Agreed Truth And Absolute Truth (part 1)

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 1 of 144

Part I

Page 1 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 2 of 144

AGREED TRUTH AND ABSOLUTE TRUTH from material to the spiritual

Part 1

R.Subasinghe Editing...

24 JULY 2019 ©R.Subasinghe [email protected] 24 July 2019 Page 2 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 3 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth ( Part 1) R.Subasinghe First Edition 2019 Author’s other publications: - Unification and Disintegration (A Theory of Life on Buddhist Philosophy) (2011) Publication: www.godage.com; www.amazon.com - LokayeMeweema (2002) A book in Sinhala language - ‘Life Force’ and Emotions in the Clasroom (2005- yet to be published ) - Freedom (A book of two plays to be published) Publisher: Author publication © R.Subasinghe

Page 3 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 4 of 144

ISBN 955-97360-3-5

Page 4 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 5 of 144

Expectation

Prisoners We who are in the universe Are prisoners of ‘the flow’ ‘The flow' which alone is ‘the universe’. It is by ‘thinking, and by ‘thinking’ only We have redemption from this ‘flow’

Page 5 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 6 of 144

Foreword This book is titled around a fundamental distinction made in Buddhist texts. The Pali terms ‘SamyuttaSacca’ and ‘ParamattaSacca’ are used to denote what is usually translated as provisional and ultimate truths. Mr. Subasinghe has correctly recognized that; that which is provisional has to be agreed upon, while ultimate absolute truth is not so. The title is an indicator of the sophistication and the value of this text. The author’s analysis of reality is clearly rooted in a Buddhist perspective, however he uses several other sources to justify and elucidate his arguments; from thinkers such as, Stephen Hawking, Daniel Goleman, Deepak Chopra, and other ‘scientific’ philosophers. This adds a considerable value to the text. Once again, although drawing from these eminent thinkers, he does not seem to be seduced by their arguments for an ‘objective’ world which is ultimate. Instead, his arguments for Absolute Truth are experiential. The final sections on meditative experiences, leading to the ‘Absolute’ is written from direct experience, rather than on any textual study. This makes this particular book unusual and not purely an academic exercise. His arrangement of the text into sections rather than chapters*, makes reading easier, but tempts the reader to read from here and there, thus breaking the value of a thematic approach. The ample use of pictorial means to explain and to elucidate is another very useful character of this text. Certainly the difficult issues addressed here requires such an approach. I wish him well in his future ventures of this nature. He has included much in this text; but can write a sequel to some of the many sections that he has written short summaries on, an example being his views on time. Professor Arjuna De Zoysa Open University Sri Lanka February 2012

*

The format in this book was changed much after this observation of the professor – Author .

Page 6 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 7 of 144

Preface This is an extension of the philosophical points I have previously discussed in my book titled ‘Unification and Disintegration’.(2011)* I have discussed in this book what a ‘life form’ is, and its relationship with the phenomena seen as ‘matter’ ‘consciousness’ ‘universe’ ‘time’ and so on in relation to the division seen in ‘Truth’ as ‘Agreed Truth’ (SamyuttaSacca) and ‘Absolute Truth’ (ParamattaSacca) as discussed in buddhsim. An ordinary person would find it ambiguous creating a lot of paradoxes when probing into the buddhist worldview. This book would show such ambiguities and paradoxes would disappear when they are seen in relation to the division ‘agreed truth’ and ‘absolute truth’. For example, the event of ‘death’ is ‘death’ only when seen in agreed truth, whereas ‘real deaths’ are in the arising and disappearing of thought moments that occur in our minds which point is seen only when seen in absolute truth. ‘Deaths’ seen in Agreed Truth are not real deaths because they are not ends as life forms when seen an absolute truth. When it is stated ‘birth’ ‘decay’ and ‘death’ are defeated in the realization of ‘nirvana’, it need not be seen as confusing when it is seen in absolute truth or as seeing in ‘pragngna’, the latter of which is a the most prominent in the epistemological thinking in the Indian background. When it is stated ‘we do not die when we die’, the paradoxical nature seen in it is removed when ‘die’ as the first term as referring to ‘death’ seen in absolute truth, and the same term as the second as referring to ‘death’ seen in agreed truth. So is it when it is stated, ‘There is a road, but no one to walk on that road; there is nirvana as an aim, but no one who has reached there’. I am very grateful to Professor Arjuna De Zoysa at the Open University, Sri Lanka, for the foreword given and the suggestions made. Format of this book was changed much and the text was re-edited several times after his suggestion to the original manuscript. I must also thank Professor Gunapala Dharmasiri who was once the Head of the Philosophy department of Peradeniya University, Sri Lanka, for the assistance and the encouragement given in my writing activities. Also, discussions I had with Mr. S.A. Sugathapala at the Education Office Gampola, Sri Lanka, too influenced me much in the writing of this, especially the section on the levels of meditation. R.Subasinghe 24 July 2019 Keselwatte Bungalow Dolosbage Road Gampola Sri Lanka

Page 7 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 8 of 144

Contents Abstract Dedication Foreword Preface

As Part 1, this book contains only the first 4 Chapters and chapter 11 : 1. 2. 3. 4. 11. PART

UNIVERSE IS THOUGHTS MATERIAL BACKGROUND CREATION LIFE FORM, CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE UNIVERSE APHORISMS ON UNIVERSE AND ITS BEINGS

2 OF THIS BOOK WILL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

‘‘TIME’ AND ‘ THREE DIMENSIONS’ AGREED TRUTH AND ABSOLUTE TRUTH CENTRE - LIFE AS ‘I CONSCIOUSNESS ’ SUFFERING AND ITS CESSATION MEDITATION: EMANCIPATION FROM CREATION SUMMARY APHORISMS ON UNIVERSE AND ITS BEINGS

References as they relate to The Pali Thripitaka Glossary References (to books): Index (not included here)

Page 8 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 9 of 144

Chapter 1

Universe is Thoughts 1.1 Thinking and Beyond Thinking (1.4) ‘Thinking’ is ‘The World’. Nothing ‘exists’, if there is no ‘thinking’. The ‘World of thinking’ is ‘an appearance unto itself’’ without which, there is nothing. Thinking determines everything. Nature and properties of universe are determined only as ‘thinking’, which means, universe does not exist without thinking. Nothing ‘material’, ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’(2.1.) exists without the thinking element determining them as existing. Anything considered ‘beyond thinking’, too, can be seen in thinking only; so there cannot be anything to call ‘beyond thinking’ too. ‘Thinking’ makes it appear things have their ‘origins’ and their ‘ends’, because although its existence is seen as a process seen in a time scale, it sees as if things exist externally as in definite states and occupying a definite consecutive expansion of ‘time’. If a thing does not have an ‘origin’ or an ‘end’, it ought to exist beyond thinking; which means, it doesn’t exist. The ‘time scale’ is seen in three divisions as ‘past’ ‘present’ and ‘future’. Such seeing of time like all others seen, is seen as caused by an ‘I’ or ‘me’, which is also the thinking process. All ‘seeing’ is centred on ‘my’ or ‘our’ ‘existence’. Based on this background, ‘thinking’ can be defined as; an activity of seeing phenomena as occurring in ‘past’ ‘‘present’ and ‘future’ out of another phenomenon seen as ‘motion’; all centred on an ‘I’ or ‘me.’. Extension of same thinking of ‘I’ or ‘me’ can be considered ‘we’ or ‘us’. The universe created as thinking consists of 3 dimensions as, 1. spatial 2. temporal and 3.thinking. ‘Thinking’ is a dimension because, universe cannot manifest without ‘thinking’, just as it cannot manifest without ‘space’ or ‘time’ as it is seen when seen in agreed truth . When seen in absolute truth however, all dimensions, too, are seeing only as thinking. Three dimensions of the universe manifest in thinking as follows: i. space – Material entities need space for their existence. ii. time – When material entities are seen as in ‘motion’, time is seen as a secondary property caused by it. iii. thinking – Existence of universe, its properties, properties of its constituents, all manifest as thinking. Just as universe cannot exist without ‘thinking’, ‘thinking’ cannot function without a universe and its constituents. In a final seeing seen at the borderline between Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth*, it is not that the universe needs ‘space’ and ‘time’ to manifest as an existence, but the thinking process creates the ‘purely conceptual’† states of ‘space’ and ‘time’ as properties of a universe, the ability to do which functions within the life forces. The ability to see something more is there as ‘purely conceptual’ states as properties pertaining to matter can be compared with how Gestalt psychologists saw perception, seeing something * †

chapter 6 Agreed truth and Absolute truth, Subasinghe R.(2011) Unification and Disintegration [chapter 8]; section 1.7 Only a Conceptual World, Subasinghe R.(2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration: Page 9 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 10 of 144

more in addition to the totality of a phenomenon. If three objects are arranged in a way to make a triangle, the triangle seen there is seen in addition to what is really there. Such a triangle cannot have an existence in an external world even if there is such a one. Seeing from the general view universe consists of 4 dimensions, ‘thinking’ has to be added to it to make it 5. Thus, 5 dimensions can be seen as, 1.length 2. breadth 3. height 4. time 5. thought. A ‘table’ as an object has the dimension of ‘thought’ too because, just as concepts of ‘length’, ‘breadth’, ‘height’ and ‘time’ show points of beginnings and ends in those conceptual states as regards the appearance of a table, so is ‘thinking’ too in it. A table is seen as having a beginning and an end as a thought form too. This can be applied to the universe itself too as the ‘Universe’ and its constituents too can be seen as having a beginning an end as it is seen by any thinking element. If it is to assume a ‘table’ ought to have an independent existence in addition to what is seen through senses as it, it has to be completely different from how it is formed as thinking. So are all ‘objects’ in the universe including the universe itself. When the universe is thought of as one whole, the term ‘spatial’ alone is enough to denote the first three of the five dimensions ‘length’ ‘breadth’ and ‘height’, because differences in the 3 of them cannot be conceptualised or cognized when seen it as one whole. So, in the final seeing in agreed truth, universe is only three dimensional as, ‘spatial’ ‘temporal’ and ‘thinking’. When taken the universe as one whole, ‘thinking’ as a dimension has to be thought of as it is infinite. So are the spatial and temporal dimensions because they, too, have to be infinite because they are seen with thinking which has limited abilities. Human thinking exists in a domain of its own, seen by itself as in a process of sensation, perception and cognition. ‘Sensation, and perception’ occurs when waves from seemingly external phenomena are in touch with sense organs, and ‘cognition’ turns what is so received into ‘thinking’ by using conceptual states which already exists as the thinking element. Cognitive thoughts can be expressed using a language created as logical thinking. ‘Perception and cognition’ also involve ‘emotions’ ‘imagination’, ‘feelings’ ‘intelligence’ and ‘memories’ as pertaining to thinking. To the whole activity of which sensation, perception and cognition the phrase ‘life force’* can be used. There is no way to verify whether what is sensed and cognised have a material base or not, or whether they are related to a phenomenon called ‘truth’. Therefore, ‘thinking’ as ‘sensation’ ‘perception’ and ‘cognition’ can have any one of these truth values; i. limited in being ‘true’ ii. ‘distorted’ in being true iii. ‘false’ in being true This is to be seen with the view, no absolute state is there to call ‘truth’, since no evidence is there for the such. Anything considered ‘truth’, is ‘truth’ only within the domain of thinking *

‘Life force’ as put forward by some Gestalt psychologists and later by Humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers. ‘Life force’ is the same as the ‘karmic force’ Page 10 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 11 of 144

element. ‘Absolute Truth’ as dealt with in this book is the realization of the absence of having a state called ‘truth’. We think of only what we want to think as energized by our ‘karmic needs’* . Thinking made as such is always utilitarian. Nature of it is seen always as limited to places of its own and periods of its own. Since what is felt as ‘truth’ originates and continues as utilitarian karmic expectations and they too are subject to change all the time, there cannot be any ‘ultimate view’ or an ‘ideal view’. If one believes there can be such ‘true’ or ‘ideal views’, she ought to be thinking as regards the existence of an ‘external world’. Ignorance and limitations evident in the abilities of ‘thinking’ makes us not perceive the existence of such an external world; therefore realising ‘true views’ or ‘ideal views’ are simply expectations that cannot be realized. Ultimate realization of the inability to comprehend anything to call ‘the universe’ through the activity of ‘thinking’, but what can be realized is only an awareness of the nature of thinking activity itself, which, too, cannot be comprehend as one definite entity. When we get an awareness of nature of thinking as a final experience, it could result in creating a mind devoid of ‘thinking’, which is a state of existing with no karmic utilitarian energy left to work. Such an ‘experience’ would change our attitude towards ‘ourselves’ and to the world, making us lead a life that makes us see ordinary people think in the opposite direction to ours. Words or phrases used in language to denote that ‘experience’ including this word ‘experience’ itself, do not denote what it really is. Only way its existence can be asserted is by ‘feeling it as experience’† which ‘feeling’ is different to other ‘feelings’ we get because it is non-sensual. Words and devices used in language with logic implicit in them, are meaningless to explain this state . Language, logic and reasoning can be used to ‘know’ of this experience, but they do not make one ‘realize’ it. This book is an attempt of such ‘knowing’ that could be used by anyone turning them to their phase of ‘realization’ which experience anybody could achieve.‡ 1.2 External World (3.3) An argument expected against the above view (1.1) is, there must be an ‘external world’ for an internal world to manifest in us. It is the common view; thinking is created upon phenomena that exist external to thinking as a separately existing ‘spatial- temporal world’. The fact not taken into account in this widely held view is, it is by ‘thinking’ itself such existence is determined. If an ‘external world’ exists external to thinking, it ought to have its own independent manifestation, position of which cannot be verified because any verification made to the effect becomes the thinking activity itself. Therefore, the conclusion that has to be arrived at always is; it is only of the world created as ‘internal world’ we know of; any other thing thought of as existing externally than the ‘internal world’ themselves exist within the same ‘internal world’. The ‘external world’ is thought of as it is made of matter. Although it is another commonly held view, that ‘external world’ consists really of images§ created in the thinking element out of the

Karmic needs = needs that go to make the ‘life force’. ‘Life Force’ is the same as the ‘Karmic Force’ characteristics of the Buddha’s teaching: /snðithiko:/ = ‘can be seen then and there’; /e:hi pssiko:/ = ‘can be realized then and there’; /pccθθŋ ʍe:ðiθbbo:/ = ‘can be felt then and there’ ‡ Subasinghe R.(2011.104) Unification and Disintegration § areas of images (ru:pə klα::p ə) * †

