#21 Avalokiteshvara, 9 Faced, 8 Armed, Bronze, 15" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 158Fig#22 Green Tara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 159Fig#23 Kali, Sitting in Sexual Union on Shiva's Corpse (Shava). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 162Fig#24 Ganga, River Goddess, AOI Plate 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 164Fig#25 Parvati, 1, from ZAIA II, Plate 421, Southern India, 15th -16th Century. . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 167Fig#26 Pythagorean Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 179Fig#27 Nandi, Shiva’s Bull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 188Fig#28 Garuda, the Bird-man, Vishnu’s Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 189Fig#29 Kali on Shiva, from PRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 205Fig#30 Chinnamasta, 1, from PRT Plate 22, Gouache on Paper 12" X 8";

Cankra, 18th Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 209Fig#31 Naga-Kanya, Triadic Oneness, Brass, 19" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 213Fig#32 Cartesian Coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 217

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -viii-

-viii-

Fig#33 Tara, 3, Green Tara, Six Arms, Bronze 15" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 219Fig#34 Schrödinger Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 220Fig#35 Samantabhadra, Faces, 96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 244Fig#36 Princess and Maid, AOI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 245Fig#37 Woodnymph from Gyaraspur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 246Fig#38 Linga in Yoni, Ellora, India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 254Fig#39 Helix Model of Unfolding SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 283Fig#40 Snakes, Couple; Stone Relief from Mysore, South India; PRT Plate 40. . . Ch. 4 Pg. 285Fig#41 Virtual Creation of an Electron Positron Pair by an Energetic Photon,

out of Nothingness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 286Fig#42 Kundalini Energies, Chakras, PY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 288Fig#43 Hexagon Model of Thinking and Sensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 289Fig#44 Hexagon Model of SAT (Sensing, Acting, Thinking) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 290Fig#45 Yantra Dance of Maya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 291Fig#46 Yab -Yum, Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 294Fig#47 Ardhanarishvara; AOI Plate 61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 296Fig#48 Ardhanarishvara, 2, AOI Plate 68 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 297Fig#49 Rukmini, Krishna’s Wife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 303Fig#50 Khajuraho, Lovers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 305Fig#51 Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri, Thangka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 317Fig#52 Vajrakila, 2, Yab-Yum, Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 322Fig#53 Vajrasattva, Adi Buddha, Bronze, 19" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 338Fig#54 Shiva Dancing on Bull, Bangladesh, 10th Century C.E., AOI Plate 70 . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 346Fig#55 Nandi, Ellora, India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 352Fig#56 Love, Linocut by M. Heising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 355Fig#57 Vajradhara and Vajradhari, 2, Brass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 357Fig#58 Vajrasattva and Vajradhari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 358Fig#59 Vajrasattva-Vajradhari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 360Fig#60 Shamvara and Vajravarahi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 367Fig#61 Naro Dakini (Vajravarahi, Vajra-Yogini, Wrathful Form ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 368Fig#62 Vajra-Yogini, Buddha, Erotic Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 369Fig#63 Apsara (Yakshi or Nymph), Kama’s Companion, with her Parrot. . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 371Fig#64 Buddha Shakyamuni, Bronze, 11" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 387Fig#65 Uma, Parvati, from Sinha, TAN Page 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 397Fig#66 Tara, Wisdom of the Buddhas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 420Fig#67 Double Slit Experiment with Electrons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 431Fig#68 Schrödinger Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 456Fig#69 Feynman Diagram for the Creation of a Force Between Two Particles.

Mediation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 458Fig#70 Vajra-Varahi, Buddha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 470Fig#71 Parvati, 2, 15-16th Century, ZAIA II Plate 419 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 474Fig#72 Shivalinga, Trimurti Cave, Mahabalipuram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 475Fig#73 Ushnisha Vijaya, White Tara, Bronze, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 478Fig#74 Chinnamasta, from PRT Plate 22, Gouache on Paper, Cankra, 18th Century Ch. 7 Pg. 480Fig#75 Samantabhadra, Yab-Yum (1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 488Fig#76 Green Tara, Sitting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 489

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -ix-

-ix-

Fig#77 Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri, Faces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 491Fig#78 Shiva Nataraja, 2, Bronze 14" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 494Fig#79 Shiva Nataraja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 496Fig#80 Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, Thangka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 499Fig#81 Shiva-shakti in Yab-Yum as Vajrasattva and Consort (1996) . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 500Fig#82 Shakti-shiva Triangle. Nava-Yoni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 504Fig#83 Shri Yantra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 505Fig#84 Shri Yantra, the Unfolding and Enfolding of What Is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 511Fig#85 Tara, Wisdom of the Buddhas, Action of Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 512

Figures in Alphabetical Order

Amitabha Buddha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 69Apsara (Yakshi or Nymph), Kama’s Companion. Conversing with Her Parrot. . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 371Ardhanarishvara;1, AOI Plate 61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 296Ardhanarishvara, 2, AOI Plate 68 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 297Avalokiteshvara, 9 Faced, 8 Armed, Bronze, 15" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 158Buddha Shakyamuni, Bronze, 11" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 387Cartesian Coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 217Chinnamasta, 1, from PRT Plate 22, Gouache on Paper 12" X 8";

Cankra 18th Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 209, Ch. 7 Pg. 480Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, Bronze, 16" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pg. xx, Ch. 1 Pg. 2Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, Thangka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 499Descent Of the Ganges; Mahabalipuram, 7th Century C.E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 85Descent Of the Ganges: Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 86Double Slit Experiment with Electrons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 431Feynman Diagram for the Creation of a Force Between Two Particles. Mediation. Ch. 6 Pg. 458Ganga, river goddess, AOI Plate 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 164Garuda, the Bird-man, Vishnu’s Mount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 189Green Tara, Standing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 4Green Tara, Mudra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 20Green Tara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 159Green Tara, Sitting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 489Helix Model of Unfolding SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 283Hexagon Model of Thinking and Sensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 289Hexagon Model of SAT (Sensing, Acting, Thinking) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 290I Ching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 126Kali in Her Wrathful Form, from PRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 23Kali, Sitting in Sexual Union on Shiva's Corpse (Shava), from PRT . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 162Kali on Shiva, from PRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 205Khajuraho, Lovers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 305Kundalini Energies, Chakras, from PY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 288Linga in Yoni, Ellora, India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 254LOVE, Linocut by M. Heising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 355

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -x-

-x-

LOVE, Linocut by M. Heising. Eternal Love, Maya’s Mystery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pg. -v-Naga-Kanya, Triadic Oneness, Brass, 19" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 213Nandi, Shiva’s Bull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 188Nandi, Ellora, India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 352Naro Dakini (Vajravarahi, Vajra-Yogini, Wrathful Form ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 368Parvati, 1, from ZAIA II, Plate 421, Southern India, 15th -16th Century. . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 167Parvati, 2, 15-16th century, ZAIA II, Plate 419 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 474Princess and Maid, AOI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 245Pythagorean Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 179Rukmini, Krishna’s Wife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 303Samantabhadra, Yab-Yum (1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 488Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri, Thangka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 317Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri, Faces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 244, Ch. 7 Pg. 491Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri Black Bronze, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 34Sarasvati, the Goddess of the Creative Arts, Bronze, 14", 20th Century . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 96Schrödinger Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 220, Ch. 6 Pg. 456Shakti-Shiva Triangle. Nava-Yoni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 504Shamvara and Vajravarahi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 367Shiva Dancing on Bull, Bangladesh, 10th century C.E., AOI plate 70 . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 346Shiva Nataraja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 60, Ch. 7 Pg. 494, Ch. 7 Pg. 496Shiva-Shakti in Yab-Yum as Vajrasattva and Consort (1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 500Shivalinga, Trimurti Cave, Mahabalipuram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 475Shri-Yantra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 505Shri-Yantra, the Unfolding and Enfolding of What Is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 511Snakes, Couple; Stone Relief from Mysore, South India; PRT Plate 40. . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 285Spirits Through Time, Oil Painting by M. Heising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pg. -iii-Tara, Sitting, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 512Tara, Wisdom of the Buddhas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 420Tara, Green Tara, Sitting, Six Arms, Bronze 15" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 219Triadic Model of Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 73Uma, Parvati, from Sinha, from TAN, page 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 397Ushnisha Vijaya, White Tara, Bronze, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 478Vahni Triangles, Shri-Yantra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 131Vajra-chopper, Ego-flayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 148Vajra-Sattva and Vajradhari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 358Vajra-Yogini, Buddha, Erotic Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 369, Ch. 6 Pg. 470Vajradhara and Vajradhari, Brass, 9" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 18Vajradhara and Vajradhari, 2, Brass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 357Vajrakila, 1, the Wrathful Aspect of the Bddhas in Yab-Yum, Bronze, 17" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 104Vajrakila, 2, Yab-Yum, Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 322Vajrasattva, Adi Buddha, Bronze, 19" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 338Vajrasattva-Vajradhari, Yab-Yum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 360Virtual Creation of an Electron Positron Pair, out of Nothingness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 286Woodnymph from Gyaraspur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 246Yab-Yum, Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 294

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xi-

-xi-

Yantra Dance of Maya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 291Yin-Yang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 127

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pronunciation of Sanskrit terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viTypographical and other conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viTable of content for figures and illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viiAlphabetical index for figures and illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ixTable of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

CHAPTER 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 3

1.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 31.1.1 THE FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF WISDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 5

1.1.1.1 THE PHILOSOPHICAL CONNECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 7

1.1.1.2 THE MYTHOLOGICAL CONNECTION WITH INDIA, CHINA,

AND TIBET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 7

1.1.1.3 THE THEORETICAL PHYSICS CONNECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 8

1.1.2 TECHNOLOGICAL AND SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 10

1.1.3 EASTERN AND WESTERN APPROACH TO PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION . Ch. 1 Pg. 12

1.1.4 THE IDEA OF MAYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 23

1.1.4.1 MAYA OF PHYSICS, AND CIPHER LANGUAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 24

1.1.5 PRELIMINARY BASIC QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 25

1.2 RATIONALIZATION OF THE WORLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 261.2.1 THE POWER OF 'REASON' AS RATIONALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 27

1.2.2 COND ENSED OVER VIEW OF THE BASIC IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 30

1.2.2.1 THE IDEA OF MOVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 30

1.2.2.2 HOLOM ORPHISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 32

1.2.2.3 THE BASIC TRIADIC MOVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 34

1.2.3 TRUTH AND REALITY, ALETHEIA AND MAYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 38

1.3 PROBLEMS OF THE MODERN WORLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 431.3.1 CONFU SION OF TH OUGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 43

1.3.1.1 DIALECTIC FORCES AT WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 44

1.3.1.2 IDEAS OF FREEDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 45

1.3.2 BENEATH THE SURFACE OF MEDIOCRITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 46

1.3.2.1 KNOWLEDGE W ITH INTELLIGENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 47

1.3.2.2 EDUCATIONAL FRUSTRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 47

1.4 A CLASSIFICATION OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 491.4.1 MOVEMENT AS FUNDAMENTAL IDEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 50

1.4.1.1 LOCALITY AND CREATIVE SPACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 51

1.4.1.2 CREATIVE THINKING-SPACE AND MECHANICAL

THOUGHT-SPACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 52

1.4.1.3 CREATIVE THINKING-TIME-MATTER-SPACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 54

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xii-

-xii-

1.4.2 THREE MOVEMENTS OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 54

1.4.2.1 MECHANICAL THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 56

A) Western Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 56

B) Asian-Indian Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 57

1.4.2.2 GENERATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 58


B) Asian-Indian Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 58

1.4.2.3 CREATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 58


B) Asian-Indian Approach, OM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 60

1.4.3 CIPHER AND SUNYATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 61

1.4.3.1 CIPHER AND SUNYATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 62

1.4.3.2 CIPHERS OF TIBETAN ART . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 63

1.4.3.3 CREATION AND TRANSFORMATION OF REALITIES . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 64

1.4.4 EXAMPLES OF CREATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 65

1.4.4.1 PLATO'S IDEA OF GENERATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 65

1.4.4.2 A POETIC DESCRIPTION OF THINKING BY H. HESSE . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 66

1.4.4.3 AN EXAMPLE FOR CREATIVE AND GENERATIVE THINKING,

BY H. POINCARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 66

1.4.4.4 BUDDHIST IDEA OF CREATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 68

1.4.4.5 CREATIVE THINKING AS CREATION IN INDIAN

MYTHOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 70

1.4.4.6 LIMITATION OF THOUGHT AND FREEDOM FROM ILLUSION Ch. 1 Pg. 71

1.4.5 TWO MODELS OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 71

1.4.5.1 A HIERARCHICAL MODEL OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 71

1.4.5.2 A TRIADIC MODEL OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 72

1.4.5.3 THE OBSERVING M IND (Heisenberg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 75

1.4.5.4 UNCERTAINTY OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 79

A) Formal thinking: Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 79

B) Non-formal thinking: generative and creative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 80

1.4.5.5 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 81

1.4.6 THE TRIADIC MOVEM ENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 82

1.4.6.1 DIALECTIC BETWEEN MECHANICAL AND

CREATIVE THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 82

1.4.6.2 PROPER KNOWLEDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 83

CHAPTER 2 IDEAS, METAPHORS, AND KNOWLEDGE . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 872.1 MECHANICAL MOVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 1 Pg. 88

2.1.1 MECHANICAL REALITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 89

2.1.1.1 CONFUSION BETWEEN THE THOUGHT AND THE THING . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 90

2.2 NON-MECHANICAL MOVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 912.2.1 THE FIXA TION OF THOUGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 91

2.2.1.1 THE VORTEX OF THOUGHT AND SELF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 91

2.2.1.2 A CLASSIFICATION OF NOTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 92

A) M echanical words: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 92

B) Generative words: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 93

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xiii-

-xiii-

C) Creative words: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 93

2.2.1.3 METAPHORS, IDEAS, AND ART . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 93

2.2.1.4 SARASVATI, THE GODDESS OF THE CREATIVE ARTS . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 95

2.2.2 THE ACTUALIZATION AND REALIZATION OF IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 96

2.2.2.1 TIME, SPACE, AND THOUGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 98

2.2.2.2 CERTAIN AND UNCERTAIN FORMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 98

2.2.2.3 METAPHORS AND CIPHERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 100

2.2.2.4 INT ELLIG ENCE AND IN TELLECT, Vernunft and Verstand . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 100

2.3 ONE-NOTHINGNESS, FUNDAMENTAL IDEA OF INTELLIGENCE . Ch. 2 Pg. 1022.3.1 CONSCIOUSNESS AND ON ENESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 102

2.3.1.1 BETWEENNESS: EROS, YAB-YUM, MAYA-SHAKTI . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 103

2.3.1.2 THE STRUGGLE FOR CERTAINTY AND TRUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 104

2.3.1.3 DIALECTIC BETWEEN CERTAINTY AND TRUTH, ALETHEIA Ch. 2 Pg. 106

2.3.1.4 CERTAINTY AND CAUSALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 109

2.3.2 THINKING ONEN ESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 110

2.3.2.1 THINKER, THOUGHT, AND THING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 111

2.3.2.2 DESCARTES' OVERSIGHT “Cogito, ergo Sum” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 113

2.3.2.3 THINKING AND NON-THINKING IN MEDITATION . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 114

2.4 MEDITATION ON THINGS AND MATHEMATICS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 1162.4.1 THE NOTION OF CERTAINTY. 0 & 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 116

2.4.1.1 THE MATERIAL OBJECT AND ITS DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 117

2.4.1.2 THE STORY OF HELEN KELLER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 117

2.4.1.3 IDEAL NOTIONS AND REALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 118

2.4.2 INTRODUCTION INTO THE PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 119

2.4.2.1 THE NUMBER 'ONE' AND 'ONE' OBJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 120

2.4.2.2 THE THOUGHT OF 'ONE' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 120

2.4.2.3 FORMAL THINKING AND MATHEM ATICAL STRUCTURE . . Ch. 2 Pg. 122

2.4.2.4 CERTAINTY , REALITY, AND "I" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 123

2.4.2.5 THINKING THE NUM BER 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 124

2.4.3 THE CHINESE 'BOO K O F CHA NG ES': I CH ING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 126

2.4.3.1 YIN-YANG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 127

2.4.4 MOD ES OF THINKING IN RELATION TO ONE-NOTHINGNESS . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 128

2.4.4.1 ONENESS AND SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 129

2.5 MEDITATION ON ONENESS, NOTHINGNESS, AND BETWEENNESS (NOB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 132

2.5.1 THINKING ABOUT NOB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 133

2.5.2 UNIVERSALITY AND TRUTH AS EXPRESSION OF NOB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 133

A) Correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 134

B) Rightness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 134

C) M etaphoric Truth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 134

2.5.3 FREEDOM, UNITY, AND COMMUNITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 138

2.5.3.1 MORALITY AND FREED OM, INEXHAUSTIBLE IDEAS OF NOB Ch. 2 Pg. 138

2.6 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 1402.6.1 POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 140

2.6.2 NEGATIVE PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 140

2.6.2.1 ANALYSIS OF IDEA S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 141

2.6.2.2 RATIONALITY OF SOC IETIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 142

2.6.3 RATIONALITY AS A FORM OF NEGATIVE PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 143

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xiv-

-xiv-

2.6.3.1 LIMITATION OF SCIENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 144

2.6.4 ABERRATION OF PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 145

2.6.4.1 CONFUSED RELIGION AND INTELLEC TUALISM . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 146

2.6.4.2 THE CENTER OF DOGMATISM: THE EGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 146

2.6.4.3 THE EGO A ND M AHAYANA BUDDHISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 147

2.6.4.4 ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY AS NEGATION OF REALITY . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 150

2.6.5 POWER OF POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 152

2.6.5.1 FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS OF MANKIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 153

2.6.5.2 JASPERS, NIETZSCHE, SCHELLING: POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY Ch. 2 Pg. 154

2.6.5.3 VAJRAYANA BUDDHISM AS POSITIVE-NEGATIVE

PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 155

2.6.5.4 TARA AND AVALOKITESHVARA AS TRANSCENDENTAL

IMAGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 157

2.6.5.5 BETWEEN KNOWING AND TRUSTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 160

2.6.5.6 THE MEANING OF HUMAN EXISTENCE; SHIVA-SHAVA . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 162

2.6.5.7 MEANING AND MAYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 165

2.6.5.8 WHY MEANING? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 168

2.6.5.9 FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 2 Pg. 169

CHAPTER 3 IDEALITY AND REALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 1713.1 UNDERSTANDING, CLARITY, HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 171

3.1.1 RATIONAL THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 171

3.2 UNDERSTANDING AND LEARNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 1743.2.1 LEARNING AS CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 174

3.2.1.1 MECHANICAL UNDERSTANDING AS CONDITIONING . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 174

3.2.1.2 MAGIC AND MECHANICAL LEARNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 176

3.2.2 LEARNING AS COMPREHENDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 177

3.2.3 LEARNING AS INSIGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 177

3.2.3.1 GENERATIVE AND CREATIVE SYNTHESIS IN

MATHEMATICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 179

3.2.4 ORDERING PRINCIPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 180

3.2.4.1 THE LIMITS OF CERTAINTY AS ORDERING PRINCIPLE . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 182

3.2.5 CONSCIOUSNESS, TIME, AND CONFUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 183

3.2.5.1 STANDARD CONFUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 183

3.2.5.2 CLARITY AND MYSTERY OF HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 185

3.2.6 PRINCIPLES OF A HUMAN REALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 191

3.3 UNDERSTANDING LOGIC AND SCIENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 1923.3.1 THE CHALLENGE OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 192

3.3.2 BASIC FORMS OF LOGIC AND SCIENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 194

3.3.2.1 HOW CERTAINTY AND CORRECTN ESS ARE POSSIBLE . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 195

3.3.3 A TEST FOR THE QUALITY OF A THEORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 196

3.3.3.1 TEST OF A THEORY AS A WHOLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 197

3.3.4 PHILOSOPHICAL TEST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 197

3.3.4.1 EXAMPLES OF INTELLIGENT AND UNINTELLIGENT

THEO RIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 198

A) In mathematics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 199

B) Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 199

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xv-

-xv-

C) In physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 199

D) Intelligence in a governing structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 199

3.3.4.2 Som e exam ples of such unintelligent manifestations are: . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 200

3.4 COMPUTERS AND HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 2013.4.1 THE AGE OF 'REASON' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 202

3.4.1.1 THE AGE OF THE COMPUTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 203

3.4.1.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 206

3.5 IDEAS AND CREATIVITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 2083.5.1 IDEAS AND CHAN GES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 208

3.5.1.1 METAPHOR OF SHAKTI-KALI-MAYA: CHINNAMASTA . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 209

3.5.1.2 TIRESIAS, METAPHOR OF TRUTH UNV EILED . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 211

3.5.1.3 NAGA-KANYA, THE METAPHOR OF SNAKE-EAGLE-MAIDEN Ch. 3 Pg. 213

3.5.1.4 IDEAS AND TIME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 215

3.5.1.5 SCIENTIFIC CORR ECTNESS IN A FORM AL REALITY ONLY Ch. 3 Pg.216

3.5.1.6 KANT'S 'IDEAS' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 219

3.5.2 ABSTRA CT M ETAPH ORS AN D ABSTRACT CONC EPTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 220

3.5.2.1 ABSTRACTION FROM NON-MECHANICAL THINKING . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 220

3.5.2.2 ABSTRACTION FROM MECHANICAL THINKING . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 222

3.5.2.3 INTELLIGENT ABSTRACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 223

3.5.3 SOLVING PROBLEMS THRO UGH IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 224

3.6 KNOWING, TRUSTING, AND ACTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 2263.6.1 TRUST OF TRANSCENDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 227

3.6.1.1 ALTERED STATES OF THE MIND AND TRUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 228

3.6.1.2 DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OF TRANSCENDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 228

3.6.1.3 DIALECTIC BETWEEN ESSENCE AND KNOW LEDGE . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 230

3.6.1.4 THE ILLUSION OF MILITARY SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 231

3.6.1.5 THE MEANING OF HUMAN EX ISTENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 231

3.6.2 THE OBSERVER AND THE OBSERV ED; CAN ONE BE C ERTAIN OF

ONE 'S TRUST? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 232

3.6.3 UNCERTAINTY AND ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 234

3.6.3.1 MYTHICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS OF INTELLIGENCE . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 234

3.6.3.2 THE WESTERN IDEA OF FREEDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 237

3.6.3.3 DIFFERENT FORMS OF REALITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 238

3.6.3.4 REALITIES AND MAYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 238

3.6.3.5 BUDDHIST IDEA OF FREEDOM AND INDIVIDUALITY . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 239

3.6.3.6 FROM DESCARTES TO NIETZSCHE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 3 Pg. 241

CHAPTER 4 TRIADIC MOVEMENTS OF SENSING, ACTING, AND

THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 2474.1 INTERDEPENDENCE OF SENSING AND THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 247

4.1.1 GENERALIZED SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 248

4.1.2 BEIN G AND THINKING As Shiva-Maya-Shakti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 249

4.1.3 BETWEEN SENSING AND THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 252

4.1.3.1 SENSUALITY AND SPIRITUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 252

4.1.4 THE ONENESS OF ALL BEING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 255

4.1.5 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THINKING AND SENSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 260

4.2 A TRIADIC MODEL FOR SENSING, ACTING, THINKING; SAT . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 262

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xvi-

-xvi-

4.2.1 TRIADIC MOVEMENTS OF SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 263

4.2.1.1 CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SUBJECT, THOUGHT, AND

OBJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 263

4.2.2 IMPOSSIBILITY OF UNDERSTANDING THE WHOLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 264

4.2.2.1 UNCERTAIN PRINCIPLES OF CERTAINTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 264

4.2.2.2 THINKING AS PART OF THE WHOLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 266

4.3 THE THREE LEVELS OF HUMAN SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 2664.3.1 THE MECHANICAL LEVEL OF SENSING AND ACTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 267

4.3.1.1 ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY AND DESIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 268

4.3.2 THE MECHANICAL WOR LDVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 269

4.3.2.1 THE SELF AND THE MECHANICAL WORLDVIEW . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 269

4.3.2.2 MECHANICAL THOUGHT-REALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 270

4.3.2.3 THE EGO-CENTERED WORLDVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 271

4.3.2.4 THE POSSIBILITY OF EFFECTIVE ILLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 272

4.3.3 THE GENERATIVE LEVEL OF SENSING AND ACTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 273

4.3.3.1 FROM IDEAS TO ACTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 274

4.3.3.2 FROM CREATURE TO CREATOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 276

4.3.3.3 FROM PRIMITIVE TO INTELLIGENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 277

4.3.3.4 CYCLES OF UNFOLDMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 279

4.3.4 THE CREATIVE LEVEL; MODELS OF UNFOLDING ORDERS . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 281

4.3.4.1 HELIX MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 282

4.3.4.2 KUNDALINI MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 284

4.3.4.3 TRIADIC UNFOLDMENT OR YANTRA MODEL OF SAT . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 288

4.3.4.4 YAB-YUM, DIALECTIC OF N OTHINGNESS-ONENESS . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 293

4.3.5 INTELLIGENT ESSENCE OF SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 295

4.3.5.1 NOTIONS OF INTELLIGENT THINKING AND SENSING . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 296

4.3.5.2 VALUES AND MEANING, CREATIONS OF THE FREE

HUMAN MIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 298

4.3.5.3 REALIZATION OF IDEAS OF FREEDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 299

4.3.5.4 TRUTH, INSIGHT, ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 300

4.3.6 UNIVERSALITY OF IDEAS EXPRESSED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 300

4.3.6.1 EXPRESSION OF CREA TIVE IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 301

4.3.6.2 ACTIVE COMPREHENSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 302

4.3.7 FORM AND IDEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 303

4.3.7.1 ART AND THE IDEA OF TRANSCENDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 304

4.3.7.2 SCIENCE AND ITS IDEA OF TRUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 306

4.4 ’SUSPENDING' MOVEMENT OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 3074.4.1 THR EE KINDS OF ‘SU SPE NDING' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 308

4.4.1.1 CREATION OF SU BJECT, OBJECT, AND I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 309

4.4.1.2 SUSPENSION OF MECHANICAL SEPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 310

4.4.1.3 CREATION O F SELF AW AREN ESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 310

4.4.1.4 THE SELF AS A WHOLE M OVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 311

4.4.1.5 REINCARNATION AND ’SUSPEN DING’

IN INDIAN MYTHOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 311

4.5 THINKING, SENSING, AND THINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 3134.5.1 SPEAKING, READING, WRITING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 313

4.5.2 THING AND THOUGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 314

4.5.3 CONFUSION BETWEEN THINKING AND SENSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 318

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xvii-

-xvii-

4.5.4 CONCEPTS AND CONFUSION OF THE SELF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 319

4.5.4.1 CERTAINTY AND SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 320

4.5.5 DESIRE AND EGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 323

4.5.6 FREEDOM AND EVIL; EGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 324

4.5.7 AN INTERPRETATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL CONFUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 328

4.5.7.1 LYING: INTENTIONAL AND UNINTENTIONAL

CONFUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 329

4.5.8 EXISTENTIAL SUFFERING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 330

4.5.8.1 SUFFERING ON VARIOUS LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 333

4.5.8.2 ATTENTION, THE EGO, AND SUFFERING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 334

4.5.9 TRANSFORM ATION THROUGH IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 337

4.6 CHANGES OF AND BETWEEN LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 3414.6.1 CONDITION FOR CHANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 341

4.6.2 CREATIVE CH ANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 4 Pg. 344

CHAPTER 5 COMMUNICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 3475.1 RELATIONSHIP OF HUMAN BEINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 3475.2 LOVE AND RESPONSIBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 348

5.2.1 IDEAS OF HUM AN RELAT IONSHIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 349

5.2.1.1 NECESSITY OF COMMUNICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 350

5.2.1.2 THE ORIGIN OF FREEDOM AND TRANSCENDENCE . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 351

5.2.2 ANIMA LS AND HUM ANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 352

5.2.3 LOVE, EROS, AND SEXUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 356

5.2.4 LOVE-EROS, AS A TRUE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 358

5.2.4.1 LOVE AND EROS, WEST AND EAST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 359

5.2.4.2 MYSTERY OF LOVE AND SEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 361

5.2.4.3 HOMOSEXUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 363

5.2.4.4 PORNOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 363

5.2.5 EROS AS WILL TO OVERCOME SEPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 365

5.2.5.1 EROS (KAMA) AS ENTICEMENT TO DANCE WITH MAYA . . Ch. 5 Pg. 366

5.2.5.2 LOVE IN A MATERIALISTIC WORLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 369

5.3 RELIGION BETWEEN TRUTH AND SUPERSTITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 3725.3.1 RELIGION AS IDEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 372

5.3.1.1 THE POWER OF MYTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 372

5.3.1.2 TRUE RELIGION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 373

5.3.1.3 TRUTH AS NECESSARY CIPHER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 374

5.3.2 RELIGIOUS THINKING VER SUS THING S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 377

5.3.2.1 THE ORIGIN OF IDEAL QUESTION S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 378

5.3.2.2 TRANSCENDING POSSIBILITY OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 379

5.3.3 GOD AS CREATION OF THE MIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 379

5.4 RELIGION: THE UNFOLDING MIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 3835.4.1 RELIGIOUS VALUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 383

5.4.1.1 MEDITATION ON O NENESS AND NOTHINGNESS . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 385

5.4.2 MYTHOLOGY AND THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 386

5.4.3 RATIONALITY AND RELIGIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 388

5.4.3.1 KANT'S APPROACH TO FREEDOM AND RELIGION . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 389

5.4.3.2 RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 390

5.4.4 IDEAS OF GOOD AND EVIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 391

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xviii-

-xviii-

5.4.4.1 METAPHYSICS OF GOOD AND EVIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 392

5.4.4.2 ECSTASY AND EVIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 394

5.4.4.3 RESPONSIBLE FIGHTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 395

5.5 ONENESS AND FREEDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 3965.5.1 MORALITY, LAW, AND FREEDOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 396

5.5.1.1 UMA’S SEDUCTION OF SHIVA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 398

5.5.1.2 THE ONE HUMAN BEING AS INDIVIDUAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 399

5.5.1.3 ONE MORALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 402

5.5.2 SOCIETY AS ORGANIZED COMMUNION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 404

5.5.3 A TRIADIC SOCIETY STRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 406

5.5.3.1 ACTING, THINKING, AND SENSING OF A FREE SOCIETY . . Ch. 5 Pg. 408

5.5.4 RESPONSIBILITY OF ALL FOR ALL IN A FREE SOCIETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 410

5.5.5 BETWEENNESS THROUGH WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 411

5.5.5.1 CONSUM ERISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 412

5.5.5.2 MECHANICAL, GENERATIVE, AND CREATIVE WORK . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 414

5.5.6 MONEY AND ITS VALUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 5 Pg. 417

CHAPTER 6 PHILOSOPHY of QUANTIZED THINKING and THE

QUANTIZED MIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 4216.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 421

6.1.1 THINKING TRANSCENDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 422

6.1.2 TRANSCENDENT MEDITATIVE VISUALIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 422

6.1.3 CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN M IND AND MATTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 425

6.1.3.1 THE ACCIDENTAL VERSUS THE ILLUSORY MIND . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 426

6.1.3.2 CONSCIOUSNESS AND ITS CONTENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 426

6.2 QUANTUM PHYSICS AND PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 4276.2.1 THINKING AND Q UANT UM PHYSICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 428

6.2.1.1 QUANTUM CAUSALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 428

6.2.1.2 THINKING AND QUANTUM PHYSICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 430

6.2.1.3 THINKING AND THE DOUBLE SLIT EXPERIMENT . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 433

6.2.1.4 MANIFESTATION OF THE SELF THROUGH OBSERVATION . Ch. 6 Pg. 433

6.2.1.5 UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 434

6.2.2 DANG ER OF C OMPLETE EXPLANATION S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 435

6.2.2.1 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 436

6.2.2.2 SCIENCE AND ETHICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 437

6.2.2.3 COMPLEMENTARITY BETWEEN SCIENCE AND

PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 438

6.3 CORRELATION AMONG MOVEMENTS OF SAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 4396.3.1 CLASSICAL TRANSITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 439

6.3.2 QUAN TIZED TRA NSITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 440

6.3.2.1 QUANTUM LIKE BEHAVIOR OF THE MIND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 440

6.3.3 QUANTUM PHYSICAL INTERFERENCE OF SENSING AND THINKING . . Ch. 6 Pg. 442

6.3.3.1 THE MIND AS QUA NTUM FLUID AND THO UGHT WAVES . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 443

6.3.3.2 A CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM PHYSICAL HOLOGRAM . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 445

6.3.3.3 THINKING CO NSIDERED AS QU ANTIZED WAVES . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 445

6.4 MATTER AS MOTHER OF THE UNIVERSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 4466.4.1 SCIENCE BETWEEN SOMETHING AND NOTHING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 448

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xix-

-xix-

6.4.2 TRIADIC MOVEMENT COMMON TO MIND AND MATTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 448

6.4.3 HOLOMORPHIC UNFOLDMENT TOWARDS THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 449

6.4.3.1 APPARENT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MIND AND MATTER . . Ch. 6 Pg. 450

6.4.3.2 FUNDAMENTAL IGNORANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 451

6.4.4 TIME, THOUGHT, SPACE, AND MATTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 453

6.4.4.1 MECHANICAL SPACE AND TIME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 454

6.4.4.2 QUANTUM THEORY OF SPACE, TIME, AND MATTER . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 454

6.4.4.3 SUBSTANCE OF SPACE -TIME: ONEN ESS OF THE UNIVERSE Ch. 6 Pg. 458

6.4.4.4 TOE, THEORY OF EVERYTHING; SYMMETRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 459

6.4.4.5 THE CIPHER LEVEL OF MIND-MATTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 461

6.4.5 GRAVITATIONAL QUANTUM-WAVES, SPACE, AND NOB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 461

6.4.6 EPILOGUE: MATTER AND THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 6 Pg. 469

CHAPTER 7 SHAKTI-MAYA-BUDDHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 4717.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 471

7.1.1 TRIADIC THINKING AND TRIMURTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 472

7.1.1.1 BRAHMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 475

7.1.1.2 SHIVA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 477

7.1.1.3 USHNISHA VIJAYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 477

7.2 THE DIALECTIC ENERGIES IN ASIAN ART . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 4797.2.1 REALITY AND TRUTH; SHAKTI AND SHIVA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 479

7.2.1.1 CHINNAMASTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 479

7.2.1.2 SHIVA-SHAKTI AND YAB-YUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 481

7.2.2 REVIEW OF THE THREE MODES OF THINKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 483

7.2.3 CREATIVE THINKING AND SHIVA-SHAKTI-BUDDHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 485

7.2.3.1 CONTRAST WITH CHRISTIAN MYTHOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 485

7.2.3.2 FURTHER EXPLORATION OF THE YAB-YUM SYMB OLISM . Ch. 7 Pg. 487

7.2.4 SHIVA-NATARAJA AND YAB-YUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 493

7.2.4.1 SHRI-YANTRA AND YAB-YUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 503

7.2.5 ENERGY AND MATTER, SHIVA AND PARVATI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 505

7.2.5.1 MAYA AND SHAKTI: THE TANTRIC VIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ch. 7 Pg. 509

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page -513-APPENDIX B: BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page -520-APPENDIX C: BIBLIOGRAPHIC ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page -523-APPENDIX D: INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page -527-

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -xx-

-xx-

Figure 3 Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, Bronze, 16"

THE GREATEST MAYA OF ALL IS WOMAN

CHINTAMANI AVALOKITESHVARA

The all merciful Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara takes on any form necessary to lure a person into the right direction.