Page 11 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 12 of 144

its creations of the basic qualities of liquidity, heat, diffusion and solidity*(4.5) They have only conceptual existences. A seemingly complex world is created out of these qualities by the thinking activity. They do not have the characteristics that go to make things seen as material, i.e. having ‘mass’, ‘occupying space’ and ‘existing in a ‘time scale’. The images conceived as smallest levels of matter are seen in the field as ‘quanta’ ‘quarks’ ‘corpuscles’ ‘photons’ ‘neutrinos’ etc. etc., which, too, are seeing only of conceptual formations in a mind. They cannot have existences of their own other than being seen as thinking. The approach of seeing more in addition to the totality of its parts in an object as held by Gestalt psychologists, too, is used in seeing them, as always seeing more than what is really there. † The argument that ‘thinking’ has to be a replica of ‘something else’ existing separately as material is founded on the premise ‘thinking’ is an ability that identifies phenomena external to it. However, even such logical thinking is a creation in the thinking element itself that may not that cannot exist in an external world. Such an argument is based on the unverifiable premise, ‘thinking has a unique logical ability to determine a state called existence or non-existence of phenomena’ which premise, too, is a creation within itself. It is not only non verifiable, but based on the idealistic belief thinking element has a ‘superior’ ability in arriving at a state called ‘truth’. Like all thinking, that premise too, is an outcome of the desires ‘to continue to exist’ and ‘to enjoy pleasurable sensations and feelings’‡, that manifests also as ‘life force’§ or ‘emotions’. So are any statement made to prove the existence of an ‘external world’; with the attempt itself they become the ‘internal world’. Thus, arguments made to prove the existence of an ‘external world’ have to be considered as they are based on fallacious thinking. In an instance a person’s leg is hit on a stone, that person could say that experience made him know there is something called a ‘stone’; therefore that stone with the area it exists can be called an ‘external world’. However, what such a person thinks as ‘external world’ is only pain, images, thoughts and memories centred on a feeling of an ‘I’ or ‘me’, thoughts of which really are utility based karmic thinking activities appearing only as thinking. Such an argument appears that of an idealist’s or a religionist’s because the person sees additional values to his experience of hitting a leg on a stone by thinking extravagantly on it, believing thinking ability can see beyond what is known. Such thinking is ‘realistic’ to many, and they are used with logic to call them ‘scientific’; however, an ‘external world’ exists only as manifestations of karmic needs as energised by desires ‘to continue to exist’ and ‘to enjoy pleasures’.(b,c) Statements made to assert the existence of an ‘external world’ is similar to an assertion made by a person as, ‘I am great’ or ‘I am the most attractive’, and thinks it is true. In making such an assertion, a person also suggests, no need is there verify what she says because she has already found it is true. If thinking is an ability that can create an ‘internal world ’ based on an ‘external world’ that really exists, then the highest form of that ability ought to be of creating everything in the four types of manifestations of matter as conceptual qualities ]= Bhutha /bhu:θə / 1.liquidity /α:po:/ 2. heat /θe:ɡo:/ 3.diffusion /ʍ𝑎:jo:/ and 4.solidity /pthəʍi/. † section 3.11 The Part - The ‘Whole: The Absolute Truth, see also section 3.10 ‡ Three basic desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures (k𝑎::mə θnh𝑎:) 2. desire to continue to exist (bhʍə θnh𝑎:) 3. desire to cease the existence (ʍibhʍə θnh𝑎:) by which all emotions arise, § ‘Life force’ as put forward by some Gestalt psychologists, and later by Humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers; life force = ‘karmic force’ *

Page 12 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 13 of 144

universe as an ‘external world’, the thought of which is ideal, religious and supernatural. If there can be such a highest level of thinking that can think of the highest level as regards an ‘external world’ by absorbing an absolute view of it, many questions arise asto whether such a holistic view would cover the universe at one moment of time or it could cover all moments in it seen as ‘past’ ‘present’ and ‘future’. Such a holistic view has to also cover all views of seeing from the quantum levels of seeing. When attempts are made to see from such diverse directions such a pursuit becomes an endless one; thus they become meaningless pursuits even is such a one is done by a Creator God. Thus we have to end up with the conclusion, there cannot be any holistic view of an ‘external world’. Such attempts make us realize ‘thinking’ has some inadequacy, i.e. what it creates have to be ‘false’ or ‘perverted’ or ‘limited in being true’, as mentioned previously. (1.1) The ‘external world’ we imagine has to differ from person to person, being to being, culture to culture, place to place and time to time; so there cannot be one external world to represent all of them; because, there are innumerable number of them. Complexity of seeing all such ‘external worlds’ suggests, one definite view of an ‘external world’ cannot be made. No being as ‘I’ or ‘me’ too is there in the final seeing to form such a common one from all, the point of which, too, leads us to see there is nothing to call an ‘external world’. Some of us find it difficult to believe non-existence of an external world because their thinking is caused by ignorance that manifest as emanating from the desire to keep the existence and desire to continue. Despite for the popularity of that belief, such an external world exists only in our minds because it is needed as a belief to continue with our existence and to enjoy pleasures, as energised by the three types of desires*. Nothing can be stated as a true statement about the existence of an ‘external world’ even by seeing in agreed truth. (6.4) The term ‘true’ itself has no meaning when seen in absolute truth. (6.7) There is no epistemological foundation to determine the existence of an external world. It is only that we believe so for ourselves, which belief has no more value beyond its being a belief. 1.3 Truth (i) (6.1,6.2) Points discussed above lead us to another question, ‘What is truth?’ Existence or not of an external world depends on the notion also of ‘truth’. Ordinary view is, ‘truth’ is perceived when sense data is perceived. However, no epistemological foundation can be made to convince us so; no authority is there to determine perception of sense data has to relate to a phenomenon called ‘truth’. No reason is there to consider why inductive or deductive judgments based on perception as ‘truth’ unless special or personal needs are there within us to consider so. When a tree is seen as a ghost at night it really is not a ghost, but at the time of seeing it is considered a ghost, because the need is there within us to see so at that time. Perception and cognition based on sense data and inductive and deductive judgments based on them are ‘true’ to us because we need to believe so in order to fulfil our karmic utilitarian needs†. By the conviction we get thus, we want to be happy in our attempts of fulfilling the desires ‘to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures’. (previous footnotes) If the needs for utilitarian expectations are not there, no need is there to * †

3 basic desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures (k𝑎::mə θnh𝑎:) 2. desire to continue to exist (bhʍə θnh𝑎:) 3. desire to cease the existence

(ʍibhʍə θnh𝑎:) through which all emotions or the ‘life force’ arises. karma /krmə/ = Things happen to beings as continuations of their past thoughts and actions,. Karmic needs are the needs arisen from a karmic background. ‘Thinking itself is karma’. –The Buddha Page 13 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 14 of 144

call them ‘truth’, (just as there is nothing to call ‘false’ too). A hungry animal finds food and eats it. After eating it, it expresses its satisfaction by engaging in a physical activity like making sounds or some movements it is used to at such times. Such experiences of satisfaction do not require a term called ‘truth’ in addition to the fulfilment of utilitarian expectations? The animal there, even if an intelligent animal, does not require the term ‘truth’ to feel its satisfaction. If some ants sense a place where sugar is, and bring granules of sugar from that place to their nest, there it is needless to say those ants found the ‘truth’ situation where sugar is. However, we are inclined to say by use ants have found there the ‘truth situation’ of where sugar is. It really is ignorant wish fulfilment of those creatures happening as causes and effects wherein an additional term as ‘truth’ is not needed. Such thinking is extravagant interference of thinking caused by ‘ignorance’*. The term’ ‘truth’ there is a creation limited to the domain of ‘thinking’, that cannot be applied to a real or any other world. Similar to those creatures, what man continuously does is searching for utilitarian wish fulfilment by engaging in sensation, perception and cognition. The term ‘truth’ signifies nothing as related to his behaviour because it cannot denote anything in addition to the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of fulfilment of karmic utilitarian needs. Utilitarian expectations are creations of the urges made in thinking element as ‘desire to continue to exist’ that exists together with ‘desire to enjoy pleasurable sensations and feelings’†; both of which create a delusory world. One who is not satisfied with the use of expressions ‘desire to continue existing’ and ‘desire to enjoy pleasurable sensations and feelings, may consider ‘truth’ only as fulfilment of basic needs. One who thinks ‘truth’ as having additional or superior meanings beyond experiencing as sense data, gives a supernatural value to ‘truth’, positions of which cannot be verified. 1.4 Thinking the Activity When light particles fall on the retinas in our eyes, a visual picture is created in our minds as a beginning of a thinking activity suggesting, those particles of light represent phenomena existing in an external world. Thinking activity thus caused through the eye can be seen in a broader view as, an activity as an ‘energy form’ as the retinas in the eye’, feeling it is in fusion with another type of ‘energy form’ called ‘particles of light’ felt as descending from externally; both types of which energy forms together making impacts one on another and contacting another energy form brain cells. (Fig.3.1) Thus fusion of light particles with activities in the retinas go to become conceptual thinking activities by contacting brain cells. Three of them have their similarities as well as their differences(3.9) as energy forms, all of which together become the thinking process. Any one of them need not be considered predominating or consuming the other in making contributions to make the thinking activity. With senses of ears and others, too, similar fusion of activities as thinking take place in similar manner, which known also as sensation, perception and cognition. It has to be also considered if any of them were not an ‘energy form’, such sensation, perception and cognition cannot occur.

* †

ignorance, not knowing [ʍiðjα:] Three basic desires :1. desire to enjoy pleasures /kα:mə θnhα:/ 2. desire to continue to exist /bhʍə θnhα:/ 3. desire to cease the existence /ʍibhʍə θnhα:)

Page 14 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 15 of 144

This thinking activity occurring through eyes can be seen in another way too as, it is not only the retinas with thinking element behind it that feels the entrance of light particles as they reach from externally, but both ought to feel one another as influences from an external source. Being thinking element centred or ‘I centred’, ‘we’ think only ‘activities in the retinas + thinking element’ as the thinking activity, and the ‘light particles’ is a physical activity descending from externally. When seeing in unification,* (3.14) thinking is consummation of all related activities as one. If it is felt as unique from the rest of the phenomena, such feeling of uniqueness, too, is a feeling unto itself. Thinking activity does not take place in the brain and the nervous system. It is a process which is always in a state of being released from them at all times. One cannot study the nature of it by studying the activities in brain or the nervous system because it is an ‘energy like’ or ‘wave like’ form always in an emitted stage; not possessing residences in a brain or any other spatial area or even a temporal area. Just as it appears it disappears too at the same time leaving room for its subsequent state. It is similar to that water bubbles in a river are not that river; nor can they remain even on surface. It can be compared also to ‘sunlight’ in that; ‘sunlight’ is not the sun, not even a part of it because, it is after it leaves the sun we call it ‘sunlight’; also two banks and other physical background of a river are not that river; men or animals as individuals are not the same as when they were in wombs where they came from, but what they are after they left them. A speech a person delivers is not the same as the person who makes it.(6.8) Similar to such examples, activities in brain and what is felt as a creation of an ‘external world’ of thinking released from them, are not the same; neither are they similar, positions of which need not suggest they are different too. (3.9) Just as thinking does not have a permanent or impermanent residence, it does not have a permanent existence too when seen in absolute truth. Since similar situations of thinking appears when thinking forms disappear, it makes us feel it is one thinking process which is witnessed. So phrases like ‘thinking process of this moment’ ‘thinking process of that moment’ are you used suggesting it consists in units of ‘ones’ or ‘twos’. Those phrases are used because they are needed when it is to explain in a language. Thinking has to be seen like when air or water are seen it cannot be seen by separating the molecules in them. Thinking is different to them in a way air or water can be seen as they have mass, but thinking isn’t. It is because of ‘seeing in unification’†(3.14) that ‘thinking’ is seen as one. When seen near the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, thinking process is neither one nor many. ‘Time’ appears go hand in hand with ‘thinking’ when seen in agreed truth(6.5), because, concept of ‘time is needed to see in unification, just as it is needed to think of all other things.(5.2) Thinking activity itself is seen as subject to time. However, it is the same thinking activity that creates ‘time’ too. Relationship of ‘thinking’ with ‘time’ can be seen in following ways as can be seen in agreed truth as; (i) thinking involves ‘time’ like any other process (ii) thinking is the same ‘ability as to see memories as seeing past’, which past it can use to create future in order to continue as an existence. (iii)thinking activity itself is seen as subject to ‘time’ First position (i) makes us see ‘thinking’ as a process, and since all processes require ‘time’ * †

unification = see following foot note seeing in unification = ability to see things as if consisting of ‘ones’(sankhatha /snkhəθə /) [Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R.(2011) www.godage.com] Page 15 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 16 of 144

‘thinking’ too has to be subject to ‘time’ for its manifestation. When seen in absolute truth however, nothing is there to call a ‘process’; it is only by seeing in unification in agreed truth(3.14)* things are seen as ‘processes’ or ‘ones’ or ‘twos’. Second position (ii) shows, ‘thinking’ is seeing memories of ‘past’ as imagining, though such ‘past’, exists nowhere at any present moment. Since it is the same ‘past’ that has become present, past cannot exist separately too. To clarify further and for simplification point (ii) mentioned above seen in agreed truth can be presented in the following equation; Thinking = Seeing Past and Future. [T = S (P.F)] Following utterances made in everyday life illustrate this point: - ‘I think of what I did last year’. (When I think of last year I think of memories of past with a need arisen in the present to do so, to be used in future.) - ‘I think of the moon’. (Even when one thinks of the moon as fancying, such fancying is based on memories of past, and it is made to proceed for a purpose in future.) - ‘I think to solve this puzzle.’(Solving a puzzle is dealing with memories of past using the conceptual states created in it, using the abilities of logic and reasoning, as an activity done in the present, to gain some expectations of using it in future.) - ‘Think before you leap.’ (Thinking here is giving or following an advice to be applied in future, which is done in the present, and which thought is based on memories coming from past.) - ‘I think I am a great man.’ (This is thinking based on past which is made in present with expectations of using it in future.) In these instances, ‘thinking’ is made using a time scale, taking ‘time’ as the base of them as seen in agreed truth.(6.4). Same instances can be seen in absolute truth too as; no time is involved with thinking them because there is nothing to call time.(5.2) When memories occur, they occur as if flowing from a domain called ‘past’, which ‘domain of past’ exists only in imagination at the present moment.(5.2). ‘Memories’ cannot flow from a ‘domain of past’ because there is no an area in mind to denote such a domain. Certain thoughts are called memories because they are seen as related to a ‘domain of past’. This point can be illustrated through the functioning of a computer. When we want to go back to a previous state of a document (as we do so in a word document in MS Word by pressing ctrl+z or pointing to ‘undo’ button using a mouse), the computer does not take us to a domain of past but continue with the same process involved in as at present. However we feel like we go back to a domain of past at such a time. Similar to that, when we contemplate on ‘past’, we simply watch the processes of thinking in the present moment which is subject to continuous change and which has no ability to stay in places called ‘present’ or ‘future’.

Difference between life forms and non life forms can be seen as having the ability or not having *

unification = ability to see things as if consisting of ‘ones’(sankhatha /snkhəθə/) [Subasinghe R.(2011) Unification and Disintegration www.godage.com] Page 16 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 17 of 144

the ability to see some of the conceptually seen phenomena as existing in a domain called ‘past’, in order to use them in a similarly conceptually seen domain called ‘future’. Non-life forms do not have such involvement with either a ‘past’ or a ‘future’. ‘Time’ is only a creation of the ability to acquire sense data and create conceptual forms and to use logic with them as the thinking activity. When a non-life form is seen as ‘existed in the past’, ‘existing in the present moment’ and ‘will exist in future’ it is seen so only in a thinking ability, beyond which seeing, nothing is there to call there as representing externally. ‘Thinking’ does not have a characteristic of definiteness to call it having an existence. Nothing definite remains to give a name called ‘thinking’, or to call there is such a process as having an existence. When seen in agreed truth it is seen as one line of process, and occurs in a scale of time. So, although we talk of it and our existence depends on it, we cannot see it in unification. Innumerable numbers of entities are seen as if in unification as seen in agreed truth, wherein purely conceptual states of forms, states, and orders of arrangements are seen in them as if they are neatly organised and arranged in them. Basis of all those conceptual states as we have seen previously for clarification are the basic states of ‘water’ ‘heat’ ‘air’ ‘earth’* that have only conceptual existences. Those conceptual states and their orders of arrangements are seen only as thinking. No material existences can be found for them even by seeing in agreed truth. So are, none of the unifications have real existences when they are seen in absolute truth. In the abilities of cell formation, their replication and their reproduction believed to have begun in macromolecules,(4.1) which ability is believed to be the origin of life forms when it is on earth, those molecules may have ‘felt the way they were’ and ‘wanted’ to continue with such feelings of existence by seeing things as if taking place in a time scale. To continue so, they began to absorb other energy forms from matter around they were in touch with, as replacements for those they began to spend as thinking. Thus they succeeded in existing for sometime in a time scale. Later on, not happy they could not continue in a longer period of time by such absorption, some of them began to create bundles of other life forms as themselves; thus replicating copies of them so that they could continue like themselves in a longer time scale. 4.1 Fig. 4.1 Later they made modifications to such existence to feel the existence better in order to enjoy pleasures better, which activities had to be done by confronting the ceaseless processes of disintegration. Methods of making such modifications could have been discovered in ‘trial and error methods’. Thus, those macromolecules began to ‘think’ of present that had become past by that time of thinking itself, and to create future based on them as cell formation and their replication; which activity, (not their material manifestations), became the ‘thinking process’ or ‘thinking beings’ or ‘life force’ when it is on earth. Although such is the ‘beginning’ of life forms on earth, it is a timeless process seen in relation to the universe, which process of life could occur anywhere at anytime in the universe in proper circumstances. In this thinking activity of beginning and continuing as life forms, it is appearances and the continuance of them that is central; not what is seen as material manifestations of them as ‘I’ or ‘we’ or ‘individuals’ or ‘groups of life forms’. It is because *

qualities [bhu:tha /bhu:θə /] that go to make the manifestations of matter = liquidity /α:po:/(water), heat /θe:ɡo:/ (heat), diffusion /ʍ𝑎:jo:/(air) and solidity /pthəʍi/ (earth) Page 17 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 18 of 144

thinking process is the central and not ‘persons’ created by it that a soldier goes to war and sacrifices his life for the continuance of others. A parent forsakes his or her life to save a son or daughter. The term ‘central’ here has to be taken as seen in agreed truth and not as an authority is out there to determine so. When seen in absolute truth, however, (6.7) ‘past’ and ‘future’ are nowhere ‘all the time’; existence of which are purely conceptual states that exist only in a mind, type of which ‘existence’ is seen within the thinking element only. Therefore, what is created as the universe through the thinking activity of seeing past to create future, are purely conceptual. (1.6) This also means, ‘thinking’ itself does not have an existence, which position can be seen even when seen in agreed truth. (6.4) Existence of ‘thinking’ itself we think as we witness is only conceptual seeing. Two different views explained so far as ‘thinking’ in agreed truth and ‘thinking’ in absolute truth can be summarised as follows: i. Thinking involves time as seeing past to take as bases of present, and to create future on them. ii. Nothing is there to denote as ‘past’. It is a creation only. Nothing of ‘present’ too is there. Just as a thing is seen as existing in the present moment, it disappears by giving way to its subsequent form which is not the same as it. Since ‘time’ seen thus is only conceptual seeing(1.6), what is created in such thinking as involved with such time too is conceptual seeing. Thus, the world is only a conceptual creation.

Thus, the world that can be seen as only a conceptual creation can be diagrammatically represented as in the above illustration. (Fig. 1.4) According to the illustration, ‘external world’ is only imaginary which means it has no [material] existence. With the absence of ‘material existence’, there cannot be a ‘non material existence’ too for it. The activity of ‘thinking’ is a Page 18 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 19 of 144

creation of its own, so it, too, cannot have an ‘existence’. The illustration shows, ‘Thinking’ and ‘The World’ created on it, all exist within an ‘Imaginary external world. ‘The World’ seen thus created within thinking consists of two kinds of seeing as; i. seeing purely conceptual phenomena through thinking ii. seeing things as if they relate to matter as seen in agreed truth.* When seeing in agreed truth, thinking functions on seeing ‘material states’ out of ‘non-material’ states of matter, the ‘material states’ of which when seen at smallest levels are 'particles’, ‘waves’ or ‘radiation’. They appear as motion at smallest levels, without their having definite shapes, definite states and definite orders of arrangement. Original states of them have to be ‘non-material states’ because it is matter x†, thoughts about which matter x cannot be made by thinking.(2.1) In other words there is no one basic entity or many such entities as original states that go to make the universe. In the final seeing in absolute truth, there is nothing to call matter. Ultimately Matter becomes nothing by what it is made of. Beyond a level of seeing smaller and still smaller states, matter is seen as losing all material qualities attributed to it, so such ‘smallest states’ of matter are finally seen as ‘non-material’ or ‘spiritual’. Things that cannot be known in sensation, perception and cognition can be included in this state of ‘non-material’. Sensation, perception and cognition have no ability in knowing smallest states beyond a limit of their abilities. Since it is same unknowable states that go to make the bigger levels, we call the original non material state as ‘matter x’,‡ separating them from what is thought as perceived and cognised. Thus ‘matter’ really is not what is seen, heard, touched or felt and what is further thought on them. What is seen as ‘matter’ really is only seeing. In having smallest contents of mass if any, thinking activity may have an existence similar to the existence of smallest particles like neutrinos supposed to have very little mass or possibly no mass at all.§ Even an electron is supposed not to have a radius which means, if it is so, it does not need space for its existence. One reason ‘thinking’ could have some element of mass in it although direct physical evidence to that effect is not seen, with our changes of moods, we feel physical changes too. Also, our minds move with us wherever we move. It is possible the ‘element of mass’ that goes to make thinking does not have any material characteristics that can be attributed to particles; thinking can finally be only matter x. (2.1) One cannot perceive or cognise ‘thinking’, but only be aware of it as a feeling like situation that always change, while an element of it remaining as non-change too at the same time . (see section ‘The ‘Real I’).7.13 Thinking cannot be perceived or cognised also because, like in anything else, qualities attributed to matter as having mass, shapes, states, orders of arrangement etc., constantly change in thinking as it happens so in particles in a flame of a candle.(7.2, Fig. 7.5) Changes seen in a flame of a candle take place without speed as seen in absolute truth, because nothing is there to represent ‘speed of change’ in such changes. If anything is seen as ‘speed’ there, such seeing is seen only in agreed truth. When one says x number of particles appear and *

Subasinghe R.(2011 p.170-2) Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R.(2011 p.30 Unification and Disintegration Matter and matter x [section 2.1] Subasinghe R.(2011 p.30) Unification and Disintegration § Hawking. S. (1988 p.204) A Brief History of Time Bantam Books † ‡

Page 19 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 20 of 144

disappear in one second when a flame of a candle is burnt it is seen so only in agreed truth. However, ‘thinking’ cannot have speed when seen in absolute truth, because in the absence of time there cannot be seconds or other measurements of time. Thinking is material or non-material depending on how the ‘original’ or ‘basic’ state(s) of matter that go(es) to make thinking is defined. If it is to assume atomic or sub atomic particles or waves or such smaller states of matter as ‘material’, then, thinking too is ‘material’. If it is to assume smallest levels of matter cannot be perceived or cognized through human levels of perception and cognition, then thinking is ‘non-material’. To this latter state of matter the term ‘spiritual’ too can be used. However, both these ways of seeing, too, are utilitarian ways of seeing, seen by ‘no one’ when seen in absolute truth. When the terms ‘original’ or ‘basic state’ are used when referring to constituents of thinking, they are used as seen in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth however, there can be no ‘origins’ ‘ends’ or ‘basic entities’ in the universe or in what constitutes it. Universe is not made of particles or atoms having definite shapes, definite states and their definite orders of arrangements. In such understanding, after getting proper contextual meanings of the terms ‘origin’ or ‘basic state’ such expressions have to be cast away as they denote nothing. Not only in the realization of those two terms, but meanings of such terms as ‘universe’ or ‘matter’ themselves, too, have to be shed away in the ultimate seeing, in order to experience the real meanings behind them. Such shedding away of meanings is similar to that; after crossing a river using a canoe, a need cannot be there as to carry that canoe to continue with the journey.(e) Thus, when studying its constituents, ‘thinking’ appears in two seemingly contradictory ways as: i. having material characteristics ii. feeling as non material It is only when seen in agreed truth that these two ways are seeing. In the ultimate seeing in absolute truth, both these types, too, are only seeing; so in an ultimate seeing, all thinking appear as false or ignorance based. Thinking form can be believed as it exists everywhere because matter x (2.1) supposed to appear as thinking is everywhere. However, it manifests to us only with our ability to unify*; which means, the ability to see things in ‘ones’; to see as if those ‘ones’ occupy areas as ‘spatial’, they consists of mass and they appear and disappear in a dimension called ‘ time’. However, seeing things in unification itself is seeing in unification, position of which can be seen in absolute truth because things seen and the ‘one’ seeing, (the observer and the observed), both are subjects to changes always seen as motion, with nothing or no one as left for the thinking activity to recognize as having existences. What is seen as ‘seeing in unification’ are created views of thinking seeing in agreed truth. (6.4) Thinking also unifies an ‘I Consciousness’ which is also felt as ‘the greatest being’(7.6) or as ‘the centre of the universe’ that constantly makes attempts to unify phenomena in order to create a world. It sees things near it as big, and things far from it as small. When things are seen as going further and further away, they are seen as getting smaller and smaller beyond a point of which nothing is to be seen as it. So it is not a real universe that is seen in unification. Such ‘world’ created in unification is not a static one too. It changes in a way that no one such ‘world’ seen at *

section 3.14 ‘Seeing’ in Unification, Also: Subasinghe R.(2011 p.30) Unification and Disintegration Page 20 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 21 of 144

one time is seen as the same again a second time. So the ‘world’ seen unification cannot really be a ‘world’ that exists but a ‘process’ that changes. One has to find the basic entity that goes to make the universe so that we could say ‘the universe’ is that; but no such basic entity could be found. All unifications that constitute the world are utilitarian creations created on ‘the desires to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures’(b) in which, ‘I Consciousness’ is the greatest one’ that can be seen as unified, at the same time as the ‘one’ ‘who’ is doing the activity of unifying. However, even the state of ‘I consciousness’, like light, originates and disappears each moment creating a feeling of one continued existence as ‘I think therefore I am’. It not only unifies itself, but unifies every other thing too to include in its own domain. When a material world is perceived, thinking element appears like void or emptiness in it like a hole in the ground the bottom of which extends to infinity; because it cannot see itself in relation to a material background. It cannot see the ‘non- material’ or ‘spiritual’ quality within itself when seeing a world of matter, but only feels as itself. Although it is seeing as a void t in relation to a material world, it is felt as having a strong existence as a unification, as it is the centre of the universe as ‘I’ that witnesses all other things. Despite for the strength of such a feeling, there is no definiteness in the state of thinking called ‘I Consciousness’ as it has occupied a particular spatial area and one particular consecutive period of time. Like particles in a flame, nothing stays at rest in space or in time. If all parts of a car are removed from it and scattered in an area, those parts cannot be called a car, because orderly arrangement is not there for the manifestation of a car. However, there is a car there in a disorderly way. Similarly, thinking form is there wherever matter is, although one does not call all matter as ‘thinking’. This means, thinking element is just everywhere, but it manifests only when there are thinking beings. This, is seen only when seen in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth however, nothing can be stated about the states at matter x level, because the concepts of orderliness or disorderliness cannot be applied to the levels of matter x. One cannot perceive or cognise matter x to say so. So, in the final seeing, thinking form is everywhere all the time just as it is nowhere, contradictory positions of which are seen when seen in the division of both in agreed truth and in absolute truth. 1.5 Perception and Cognition Let us call a collection of all sense data one perceives at any one moment of time from the eye, the ear and other senses as ‘X’, as seen in agreed truth. When X is perceived like that, that’s all there is as seen in agreed truth. Nothing more. Nothing less too because it is the only phenomenon that remains at that moment to call ‘everything’ or ‘the world’ ‘the universe’ ‘life’ or ‘I’. Anything else one thinks of as that could exist separately from it at that moment as X is perceived, like ‘experiences of past’ or objects existing or events occurring beyond experiencing X, beginning or end of universe, expectations for future; all those do not really exist. The existence of them is only seen in imagination. If one takes an action believing any of those additional things as really existing at the same time as experiencing X, then, such action resembles that of a schizophrenic, an attempt in trying to adapt to imaginary things.