In this symbolism we have a typical example of the combined spirituality and sensuality of Indian and Tibetan art,

developed to its most beautiful in the figures and paintings of Tantric Buddhism. (For more information see the later

section “Tara and Avalokiteshvara as Transcendental Images” on page 157.)

FRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -1-

-1-

DANCING WITH MAYA

Maya is the Goddess;If you want to use the name of your personal God,

She does not mind.Now, Dance With Maya!

You may worship her, love her, fear her.She invites you to be with her

To participate, To dance with her

And create a world of freedom.

We are her children, her creation.To be worthy of her we must accept her invitation.

Dancing With Mayais Freedom from Ignorance and

FREEDOM FROM

ILLUSION


Ch. 1 Pg. 2

Figure 4 Chintamani Avalokiteshvara

In this manifestation below, Chintamani Avalokiteshvara, a being capable of enlighteninginsight, has taken on a seductive female form. Her body posture indicates flight meaning that shewill fly to the aid of any person who strives for clarity of mind and soul. In her hairdo she wearsthe magic jewel Chintamani which grants any wish. In her right hand she carries the little hand-drum reminding of the primordial sound through which all existence came into being. The Lotusflower below her right knee, as well as the double Lotus pedestal show her divine nature, and heroneness with the ultimate creative power of What Is. See the section 2.6.5.4 “Tara andAvalokiteshvara as Transcendental Images” on page 157; see also page 499.)


1) "Was können wir wissen? Was sollen wir tun? Was dürfen wir hoffen?"

Ch. 1 Pg. 3

CHAPTER 1

"THE UNFOLDING OF THE PLAYFUL

ILLUSORY MANIFESTATION

OF TRUTH

ON THE EARTHLY PLANE."

(Lalita vistara sutra)

BETWEEN ILLUSION AND INTELLIGENCE

"What can we know?What should we do?What can we hope for?" Immanuel Kant1

1.1 INTRODUCTIONFor time immemorial people have sought to find the ultimate truth under the name of

Wisdom, fountain of youth, God, eternal bliss, happiness, nirvana, heaven, etc. There areinnumerable systems, usually called religion, which pretend to be in the possession of that truth. Butalas, reality is not truth, and nothing in reality is truth. This mysterious relationship betweentruth and reality is the theme of this book.

To hold any knowledge or system of any kind for absolute truth is one of the preferredactivities of what is called maya or illusion in Indian philosophy. This concept is so powerful thatit is being represented by the Goddess Maya, the greatest, earliest and most powerful of all Godsand Goddesses, who, if taken as knowable truth, is the ultimate illusion.

My 'personal' insight that 'Reality Is Not Truth' is the foundation of this book. I will showhow the most advanced theories of human insight, from the Indian Upanishads of three thousandyears ago and older times, to modern quantum theory support this view. I will also show that if weassume that life has meaning for an actual individual human being, and I suppose almost everyoneassumes that, then human thinking cannot ever lead to absolute knowledge about the actuality ofWhat Is, from the smallest atoms to the beginning of the universe, from human freedom to humanreality. Conversely, if there is meaning to a human being, then there is also meaning to the smallestpebble of sand, atom, and particle in the universe.

The unknowability of the truth which underlies reality was seen in many ancient cultures,and has now been confirmed by the discoveries of quantum theory early in the twentieth century.I will show why it is impossible for human thinking to arrive at cogent knowledge about the mosturgent, i.e. meaningful, questions of human societies. In order to do this we must explore the issuesin a somewhat circular fashion and be clear about some basic assumptions.


Ch. 1 Pg. 4

TARA, in Tibetan mythology and Buddhism, personifies the wisdom of the universe, and the wisdom

of enlightenment itself. Thus, she is often called the mother of the Buddhas. She is the Goddess Lotus (Padma).

The posture of her right hand indicates the granting of gifts. Her left hand is raised and makes the symbol of

teaching the Wheel Of Law. The cause of human suffering lies in the illusion of the ego, the confused se lf.

Tara is a figure who in Indian mythology is represented by the Goddess under many names: Shakti,

Devi, Parvati (in her beautiful manifestations), as Kali and Durga (in her fighting and wrathful manifestations).

In the Western world she is Aphrodite or Medusa, and in Egypt, which is one of the origins of the Mother

Goddess, she is Isis. In Tibet she is also the consort of Avalokiteshvara when he appears in his male form. Both

together embody the complementary oneness of opposites. See the section “Tara and Avalokiteshvara as

Transcendental Images” on page 157 and 499.


Ch. 1 Pg. 5

One of these assumptions is that our thinking should be consistent with the findings ofscience, in particular quantum physics, because thinking is based on material processes in and of thebrain, which must follow the laws of physics. Quantum physics generally governs microscopicprocesses at the atomic level and smaller. The rules of quantum theory are supposed to be ofunlimited generality. As material processes can be subdivided into three modes of operation I willassume the same for thinking. Actually, I will show that it is possibly the other way around: Becauseour thinking operates in three different ways, whatever it discovers in reality and beyond will fallinto the same three categories. I call them mechanical, generative, and creative modes ofoperation, or movements.

It turns out that the ancient insights of the Indian Upanishads, Tantra Buddhism, Greekphilosophy, and idealism support such a view. This is why I use mythological and philosophicalideas of those areas throughout this book. They provide complementary models for the ideaspresented and help the reader to look into his or her own mind to find the same mystery, to whichsome of the great philosophers of all times allude.

Mind you, it is quite a rare and precious event to find a truly great philosopher in one’s life.It is rather easy to fall for ideas which appear to be profound and true, but which are actually a formof deceptive propaganda. To see the difference between wisdom and a pathological foolishness oftenrequires more than following the so-called truthful path of a “holy” man or book. We always haveto investigate carefully for ourselves. And this can only happen if we are able to free ourselves frommuch of the conditioning of the culture and religion into which we are thrown by the accident ofbirth.

While we contemplate our thinking and sensing processes we use our own mind-body as thebasic laboratory and reference for all our thinking, sensing, and acting. The problem is that the‘setup’ of the experiments, the underlying theories and ways to look at results, are conditioned byhuman thinking and society: language, morals, education, indoctrination, and even geneticinstructions. The confusion, ignorance, and illusion which this conditioning produces is called mayain India, a power which is personified in the 'Goddess Maya.' All of what we call reality is affectedby her. I will show in Dancing With Maya how we can live in a reality, knowing that it is not truth,and yet have meaning in our lives. The relationship between reality and truth is a dynamictension, for which I use the term complementary.

The passionate loving embrace, Yab-Yum, between the Buddha and his consort in TantraBuddhism is an extraordinary example of esthetic ideas which express this complementarity betweentruth and reality just like the advanced formulas of quantum field theory or the texts of theUpanishads. These symbols are metaphors that attempt to communicate the mystery of humanthinking more directly to the senses and our intelligence, which is more than the intellect.

To dance with Maya is an act of freedom, to deny her is the essence of illusion. To findthe harmony between freedom and meaning, between Nothingness and Oneness, is the invitationby Maya to dance with her.

1.1.1 THE FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF WISDOM"Look at the do-gooders and righteous! Who do they hate most? The one who breaks their canons of

values, the destroyer - but that is the creator!".. "I want to join the creators, the harvesters, the

celebrators: I want to show them the rainbow and all the steps to the Man beyond

(Übermensch)."...This Zarathustra had spoken from his heart, when the sun was high at noon: and

he looked up, questioning - because he heard the sharp call of a bird. And lo! An eagle soared through

the air in wide circles, and at him hang a snake, not like a prey, but like a girlfriend: because she was

encircling its neck. "They are my animals!" said Zarathustra and was happy deep in his heart. "The

proudest animal under the sun and the most intelligent animal under the sun - they are looking for


2) Translated by FW from Friedrich Nietzsche, “Also sprach Zarathustra (Thus Spoke Zarathustra)” chapters 9-10.3) In “The Teachings of Don Juan” (CCM) and “A Separate Reality” (CCS) by Carlos Castaneda.4) Aryan tribes started to invade India during the second millennium B.C.E. They did not penetrate much to the south

of the Ganges, where the culture of the aboriginal dark skinned Dravidic tribes survives to this present day.5) Zimmer, ZP, page 219.

Ch. 1 Pg. 6

news. They want to find out whether I am still alive. Truly, do I still live? I found it more dangerous

among people than among animals; dangerous paths walks Zarathustra. Let my animals guide me!"

(Friedrich Nietzsche)2

After I had studied quantum field theory and obtained my doctorate in physics at theuniversity of Karlsruhe in Germany, my thirst for scientific knowledge was temporarily satisfied butonly to leave me with a much greater thirst for meaning. I did not know that at the time, but, guidedby some good destiny, I took off to an exploratory journey to Mexico. I did not know what I waslooking for, but, strangely enough, I carried a complete edition of the works of Friedrich Nietzschein my backpack, and carried the whole twelve volumes in and out of the Copper Canyon in theSierra Madre. I was fascinated by his beautiful and powerful, inspired language together with hissarcastic irreverence for any institutions of state, education, or religion. One idea, which captivatedmy imagination, was his profound trust in the "unknown and unknowable God." The other idea wascontained in his appeal to every human being to "become who you are."

In a little apartment in Oaxaca, Mexico, where I stayed with a friend for more than sixmonths, I painted those words on the wall. I saw that the relationship between "the seer" introducedby the Yaqui Indian and brujo (shaman, sorcerer, magician, wise-man, mystic) Don Juan3 was veryclose to Nietzsche's idea of the "Super-man and Super-woman" (Übermensch). I see this notion asa metaphor for "Man and woman who have gone beyond the conditioning of reality."

It was there in Oaxaca that Maya revealed herself to me. Later, back in Germany, I delved into Indian, Tibetan, and German philosophy, and I

rediscovered the German existential philosopher Karl Jaspers. In his philosophy there is onesentence which highlights his ingenious insight into the mind of true human beings of all times,namely that "there is no existence without transcendence." One does not truly live up to thehuman potential, one does not exist, unless one can see transcendence which gives meaning toreality.

It took me a while to find out that these statements were about the fundamentalcomplementarity of all Being. They were made by Western philosophers but have also quite atradition in Asian Indian philosophies where they culminated in some forms of MahayanaBuddhism, the so-called Vajrayana or Tantra Buddhism. It is in Tantra Buddhism that the ideas ofcomplementarity have found their most profound and beautiful expressions. They include thecomplementarity between sensuality-spirituality, God-Man, God-Goddess, Matter-Spirit, Oneness-Nothingness, and so on. Heinrich Zimmer says of this Tantra philosophy:

It is "an extraordinarily sophisticated application of the Aryan-Dravidian synthesis4, whichshaped both the Buddhist and Brahman philosophies and practices of the medieval period, and tothis day inspires not only the whole texture of the religious life of India but also much of the popularand esoteric teaching of the great Buddhist nations, Tibet, China, Korea, and Japan."5

I use the ideas of some of the great philosophers of human history to penetrate into thisuncertain mystery of Maya. I show that the modern theories of quantum physics and the oldmetaphysical ideas of East and West are rooted in the same or at least similar ideas, the same geniusof the human mind. What separates us is less important than what makes us one. I understand theMan of Power of the Yaqui Indian, Nietzsche's Superman (Übermensch), and the Tibetan


6) Yoginis and Dakinis are divine females who move on the highest level of actuality. They are helpers of the Buddhas,

and their task is to persuade people to wake up to their spiritual nature.7) See the beautiful Yogini Vajravarahi on page 369 in section 5.2.5.1.8) In the quantum physical operator language of theoretical physics, we have developed a description of quantum-fields,

which has many similarities with the three operations of human thinking. I will make the case that this resemblance is

no coincidence. For more on operators see the glossary on page 516 under Lie algebra.9) 'God' and 'Goddess' are only appropriate notions in the context with Hindu philosophy and religion, not with

Buddhism. In Buddhism there are no Gods. Buddhas are no Gods. They are human beings who have awakened to the

truth of What Is. The Gods and Goddesses referred to in Tibetan or Tantra Buddhism should be considered as personified

and deified energies, used as teaching devices.

Ch. 1 Pg. 7

‘sages,' male and female Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, Yoginis6, and Dakinis7 as metaphors andciphers for human beings who have learnt how to live in reality in awareness oftranscendence.The oneness of human thinking comes to the fore in women and men who havetranscended the conditioning of their particular times and cultures, their reality.

Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, the destroyer who is the creator, is of course Shiva, the dancingGod, and Maya-Shakti-Kali, is his female representation, or he is her’s (See pages:60, 346, 494).They are both separate and one.

1.1.1.1 THE PHILOSOPHICAL CONNECTIONThinking about ideas like "Become who you are " can only have meaning if we comprehend

that such notions are of a different category than those used in everyday language. A different wayof thinking which uses reason much more freely and creatively is implied. I try to draw attention tosuch thinking here. Guided by direct observation of thinking I introduce the idea of threequalitatively very different modes, corresponding to three categories of thinking. We must be awareof such differences if we want to understand the world and ourselves. I call the different operationsmechanical, generative, and creative thinking modes8. These modes of thinking are closelyrelated to degrees of uncertainty which characterize them. Briefly put: In mechanical thinkingcertainty is possible, in creative thinking it is not. Generative thinking is sub-certain and fallsbetween the two extremes. (See 1.4.5.2 page 73)

To these various modes of thinking correspond different kinds of possible functions, valuesand meaning. Unless we recognize these differences we are confused, and our societies are confused.Knowledge, science, philosophy, mathematics, religion are created through thinking but havedifferent functions according to the predominant modes of thinking which create and maintain them.Unfortunately, language itself has no built-in characterization of the different categories. Much ofhuman confusion, self-deception, and deception can therefore be traced back to a confusedinterpretation of language. Such confusion can have horrific consequences. At the least they createconfused and confusing 'realities.' In spite of the tremendous discoveries of science in recent timesthe general confusion in human thinking and behavior does not seem to have changed to anyappreciable degree. I see some of the metaphysical and spiritual ideas, which have been present inhuman consciousness throughout the ages, as attempts to clear up this almost all-pervasiveconfusion.

1.1.1.2 THE MYTHOLOGICAL CONNECTION WITH INDIA, CHINA, AND TIBETThe confusion of human thinking and acting is a central object of Indian philosophy. This

confusion has a name and is represented by the most powerful of all Gods9 and Goddesses. WhenShe represents this confusion she is called Maya, but this is just one form and name of the many shecarries as Mother Goddess, Maya-Devi, Shakti, Shri, and so on. She is all action, the creator of


Ch. 1 Pg. 8

actuality and reality, of time and thought. As such, she is also the mother of confusion, but not inthe sense that she creates confusion, but that she creates the condition for confusion which isreality. The basis for such thinking is the insight that any action which leads to consciousnessleads to duality, which is the quintessential setup for certainty but also for confusion, permeatingall reality in as much as it is the object of consciousness.

The greatest confusion exists between the certain and uncertain categories of the humanthinking process itself which is responsible for creating consciousness and its world. It is just onemanifestation of the fundamental problem which arises when the mind grapples with the mysteryof reality and truth, sensuality and spirituality, and many other apparently opposing dualities. Muchof the confusion arises in thinking because of one of its intrinsic functions to rationalize and to makeeverything certain. In this process thinking tends to overlook its own properties, which allow for athought to be forgotten, hidden, recovered, and so on, properties which I later discuss as thesuspending powers of thinking. In mythological stories these properties are subconsciouslyrepresented by the lives and deeds of Gods, Goddesses, and demons. If we don't understand themetaphoric ground in these myths, we miss their point. The numerous Gods and Goddesses aremanifestations and externalizations of human thinking rather than separate entities. TheseGods and Goddesses do not have static characteristics but are dynamic energies which can changetheir form, powers, and names. To place these powers outside of ourselves as completely separateforces is the prime confusion about reality. They are part of us and they are us, and we arethey, ultimately unknowable.

In some of Indian and Tibetan art this problem of mis-understanding is alleviated byrepresenting spiritual ideas in artistic form, as architecture and decoration of temples, throughpaintings and sculptures. These expressions can bypass the intellect and speak directly to the senses.Just as the sight of a beloved person has an immediate effect on the psycho-somatic being of thelover, filling him or her with affection, desire, passion, and general well-being, so does the sight ofa beautiful deity affect the mind of the worshiper. The rationalizations of the Gods and Goddesses(or their rejections) are the result of the dominance of mechanical thinking. Where this rationalityis likely to lead to confusion, as in spirituality, the mind's own capability to transcend reality can bemore efficiently expressed through poetry, paintings, and sculptures, in combination with each other.This deed has been achieved in a unique way in much of Indian, Chinese, and Tibetan spiritual artwith a tradition of almost three thousand years. The Upanishads, Shaktism, Hindu and BuddhistTantra, and Taoism contain ideas which comprise philosophy, mystic insight, spirituality, and artin a unique blend and vision which ultimately tries to clear up the confusion of human thinkingabout itself, reality, and truth. I will show here that modern physics has elements in it which can beseen as supporting those mystic insights. To show the various modes of human thinking in action,I use all three different approaches mentioned: philosophy, mythology, and theoretical physics.

1.1.1.3 THE THEORETICAL PHYSICS CONNECTIONThe connection of these metaphysical ideas with theoretical elementary particle physics lies

in the fact that in physics all major quantities, energy-time, momentum-space, etc. can becategorized according to their compatibility with each other, their simultaneous measurement. Therules of quantum physics apply to all observable and non-observable real and actual systems in allgenerality. In its terminology two quantities are compatible if they can be measured simultaneouslywith arbitrary accuracy, limited only by the precision of the measuring instrument.

There are three different categories of physical quantities:


10) See section 6.3.3.1 page 444.11) These ideas are discussed in greater detail as we go along, particularly in chapter 6.12) This length is called the Planck length, it is the smallest possible length. See glossary, black hole. Even at much longer

distances like the 'diameter' of an electron which is about10-18 meters, time and space become sub-certain quantities.

Ch. 1 Pg. 9

(1) Those that can be measured simultaneously to arbitrary accuracy, limited only by themeasuring apparatus; in classical physics all quantities fall into this category. There, any mechanicalsystem can be completely determined by the knowledge of the coordinates and velocities. This is thedomain of Newton's laws, modified by Einstein's theories of relativity. This is the domain ofcausality, certainty, and separation. The world is being analyzed into separate objects connected bycausal, continuous links, even though continuity and separability cannot both be correctsimultaneously.

(2) There are those quantities which are complementary. The Heisenberg uncertaintyrelations and the Schrödinger equation10 are characteristic for these quantities.11 The accuratemeasurement of one quantity limits the simultaneous determination of the other. In quantum-physicsobservations at the atomic level cannot be made with arbitrary theoretical precision. (Even if onecould construct an ideal measuring instrument, one could still not make those measurements.) Theknowledge of the position of an electron with precision )x allows only a precision of )p/S at thesame time. This means that the results of observations, carried out with different experimentalsetups, cannot be combined into a unique picture which would correspond to actuality in a one to onerelationship. However, the different pictures must be considered to be complementary, i.e. only thetotality of all observations does justice to the actuality, even if they seem to contradict each other, inthe sense that they cannot be merged into one unique image in a reality. As the best images we canobtain in reality stem from physical observation at the quantum level, we must conclude that realityas a whole can also not be a unique image. This includes dynamic changes. Reality is fundamentallyas non-certain and complementary as the complementary images which constitute and generate it.

(3) There are those quantities (ideas) which cannot be measured, because they belong todimensions where time, space, matter concepts as even potentially observable break down, which isat distances of about 10-35 meters.12 Neither the rules of causality (predictable with certainty andobjectively verifiable), nor quantum theory can penetrate into this area and be experimentallyverified.

It is because of the existence of categories (2) and (3) that there is mystery in the worldtogether with freedom. This is the fundamental No-thing-ness aspect of nature. Everything that canappear in the framework of space-time-thought follows the same physical laws of nature. All thingscome from, or are unfolded by the underlying ocean of immeasurable energy, so-called quantumfields, in unobservable ways. This is, so it seems, as close as we can get to the idea of No-thingnessand Oneness of All, of What Is, of Being.

All phenomena of reality are being recognized as such through the thinking human brain inconjunction with the senses, which are all material processes. Therefore, the human brain itself mustbe operating in similar ways, obeying the same laws of physics and beyond, representing, unfolding,and enfolding Nothingness and Oneness. Thus, one should also be able to discover the samecategorization introduced above in the brain's operations and in the thinking processes themselves.


13) See Bohm, DBCC, “Causality and Chance in Modern Physics,” and BQT, “Quantum Theory.”14) The Sanskrit word 'ma' also means mother, and is as such known in all Indo-European languages.15) Plato: Laws; book 4.716 c.

Ch. 1 Pg. 10

By all indications it seems that some mystics throughout the ages were able to observe or intuit thesecategories in thinking. Many scientists would reject category three.13

My interpretation of physics is not as far fetched as it may seem for the modern reader. Inancient Greece and Asia this relationship between energy and God or Goddess, the oneness andmystery of all, must have been closer to human consciousness than it is today.

The syllable 'Phy' means action in Greek, an acting oneness of nature from which we are notseparate. This feeling for nature and oneness with it was prevalent in early Greece, even until the timeof Aristotle. The word physics should imply this same oneness, and actually until the 18th century,physics and philosophy were inseparable. In Sanskrit the word ’shak’ means about the same as ‘phy’in Greek. The word Shakti became to mean action, energy, but is also the name of the FemaleGoddess: Shakti, Devi (Goddess).

Another one of her names is Maya; the root 'ma' in Sanskrit is related to the word formeasure.14 We also derive our word 'magic' from it. In Greek philosophy the idea of measure was asimportant as in Buddhist philosophy. The sophists in Greece maintained that "The measure of allthings is man." Plato held against this that "the measure of all things is God.15 " What he meant with"God" is not quite clear. The feeling that "there is nothing at all in the universe including matter andhuman consciousness in which there is not God or Goddess" has always been an essential part of theperception of all mystics of East and West.

I will make a case in this book that philosophically speaking "The measure of all things isMaya-Shakti." My point here is that the study of physics should not exclude considerations ofthinking and spirituality. The reality of physics, particularly so in its most advanced forms ofquantum field theory, tries to tackle the innermost movements of matter and is forced to enter fieldsof philosophy or spirituality. Heisenberg has ‘proven’ that the concept of causality is non-certainin the context of quantum physics, or in other words, that causality does not exist in afundamental sense, i.e. at the level where Nothingness creates, maintains, and reabsorbs thedimensions of potential reality: time, space, matter, and thought.

1.1.2 TECHNOLOGICAL AND SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION The Western worldview has advanced the idea of individual freedom and human rights to

successes which we have never before seen in the history of mankind. The Western ideas of freedom,business, free enterprise, rational government, technology and science, law, education, social valuesand so on are spreading around the globe like wildfire. These ideas are not promoted or sold by powerhungry colonialists but are eagerly embraced by people who see beneficial values in them. A greatnumber of positive developments for the largest number of people have their roots in European ideas,similar to those mentioned above. People all over the world spread them through moderncommunication devices, like radio, television, fax machines, and computers, inventions of thetechnological and computer revolution of the Western world.

But any idea needs to be balanced, lest it becomes destructive. The perfect match for ideasof pragmatic free enterprise, for example, comes from ideas which have been around for a fewthousand years as well. Actually, it is the idea of balance, of harmony, and of a middle path betweenextremes, which needs to be energized during any period of rapid human development and change.

In our times, around the turn of the second to the third millennium of the Common Era, wewitness the accelerating breakdown of illusory absolute values and customs. Through the free flow


16) In chapter 7 I provide additional information on Indian mythological concepts, in as much as they relate to the ideas

developed in this book.17) ‘Veda’ means ‘knowledge and w isdom.’ There are four parts to the texts of the Veda: The Rigveda (the wisdom of

praises), the Samaveda (the wisdom of the songs), the Yagurveda (the texts of sacrifices), the Atharvaveda (the wisdom

of magic). Within each Veda there are four sub-divisions: Mantras (hymns and prayers), Brahmanas (directions for the

use of the mantras), Aranyakas (‘forest’ texts for the forest dwelling hermits), and Upanishads (secret teachings). From

a philosophical and spiritual point of view the Upanishads are the most important ones.

Ch. 1 Pg. 11

and exchange of information among the nations of the world everyone on this globe can be inimmediate contact with everyone else. Constraints of time and space have lost their limiting power,when it comes to communication of data, information, news, etc. Values of one country are exposedto the glaring light of another country without the conditioning forces of tradition, habit, and age oldpower structures being able to exercise control. What works in one country can be transferred andadopted by another.

In the past, a religion or belief system could dominate in a civilization that was rooted in theabsolute ideas and dogmas of that specific religion. No other really different belief system wasavailable for comparison. It looks as though all that may soon be gone forever. This has caused agreat deal of confusion about some fundamental questions which ultimately boil down to questionsof "what is reality?; what are values?" Today we see a slow breakdown of many dogmatic beliefsystems, much to the dismay of those who administer them to their own benefit.

There is great fear among believers in the supremacy of their particular God. All values maybe relative, and may be there is no unquestionable idea on which our mind can rely as anchor-pointfor our lives. Women may be equal to men, what blasphemy! As long as this fear brings about morescrutiny and investigation of taboo institutions and belief system, it may be beneficial.

The comfort of certainty, which absolute values of the various religions used to offer, isslipping away. The great Nothing, a power of emptiness and meaninglessness, as so nicely illustratedin the "Infinite Story" by Michael Ende, seems to be threatening our lives and creates alarm in thecircles of undisputed or absolute power and influence. Once again we hear the battle cry of ‘spiritual’and nationalistic institutions to return back to the old values and holy books.

In order to address some of these fears I embark on a speculative journey through culturesand psychological attitudes. In a playful comparison and dialectic synthesis of Oriental andOccidental thinking I attempt to use varying experiences of our common histories to understandourselves better. It is a contemplative study and proposal of some uncommon ways of looking intoourselves and our realities.

I use many myths and symbols from India, which is so creatively and beautifully rich in them,to illustrate our own spiritual thinking.16 Some Indian thinkers have been pondering the questionof the illusory nature of reality for more than four thousand years, and we have records of theirspiritual passion. India probably has the oldest and richest philosophical tradition of any country. Thewritings of the Veda17 alone occupy more than six times the volume of the Bible. The myths andsymbols serve the same purpose for speculative thinking as the examples from mathematics andscience, which I use to illustrate the power of formal thinking. Furthermore I see in some of Indianand Tibetan mythology and its artistic expression an astonishing representation of the various modesof thinking. The longing for oneness among what is separate, the power to create, destroy, andresurrect under a different form seem to be the fundamental themes which permeate those cultures.

I try to transcend the cultural and personal differences among individuals and societies so thatwe can explore the transcendent mind which we have in common. In this I wish to comprehend thehuman mind and our illusions, frustrations, and fears. I hope that this will not lead to another set ofabsolute values but rather to the insight that for consciousness there is an unresolvable harmonic


18) Nietzsche, Friedrich: “Menschliches Allzumenschliches,”“Human, All-too-human,” NMM, Aphorismus 23.

Ch. 1 Pg. 12

tension between the realities which our mind creates and the unfathomable truth of which thesame mind is an integral part.

We human beings, as tribes and races, have all been victors and victims in the past 10,000years. We don't know which paths our ancient ancestors have walked or what triumphs and defeatsthey have experienced. But we can realize that we all participate in the true adventure, an adventure,which the human mind has been creating since the first human being asked the question:

"WHO AM I? WHERE DO I COME FROM? WHERE AM I GOING?"In different times, under different circumstances, we have found a variety of temporary

solutions to our problems and our dreams. Some of those dreams may have been universal, and it maybe of help to rediscover them. My goal is to reach more clarity, more honesty, and more freedom inour thinking and in our value systems.

In some respects I also try to follow Nietzsche’s prophetic ideas in his work dedicated "to thefree spirits"18:

"the various worldviews, manners and cultures are to be compared and experienced side byside, in a way that was formerly impossible when the always localized sway of each culture accordedwith the roots in place and time of its own artistic style. An intensified aesthetic sensibility, now atlast, will decide among the many forms presenting themselves for comparison: and the majority willbe let die. In the same way, a selection among the forms and usages of the higher moralities isoccurring, the end of which can only be the downfall of the inferior systems. It is an age ofcomparison! That is the pride - but more justly also its grief. Let us not be afraid of this grief!"

1.1.3 EASTERN AND WESTERN APPROACH TO PHILOSOPHY AND

RELIGION Philosophy is a field of human endeavor with its own independent origin between scientific

thinking and the trust in divine revelation. Love of wisdom engages all movements of humanthinking, sensing, and acting. During the classic Greek period wisdom became more and more anendeavor for thinking alone. Pleasure, which comes through the senses, became ever more suspectduring the following Christian period. Nevertheless, there are great examples in Western churchesand temples which are tributes to beauty, though mostly to celebrate the glory of God.

There are some exceptions to the rule notably the temple Hagia Sophia of Constantinople builtby the Roman emperor Justinian (527-565 C.E.).

The Hagia Sophia is a remarkable artistic and spiritual representation of the idea of wisdomcombined with beauty. This church was dedicated to Holy Wisdom and was designed to surpass anyother church or temple in beauty. This was achieved by using innumerable precious stones and thirtysix tons of gold in its decoration. Being located at the junction point between Eastern and Westernreligions and civilizations it is a symbol for both. Beauty, wisdom, spirituality and craftsmanshiphave converged into one masterpiece of the European and Asian genius. It is a legacy and reminderof what we could and should do. The history of this church shows that the human spirit fails most ofthe time in reality and instead of oneness brings about fragmentation. Most of its interior decorationshave been stolen during the many upheavals and conquests of the middle ages. The worst damageoccurred at the hands of Venetian and French nobles at the ransacking of Constantinople during theFourth Crusade in 1203 C.E. The last remnants of its decorations were taken by the Turks in 1453C.E., who converted the church into a mosque.


Ch. 1 Pg. 13

The oneness of beauty, sensuality, spirituality, and wisdom was never vanquished in India,whose temples and sculptures show the unique blend of these great human qualities till today.

The love of wisdom, the startling revelations of the human mind about its own mysteries andthose of the surrounding world and universe, have been catalysts for artists and philosophers in theircreation of works of beauty and spirituality.

But it seems as if beauty and its enjoyment has always been stifled by guilt and fear, the othergreat motivators in the creation of organized spirituality. Wars, natural catastrophes, starvation,sickness, and death must have been dominating the consciousness of peoples at least as much as theirsearch for enjoyment and pleasure. These fears and pleasures had to be held in check, lest they wouldlead to the collapse of society. Thus, the giving and receiving of the most intense pleasures, i.e.sexual pleasures, was turned into a degrading, humiliating, and sinful activity. When men were the“perpetrators” their behavior was ignored, frowned upon, or more or less tolerated. If women werethe ’sinners' they were usually severely punished. The conditions of meekness, poverty, and death,on the other hand were given a positive twist.

One may say that even though people have started from great spiritual ideas, they tended tosuccumb to organized systems of metaphysical security and control, ultimately dogmas whichsubjugated freedom and creativity. The enjoyment of the presence of the Gods and Goddesses tookbackstage to fearing their wrath and revenge. Worship of and sacrifice to deities were supposed tosustain people in their daily fears and anxieties and allow them to face sickness, calamities, and deathwithout falling into panic and paralysis. But what was conceived as metaphysical security becamea means of control among oppressive religious organizations. They created, intentionally orunintentionally, a pervasive fear and mindset demanding control, certainty, and security in all ouractivities as human beings. The struggle for power and control through means of deception andmisinformation always played a major role in any political power structure but in organized religionas well. Fear of real or imagined dangers and guilt are great devices in controlling people. They playinto the hands of those who pretend to know solutions and who sell them at a price. No wonder thatall religions have had periods in which their predominant thinking approached the level of idiocy andtotalitarian terror.