Page 21 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 22 of 144

One could object to this view as, ‘If I think of Colombo as it exists at the same time as X is perceived, it can be true by logically seeing, because I will see Colombo as it really exists if I go there tomorrow. Similar to that, existence of hundreds of other things that can be thought of as existing at the same time as X is perceived, can be proven as existing similar to that existence of Colombo. So such imagining of things existing in addition to X cannot be unreal’ In an instance a person thinks of Colombo as it exists externally to X, what she thinks really is of what is stored in her mind as memories of Colombo which are always past based. They represent nothing material as existing at a present moment. Such memories of Colombo do not denote Colombo, nor do they ‘represent’ such a place; they are phenomena that do not ‘represent’ anything to call as having an existence. Suppose, Colombo is covered by water as a result of tsunami waves at the same time as X is perceived the fact of which the person does not know; then, it is clear, it is not real Colombo one thinks at that time but one destroyed by a tsunami. Such memories of Colombo do not even ‘represent’ Colombo because the term ‘representation’ denotes only a ‘purely conceptual’ state, which ‘purely conceptual’ state denotes nothing as related to an existence. This point is realized better if one visits a town or a village that he lived a long time earlier, and hadn’t visited there after leaving it. In such a visit one would realize, the town or the village that was in his imagination before he visited there later was one of imagination denoting nothing as real. Those ‘imaginary memories’ of past of the town that was in his mind are based only on what he had perceived a long time ago that have nothing to do with ‘its present moment’. Such a town or village has to be one hundred percent different with the imagined one as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. One may point out there are conceptual similarities with such a town or village of its present form and its past form now existing only as memories, but since ‘conceptual similarities’ denote nothing in existence, they cannot relate to reality. It is also to be pointed out, the term ‘similarity’ does not mean the ‘same’(3.9). For one reason, no two things would be ‘same’ at any two points seen in a spatial scale; so is it, no object is the same at any two moments of time seen in a temporal scale. Also, no two or more things would be seen as possessing ‘same’ ‘similar’ or ‘different’ characteristics when seen at matter x level mainly because, conceptual existences cannot be applied to states at those levels, just as things cannot be seen in ‘ones’ or ‘twos’ at such levels. Things, places and events change 'moment by moment' so that one cannot perceive the same thing twice as Heraclitus too has shown. If a thing is not the same again, no name can be given to it because it cannot be seen again to identify it using the same name. One cannot call a ‘baby’ to the same person after ten years of calling one so. One cannot call a ‘tree’ a tree when it later appears as a fallen tree trunk with its leaves and other constituents that went to make it are not the same. Added to those points, when a thing is thought of as ‘same’ or ‘similar’ with its existence at a previous time, it is from a very little amount of sense data we do so, sensual limitations of which as caused by karmic abilities. Through such little amount of sense data and ideas and interpretations created on them, one cannot consider things as ‘same’ or ‘similar’; just as the values ‘true’ or ‘false’ cannot be applied on them. When seen in absolute truth, one cannot even Page 22 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 23 of 144

name anything because a thing is not the same after ‘one moment’ of seeing it. When names are given to things by seeing in unification, it is as an act of ignorance it is done so with the hope of fulfilling utilitarian needs of that name user. Extending thinking from this background, nothing is remained as to perceive and to cognise as ‘the world’. Nothing is there to perceive and to cognise for two other basic reasons that can be dealt with in discussions in physics too. One is, no fundamental or basic entity is there that went to make the universe; the other is, no ‘one’ or ‘many’ (persons) have occupied ‘our’ ‘physical’ bodies to see anything. Therefore, not only when Colombo is imagined when X is perceived, everything considered as happened in the past, happening in the present other than X, and those that are expected as ‘will happen’ in future, and everything seen through conceptual states of ‘same’, ‘similar’ or ‘different’, all such seeing is limited to imagination as we see so when seeing agreed truth; making us resemble schizophrenics when we act on the decisions made on them. So when we see, we do not see ‘truth’. When phenomena are seen as seeing X, and additional phenomena are seen as based on it, they can be seen in two divisions; i. Perception of X ii. Decisions the brain takes beyond the retina and other sensory levels of perception as creations of thinking as brain activities, the abilities to make which depends on the nature of brain matter and the nervous system. When a study done to see smaller and still smaller levels of brain matter and the nervous system in order to reach at the basic block by which all are made they will end at matter x levels, after which, the thinking element cannot proceed. Attempts made to such search for them are simply manifestations of karmic energies that do not require another term called ‘truth’. These two stages of perception and cognition are finally not two but one experienced as the ‘internal world’ as seen in agreed truth. However, when seen in absolute truth, no one of these two exists, and there is no ‘one’ too to see as they exist. 1.6 World of Agreed Truth(6.4) and World of the ‘Purely Conceptual’* Examples for ‘purely conceptual states’† and what we presently consider ‘related to matter’ as seen in agreed truth’(6.4) can be presented in a tabulated form as follows. The terms on the right side of the table denote ‘the purely conceptual’, which means they have no type of existence other than the appearances they make as thinking forms. The terms on the left side show, they have some existence with an ‘external world’ as ‘related to matter’, which means, they have beginnings and ends as seen in agreed truth. However, both groups have no type of existence when seen in an ultimate seeing in absolute truth.

* †

Next section 1.7 Only a Conceptual world , Also, Subasinghe R.(2011. p.70-2) Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R.(2011 p.170-2) Unification and Disintegration Page 23 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 24 of 144

Based on the attitude one has towards formations of concepts in minds with their relationships with an ‘external world’ as seen in agreed truth, ‘purely conceptual’ states can be seen in two different ways as follows: i. ‘Purely conceptual’ ‘phenomena’ cannot have independent existences of their own. They always have to be formed on things that is believed to exist as an ‘external world’. ii. Whether an ‘external world’ exists or not, ‘purely conceptual’ states have their own ‘non-material’ or ‘spiritual’ types of existence.

‘Related to Matter’

Purely Conceptual

Conceptual states seen as if they have some form of existence related to an ‘external world’ seen in agreed truth man ball a king Sri lanka London any event or function

No material existences are for them unless one considers the formation of themselves as thought forms at matter x level are in material states, (which point cannot be substantiated) pain mind love attachments emotions zero triangle time breadth height angles skills length kinghood courage

Which side is ‘universe’ ? When the concept ‘square’ is seen when seen a box and the same concept is seen in another object too like a room, an ability within us is displayed to extract the concept of ‘square’ as independent from those objects. Such independent existences cannot be ‘material’ because they do not possess material qualities of having ‘mass’ ‘states’ ‘orders of arrangement’ or abilities to exist in periods of time. This means their existence is non-sensory. However, have to be always extracted from objects when perception of anything occurs. When an attempt is made to form an image of a ‘square’ in our minds without using an object, it may appear as a square of colour lines in a background of another colour as we seen in a piece of paper, which colour is imagined out of light seen in the external world. So those images always appear as ‘related to matter’. Second point (ii) suggests, thinking creates phenomena not found as appearing in spatial or temporal scales. E.g. ‘pain’, ‘mind’, ‘love’, ‘attachments’, ‘emotions’, ‘zero’, ‘triangle’. Although nothing is denoted by them in the external world even by seeing in agreed truth, we imagine and create a huge world using them, and feel this ‘huge world’ has an actual existence. However, such a world is a world only for the thinking element itself, and it must be independent from the ‘material world’ if there has to be such a material world. This world made by the thinking element as they consist of purely conceptual states is always an imaginary creation of the similarly imagined conceptual state of ‘I’. Realization of this point may make us accept the notion of ‘idealism’ (world of thinking alone) as having a valid background that consists of a purely conceptual world alone. Page 24 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 25 of 144

Since ‘purely conceptual’ creations do not show material characteristics of having ‘forms’, being composed of ‘mass’, subject to exist in a time scale, perceived through behaviour of light particles around ‘objects’ or by being in direct contact with them, they appear as having an existence independent from the material world. The world created thus is always centred on a similarly imagined strong concept called ‘I’. This ‘ideal world’ is created by the thinking element by ‘seeing in unification’*(3.14) i.e., seeing things as if they exist by occupying spatial area and lines of consecutive moments seen in a time scale, which unifications really are creations limited to the thinking element itself . 1.7 Only a Conceptual World When ‘the world’ is seen, formations of concepts appearing as arranged in logical orders are seen, which world of concepts and the orders of logic that went to create them are nowhere when seeing in absolute truth(6.7, 6.8). Such ‘Logical orders’ seen themselves are creations of the karmic utilitarian expectations of ‘the desire to continue to exist’ and the desire to enjoy pleasures†(b,d), as originated in the thinking element.(k) ‘Logical activities’ do not have an existence beyond the domain of thinking. Thinking is unifying,(3.14) in which activity, images are made by conceptualising on sense data, and ideas (interpretations)‡ are made on them using logic by seeing interrelationships among them, the process of which continues according to karmic energies available. The activity of ‘unifying’ may be compared with the activity of perception as seen by gestalt psychologists who saw ‘perception’ through what they called ‘figure-ground principle’, according to which, ‘perception’ is an activity of organizing sense data ‘into a figure which stands out from a background’.§ In almost the same way, the act of ‘unifying’ suggests seeing phenomena as consisting of ‘ones’ (uni), by contrasting them with their backgrounds. It is because of the nature of ‘seeing in ones’ that searches continue to discover the smallest possible particle or the basic element by which things are assumed to manifest to us; and the ‘universe’ is thought of as it is one big entity made by all of them. It is because looking for smaller and still smaller constituents in the phenomena that searches go on to find one definite thing as ‘the basic block of the universe’. It is because ‘perception’ occurs in ‘seeing in unification’ that searches are made to see a ‘singularity’ or a ‘unified field’ that is applicable to the whole universe to consider it, too, as one. When the terms ‘bigness’ or ‘roundness’ are used, they denote unified concepts in our minds, with their having no relationships with a material world. When they mix with sense data perceived as coming from a material world, they become images like ‘planet’ or ‘ball’. After sense data has reached the thinking element, they become concepts, not as ‘information’ ‘coming from’ an ‘external material world’. Nothing can be considered as coming from ‘there’ to ‘here’

unifications = ability in the thinking element to see things as if in ‘ones’, section 1.4 Seeing in Unification , Subasinghe R.(2011) Unification and Disintegration Three desires that go to make a being :1. desire to enjoy pleasures (kα;:mə θnh α:) 2. desire to continue to exist (bhʍə θnhα;:) 3. desire to cease the existence (ʍibhʍə θnhα:) ‡ interpretations = thought forms after they are reformed or edited = sanskara /sŋskα:rə/ § Barlow A.R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident * †

Page 25 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 26 of 144

as sensation, perception and cognition that can be stored in brain as memories.* To cognise the word ‘planet’ as ‘an object in the sky that does not twinkle’, concepts like ‘one’ (= an), ‘object’, ‘inclusion’ (= in), ‘definiteness’ (= the), ‘space’ (= sky) etc. are used. When it is heard ‘The ball moved’, further concepts indicating spatial positions, spatial directions and moments seen in a time scale are added to those concepts of ‘ball’ and ‘object’ and an orderly arrangement is seen in them to create one meaning. This ‘orderly arrangement’, too, denotes only conceptual states existing within the thinking element. When it is said, ‘The ball went to the edge…’ the logical element appears suggesting, ‘it ought to fall from there’, suggesting the conceptual state of ‘future’ creating a broader conceptual state of ‘domain of time’. To come to this logical conclusion inductive thinking has been used, in which, previous experiences of balls or other objects falling from edges re-manifest in minds. The ‘world’ is a manifestation in the thinking element consisting of concepts, images and interpretations (ideas) (see footnote p.24) that works on logical abilities in reaching at inductive or deductive conclusions. The ‘logical abilities’ here do not represent a state called ‘truth’. When a person thinks there is a ghost in his room his thinking has a logical background, however, his conclusion may not be true. Similarly, all that we consider as ‘truth’ may have nothing in them to so that they can be known as ‘truth’. ‘Truth’ in all instances is limited to its own environment within a thinking element. It is because it is needed for our continued existence and to enjoy pleasures that some states are called ‘truth’ and others ‘false’. Any interpretation arrived at as ‘truth’ may not be seen so when seen in a broader view nearing absolute truth. They are not ‘false’ too on the same ground. In an ultimate seeing, there is nothing to call ‘false’ too just as there is nothing to call ‘truth’.† When a thing is seen as ‘true’ it is always within limitations it is seen so, because the person sees so cannot think outside her limitations. Outside those limitations it could be neither true nor false‡(o). When an insane person thinks he is Napoleon, he is true within his limitations. He is false only in a broader view. In the broadest possible view, (no one can be presumed to have such a view), all that we think as truth has to be ‘neither true nor ‘false’.(o) One reason why we come to that view is, none of the views can take all relevant backgrounds to determine they are true or not. Limited abilities of brain activities and the amount of information coming in as sense data are always limited to come to a view like ‘the correct logical view’. In the ultimate seeing in absolute truth, there is nothing that can be reached at as ‘the correct logical conclusion’. The ‘real world’ or ‘the external world’(Fig. 1.8) (two of which are seen only in agreed truth), and this world of concepts cannot be one and the same. The ‘world of concepts’ does not represent a ‘real world’. The reason that makes us arrive at such a position is, the ‘world of concepts’ is created on the limitations in karmic abilities(a), not because an ability is there in the thinking element to determine a state called ‘truth’. It also means, appearances in the thinking element are appearances made for their own sakes. They are not there to solve problems like whether an external world has a real existence or not. The ‘five’ senses and the brain and the nervous system are formed according to karmic abilities; they have no mechanism that makes them understand and realize a ‘real world’ even if there can be such world. * † ‡

section 3.4 ‘Domino Effect’ in the Creation of the Internal World [Fig.3.4] section 6.4- Agreed truth – Only Utilitarian Views Seeing Absolute Truth [section 6.5] Four types of verifiability of a statement 1. true 2. false 3. true and false 4. neither true nor false Page 26 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 27 of 144

The ‘conceptual world’ and the ‘real world’ are neither ‘two’ nor ‘one’ because they cannot be seen in relation to one another. In other words ‘conceptual world’ can be the same as the ‘real world’ although mistakenly they are seen as two. Verifications made to prove the existence of the ‘real world’ ends in their becoming a part of the conceptual world itself. In order for a person to think the conceptual world and the real world have to be ‘two’, or the conceptual world is a replica of the external world, she has to use a type of imagination and cognition beyond thinking abilities, evidence to which is not to be seen. Attempts made to perceive and comprehend a ‘real world’ through concepts, themselves become activities in the same conceptual world. The fact that people die or suffer in multitudes of disasters without being aware of them beforehand, similar to that people had no warning when two buildings in New York were bombed, or people were flown to sea like colonies of ants in streams of water appearing as tsunami waves, show, the ability that goes to create this conceptual world is in no way superior to the rest of the motion in matter by possessing an ability to know ‘the truth situation’. If there are even traces of premonitory awareness among human beings as to know the ‘external world’, things could have become much different when such disasters occurred. This need not suggest thinking element as inferior too, because feelings of both inferiority or superiority are values only created as conceptual states in the thinking element. Mental activities, bomb explosions, tsunami waves, all are manifestations of matter x seen as matter, in which, only the forming of thoughts manifests as experiencing matter x level(2.1). In an instance when conceptual thinking is seen as having an ability to control the material world, they show only causes and effects that only appear as thinking controls matter. When nuclear power is used for some purpose, there the thinking element is seen as showing an ability to comprehend and exploit laws in physics and to use them to make changes in the material world. Although thinking activity there is seen as it supersedes the rest of matter, both the thinking activity and nuclear activities there are the same motion of matter arising from matter x levels, in which, no one is above the other. No similarities and differences are in them at matter x levels to see one as superseding or dominating the other.(3.9) As seen in agreed truth, images are made by sensation and perception when sensory organs contact the ‘external world’, based on which, interpretations (ideas) are made as ‘thinking’ using logical abilities. Same ability creates the feeling of ‘awareness of being one’ felt also as ‘consciousness’, making the thinking element feel everything is centred on it and it is dominant over rest of matter. Such feeling of ‘dominance’ itself, too, is a feeling unto itself of the ability to think as sensation, perception and cognition. Similar to a person taking decisions by referring to information obtained from a computer, all conceptual thinking appear as made by an imagined ‘person’ by referring to memories in the thinking element so that ‘she’ could satisfy her desires of ‘continue to exist’(b) and to ‘enjoy pleasures’* (c). Those desires are karmic desires in the thinking element, energized by ignorant craving (d) created in itself, that manifest also as ‘emotional states’. Thus conceptual thinking emanates as emotions of energies. When seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, not only emotions, all particles everywhere are active all the time as energies, so one type of motion as ‘emotions’ cannot be considered special. It is ignorance that makes it seen *

desires =/θΛnhα:/ It is desires that cause ignorance in thinking that go to create a world . Page 27 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 28 of 144

some energies are of special values while others are inferior; or, some of them are energies others are objects. In an ultimate seeing, karmic energies or emotions need not really be energy forms, but manifestations as energy forms when it is in the thinking element. Thus, ‘emotions’ are finally seen as, manifestations in the thinking element appearing as releasing energy in bodily forms, making the thinking element appear as active and possessed by a ‘person’.*

Sluices in a dam in a reservoir do not create energy with water when they are closed, but when opened, water flows through them making it manifests as an energy form. Arrangement of sluices in such a dam in creating energy forms can be compared with the arrangement in the thinking element to make the appearances of ‘emotions’ as motion. It shows that, there has to be a proper order arrangement of what it constitutes for ‘emotions’ to make their manifestations as ‘emotions’. As seen in everything made of matter, history of appearances of emotions extends to the infinite history of matter; therefore, origins of emotions cannot be traced. Some emotional activities are initiated by ‘cortical thinking’ (intelligence), whereas others spontaneously appear. Manifestation of emotions is ‘emotional intelligence’ as Daniel Goleman† puts it. According to him, personality development of human beings have to be centred on ‘emotional intelligence’ instead of ‘cortical intelligence’.

* †

More on emotions: Meditation and the Three Facets of ‘I’ [section 9.1 Fig. 9.1.1] Goleman D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence Bantam books Page 28 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 29 of 144

Such ‘emotional intelligence’ has to be the basis of life form when seen in agreed truth. It is also the ‘life force’ or the ‘need for self actualization’ as seen by Rogers, Goldstein and Maslow.* It is a development of the ‘Primordial I’(8.10), and ‘cortical thinking’ is a secondary development built on it. It can be presumed, intelligence’ is the product, and emotions are the energy source of that product; both of which ultimately are one and the same. It need not be taken as all emotions produce intelligence at all times. Concepts by which the world originates are ultimately ‘spiritual’, which means they are beyond the domain of perceiving through sensation, perception and cognition. Ideas or interpretations arise when the ability to conceptualise fuse with logic. All these seen as one are seen in a greater unification as ‘awareness of being one’, which is also called the ‘consciousness’†, the ‘personal’ feeling behind which ‘consciousness’ is the ‘I Consciousness’(7.6) feeling of being the centre of everything. A piece of bread exposed to elements like light and air is not a piece of bread after sometime. Its shape and shapes of its constituents, orders of arrangement in those constituents, states of matter in the whole or parts in it including in its molecules, atoms and particles, all have changed after some time with some amount of matter leaving from it while some external matter are added to *

as such points are discussed in Humanistic Psychology Consciousness is one of the 5 components that go to make a human body. Those 5 are 1. images /ru:pə/); 2. pain (/we:ðənα:/; 3. signs /sΛɲɲα:/: 4. interpretations /sΛŋskα:rə/; 5. consciousness /wiɲɲα:nə/ †

Page 29 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 30 of 144

it. If similarities are there in a piece of bread seen earlier with one seen as the same later, they are only conceptual similarities seen only by a thinking element. Such seeing of similarities are creations of ignorance caused by desires. It is only an ‘I Consciousness’ that suggests the former piece of bread is ‘same or ‘similar’ or ‘different’ with the latter. It is the same ‘I Consciousness’ that thinks it sees images occurring as ‘earlier one’ and ‘present one’ and new existences would occur as in a domain of future by seeing through a dimension of ‘time’.(5.1) James Jeans mentions of two states of waves* (1966.46) that go to make matter as condensed or ‘bottled up’ matter (any object we see) and released states of matter like light, x ray, micro waves, ultra violet rays and so on. When following this division, brain can be included in condensed matter and the mind as released forms of matter x, properties of the latter of which are beyond sensation, perception and cognition. Nothing can be stated about released states of matter x as brain activities but they are strongly felt as having an existence with great value. Such released states of brain activities cannot be seen because they are in released states. One cannot see matter too in its real states of motion because they are beyond sensory and cognitive abilities. So we come to the conclusion, nothing can be seen as mind because at the time we think of it is in a released form so that it cannot be subject to sensation, perception and cognition. In such situation no person too is there to see it. 1.8 Three ‘Worlds’ as seen in Agreed Truth Based on the premises discussed above, three divisions can be identified as ‘worlds’ based on the functioning of sensation, perception and cognition. Ultimately, these three ‘world’s are one and the same though seen as in three. However, they are seen as worlds unto themselves. They are; 1. Real World 2. World of Signs (ap) 3. World of Imagination. They can be represented as in the following illustration. (Fig. 1.8) Three areas in the first column show the ‘Real World’, that can be seen only in agreed truth. ‘Reality’ of its existence has to be only believed in. Second column shows signs or images made as impacts caused by the waves in contact with sensitive places in the organism, signs or images of which are believed to have originated in the ‘Real world’. However, it has an independent existence, which means, it is not the same as the ‘Real World’ or the ‘World of Imagination’. So are the other two; they do not belong to one another; they do not have relationships with one another although that’s how we see so. What is seen as relationships among them are relationships only to a ‘you’ or a ‘me’. The World of Signs can be compared with the symbolical representations created as circuitry paths in a computer when they are live. It is them that are felt as concepts or images when it is ‘thinking’. Third column shows world of imagination formed as impacts of the second one of symbolical representations of signs. This ‘World of Imagination’, is not the same or similar with the ‘Real World’, nor can it contact the ‘Real World’.

*

Jeans J. (1966) The Mysterious Universe Page 30 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 31 of 144

. The ability to create these ‘three worlds’ is the ability in the thinking element to see in unification* as caused by three desires. The activity of ‘seeing in unification’ is similar to the perception explained in Gestalt psychology as, ‘…every perception is organized into a figure which stands out from a background, which is known as ‘figure ground principle’.† However, when it is in unification, it is explained as caused by ignorance because of the influences through desires. Seen from a wider perspective, it is the same phenomenon seen three times when these divisions are seen. It makes no difference if nametags ‘Real World’ ‘World of Signs’ and ‘World of Imagination’ are changed with one another because all denote same phenomena only seen as if in three separate divisions. In an ultimate seeing, it is only the third, the ‘World of Imagination’ we deal with. ‘World of Imagination’ is felt as it is the only one we witness, work on, contemplate on and meditate on; therefore, it is enough to focus on it to know what the ‘universe’ really is; and who sees that. ‘Real World’ is guesswork; nothing about it can be known either in agreed truth or in absolute truth.

* †

section 3.14: Seeing in unification, Unifications are sanskara and they are caused by ignorance or avidhya /ʍiðyα:/ Barlow A.R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident Page 31 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 32 of 144

When the terms ‘signs’ or ‘symbols’ are used in explaining the ‘World of Signs’, it need not be taken as there are definite entities called ‘signs’ or ‘symbols’ that occupy some space and some mass. As processes they are involved with ‘time’, but, since ‘time’ is purely imaginary,(5.1) they cannot have ‘beginnings’, ‘presents moments’ or ‘ends’. No definiteness is there in them when seeing with the notion of time, although we tend to feel some definiteness is there in them when they are considered as ‘signs’. In a background of the inability to use the term ‘definiteness’ to anything, the expression ‘non-definite existence’ too cannot be used to them. Therefore, ‘signs’ have to be considered as having neither definite nor non-definite existences. When the world is seen thus, it can be seen also as functioning in different levels of magnitudes as at molecular levels, atomic levels, quantum levels and beyond quantum levels. Whichever the level the world is seen, it is from the world of ‘signs’ the ‘‘World of Imagination’ is determined. It is by seeing through ‘signs’ only the world of Imagination is created, ‘Real World’ cannot be in direct contact with the world of imagination. How it happens so can be illustrated through the activity of ‘domino effect in perception’* (3.4) according to which, the first point in a linear path in a circuit through which an electric current passes or the first point of taking an action when passing a message, are not the same as the motion seen as at their finishing points. In perception and cognition, it is ‘signs’ in the ‘World of Symbols’ which are in touch with the ‘World of Imagination’, not the ‘Real World’. The fact that ‘World of Imagination’ cannot contact with the ‘Real World’ suggests, it can never ever know the ‘Real World’; thus the existence of ‘Real World’ cannot be determined by ‘signs’. Since it is possible ‘signs’ and interpretations made on them manage to create their own phenomena that are not related to an external world, one cannot know how much symbols represent the real world and how much imagination represents both of them. Finally, it is only the ‘World of Imagination’ we deal with. One cannot say this ‘World of Imagination’ even exists when seen in absolute truth because nothing remains as definite to see even as a ‘World of Imagination’. Whether there is a ‘World of Signs’ or a ‘Real World’, everything is finally felt as ‘imagination’ ‘interpretations’ and ‘ideas’ (ai) as seen in agreed truth. Therefore, whatever we think of or talk of, it is done only as ‘World of Imagination’, which is also called the ‘internal world’. (1.2) Regarding ‘who’ is doing the computing creating a ‘World of Imagination’ out of signs, or ‘who’ is seeing, enjoying or interpreting those computations appearing as a ‘consciousness’, or an ‘I’, or an ‘awareness’ or ‘the ‘mind’, one answer is; what is seen as a ‘who’ or a ‘doer’ itself is a conceptual creation within the same thinking element, felt as a formless, mass less, timeless ‘state’. It is only felt as a ‘person’ out of ignorance and it cannot be seen in perception and cognition. It is the nature of thinking that makes it appear to itself as a ‘’person’ that has occupied a position in the thinking element in order to witness a world. Just as there is no ‘person’ behind the activities in a computer; it is always a man as the maker or the operator who does the role of a ‘person’ when it is a computer; no ‘person’ is there behind thinking as ‘I’ or ‘self awareness’ or as a soul.

*

‘Domino Effect’ in the Creation of the Internal World [Section 3.4] Page 32 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 33 of 144

Although 3 worlds are discussed herein, seen in relation to the activities of sensation, perception and cognition a fourth one too can be added it as ‘The World of Fantasies’ or ‘defence mechanisms’ based on the normal abnormal difference in human behaviour as seen from a psychological point of view. Such a world of fantasy consist of illusory or delusory thoughts as created by the negative impacts of emotions, to some of which thoughts Chopra uses the phrase ‘distorted thoughts’. However, since it is not of direct relevance in the present context, it has not been discussed here. (See Fig in the appendix] __________________________________

Page 33 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 34 of 144

Chapter 2

The Material Background 2.1 Matter and Matter X It is by seeing variety in the manifestations of ‘matter x’* as matter that a world is seen, by seeing in unification.(3.14) Seeing in unification is a characteristic in the thinking element when it is occupied with creating a ‘world’ to fulfil the desires to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures†. Manifestations of matter x as matter is seen along with the conceptual state of ‘motion’, making it appear ceaseless appearances and disappearances along with other conceptual states of ‘shapes’, ‘states’ and ‘orders of arrangements’ with them that go to make a world. Thus the thinking element sees a world of four dimensions‡ that is subject to change all the time. ‘Motion’ makes it seen all things seen disappear too at the same time as they appear; and after such an appearance disappears, it never reappears. This makes us exposed to unexpected situations all the times; which are seen as unexpected because we expect things to be same or similar all the time as needed for our continuance. However, just like all other conceptual states, existence of ‘motion’ too has only a purely conceptual existence. Matter x, through which the world manifests, is unknowable to the thinking element. It cannot be seen through sensation, perception and cognition. It cannot possess any characteristic seen through conceptual seeing. It need not contain the characteristics even of ‘singularity’ or ‘plurality’ because it is ‘unknowable’ and none of the conceptual states can be with it. Neither can it be seen through the notion of ‘time’ because ‘time’, too, is only conceptually seen as a separate dimension in the universe, manifesting as it exists behind everything;. Imagine a big iceberg appearing as an island. One sees mountains, hills, valleys, plains, plateaus etc. etc. in this ‘island’ made from the single material form of ice, showing variety is there in the conceptual states of shapes that went to make it. However, what is really behind there is only water in the form of ice. The conceptual state of matter seen as ‘ice’ in that island with its ‘shapes’ of mountains, hills, plains, plateaus etc. etc. with the particular orders of arrangements in the molecules in them occur only as ‘seeing’ in the World of Imagination’(Fig.1.8) No ‘singularity’ or ‘plurality’ can be seen in such an island because conceptual states by which it exists as having variety is only as thinking form. It may be shown there is ‘singularity’ there because it is made from the single form of ice. However such singularity is not seen when seeing in a wider scope as ice there really is ‘water’, and water really there is oxygen and hydrogen, and oxygen and hydrogen there really are electrons, protons, neutrons and other particles; the search for one basic entity of which makes us see nothing beyond a limit. It can be guessed, beyond a certain level of seeing smallest states in matter through sensation, perception and cognition nothing at all can be seen, so that ‘singularity’ ‘plurality’ or any other conceptual state cannot *