The search for security and certainty has had a positive impact on the development of culturesand civilizations as well. But it has also let to further deception, self deception, illusion, and evendestruction. What fascinates me most in the context of human reality, is the Indian idea of Maya, thedual concept of a metaphysical idea and its representation by the Goddess.

The Asian Indian concept of Maya, crudely translated as illusion, ignorance, or conditionedself-created reality, permeates all of Eastern thinking. But illusion should not merely be seen in itsnegative sense. The word itself is related to the Latin word 'ludere' (to play). Like in a theater, Mayaproduces a play, an enchantment and spell, in which we are not the spectators but in which we arethe unsuspecting puppets. To advance from puppets to conscious actors requires that we understandhow our mind is working. The stage is our own consciousness, the various plays range from comediesto tragedies. The director behind the scenes is Maya-Shakti, the Mother Goddess as personifiedenergy of reality but also of actuality and beyond. The word ‘shak’ means "to have force to do," "tobe able." Thus, an adequate translation of ’shakti' is 'energy.' Maya-Shakti is the intelligent energywhich creates out of the primordial Nothingness-Oneness the first complementing duality of Shakti-Shiva. Then she allows this oneness to separate and simultaneously creates the energy of Love, Eros,Kama, which for always seeks to reunite the two apparently separate manifestations. All this is amysterious happening for which there is no other but a metaphoric comprehension. From there onevery thing is created in the magic web of time and space. All this is Maya. The Nothingness-


19) From the "Lalita vistara sutra”.20) 'Buddha' should be read here simply as 'What Is.' Even though this is a text from Tibetan Buddhism, it represents

exactly the characteristics of Maya, which is a Hindu concept going back to pre-Aryan times. Tibetan Buddhism

absorbed much of Hindu mythology and philosophy and recreated it with much enriched ideas.21) dharma: A Sanskrit term which means 'holding,' 'carrying.' In Hinduism it refers to the essence of What Is. For the

individual being dharma is inseparable from karma, a conditioning resulting from innumerable reincarnations. In

Buddhism 'dharma' is a key notion which stands for the teaching of the Buddha, the 'law.' It might also be translated as

'moral or ethical law.' The Buddha saw this law in operation, had direct insight into it, and expressed it. Buddha, dharma,

and sangha (the community) are the three key elements of Buddhism.

Ch. 1 Pg. 14

Oneness of creating intelligence is the Goddess Maya. The products of her show are called maya,with lower case “m.”

Maya-Shakti puts on the dramatic show of

"THE UNFOLDING OF THE PLAYFUL ILLUSORY MANIFESTATION

OF THE BUDDHA ON THE EARTHLY PLANE."19, 20

And she invites us to join in the performance and dance. There is joy in this dance andplayfulness and laughter. Fear and guilt are products of the confused mind, and the goal of the danceis to have insight into their origin and be free of them. Maya, in one of her many Tibetan-Buddhistincarnations as Tara, is a spiritual creation to help us to reach such insight.

It is the christianized Western mind which has a problem with this positive and affirmingworld view which puts the remedy to human problems into human hands. The Western mind wantsabsolute truth, here and now and forever. Thus, it tends to regard this Eastern view of the world andreality as a profound ignorance. The fundamental uncertainty in this Eastern world view is suspectto the Western mind.

But in the East this idea of uncertainty and Maya is often regarded as a positive idea. She isthe essence of wisdom, represented by the female lover of the Buddha. She is wisdom (prajna), heis compassion or artistic methods (upaya). Together, in love and beauty, they form the essence ofWhat Is, and of the reality, the theater, the show. The essence of this has also been called dharma.

In Tantra Buddhism the two elements of insight into What Is, and its expression in reality arerepresented by the female and male Buddhas in erotic union. Insight and wisdom is a female energyand compassion or artful, skillful means is a male energy. Together, in love and beauty, they formthe essence of What Is, and of the reality, the theater, the show. All this is dharma21. It is the insightinto What Is and the transformation of that into cipher, metaphor, and symbols, i.e. forms whichaccessible to the mind and senses. Whatever can enter the confines of formal conscious thinking canat best be an expression of dharma but never dharma itself, though the idea of dharma tries toconvey the oneness between the essence of What Is and the perceiving mind. This oneness is themystic non-certain 'experience' in which the conscious mind and its object merge into Oneness-Nothingness. Of this experience the mind cannot know with certainty, because certaintyrequires the repeatable form in reality in which Maya is always present.

Some statues of Tibetan and Hindu art seem to be as close to the idea of dharma as is possiblefor human consciousness. This whole idea of dharma and Maya has been profoundly well exploredmetaphysically in the East and has let to psychological insights, which we in the West have started


22) Maya is a lso recognized as the supreme Goddess Devi, Maha-D evi.23 ) The Rig Veda is the oldest of the Indian scriptures, 1200 - 800 B.C.E. It comprises 1,028 hymns, mostly directed to

personifications of natural forces: e.g. Agni, Soma, Indra.24) This sense may go back tens of thousands of years in the case of the aborigines in Australia.

Ch. 1 Pg. 15

to systematically investigate only in the last few centuries.22 I prefer to use the Western term truthfor dharma and the term reality for Maya.

In the creation myths of the Rig Veda23 we find a text which expresses this uncertainty in amost fundamental form: the creator of What Is may not know its own origin. It is not far from thisknowing ignorance to the idea of emptiness or Nothingness. The notion of emptiness is misleadingbecause it is a notion borrowed from reality in which it implies the existence of a container which isempty. Nothingness, on the other hand, is a notion which defies and denies all reality, and pointsbeyond it. The insight to be had is the difference between saying “There is nothing beyondreality,” and “What is beyond reality is Nothing.”

From the insight of the Rig Veda one may conclude that What Is does not know its ownorigin. As thinking is being, at that level, one may conclude further that the origin of What Is, isunknowable. This is its essence.

The ultimate mystery forces us to say: It is neither this nor that, no opposites can contain it.Even the word "it" is already saying too much. If it cannot be thought, or sensed, it is neither thoughtnor thing. It is No-Thing, Nothing. Thus, the essence of all things, including human beings and theirconsciousness, are all the same, they are all No-thing. Thus, What Is, is this ONE-NESS which isNO-THINGNESS.

The Hindu view of Maya and the Buddhist view of the empty self with its empty reality aresomewhat similar to Plato's idea of reality as shadow play. These views put human existence andvalues in serious question at roughly the same time in history, i.e. about 500 before the common era(B.C.E.). Nevertheless, the common view of human existence was mostly positive in these ideas,which were appeals to the divine nature in human beings and all things alive. Underneath it all, adivine oneness was felt, which can be traced back to the Egyptian Pyramid scriptures of around 2,300B.C.E.24. The idea of one truth and transcendence, one What Is, had started to emerge, and peoplewere struggling to make this idea manifest in the world, through their references to Gods and otherpowers beyond reality.

But the oneness had to develop into a freedom from oneness in order to allow consciousnessto see itself as subject, and the outside world, including gods, as objects or otherness. Once that pathaway from oneness had been taken, the direction towards nothingness was open. Thus, humanconsciousness found itself immersed in the dialectic struggle of its own making, between oneness andnothingness. This is the conscious human mind, and anything that enters its sphere will be immersedin the same dialectic. To comprehend this is the goal of a free mind.

In spite of the incredible progress we have made in the sciences, it is generally overlookedthat the boundaries of our understanding have not been eliminated but merely expanded. Even thoughthe potential of our understanding can grow indefinitely, there is a mysterious domain which is notpart of the world that can ever be understood. Why that is, we can understand and comprehend bylooking at how our knowledge comes about. The particular mode of thinking which allows forrational and cogent explanation is simultaneously also the limitation of that thinking. We know frommodern physics that there is a fundamental uncertainty governing the laws of nature, whichcannot be overcome by any more sophisticated tools. I am making the case that we must come toan even deeper understanding of this uncertainty in psychological and philosophical terms. It is the


25) In German this can be said better: "Das Wahre ist das Unbedingte. Was unbedingt ist, w ie Nichts, ist das Freisein

von allen Dingen und Bedingungen."26) Hegel, Logic; HW vol 8, page 178.27) This image and its characterization as male and female Buddhas may be controversial, but it is supported by the

Paramasukha-Chakrasamvara Tantra. See the picture of Shamvara Yab-Yum and the text on page 367. See also Rhie-

Thurman, “Wisdom and Compassion,” RW C page 215.

Ch. 1 Pg. 16

power of Maya-Shakti which guarantees human freedom. Conversely, without uncertainty therecan be no freedom; without Maya reality is dead and with it human consciousness.

The world shaped by our knowledge is what I call reality. It has to be questioned as a whole:what it is, how it comes about, how it is maintained, changed, transformed, destroyed.

I refer to this reality in question as "nothingness." It had been felt already early in theunfolding of human consciousness that, what the mysterious oneness contained or was, were notthings, that could be described. Some sages saw that the mysterious oneness was not a world ofthings, or reality, which is the world of conditioning.

What Is, is not conditioned, but free of any conditioning,25 the essence of freedom. This iswhy this oneness of What Is could and can also be seen as a no-thing-ness or nothingness. (InGerman the word for no-thingness is “Unbedingtheit,” which is used in the meaning of “theunconditioned,” which means literally “un-thinged-ness.”) The oscillation of human consciousnessbetween nothingness and oneness had as intermediary stages the ideas referred to as polytheism,monotheism, atheism, and nihilism. The ultimate truth is not a world of things or ideas, it is notanything that could be properly expressed through cogent thought or any thought.

"The truth of Being as well as of Nothingness is that both are one."Hegel, Science of Logic 26

The harmonic dialectic truth of this statement is what the spiritual artists in Tibet tried toachieve in their bronzes of Yab-Yum. The erotic union of a male and female Buddha27, the union ofwisdom (she) and compassion (he), is the ultimate image of the dialectic unity of Oneness andNothingness. This image, the enciphered actualization and realization of a truth, is the mystery ofBetweenness.

It is easy to misinterpret these statues and to reject them. It is just as easy to reject the ideasof oneness-nothingness. This easy rejection is the working of the conditioned mind which can onlydeal with "real things" in a "real reality."

Plato's shadows were the things of reality, and what created these shadows was the light, theoneness which contained no things. The things in their appearance to human consciousness werecreated by the human mind.

The basic mystery of all being was not seen as something which wasn't there and whichshould be, or as a negative void and punishing hell, imposed on us by some other gods. No, this basicmystery is what every human being and any part of the world, including gods, demons, and Buddhastruly was and is. The underlying mystery is positive yet uncertain. This mystery has to be seen or"experienced" directly without the intermediary of thought by the human mind in a logic transcendingvision outside of the sphere of certain and cogent knowledge.

It was and is the dynamics of any spiritual existence: the experience of identity with theoneness-nothingness of all being, the direct perception of the mystery, leading to a profoundcomprehension and insight which gives liberating meaning and which sees the limitations of


28 ) This wisdom has been called gnosis in Western antiquity, jnana and vidya in Hinduism, prajna in Budhhism.

Prajnaparamita, the wisdom of beyond reality, in Tantra Buddhism is the highest wisdom of Nothingness.29) Uma appeared in a Indo-Aryan document for the first time in the Kena Upanishad 600 B.C.E., she predates Aryan

influences and goes back to Bronze age times; it was she, not the Vedic gods, who knew brahman, the divine essence;

see page 186. For a picture of her see Figure 65 on page 397.30) I rely here on the knowledge and w isdom of Heinrich Zimmer and Joseph Campbell.31) Mohenjo-daro, an ancient culture of the Indus Valley dating back to as early as 4000 B.C.E. Excavations started in

1924. The city of Mohenjo-daro is together with Harappa (400 miles away) the most important city of the Indus culture32) Shiva and Shakti represent two aspect of the transcendent absolute. Shakti, Kali, Durga is the female part which

corresponds to the active powers of the absolute. Shiva is the more inactive contemplative aspect.

Ch. 1 Pg. 17

thought together with its powers. This wisdom28 is not an end but a beginning which allows newthinking, new perception, new action, which can be called compassion. In the Christian Westernworld such a view was never really taken seriously except by some mystics from Meister Eckehartto Jacob Boehme and Friedrich Nietzsche, very different personalities who had in common that theyhad "seen the Unknown God." For Boehme "Nothingness was God., the Oneness of all opposites."

I want to make the point that this insight is not something to be acquired through 'mystic'preparation and exercises. It is part of all creative thinking which operates in the mind of everyhuman being, but it is covered up by conditioning. Put differently, intelligent creative thinking ismysticism for mechanical thinking. Only intelligent thinking can see the oneness of opposites asthey appear to mechanical thinking.

Some Hindu and Buddhist traditions share(d) the view with many Christians that reality, theworld of society, was something negative and to be avoided. Maybe this was the result of Aryan andSemitic influences. The driving force in this worldview was that the certainty about the evilness ofworldly reality provided the necessary spiritual comfort. If I know through my God or religion thatthe world is ruled by evil, then, by following the guidance of my God, I can hold that evil at bay.

In many Eastern religions, life and reality affirming tendencies, which I summarize as theMother Goddess aspect, were always very strong. She is called by many names, from Isis in Egypt,Ishtar in Sumer, Aphrodite in Greece, to Shakti-Maya, Lakshmi and Shri (prosperity, fortune, beauty,virtue), Uma, Parvati, Durga, Kali in Indian Asia29. This idea of the Goddess Devi could never bequite suppressed by the life denying religions of the likes of Jaina, Hinayana Buddhism, or thevarious ascetic Yoga systems.30 Even in the Greek orthodox Christian church this idea stayedsomewhat alive in the form of the divine Sophia as creative wisdom, in whose honor the emperorJustinian, during the sixth century CE, built the magnificent temple, the Hagia Sophia inConstantinople, today's Istanbul. In the catholic church females such as Mary, mother of God, Fatimain Spain, or La Virgen de Guadalupe in Mexico, were reluctantly tolerated as holy because the deepseated instincts of common people demanded as much. The many cathedrals called Notre Dame bearalso witness to this ancient idea. In the protestant churches such ideas have no place at all. In anycase, Mother Goddess symbols were found in Hacilar (Turkey) dating back to 7000 B.C.E. InPakistan-India the earliest finds of Mother Goddess artifacts come from the Indus Valley citiesHarappa and Mohenjo-daro31.

In India, the Mother Goddess Shakti, the energy of What Is, in conjunction with her othermale persona Shiva32, the immovable absolute, is the creator and lover of all, and also its destroyer.They are One, often shown in sexual union. Shiva as well as Shakti (Kali) are also often representedas containing both aspects as one in themselves. Both are creators and destroyers, immovable movers.

The profound meaning of this lies in the complementarity between absoluteincomprehensible transcendence and manifestation as reality. Human attempts to reconcile,


Ch. 1 Pg. 18

Figure 6 Vajradhara and Vajradhari, Brass, 9"

comprehend, and understand these two 'forces' and ideas have given rise to philosophy, mythology,and religion.

The similaritiesbetween the images ofShiva in India and Dionysusi n G r e e c e , b o t handrogynous, wild, lifeaffirming divine forces,seem to be giving us aglimpse into a possibleworld of a creativeh a r m o n y b e t w e e nsensuality and spirituality.There is no Oedipuscomplex here. Nevertheless,I need to point out thatfemale power and influencehas been oppressed inIndian society at least asmuch as in the Westernsocieties of yesteryear. TheAryan and Brahmanicinfluence since about 1500B.C.E. has suppressed muchof the original culture of theMother Goddess. Still, thedialectic harmony betweenthe aggressive paternal andmore nature orientedMother Goddess ideas gaverise to the Indian, Greek,and Chinese cultures.

In India, the ratherpessimistic dualism of Jainism and early Buddhism, as well as Islamic influences have created andtolerated a social system of castes in which the woman was not much valued at all. She was ratherenslaved to her husband, father, or brothers. From the sale of girls into prostitution to the Sati ritesof widow burning, the spiritual importance of Shakti was and is turned into a farce of oppression andcruelty against women in general and against the free expression of their sensuality in particular.

I should also mention here that the oneness of Shiva-Shakti is not at all universally acceptedeven in India, where the social oppression and suppression of women has been at least as bad as inmost other European countries. Indeed, the great Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore, lent his name tothe confusion which arises through the separation of those two energies, which are one.

He wrote: "The male Deity (Shiva) who was in possession was fairly harmless. But all of a sudden a

feminine Deity (Shakti) turns up and demands to be worshiped in his stead. That is to say that she


33) See Shakti and Shakta, WSS page 121.34) A Bodhisattva is a person who has had the fundamental insight into the nature of human consciousness, but who

refuses to die to the world out of compassion for all other sentient beings, who will benefit from his or her continued

presence in the world. The thought of ending the wheel of suffering is a thought which is caught in the illusion of Maya.

The idea of a Bodhisattva rectifies and transcends the original idea of Buddhahood with its distinction between samsara

and nirvana. It is an affirmation of the value of the Dance With Maya .35) See Zimmer ZMS, page 100.36) The historical Buddha was born in an area of Northern India, which today belongs to Nepal. He lived from about 566

to 486 B.C.E. and is often referred to as Shakyamuni (belonging to the Shakya clan) or Siddhartha Gautama.

Ch. 1 Pg. 19

insisted on thrusting herself where she had no right. Under what title? Force? (i.e. Shakti) By whatmethod?"33

This should not be at all surprising. The idea I put forth in this book is that absoluteseparation in any of its forms, exemplified here in Tagore's mind as the separation of Shiva and hisShakti, is at the root of confusion. This confusion is as pervasive in the old times as it is today. Itknows no national or racial boundaries but is (or seems to be) an unavoidable stage of humanconsciousness.

In Tibetan Buddhism the positive worldview of complementary opposites is best expressedin the provocative religious metaphoric symbol of the naked Buddha (representing compassion) inLotus position with his equally naked female consort (representing supreme wisdom, “prajnaparamita”). She sits on his lap, embracing him passionately with arms and legs, in evident sexual blissand union, called Yab-Yum, father-mother, in the Tibetan language. She is the active energy (shakti)of the supreme wisdom of the Universal Buddha. The Buddhas and Bodhisattvas34 are projections ofher operation. She is the very meaning of the Buddhist law.35 Shiva (the Indian deity in love withhis Shakti, who in Tibetan Buddhism became the Buddha36 with an immensely enriched philosophy)and Shakti-Maya do love each other in every sense of the word. It is in ecstasy that the brain can letgo of its self images and the fixed images of the world. The most extreme opposites must becomeone, our grandstanding ethical images must soften. What better image to use than the shocking lovemaking of our holiest deities, who in most religions would come down with thundering punishment,fire and brimstone, to destroy and punish the evil thinkers and fornicators. Most religious authorities,who generate much of their psychological power through their anti-sexual and anti-pleasuredoctrines, would throw anyone into the deepest everlasting hellfire - burning them at the stake orsimple hanging would have to suffice temporarily on earth - for even thinking about sexual pleasures,let alone attribute them to their highest deities.

The theme of the oneness between the Buddha and his loving female persona, or of Shiva withShakti-Maya, or of Yang and Yin, is the symbolism of the middle way, the harmony betweenopposing uncertain forces of life and in the universe. It is the bliss of the union between wisdom(Shakti) and compassion (Buddha), between the creation of illusion (Maya) and its destruction(Shiva). To comprehend and live this harmony is to dance with Maya. The particular form ofBuddhism which is centered around similar ideas is called Vajrayana Buddhism.

Vajrayana Buddhism, also called Tibetan or Tantra Buddhism is the latest form of MahayanaBuddhism. Vajrayana means "The way toward the adamantine (vajra-like) essence of TranscendentTruth." The vajra scepter (Tibetan: Dorje) is a symbol carried by almost all representations ofBuddhas and Bodhisattvas in Tibetan Buddhism. It is a symbolic diamond standing for the perfecttranslucence of nothingness, untainted by all forms of appearance and reality, including allthings and all thoughts. The symbol came originally from the Vedic God's Indra thunderbolt.


37) Heinrich Zimmer, on whose work I base many of my interpretations of Indian philosophy and religion, regards the

Tantras as "the latest crystallization of Indian wisdom," ZM page 247.38) samsara means literally the unending 'moving on' or wandering. (“Shakti and Shakta,” WSS, page 449.)39) Avalokiteshvara, Tara, Padmapani, Samantabhadra, Vajrasattva, Vajradhara for example.

Ch. 1 Pg. 20

Figure 7 Green Tara, MudraIt appears as a magic wand for the

exorcism of evil forces (Vajrakila andVajra phurba) or as the handle of a bell(drilbu) used to mark time in the recital ofsacred texts. Tantra Buddhism can be seenas the mystic and esoteric component ofBuddhism.

According to the ideas ofVajrayana Buddhism every human beingcan reach enlightenment in one life time.Like in Mahayana Buddhism, activeparticipation in reality is encouraged.Vajrayana refers to all the Tibetan Buddhistteachings around this idea of Nothingness-Oneness. Also called Tantra37 Buddhism itis a form of Mahayana Buddhism (Maha =great; yana = vehicle or means, methodsand tools) which also maintains that insightinto oneness-nothingness, which isenlightenment, can be achieved in a life-time rather than in an almost infinite cycleof births and rebirths. However, even theidea of enlightenment, when manifest in areality, is already part of Maya's illusion,samsara38. In Vajrayana Buddhism, thehistorical Buddha Shakyamuni is onlyone more appearance, part of Maya, ofthe many transcendent Buddhas andBodhisattvas. The primal or Adi-Buddharepresents with his numerous maleand/or female successors39 the realitytranscending power of wisdom.

Generally, when reference to the historical Buddha is made, he is called Buddha Shakyamuni orGautama.

The prevailing Western Christian view, on the other hand, has been that human reality issinful and condemned since the expulsion of Adam and Eve out of paradise. When they recognizetheir nakedness, sexual difference and sexual attraction, the ‘original sin’ has been committed. Eversince, sensuality associated with the naked body, in particular the sensuous female body, has in itselfbeen sinful. This is an interesting case of confusion between cause and effect. The naked body, ‘itsdepiction and appreciation lead to sin,’ is the trivialized view of many religions.

I will clarify that the underlying fact of the so-called ’sin' is that duality enters the world ofhuman awareness and is necessary for a consciousness to function.


40) The Egyptian cobra was the symbol of power for goddesses and queens and also signified female attributes in general.

The uraeus is the figure of the sacred serpent worn on the headdress of ancient Egyptian rulers and deities.

Ch. 1 Pg. 21

This duality is in itself neither sinful nor bad; it is the condition for anything to happen. PureOneness, like pure symmetry or pure Nothingness, are ideas without attributes, and cannot even bethought. And when we try to think it we see that unless the perfection is violated, Nothing remainsNothing. Evidently, there is something, which means that the Nothingness has divided itself, or theperfect symmetry has broken itself spontaneously, to use the language of the theoretical physicist.To blame Adam and Eve and all humankind for the fact that there is a reality and a consciousness isitself missing the mark. Blaming reality on the sexual and erotic desires is ridiculous, but thisattempt has had horrific and deadly consequences for mankind and even more so forwomankind. If there is a fundamental sin, then it is the one of imagining such blame.

In Tantra the symbol of nakedness signifies that the naked person or Goddess/God is free ofillusion, free of maya. Thus depictions of the naked body in all its beauty and attractiveness is acommon attribute of Buddhas, Dakinis, Shiva, Shakti, the highest representatives of humanaspiration.

We have similarly opposing psychologies operating in the representation of the other mostimportant 'icons' in the two religions. The symbol of the Christ nailed to the cross as a symbol of hopefor paradise after death; Yab-Yum, a Buddha and his female counterpart in sexual union as a symbolof the oneness of all opposites. Despair and torture there, i.e. Christ suffering for all, the highest beingsuffering at the hands of sinners. Beauty, grace, and love here in Tantra Buddhism as appealingsymbols for human inspiration. Buddhism wants to end suffering in real life and drawsattention to the confusion causing it. Christianity rejects happiness in life and advocates beliefin the absurd as a means to happiness after death. The life denying aspects of the Christian andrelated religions are obvious.

In Christian mythology the paradise was lost when the "evil" snake talked Eve into seducingunsuspecting Adam to eat from the tree of knowledge. Ever since, women have been seen as seducersand were blamed for the pleasures they gave men. The more pleasure they gave the more they werevilified. The more beautiful and therefore seductive they were, the closer they were to the devil.Scientific knowledge, the undogmatic investigation of reality, or any knowledge which could beperceived as being in conflict with a particular biblical verse, has similarly been rejected andcharacterized as the product of the devil.

The symbol of Yab-Yum, on the other hand, is a guide to the tree of knowledge and self-comprehension, to wisdom and artful action not away from it. It is a guide to the sacredness of all lifeand its manifestations. The reward is the union with the paradise which we have never left. To beable to act with artful wisdom is nirvana, paradise.

One should recognize here that both the serpent and the tree are much older positive 'pagan'symbols for the creative female powers of nature40. The combination of those powers with the powersof the intellect was indeed the beginning of modern consciousness. The paradise of ignorance waslost with this powerful marriage, which should not at all be seen as a deceitful seduction, but as thecreative unification of two vital energies, which helped the human species to evolve.

The paradise of wisdom was opened from the moment of this sacred marriage. Thefemale creative power of nature seduced the abstract powers of thinking into her embrace. What waslost in this union was the world of unquestionable submission to magic powers, the world of blissful


41) The Gnostic interpretation of the seduction of Adam by Eve is actually very close to the Buddhist idea of female

wisdom being paired with male skill into a powerful and enlightened union. See for example "The Gnostic Gospels" by

Elaine Pagels, chapter 2. 42) Campbell: “Creative Mythology,” CCM, page 338

Ch. 1 Pg. 22

ignorance, but above all, the sense of being an integral part of the Nature Goddess.41Ever since, thecognitive mind has made ever more successful attempts to understand what was and is going on.What was forced into submission through this relentless drive to understand all and everythingwithout any limitation in sight, was the creative power of the Mother Goddess, a name as good as anyfor the mystery of consciousness. From that mythical moment onwards Man had to understand, toknow, had to question everything divine or human. He had to speculate and reason. He was left tobelieve and fear where he could not know. Thus, knowledge and fear, are intrinsic functions of aconsciousness awakened to its powers of creating realities. This consciousness had to create a webof meaning to replace paradise lost and to create the expectation for regaining access to it. Little doesconsciousness suspect that its loss and its redemption is its own product. Little does it know that mostof Man's realities created in this fashion were and are cobwebs of its own illusions and lies,masterfully held together by strings of causality. Consciousness is actively and ignorantly trying tocover up its own underlying ignorance.

Thus, in essence, Christian thinking interpreted the mythical moment of awakening ofconsciousness as the end of paradise and as a condemnation; mystic thinking sees the potential fora new paradise in which wisdom and active participation in the universal play of realities and truthcould be united. Christianity rejected the world with the hope for heaven and the fear of hell, whereasa mystic view tried to transcend the world, heaven, and hell, to make room for a life in actualitywithout dogmatism and without escape from the world.

In modern times, Kant and Hegel explained again that all reality is conditioned, through andthrough. It seems that Schopenhauer was the first philosopher in the West who understood that the"Kantian concept of a-priori forms of sensibility and categories of logic are practically identicalwith the Hindu-Buddhist philosophy of Maya," of which we heard in the West reliably only twohundred years ago.42

I will use examples and illustrations from Tibetan Buddhism, and Hindu mythology onoccasion, because of their often times very visual and dramatic metaphors, for which the Westernmind-set seems to be more receptive than ever. I think that readers in the West are ready to considerthem with great benefit, along with the insights of Eastern and Western philosophers from theunknown yogi saints of the Upanishads to Nagarjuna, and from Plato to Kant.

Western symbols and concepts may have become stale and suspect to many who feel that theyhave been used too often to deceive and enslave us, rather than to help us free ourselves. The all toocommon idea that we are victims of outside forces which control us and lead us into temptation haschained our minds to the illusory hope that all our problems can be solved through rationalapproaches or through a divine savior, be that in the manifestation of a Messiah, a duce, a religion,or a sociological theory.

1.1.4 THE IDEA OF MAYAKnowledge as we commonly use it, is our reality as presented to our conscious and even to

a large extent sub-conscious mind by our self and ego. The structure of any reality is based on the a-priori conditions of experiencing and thinking: the basic structure of time, space, and causality. Thisis the unescapable creative work of immeasurable Maya, the unfolding of the unknowableNothingness into what can be experienced through consciousness as actuality, reality, and complete


Ch. 1 Pg. 23

Figure 8Kali in Her Wrathful Form

illusion. The process of unfolding is represented by the female energy of creation and action (Maya-Shakti, Mother Goddess) out of the immovable energy of the absolute (Shiva).The Sanskrit word'Maya' is also related to the word "measure."

Anything that can be measured, i.e. reality, is therefore the product of Maya. All things andthoughts are subject to the influence of Maya, which makes it impossible to know anything withcertainty if it has meaning. In the conditioning imposed on us by our senses and by the rules ofmechanical thinking, we experience space as three dimensional and time as independent of space (andmatter). We even regard the thinker and thought as being independent of space, matter, and time. Thesum total of the basic structure of all human realities can be called rationality. On top of this basicmatrix of a reality the individual person and society create the reality which is being experienced byeach person in his or her historical, environmental, and personal context, the personal Maya.

This reality - created by ourselves -conditions and channels our thinking, sensing,and acting, in a circular process. Even what weterm our free will is not free but is subject to thissubtle self-conditioning. By creating andmaintaining this reality we are actuallyconstructing an invisible barrier to our freedomand intelligence and are setting ourselves up forfailure, for psychological and physical pain andsuffering. In this way we are creating our hell,our concepts of sin, and our pathologicalgroveling for salvation. To understand thisrequires that we somehow remove the self-perpetuating concept of a single reality "outthere" to which we respond and react andagainst which we have to defend ourselves. Ishall explore the term reality later in greaterdetail. Let me briefly indicate what I mean by it:There is an independent world outside of thehuman mind. In its unexplained forms this worldacts and interacts with itself; and we humanswith our consciousness are a part of that; I callthat world actuality. The human mind throughits consciousness makes this actuality part ofitself as objective reality.

The objective reality as it appears to ourconsciousness is part of the rational andrationalizable aspect of actuality. It depends onthe a-priori conditioning of humanconsciousness in terms of time, space, andcausality. This objective reality of which wecan be conscious can be shared among humanbeings, who all have powers of rationality in common, and this rationality is one and the same. Itoperates according to rules which can be discovered, exactly described, taught and learnt throughcogent processes. Mathematical and scientific discoveries can be shared through reason across alltimes and all locations throughout the world. Newton's laws of classical physics, Euclid's theorems


43 ) I use the word 'irrational' preliminarily as the opposite of rational. I use the expression ‘non-rational’ to indicate with

the word ‘non’ also those forms of thinking, which though not rational, can nevertheless convey meaning to the mind.

Poetic, artistic, speculative, and mythological thinking can be non-rational and at the same time not be irrational.44) See also the discussion of Maya and Shakti in section 7.2.4 page 495 ff.

Ch. 1 Pg. 24

about plane geometry are universal descriptors of that reality. Once we learn about them we cannotreject them any more. This is the reality of rational Maya. If we want to operate in the world, it wouldbe foolish to contradict or ignore her.

On top of this objective reality the individual mind establishes a subjective psychologicalreality which is dependent on irrational and non-rational feelings, hopes, desires, traditions, societalvalues, and so on.43 In many respects this is a self-created prison, from which the mind has greatdifficulty to break out. The particular language a society uses has implicit rules, barriers anddirectives built in, which try to allow only one set of realities to develop. This is where theillusory Maya starts to reign supreme, unchecked, ignored, all but invisible.

The so-called reality which we experience in our daily lives is a mixture of objective andsubjective realities, and irrealities. A human being who is controlled by such conditioned andmechanical behavior, developed and enforced by traditions and norms of behavior in families andsocieties at large, has abandoned thinking in favor of mechanical repetitions of thought patternswhich are scattered in consciousness as separate pieces. Ideas of freedom, honesty, and truth can onlyexist as distorted meaningless forms.

The life of such a person is governed by the Maya in her horrible form as Kali. In Tibet,Shakti becomes the consort of the Buddha(s). She appears in a beatific and in a wrathful form,depending on the need to encourage or to forcefully dispel illusion.

Our subjective reality furthermore is a mixture of ego driven desires and emotions which Icall irrational, as well as of human feelings and ideas, from love and compassion to the honoring oftruth. The latter category of feelings, though also non-rational, is not irrational. Some of the importantissues to explore will be the relationships which our mind establishes subconsciously among theseaspects of reality.

I will show how objective realities, subjective realities, and irrational realities tend to becomeincreasingly empty and devoid of true meaning, which, as I see it is not to be found in any reality.This meaninglessness is in itself one of the most sublime and powerful manifestations of Maya.44

1.1.4.1 MAYA OF PHYSICS, AND CIPHER LANGUAGE Let me show how Maya has unexpectedly entered even the field of science. During the first

half of the twentieth century Werner Heisenberg discovered that the notion of causality does notapply at the fundamental level of physical ‘reality.’

Causality is the notion that there are predictably measurable characteristics of a substancelike e.g. location and velocity. They follow a continous chain of causes and effects. Thesecharacteristics can be predicted and measured at any point in time. The motion of planets is a goodexample for such causal behavior. When we deal with atomic physics and even smaller dimensionsthis causality breaks down.

Even the concept of material substance, the most cherished concept of solidity, vanishedliterally into nothing during the beginning of this century through the insights of physicists, whodiscovered the wave-particle nature of all matter and energy.

Thus, causality, material substance, location, movement, time, and space, our whole conceptof reality became questionable at a fundamental level. One can say that not only individual realitybut also so-called objective reality broke down. What was left was nothing, no-thing, and thinking.