Matter x is unknowable states of matter, unknowable through sensation, perception and cognition.- Subasinghe R.(2011.30) Unification and Disintegration Three types of desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures /kα::mə θΛnhα:/ 2. desire to continue to exist /bhΛʍə: θΛnhα:/ 03. desire to cease the existence /ʍibhΛʍə: θΛnhα:/ ‡ 4 dimensions as traditionally seen. 3 dimensions in the universe [section 1.1] The universe seen in thinking consists of 3 dimensions as, 1. spatial 2. temporal and 3. ‘thinking’. †

Page 34 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 35 of 144

be applied to them. If a particle or a point is shown by a scientist and declare it is the smallest state of matter so that it can be considered the basic form of matter, such an end of search ends only as limited to his thinking ability. The ‘World of Imagination’(1.8) shows only variety seen in the conceptual states of ‘shapes’, ‘states’ and ‘orders of arrangement’ as seen in an island made of ice, the basic form behind which matter finally becomes unknowable matter x. Thus, such an island finally is not ice, nor is it matter. No logical reason can be there to look into the basic form of matter from which that island is made unless an ignorant utilitarian need is there that motivates one to do so. This position can be applied to the universe too to say, the universe is not made of any basic block as matter or otherwise. The urge to find such a basic element is caused by ignorance in the thinking element caused by the three desires.(d) (previous foot note) No logical reason is there to consider matter has to contain the property of singularity so that everything has to emanate from one definite state or one definite cause. In the final seeing, existence of the ‘Real World’ of matter, too, has to be purely conceptual; thus, what is really seen as ‘Real World’ is only a ‘World of Imagination’.(1.8) Take any object of matter such as a leaf. The constituents of that leaf were there forever coming from the infinite past of them and they will continue to their infinite future. However, it is only to the present appearance of it as the shape of it, the shapes in the constituents of it and the orders of arrangement that go to make other shapes that we call a leaf there. So, in ultimate seeing there is no leaf there. Since what constitutes a leaf as atoms, particles, waves and their orders of arrangement disappear too from them as affected by the continuous motion in them, it makes us finally see nothing as a leaf in definite form. In an ultimate seeing they disappear from our memories; and the memories of all human or animal kind too. As memories they cannot be kept forever not only because memories too disappear, but also because we ourselves too change all the time so that nothing can be left to call ‘my’ memories or memories of others that can keep records of definite existences. With all creations seen as material manifestations, an ‘unknowable something’ has to remain as it is assumed by seeing in agreed truth, point of which cannot be verified because our seeing is always ‘false’ or ‘distorted’ in being true; or they have their ‘limitations’ in being ‘true’.(1.2) Since we can never ever know of such a state as ‘the unknowable something’, we can never ever know even whether there is such a thing. Unknown ‘constituents’ that went to make a leaf could have been there in the ‘original atom’ too that became the universe as it can be hypothesized through the theory of Big Bang(4.5-7), the type of which existence cannot be imagined using our perception and cognition. It has been seen earlier, matter cannot be perceived or cognized beyond a certain level of probing into smaller and still smaller states in them. It has also been seen that, at the levels we perceive phenomena as matter, it really is not matter perceived, but seeing of conceptual states that exist only within our minds.

Page 35 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 36 of 144

In addition to the inability to know what matter really is, there are certain places and periods of times where states of matter in them cannot be imagined. For example, the state of matter before the Big Bang ‘explosion’ supposed to have been massless and formless; therefore, nothing in it can be thought of it as matter. The term ‘state’ itself may not be attributed to the universe before the Big Bang so that there is no way of imagining it at all. Since the state of matter beyond the event horizon in a ‘black hole is unknowable, such matter too can be included with matter x. By the very name the ‘dark matter’ in the universe too can be considered non-matter or ‘matter x’ because they, too, cannot be perceived though we cognise of them as guesswork using language and logic. Added to the absence of matter in certain spatial areas, state of universe or type of matter at times far ahead in future, too, cannot be imagined by seeing in a temporal scale too, despite for the fact so much of thinking goes to imagine of them by logically seeing, as it is imagined of the occurrence of a Big Crunch now. When ‘matter’ is defined, it is inadequate to express in a definition like ‘what is perceived by senses and cognised by an ordinary person’, because different types of manifestations of matter are seen when they are seen from wider or narrower levels of seeing and different to ways seeing. So matter has to be defined in different ways according to the ways it is wanted to be seen. In addition to material manifestations, there also are phenomena that can logically be guessed as fully ‘non material’ because of which they may also be called ‘spiritual’, proving the existence of non material phenomena. They are ‘non material’ by the way they are conceived in our minds, and because they cannot be witnessed using sensation, perception and cognition. Although they appear as ‘non-material’ they are included in the levels of ‘material manifestations’ as explained below because they are felt as existing with thinking activities within us, and they appear as having some relationships with matter. Based on the discussion above four different levels of manifestations of matter can be shown: (Fig.2.1.1) Those that have; i. Physical existence = phenomena seen as perceivable and cognisable by using senses as doors. ii.

Physical existence, but beyond the reach of sensation, perception and cognition = phenomena that have some physical existence when logically seeing; but cannot be perceived or cognised because of karmic limitations in the thinking element, which are the same as limitations in seeing through sensation perception and cognition. This level differs from the next one (iii) because it is only the inability to see through perception and cognition that makes it seen as non existing; however they ought to have some form of existence as guessed by logically thinking.

iii.

Matter x = This is the base of what is seen as physical, but the nature of it cannot be seen in any manner by using sensation, perception, cognition or by logical guessing. Logical guessing used here in seeing this level is the last that can be done when probing in to the Page 36 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 37 of 144

smallest levels of matter, before speculating on the totally unknown. The term ‘base’ has to be taken as they represent the unknown state(s) at beyond the smallest levels; and not as suggesting ‘things’ have unseen existence by being in definite states, or fixed proportions; or existing as, the ultimate level. Neither should it contain the conceptual characteristics of ‘singularity’ or ‘plurality’; nor should they be subject to the notion of time.

iv.

The Purely Conceptual or the Metaphysical*(1.6) = These are what the thinking element alone feels as existing. The term ‘feels’ here refers to feelings as thinking, not to sensory feelings. No material existence is to be found in them by seeing through sensation, perception and cognition or by using logic, although logic is used to guess an existence for them. Although ‘The physical’ (i) are considered our manifestations appearing from matter x,' ‘The Purely Conceptual’ do not have even such a base.

The first three of these levels are grouped into one category as ‘Seen as in Material States’ and matter x is shown as the basis of them. The fourth one is seen as having only a purely nonmaterial existence. The first two are a subgroup within the third by having a material base in them, but they differ from one another on the division (i) those that can be seen in perception and cognition and (ii) those that cannot be seen in perception and cognition but their existence can be *

Subasinghe R. (2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration Page 37 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 38 of 144

logically guessed as having a material base. The last one (iv) cannot be seen as having any material background suggesting, the existence of them as only ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’. However, all these four levels of seeing matter are when seeing in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth, everything has to be seen as ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’. ‘Matter x’ may be defined herein as, ‘non-perceivable and non-cognisable states of matter which means, they cannot be comprehended by any attempt of using sensation, perception and cognition. It can also be called ‘the unknowable state of matter’. Such definitions imply, no ‘final’ or ‘original’ state of matter is there by which everything manifests. This, ought to also mean, matter becomes nothing by what it is made of. Some instances can be cited to lead to the point matter cannot be known in its ultimate states. To see anything visually light should reach the retinas in our eyes. Particles smaller than particles of light cannot be seen because light travels through them undisturbed or little disturbed, so that they cannot be reflected from them. Therefore, perception or cognition of those particles through visual perception cannot occur. They cannot be perceived through other senses too because vibrations of sound can never contact them and no other sense organs can be in direct touch with them. From the negligible amount of particles of light that fall on the retinas in our eyes, the nerve paths involved cannot process all that involved so that they can conveniently be called related to a ‘truth’ situation. Even if it is to consider they represent the ‘truth’ situation, they ought to have their limitations in being so. (Fig.3.1) The neurons in retinas or other neurons involved in perception cannot be considered as all knowing or having all potential in getting all information related to the nature of light particles seen as coming from an ‘external world’. A mango seen when near a mango tree cannot be seen when beyond a distance from it, because, no adequate amount of light reaches the retinas from it to identify it as separate from its background. ‘True states’ of matter cannot be perceived or cognised because our minds cannot absorb everything related to such ‘true states’ by having a superior state called ‘possessing the ability in all knowing’. There have to be so much phenomena left in matter, (may be extending to infinity there too) which are always beyond comprehension of the thinking abilities. When attempts are made to see what they are, the boundaries of our abilities of seeing are reached, so that nothing can be imagined or logically guessed beyond a point, to which incomprehensible states of matter we call matter x. Everything we know as matter ultimately is based on these non perceivable and non cognisable levels of matter. One might speculate whether man in future could see all smallest states of matter using a sophisticated instrument like an Ideal Microscope, so that the nature of matter X can be fully discovered by then. No possibility is there for such an occurrence because, if anything is discovered as the smallest state, there could still be smaller states than them, beyond a point of which seeing, nothing ought to be seen through sensation, perception and cognition. Men in future may perceive and cognise matter better than us, but no man or other thinking being will see beyond a certain level. Just as the biggest level of universe could extend to infinity when we think of it, so is the smallest level of the universe; the search for which ideals states could extend to infinity if the search continues. It can be postulated from these observations, when probing

Page 38 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 39 of 144

into the infinitesimal our abilities of sensation, perception and cognition cannot proceed at all beyond a limit. Smallest levels of matter cannot be seen through sensation, perception and cognition not only because nothing is there as ‘the basic entity or entities’ by which all matter manifests, or our abilities of sensation, perception and cognition have their limitations in seeing them, but also because no ‘person’ resides within our bodies to see anything as ‘the truth situation’ which point is seen when seen in absolute truth.* (7.10) The two divisions in mater made here as ‘matter’ and ‘matter x’ can be seen through another way too as shown in the illustration. (Fig. 2.1.2 ) It shows that, the phenomena seen as matter are based on the ‘non – material’ or ‘spiritual’ states’ of the same. When a mountain is seen as a huge mass of matter, it can also be seen at the same time, it is made of ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’ states of matter too.

*

Subasinghe R. (2011.chapter 7) Unification and Disintegration Page 39 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 40 of 144

It is because of limitations in karmic abilities that the smallest levels cannot be seen beyond a level of seeing in sensation, perception and cognition. They cannot be seen also because the thinking element itself is a manifestation of matter x as matter, the search for the original state of which matter extends to infinity when seen in a time scale seen in agreed truth. Beyond a limit of seeing smallest levels, our levels of sensation, perception and cognition may not proceed at all. If one believes scientists could discover all smallest states of matter at a future time, and those scientists could explain all that can be told about the nature of matter by that time, such a belief is seemingly based more on a supernatural or religious thinking than on logical reasoning. Such belief is similar to those of who believe in a day in future like the Armageddon or the Doomsday after which everything is settled; after which God allows man to discover the smallest level and the biggest levels in matter so that nothing would remain as mysterious thereafter; after which everyone would live happily. No undiscovered secrets will be left after that for mankind to peep into, as we now do so like monkeys peeping into houses or objects out of curiosity. If men in future will get such an ability to know the nature of everything, they become supermen who have transcended all limitations in the abilities of thinking, about such an ability one cannot think of now. The opposite view to such an ideal situation is, everyone dies without knowing what matter really is. Dying like that does not make one to lose anything she really needs. The point above can be approached in the following two ways, one of which can be applicable at one time : i.

Although ‘the smallest’ or ‘real’ or ‘original’ level of matter cannot be witnessed now, the potential is there within the human thinking element to discover it, so that, provided the opportunity and resources to do so, anybody could find it. Scientists in the past did not see what quantum physicists now see as smallest possible states of matter. However, they had the potential to see them had they the access to proper instruments. Similar to that, potential is there with us even now to see the basic or the real state of matter the scientists could discover at a future time.

ii.

Smallest or the real state of matter cannot be seen by any means because of the limitations in the thinking element caused by limitations in karmic energies. Beyond a level of seeing, the ability to see the still smaller levels surpasses all abilities of sensation, perception and cognition, so that nothing can be comprehended in any manner beyond them. This ought to also mean, perception at beyond certain levels could be non-sensory, so that nothing can be seen beyond them through eyes or other senses. It ought to also mean, such states are incomprehensible to cognise in any manner using the activities in the nerves and the brain cells. It has to be so also because, no a state has to be there to call ‘the real nature of matter’, or ‘the basic state of matter’, or ‘the smallest possible state of matter’, because the desire to perceive such an ideal, basic or smallest possible state(s) of matter is only an ignorant, idealistic expectation in the thinking element, appearing only as manifestations of ‘the desires to exist eternally and to enjoy the pleasures’ (d) that have nothing to do with a world of matter.