Ch. 1 Pg. 25

But whereas irrational individual realities are empty in the sense of personal illusions, thematerial actuality is empty in a sense of an ultimately unknowable and immeasurable no-thingness.All matter is at the subatomic level an invisible web of quantum-physical probability amplitudes orquantum-fields which can only be forced into certain reality by destroying their pre-measurementnon-observable actuality. The description of this reality is itself highly mathematical and so abstractthat most people will never be able to understand any of it. Our mind, nevertheless, being aproduct of this actuality, shares in this ultimate no-thing-ness. It is of the same nature. To seethis is the beauty of it all.

One of the easy traps of human psychology is to jump to the objectively invalid and irrationalconclusion that the human psyche and soul is an (absolute) illusion and not more than an accidentalconglomerate of neuron firings in the brain.

To this, what one may call nihilistic worldview, I say that ideas of the human psyche and soulare not objective real things but metaphors and cipher. We must learn to adapt our mode of thinkingto the mode which can deal with ciphers. This mode is neither rational nor irrational. I call it non-rational. It is required when we try to understand the meaning of the human mind, and it applies whenwe try to decipher the mysteries of sub-atomic matter and the whole universe.

A cipher can carry the power of Nothingness into reality. Even though language ciphersconsist of words put together in a comprehensible fashion, their logical content is like nothing andcan bring mechanical thinking to an end. They are meant to suspend logical thought and to give themind the energy to look beneath the surface of reality. Thus, when I use cipher language, I may evenbe in agreement with Wittgenstein's warning, that "about things about which one cannot speak,one should be silent." I do not talk about no-things to convey content or knowledge. I talk about themto show that they are empty from a point of view of logical reason, but full of uncertain meaning froma point of view of intelligence. It should be clear that I don't use "intelligence" in the conventionalsense of “very smart,” but with metaphysical and spiritual undertones.

1.1.5 PRELIMINARY BASIC QUESTIONSIn our exploration we shall encounter questions like: “Is spirituality incompatible with

science, or is the apparent contradiction between spirituality and science based on irrational traditionsand habitual emotional and cultural reactions? Does the separation arise from concepts of religionand science gone astray? How can a person in the modern world of space flight, computers, robots,and genetic engineering be connected to the deeper meaning of life, of which sages, poets,philosophers, priests, gurus, shamans, and witches have talked throughout the ages?”

I think that the answers to these questions lie in the original insights of science andmythology. Thinking creates our realities, our religions, our science. The perceived incompatibilitybetween thinking and spirituality is itself a product of thinking. Thinking about thinking shouldtherefore be at the beginning of any discussion about religion, science, and spirituality. Thinkingis much more than just logic or a concatenation of thoughts. Thinking in its widest aspects has createdthe world (the phenomenal world) and all realities since time immemorial. It has created heaven andhell, gods and demons, beauty and misery, love and suffering, reality, truth, and deception. It hascreated hope, despair, and paralysis. Through thought we live and we die, and yet thought generallyeludes us and deceives us into believing that it is an independent agent that willingly and objectivelycarries out its master's will and command. To reveal thinking and thought as the great deceiver, thegreat maker, and destroyer of the world is one of the goals of this book. If in this process, which isas much intellectual study as meditation, we can comprehend thinking, then our own thinking maytake the step of transcending itself.


Ch. 1 Pg. 26

MAYA THE MISTRESS OF MYSTERY

There is no river to cross

No goal to reachThere is no-thing

That must be achievedCan be explained

What is the meaning of lifeThe meaning of love, suffering

The mysteryIs the pathThe riverThe light

Life and Death and BeautyMystery.

1.2 RATIONALIZATION OF THE WORLD During the last few hundred years Western societies have witnessed a process of

rationalization in almost all aspects of human affairs. In this time period rational and logicalapproaches to all human activities have become increasingly important. This process wasaccompanied with increasing individual freedom and has been of particular predominance inEuropean and North American countries. Originating in Greek culture of two and a half millenniaago (Socrates, Plato, Zeno, Aristotle) objective observation and calculation, as well as accountablereporting and planning have been at the root of European and American (US) power in as much asthey let to scientific, economic, and political results. For example: The invention of the printing pressby Johannes Gutenberg around 1450 C.E. helped the power of objective knowledge to becomeavailable to anyone who could read and write. Up to that point in history the civilizations of Europe,China, India, Japan, and maybe even of the Incas and Aztecs were similar.

One should just recall that it was only in the thirteenth century C.E. that the Mongolsgoverned the largest empire ever ruled by one people, covering most of Asia, Asia Minor, andEurope. With the invention of the printing press and the gun military strategies using guns tilted thepower in favor of European countries. Since the Age of Reason this process continued to accelerateup into our time, culminating in the age of science and technology, which started about two hundredyears ago with Newtonian physics. Science and technology together with free market ideas led toincreased wealth, economic freedom, and liberty for more people than ever, women included. Theyhave become the decisive factors of power in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The rape and exploitation of countries, which still went on during this time, was not a newfactor in history, the looting, the rape of women and children, their subjugation into slavery, thekilling of able bodied men, had always been standard procedure, since the Egyptian pharaohs, theTrojan wars and earlier. The priced booty of any war was, until very recent times, the gold and thewomen of the defeated enemy.

The new conquest is a conquest of freedom and rationality: science, technology, mathematics.


Ch. 1 Pg. 27

1.2.1 THE POWER OF 'REASON' AS RATIONALITYIt is clear today that any society which wishes to partake in the financial wealth and political

freedom associated with this movement of rationalization must for better or for worse integraterational methods into its political, social, and economic structure. This integration is not possiblewithout radical changes in the ways people perceive themselves and their place in the world.Furthermore, a rational approach to problems will increase the demand for freedom on an individualand global level, because rationality and dogma are fundamentally exclusive modes of operation.Rationality is a universal power independent of tribe or race, though it was brought to the center ofhuman consciousness by the pre-Socratic Greeks as logos in its form as logic. (The original idea ofLogos encompasses all of thinking, creative, generative, and mechanical. Thus, the modern meaningof logic does not correspond to the idea of Logos) Rational thinking can free the mind of dogma andparticular rules of operation. When guided by intelligence, its drive and goal is freedom, universality,and consistency. Belief is then on the defense, rational persuasion is on the offense, so to speak.Nevertheless, rationality has by no means established an unchangeable situation. It is conceivable thatpeople prefer dogmatism and superstition. Under most circumstances, the only reason why themajority of people would be willing to embrace new ideas is the promise that they could benefitpersonally on an economic or social level.

Science and technology are the most important aspects of the rationalization process. Theexact reasons of this development are by no means well understood, and being an outcome of thetotality of human thinking and acting, will always be open for dispute. Let me outline what I thinkmay have led to this.

The invention of the alphabet and of a written counting method together with the writtenfixation of rules of conduct and business must have played a predominant role in this revolution.Once these rules were fixed, only reason was necessary to apply them or to contest them. Theseobjectively usable written rules were transferable to any society or country, which led to themodification of said rules but also to the modification of societies. Trade and commerce, or ratherthe forces of doing successful business, helped to open up language barriers, custom barriers, and soon. The centers of trade and business have changed throughout the centuries. They were concentratedfor hundreds and thousands of years in the middle East: Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia. They tradedwith India, China, and the Mediterranean world. In the fifteenth and sixteenth century of ourCommon Era (C.E.) the centers of trade shifted to Western and Northern Europe and from there tothe United States. Since the second world war the economic centralization in one country or anotherhas slowly given way to a globalization. Helped by ever more powerful, cheaper, and faster financialtransactions among all parts of the globe, trade and the production of goods do not have to becontrolled through on-site measures any more. Worldwide production lines can be controlled bypeople located anywhere on the globe where there are efficient means of communication such astelephone lines or satellite links. The Internet is in the process of bringing people and peoplestogether like never before in an uncontrolled fashion.

We hear in the daily newscasts about other countries, their cultures, religions, and problems,and we begin to realize that local economies have become dependent in many respects on what ishappening in other countries and continents. Information about any events flash across the computerscreens linked to the Internet instantaneously. The whole world is as close to us today as was ourcounty, state, or country just one hundred years ago to our ancestors. We know more today about thehistory of other cultures and civilizations than at any other point of time. We have available studiesof the myths, religions, sciences, arts, social structures, of practically all cultures that have ever


45) Conventions: Key notions which have an uncommon meaning will be in this italics typeface, whenever the difference

is of crucial importance. Notions and expressions which I want to emphasize will be typed in boldface. If both

characteristics apply I will use boldface and italics. I put words between 'apostrophes' when I refer to their common

usage which I consider to be wrong or misleading. Words in a foreign language are put between “quotation marks”

and/or italicized. "Direct quotations appear between quotation marks.”

To facilitate the approach to this book an extensive index and a collection of the basic definitions and Sanskrit terms are

provided at the end of the book.

Ch. 1 Pg. 28

existed, we can learn from each other and about each other to a degree never dreamed possible justa few decades ago.

One side-effect of this process is and has been the intermingling of human values in thevarious systems of traditionally separate societies. This has led to a weakening of those systems,which were mostly based on tradition and convention. The word system as used here stands forpatterns of thinking, sensing, and acting. It includes forms of government, traditional racial andreligious concepts or prejudices, feelings of nationalist or tribalist superiority and identity, habits andconventions as they rule the collective subconscious of a group of people. Their unquestioned statushas been shattered in this confrontation of value systems and world views. The individual today hasmore opportunities than ever to liberate himself or herself from this yoke of unquestionable and henceirrational psychological forces. The strongest force behind this liberation, which brings with it thedecay of tradition-based value systems, has been the process of rationalization itself. It has givenevery single human being the possibility and the power to effectively put thinking according toconvention in question.

As a matter of fact, it is ironic that rationalization has become so strong a force that it showstendencies of developing into an unquestioned world view itself - thus becoming irrational - and isas such about to endanger its own beneficial effects. The dominating economic and scientificsuccesses of the West have also contributed to the weakening of its own cultural and spiritualtraditions, as well as of those in Asian countries and societies. Traditional values have to deal withthe constant and disrespectful challenges by rationalistic thinkers who often attack those values.

In the sciences and in the economies at large, rationalization on the basis of numbers andaccurate calculations with money - those two most abstract things of a reality - has led tounprecedented success, and inadvertently numbers, money, and rationality have become absolutethings45. This absoluteness of things implies an absoluteness of the value of these things and is assuch also irrational.

The results of rationalization, including the increasing demystification of the world, ourknowledge of other religions, the discovery of a sub-certain and uncertain reality through quantumphysics, the decoding of the genome etc, demand from the religious and creative consciousness ofa human being that it abandon its irrational beliefs in any absolute knowledge in a reality and thatit reconsider its concepts and ideas of rationality and reality.

Friedrich Nietzsche intuited this fact and described it in his famous and provocative wordsof "God is dead," which I interpret to mean:

Our knowledge of God, of an absolute idea, has been revealed as illusion. The unquestionedfoundation of much of Western thought, namely the authority of a personal God and above all ouronly relationship to him possible only through an exclusive church has become shaky and suspect.

Nietzsche himself talked about "Götzendämmerung" the "Twilight Of The Idols," the "WasteLand of the modern soul." The old myths are at their end because they have been corrupted and losttheir relationship to truth.


46) Nietzsche was deeply spiritual, not at all nihilistic.

Ch. 1 Pg. 29

This shocking discovery may lead to nihilism46, to more rigid indoctrination, but maybe alsoto a new awareness and openness to the creations of the human mind and to the process of creationitself. Not the Gods are on their way out, but the Idols, their images and superstitions, and thebeneficiaries thereof. The old questions of philosophers and religious thinkers must be askedanew but cannot any longer be answered with the traditional certainty, rooted in very localizedrealities. Ideas of Maya as mentioned before will guide us in our questioning of old fashionedrationalistic certainty, stupid irrationality ("I believe because it is absurd" or "Repent andbelieve the Gospels"), and all-pervasive religious dogmatism.

The unquestioned foundations of Oriental and Occidental thought and tradition are undersiege by the successes of science and rationality, but also, and probably even more so, by theunprecedented flow of information among all cultures and societies.

I try to show philosophically that the old certainty, which is still the most powerfulpsychological drive of habits, traditions, and religious beliefs may have been adequate in formerrealities; who is to judge, and by what criteria? In those times certainty was not reducible to numbersand logic, and rational thinking may not have been advanced or widespread enough to consciouslyquestion itself and give a rational account of that questioning. (Accounts and proofs in rationality andmathematics were not systematically available yet, much remained to be discovered.) That certaintyis not adequate anymore. It must be clarified and supplemented in such ways as to make it intoonly one ordering principle among others, valid only in a relative sense under well definablecircumstances within a reality. Above all, its absolute status must be abandoned.

All this implies that in some important respects reality, certainty, and human thinking,including our spirituality, are functions of one another. We must therefore find a true clarityregarding the following issues:

! What is certainty, and how certain is it? Is it justified and wise to demand certaintyin all aspects of human thinking?

! Has certainty a universal meaning? ! How can we approach meaning, ethical values, ideas, responsibility, if the demand for

certainty is misleading? ! What is reality?! What is truth?! What are the roles, if any, of mythologies and religions. What can we learn from other

mythologies and religions?! What is spirituality?

As all of these questions are deeply interdependent we are forced to explore them all to somelimited extent. However, I shall attempt to show that various modes of thinking are associated withthese issues, and that the exploration of that thinking will give us a natural access to the questionsinvolved. Therefore, the focus of this book is thinking in its various modes, its possibilities, and itsrelationship with sensing and acting, activities which together form a reality, and through which truthand freedom can manifest themselves.


47) Heraclitus was a Greek philosopher and politician, who lived around 544-483 B.C.E. in Ephesos (Greek Asia Minor,

today W Turkey.)48) Pythagoras, 580-500 B.C.E. on the island of Samos, E Greece in the Aegean off W coast of Turkey; philosopher,

mathematician, and astronomer.49) We owe the notion of 'philosopher' as a 'lover' (philos) of 'truth' (sophia) to Pythagoras who refused to call himself

a ’sophos' or wise-man, saying that such a notion would be too presumptuous.50) This thinking is the 'Maya' or illusion of Hindu mythology and her power, a female creative, concealing, and

destroying energy.51) See also the discussion on "being" (Sein, SAT) in chapter 4.

Ch. 1 Pg. 30

1.2.2 CONDENSED OVERVIEW OF THE BASIC IDEAS Let me describe in the form of a very condensed overview, and at the risk of its being difficult

to understand, the general direction of my thinking. I explore the question: "How does thinking,the mind, create the objects of thought and then forget that it has created them, treating themas though they were independent entities"?

1.2.2.1 THE IDEA OF MOVEMENT A fundamental idea and starting point of this study is that the underlying reality of all is an

unspecified energy, a movement of matter or rather its associated quantum fields, and maybe spirit,all of which need yet to be defined either from within an accepted set of logical symbols or throughmetaphors and myths which reach beyond the rational horizon.

Let us start with Heraclitus47 statement that: "What Is, is movement" or with Pythagoras48:"All things change, but they are one. The one wax takes many molds."

The essence of things is their changing nature, not the fixed appearance which is only relativeand temporary. As to human thinking, which creates reality, it is a movement whose content is evenmore ephemeral than the movement of things. In physics we know that there is no absolutereference point anywhere, neither with respect to constant motion nor accelerated motion.Actually, this principle is one of the major symmetry principles which demands a certaininvariant form from all fundamental laws of physics (those are the laws of quantum fieldtheory.)

Heraclitus, Pythagoras49, and the Buddha have expressed this idea of fundamental movementin one way or another two and a half thousand years ago (not the laws of physics !).

I want to emphasize that I don't refer to movement in the usual sense of the word as being themovement of "something" in a time-space reference system. I consider movement to be in itself thesource of that "something" as well as the source of time and space. Underneath the wax and thechanging things there is a movement of What Is, before time and space. I might also say thatmovement is energy, a potential to act, to sense, to think, to become. An integral part of that unfoldedmovement is thinking, which, as human thinking, is the creative link between What Is and our mentalrepresentation of What Is.50 This “What Is” unfolds and enfolds quantum fields, matter, time,space, and thinking. Our thinking refers to various stages of such unfoldment as actuality, reality,truth. By choosing the idea of movement as a starting point for this investigation I want to emphasizethat the topic of this whole investigation - being51 - is not a static thing which could be looked at andexamined objectively at will. Movement, as the essence of change, cannot be brought to astandstill, and therefore, in some sense we cannot under-stand it. We can move along with it ina spiritual dance, it being our thinking in its deepest sense, and learn about movement while movingin a sort of meditation, the voyage and the goal being one. The ancient Vedas called this: "Tat TvamAsi," "this is you," (Chandogya Upanishad) the essence of being is you. They balanced thisaffirmative statement with the simultaneous negation of all knowledge about the essence of What Is:


52) Vedanta "the end of the Vedas" can be regarded as the culmination of the Vedas. A main proponent was Shankara

who lived around 800 C.E. (time of Charlemagne). The basic idea was the oneness of All in Atman (the ’soul') and

Brahman (the 'Absolute').53) Shankara formulated a similar idea in the Advaita, which means, "without a second.” Shankara: 788-820 C.E. one

of India's greatest saints and philosophers. His name means "he who brings blessings" and is also an epithet for Shiva.

When Shankara was eight years old he renounced the world and began to wander through India. He was at once a

philosopher, poet, scholar, saint, mystic, and reformer. He was the main representative of Advaita-Vedanta and the

renewer of Hinduism after that tradition had been replaced for a time by Buddhism (which in turn had been wiped out

by the Islamic conquest). Hindu philosophy became increasingly a world-renouncing, cold, and ascetic doctrine, which

rejected the life-affirming ideas of the Vedas and Upanishads. It was this Vedic embrace of sensuality w ith spirituality

which found in Hindu and Buddhist Tantra its best and enriched expression.

Ch. 1 Pg. 31

"Neti, Neti" (Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad); it is neither this nor that. Still, some of the Vedas embracea degree of duality between matter (prakriti) and mind or spiritual energy (purusha). This duality wasovercome in the later philosophy called Advaita-Vedanta founded by the great Indian mystic andphilosopher Shankara52. He described the entire observable cosmos as maya, an illusion superimposedupon true being by Man's deceitful senses and thinking process.

However, even in Vedanta philosophy a duality crept in when the metaphor of 'neti, neti'became the essence of a life rejecting, intellectual, abstract, and ascetic doctrine. It maintained thatit had overcome the ideas of the life affirming Vedas, which were still much closer to the sensual-spiritual Maya-Shakti.

It is in the Tantras that the idea of Oneness became truly encompassing. Thus, one could saythat Tantra Buddhism is the combination of the Vedas, Buddhism, and Advaita-Vedanta, preservingmany of the original ideas of Shakti-Shiva-Maya, but moving them to higher levels of manifestinsight. As I see it, Tantra Buddhism (at its essence, not its organizational practice!) representsthe most advanced form of the insight into the Oneness of Oneness-Nothingness.

I am not talking here, of course, about the practices of any of these religions in their organizedform. In my view any such organization involves and creates the corruption of the underlying ideaswhich is again an unavoidable effect of the omnipresent power of illusion, maya, inherent in any formof thought and reality. What remains as positive option is the Dance With Maya, an individual,existential affirmation of life and death in the awareness of an all-pervading non-certainty.

Thus, from the first ideas of Maya-Shakti of 3000 B.C.E. to the Vedas (1500 B.C.E.),Buddhism and Taoism (500 B.C.E.), Vedanta (700 C.E.) and Tantra (800 C.E.) we have a dynamicand continuous unfolding of human spirituality in Asia which is unparalleled anywhere else in theworld. All of these ideas are still alive in one mostly hidden form or another, not only in Asia, butpractically everywhere. They have even resurfaced in modern physics.

With this historical interlude in mind let us go back to slowly introduce the basic ideas. Wewere discussing movement.

The movement of What Is, is a holo-movement. It has the basic characteristics of aholographic image, i.e. any part of this movement contains the whole movement, though in a non-certain mode. This corresponds to the mystic perception that God is in everything and in everyone,is everything and is everyone.53

But again, one should not be caught in this new trap of the imagination which tries to tell ussurreptitiously what the Self is, just like our imagination tells us what or who God is. One needs togo further and look through any imagery as a product of human thought and consciousness, alwayslimited by its innate duality or maya. The fundamental idea of God or the human essence, anyessence, is unknowable. Whatever we think it is, it is not.


54) vajra, in Tibetan Buddhism

Ch. 1 Pg. 32

1.2.2.2 HOLOMORPHISM Our description of human consciousness is itself a holo-morphism, a 'mapping' of the whole

of our uncertain thinking processes, onto submovements of our consciousness. This consciousnesspreserves characteristics of the whole super-movement. It is different in many aspects, because it hasan observable form, but preserves the main characteristics of being capable of moving mechanically,generatively, and creatively. Saying that every part contains the whole is the expression of similarstatic relationships. The content changes, but the relationships and interactive or correlatingmovements among the different forms of the content retain a fundamental similarity, which I callholomorphism.

This reflects the generally accepted conviction among scientists that there is only one set ofdynamic laws governing all aspects of nature. The laws which govern the intrinsic thought processesof the brain and their underlying biochemical changes are the same as those which create thethermonuclear reactions in the billions (1022 , to be a bit more exact ) of suns in the universe. Just likethe forces of gravity affect any aspect of matter or energy, so do these laws affect every aspect of theactuality of What Is. There are no separate laws for a ’spiritual' world in contrast to a'material' world. There is only one 'What Is.' The ultimate ‘order’ which underlies the phenomenaluniverse, or infinitely many universes, will never be known. But my point is that this unknowableorder, which I call Oneness-Nothingness, gives rise to all the thinkable and observable laws of theuniverse.

The movements of our mind and the movements which the mind finds in nature aresimilar. The movements of What Is create the movements of matter, of the mind, and ofactuality, and of reality. It is in the human mind that these movements can become consciousof themselves and are representative of all movements.

The human being and its consciousness is the first holomorphism in terms of a rationalaccounting of genesis, the creation of the universe; “God makes Man in his/her image.” Tounderstand this as meaning that God looks like a man or a woman, is a naive mis-interpretation,which regards an appearance as the essence of a movement. Neither the appearance of a man or awoman, or of the God or Goddess is of fundamental importance. The essence of either is not in theappearance but in their non-certain dynamics, which is not accessible to any mechanical kindof human thinking or sensing. To repeat: the holomorphism refers to movements andrelationships, not to fixed content or appearance.

Our own comprehension of ourselves and the universe is another such holomorphism. I.e.,an inferior image serves as symbol, metaphor, and cipher for a higher idea, which is beyond the realmof rational thinking. The meditating mind is capable of doing this intelligently through myths andmetaphysical speculation. This meditation can have meaning if the meditating mind is of the samequality of what it is meditating on, and as long as the meditating mind does not remain in any of itsmodes of operation, either exclusively or for too long a time. But alas, this is easier said than done.Whenever we look too closely, impudently, the fluid intelligent perception of life itself turns intostone under the stare of the Mother Goddess Medusa. Then, ideas and myths become rigid thoughtsand deadly religious doctrines. The ultimate truth cannot be touched by mechanical thinking. Forsuch thinking it is like a diamond54; just like no tool can scratch a diamond so can no thought dojustice to the ultimate truth or being. In the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad this has been expressed as"Neti, Neti."

It is neither this nor that, nor is it not-this or not-that. But every human being (anysentient being) is, what he or she can never properly think without uncertainty.


55) See e .g. the books of Rhie and Thurman: “Wisdom and Compassion, The Sacred Art Of Tibet” and Zimmer: “The

Art Of Indian Asia ,” ZAIA.56) Section 4.1.1 on page 248.

Ch. 1 Pg. 33

This premise is what I call the holomorphic structure of being, which includes the universe,the human mind and all that is directly accessible to this mind as reality. The structure of What Isreflects itself in the movements of the human mind. And What Is is oneness and nothingness andneither. The whole of What Is cannot properly be thought or expressed in any form, which, bynecessity is a part or fragment. The part cannot contain the whole; it can reflect it and or be anuncertain holomoving image of it. This non-certainty about What Is should therefore be present inany attempt "to talk about that which calls for silence" (Wittgenstein).

It is difficult if not impossible to find adequate words to describe something which is actuallythe precursor and the matrix of that thing, i.e. no-thing. This is why all notions here should be takenin a poetic sense, as allegories and metaphors. I hope that the whole meditative description in thisbook will be able to convey the music and not just the tones, so to speak. Another way of putting itis that this whole study is a device for meditation for those people who are comfortable with rationalabstract images of science and/or people who are open to mythological approaches. The mentalimages are as concrete and real and transient as the churches, and temples, or the beautiful bronzesculptures and statues of Tibet and India55. I present thought-ideas; art, in the way I see it, presentssense-ideas.

“Idea, insight, all, is, movement, time, space, matter, thought” - all are key notions whichwill be examined anew under this basic premise of non-certain wholeness.

Implied in the idea of "What Is, is movement" is the idea that thinking is movement as well.Furthermore, What Is cannot be fundamentally separated. Therefore, I consider thinking and WhatIs to be one movement. I do not restrict the notion of thinking to human thinking alone. Later on, inchapter 4, I will define the notion of a generalized thinking56 to include the thinking of creation,which, metaphorically speaking, is the 'thinking of the Gods.'

Locality and movement are dialectical and complementary notions. Therefore, to ensurethe existence of one, the other must become uncertain.

1.2.2.3 THE BASIC TRIADIC MOVEMENT At first, the content of such an idea of "What Is, is movement" must appear to be quite

empty, as though it meant nothing in the conventional sense. Whenever our rational thinking hasdifficulty to comprehend statements of non-rational thinking, it tends to treat them as though theywere nothing, implying that they are non-sensical, irrational, meaningless, and irrelevant. Thecharacterization as 'nothing' is inadvertently almost a correct description of what I actually mean. ButI will show that this perception of 'no-thing-ness' is the product of an energy which is behind thedemand for certainty in all of our rational thinking. This demand for certainty, though appearing tobe a safe and sound approach to the world, can be fundamentally misplaced and mis-applied. It canbe outright destructive for the mind.

"If it means nothing, it is nothing," and vice versa, “if it is nothing, it means nothing” is acommon logical device which helps thinking to bring order into itself and into the world. In this basicorder thought throws out what has no tangible meaning. Thought discards it and separates it fromitself, because uncertain content cannot add to its solidity, security, or certainty. The tacit assumptionof this conventional thinking is that what has meaning amplifies the power and value of thinking.Certain meaning will be added to itself, and increase its whole order, its wholeness and oneness. But,in pursuing the idea of one-ness we arrive at the apparently irreconcilable opposite of nothingness.


Ch. 1 Pg. 34

Figure 9Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri BlackBronze, 9"

Rational thinking wants to be certain of itself. It does not understand that this will lead to the demandfor absolute certainty in everything it touches, and will therefore result in deception and illusion.Rational thinking wants oneness for its security but ends up with uncertain nothingness, which temptsit into nihilism. Horrified by nihilism the mind then takes refuge in irrational belief systems, (BlaisePascal comes to mind). Thus, rational thinking is threatened from both sides.

Ideas of Nothingness and onenessare creations of the non-certaincontemplative and intelligent mind. Ifrational thinking usurps the energy thatcomes from those ideas it oversteps itsboundaries and enters dangerousterritory. Nothingness, as the drive forcertainty is as important a foundationfor our thinking as is oneness, which isbehind the demand for order.

Both are borderline experiencesof the meditative mind in self-reflection,which can only come to peace with itselfwhen it has found the harmoniousmovement between them. Butnothingness and oneness, the basicstructure of What Is, must also gotogether in the mind's creation of theworld as reality. The mind needs anorderly certainty, i.e. a dynamic orderwith a relative certainty, open to change.Wherever these ideas are being used inisolation from each other and in isolationof the intelligent non-certain movementsof thinking, they lead to deceptive anddestructive results.The mind's ownn o t h i n g n e s s - o n e n e s s i s aholomorphism of What Is. And themind should attempt in its creation ofrealities to establish a structure which

is orderly and yet free. Let me dwell for a moment on this mysterious dialectic nothingness-oneness. The two

absolute opposites are one. They are unconditioned and the source of any conditioning. This logicdefying mystery of the "one who becomes two and the two who are one" has occupied human kindas far as we have records dating back to mythical times. It ranges from the abstract nothingness-oneness idea, (What Is is Sunyata, in Buddhism) to the idea of the sacred struggle between God andSatan. It involves questions between meaning and no-meaning, goodness and evil, value and no-value, and so on.

This abstract mystery of the mind has been translated into images of art, poetry, and ritualsince the beginning of civilization and earlier. Most striking by their beauty, power, and daring


57) The word 'upanishad' implies a teaching which a teacher passes on to a student who sits (shad) close (upa) to him or

her. Thus, this is quite a personal and this sense secret instruction.58) see Campbell, CPM page 82.59) It is interesting to note that it is man who desires - and is in need of - the oneness with the Supreme Self, who thus

is female. This is again consistent with the mythical view of the mother Goddess as the active creator, even though the

Vedas reflect the Aryan male dominated view of the universe.60) See “Shakti and Shakta,” WSS page 146 ff.

Ch. 1 Pg. 35

artistry are expressions in oriental myths and religions, from the lingam-yoni rites of the Indus valley3000 B.C.E., to the Shiva-Shakti images in South India, to the Yab-Yum figures in Tibet.

The mysterious non-duality has been seen by some of the world's mystics, and has beenexplored in philosophies of both the Orient and Occident. It has given rise to dialectic thinking, fromthe passionate thinkers of Aryan tribes of old, according to Heinrich Zimmer, to the grandioseintellectual works of Nagarjuna, Shankara, Heraclitus, Friedrich Hegel, and others. In the Brhadan-anyaka Upanishad57 (800 B.C.E.), to cite just one example, we read about the mystic experience ofoneness with that, which cannot be expressed in words, in terms of the most basic human experience:

"Just as a man, when in the embrace of a beloved wife, knowsnothing within or without so does this being, when embraced bythe Supreme Self (Atman), know nothing within or without." Brhadan-anyaka Upanishad 4.3.2158, 59

The author of this Upanishad talks about the mystic oneness in which all knowledgedissipates. All that should be said about this is the reference to this oneness-nothingness, andwhatever is said about this is metaphor and cipher, tantalizing images of illusion. Some of these aremore truthful than most if they help to dispel the illusion and reveal the oneness-nothingness.

The idea of the Supreme Self (Brahman or Atman), alluded to in this Upanishad, actually putssomewhat more emphasis on the oneness aspect of the dialectic pair oneness-nothingness, whereasthe Buddhist idea of Sunyata (Nothingness as emphasized by the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna),or Sunya-sunya (Nothingness which is not Nothingness) emphasizes the nothingness aspect.Brahman is seen as being itself beyond mind and speech, that from which the universe is born,by which it is maintained and into which it is dissolved. In Taoist philosophy nothingnesscorresponds to the idea of Wu. Tao is the underlying oneness which manifests itself as thedialectically opposed principles of Yin and Yang, which corresponds to Shiva and Shakti60,Oneness and Nothingness, Zero and One.

It is interesting to realize how little these old insights have actually found their way into theconsciousness of most people in the course of almost three thousand years.

In the Orient this mystery of power - "becoming something out of nothing," or of "oppositesbeing one and influencing each other" - was often represented in most striking images meant toappeal directly, existentially, to the powerful forces between life and death and beyond.

Nothingness and oneness are not merely ideas of the mind, reaching far beyond the mind ofthe individual human being, but are the source of its energy, its movement. The demand for universalorder and absolute certainty is an outward expression of the inner irreconcilable creative energiesof the mind. The absence of such order (oneness) and certainty (security) leads to the feeling of fear,the power which suppresses love. And the order breaks down when the meditative mind awakens toits consciousness and forgets about its source. Being conscious means for the forgetful self that theoneness has been irrevocably violated by the creation of the other. Because of the existence of theother, there is no more absolute certainty or security, therefore there is the notion of fear and theescape into the belief of the gods outside, separate from oneself. The powerful truth of this propertyof our mind is revealed in ancient myths. In the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad, for example, we read:


61) See Joseph Campbell, “Creative Mythology,” CCM, page 631.62) See Schelling, SFM I, page 180.

Ch. 1 Pg. 36

“In the beginning, the universe was nothing but the Self in the form ofMan. It looked around and saw that there was nothing but itself,whereupon its first thought was, "It is I!"; whence the concept Iarose...Then he was afraid. (That is why anyone alone is afraid.) But heconsidered: "Since there is no one here but myself, what is there tofear?" Whereupon the fear departed. (For what should have beenfeared? It is only to a second that fear refers.)However, he still lacked delight (therefore we lack delight whenalone) and desired a second. He was exactly as large as a man and awoman embracing. This Self then divided itself in two parts; and withthat, there was a master and a mistress...Anyone understanding this becomes, truly, himself a creator in thiscreation...Whoever knows "I am Brahman!" becomes this All, and not eventhe gods can prevent his becoming thus, for he becomes their verySelf. But whoever worships another divinity than his Self,supposing "He is one, I am another," knows not. He is like asacrificial beast for the gods. And as many animals would be useful toa man, so is even one such person useful to the gods. But if even onesuch animal is taken away, it is not pleasant. What then, if many? It isnot pleasing to the gods, therefore, that people should know this.”61

Yajnavalkhya, the speaker in this creation myth, struggled with the idea of the one and thenothing, and the unfolding of the one mind into subject and object. And he knew that his insight wascontrary to conventional dogma.

"In the beginning there was Nothing but the Self (Atman or Brahman) in the form of man."There was this Self and nothing else, therefore this Self was One. But as something is only withsomething else, the One was also Nothing.

Two and a half thousand years later, the German philosopher Schelling should ask hisaudience in the lecture hall of the university of Berlin:

"Do you realize, that the I, in as much as it appears in consciousness,is not anymore a pure and absolute I; do you realize that for thisabsolute I there cannot be an object anywhere at all; and that muchless it could ever be object itself?"62


63) Hegel, HPG, page 521. 64) Martin Heidegger and W olfgang Schadewaldt.

Ch. 1 Pg. 37

Hegel, Schellings contemporary philosophical adversary, wrote in his "Phenomenology ofMind"63:

"The Self is the Absolute Essence."

This is the same old ancient and eternal, almost incomprehensible insight. Yajnavalkhya of the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad (800 B.C.E.) could have asked Schelling's

question or uttered Hegel's phrase. Shankara the Indian philosopher (around 800 C.E.) said it.However, it must be noted here that neither Hegel nor Schelling had apparently any inkling of thedestructive danger of the I and ego, which the Indian philosophers make the center of theirphilosophy of liberation and freedom. On the contrary, it appears that both philosophers wereextremely self-centered and almost ego-maniacal people.

With the concept of 'I ' the concept of separation and of fear arose as well. Once he (thehypothetical person who contemplates his thinking process) realized again that this division in hisconsciousness, which had created the concept of I, did still not involve any other but himself, hedeveloped desire, for another, and thus became the creator of the world as thought, in pairs ofdialectic opposites. The notions of the self, of separation, of subject-object, of fear, and of desirearose, and indeed arise, simultaneously. Desire wants the other, wants to own it, now and forever.Fear is the desire to keep it, to be certain of one’s ownership, now and in eternity. The foundationfor knowledge, ignorance, certainty, etc. are being laid in this moment of self-realization. It is theself-contradicting now and forever, which creates the confusion.

The ambivalence of nothingness and oneness, contained in this mythical truth, highlights thedialectic nature of thinking itself and of anything it expresses, i.e. the world and reality. Wheneverwe talk or think about What Is, the object of our thinking will follow the nature of our dialecticthinking. No matter how we try to express a truth, it will never be the truth, but, at best, a form of adialectic energy which mirrors itself. Attempts to arrive at a final logical truth lead to rigid systemsof thought and belief, maybe best represented in the dualistic world of Zoroaster, and Judeo-Christiantraditions. But the philosophies of Schelling and Hegel also became rather dogmatic. The mindcreates a world of duality through consciousness. Duality is the price for consciousness, and, inits attempt to secure its world, consciousness becomes oblivious to the fact that itself has createdthis (dualistic image of a) world. This forgetfulness is at the heart of human ignorance, illusion,and sorrow. It creates the whole content of thought, the self, the ego, and its worlds conditionedand framed by the ego's emotions, paralyzed into words and language, set and dead. But thissame forgetfulness is also at the heart of all human knowledge.

1.2.3 TRUTH AND REALITY, ALETHEIA AND MAYAIn Greek the word 'aletheia,' roughly translated as truth, is regarded as an energy which

reveals itself for a moment and in this revelation withdraws again. What remains after it haswithdrawn is reality; its truth must be discovered from moment to moment.6464 Friedrich Nietzschehad a mystical revelation in Sils Maria his Italian mountain retreat, and the outcome of this insightwas "Thus Spoke Zarathustra." In this master piece of poetry, philosophy, and mythology Nietzscheexpressed and communicated his insight in the most ingenious form. But still, to get a true glimpseof Nietzsche's insight, reading or studying his work is not enough. There is no cogent pedagogicalmethod to convey any insight. The insight of the original mind must in one way or another resonatein the mind of the reader and be recreated. This is only possible when the listening mind is in a free


65) Schadewaldt, WS, page 364.66) Heraclitus, Fragment 17 in WS, page 366.

Ch. 1 Pg. 38

and creative mode itself. Freedom can only speak to freedom, creativity to creativity. Truthcannot be expressed in cogent form, only in metaphors and ciphers. The supposedly correctexpression of truth in cogent form leads to deception, dogmatism, and superstition.

This view of reality and truth is close to the Indian view of Maya, which represents thevarious layers of deception are contained in the human concepts of What Is as reality. The analogygoes further: Heraclitus states that those who are awakened share one cosmos, whereas thosewho are asleep have many separate and different ones65. This is Buddhism! The word “Buddha”means the 'awakened one.' No doctrine, no thought, including the dharma of the Buddha, can revealthe truth of What Is. It can only point to what it is or is not. As long as we are caught in the web ofMaya, we live in our idiosyncratic world of separate selves and egos bound by time, space, andinnumerable conditioning constraints. (For example: I am a brown female of the nineteenth centuryliving in Bangkok, and my mind is completely conditioned by being brown, female, living in a certaintime in a certain environment.) Heraclitus, the Buddha, Plato, and a few others call on human beingsanywhere and through all times to wake up, to look through the veil of Maya, and to see the commonLogos, Dharma, Truth, the common time-andspace-transcending truth shared by all waking humanconsciousness.

But Heraclitus states also: "But most people do not have any insight into this truth, nomatter how many times they encounter it, and even when theyhave learnt it, they do not comprehend it, but they merely imagineit.” 66

Similar things are said about Buddha's teachings. It is told that nobody could understand them.So he created simple rules while giving the true teachings to the king of the snakes. It was almost onethousand years later that Nagarjuna, under the instruction by the snakes king ('Naga' means snake,'arjuna' is a kind of a tree, under which he was instructed) was able to interpret the Buddha's teachingin what then became Mahayana Buddhism whose most important branches -for our purpose here- areTibetan and Tantra Buddhism, also known as Vajrayana.

When thinking cannot 'under-stand' itself through static logic it tries to ’super-stand' itselfthrough superstitious belief systems. In both cases it wants security and certainty; it gets both at theprize of paralyzing itself.

Before I elaborate on these issues further let me summarize and anticipate very briefly: Thinking is a movement, it is one, it is nothing, in the sense of no-thing. It comprehends oneness and nothingness as and through a dialectical and complementary

movement of which it generally is unaware. It cannot, through an exclusively logical process, understand itself with certainty, neither its

oneness in concepts of absolute all-encompassing ideas about religion, God, etc., nor its nothingnessin concepts of absolute negation of all. But what is this thinking which can comprehend, create, andsee its own limitations?


67) The deepest comprehension of physics would say that this movement is a dynamic non-observable web of quantum

fields out of which time, space, matter, universes, the mind, unfold and into which they enfold.68) 'Persona': the mask through which one speaks (per = through, sonare = to sound); original meaning in Greek theater.

Ch. 1 Pg. 39

Thinking is a holomorphism of being, i.e. the movement of thinking is a material67

movement and is similar to the movement which created the universe with the humanconsciousness in it. If one accepts this premise it makes sense to speculate beyond what thinking candirectly analyze. This speculation is not knowledge but rather a metaphysical art-form which shouldtherefore remain non-certain in form and content. This is often achieved by using circular or evencontradictory statements. The Kena Upanishad, for example, expresses some of these mysteriousideas:

"Who sees that 'It' is incomprehensible comprehendsWho understands 'It,' does not.To those who know 'It,' 'It' is unknown;They comprehend who know nothing." Kena Upanishad, 2.3

Any expression of thinking contains similar elements of oneness and nothingness - of orderand of certainty - enfolded in itself. The degree to which they are present in a thought and the degreeto which they are transparent to the thinker in a given context determines the quality of the realitydefined by such thinking. Numbers and scientific formulas are at one end of this quality spectrum,while ideas, existential-transcendental trust, or faith in Oneness-Nothingness are at the other.

By Oneness-Nothingness, I do not mean to say that there is one God, like for example theJewish or Christian god, but that there is ONE UNKNOWN AND UNKNOWABLE GOD-GODDESS, One with our mind and One with What Is. All particular gods of the various religionsare images, illusions of Maya, whether they be called one supreme God or not. The ONE GODas moving idea tends to get lost in the moment we give attributes to 'it' in terms of 'he' or ’she,' andin the moment we claim to know what this God/dess wants from us and with us. The idea of Sunyata,as Nothingness, or the idea of Oneness, are impossible to grasp by the mechanical thinking processbecause they are intelligent ideas. When we use the word God, we imagine wrongly that we knowmore than when we say Nothingness. This is illusion. The abstractness of the word Nothingness savesus (to some degree) from this particular illusion. But illusion comes with any thought which tries toreach transcendence.

The mind as self and ego does not want to liberate itself from fixed images, because it hasfound the only certainty of its existence in these images. The ego is the mask (persona)68 of the self,created and maintained as an absolute concept of individuality and personality. This personal maskcreates belief systems about its eternal existence in heaven or in hell. Apparently, the ego finds itpreferable to believe that it will suffer in hell for eternity, rather than face the possibility that it is aconstruct of thinking. The meaning of human existence is uncertain and belongs to the realm ofunknowable Nothingness-Oneness, the source of freedom and intelligence, and of maya. This is whyfreedom and intelligence in the deeper sense are so difficult to embrace.

(I do not use the term 'ego' in the Freudian sense, but in the sense of a confused self. Theconfusion lies in the fact that the self believes in the absolute separation between itself and thethings of the world. In the ego's attempt to give itself certain meaning, it separates itself from itssource which is intelligence. The idea that the world consists of separate parts and can be analyzed


69) See H einrich Zimmer, ZMS, ZAIA and Joseph Campbell, COM.

Ch. 1 Pg. 40

and understood accordingly is very useful in some areas like classical physics. There are howeverareas where this premise is wrong and can have disastrous consequences.)

If we pursue a meaningful thought far enough we will encounter its dialectic complements,which form an insurmountable barrier for static logical thinking. All we have to do to confront thiswall is to keep asking for the ultimate constituents and causal connections of a thought withquestions of "What is it and why is it?" It is such questioning which let Nagarjuna to proclaim that"all is nothing," because every thing exists only in relation to its opposite. That which has noopposites is Nothingness or Oneness. It cannot be separated or analyzed. Even here we can see thatthe terminology, our thinking process, requires opposites. The closest we can come through consciousthinking is to comprehend that these opposites are dialectic in nature, representing the dynamicqualities of thinking.

Let me clarify at this point what I mean by the dialectic of thinking. Thinking, in itsconscious form, cannot comprehend itself because it cannot be object and subject of itselfsimultaneously. When consciousness attempts to get hold of truth or absolute meaning, it is calledupon by its own energy to keep moving between irreconcilable opposites. This particular act ofthinking, in which consciousness is created, creates the world for this consciousness as well. It is thestep from the absolute unknowable oneness to the world of duality, the limited reality vision of thetwo eyes. Mythologically this corresponds evidently to the creation of the world, extremely wellexpressed in this context in Indian philosophies.

In the mythologies of the Hindus, more specifically in Shaktism, as well as in VajrayanaBuddhism the dialectic tension between opposites is an integral part. Vishnu, the absolute God-energy, creates Shakti-Shiva out of itself/himself, Shakti is the female principle of creation,destruction, and concealment (as Maya). Shiva is the male energy of preservation, compassion, butalso of destruction. Shakti and her Maya is discretely indispensable in all these actions.69 Shivaappears sometimes as male energy, sometimes as female energy, and sometimes as both. (In anothervariation it is Brahma who creates, assisted by Vishnu and Shiva. See section 1.4.4.5. on page 70.)

The dialectic draws and guides thinking towards a self-deceptive attempt to find one absoluteorder which would be absolutely certain. In a system of absolute and certain order, freedom wouldhowever not be possible. On its way to freedom the human mind needs to understand the dialecticdynamics between opposites. The gods can evidently not help Man in this quest for freedom, anyhelp or directive would deny and destroy their most magnificent creation, the human being with thepotential to be like God, free, oneness and nothingness. They are caught in the same dilemma.

Richard Wagner's "Ring der Nibelungen" dramatizes this dialectic problem: The Divine giftto Man is freedom; by giving it to Man, the Gods forego their exclusive directing power over them.From now on Man is free, potentially like Gods, but the freedom does not come automatically,because Man is free to be free or unfree. So free even to kill the Gods, or freedom. Nietzsche callsthis dilemma the 'origin of tragedy.' It is the unfolding of a moment in reality, in which we are freeto choose between two equally ‘evil’ alternatives, each one leading inevitably to the destruction ofa ‘sacred form’ in this reality.

Ultimate order would be Oneness, and ultimate certainty would be empty thought. They aredialectic opposites and are impossible to achieve in a reality except through self deception. Thinking,having its source in both ideas, is forever moving to reach and realize this impossible idea, of whicheven the impossibility itself cannot be proven. It is easy to misunderstand any dialectic as a


70) Thus, my concept of dialectic differs radically from that of Hegel. In my view, the intelligence and freedom of

the mind precludes any such determination. I understand 'dialectic' as an intelligent non-certain movement of

the mind.71) See Jaspers, JG, page 179.

Ch. 1 Pg. 41

mechanical determinable movement whose general direction of unfoldment could be known, as e.g.Hegel thinks in his later works.70

Let me quote Karl Jaspers on the dialectic movement of thinking:

"Wherever there occurs a contradiction for (intelligent, open, free)thought it wants to be resolved. Thinking cannot bear it. Unless thiscontradiction can be resolved in terms of one correct and one incorrectside of the issue at hand, thought enters into a movement which iscalled dialectic.71" (Parentheses by FW.)

One of the problems of human consciousness in general is that it assumes implicitly orexplicitly that it does or can know and understand completely, absolutely, and finally. It disregardsthe dynamic and creative nature of thinking, acting, and being, the movement which I call intelligentdialectic, thus putting in effect an artificial end to this dialectic movement. Normal consciousnessdoes not see the gift and challenge of thinking as an infinite and inexhaustible appeal to understandcompletely (complete in a relative sense) wherever possible, and to radically and dialectically changewhen it encounters the limits of its ability to understand. This is a mental inertia and inattention,sustained by fear and tradition, which leads to a general confusion of thinking, the manifestations ofwhich we can find in all aspects of a society and of the world.

The hope for and drive towards certain and secure knowledge, i.e. rationalization andscientification of all aspects of human reality is a potentially infinite process. I see the energy behindthis force as a fundamental drive and demand in the sense of a movement of intelligent thinkingtowards an objective and universal understanding. But this positive drive turns easily into stagnationand the quicksand of confusion, if thought does not comprehend and understand its own categoriesof operation as being a certainty which is meaningful only within subcertain and uncertainlimits.

This confusion deceives thought into attempting an absolute certainty of understanding,feeling, and acting with all the means available to it, including irrational ones. The rational dynamicprocess becomes a stagnant automatization and technocratization which confuses mechanicalnesswith security and success. Confusion blindly pursues and constructs an irrational certainty throughan unquestionable belief system, be it ‘scientific’ or ‘religious.’ This process, initiated throughthinking itself threatens its own essence, its freedom and oneness, and intelligence. Humanconsciousness spends most of its time and energy in building illusions of certainty, the ego or self(the ego being loosely defined as the irrational, confused aspect of the self) with all its ramifications,i.e. psychological and psychosomatic defensive mechanisms. These mechanisms ultimately destroywhat they are erected to protect. If the whole consciousness of a human being has been dedicatedto building this mechanism, its destruction results in fear, pain, suffering and utter confusion of theperson underneath it. From confusion to confusion. Such a consciousness does not want to "see" andlearn, no matter how painful the current situation. And yet, even illusion can bring about positivechange, or can sustain a consciousness in an otherwise unbearable situation.


72) Sanskrit per se is the language which was artificially established with fixed grammatical rules in the first millennium

B.C.E. The Vedic language on which Sanskrit was based is much older, going back to the times of the Aryan invasion

of India.

Ch. 1 Pg. 42

It is interesting to note that thinking, knowing, and seeing are not as different as commonlanguage suggests. Sometimes the relationship between seeing and thinking is preserved in the usageof a word. For example, the word ‘veda’ as in the Vedic Hymns of ancient India (1,500 B.C.E.),means knowledge in Sanskrit. The root meaning is ‘vid’ (compare the Latin ‘video’ which means‘I see”), which means "to perceive, to know, to regard, to name, to find out, to acquire, to grant," allattributes of thinking.72 In many European languages, for example, English, we say “I see” whenwe want to express that we have understood something. We furthermore talk about insight andvision, terms which are much more uncertain and unspecifiable than “I know.”

Yet we use exactly such metaphoric non-certain terms when we want to indicate that we aredealing with some truly important and meaningful ideas. We make a clear distinction betweenknowledge and wisdom.

End of introduction.


73) Max Weber; MW P page 189.74) Geist: The German word 'Geist' (rhymes with the English word ‘heist’) has many meanings which together form an

important whole; It means intelligence but also ghost or spirit. A person who has 'Geist' has wisdom; more than the

equivalent French word 'esprit' indicates. This wisdom displayed has a magical, dynamic, quality, which is as invisible

as a ghost. “Geistlich” means ’spiritual'; “geistvoll” means 'full of w isdom and intelligence.'75) Gilgamesh epos. The mythology of Astarte, the mother Goddess, goes back to the Sumerian Ishtar (Inanna), mother,

wife, and lover of the Sumerian dying God Tammuz (Dumusi). See J. Campbell, CCM , p. 628.

Ch. 1 Pg. 43

1.3 PROBLEMS OF THE MODERN WORLD

1.3.1 CONFUSION OF THOUGHTS I have succumbed to the temptation of characterizing the true believers in a modern highly

industrialized and rationalized world by quoting from Max Weber's essay “The Protestant Ethic.”73

"Specialists without intelligence (Geist74 ), sensualists without heart:This Nothing imagines that it has climbed to a level of humanity(“Menschentums”) never before attained."

This statement is only too accurate also today. Many of our specialists in education and

private industry do not know or have even an inkling of what heights of humanity other cultureshave reached in the past eight thousand years. The fact that those cultures lie in the past and areusually not even exemplary civilizations today is reason enough for those specialists to not evenwaste time glancing at their achievements. This is very unfortunate, for, when it comes to richnessand depth of insight into the human psyche, a good number of ancient cultures have or had achievedlevels of great humanity. The highest achievements of cultures like Egypt, Sumer75, Greece, India,China, Tibet in human activities which give meaning to our existence like art, religion, andphilosophy seem to have been of a level not reached anywhere in the modern world.

As I see it, we live in a time of transition again, at a crossroads, which may lead us either intoa new period of worldwide communication, increased freedom and oneness, with cultural andeconomic exchanges never seen before in the history of mankind, or into new chaos. One has torecognize that during the last decades of the twentieth century computer and biological technologieshave made unprecedented advances which have the potential to radically change human societiesto the better.

Today's spiritual problems may appear to be more prevalent than in times when knowledgeand technology were not as wide spread, when there was more of a sense of the mystery of nature,of the Gods, and the stars, prevailing in people. A danger may be the technological illusions, theautomatic and habitual beliefs that there can and will be technological and mechanical solutions forall human problems, be they religious, spiritual, ethical, or psychological. The accompanying beliefis that spirituality and ethics are merely convenient deceptions of antiquated minds, reacting to asense of fear. Still, superstition and ignorance have dominated societies of all types. It is quiteunusual that the last fifty years of the twentieth century have advanced the cause of freedom,tolerance, and prosperity as much as they have.

The promise for a new beginning in relationship among the cultures and civilizations of theearth is also real. The collapse of the communist systems in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europemay be viewed as prime examples of how a mechanical and even totalitarian system cannot maintainthe status quo or change the system in a mechanically predictable manner. It may be a symbol of our


76) It was not understood in the West either. The communist system essentially self-destructed.

Ch. 1 Pg. 44

times that one oppressive political system after another collapses under the onslaught of seeminglyunstoppable and uncontrollable information that is flowing through the airwaves. The floodgates ofcorrect information, beginning with knowledge of effective economic free enterprise systems areopening. Once modern communication systems, from fax machines to computers, have beeninstalled at the universities and business head quarters, they will soon also be in the homes ofaverage people. Then, no one will be able to control knowledge anymore, and knowledge is power.I trust that this development will bring increased openness and freedom everywhere. The greatestobstacle to freedom and happiness is ignorance, and stupidity, some of which can be dispelledthrough access and use of correct information. The propaganda machines of the power brokersanywhere will automatically become less effective.

But even though accurate knowledge may be accessible anywhere (together with propagandaand misinformation, of course) it is by no means necessary and inevitable that intelligent behaviorwill become more widespread. The ego and superstition are very hard to get rid of. They are almostimmune to proper knowledge. Aren’t most organized religions based on the most irrationalsuperstitions and absurdities?

1.3.1.1 DIALECTIC FORCES AT WORKThe early Hegel was right: intelligent dialectic, the mutually influencing and driving of

uncertain forces of societies and individuals, does not stop. Ironically enough, the dialectic materialism of the communist doctrine contains in its

theoretical structure some of Hegel's thoughts on dialectic. The mechanical dialectic of thecommunist regimes, which their pundits thought they understood and could control, has proventhrough the actuality of its self-destruction that it was neither mechanical, nor understood, norcontrollable.76

The true dialectic of life and society is dynamic and no thought or theory can grasp itor force it in a predictable direction for long. Whether one tries to explain the behavior ofsocieties through chaos theory, or through the subtle quantum-mechanical interactions of the humanmind, the strange fact remains that people and societies behave in non-predictable ways. This factis strange only for those people who believe that any behavior can be explained mechanically,predictably, causally.

The last three thousand years of human development is an indication to me that intelligentforces of freedom in individuals and cultures are gaining ground. People seem to be freeingthemselves increasingly from hierarchical and oligarchic secular and religious ruling structures. Along way remains to go.

It seems to me that the foundation of any modern society should rest on the ideas ofindividual freedom, a trust in the potential sacredness of the human being and all sentientbeings, and the recognition that every man and woman has a natural right to pursuehappiness. These or similar ideas are required and designed to keep the raw and chaotic forces ofthe human ‘animal’ under control. In modern Western societies they have been developed as self-controlling contracts among people. Individual freedom, the sacredness of the individual, theorganization of a society, and the pursuit of happiness of the individual, are ideas which are inconflict with each other. This conflict is the dialectic energy which keeps a society moving. Humanthinking tries to shape the world, including the ideas of Man and societies, according to itself andaccording to the notions it can develop and stabilize in fixed thoughts. At first, these differentmovements of thinking are hidden from itself. Only with a sufficiently complex repertoire of


77) I use the expression 'empty chaos' as opposed to 'full, or meaningful chaos,' which is What Is.

Ch. 1 Pg. 45

thoughts and thinking skills, can thinking reflect itself on itself and understand some of its ownmovements and tricks. In doing so it creates the individual and societies but finds itself in a naturalconflict with the 'diabolic' forces, the forces that throw everything across our little rooms of security.Thinking, despite its constant attempts, cannot control the forces of nature, nor understand them toa point where it could save itself from them. Human sensing and acting seem to be closer to theforces of nature than thinking, even though, evidently, thinking is part of them. We just tend tooverlook that.

Thinking likes to think that it can reign supreme with perfect control over the senses andnature. It does not like to remind itself of its transient and ephemeral nature and wants stability,certainty, forever now.

1.3.1.2 IDEAS OF FREEDOMIdeas are intelligent perceptions and expressions of the mind. Ideas like freedom and

individuality are intelligent as long as they remain dynamic and open to change, thus underminingthe deceptive hope for certainty. I will show that they then correspond naturally to the quality ofhuman thinking.

But we must bear in mind that an idea can take many different forms in a reality and yet bea true expression of that same idea. The development of ideas in realities and even as realities canlead to a deeper understanding and comprehension of the original idea. For an idea to be expressed,a person or a group of people must assume the risk and responsibility for it. In a sense, one mightsay that by trying out a particular form of an idea in actuality one may be led to a new reality.However, when all there is left of such an idea is its form, then that form endangers the original ideaand the reality resulting from it. This is the situation which I refer to as being empty chaos77, andsuch chaos is a constant threat to all societies of the world. For example, Greece after the occupationby Rome, as well as the Roman or Chinese Empires fell into such chaos from the height of theirpower.

The idea of freedom is at the root of the foundation of the United States. From its outset thisidea threatened the conventional society because its practice and implementation did not excludein it the freedom of colored people or of women. These groups had to wait for two hundred yearsbefore their freedom was included in the laws of this country.

Too many people take freedom in our society for granted, as something given by the stateas a right that could never be taken away. Evidently, human freedom is not a right but an illusivechallenge, hope, and guiding light for our personal actions in a confusing reality. We haven't evenbegun to understand what it might mean, and already we claim it as a right, thus almost guaranteeingits demise and destruction.

Unfortunately the people of the United States, which is the most important formal bastionof these threatened ideas, appear to be at the forefront of taking freedom for granted.

Whatever is happening in this powerful country is bound to have consequences for the restof the world. Leaving the positive aspects aside for the moment I feel it important that we bringsome dangerous symptoms to light and that we go beyond the symptoms to the possible causes ofthis elusive 'chaos.'

As I see our society today, the great ideas of freedom, tolerance, and compassion seem to belosing their meaning. They are of course always threatened, because they depend on free minds. Thevalues of freedom are ultimately intangible and are hard to define and therefore to implement andto defend.


Ch. 1 Pg. 46

In too many minds, democratic freedom has been turned into the 'idea' of license for all andrights without responsibility. The rule of ever-worsening mediocrity has become the standardendorsed by professionals, professors, specialists, and technocrats alike. We determine standardsof behavior through the use of statistical curves, and declare the law of averages to be the measuringstick for democratic freedom. The push towards relentless consumption at any cost has become thedriving force, almost exclusively, of our society. To consume means to be successful, and successmeans above everything else money, with which one can presumably provide for one's completephysical security, and for the satisfaction of all one's needs and desires.

One need only watch the most popular television shows to see this neurotic celebration ofmoney and success with its outright ’spiritual' and 'religious' overtones. The stories of the futile livesof many of our stars and so-called heroes are sold to the masses as role models of achievement.Since modern consciousness is shaped mostly by television, a look at the list of our highest rated TVshows reveals what the vast majority of people are dreaming of, hoping and striving for. Many‘Christian’ television programs, which were supposedly generated as an alternative to the ‘sinful andevil’ programs of ‘secular’ television, have actually made things worse. Having linked money with‘salvation,’ and ‘spirituality’ with narrow-minded superstition, often called ‘fundamentalism,’ these‘Christian’ programs are preying on the ignorance and gullibility of the masses and have becomeextremely successful financial enterprises. They preach intolerance and call it compassion.

Religious organizations become corrupt because spirituality exercised as a profession in areality is intrinsically dishonest and a conscious and/or sub-conscious deception. They destroy thepower of the non-certain myth by ‘elevating’ it to certain and rationalized but irreal reality.

The issues which I offer for our consideration are not unique to our times, only theirparticular manifestations are different. The actual problem is an intrinsic difficulty which the humanmind experiences in its non-conscious creation of a reality, torn between the demands of physicalcomfort - after issues of basic survival have been taken care of - and the desperate longing formeaning.

1.3.2 BENEATH THE SURFACE OF MEDIOCRITY The more subtle creations of the human mind, those which give meaning to our lives as

communal beings in relationship with each other and with nature around us, the true products of art,music, literature, philosophy, and religion have been replaced by products whose conditioned valuesare predominantly or exclusively determined by dollars. Hired specialists - behaviorists, sociologists,and psychologists who have categorized society by means of statistical curves, from which they readnormal, to mean mediocre behavioral characteristics - tell the public what it should consume, buy,follow, listen to, and so on. The laws of statistics have come to mean that the majority (i.e. themediocrity) is right. They smother difference, dissent, diversity, and true originality. Experts are,of course, a necessary part of any rationalized society, but they become dangerous to that societyif they extend their 'expertise' into the non-rational areas of humanness and human relationship.When this occurs, those members of the specialist community who have strong egos begin to imposetheir unquestioned values on the weaker members of society under the pretense of their superiorknowledge.

Scientific research, for example, is increasingly falling into the hands of powerful specialinterest groups whose interest is neither science nor truth but money and dominance. Scientificthinking as the rational playful investigation into a limited domain of problems with defined ordefinable assumptions and methods, is itself threatened by a lack of comprehension of these


Ch. 1 Pg. 47

scientific processes. Too many people have been unwilling for too long a time to think critically andobjectively.

All this may be the result of unleashed and uncontrollable forces of rationalization, inaddition to a global population explosion. There would seem to be a trend in our modern societiesto pacify and control the masses through talk of equality and majority rule. At the same time, theidea is all but forgotten that the individual human being is essentially much more than a pointon a statistical curve or a number in an opinion poll.

Men and women in such societies are in danger of losing touch with their mass-transcendingindividuality, their spiritual nature, and their common sense. Most countries seem to be sold on anexclusive technological and mechanical thinking which gives in to the absolute power of numbersand number-logic, accepting these as the only and absolute all-encompassing problem solvers.Science itself as well as the positive result of the rationalization process, is threatened by such anuncritical and unthinking attitude. It seems that we are in danger of losing our spiritual wisdomalong with our rational reality and our scientific, technological achievements.

In order to find a way out of this dilemma and to discover our true source of humanness, wemust not use the methods of science and logic alone to the exclusion of those faculties of our mindwhich have made science and logic possible in the first place. I do not propose as a solution thatwe return to the 'old time values.' It is evident that they have not only been unable to preventthis present dilemma but that they have actually been a part of its cause.

I propose that we occasionally stop for a moment in this race toward technocratization andthat we open up our mechanical, habitual, and unreflective way of thinking, laboring, and living, towhat we as human beings are. Only then do we have a chance to find out what it is for which wetruly want to live.

1.3.2.1 KNOWLEDGE WITH INTELLIGENCE To do this we must employ the full capacities and possibilities of human thinking, sensing,

and acting, never losing sight of logic, but never using logic in an attempt to prove what is beyondits realm. We must uncover the art of intelligent philosophical thinking together with the roots ofscience and of true creation. We must get in touch with the art of art. We must begin to learn againand to educate ourselves. To open ourselves not merely to knowledge but, above all, tointelligence, which is at the inception of thought as its creator. We need knowledge withintelligence and intelligence with knowledge.

When we see how reality is being confused with truth, knowledge with intelligence, andaverage human behavior with human essence, we are looking at manifestations of a fundamental,extremely complex and illusive problem.

1.3.2.2 EDUCATIONAL FRUSTRATION A good illustration of conventional thinking that confuses knowledge with intelligence can

be readily found in our educational system. Let me mention a simple and typical example:In the field of education a generally observable decline in statistical test-scores, measuring

the so-called basic skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic, is treated as though it were merelya mechanical problem of management, money, and organization. It often seems that school systemsexist primarily for the benefit of its employees rather than for that of the students.

The fact is that many students are bored, repelled, or frightened by the mechanical anddespiritualizing nature of our educational institutions, which nurture and then test measurable


78) Friedrich Nietzsche, “Twilight Of The Idols,” 1888; “Götzendämmerung .”

Ch. 1 Pg. 48

knowledge at the expense of the creative individual mind. Our students correctly see no meaningin such an education.

Even knowledge has been watered down in most schools, and teachers hardly ever dare tochallenge the intellectual skills of students, lest they might discriminate against disadvantagedstudents. When some schools introduce methods of 'creative learning' the result is often that thestudents don't learn anything at all.

We allow so-called objective test-score averages to determine the lives of human beings whohave become mere dots on a statistical "normal curve," which is rather a curve of mechanicalness.By mechanical measures, that is by more organization, more supervision, and more statisticaltesting, the school districts want to forcefully produce better test scores. This will probably work tosome degree, but it will not truly improve learning and education. Our public schools have becomebaby sitting institutions. Increasingly also our colleges and universities are becoming factoriesproducing specialists who have invested a lot of money in their 'education' with the promise that theywill be able to make even more money.

Money has become the name of the game, and our ‘God.’ The foundation of all true learningseems to get weaker. This may be the result of our mass education system. After all, FriedrichNietzsche complained and polemicized against the decline of the German educational system morethan one hundred years ago. The dangerous conditions of a sterilized and despiritualizing teachingindustry, where mediocrity is the norm, have in the meanwhile conquered the world.78

Apart from learning about facts and figures, language, mathematics, science and history, weshould challenge the mind to think critically, openly, and carefully. Of all the animals we are theonly ones who have a history, and even a history of learning. Learning is an integral part of thinkingand should be seen as a fascinating and fundamentally human experience, which can bring us intocontact with the ideas and actions of exemplary human beings, people who give 'measure' andreference to the rest of us through their achievements and tragedies, which are essentially our ownas well.

Learning should bring us in contact with ourselves: with who we have been as a human race,with who we could be, and with what our responsibility is for one other, for the whole earth, fornature, and even for the universe. Thus, learning is about listening, communicating, and acting; butabove all it is about human beings who can and ought to be free, and who are therefore responsible.For this we need the best teachers in all areas of human endeavors from mathematics to philosophy.

We should understand that all intelligent learning, including the learning of science andmathematics, is based and grounded on the ideas of truth, freedom, and communication.Teachers ought to communicate this to their students together with any subject matter of a particularfield. Only then can learning occur to the benefit and improvement of ourselves, of our society, andof mankind. It is these ideas about which we must learn. This kind of education should be ouroverriding goal and commitment.

Learning ought to address all levels of human thinking, sensing, and acting, carriedforward by a relentless will - guided by honesty, and the love of truth. A studying that over-emphasizes formal topics and formal learning ignores creative aspects and excludes the joy oflearning. This joy arises when we accomplish something genuine and non-mechanical; that is whenwe truly learn. To make ourselves and our students aware of this creative aspect of the humanmind we need metaphors and ciphers in addition to facts and figures. No mechanicalknowledge can ever communicate the fundamental ideas of humanness. The attempt to do soignores that we can only hint at human creativity and essence through a poetic cipher language. The


Ch. 1 Pg. 49

pretense to know human freedom and essence atrophies the human mind and society. Metaphor andcipher, which are expressions of an uncertain groping and hoping for a truth to reveal itself, are atthe basis of all great humanness. Without this any society is bound to decline to a state of merephysical survival. Forms of art from the earliest cave and temple paintings, sculptures, myths,inspired writings, tragedies, poems, music, dance, and so on, express the human soul and itsrelationship to reality and transcendence. The meaning of these metaphoric expressions cannotbe acquired in a formal way but requires the resonance between the creating mind manifestin the work of art and the mind contemplating the intelligible form. Mathematics and scienceare different from the art forms.