Page 40 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 41 of 144

The former of these two approaches (i) appears more as a belief than real. It is difficult to see an end in the process of searching for the ‘true state/s of matter’ even if there can be such a state. Since a search made to find them is not in accordance with the fulfilment of our utilitarian needs even if there can be such a state, it becomes a useless pursuit when one attempts to do so. According to the second approach (ii), we have to be content by seeing with our limitations because the purpose of existence is only the fulfilment of utilitarian karmic needs as it is seen in agreed truth. Purpose of our existence is not to conquer the material universe by seeing what it really is, so that we reach a final state called the ‘true state’ of such search, but to make use of the phenomena to see whether they can be of use in realizing the fulfilment of basic desires. It is ignorant karmic thinking that creates a wish like, ‘to know what matter really is’ or ‘what truth is’, and makes us feel to search for them when nothing is there to denote them. It is a goal that cannot be pursued because what is searched for does not exist. Such a search resembles the expectations of two characters in the play ‘Waiting for Godot’ of Samuel Beckett thinking they could resolve the problems they have, but they do not know what the problems themselves are. What is seen as matter when seen in agreed truth(6.4) are only concepts or images which are creations in an ‘internal world’, seeing of which is a creation of the karmic abilities of sensation, perception and cognition. We think what is seen as qualities of matter seen through sensation, perception and cognition ought to be there in an external world too, but whether such qualities really are out there or not cannot be ascertained because the real nature of them can never ever be seen. If light particles are not reflected from other particle in an atom, nothing can imagined as the shape of it. Nor can we know the states or orders of arrangement in the constituents of them because they cannot be seen. Physicists explain certain qualities evident at smallest possible quantum levels, but by the definition itself ‘matter x’ has to be pushed towards an area of the totally unknown. If there is an ‘Omniscient Being’, ‘He’ does not need to differentiate matter from matter x because ‘He’ sees everything. It is possible that such an ‘Omniscient Being’ sees neither matter nor matter x as reality. ‘He’ does not need even to think what matter is, because ‘He’ knows ‘everything’. If a person knows ‘everything’, there is no need for such a person to think, or to live, or to ‘be’ even. However, beyond guessing through some ignorant logic, existence of such an ‘Omniscient Being’ who knows everything cannot be thought of. Therefore, guessing through

Page 41 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 42 of 144

the seeing of an ‘Omniscient Person’ to see the ultimate nature of matter becomes pure guesswork of using ignorant logic that cannot have a truth basis in itself. The term ‘everything’ used in the expression above as ‘He’ knows ‘everything’ has no meaning when it is seen, every time we think of ‘everything’, we imagine of things with limitations seen spatially and temporally which is a result of the inability in seeing beyond limits. It has no meaning also because a contradiction arises there when endless things are thought of as ‘everything’ at the same time as seeing limitations to such ‘everything’. Therefore, thinking of ‘everything’ becomes pure guesswork of using ignorant logic, so that, even if there is an Omniscient Being, ‘He’ cannot see anything to call ‘everything’. Basic characteristics of ‘matter’ and ‘matter x' as related to the discussion above can be presented as in the following table. (fig.2.1.4)

matter

matter x (spiritual) As seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth :

As seeing in agreed truth:  variety to be seen  felt by sensory perception (touch, seeing, hearing and cognition – smell and taste included with touch)  known by cognitive thinking  manifestations based as the thinking element itself  seen by thinking only

Fig 2.1.4

 neither variety nor unity can be seen  smallest levels that cannot be seen or known by sensation, perception and cognition in any manner  only the logical element in thinking guesses an ‘existence’ for it without an ability to explain them  Since the universe as a ‘whole’ consists of these smallest levels, matter x is the universe itself. What is seen as matter are only ‘seeing’.  the base of material manifestations from thinking point of view.  void from thinking point of view, therefore really void .  States of this ought to exist in ‘places’ like in a black hole or where ‘dark matter’ is, because they are beyond the levels of seeing through sensation, perception and cognition.

Differentiating Matter from Matter x

All these seen in a division as matter and matter x are seen only when seen in agreed truth. Nothing can be seen either as ‘matter’ or as ‘matter x’ when seen in absolute truth.

Page 42 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 43 of 144

We think only of one world when seen in agreed truth which is the ‘conceptual’ or the ‘internal world’. It is not a world of matter. Since it is not material nothing can be known of it as in a final seeing. The material world created in agreed truth is seen as having a real existence because we have to believe so to fulfil our desires for existence, continuance and enjoying pleasures*. However, such a ‘material world’ is not seen when seeing in absolute truth. The belief a world of matter exists external to thinking is a creation within the conceptual world of thinking itself that cannot transcend its own conceptual limitations to know whether there really is such a world. In the final seeing in absolute truth, ‘nothing’ is seen as matter and ‘no one’ is there within physical bodies to see a thing like that.† 2.2 Mind and Matter Based on an ordinary view (i.e. non-physicist’s view) of matter as objects are made of matter and they are perceivable through the senses; they have forms and other properties pertaining to objects, and seen in perception and cognition, ‘mind’ or the ‘thinking element’, both of which exist only in a conceptual domain, is a state felt as non-matter. Even if it is to believe it is a subtle form of a material state, (like particles in a flame of fire), it cannot witness itself or prove so to itself. Nothing can be found as to what constitutes the mind from physicists’ laboratory experiments, although instances are shown as appearances of thinking activities correspond to physical chemical activities in the brains and the nervous system. When physical chemical activities in the brain are shown as corresponding to mental activities, the term ‘corresponding’ used there need not be taken to mean ‘the same as’ or even as ‘similar’. No need is there to consider them even as ‘different’ too.(3.9) This point can be illustrated with an example of an earthquake that occurs in the seabed because of which tsunami waves occur on the surface of the sea. It need not suggest the earthquake and the sea waves there are ‘same’ or ‘similar’. To give another example, when a person walks in sunlight and his shadow follows him, it need not suggest the shadow and the man are ‘same’ or ‘similar’. They need not be considered as ‘different’ too. A shadow of a man represents only the fact of having less sunlight in places compared with other places round it having more, the places of which change in accordance with the movements of the man. Similar to those examples, brain activities and mental activities are not ‘same’, ‘similar’ or even ‘different’ just because they occur at same times. Thus, ‘mind’ is not the ‘electro-chemical activities in the brain’ and the nervous system, nor is it ‘corresponding’ to them because the term ‘corresponding’ denotes the fact of ‘occurring at the same time’ because one is ‘linked’ to other. Just as sea waves can occur without earthquakes, so can it be, shadows can occur in sunlight without men moving about. Added to this, no definite thing can be found to consider as ‘mind’ to see it in unification, which also means, there is nothing to denote the word ‘mind’ in addition to the totality of all mental activities. This has to be seen with the view, the ‘whole’ has nothing more in addition to the totality of its ‘parts’ as discussed elsewhere in this book‡. However, despite for the fact the ‘mind’ denotes nothing, when a person is compelled to choose one of the two from ‘body’ or ‘mind’, she would choose the feeling of ‘mind’ not the ‘body’. Everyone considers the body as *

Three types of desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures /kα::mə θΛnhα:/ 2. desire to continue to exist /bhΛʍə: θΛnhα:/ 03. desire to cease the existence /ʍibhΛʍə: θΛnhα:/ Subasinghe R. (2011.113-4) Unification and Disintegration ‡ Section 3.10 : The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’ Fig, 3.10 The Gestalt view of seeing ‘Perception’ as ‘seeing something more in a ‘whole’ in addition to the totality of its ‘parts’ is caused by ignorant seeing. †

Page 43 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 44 of 144

temporary but the mind as having some definiteness, if not for its having a permanent existence. Even though such is the general attitude towards ‘mind’, it is the body which is seen as having an existence even such existence is temporary as seen in agreed truth. The ‘mind’, which is considered so precious, is nowhere to be seen as having an existence in addition to the totality of all thinking activities. When the phrase ‘non-material’ is used to explain the state of mind, it need not suggest it denotes unknown, mysterious ‘states’, ‘substances’ or ‘entities’ are there having their existences by having a unique identity different to ‘the material’ world. It only suggests, certain phenomena can be considered ‘non-material’ because qualities that go to consider them as ‘material’ such as the ability to perceive through senses, cognising them as having mass, occupying space, being subject to motion and existing in a time scale and so on, do not manifest in them. The term ‘mind’ belongs to the category of ‘non material’ because it does not make us feel as its having those material qualities. If the mind is made of matter, it has to be with an ‘unknown state of matter’. Such matter beyond the levels of having material qualities have been herein named as matter x, (2.1) and it was assumed, what is seen as matter is only manifestations in the thinking element of this matter x. Therefore, the position mind is ‘non material’ need not incorporate the view, it can have an independent existence from matter. Matter is what is perceived as solid, liquid and air, having mass, which also means occupying some space. We feel the touch of them or know of them through rays of light reflected or refracted from them, or vibrations as coming through or across them. Existence of matter cannot be thought of as they cannot be perceived sensually. They are what is seen, heard and felt as matter, although, in the final seeing, all are only conceptual formations of thinking activities. Despite for having seemingly material qualities, the ‘mind’ is felt strongly as having the characteristic of a non-physical, non-sensory ‘feeling’ when seen in unification in agreed truth. Thinking activities by which ‘mind’ is seen itself is subject to the same fate as everything that has an ability to appear; they decay and disappear too just after those appearances. When seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, each thought moment is born, live and die then and there giving way to their new forms, which ceaseless activity alone is felt as the ‘mind’.* Thus, it is a process that does not make us see qualities to call material there. Let us imagine of some beings somewhere in the universe who do not have our abilities of sensation, perception and cognition. For example, they see things by not reacting to light waves or to the vibrations in the air, but by responding to other types of motion in the universe. Let us imagine their cognition too is different. Such beings may not see matter as it is seen by us now. Such beings may see a world where particles move without space being a hindrance, or witness phenomena when particles and their anti-particles meet and annihilate one another in creating new phenomena. A being who perceives the world different to us like that need not see matter as we see them. If there is an omniscient, Creator God, He may not see matter at all. He need not think too since He does not have problems to solve, so He does not need to see the phenomena called matter as we see them. Such hypothetical situations show, existence or non-existence of

*

A thought moment has 3 stages: 1. birth /uθp𝑎:ðə / 2. life /tiθhi/ and 3. death / bhŋgə/ In a life form it is /j𝑎:θi/ (birth) / ɡ r𝑎:/ (decay) and /mrənə/(death) Page 44 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 45 of 144

matter depends on thinking. Matter is a manifestation in the thinking element rather than an independent existence. When scientists describe what ‘particles’ ‘waves’ ‘quarks’ etc. etc. are, they only deal with shapes in their minds, which shapes they attribute to the smallest levels of manifestation of matter x as matter. When you say a particle has some mass, you are attributing a quality you know as ‘mass’ to an unknowable state of matter, to adjust to the experience of observing it to your thinking. Those attributes or concepts are ignorant creations. Concepts of ‘shapes’ ‘states’ or ‘orders of arrangement’ seen as the constituents of them are creations of the thinking element arising as activities of unification. No one is out there to suggest they have another type of existence that can be called ‘real’, or they relate to a state called ‘truth’. When it is stated a particle is a wave at the same time as it is a particle, only our conceptual attributes are adjusted from one to the other to suit to what is seen. When a ‘particle’ is considered a ‘wave’, the term ‘particle’ suggests qualities of matter and the term ‘wave’ suggests qualities beyond the levels of matter, resembling ‘purely conceptual’ states of other waves seen. It need not be taken as an insignificant statement when it is stated, it makes no difference to the ‘particle’ what the term is used to it because, the particle ought to be what it is, not what thinking beings think as what it is. ‘The real smallest particle’ or ‘the basic particle’ cannot be known because there cannot be such a one; there is no need too to know of it even if there is such a one. The smallest levels can be whatever we attribute to them. Whatever is the state of thinking that goes to see what they are; they are manifestations of our own. It may be an exaggerated view as some would see when it is stated, the smallest particles and the material world believed to have structured on them, both are only creations of the mind. Matter may not have an existence when probed into beyond the smallest levels physicists mention as ‘waves’ or ‘particles’ point of which can be seen even when seen in agreed truth. A non-physicist or a non-scientist cannot understand how a ‘wave’ could exist without mass or without space. There are waves in the sea because it is the same water that takes the shape of waves because of the particular type of environment round such water. It appears that, the water there is material and what is seen as ‘waves’ there are simply conceptual.* This division of matter seen as ‘particles’ or ‘waves’ can be, human view can see nothing beyond a certain limit. Men in future with better developed scientific tools and better-evolved cognition may see better, but no one may see all. Beyond a certain level of seeing the smallest, even sophisticated instruments will not show anything as matter or as any other. Finally, matter ought to become nothing by which it is made of. It transpires from the same view, man, ought to become nothing by what she is made of.† All that is considered material can really be creations in the mind. What is seen as the mind having a relationship with an external world consisting of matter itself can be a construction in the mind. The question may arise here as to why the need is there for conceptual states of ‘shapes’, ‘states’, ‘orders’ of arrangement’, ‘mass’ and other such be applied only to matter at bigger levels, and why they cannot be applied at smallest levels? As it was seen in already in the previous * †

Seeing the concept of ‘waves’ in addition to the water in motion in a sea is perception according to Gestalt psychologists the point of which can be explained as ‘seeing more in a ‘whole’ in addition to the totality of its ‘parts’. ‘he’ = both he and she Page 45 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 46 of 144

paragraph, nothing is received as sensory data beyond a limit of being small so such levels cannot be conceptualised. Also, what is seen as matter at bigger levels are creations of ignorance based attachments in the thinking element caused by ‘desires for eternal existence and to enjoy pleasures’* so they do not have the need or strength to create smallest levels because they do not need to see so. This also means, thinking as sensation, perception and cognition have their limitations in seeing and the smallest levels beyond such limitations. Added to this point, seeing proportions as ‘biggest’ and ‘smallest’ themselves are creations of concepts in the thinking element. If no thinking element is there, nothing is there to see as ‘big’ or ‘small’. The universe is neither ‘big’ nor ‘small’ in such a background. Nothing could manifest as beyond seeing through the karmic abilities of sensation, perception and cognition so that, nothing can be stated about things existing beyond them. This view of matter being non-existent may appear as idealistic. If it is idealistic, behaviour of some particles of matter at quantum levels too have to be idealistic, because shapes in some smallest particles cannot be seen sometimes. There is no mass in some of them, or they move without space being a hindrance. The widely known particle ‘electrons’ are supposed to have no radiuses, which also means they do not exist in space. When the situation is like that at observable levels, situation at still smaller non-observable levels could be more subtle, such as in their not having any material characteristic to be seen at all. The answer to the question whether the mind is made of matter or not rests on our inability to perceive and cognise the qualities that go to make the smallest levels of matter. Beyond a level of seeing the smallest, it was assumed, nothing at all ought to be seen; although it is by that same nothingness at smallest levels our existence or the existence of universe manifests. If it is nothing which is at the smallest levels, it ought to be so at the highest levels of seeing too, so that nothing is seen as the universe when it is seen. We are compelled to arrive at such conclusions sometimes by logical seeing, although they appear as paradoxes. Although the existence of mind is felt as a strong feeling within us, although it has an ability to symbolize a universe as it is very big and consists of smallest levels, it consists only of symbolic forms. There cannot be a material existence for them because they are symbols or creations only. We deal with nothing else when we deal with those symbols. Although we feel superior about creating such a symbolic picture of a universe, we are helpless in verifying the truthfulness of the corresponding existence of it as an ‘external world’. Such a feeling of superiority we get, too, is a feeling unto itself, because it is needed to fulfil the utilitarian need for an existence and to enjoy the pleasures as we see so when seen in agreed truth. 2.3 Seeing Forms, Motion and Thinking As seen in agreed truth, patterns of thinking as motion of behaviour of life forms has to be seen the ‘same as’†(3.9) patterns of motion to be seen as physical manifestations in the material world, point of which can seen even at particle levels.