Even though they are also creative and metaphoric in their foundations, they lend themselvesto an exclusively mechanical presentation, memorization, and application. They can effectively beused mechanically with great success, fortunately. It is unfortunately this mechanical (and forstudents particularly boring) aspect with which most teachers confront their students almostexclusively, and it is this aspect of 'learning' which tends to dominate society. Every true teacher,politician, priest, in short, any real educator, thinks and lives with ideas of humanness. Their acting,thinking, and teaching ought to convey, above all else, ideas of freedom and truth, i.e spiritualvalues, which are our heritage and hope, and which are the 'truest' expression of human thinking.

1.4 A CLASSIFICATION OF THINKING I begin this investigation by introducing some of the key notions which are of central

importance for the rest of this book. The way in which they will be used differs from their use ineveryday language, and will become clearer as the work proceeds. The uncommon meaning of suchnotions is not an artificial construct but a necessary outcome of the thinking processes underinvestigation. When some new ideas manifest themselves in a reality, a fresh emphasis and meaningmust be attributed to conventional words, which then reveal the dynamic origin and the thinkingbehind them. Initially, many words will be definable in vague or flexible ways only. In spite of theiruncertain character - and actually because of it - they fulfill a crucial function: They are meant toopen up different ways of thinking for the reader. (See also section3.2.4 on page 181, also 145, 202)

The main topic of this book is thinking in its various movements, its uncertain idealities,and its certain realities. We shall see the main issue and challenge of thinking as being thefollowing: Only if thinking understands itself, comprehends itself, and has

insight into itself can it move freely and at the same time limititself through itself. In this process, thinking creates a part ofitself as object and another part as subject without beingdeceived by the products of its own creation.

This is the kind of thinking which we have to learn to employ in communication with eachother, thereby transforming and opening up our normal thinking which is full of confusion and self-deception. While I explore thinking first, we must always bear in mind that thinking, sensing, andacting belong together. I will explore this connection in chapter 4. The ultimate challenge in ourexploration of reality and truth lies exactly in a comprehension of this connection.

1.4.1 MOVEMENT AS FUNDAMENTAL IDEA At this point it should be clear that the previously mentioned basic ideas of "thinking is one

movement" or "What Is, is movement" make indirect reference to this open thinking and are onlycorrect if they include in their meaning that thinker, thinking, and thought are parts of a whole.


79) See also Friedrich von Weizäckers article "Parmenides and Quantum Theory" in WUN page 399.80) Mathematically, quantum physics is accurate, logical, causal, and certain. It is the interpretation and translation into

reality and actuality which has sub-certain elements. Some characteristics cannot be measured individually anymore,

others cannot be measured simultaneously. Some, like the quantum potential in David Bohm’s approach, cannot be

measured at all, as far as is known at this point in time (1998).

Ch. 1 Pg. 50

Thinker, the thinking process, and thought are all part of one movement. Thus, when ourconsciousness perceives a separation between these components of a whole process, this perceptionis the result of a thinking, which has suspended its oneness. Once consciousness has beenestablished it functions in a mode of separation, that governs all of its reality. For the mind to seethe underlying oneness it is necessary that this separation, i.e. consciousness, be suspended in itsturn. This explains why we can say that all movement is fundamentally one movement, even thoughto consciousness the world appears in terms of separation and division. I want to highlight theseideas in a more specific and reality-oriented principle in the following form:

The concept of absolute separation is a deception and self-deception of mechanical thought.This deception is real and necessary for us to create an order in which we can operate through oursenses and thoughts. Truth is beneath this order of separation.

Just like there is no absolute separation between thinker and the object of thought, there isalso no absolute separation between objects in the universe. In other words: space is not an inactiveabsolute background on top of which the world unfolds. This is merely a secondary reality. Space-time unfolds from a deeper level of Oneness. Once space and time have become real, interactionsbetween its objects can be observed in terms of measurable forces and energy changes. But if wewant to look very close, at a quantum level we find that the actual connection between subject andobject occurs in a “space of non-certainty” between. I.e. the meeting 'point' between subject andobject is not a point but a general non-measurable and uncertain interference of Betweenness.Observable space with its objects in the physical world corresponds very much to humanconsciousness with its content in the case of the human mind.

We cannot meaningfully think about an entity, idea, or object which would be absolutelyseparate from us. The prime example of ’something' separate from us is illustrated by the notion oftranscendence or God. Either transcendence is absolutely separate from us, in which case the wordtranscendence is without meaning, or there is some kind of a correlation between transcendence andour thinking. Then the word and idea of transcendence do have meaning. Only in this latter case canwe talk about transcendence meaningfully. The same is true with the idea of Oneness orNothingness, which cannot be thought without introducing separation79. Any thought introducesimplicitly the separation between thinker and thought. While creative thinking is one with the idea,mechancial thinking is separate from it. It has the illusion of separation built into it, so tospeak, and therefore does not recognize it.

The analogy with physics can be found in the fact that we cannot physically see the moonwithout there being a connection between the moon and our body. In this case the connection isestablished by light-waves, which travel in an apparently empty separating space. The mechanicaldescription of the universe and reality is very successful and correct, to a point, but ultimately it isembedded in the sub-certain description of quantum-theory80 and the non certain ciphers of thecontemplating human mind. In addition, moon, earth, and all other objects and energies interactwith each other through gravitational fields (gravitons).


81) The names of Bohm and Aharonov should be added because they have made such profound contributions to the

comprehension of this idea. Thus it is the EPRBA experiment. See D. Bohm, BQT, “Quantum Theory;” A. Einstein, B.

Podolsky, N. Rosen, Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935). D. Bohm and Y. Aharonov, Phys. Rev. 108, 1070 (1957).82) See section 6.4.4.3 “QUANTUM THEORY OF SPACE, TIME, AND MATTER“ on page 458 ff.

Ch. 1 Pg. 51

1.4.1.1 LOCALITY AND CREATIVE SPACE An important example of the underlying oneness of the universe which seems to indicate

non-locality is given by the Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPRBA) experiment81. Einstein used thisthought experiment to argue against the completeness of quantum theory, which he regarded asbeing fundamentally flawed, particularly in the interpretation given by Niels Bohr. It is an examplein which there seems to be an immediate instant action from one spin state of an electron to the spinstate of a positron across any distance. We assume that this positron and electron originated fromthe disintegration of a single photon. Even though the two particles may move apart from each otherfor a great distance they remain connected, or correlated, in the sense that the change of spin of oneparticle results in an immediate and instantaneous change of the spin of the other particle. Thisappears to be an action at a distance across a separating space. It may be that the quality of spacewhich is relevant in this situation is not the normal separating mechanical space but rather a'creative' kind of space which is non-mechanical and non-separating and therefore also non-causal.In the particular example of the EPRBA experiment this space is the quantum-mechanical spin-space, which may be more than just a mathematical construct. The two particles occupy the samespin-space (and have the same wave function), even though the physical “normal “three-dimensionalspace separates them.82

In the language of physics, the fact that apparently separate entities influence each otherwithout there being measurable connections (particles or fields) is called non-locality. (Einsteincalled this “spooky”!) This non-locality is part of the sub-certain actuality, already contained in theHeisenberg uncertainty relations and the whole rest of the quantum physical description. This factconstitutes Bell’s theorem. Thus, quantum theory suggests an underlying wholeness of the universe.The puzzle of non-locality should lead us to the questioning of our space-time-matter-thoughtconcepts as separate, independent parameters of a reality.

The assumption of a non-certain Nothingness-Oneness quality of time-thought-matter- space(TTMS) helps us to comprehend the mysterious behavior of particles in quantum-theory and in manyother instances as well. Thus I regard space, time, and thought, as quantities of reality. Theunderlying actuality, and What Is, can be thought of as undivided wholeness. This idea of wholenessor oneness implies that the concepts of locality and non-locality are meaningful and puzzling in areality context only. Oneness cannot be thought or expressed properly. All things in reality are ina space-time framework, in which separation, distance, movement etc. are definable. The underlyingOneness is not something in such space and time. It is the creator of space and time. Therefore, weare forced again to regard the Oneness as a No-thingness or Nothingness.

Neither locality nor non-locality should be looked at in their certain definitions ofmechanical reality. Both concepts of classical connectedness through a continuous space or absoluteseparation must be modified through a thinking of a Nothingness-Oneness-Betweenness (NOB),which is a thinking of uncertainty. Part of this thinking works effectively in terms of complementarypairs. Thus locality and non-locality can be looked at together as complementary notions,similar to reality and actuality. Even if we create a mathematical formalism which establishes atime independent connection between objects across spatial separation, thus providing a seeminglycausal mathematical connection, causality in the conventional sense remains uncertain as long asthe elements performing the connection cannot be measured simultaneously.


83) See “Generalized SAT” section 4.1.1 page 248.

Ch. 1 Pg. 52

This example from a highly advanced branch of physics illustrates a simple idea, namelythat there is a fundamental oneness of all movements of being. The intrinsic difficulty lies in ourthinking which, in the final analysis, cannot grasp the idea of a fundamental oneness with logicalconclusiveness. After all, if it is one, then how can it have different constituents? I propose to allowthe thinking of oneness to have as important a role in our worldview as the thinking of separation.In all this we must not forget that thinking Oneness means also thinking Nothingnesssimultaneously, and vice versa. The uncertainty in this thinking is fundamental and cannot beovercome.

What I suggest here is that thought, objects, and separation are unfoldments of onemovement through which relatively fixed and separate realities can be created. Their oneness isfundamental and ideal; their separation is part of appearance and reality, but both oneness andseparation are different aspects of What Is. Thus, the separation between transcendence and humanconsciousness is part of appearance. It is thought-space which separates thoughts. But whilethought-space can disappear through another act of thinking, actual space separates actual objectsin a reality.

In a quantum field theory of gravitation one finds that actual space-time needs to be thoughtof as being established by gravitons or similar quantized wave-particle fields. Strangely, while thesegravitons 'are on their way' from one particle to another, neither space nor time associated with thesevirtual gravitons can be measured, and are therefore not real either in the conventional sense of theword. “While” these “particles” are on their way, they create time and space and correlate“simultaneously” all forms of energy in it. According to the Big-Bang theory for the creation of theuniverse, all particles and other forms of energy were contained in the moment of birth, as yet non-manifest, as a non-specifiable non-object, no-where and at no-time. “They” have moved apart fromeach other, unfolding the actual universe, and “on top of that” the real observable universe. Thereal and actual universe is connected through quantum physical interactions, while the even deeperOneness is eternal. Ultimately all three are inseparably one. As this oneness is not in time andspace, it cannot be an object. It is therefore a no-thing-ness, a Nothingness. One can show that thesmallest observable object in the universe must be slightly larger in radius than 1.14"10-35 meters.(See p. 449)

All measurable phenomena occur in reality-actuality, on top of or inside or perpendicular tothis underlying Oneness-Nothingness. Just as we do not and cannot know where an electron is whileit is “jumping” from one energy level in an atom to another energy level, we cannot know where agraviton is while it is connecting any two points in our universe. This similarity between the materialbehavior of matter at the quantum level and the behavior of thinking at the subcertain level is noaccident. It merely illustrates that thinking itself is a material process. The converse is true also,material processes can at some level be looked at as generalized thinking processes.83

1.4.1.2 CREATIVE THINKING-SPACE AND MECHANICAL THOUGHT-SPACEThe connection through space between the moon and our eyes can be studied scientifically

and rationally. We can create various models of space, from the absolutely separating space inNewton’s theory to the underlying quantum-fields which unfold that space out of an unobservableNothingness-Oneness.

The connecting space between our thoughts can be compared to this physical space. Except,one has to see that the space between thoughts is created by thoughts as well. Therefore, its studyis often more a study in possibilities and plausible associations, rather then the establishment of


Ch. 1 Pg. 53

cogent cause and effect sequences. Only in the areas of logical reasoning, whose content is basedon knowledge, can we follow a reproducible trace of our thoughts. On the other hand, when we aredealing with sensations, emotions, feelings as well as with artistic, creative or spiritual ideas, theconnection between the thoughts associated with them and our conscious thinking eludes a logicalreproducible approach, and leads me to the introduction of the notion of a creative thinking-space.Evidently, thoughts are not constantly and continuously being generated. We cannot assume thatthinking in terms of specifiable thoughts is going on in the mind all the time.

I want to call thought-space (not thinking-space) the separation between thoughts or the‘separation’ between consciousness and thinking. It corresponds to the notion that the thinker andthe thought are separate entities. This separation is of course also created by the correlation betweenconsciousness and its thoughts. Such a space would have qualities which fluctuate between thecertainty of mechanical thoughts and the uncertainty of creative thinking. In mechanical thinkingthe space and separation between thoughts is very certain. In creative thinking the space betweenthinker and thought can all but vanish. Mechanical thought-space is like the certain 'space’ betweenthe numbers 0 and 1, or the space between moon and earth, presumed empty ; creative thinking-space is space without discernible separation between thinker and thought.

When we dream, for example, the space which separates the dreaming consciousness fromits objects, could be regarded as such creative thinking-space. During a meditation or contemplationthis creative thinking-space plays a role.

In Tibetan Buddhism a person is asked to learn how to visualize the form of a particularimage, a Buddha figure, until consciousness can hold that image steady in the mind. Then, thestudent learns how to bridge the space between the image and the mind until consciousness andimage merge into one. The encounter between consciousness and its image occurs in creativethought-space. The observer and the observed are simultaneously separate and yet one. Neither isreal in a substantive way; both are no-thing and both are one. Thus, in this meditation, nothingnessand oneness are created by the mind, and seen simultaneously.

The creative thinking-space is the space of ideas, of ideality, just like the mechanicalthought-space is the space of fixed thoughts and forms, which ultimately constitute reality. Once thethoughts have entered the thought-space, they follow (through consciousness) the rules of theprevalent reality. The mechanical and even quantum-mechanical understanding of the universe andits content depends on the possibility to define and measure space and time. At the boundary (whichis everywhere) of this space time structure, Nothingness takes over. The idea of creative space inthinking is comparable to the idea of this 'empty' space or Nothingness. The Nothingness of thephysical universe can at that point not be distinguished from the Nothingness of the Mind. Thus, wecome again to the existential conclusion that Nothingness is true Oneness.

This creative space is not empty but contains or is the underlying energy out of which realthings can emerge creatively and freely, but also orderly. The material observable reality which werefer to as the universe, is merely a ripple effect of this sea of unlimited energy. Humanconsciousness is also just a little ripple on top of an infinite creative thinking potential.

The idea of a creative space of thinking is a speculative tool to allow rational thinking in anon-rational domain.

In reality-space thoughts have been separated from consciousness and can be acted onconsciously by other thoughts and can be memorized. As long as thoughts have not been formed andbeen separated from the observer, the creative space is active, and consciousness is not clearlyestablished.

We understand the world by experiencing it through a combination of thinking, sensing, andacting under the guidance of thinking. The oneness of this movement then means that thinking,


Ch. 1 Pg. 54

sensing, and acting together are able to create, access, and experience the world. Whatever wethink and experience the world to be is partly a creation of thinking. By exploring ourexperiencing we also explore thinking. Any movement of thinking will sooner or later be reflectedas content of thought, revealing its different modes of operation. We want to find out what thosedifferences are. For example, when thinking moves mechanically, it creates concepts ofmechanicalness as its content. When the quality of thinking is creative, it is able to project newconcepts into consciousness. It functions then as the linking movement between uncertainintelligence and certain thought. This transient mode of our mind is what I call generative thinking.Consequently, I distinguish between three kinds of thinking:

(1) The final product of awareness as conscious thought, (physical and psychological reality;mechanical space and time);

(2) the intermediate process of subconscious thinking; dreaming and meditating areexamples; and

(3) an uncertain thinking of which the thinker is not and cannot be consciously aware. Thisis the space of creative thinking, which is unknowable, and in whose actuality or 'being' we can onlytrust.

1.4.1.3 CREATIVE THINKING-TIME-MATTER-SPACE We talked about the creative space underlying the material universe and we talked about the

creative thinking space of a human being. Ultimately, we have to admit that there is little or noseparation between the two, if we accept that human thinking is a material process. The Oneness-Nothingness of What Is encompasses both ideas. Thus, we can talk about an undivided holo-movement of a creative and intelligent Thinking-Time-Matter-Space (TTMS). Any of these notionscan be defined separately in a reality, but the deeper we explore reality the more we find that theseconcepts of reality become ideas of non-certainty. They become indistinguishable in the non-certainthinking of Oneness-Nothingness-Betweenness. It is interesting to note that in modern physics,specifically in relativistic quantum field theory, the concepts of time, space, matter, and thoughtbecome also a non-certain Oneness-Nothingness-Betweenness. Creative thinking is one with theeternal Oneness of the unobservable quantum-field-ether which enfolds and unfolds time-space-matter-thinking, from the smallest graviton to whole universes, from the laws of quantum-physicsto the laws of thinking. Whatever we think it is, it is not. It is not a thing and it is not inside anyspace-time-matter-thought delimitation. For a human consciousness it is also a thought, but it pointsbeyond any thought content and is a cipher of creative thinking. We can think it as such a cipherof undivided, unlimited, eternal, energy and intelligence which unfolds similar forms of energyand intelligence in and as reality, actuality, and truth. We can put our trust in this insight.

1.4.2 THREE MOVEMENTS OF THINKING The distinction of three different movements of thinking, which can be observed through and

in thinking, is not primarily based on the product or content of that thinking but on the qualitativedifferences of its movement: The movement of thinking is the relationship between the thinker(subject) and the thought (object). It is also the uncertain internal dynamics of thinking, inwhich subject and object are yet to be created. One may call this differentiation into three parts,which remain one, the triad of consciousness. One might also say that content-free thinking is the


84) just as physical space - including creative physical space - is what is between objects and their existence.

Ch. 1 Pg. 55

creative space which is between conscious thoughts and before them.84 What is before thoughts andbefore physical objects can be adequately labeled an unknowable no-thing-ness. This is without any'otherness' and is therefore also a oneness, thus a nothingness-oneness. The thinking whichcontemplates these ideas is between them and part of them, a betweenness.

A similar distinction of three modes of consciousness is that of the waking state, the dreamstate, and the deep sleep state. In Indian philosophy these three states are represented by the letters

A-U-M which together form the sacred mantra OM. A fourth movement of thinking is containedin this syllable which is the silence, or unknowable nothingness-oneness behind and beyond anymanifestation.

Only after thoughts and time, objects and space, have been created out of that nothingness-oneness is there a consciousness with its objects of thought. These processes may occursimultaneously: Thoughts, time, space, consciousness, and things in space.

It is consciousness which then feels compelled to explore its own essence, and the essenceof things, which are ultimately like reflections on its own space time perception. Consciousnesscomes up with notions oscillating between no-thing-ness and oneness. Our consciousness and itsobjects may therefore adequately be called a Betweenness. As there is no absolute separation, thecontent of consciousness must be between the idea of its own oneness and the idea of its own no-thing-ness. This Betweenness is the self, the self-conscious reference of thinking to itself, betweenthe certainty and uncertainty of its own existence.

To explore difference or separation as qualities of thinking seems to be an unavoidable firststep in the classification of thought. The goal is for the mind to truly comprehend its own natureand the products of the mind as such Betweenness. Our consciousness vacillates between thecertainty of fixed thought and the non-certainty of self-reflection. To remain for too long on one orthe other side of the middle path fosters illusion and deception.

Depending on its dominant mode of operation, an observing consciousness may see thinkerand thought related in different ways, with different degrees of self-deception:

! As being totally separate, (e.g.: I am in complete control of my thoughts)! as being totally one, (e.g.: I am God)! or as being neither totally separate nor totally one. (e.g.: Who am I?) The modes of separation correspond to degrees of certainty. The more a thinking

consciousness is separate from the content of its thinking the more this consciousness can becertain of that content, and can imagine to be in complete control of its thinking. The moreconsciousness is one with the content of its thinking the less is its demand for certainty. Certainty(security or fear) has no meaning for a holistic consciousness. The self can see that it is the sum totalof all of its thinking. It starts to see that without thinking there is no self, there is no reality. Whatis when there is no thinking is evidently no reality and no thing, both of which are products ofthought. However, this state of nothingness excludes reality, and is therefore also limited and notholistic. The mind can move from one state to the other to some degree. It is the flexibility whichmaintains the health and creativity of the mind, the middle path. The state of mind, when thinkingappears to occur without the self, is not absolutely separate from the thinking self. Otherwise, therewould be no access, no memory, no reference possible to it. We cannot abandon the modes ofoperation of rational thinking, if we want to communicate.

We can classify the movements of separation between thinker and thought according to theireffect on thinking and arrive at three qualitatively different movements of thinking, the triad ofthinking :


85) In quantum field theory, theoretical physicists make effective use of generators of physical entities, the Lorentz and

Poincare group descriptions, for example. The algebras involved are called Lie algebras. [A, B] = C; see glossary on page

516.

Ch. 1 Pg. 56

(1) Mechanical thinking is a thinking in terms of fixed rules. It preserves traditional andhabitual thinking and can be mechanically described as a movement of thought based on cause andeffect, which may be imagined or real. This thinking can be correct and certain within a limited area.Opposites can not be thought together. This is the domain of logic. In the world of realitymechanical thinking in its rational, mathematical, and scientific forms can help to discover the truth(correctness) of real relationships. This correctness is the classical certain correspondence betweenthought and thing.

(2) Generative thinking extends and modifies rules of thinking and thought-forms. It is asub-conscious, sub-certain movement between mechanical and creative thinking and displaysproperties similar to those which can be found in the quantum physical description of phenomena.Correctness in the single event (in contrast to events in the statistical aggregate) becomes necessarilysub-certain.

(3) Creative thinking cannot be described adequately, but we can allude to it indirectlythrough dialectic metaphors and ciphers. On this level, the uncertain creation of radically new rulesand thought-forms begins. The concept of correctness must be replaced by the uncertain dynamicidea of truth. This thinking is closely related to dialectic thinking, in the sense that opposingthoughts and ideas can be mirrored on each other (mirroring = speculating) and be seen as one andseparate simultaneously. Creative thinking is part of what I call insight and intelligence. It ismysticism for mechanical thinking.85

Unless human freedom and the meaningfulness of human life are part of non-mechanicalactuality these ideas cannot be saved and become superstition.

All the key notions mentioned in these short definitions serve as a means to ourinvestigation. In the process of this exploration they will lead to a clarification of the problematicissues at hand and of themselves. Let us now look closer at the different kinds of thinking.

1.4.2.1 MECHANICAL THINKING A) Western ApproachMechanical thinking is based on fixed and certain definitions and ratios and is dominated

by the undoubted divisions between thinker and thought, between subject and object, between mindand matter, and so forth. It is a dualistic thinking in terms of mutually exclusive opposites. If weapply such thinking to a reality in general, it leads to the appearance and experience of absolutedivisions in that reality. This is the domain of a particular kind of knowledge, which I call certain.Certainty requires the possibility to discern, to distinguish, and to separate definitely. However, thethinking of certainty can be easily confused with opinions in connection with strong sensations andemotions. In general, mechanical thinking is most often based on an unquestioned conditioning, onhabits, and on conventions.

The fundamental importance of mechanical thinking lies in the fact that it gives us thepossibility to arrive at certain and correct knowledge by means of universal methods ofrational thinking. Mechanical thinking, in conjunction with sense impressions, produces theexperience of facts with their appearance of certainty, which cannot be rationally put into doubt bythat same thinking. The 'facts' can be opposed and attacked by other mechanical thinking, based ondifferent sets of habits and conventions, but they cannot be seen to be relative and dependent onfixed parameters of mechanical thinking. Whatever is accessible to such mechanical thinking will


Ch. 1 Pg. 57

be called reality. The facts of a reality can only be changed through a transformation or revolutionof thinking with a different reality in its wake. This revolution is the unpredictable result of creativeacts, in which thinking and acting merge into an uncertain whole.

The certainty of consciousness has no meaning or absolute value in itself, whereas theuncertainty of intelligence is What Is. But without becoming real to some extent the uncertaincreativity has no significance. The problem is that we are desperately seeking absolute certainmeaning, and this despair is one of the sustaining powers of the rational self and the irrational ego.The rational self is a product of the search for meaning, whereas the irrational ego is the result ofthe desperate search for absolute meaning, which would give absolute meaning and certainty to theself.

B) Asian-Indian ApproachOn its own, this movement of reality is in Hindu terminology called Maya, also avidya

(ignorance but also active contribution to the mechanical web of conditioning). This is not wrongthinking per se but conventional thinking which closes itself off to the transforming powers ofchange as contained in the non-certain modes of thinking. The lover and husband of Maya is Shiva,the dispeller and destroyer of illusion. The mythology of India describes the endless stories ofseparation and reunion between Shiva and Maya, the endless struggle between the creation,transformation, and destruction of illusion. Maya in its purest form is also comparable to the state

of waking consciousness, characterized by the letter A in the sacred Indian-Asian syllable AUM

or OM. (Mandukya Upanishad.)The irrational ego is the most prevailing veil of Maya, with which she, i.e. our ignorance or

avidya, cloaks actuality. As we shall see later, there is a layer of this veil of Maya, which even ourgreatest intelligence cannot lift. But we are not speaking of that Maya here, to which even the Godsare subjected.

The challenge is therefore to think both intelligently (with uncertainty) and rationally(with limited certainty):

We must learn to intelligently choose limited meaningful areas of thinking and to define themeans and rules by which to explore them rationally. Within these limits, certain results arepossible, but as a whole this process is non-certain. The results of a limited exploration must againbe evaluated rationally and intelligently. The actual life-experience of a human being will alwaysbe contained between the ideas of certainty and uncertainty. As we are generally only conscious ofmechanical thought, we tend to believe that all activities of thought are activities of the intellectalone and, as such, are mechanical. In the subsequent chapters it will become clear that such a beliefis misleading and contains serious dangers for the individual and general consciousness of man. Butwe shall also show that, on the other hand, a mystification of the human mind and a rejection ofscientific methods is a murky and even more dangerous approach to man's problems as well. Tooppose scientific and rational methods as being the quintessentially bad and mechanical waysof operation, which are responsible for all the ills of our times, must lead to a new era ofsuperstition and ignorance. It seems that in order to keep fundamental ideas of truth alive inscience, philosophy, and religion, but above all in human relationships and society, one mustconstantly reflect on these ideas, lest one fall prey to the somnambulance of convention and make-believe facts. One does not need to be a philosopher or scientist to be able to think about such'deeper' ideas. Every human being who is able to enter an honest inner dialogue with him or herselfis open enough to dispel confusion and illusion. Indeed all that is required is that a person enter intothis inner dialogue. The first step is the essential step, or, the goal and the path are one and the same.


Ch. 1 Pg. 58

We must never allow the specialists: philosophers, priests, educationists, or politicians todefine meaning for us.

1.4.2.2 GENERATIVE THINKING A) Western ApproachWhen we think of the non-certain and essentially unknowable area of truth and intelligence

we are using formal words and yet we want to communicate through these mechanical forms an ideawhich is not at all mechanical. Herein lies hidden the difficulty of all true communication. Themeaning of truth and intelligence reveals itself only when the separation between thinker andthought is in suspension. Meaning can therefore not be cogently captured or conveyed throughlogical terms alone. Formal language, or any finite thing of any form, can only serve as a pointer bymeans of which individual human beings can intuit a meaning of truth and intelligence. I concludefrom this that there must be some kind of a transition between the unknowable movement ofthinking without subject-object split and the formal thinking of a consciousness. This is theintermediate movement which I call the generative mode of thinking. I call it a particular processof betweenness. Generative thinking can be thought of as being the mediator between intelligent andmechanical thinking. It is acted upon by intelligence, and, utilizing parts of mechanical thinking, itcan extend, modify, and change mechanical thinking. One might say that in this thinking theseparation of consciousness from its objects is in a state of suspension. Thus, generative thinkingcomprises the area between certainty and uncertainty which means that it is sub-certain. The sub-certain thinker of sub-certain thoughts will be referred to as sub-consciousness. As that thinking issub-certain, we must bear in mind that we cannot describe and study it as an object which followsrules of causality exclusively. We cannot arrive at universal and certain conclusions about it withoutviolating truth.

B) Asian-Indian ApproachIn Hindu terminology this mode of thinking is called dhyana, inner seeing, contemplative

or meditative thinking-seeing-sensing; dhyana is intelligent attention. It is the letter U in the syllable

AUM. Without this thinking actively participating in consciousness, the mind remains in the stateof illusion of deceptive Maya and avidya (ignorance). This thinking is the transition betweensamsara (world of ignorance and suffering) and nirvana (world of wisdom and bliss); it is thevehicle ('yana,' like in Mahayana, Hinayana, etc.) to take the mind to the other shore from where themind can see that all is one, that there is no shore, no vehicle, that even samsara and nirvana are bothconcepts which are ultimately empty. This thinking is the energy which binds Shiva and Shaktidialectically together and suspends that union again intelligently.

As long as thinking goes on in a living mind with a conscious self, this consciousness hasto acquaint itself with those less certain dream-like modes of thinking. The pathless land begins here.

1.4.2.3 CREATIVE THINKINGLet me quote the poet and historian Ranke Graves on creative thinking: "Indian mystics hold that to think with perfect clarity in a

religious sense one must first eliminate all physical desire, eventhe desire to continue living; but this is not at all the case withpoetic thinking, since poetry is rooted in love, and love is desire,and desire is hope for continued existence. However, to thinkwith perfect clarity in a poetic sense one must first rid oneself of


86) Robert Graves, “The White Goddess,” GWG , page 409.87) This is in contrast to generative thinking which creates out of something under the guidance of creative thinking.88) 'nous' in Greek; (like in noumenon which is the opposite of phenomenon ) or 'Vernunft ' in German.

Ch. 1 Pg. 59

a great deal of intellectual encumbrance: political party, religioussect, or literary school deforms the poetic sense -as it were-,introduces something irrelevant and destructive into the magiccircle, drawn with a rowan, hazel or willow rod, within which thepoet insulates himself for the poetic act. He must achieve socialand spiritual independence at whatever cost, learn to thinkmythically as well as rationally, and never be surprised at theweirdly azoölogical beasts which walk into the circle, they cometo be questioned, not to alarm."86

Needless to say, that the characterization (by Robert Graves) of Indian philosophicalthinking attacks the ascetic kind, the one which is as confused as most of the similar Westernapproaches. I want to show that the culture and religion around Shiva-Shakti Maya, is themore profound attitude. According to Heinrich Zimmer this thinking is more deeply rooted in theIndian psyche than any other thinking. The images which are omnipresent in Indian temples andmyths support this view. This is the Indian and Tibetan thinking which I use in my approach. It iscertainly dominant in Mahayana Buddhism, in Shaktism, Tantra, and Vajrayana Budhhism.

A) Western ApproachCreative thinking is even more difficult to characterize and eludes a strict definition

altogether. We can speak about it in terms of what it is not, and allude to it through metaphors likeNirvana, nothingness, truth, divine wisdom, etc. As the name conveys, this thinking can create, bywhich I mean that it can even create out of nothing.87 When creative thinking is operating freely,being non-exclusively together with the other modes of thinking, it is intelligence88 in action.Clearly, a subjective consciousness in opposition to its object thought cannot be aware of thisthinking at all. A mind that is functioning predominantly in this creative mode at a particularmoment is at that moment a world in itself and is one movement, in which thinking is being andbeing is thinking; it is the mystic’s experience in which thinking of truth is truth, but which does notknow itself. This thinking-thinker is not in a reality and is therefore not limited by orderingprinciples. This thinking occurs in creative thinking space. But without reality this thinking isirrelevant. Where there are no differences nothing can be revealed. Thus, for such thinking to affectreality, it must take on a form; and the thinker must come into reality.

But for a consciousness which is dominated by certainty, creative thinking appears to be notonly uncertain but even non-existent, as though it were nothing, and yet, this creative thinking is thesource for that consciousness.

What I mean by uncertainty - and this is important to understand - is not merely the oppositeof certainty but a different quality, a different ‘space’ of thinking altogether. Throughout thisbook I use the word non-certain to imply a thinking which is beyond all mechanicalness(dialectically opposed to it) and which I subdivide further - as I have already indicated - into a sub-certain (generative ) and an uncertain (creative) thinking. This creative kind of thinking cannot bean object to conscious thought without losing its direct contact with uncertain creativity. Anycontent of conscious thinking can therefore only point towards creative thinking or its essence,which is truth. I call such pointers ciphers, ideas, and metaphors.


89) Paul Deussen, “The Philosophy Of The Upanishads,” 1906, DPU.

Ch. 1 Pg. 60

Figure 10Shiva-Nataraja, 1, Bronze 14", 20th Century

B) Asian-Indian Approach, OM "The Self, beyond all words, is the syllable OM. This syllable,

though indivisible, consists of three letters A-U-M...Whosoever knows OM, knows the Self, becomes the Self." Mandukya Upanishad.

In Hindu terminology this thinking or non-thinking can be called nirvana, highest wisdom,

nothingness and oneness in union. In the context of the syllable OM or AUM it is characterized by

the letter M , but also by the

whole syllable AUM itself,and the empty spacesurrounding it. This meansthat this thinking does notexclude the other two states,but embraces them asmovements. Such thinking isnot a thinking which couldbe arrived at by the two othermovements, or even bedescribed by them inadequate terms. For them itappears to be illusory. Butthis thinking can influenceand radically alter the moremechanical forms ofthinking. The consciousnessthat 'advances ' f rommechanical to creativethinking is that all inclusivethinking already. In otherwords, the thinkingunfolding from mechanicalto creative is creative, thepath and the goal are one.As this thinking cannot becontrolled by the thinker, itrepresents unconscious thinking without the thinking self. As such it is called prajna in Sanskrit.It can be described metaphorically as the essence of the soul (atman), the ’soul in deep sleep,' or the'objectless subject of consciousness.'89


90) See for example the figures on pages 34, 338, 358 and 500.91) Translated from: Wolfgang Schadewaldt, SW, page 384.

Ch. 1 Pg. 61

The oneness of seemingly polar opposites is dramatized by the Yab-Yum figures of Tibet,the Buddha and his consort in erotic embrace 90. The central Buddha figure sitting in Lotus positionon a Lotus throne is the Nothingness of creative thinking or nirvana consciousness, symbolized bythe Vajra, the diamond of unbreakable translucency, which he often carries in his hand or on hisheaddress. Many times he carries a bell with a Vajra handle in one hand and a Vajra scepter in theother, symbolizing again the oneness of the complementary principles of female (bell) and male(Vajra), nothingness and oneness. The female figure sitting on the Buddha’s lap encircles her loverwith her legs and embraces him. She also holds the diamond of Nothingness, often attached to askinning knife in her right hand. In her left hand she carries a skullcup filled with blood and braintissue. She represents the action of generative and mechanical thinking, the Maya of the world,which presents itself to the waking consciousness as separate. She cuts off the ego from the self likethe skin from the flesh. Nothingness is in loving embrace with Oneness. All aspects of love areincluded in Yab-Yum, from carnal to divine. We are dealing with an awareness of the correlationof dialectically opposed principles at every level of the visual representation. The same idea isrepresented in the famous Southern Indian bronze statues showing the dance of Shiva.

The dancing Shiva's facial expression shows the serene aloofness of the mind immersed innothingness, the incarnation of the yogi who has renounced the world. His beautiful floating longhair, on the other hand, defies this same asceticism. So does the whole body of Shiva, dancingecstatically the dance of the world, accompanied by a swaying cobra, celebrating creation, action,joy, and exhilaration. He stomps down on a dwarfish figure lying on his fat belly and representingthe repressive forces contained in both asceticism as well as in overindulgence. That little figure,representing mankind, tries to strangle the forces of nature represented by another cobra, to no availof course. This diminutive figure is in terrified awe of Shiva and his dance on the razor's edgebetween exhilarating life affirming action, and the unfazed meditation of Shiva's head which is onewith the whole of creation.

Both kinds of statues, the Yab-Yum statues of Tibet and the Nataraja images, show theoneness of seemingly opposing forces, as well as the oneness between the world and paradise.Heaven is hell, nirvana is samsara, there is no path from here to there. To see this is the invisiblepath.

1.4.3 CIPHER AND SUNYATA

"THE LORD, WHOSE IS THE ORACLE OF DELPHI,

NEITHER DEMONSTRATES NOR COVERS UP, BUT

SPEAKS IN CIPHERS." Fragment 93, Heraclitus.91 In this introductory description the dialectic nature of thinking begins to emerge: Thinking,

as seen from the standpoint of mechanical consciousness, appears to be a movement betweenthe uncertain nothingness of creativity (chaos and revolution) and the certain oneness ofconsciousness, absolute law and meaning. It seems elusive, if not illusory.

Seen from the sub-certain viewpoint of generative and creative thinking, it appears to be theother way around, i.e. consciousness appears as empty nothingness (meaninglessness) and creativity


92) In Hinduism, in particular Vaishnavism, with Vishnu at the center of worship, the action of a divine being or Avatar,

who has come to this world out of an act of free will, not out of karm ic causality, is required to set a human being free.

This is similar to Christianity. In Buddhism, every human being is essentially an integral part of this freedom, and can

therefore see his maya and ignorance.

Ch. 1 Pg. 62

as full oneness (order and beauty). If thinking comprehends that both appearances and thecorresponding viewpoints are meaningful and subcertain, the absoluteness of either one has beensuspended and thinking can start to free itself of its errors and illusions. Then thinking has found thethird energy source between and beyond the mechanical dialectic of rational thought. Indian sagesas well as mystics during all times and civilizations use this sub-certain domain as their primereference and regard reality with all its strife and suffering as illusion. They call this reality the Mayaand mean illusion. From here comes the Buddha’s statement that "All life is suffering."

From here also comes Heraclitus' insight which proclaimed: "We must know that war is common to all, and strife is justice, andthat all things come into being according to this strife as well asdeeds and indebtedness." "All is one." (Heraclitus, fragments 80 and58. Translation by FW.)

The Buddha and Heraclitus were both aware that their teachings would be very hard tounderstand and comprehend. We can see that both viewpoints, the one with reality as true referenceand the one with the mystical experience as true reference, are simplifications, clouded by the tricksof Maya, whose powers stretch from the mechanical to the creative domain, or our understandingthereof. Wherever there is self-consciousness in a reality, the web of Maya is already stretched. TheBuddha did not merely describe what he saw, namely human suffering. He also saw its cause inhuman ignorance which leads to the illusion of the ego and to wrong action, wrong Karma, and anever ending wheel of cause and effect. A person has to awaken to this truth, have insight into it,comprehend it, and understand it. (“Buddha” means, “the awakened one.”) This is the ultimateact of freedom.

It seems to me that Heraclitus' insights are very close to the Indian, more specificallyBuddhist, ideas of karma and enlightenment.92 Particularly so, if taken together with the inscriptionat Apollo’s temple at Delphi, which reads GNOTHI SEAUTON, meaning "comprehend yourself;have insight into who you are; know thyself."

1.4.3.1 CIPHER AND SUNYATA Sometimes the etymology of a notion reveals the dialectic character of thinking. This is most

strikingly the case for the words zero and cipher which have the same root. Indeed, the very wordcipher is a cipher. It derives from the Sanskrit word sunya which means empty. The noun sunyatacame to mean the emptiness of the meditating mind. For the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna(second to third century C.E.) this sunyata, in which "nothing is" and "Is, is nothing," is nirvana.The word sunya found its way into the Arabic language as as-fir, which means emptiness. From thisthe notion unfolded via the Latin word ‘cifra’ to the English word cipher, which can mean ‘zero,number, non-entity, code or a message in code’. The German philosopher Karl Jaspers introducedthe word into his philosophy in the sense I want to use here:

Cipher is a word, a sentence, or a message of any kind which triesto convey and communicate meaning of What Is. The meaning ofa cipher is inexhaustible and cannot be reduced to formal logic.


93) Parmenides, 540-480 B.C.E., of Elea, lower Italy.

Ch. 1 Pg. 63

The limited logical contents of two ciphers can even contradict each other while theirmeaning may be similar.

Let me illustrate this with a historical example: The philosopher Parmenides of Elea93 useda statement to describe the core of his enlightening insight - revealed to him by the Goddess - whichis logically the opposite of the Indian philosopher's Nagarjuna statement. Parmenides said "Is, is"and "Is Not, is not," and he meant to say that conscious thinking can only explore that which itencounters as object. Nothing is not an object and can therefore not be explored.

If we contrast this with Nagarjuna's "nothing is" and "Is, is nothing," we can see that bothphilosophers seem to be in irreconcilably separate camps. But the meaning of these cipherstranscends logic. In typical dialectic fashion the nothingness of Nagarjuna, i.e. Sunyata, became also

Sunya-Sunya, Nothingness which is not nothingness, the negation of Nothingness; beingnegation of all, it must also negate itself.

About the essence of What Is or the essence of Nothing, cogent statements which can bechecked out with dualistic logic, lead to emptiness. The statements of the two philosophers are trulydialectic opposites. Both try to fathom the unknowable dynamic intelligence of the human mind,faced with the equally unknowable cipher of What Is. The forms through which they expressed theirinsight and the general thrust were different. But the idea behind the form, the energy of thinkingwhich expressed itself as meaning of the cipher, was essentially the same. The level of abstractionin both statements is pushed to the limits of human comprehension, the limits where the differencebetween 'Is' and 'Nothing is,' is between 'Is' and 'Is-not.' The difference does not exist; it is andis not.

I regard both statements as existential appeals to human transcendence. Parmenides (likelater Wittgenstein) tried to warn against entering the pathless land of Nothingness, saying in essence"Don't go there," which could be interpreted as meaning "there is nothing there." Nagarjuna said thatthe mind has to undergo a transformation, thinking must change in order to see that 'Nothing Is,'and 'Is, is Nothing.'

1.4.3.2 CIPHERS OF TIBETAN ARTWhat is relevant is not the form of these statements but the fact that a human being takes

them seriously and places his or her honest trust in them and then approaches those limits of thinkingthrough genuine thinking. Right now, this example may serve as an illustration of how I intend touse the notion of cipher and idea. What we can know of an idea is always just its manifestation. Itrequires trust and courage to 'endorse' such a manifestation by living according to one'sunderstanding of it, but by always being alert to possible self-deception.

This trust is inseparable from the actual insight. Trust and truth of intelligent thinking areone with that thinking and open to communication. The Buddhist notions of "dharma," and of"wisdom and compassion" come to mind, when alluding to this energy between trust and truth. Theparticular form of trust in an idea - truth - must prove itself in a reality. But the trust carried over intoreality as an absolute certainty is altogether a different thing and is deceptive in its isolated andisolating knowledge.

The cipher language is even more pronounced in the works of religious art as shownthroughout this book. Tibetan art in particular shows this capacity of speaking to all levels of ahuman being. The Yab-Yum statuettes, for example, can be seen as highest revelation of wisdom,


94) See Shaw, Miranda: “Passionate Enlightenment,” SPE, page 132.95) See chapter 4.

Ch. 1 Pg. 64

or they can be seen as the pornographic pagan celebrations of sexuality in its Christian associationwith devil worship. With ciphers of any kind we come to the insight that the observer is theobserved; what an observer is able to see in a cipher is a reflection of the degree of wisdom of thebeholding mind. Thus, a cipher is a mirror, as well as a light which the mind can follow in its searchof nothingness and oneness. As Goethe said: "Anything transient is merely metaphor" ("AllesVergängliche ist nur ein Gleichnis.")

Tibetan art is created with this comprehension. The statues are educational devices, notmeant to be prayed to from the outside. Just like in any true learning, the mind of the student mustget existentially involved. It must immerse itself in the ocean of wisdom which is alive underneaththe superficial appearance of reality. The historical Buddha can be seen in the same light as a cipheremerging in and as reality. All reality is ultimately cipher. The female Tantric teacher of the monkSaraha said: "The Buddha's teaching can be known through symbols and actions, not throughwords and books."94

This is true in the sense that actions are more encompassing than thoughts, but only if we areconsidering holistic actions. But then again, any holistic movement, be it in thinking or in acting,can bring about radical change. As a matter of fact any creative acting is also a creative thinking,and thus holistic, and vice versa.95

1.4.3.3 CREATION AND TRANSFORMATION OF REALITIES

Different manifestations of the same idea might create whole new realities, be incorporatedin a reality, or be quickly forgotten. The idea which may have led to the earlier-mentionedrationalization of all aspects of modern societies arose possibly out of the ideal demand for averifiable truth, at the roots of which were probably questions such as these: "How can one becertain of some concepts or observation in a reality; is there a certainty which can be verifiedobjectively by every person who desires to do so?"

To make progress toward a true and correct reality such as the one mentioned may takehundreds or thousands of years of trial and error. The insight, trust, skills, and intelligence ofgenerations of people are required for its implementation. Such an evolution of reality is evidentlynot an easy process. It is usually people who live at the edges of reality, who dare to propose somenew idea. They do not propose it out of a whim or as an opinion, but because they trust in theirinsight, live it, and risk their lives for it if necessary. Having that insight allows them also to see theweaknesses of a particular reality and its potential destructiveness. To live at the edges of realitymeans to be free of reality, in spite of living in it, and to be open to cipher and transcendence. Evena reality in itself, our understanding of it and ourselves, remain fundamentally cipher. We mustembed our reality in the creative space of ideality. There is no point in fighting Maya. But to dancewith her may lead to a moment of bliss, in which confusion gets cleared up.

It is this lived sub-certainty which makes us human and free: To function in a reality but yetnot to confuse the certainty which is possible within it with an absolute certainty in the reality-transcending areas of values and ciphers. We are tempted to build our lives and realities on values,good values, on which we all hopefully can agree. But then we must define the values, and this iswhere the trouble begins.

In our lives as individuals and as groups, as societies and as nations we are often challengedto change our realities when we are confronted with disasters, catastrophes, or simply some


96) Campbell, CCM , page 84.97) This translation follows closely a text by F.W . von Schelling in his “Philosophy Of Mythology” lecture #14. (The

words in parentheses are transliterations of the original Greek w ords.)

Ch. 1 Pg. 65

unexpected changes. The death of a beloved spouse or the realization that a trusted friend hasdeceived one can be such incidents in which our realities are shaken and we are called upon to lookat life with new eyes.

When Germany was transformed into a totalitarian system during the Third Reich manyGermans did not understand that their outward reality was changing to a degree that threatened theirexistence and transcendence. In order to meet that threat they had to see and understand this threat,which led to an immediate change of their way of thinking and living, i.e. a change of their personalreality. If they had been law abiding citizens before, they were suddenly confronted with the taskof fighting against an oppressive system with all possible means, including disobedience,underground resistance, and even the taking of human life. Such a radical change of one's realityrequires insight, creative thinking, courage, and daring. For the person who is flexible and generallyopen, the change may seem relatively easy; but the person who does not want to be confronted withthe facts and consequences of what is happening, the demand to change means either the agony ofhelplessness, frustration, and despair, or it results in a conforming to the new situation. Avoidingto see the facts relieves one psychologically from the dreaded responsibility to act and change.Inertia is security.

1.4.4 EXAMPLES OF CREATIVE THINKING These examples should make clear that creative thinking is not limited to people such as

artists, poets, and novelists, but that it is absolutely relevant for every human being. What sets(some) poets and philosophers a little apart is that they have always to some degree been aware ofthis important and extraordinary faculty of the human mind, and that they have tried to express andcommunicate it, tried to "open their own truth and depth to the depth and truth of another in sucha way as to establish an authentic community of existence96 and transcendence."

1.4.4.1 PLATO'S IDEA OF GENERATIVE THINKING Let me give some additional examples of generative and creative thinking. It should become

quite clear in these following excerpts that the boundaries between creative and generative thinkingare fleeting. Plato describes the realm of generative thinking at the end of book VI of his “Republic”:

"Hear now what I call the other part of the intelligible, namely thatwhich intelligence (logos) itself touches. It does so by creatingpropositions and preconditions (hypotheses) through its own dialecticpowers (dialectic dynamics), propositions which are not principlesbut truly (to onti) mere propositions, like attempts and accesses, tomove with their help to that which is without propositions andpreconditions; to the beginning of all, the principle of all-being."97

In the allegory of the cave (book VII of the “Republic”) Plato states that those who havebeen outside of the cave are ridiculed when they return, since their eyes, having been exposed to thetrue light of transcendence, are now disaccustomed to the darkness in the cave. They can no longerrightly discern and judge the shadows on the walls, which for the cave dwellers are the only truereality. The people who have been outside of the cave are the truly creative people. They live in the


Ch. 1 Pg. 66

common reality but they have somehow avoided to block their access to the creative movements oftheir mind. Their mechanical thinking is relatively open to creative change. Plato may have had inmind only intellectual, highly sophisticated, rational thinking, because he condemned the oldmythologies, and he was very suspicious of the senses. Whether he wanted to attack only the literalunderstanding of mythologies, or the mythologies and the ideas behind them, I don't know.

Be that as it may, from the point of view of the mystical insight, normal reality is merely aplay of shadows, an illusion, but as I have said before, this characterization is deceptive itself.

1.4.4.2 A POETIC DESCRIPTION OF THINKING BY H. HESSE Hermann Hesse describes a movement of thinking, which is an excellent expression of what

I want to allude to by the metaphor of creative and generative thinking. In his “Glass Bead Game”he writes about a new awakened energy in Joseph Knecht :

"He felt changed, growing; he felt new tensions and new harmoniesbetween himself and the world. There were times, now, in music,Latin, and mathematics, when he could master tasks that were still farbeyond his age and the scope of his schoolmates. Sometimes he feltcapable of any achievements. At other times he might forgeteverything and daydream with a new softness and surrender, listen tothe wind or the rain, gaze into the chalice of a flower or the movingwaters of the river, understanding nothing, divining everything, lostin sympathy, curiosity, the craving to comprehend, carried away fromhis own self toward another, toward the world, toward the mysteryand sacrament, the at once painful and lovely play of the world ofappearances."

1.4.4.3 AN EXAMPLE FOR CREATIVE AND GENERATIVE THINKING, BY H.POINCARE

In his book “Science And Method “Henri Poincaré describes the ways in which he came tosome important mathematical discoveries.

"For a fortnight I had been attempting to prove that there could notbe any function analogous to what I have since called Fuchsianfunctions. I was at that time very ignorant. Every day I sat down atmy table and spent an hour or two trying a great number ofcombinations, and I arrived at no result. One night I took some blackcoffee, contrary to my custom, and was unable to sleep. A host ofideas kept surging in my head; I could almost feel them jostling oneanother, until two of them coalesced, so to speak, to form a stablecombination. When morning came, I had established the existence ofone class of Fuchsian functions, those that are derived from thehypergeometric series. I had only to verify the results, which onlytook a few hours... When we arrived at Coutances, we got into abreak to go for a drive, and, just as I put my foot on the step, the ideacame to me, though nothing in my former thoughts seemed to haveprepared me for it, that the transformations I had used to defineFuchsian functions were identical with those of non-Euclidiangeometry. I made no verification,... but I felt absolute certainty at


Ch. 1 Pg. 67

once. When I got back to Caen I verified the result at my leisure tosatisfy my conscience."

I chose this example because it demonstrates the movement between conscious,subconscious, and unconscious thinking with little interference from the senses. The thinking interms of numbers or rigid building blocks exists in its pure form in mathematics. This is mechanicaland generative thinking at its best. The creation and generation of new entities, laws, andrelationships is in analogy named creative and generative thinking. Creative, generative, andmechanical thinking are always present simultaneously in the human mind, even though aparticular mind in its form of consciousness might never become aware of a creation of its own.But the insight, which seems simple, that certain thoughts can be manipulated through fixed abstractsymbols, denoting pure quantity, is an act of creative thinking. This is of course the beginning ofcounting.

In the previous example, taken from mathematics, which in its formal aspects is a thinkingwith and between the numbers 0 and 1, I showed that the idea of creative, unconscious thinking iswell known.

A mathematician may, through playful creative thinking in the unknown area of truth, arriveat a correctness, a formal theorem, which can be conveyed to anyone in a cogent way. A physicistmay connect the abstract notions of mathematics and re-discover them in nature, and vice versa, hemay find that to an insight into nature there correspond mathematical equations. To understand thefact that some differential equations of mathematics contain our deepest knowledge aboutnature is in itself one of the most profound acts of creative and generative thinking.

Philosophy on the other hand is, as I see it, a self exploration of the whole human being,which leads to a truth revealing itself in communication. This communication is with life and otherhuman beings. A mathematical and scientific truth differs therefore fundamentally from aphilosophical truth. The former can be possessed, known, and used in terms of definite statementsand laws without which the mind loses its mechanicalness. A philosophical truth engages the wholeperson, including the operations of sensing and acting.

The form of the particular mathematical truth is so efficient and powerful that itappears to be the actual truth itself. Such a truth and its form are universal within limitations,which can sometimes also be known. A philosophical truth, on the other hand, begins at thoselimitations and goes beyond them to the unknowable center of creative space of the humanbeing where any correctness, logic, and reason originates. A statement which is a potentialphilosophical truth requires a change in thinking, in which mechanical thinking loses itsdominating function. The form of its truth is meaningless per se and can only serve as a challengeand appeal to let go of the mechanical reality and self and to open up for freedom and creativity.

1.4.4.4 BUDDHIST IDEA OF CREATIVE THINKINGThe essence of Buddhist thinking is in my terminology to overcome the illusory certainty

and security of a mechanical world view. This worldview is avidya (ignorance) or Maya. Both formthe reality called samsara. The transcending comprehension of the truth behind samsara is thegoal of Buddhism and is called nirvana.

The Hindu term Maya has the clear connotation with the active principle of creating amechanical world through restrictive mechanical thinking. It alone is actually void and empty andin addition has a tendency of being utterly destructive for all living beings.


98) This is the essential insight of Vajrayana Buddhism, which is a form of Mahayana Buddhism. For most more

traditional forms of Buddhism the goal of 'enlightenment' remains.

Ch. 1 Pg. 68

Avidya and maya is not merely the lack of knowledge or deceptive illusion, but theseparation (by consciousness) of a oneness into a fragmented world of separate things,thoughts, individualities, which have the appearance of being absolutely independent fromhuman thinking.

It is the goal of true thinking to see the danger and destruction which can arise frommechanical thinking. The mechanical self and ego must be overcome, i.e. understood andtranscended. Nirvana is creative thinking and the comprehension of emptiness of the self. It is theopening of the mind to its own unconditioned creativity and clarity. In this comprehension the emptyself, a negative concept, is transcended to a oneness-nothingness, sunyata, a positive concept. Theempty self is controlled by fear and the desire to fill its emptiness with the never-ending diversionof the day: power, money, fame, and superficial pleasure.

But there is no self or individual which could ever reach nirvana, because the concepts ofself, nirvana, goal, etc. are themselves part of maya. There is no goal to reach, no river to cross;samsara is nirvana.98 The notions are at best temporary sign posts, which have to be understood intheir limitation.

This is why it is impossible to talk about creative thinking or enlightenment, or any spiritualmatter, without entering a world which is characterized as dhyana: meditative, dreamlike, mystical.But this mode must be complemented by clarity, rationality, sharpness, and profound knowledge.The clear mind must not be sacrificed to an irrational mind, which often stands for mystical.Intelligence with knowledge, and knowledge with intelligence must move harmoniously together.To achieve this, the mind must shift gears, so to speak, in moving away from its predominantlymechanical and conditioned mode.

But this cannot be done through an act of will, which would be an activity of the mechanicalself. This belies the fact, of course, that so-called spiritual authorities, from priests to shamans topsychiatrists have offered innumerable methods, procedures, rituals, and ceremonies which pretendto lead a person from here to there, from an empty meaningless life to a meaningful fulfilled life.

A different, creative and free thinking is needed. It will lead to different acting in existentialsituations. Life as a whole with all its uncertainties can in the best and clearest moments be seen asthe mystery, the beauty, the challenge, the dance. All of this is the doing of creative thinking inconjunction with creative acting and sensing. And the creativity is also an openness to themechanical aspects of our thinking and existence, which are ultimately as sacred and necessary asthe creative aspects.


Ch. 1 Pg. 69

Figure 11 Amitabha Buddha

This kind of creative thinking (holy wisdom, dhyana, gnosis (Gnosticism), bodhi(Buddhism), nous, Vernunft) is simultaneously a sensing and internal acting. In the Western worldwe often talk about intuition to allude to such thinking. This thinking, dhyana, involves paying closeattention to the activities of the psycho-somatic entity, but

attention in such a way that the conscious self is not in exclusive control over its activities. Rather,in this attention the rigidity of the self dissolves. Then the mind can see that the object of thinkingand sensing is partly created and maintained by itself. Such attention has been systematicallyexplored in Vajrayana Buddhism. Dhyana Buddhas are Buddha images, or rather tangible ideas inthe most profound sense, created to facilitate this thinking and living through contemplation andmeditation.

The Buddha's basic recommendation was, as paraphrased by me:

"STOP IGNORANCE, SUPERSTITION, STUPIDITY, INSANITY."

There are three major areas to this recommendation; 1) Simple ignorance and superstition which can be remedied by a good educational system,

i.e. good schools; accurate knowledge about things and history.

Amitabha Buddha: The figure shows a standing AmitabhaBuddha on a four layered Lotus bud (the symbol of PadmaPani, Lakshmi, Shakti) which in turn sits on the cosmictortoise. Amitabha Buddha is a transcendent or meditation(dhyana) Buddha of Vajrayana Buddhism; he represents theBuddha of Immeasurable (amitha) enlightening splendor(abha) or Amitayus the Buddha of immeasurable life duration(ayus). "The Buddha realm of Amitabha came into being when herefused enlightenment for himself unless by his Buddhahoodhe might bring to nirvana anyone who appealed to his name.The power of his yoga was such that a purely visionary land,the Land Of Bliss (Sukhavati) came into being in the West,where he now sits forever, like a setting sun - never howeversetting - forever enduring (Amitayus), immeasurably radiant(Amitabha) on the shore of a great lotus lake." (H. Zimmer) The Cosmic Tortoise Kashyapa is the second avatar ormanifestation of Vishnu who carries the world with its time,the first manifestation being that of the fish. Another avatar isthe Cosmic Snake (Ananta, Vasuki, Shesha ). The face of thetortoise shown here resembles that of Mahakala, the great time.By placing Amitabha on this tortoise, the connection andoneness with older Hindu traditions are maintained.


99) See “The Involuntary Creation,” ZKC, page 243. Translation by H. Zimmer of the Kalika Purana. Other parts of this

story can be found in sections 5.2.5.1 on page 366 and 7.1.1 on page 474.

Ch. 1 Pg. 70

2) Rigid Self and ego controlled insanity (insane means lack of wholeness) comes about

in great part through the conditioning in a particular socio-economic and culturalenvironment. In a free modern society much of this insane and often pathologicalbehavior can be dispelled through accurate information together with psychologicaland possibly medical treatment.

3) The profound ignorance of a thinking process which cannot reflect on itself.This iswhere meditation, wisdom (dhyana ), and creative self reflection must come in as aremedy. The liberating thinking which performs this miracle is the thinking whichdoes not address content, but the mode of thinking itself. In some ways this couldbe described as a thinking about no-thing in which there is neither thinker nor objectof thought. It is what Aristotle called "noésis noéseos" the thinking of the Gods. Itis what the Mandukya Upanishad calls the fourth state of non-consciousconsciousness, represented by the whole syllable AUM and the Nothingness in whichit is embedded. It is ultimate healing energy contained of the mind and What Is.Without the actual self-observation and self-reflection the self and the ego-controlledproblematic behavior cannot change to appreciable degrees.

1.4.4.5 CREATIVE THINKING AS CREATION IN INDIAN MYTHOLOGYHeinrich Zimmer has translated a Hindu creation myth which is an excellent example in the

mythological realm for the action of creative thinking, which is simultaneously an uncertain sensing,and acting. It is the thinking of the creator God Brahma and is fittingly called “The InvoluntaryCreation” 99:

"Brahma, sinking still deeper into the limpid darkness ofhis own interior, struck a new depth: suddenly the most beautifuldark woman sprang from his vision, and stood naked beforeeveryone's gaze.

She was Dawn, and she was radiant with vivid youth.Nothing like her had yet appeared among the gods; nor wouldher equal ever be seen...

Brahma became aware of her, arose from his yogicposture, and fastened on her long and earnest gaze. Then with hisphysical eyes still fixed upon her, the Creator permitted hisspiritual vision to fall back again into its own profundity; and hesearched to know what the task of this apparition would be in thefurther unfoldment of the work of creation, and to whom shewould belong.

When lo! a second surprise: out of Brahma's inner searchsprang another being - this time a youth, splendid, dark, andstrong...

Brahma remained silent for a moment, astounded by hisown production. What had slipped from him? What was this?Then he gathered and constrained his consciousness, and broughthis mind again to center. Surprise was conquered. Again in


Ch. 1 Pg. 71

mastery, the World Creator addressed this remarkable creatureand assigned to him his field."

Out of the uncertain, uncontrolled, nonconscious consciousness of Brahma emerges a vision,

and that vision becomes flesh and reality. This is exactly the process of creative thinking which Iallude to. The very first driving force of the emerging reality is the beautiful woman andGoddess Maya. She is even behind the dreaming consciousness of Brahma. The youth creatednext is the God of Love, Kama. Kama and his wife Rati, delight, are the all-encompassing forces,who generate reality with all its chaos, unpredictabilities, and passions. They are the forces behindthe continuing creation of all living things. Even Brahma, who gives his powers to the God of Loveand his mate, is not immune. For short moments he falls into passionate love and lust for his owndaughter Dawn, the Goddess Maya.

1.4.4.6 LIMITATION OF THOUGHT AND FREEDOM FROM ILLUSIONIt is the movements of thinking itself which are at the center of my discussion here. All

content of thinking is necessarily limited and cloaked by the activities of Maya. The only reliablecontent of thinking is the one based on the rules of logic, and the laws of science whose limitationsare part of the content. In the very moment that logic or science pretend to cover in a cogent way,i.e. through mere reason (ratio), the whole of existence, the whole of time, the whole of reality, theyoverstep their bounds and entrap themselves in illusion. Telltale words in the vocabulary of such aconfused self are: always, forever, absolute, the whole, eternity, heaven, nirvana, enlightenment,and many more.

If someone claims to never make a mistake, and not to have an ego, watch out, you aredealing with a con-artist.

A content of thinking which points at the limitation of thinking and at the movements ofthinking themselves calls for an action, namely the action of observing. It tries to educate the mindto detach itself from the products of thinking, thought and reality, and to understand how they comeinto being through the various operations of thinking. It says, "Watch the flow of your thinking,watch its source as unspecified transient center, as self or as ego, watch its objects as abstractthought, associated with the senses, feelings, and emotions, and thoughts attached to thecenter."

Only by learning and observing the movements of thinking can thinking free itself fromillusion. No content of thought, no pointing, can ever replace the actual doing. It is only thinkingitself which must act and look at itself. No person can do this for anyone, no faith or belief, nomemorization, no knowledge, or system, or method can substitute for the actual self-observation of thinking. The actual thinking and observing can lead to a transforming insight.

1.4.5 TWO MODELS OF THINKING

1.4.5.1 A HIERARCHICAL MODEL OF THINKING

Considering the three qualitatively distinct modes of thinking one might feel tempted toconstruct a model in which mechanical thinking would be at the bottom of a hierarchy, generativethinking in the middle, and creative thinking at the top.


Ch. 1 Pg. 72

CREATIVE THINKING

GENERATIVE THINKING

MECHANICAL THINKING

This hierarchical model stresses the separateness of the three modes of thinking. Creativethinking controls generative, which controls mechanical thinking. This concept is pleasing to usbecause we identify with the ruling part of thinking and because, traditionally, hierarchical systemshave been predominant in societies. Hierarchical systems are simple to grasp. This tradition hasprobably become part of our subconscious conditioning, which is why such a hierarchical structurecomes close to the image of how we want to see the world and ourselves. As such, this order is acontrol structure of dominance and subservience which lacks all the ideas of freedom, uncertainty,and creativity. It is basically a mechanical conceptualization of mechanical thought.

I want to emphasize that the three modes of thinking are essential to all thinking and followfrom the fact that fundamentally all thinking is one undivided movement. Mechanical thinking ispart of creative thinking, but just like in the above model, mechanical thinking can be separated fromcreative thinking. In a hierarchical structure the creative potential of mechanical thinking is hiddenby and in its separation. One could also say that the creative part of thinking is enfolded and hiddenin mechanical thinking. It appears to me that this basic oneness of the three kinds of thinking hasbeen the unconscious source of the idea of spiritual triads. The Self which thinks about the worldis the fundamental triad (Self-thinks-world) accessible to mechanical thinking. More sophisticatedtriads or systems of duality permeate philosophical, spiritual, and mythological thinking of mankind.

It is again very revealing to look at the corresponding Greek word for thinking which is'noéin.' As the Greeks used the word, there was no (or little) division in the subject-objectrelationship. Rather there was a movement of dividing and synthesizing implied. Closest to theGreek 'noéin' is our 'to see' or ’seeing.' Aristotle describes the activities of the highest God as 'noésisnoéseos': a thinking which thinks itself. This noéin was a total movement as a 'thinking vision' or’seeing thinking.' ‘Noéma,’ that which is thought, was never just a 'fantasy,' but somethingactually perceived. 'Nous' (mind) was something like the soul's eye, i.e. the 'organ of insight.' Weencounter similar ideas about thinking in India and Asia.

This hidden relationship and holistic movement between the various forms of thinking needsto be brought out in a better model.

1.4.5.2 A TRIADIC MODEL OF THINKING I want to propose a triadic model of thinking which incorporates the observable fact that we

can think consciously, being aware of some rational content of the thinking process, while at thesame time a non-observable kind of thinking goes on. (This unobservable thinking is very muchcorrelated with our sensing and acting as well, but I postpone this discussion to a later chapter.) Wecannot rationally influence this non-observable thinking, which is why it is appropriate to call it non-conscious. It may be helpful to subdivide the non-observable mode into a sub-conscious level, ofwhich we can be aware ever so vaguely, while dreaming or meditating, for example, and into aneven deeper level which creates this subconscious movement of thinking. This is of coursereminiscent of the other triads which I have used so far:


Ch. 1 Pg. 73

Figure 12 Triadic Model of Thinking

Nothingness-Oneness-Betweenness, consciousness-object-thought, mechanical-generative-creative thinking. In many religions and mythologies we find similar differentiations of powers,some of which I will use in this book and discuss further. I suggest to consider that these triads arenot accidental or convenient fantasies, but correspond to the intrinsic qualities of thinking, whichprojects its own qualities into and onto the world. They contain all potentialities through whichthinking can fulfill its functions: cogent understanding, intelligent comprehension, andexistential-transcending insight and creation.

In order to deemphasize separation between the different modes of thinking and to emphasize

this triadic structure, I propose a model of thinking in a triangular shape, which is the onlygeometrical shape which visualizes a triadic oneness. The three modes of thinking in 'purity' arerepresented by the vertices of an equilateral triangle. They correspond to T1 (mechanicalthinking), T2 (generative thinking), and T3 (creative thinking).

This is an attempt to describe and visualize thinking as a triadic holomovement, whichdifferentiates itself into three submovements, each of which has an uncertain connection to thewhole. The self can be illustrated by a small triangle at the center of the larger one. If one drawsperpendicular lines from this center to the sides, one obtains three areas within the triangle, which


100) See the sub-section 1.4.1.3 “Creative Thinking-Time-Matter-Space” on page 54.

Ch. 1 Pg. 74

can be thought of as the areas of influence of the closest corner points of mechanical, generative,or creative thinking. A well balanced self stays essentially at the center of the whole thinking space.Whenever it is dominated by one kind of thinking it drifts into that direction. Any thought activitycan be represented as another small arrow which is free to move within the thinking space, from theT3 domain, to the T2, and then to the T1 domain for example. One might describe the creation,generation, and manifestation of a thought through the path of A to B to C. The trajectory, or theactual unfolding of this thought is not conscious. Consciousness kicks in so to speak, whenthought B crosses over the boundary from generative to mechanical thinking. There, consciousnessis changed in such a way that it can pick up the thought A, which then becomes also a part ofconsciousness and can be memorized. For consciousness to trace thought A back to its origin, ithas to free itself from the conditioning of the mechanical area, and then also of the generative area.But this trajectory cannot be followed consciously with any certainty. Thus, the “trajectories” ofsubconscious thinking are represented by broken lines and those of un-conscious thinking bydots. Nonconscious thinking can enter the conscious area, but not vice versa. The boundariesbetween the areas should be transparent or semi-transparent.

The three vertices correspond to points of only one mode of thinking. The boundary linesof the triangle correspond to a combination of two modes of thinking. The closer one comes to acorner point, the more that mode of thinking dominates. This "one" is the consciousness of the entityin question which one may represent as a point or small area within the triangles. This point is freeto move around in all directions, coming more or less under the influence of the corner points,depending on its closeness to them. Thus, within the triangle one has all combinations of thinkingwith various importance of one mode or the other, according to how close one is to any of the threevertices. The central area of the triangle therefore corresponds to an equal influence of all threemodes of thinking. This triangular model has the advantage over a hierarchical model in that itstresses the oneness of all three modes of thinking; it also allows the possibility of a thinking withvery little intelligence (far away from T3), as well as a thinking with very little mechanical thought(remote from T1). Its disadvantage may be in a possible continuous interpenetration of all threelevels of thinking, even though they are qualitatively very different. However, following the ideaof thinking outlined earlier, the mechanical mode of thought cannot enter the intelligent modewithout being negated, which means, of course, that it cannot enter that kind of thinking at all. Thus,the internal boundaries between the creative and mechanical thinking areas should be emphasized.The generative thinking area serves as some kind of a transition between the creative and themechanical thinking.

We see that the hierarchical model emphasizes the separation of all modes of thinking toostrongly, whereas the triangular model emphasizes their oneness somewhat inadequately. We needa model with the advantages of both and without their shortcomings. The creative thinking spaceintroduced earlier100. helps to understand the non-causal aspects of some kind of thinking withoutthe thinker. We cannot expect to find a truly representative single model of our thinking, becauseof its fundamental quality which allows it to be free and to suspend itself. I use the notion to suspendthroughout this text with the triple meaning given to the corresponding German word 'aufheben' byHegel ; i.e. thinking preserves, it negates or makes disappear, and it lifts up to a new level, allthree movements being performed simultaneously. Characteristic for this behavior is that subjectand object interfere with each other to a degree, which makes a deterministic description impossible.In order to emphasize that thinking is a living movement of the living material process of the mind,the use of the expression quantum organic rather than quantum physical would be appropriate.


101) In honor of the German physicist Max Planck who in 1900 came up with the first notion that energy packets in nature

are quantized and cannot take on just any value in a continuous spectrum of energy. W ith this assumption he solved the

mystery surrounding the so-called black-body or cavity radiation.

Ch. 1 Pg. 75

In this attempt to describe thinking through models we must not allow those models to getin the way of actual observation. I show these new models to introduce the reader to somepossibilities, which are based on my own observation and are inspired by the mysterious thinkingprocesses which we can all observe in ourselves, if we pay attention. Many religious accounts fromthroughout the ages also serve as guidance. They correspond to a spiritual and mythologicalthinking which is in its foundation universal, but different in the form of its expression. Myunderstanding of quantum physics with its strange situations, in which the 'observer influences theobserved,' at an atomic and sub-atomic level, plays a significant role as well. Readers should realize,that even though they may think that they do not need such a model, they do use a (very limited)model, which is built into our languages and belief systems, another effective ploy of Maya.

I do not assume that the general reader will be familiar with quantum physics. But my ownthinking was deeply influenced by some of the ideas of quantum physics, and I now think that justas Newton's laws seem to be natural for the conscious content of our thinking, so may the particularlaws of quantum physics be natural for the less conscious movements and internal correlationsof thinking.

1.4.5.3 THE OBSERVING MIND (Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Relations) In the theory of quantum physics there are some equations which may be the most

fundamental equations of all of physics, namely Heisenberg's uncertainty relations. Theseequations say in general that so called complementary quantities, like space and momentum, or, timeand energy, can under no circumstances be determined simultaneously with absolute precision. Itis exactly the simultaneous determination of these quantities which is required for the causal,Newtonian-Aristotelian worldview. Heisenberg's uncertainty relations prove that this mechanisticworldview is incorrect.

)p @ )x $ S/2 The letter S (pronounced h-bar) stands for the so called Planck101 action quantum h divided

by 2B; its value in metric units is 6.63@10-34Js (Joules times seconds). This relationship states thatthe location x of a particle cannot be known with certainty at the same time that we know itsmomentum p (mass times velocity) with certainty. Thus, the classical notion of an exact trajectoryof a point-mass, with its velocity given at every point in space, is no longer correct in principle. Thelocation of an electron, e.g., and its speed cannot simultaneously be known. Heisenberg's principleis about the impossibility of exact knowledge not about the impossibility of exact measurement,even though the former implies the latter, but not vice versa. This principle is a result of the fact thatall matter consists of the two complementary movements, one called particle, the other wave.Whereas a wave-packet cannot be exactly localized in space, and can go through two holessimultaneously, a particle can be localized and can go through only one hole at a time. The fact thatevery particle is also a wave leads to the for classical understanding impossible situation that awave-particle can do both.The wave particle duality, as it is often called, reveals strikingly anintrinsic property of human consciousness. Human thinking has found out how to describe naturewith an extremely high degree of certainty. The laws of physics describe phenomena or things in theworld using parameters of time, space, and matter-energy. These laws have been cast into theabsolutely accurate (accurate but not necessarily true) language of mathematics. The correctness


102) The well know n physicist R ichard Feynman defines the principle as follow s: "Any determination of the alternative

taken by a process capable of following more than one alternative destroys the interference betw een alternatives."

(From Feynman-Gibbs, “Quantum-Mechanics And Path Integrals.”)

Ch. 1 Pg. 76

of these laws must be determined by experimental measurements which require observationsof time, space, and mass-energy.

The difference in behavior between a particle and a wave approaches the fundamentaldifference between a thought A and its opposite non-A (note that this a mathematical logicaldistinction). The foundation of normal logic is the principle of non-contradiction, two things cannotsimultaneously be A and non-A.

In HUL it turns out that the actual objects in the world behave like both particles and waves,which reveals beautifully, that our most accurate description of phenomena in the universe, isnecessarily non-certain.

There is another uncertainty relationship involving energy E and time t.

)E @ )t $ S/2If applied to the beginning to the universe we can see that the closer we get to the zero point

of the universe, the moment when it came into existence out of nothingness, the greater its energy.Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations in conjunction with the laws of gravity make a collapse into 0impossible and lead to a smallest possible distance of about 10-35 meters, which is also known as thePlanck length. As a consequence, the smallest possible time interval is about 10-44 seconds. Therewas no smaller time for this universe. (See glossary: black hole)

Formulated differently and general enough to be readily applicable to thinking theHeisenberg uncertainty principle can be interpreted to mean: the more precisely one of twocomplementary quantities or qualities is being determined the more imprecise the othercomplementary quantity or quality becomes at the same moment.102

Knowledge and the Oneness of What is are evident complementary pairs. The wholemanifestation of the universe as well as the manifestation of thinking, are the results ofdifferentiations introduced by thinking. Certainty and causality are measures of the separationbetween the Truth of Oneness and the reality expressed through the knowledge about it. Themore certain we are or can be about any objective characteristic of reality the more distant is thatreality from Oneness and its Truth. (I am evidently not talking about an uncertainty which is theresult of ignorance, error, or superstition, but about an objective, unavoidable uncertainty.) Thus,we can be very certain about mechanical movements in a reality because the very mechanicalnessis far removed from the fundamental Oneness of What Is. In quantum physics we go to the detailedstructure of atoms and uncertainty arises. When we study the conditions of all measurable causalitywe investigate the properties of space and time on a quantum level and the situation becomes evenmore uncertain. It seems that the separation in time and space between an object and itsobserver is also an indication for the actual separation between transcendence and humanthinking. Transcendence cannot be known, but it can guide and influence thinking.

The deterministic worldviews of the late centuries as well as the worldviews which regardhuman beings as entities totally separate from transcendence are separate from the truth they claim.

Another way of expressing this principle is that the very fact of observation changes theobserved object to some degree. Any observation involves an interaction between the observer andthe observed. This is correct in the purely physical sense. (It has always been true and known for along time in the psychological sense.) It is relatively easy to accept that the observer is influencedby the observed. It is much harder to see that the observed thing is also influenced by the observer.


Ch. 1 Pg. 77

We do not generally realize that the thing is brought into its existence as thought object through ourthinking and sensing processes together. In quantum physics this fact becomes unescapable.

We can see this readily in the case of a thinking which tries to observe itself. I suggest herethe analogy between the observation process of thinking and the observation process of a physicalobject through instruments at the quantum level. I make the case throughout this book that thisanalogy is more than that. The analogy reveals a truth about thinking and its object, the world,whether in everyday life or in quantum physics.

Here are a few other examples, which may help clarify this peculiar interaction between theobserver and the observed:

C The dynamic thinking process itself cannot be observed without the observing self losingits focus and even 'existence.’

C The conscious self and its object are complementary notions. Whenever the self holds athought (object) in its consciousness, the thought can be well defined; the self is defined onlyimplicitly through the thought.

C When we try to observe our own thinking process the attempt interferes with our thinking.This is unavoidable.

C When we observe a very subtle object like the generative and creative movements ofthinking, then the altering influence of the observation is significant. When we are in a semi-dreaming state, for example, the observing consciousness can direct the development of the dreamcontent. The dream is influenced by the dreamer, and vice versa.

C Furthermore, we all have experienced that no matter how hard we try to understandsomething sometimes, it does not work. We cannot force our understanding or comprehension. Butif we relax our thinking we are more likely to understand.

C Before a thought becomes manifest to consciousness, it is somehow enfolded in the wholemovement of non-certain thinking. It is somewhere or everywhere, in some non-manifest form.Comprehension takes place in the non-certain 'twilight zone' of the observer and the observedbecoming less distinct. Or, to put it differently, comprehension occurs when consciousness, thinkingprocess, and content of thinking melt together. In terms of the uncertainty principle stated above,one can also say that the possibility of thinking to move on more than one single (non-conscious)path of “logic” simultaneously, is suspended when this thinking becomes conscious, after havingchosen one path.This is very similar to the uncertainty principle in physics, which is a fact and nota result of poor measurement or imprecise tools. There is overwhelming experimental andtheoretical evidence that it is a fundamental property in all generality of any actual object in a realityand for the actuality underlying it. It is related to the fact that every object in the universe is aparticle but also wave. As a particle it can be localized in space, as a wave it is always movingand spread out in space. Yet every object is both particle and wave. Even more, time-space itselfis a movement of unobservable quantum-fields which are neither waves nor particles, but which arethe matrix out of which they unfold.

I therefore trust that this relationship reaches even deeper than our reality. It provides us witha tool to probe into the sub-certain movements of mind and matter. This uncertainty relationshipreveals the fact that we become conscious of properties of matter through interaction. We measure,probe and examine matter using material objects and ultimately the human brain and mind; thinkingis itself a material process. When we talk about objective properties of matter as though they weretotally independent of thinking we seem to erroneously imply that it makes sense to think about auniverse without thinking or without a thinking intelligence. Properties of objects are not somethinggiven to us of which we obtain knowledge through some miraculous insight. The only way we can


Ch. 1 Pg. 78

gain knowledge about objects is through interaction with them, which includes thinking, sensing,and acting. We gain knowledge of and about thinking through thinking, and interacting withthinking, in ways which are at least as intricate and subtle as our interaction with matter, particularlyat the sub-atomic level.

We may therefore assume that the complementarity of quantum physics must be afundamental property of thinking as well. Our thinking is a material process just like theunfolding and enfolding of material wave-particles out of the no-thingness of the underlyingquantum-fields. One manifestation of this is the complementarity between the observing self andthe observed thought. Any conscious thinking can only occur in the subject-object split modeintroduced by sub-certain thinking, which creates the self as subject and reality as its object.

Mythologically speaking, this is the action of Maya, who brings the self and reality intobeing, and who can dissolve them. In this process Maya, who is Shiva-Shakti in one, becomes Shivaand Shakti as separate powers. Their separation is their power and their limitation. This is why adynamic dialectic movement between the Oneness of the Two and their separation is required tocreate something out of nothing. If Shiva-Shakti would never separate there would only be emptynothingness. Human consciousness would not exist in any self reflecting form.

In our triangular model this thinking which leads to the separation between subject andobject occurs in the generative area. The content of consciousness, and with it consciousness itself,is sub-certain when operating in this generative (or creative) mode. In all human activities in whichthinking is involved, like in the realities of a society, we are dealing with essentially non-mechanicaland non-deterministic phenomena.

Mass sentiments, value systems, belief systems, moods of a society, the cultural ups anddowns, the rise and fall of states and empires, the developments of economies, the behavior of stockmarkets, and so on, are non-mechanical. The complexity of these phenomena does not requirequantum theory for their analysis. Chaos theory is appropriate here. Mathematically speaking, thesesystems show non-linear behavior. They are also non causal and not predictable. But quantum theoryand the Heisenberg uncertainty relationships reveal that uncertainty is the fundamentalcharacteristic of actuality and not the result of a very high level of complexity.

The uncertainty relationship of thinking becomes clearer when we think about the self. Onone hand, thinking is movement and, as long as there is no focus, corresponds to the realm ofgenerative and creative thinking; on the other hand, the content of conscious thinking is static andcorresponds to mechanical thought. The thinker, the self, is an entity created by thought and isenfolded in all thinking. But when we think about the self, it becomes a static object to itself, whichappears to be as real and certain as any object, and which seems to be doing the thinking as well.The observing self seems not to be there at all in this little experiment. Its existence is uncertain, themore certain its object of thinking appears to be, and vice versa. On further reflection we can see thatthe self's true being is part of the whole of thinking, encompassing both certainty and uncertainty,static object and moving subject, as well as thinking without focus. Whenever we try to know theself as object, its complementary nature reminds us - or should remind us - of the uncertain natureof this appearance, and it appeals to us to regard this knowledge as cipher.

1.4.5.4 UNCERTAINTY OF THINKING Thus, the complementary and dialectic model of thinking, represented by the triangular

model, addresses the genuine difficulty of thinking when it tries to determine the relationshipbetween movement and non-movement, between separation and oneness, between certainty


103) The questions and paradoxes which movement and location create for logical thinking have first been brilliantly

formulated by the Greek philosopher Zenon of Elea, student of Parmenides.“That which is moving, moves neither on

the location where it is, nor where it is not.” (See: “Zeno von Elea” by Hermann Fränkel in HF page 198 ff.)104) All numbers which can be expressed as the ratios of integers: ½; 1/3; 1/7; 1.345627262; 1.3333333... belong to a set

Q .105) When we are dealing with so-called ir-rational numbers like %2 and B we are entering a domain of thinking which,

as Pythagoras saw more than two thousand years ago, cannot be represented by a finite rational process. The fact that

we can deal with infinities correctly through ‘simple' formalisms, which effectively hide the problem, is a tribute to the

ingenious human mind. Students of mathematics encounter this problem when they are dealing with calculus and the

proposition of an infinitely dense continuous number line of real numbers. The non-rational nature of the notion of

infinity can be seen easily in the equation: infinity + infinity = infinity.

Ch. 1 Pg. 79

and uncertainty, between order and freedom, and so on. I call these quantities complementaryin analogy to Niels Bohr’s label of complementary quantities in physics.103

I suggest here that these problematic issues do not merely occur in our consideration andattempts to understand logically the movement of a (quantum) object in space and time, but that theyarise in a more direct way when we try to understand thinking itself. They take the form of a

Fundamental Uncertainty Relationship Of Thinking, in whichmechanical and non-mechancial modes of thinking are twocomplementary quantities.

The concept of mechanical thinking with fixed definitions and rules of logic before thebackground of a consciousness is completely static and is comparable to the classical physicsconcept of a world put together by separable point-masses in time and/or in space. Single thoughtsappear to be totally separate from each other and from the thinker. They are linked through logic,a formalized, fixed system of thought. This corresponds to the point masses of physics, which areindependent of time and space, and which are linked together through the continous and causal lawsof Newtonian physics. The change of location and momentum of these point masses in time providesas with a logical, causal, and measurable reality, changing in predetermined fashion. (See p. 9)

A) Formal thinking: LogicThe absolute certainty of mechanical thinking is based on the (uncertain) assumption that

a definition can be absolutely correct and precise, the quintessential concept of which is thereducibility of formal logic to the numbers 0 and 1. Thinking as a whole is never exclusively logical-mechanical, or creative-non-mechanical. It is always a correlation of all modes of thinking, but withvarying emphasis.

Formal-logical and mechanical thinking are reducible to rational building blocks, ultimately,to the set104 of fractions (rational numbers )Q and its operations of addition and multiplication. Thisset is reducible to the numbers 0 and 1. (To see that this is correct one needs only to realize that allformal-logical operations can be simulated by a computer.) These numbers can be representedvisually through geometric elements or through points in a coordinate system, a mathematical space.Mathematics can therefore be regarded as the quintessential representation of mechanical logicalthought.105 In its geometrical form it provides the link between thinking and sensing. Numbers arein themselves meaningless and empty forms, which are given meaning through creative andgenerative thinking. This is true even for formal logic. Both can be regarded as abstract forms ofNothingness.

Creative thinking gives meaning to mechanical thinking through its interconnectedness withthe whole, the whole of the human being and the whole of What Is, thus it can be considered an


Ch. 1 Pg. 80

expression of Oneness. One can say that creative thinking is a whole movement and a movementof Oneness.

Thinking in terms of fixed symbols like numbers, is based on an absolute division betweennumbers and everything else. If that division were actually true in our practical application oflanguage and mathematics, we could neither think nor compute or act reasonably; our thinking andwe ourselves would have no meaning. But, as all human beings trust that there is some meaning inlanguage and rational thinking, it is appropriate to consider the nothingness of mechanicalthinking as a cipher just as the Oneness of creative thinking. Both, mechanical and creativethinking, are mutually exclusive from a logical standpoint, but both require each other to berational and meaningful. They are dialectic and complementary. In mechanical thinking Nothingand One are totally separate quantities. Nothingness and Oneness are too abstract for mechanicalthinking. For creative thinking they are complementary ciphers. Thinking undergoes a qualitative,yet often imperceptible change when it moves from mechanical to generative-creative modes.

B) Non-formal thinking: generative and creative Generative thinking forms the sub-certain bridge between the two movements of mechanical

and creative thinking and can be described as a betweenness. It unfolds the uncertainty of thinkingas a whole to its mechanical sub-movement and can therefore be considered to be the uncertaintyrelation of thinking itself. Precision in the non-mechanical areas of human thinking diminishmeaning. Vagueness in the mechanical areas of human thinking is called confusion and causes errorsand mistakes. Certainty and uncertainty are complementary movements of thinking.

Trying to be certain in the domain of uncertainty is as “wrong” as being vague in the domainof certainty. To know God is a dangerous delusion. To build a bridge relying on intuition alonerather than on precise engineering will cause its collapse. These are clear examples, but in everydaylife the boundary between certainty and uncertainty is itself often sub-certain.

The more precisely a positive statement about non-mechanical areas is being defined themore the statement tends to lose in meaning for the whole of thinking. The more uncertain astatement about something mechanical the less its correctness and meaning for the whole ofthinking. Any unbalanced approach becomes in the long run part of deceptive illusion.

Let me give a few more examples: C If we treat the essential ideas of a religion as something we canknow with certainty we empty religion of meaning and are forced toreplace true meaning with opinion, superstition, indoctrination,dogma, and deception (including self-deception). C If we adopt a belief system like that of creationism, for example,and call it scientific, we commit the double error of destroying themeaning of religion and the meaning of science. C If we think that scientific results are arbitrary opinions we aretotally confused and ignorant.C If we believe that scientific research can give us the whole answerabout the human being and being in general, we violate the scientificmethod itself.

To obtain a meaningful precise statement, followed by suitable action, in a particular andpractical situation, intelligence is required to create a thinker, the generating and connectingthinking, as well as the thought which is the object of the thinker. This intelligence is the whole ofthinking functioning harmoniously on and between its different modes.


Ch. 1 Pg. 81

We can now see that with respect to the proposed model of thinking as three movements onecan consider the three levels as complementary. The mechanical level is complementary to the twonon-mechanical levels, and the generative level is complementary to the creative level. Let me tryto express the same idea in three different ways:

!The degree of determination of the mechanical level of thinking isdirectly connected to the degree of indetermination of the non-mechanical levels. Neither level exists all by itself. ! The attempt of absolute determination of one level of thinkingexcludes the other levels from such determination completely and isa detrimental disruption of the whole flow of thinking. !One cannot be certain of either the whole of mechanical thinkingor creative thinking. The conscious or sub-conscious belief in thepossibility or even reality of an absolute certainty is confusion in anycase.

The purpose of this model is to provide a fundamental and inseparable interconnectednessof all modes of thinking. When thinking as a whole starts to understand and comprehend itself, itmoves between mechanical and creative thinking with a subcertain awareness of itself. Since thetimes of Heraclitus, Parmenides, Zenon, and Plato such thinking has been called dialectic which is -as we can see now - a proper name for this generative or quantum-organic thinking of betweenness.

I consider such a triangular model of dialectic thinking to be indispensable to any explorationwhich attempts to learn of the human being but also of nature in general.

One may be able to see that this philosophical investigation starts from a perception of theinseparability of all thinking as displayed to itself through the dialectic notion of nothingness,oneness, and betweenness (NOB). It leads to a comprehension of the interconnected oneness of allthat can enter thinking, sensing, and acting of an intelligent being.

1.4.5.5 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION The triangular model of thinking should in itself be considered as a sub-certain model, i.e.

an adequate means, as I hope, to explore some particular products and movements of thinking. It isneither a definition, nor recipe or formula.

An investigation of the human mind and its actions is not only an exercise in deductive orinductive reasoning, belonging to the limited realm of science, but a challenge and appeal to ouressential human freedom as well. Science does not lead us to comprehend who we are, and it doesnot tell us how to live that comprehension in a free communication with others.

This means also that a comprehension of this writing requires ideally a participation, anactual thinking, which allows for an openness in which the boundaries between thinker, thought, andthe object of thought merge. Such thinking can neither be memorized nor generated through causalor cogent methods.

Usually, when I refer to thinking I imply that the three modes of thinking are active together.When I refer to consciousness, to the 'I ' or self, I refer to a thinking which is predominantly takingplace in the mechanical thinking space in our triangular model. The quality of this Self correspondsto that area in which thinking occurs. Thus we should distinguish between a mechanical,generative, and creative Self. When 'it' thinks mechanical thoughts it becomes more mechanical,when 'it' thinks more subtle thoughts like in the generative area, it becomes more sub-certain. Whenthinking is in its most creative mode the Self ceases to be an object to itself, i.e. consciousnesssuspends itself, and dis-appears.


106) See sections 4 .2 ff in the fourth chapter: “Triadic movements of sensing, acting, and thinking” on page 262.

Ch. 1 Pg. 82

1.4.6 THE TRIADIC MOVEMENTS As anything which enters our image of reality can become our consciousness or a part of it,

the three complementary thought movements have their counterparts in similar movements ofsensing and acting. Any single one of these movements implies the others directly or indirectly tosome degree, which is why I use the word triadic for this interpenetrating One movement ofsensing, acting, and thinking (SAT).

For example, any creative action involves sensing and thinking. It becomes manifest throughthe mediating and focusing sub-certain level. An apparent separation of this triadic movement ispossible only on the mechanical level of thinking. (There, we are usually dealing with a doubleseparation: the separation of the three levels and the separation of the triadic movement of sensing,acting, and thinking.) I will expand on the basic idea of these movements in chapter 4.106

1.4.6.1 DIALECTIC BETWEEN MECHANICAL AND CREATIVE THINKINGOur foundation and point of departure is the perception that all is fundamentally one.

Separation is appearance which is a necessary and correct description for much of reality. The ideaof oneness must be seen as cipher which demands repeated interpretation.

Fundamentally, all movements are inseparable: ! The triadic movement of thinking, sensing, and acting;! the movement of the three distinguishable levels of perception;! the movements of mind and matter;! all of the above.

However, their separation is possible, necessary, and adequate as a particular sub-movementof formal thinking, sensing, and acting. This possibility is part of that one movement. This seemingcontradiction of the possibility of the separation of a fundamental oneness is highlighted by theapparent contrast between oneness and nothingness as absolutely separate and irreconcilable ideas.That which is one cannot be nothing and that which is nothing cannot be one. To comprehend anddissolve this apparent contradiction we must have insight and understand the different levels of ourthinking.

Oneness and nothingness are connected through sub-certain relations similar to thosebetween matter and mind, or freedom and unity. Their reality is part of thinking, and thinking is partof them and their relationships.

This means that the oneness aspect of NOB cannot remain static but is guided and drawn byits hidden nothingness aspect - its power to negate itself - to differentiate itself. Each part which hasthus been separated from the whole retains the oneness and nothingness aspect in itself. On one handthis is a potentially intelligent and dynamic will to oneness. On the other hand, it is a will tonothingness or a will to freedom, which includes the freedom from all rules and which leads to theseparation from the whole. But no matter how far this will drives or guides a separated part intoeither one of these directions, the power to negate the separation, to undo what it has done, remainswith it. This means that neither a total separation (total freedom) nor a total oneness (one absoluteorder) can ever be attained as a static system. What Is, is dialectic eternal movement.

For a human being in a society this movement becomes apparent in the structure of thatidealized society. Every human being is separate from every other human being and from societyas a whole. In a society like the US it is the constitution which guarantees the freedom of everycitizen and thus their possible separation from each other. But the creation and observance of this


Ch. 1 Pg. 83

(freedom guaranteeing) constitution implies the oneness and therefore limitation of that freedom andseparation. The diverse and pluralistic groups of society must respect each other's freedom and formone dialectically moving order through the respect for that freedom.

1.4.6.2 PROPER KNOWLEDGE Understanding with certainty is only that small part of thinkingwhose certainty requires the separation of thought from its sourcewhich is the thinking self. In this separation formal thinking becomesthe foundation of mechanical time as the memorized and rememberedchain of thoughts. Whatever can be remembered identically, or atleast with some degree of resemblance, has a degree of certainty.

We experience the reality of matter in space as a conception and perception of sensing,acting, and thinking combined. (For more details see “Thing And Thought “on page 314.)

For example, the picture of the "Descent of the Ganges" is different in its concept from alinear time arrangement. The whole story of the "Descent of the Ganges" is told simultaneouslywithout the temporal sequence of the actual story. Our thinking paints or projects its objects of amanifest world, encountered by means of sensing and acting, onto its own thought-space or thing-space, where it can understand and measure according to its memories and value-systems. Just likethe temporal sequence of the above story may be unimportant, so may the sizes and spatialproportions be understood as being independent of actuality.

We represent the actual world to our consciousness as the real world which is a product ofour Maya, i.e. a product of our idiosyncratic measuring and value systems. The true nature of WhatIs is beyond measure and is part of a whole movement of thought-time-space-matter (TTMS),which, as a whole, can never be a real object of investigation. Thought cannot truly separate itselffrom that movement. Only particular and limited aspects of the whole can be so investigated andeventually be measured. We can dance with Maya but we can never eliminate her.

A limited separation of the whole into parts is a proper and often indispensible functionof that whole movement. Therefore, the formation of a self, of formal knowledge andmeasurement are valid and not mere illusion. They can lead to universally correct resultsbecause the separation of time, space, matter, and thought is of the same origin as that ofcorrectness and the concept of universality.

Correctness requires that mechanical time and causality be added to the much more holisticsense of space. The stories of many ancient rock carvings and pictographs are not causal and aretherefore not seen in a logical sequence. (See the photograph of the “Descent of The Ganges.”Figure 13 on page 85) The introduction of time and causality in a continuous string from the pastthrough the present to the future is one of the necessary movements of logical thinking, but it is alsoits greatest self-deception when it comes to meaning. Thinking can see that for meaning eternity isrequired.

Knowledge and measurement can lead to correct and significant results in limited areas,which may extend over many different realities. I use the word proper in this context to indicate anattitude of the human mind, which is aware of its limitations and limits. Consequently, to discoverproper separations, which provide order for thinking and a reality, a creative perception, whichtranscends a particular reality of space and time separations, is required.


Ch. 1 Pg. 84

For example, the naming and classification of insects or plants requires that one first look atthem carefully to find characteristic distinctions and similarities. Without such open minded study,all insects and plants will look essentially the same. Cliches, on the other hand, are poorly chosengeneralities, lacking sufficient differentiation. They are typically the result of the lack of care, ofobservation, and of intelligent thinking. The degree of mechanical conditioned thinking is very high.For example: "All Chinese or Indian people look alike," is a mild example of these old unthinkingcliches which we justly characterize as stupid. Giving derogatory names is a cherished method toforce thinking in a mechanical mode.

It is only when we care to observe and think carefully that we discover that people are verydifferent, that they look differently, speak and think differently, etc.

We are able to introduce differences through separation, and order throughreconnecting the differences. Thus, through observation, thinking, and interacting we createthe basic structure of our realities. If we do this properly, we can form a basis of knowledge andmeasure, which are to a high degree reality independent. Then we can build on that knowledgeand expand it through reason and logic.

Such ordering knowledge and measure is valid to the degree to which it can express itslimitation. In mathematics and the physical sciences this is relatively easy.

Knowledge can be certain within its limitation and can be used for sub-certaininferences beyond its limits. But the assumptions of infinite knowledge and knowledge of theabsolute infinite, are infinite illusion. When such assumptions are made within an ordering systemof thought irrational thought has taken over and tends to dominate all other thoughts. To avoid suchdestructive developments in thought, safeguards against any absolutist forms in a reality should beintroduced intelligently.

Even the prime and proper parameters of formal knowledge, i.e. concepts of space,time, matter, and thought, should not be regarded as absolute and static. They should be seen asintelligent and potentially dynamic forms of perception.

In a formal reality, space appears with matter and time appears with thought. Space and matterappear to be separate from time and thought in a separation which is bridged by sensing and acting.The formulation of correct results about a physical reality is based on that separation.

For example, we can observe a bird flying through the air and accurately measure its locationand speed. To do this, we need space and time measurements, defined and applied through thoughtand physical observation. Time has a unique direction, which defines past, present, and future as adirected line in our consciousness. Thus, a story is told generally starting at the initial point in timeand then progressing steadily to its end. A story can also be told through pictures, like on theadjacent relief of the Descent of the Ganges. Here the story is not at all told in a time sequence butrather according to the importance of the various symbolic figures involved.

Description of plate 13 on page 85. Descent of the Ganges:


Ch. 1 Pg. 85

Figure 13 Descent of the Ganges; Mahabalipuram, 7th Century C.E.

The gigantic relief of 90 by 30 feet is part of an effort of the Pallava kings of South India ofthe seventh century C.E. It is part of a huge area of cliffs and boulders which all have beentransformed into sculptures and temples, cut out of the living rock as the artisans found it.

The tale described on this particular relief stems from the “Ramayana.” After the ocean hasbeen swallowed by a demon the whole world is threatened by famine, drought, and catastrophe. Thehero of the story, the king Bhagiratha, seen as one of the main yogic figures, standing on one legwith raised hands, frying at the center of five fires, four around him, and the sun above, convincesthrough his heroic asceticism and yoga magic the God Brahma to allow the Ganga (the riverGanges) to descend down to earth. But the Lord Shiva's assistance is needed as well to soften thefall of the gigantic waters onto the earth. So, through further ascetic practices Bhagiratha impresseseven the master yogi Shiva and wins his help. Shiva, the divine Yogi, agrees to receive the torrentsof the Ganga in his hair, and thus reduces their devastating force to a gentle flow down theHimalayas into the wide open planes of India. In this scene therefore Shiva is the helper of theGoddess in her form as Ganga. The life giving, purifying, and healing waters represent her entirelypositive aspects. In the bronze figure of Shiva-Nataraja ( Figure 77 on page 493), we can see theGanga in his hair, which appears to be at the same time the torrential waters of the Ganges and thefiery flames of his halo.


Ch. 1 Pg. 86

Figure 14 Descent of the Ganges: Detail

At the center of the relief we see a huge cleft, inhabited by the serpent king and his queen,rejoicing at the waters rushing down the mountain. From all sides of the earth flock together gods,humans, animals, demons, genii, to witness the miracle. Spiritual, yogic, willpower succeeds to winfavors of the Gods and nature herself.

The adjacent detailof the “Descent of theGanges” shows the asceticBhagiratha standing on oneleg in the center, and theGoddess Ganga to his rightbelow, with the body of asnake and a crown of cobraheads.

DANCING WITH MAYAFRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -iii- -iii-Figure 1 Spirits Through Time, Oil...

Documents

Transcript of DANCING WITH MAYAFRITZ WILHELM: DANCING WITH MAYA PAGE -iii- -iii-Figure 1 Spirits Through Time, Oil...