* †

Three types of desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures /kα:mə θΛnhα:/ 2. desire to continue to exist /bhΛʍə θΛnhα:/ 03. desire to cease the existence /wi bhΛʍə θΛnhα:/ Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9] Page 46 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 47 of 144

Such commonness between the behaviour of life forms and motion seen in physical manifestations show:

i. ii.

ability to think is of no particular value compared with motion in matter being a life form itself is motion seen in matter

When observing pictures of galaxies, nebulae, black holes, etc. etc., forms of them resemble those in common objects to be seen at the smallest levels. Being very far in universe or being very huge do not make them any different. Galaxies appear like hoppers, omelettes, some like cells, neurons, bacteria or viruses. Stars in Milky Way appear like lights in a town at night. Milky Way galaxy was so named because it appeared a river of milk to ancient astronomers. Modern picture of it would look like a whirlpool in water. They appear so because all are only thinking. Seemingly hugeness of universe does not make it a difference. Both the behaviour of life forms and laws in physics are manifestations of the same matter x appearing as same in shapes and those shapes are seen as matter in motion. Just because very big or being too far do not make their appearances different. One suggestion for the phenomenon can be, types of motion seen as behaviour of life forms are so few, they easily fit on with motion seen in matter. It is seeing so within the thinking activity itself. It sees a world by seeing similarities and differences * in which, when similarities are seen the differences are overlooked. The thinking ability makes things seen as sharing similarities or as they appear again and again. It also makes us see any one thing has the potential to be another. It also suggests, constituents that go to make electrons ought to have the potential to become protons in given situations. It is similar to that, when a simple man like a farmer is appointed as a President in the country he can work in that capacity too, similar to Azdak the man in the lowest strata of society playing the role of a judge according to the play The Caucasian Chalk Circle of Bertolt Brecht. Particles manifest from matter x levels, the ultimate state(s) of which cannot be seen in sensation, perception and cognition. Different types of motion manifest at bigger levels of formations, making us see similarities and differences when comparing them one with other, similarities and differences of which have nothing to do with an ‘external world’. So, the neutrinos, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks etc., all are manifestations of same matter x, but appear to us as having differences because they have become our appearances caused by our karmic energies. When two people are assigned a task, one opts to play the active role in it, while the other chooses to play the passive role there. They can be compared to the ‘charged particle’ electron and the neutral particle of neutron. Similar situations are seen between master/ servant, leader/ follower, politician/supporter and man/woman relationships. In a given situation of any such pair of human beings, the one who plays the active role may opt to perform the passive role, while the one who performs the passive role reacts by playing the active role. Thus, one who plays the active or the passive role there does not do so because she cannot perform in the other, but she reacts to the overall situation depending on the context. Just as matter x, she can become anyone depending on the background. They also show, roles that we play are not predetermined; but *

Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9] Page 47 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 48 of 144

assigned by ourselves according to background. Such ability emanates from the non-definite, unpredictable behaviour at the smallest levels of matter.* Sometimes when two people are assigned roles, both may opt to share half the responsibilities with one another, similar to the motion seen in ‘dual stars’ in which; both stars travel one round the other influenced and bound one by the other. Both of them opt to be active at the same time as allowing one another to function in their own ways, thus depending halfway on the other. They are independent just as dependent on same strengths. In having a proper relationship, man/woman relationship may take this type of ideal relationship in order to be successful. When everyone is seen as assigned a role at her birth, it is a way of seeing in agreed truth that has no truth basis when seen in absolute truth. This point has to be seen in the background of uncertainty and disorderliness seen all the time, everywhere,(4.8) according to which, the universe is not governed by laws, theories or hypotheses, because all those are only imaginary. They are seen only by ignorant addiction to the use of logic, reasoning and language that manifest as thinking. This point of uncertainty and disorderliness† can be applied the same way to the manifestations of the laws of karmic phenomena too.(a) Although karmic phenomena suggest one reaps what one sows, the seemingly linear path of such karmic happenings, too, are affected at times by the states of uncertainty and disorderliness to be seen in everything. Presence of karmic phenomena need not indicate there have to be predetermined states in material formations and/ or human behaviour. A person has the potential to be anyone though it is seen he acts in one limited role. To illustrate with a hypothetical instance, when a class in a school has both the very weak and the very clever students, and it is divided to two separate classes by dividing the weak from the clever and taught them separately, some weak students might begin to act as clever in the new class of the weak group because no students are there to take the roles of the clever ones there. Similarly, some clever students in the clever class may begin to act as weak because they have no one to compare themselves as clever when with clever students. The new environments have changed them because no pre-determined orders are there in the universe, the absence of which orders can be seen from the motions at particle levels. The ability of one person becoming any other has been discussed elsewhere in this book.(4.2) When a group of people go to a new country and settle down in it, and they live in it for a period of time forming a new society, the tendency ought to be they play new social roles in the new environment which ought to be different from what they played earlier. For example, one who had no opportunity to be a leader in that society previously, may be seen as performing as a leader in the new society; a previously rich person who made others to work under him, may perform as a poor man doing menial jobs. When lightning strikes in one place one year, the same place is more likely to be struck by lightning in the following year too. When rain occurs after the absence of rain for a long time, new streams or rivers are created on the same paths that were there earlier too, without the new * †

Ref. ‘Uncertainty Principle’ - Heisenberg Ref. ‘Uncertainty Principle’ - Heisenberg

Page 48 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 49 of 144

rains having any ability to change the paths of the previous streams or rivers. Similar to these natural happenings, when a person goes to work in a new place like when a teacher being appointed to a new school, she may prefer to sit on the same seat in the staff room every day where she used to sit on the first few days. When a person is born in one particular place and brought up in the same place for the first few years, she would like to be back there wherever she lives in her later life. So we see similar phenomena as in the nature of physical manifestations and the nature of human/ animal behaviour, showing, the tendency is there for an event to recur the same way. Similar to the phenomenon seen as ‘interference’ in quantum physics, man sometimes justifies making war to end war. The war element seen among people is retaliated by making similar type of war against it. Thus aggression is repulsed by aggression. Arguments are seen to the effect, ‘This war is to end the war, not because we want war.’ Religiously it is expressed, ‘eye to eye, tooth to tooth, life to life’. To annihilate one thing, same type of motion by which it is operated is used. A tame elephant is used to tame a wild elephant. The violent activities of the political party ‘JVP’ in Sri lanka in 1988-9 were repulsed by similar forces created by the then government, the rulers becoming as barbarous as ‘terrorists’. Normally, the police in a country are to maintain peace, but when ‘terrorism’ is active, the police too act like terrorists. Thus, in a given situation, a peace keeping man becomes a terrorist. When matter x is seen as taking forms like particles or waves, it is a creation in the thinking element, and when such particles are seen as making appearances as bigger objects, making a universe to be seen, that too, is a creation in the thinking element. They are all ‘seeing’. So, the universe can be considered only matter x that has nothing definite in ‘it’ as having definite shapes, definite mass, definite periods of time, etc. etc. when seen it at the smallest levels; but, the same matter x when seen at bigger levels are seen as having definiteness, by having ‘definite masses’, ‘definite shapes’ ‘definite states’ and ‘definite periods of time’ which are only conceptual states seen. If one is to fancy on the ideal state of behaviour a man could acquire from the nature of motion in physical manifestations, it may be the behaviour of ‘neutrinos’; as Hawking explains what a neutrino is, ‘it is extremely light, probably mass less’.* When absolute truth is realized by being at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth in meditation, one could have such feeling of being ‘extremely light’ and ‘mass less’. One ought to feel there like a massless and pointless bundle of particles when in the state of ‘feeling oneness’ seen as the fourth level of vidarshana meditation.†(9.2) The other states of feelings reached through vidarshana meditation like ‘feeling only space’, ‘neither signs nor no signs’ and ‘seeing nothing’, too, can be considered as extremely light states of ‘I’.‡(ak) When one sees there really is nothing to be seen when in meditation, because of the realization everything changes leaving nothing as material or as ‘I’, including the thought process by which it is seen; it is possible one would feel such a ‘light’ and ‘mass less’ state that resembles the state of the neutrinos in being so light and mass less. In other words those ‘neutrinos’ are matter at the same time as they are non matter. _______________________ * † ‡

Hawking Stephen (1988.133) A Brief History of Time Bantam books Levels of Achievement in Meditation [section 9.2] Levels of Achievement in Meditation [section 9.2] Page 49 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 50 of 144

Chapter 3

The Creation 3.1 The Door of the Creation: ‘The Screen’ and ‘Behind the Screen’ When you close your eyes and make an attempt to visualise, you will see ‘dots like’ and ‘patches like’ areas of colour which are seen bright when light filters through the skins in your eyelids. They appear even when light particles do not filter through eyelids. Let us call this area you visualise ‘The Screen’. If you imagine on a thing with some emotional involvement behind it at the same time as you visualise those ‘dots like’ and ‘patches like’ appearances on this ‘screen’, you experience forming of images as energised by that emotion behind, making you feel those images appear behind that ‘screen’. Let us call this latter area of forming of images ‘Behind the Screen’. (Fig.9 p.8) In forming images behind the screen, those ‘dots like’ or ‘patches like’ areas of colours on ‘The Screen’ are seen as they begin to function like building blocks in the formation of those images. The fact that this happens even when light rays are not entering through the eyelids shows, light entering from externally is not involved in the formation of the images ‘Behind the Screen’ too. They may perhaps be caused by the involvement of static electricity produced with bodily activities; or they represent pure imagination working with memories. Whichever is the cause, it is on this ‘Behind the Screen’ the visual phenomena of the world are initially created. Even when the eyes are opened, it is the same that happens as ‘visualising a world’, though seeing such visualisations as ‘real world’ occur when light directly falls from externally into the retinas in the eyes. Similar ‘screens’ for other senses of auditory and the tactile too occur in the same manner, all of which function as doors in creating ‘thinking’ as sensation, perception and cognition. When wind blows touching one’s skin, it gives the idea of air being in motion similar to a visual experience when it occurs on ‘the screen’; and when the person who feels so is in a dreamy state, she might experience it as something else too happening ‘behind the screen’ like she is facing the wind when travelling in a vehicle. The ‘screens’ of such other senses are not so strong as those made as visual. The whole world is created initially as ‘images’ appearing on this ‘behind the screen’ as energized by the karmic energies called emotions. The initial appearances of phenomena ‘on the screen’ can be compared with the appearances on a television screen when it is switched on but not turned to a channel, except for that the appearances of the phenomena ‘on the screen’ as thinking are not so orderly, clear, or simple as those that appear on a television screen. When the ‘world’ is created like that, it becomes the activity of thinking as using imagination, intelligence, memories and conceptual thinking; in the creation of which, use of logic and language too are involved. In an instance you watch what is ‘on the screen’ by closing your eyes at a time like taking a nap, imagine of something like a whirlpool. Those ‘dots of light’ or ‘patches of light’, (although they are called ‘dots of light’ or ‘patches of light’ it is possible ‘light’ has nothing to do with them), begin to act like a whirlpool in ‘behind the screen’, resembling a television screen creating pictures when it is turned to a channel. Then those ‘dots of light’ or ‘patches of light’ ‘on the Page 50 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 51 of 144

screen’ are seen as arranging in particular orders in creating pictures to suit the emotional background of yours; thus, ‘behind the screen’ becomes active in creating visions according to the emotions active behind it, which creations are strong when the conscious mind is submissive. Whether those patches or dots of light arrange by themselves in an orderly manner, or what appears as the orderly arrangement of them are purely imaginary creations of mind with no material background behind them, cannot be verified easily.

If you close your eyes at a time you relax, and utter the word ‘the sea’ for some time at the same time as you watch ‘on the screen’, first you get feelings or emotions related to sea; then those dots or the patches ‘on the screen’ begin to behave as if creating a picture of the sea ‘Behind the Screen’. If you an emotion of fear too is involved in it at such a time, the dots or patches arrange as if creating bigger waves to make you frighten, thus allowing the release of energies of karmic emotions within you. The more the emotional involvement, the more the conscious mind becomes passive and the stronger and clearer are the images or ‘pictures’ ‘Behind the Screen’. When you want to consciously control these appearances and disappearances of the pictures ‘Behind the Screen’ according to your wishes, you cannot do so because formation of pictures in it have their own ways of arranging and their own ways of motion. They appear as they activate without any person’s ability to control them. Even though emotions or imagination and thinking behind those images or pictures are considered ‘ours’, these forming images have their ways of motion so that they cannot really be called ‘ours’. At times when our conscious mind is inactive when we sleep, these ‘screens’ become fully active, to the appearances of which pictures in motion we call dreams. In such dreaming, it appears like both the ‘screen’ and ‘behind the screen’ are involved as one. Such dreams give outlets to hidden karmic urges of emotions or feelings. When we dream thus, the ‘I’ Consciousness (7.6) which is Page 51 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 52 of 144

passive because of the absence of the conscious mind, receives whatever the pictures convey as real. If those images in motion are seen like a monster coming to attack, the ‘I Consciousness’ considers it as real and makes the person frightened to which the physical body too responds in fear. It can be assumed, the emotion of fear is given an outlet at such a time through dreaming, in which, the fact of reality in it is ignored. Creation of pictures on the ‘screen’ and ‘behind the screen’ and other activities that follow them can be considered ‘re-echoing’ in a different way of perceptions of what is received as sense data from an ‘external world’, which are also karmic manifestations working as memories. The expressions ‘re-echoing’ and ‘external world’ need not connote that what has been ‘re-echoed’ really represents an ‘external world’. It is seen so only when seen in agreed truth. Visualization of images in motion as ‘behind the screen’ can be seen in another perspective too as they show an instance of mind controlling matter to form pictures it wants depending on the karmic background it has. Those ‘patches’ or ‘dots’ ‘on the screen’ cannot create pictures, but the karmic energy active behind has an ability to use them in creating what it wants. In order to reach a conclusive answer on this point, we have to be sure whether those light ‘dots’ or ‘patches of light’ consist really of particles of light with or without electricity involved, and the pictures made ‘behind the screen’ really are not ‘dots’ or ‘patches’ created somewhere behind the retinas, but they have independent non material existences of themselves. Even at times our eyes are opened so that particles of light directly fall on the retinas in our eyes and the conscious mind is active, it is the same creations of karmic energies that occurs ‘behind the screen’ that we call ‘the real world’. However, it is due to ignorance we consider we see a real world at such times and it a false world we see when our eyes are closed and the conscious mind is passive. No difference is there between the ways the two worlds are seen. We are not bothered with the truth element in the creations of a ‘real world’ when our eyes are opened and the conscious mind is active, just as we are not bothered so when we see a dream, although we think we have a special ability to see a ‘true world’ when the conscious mind is active and our eyes are opened. In both instances it is only with utilitarian values we are bothered with, which utilitarian values are the manifestations of karmic energies. If anything is there to call ‘reality’ in them, it is only the manifestation of karmic energy with them. 3.2

The Nature of the ‘World’ as a ‘Creation’

Thus, the world is created through ‘on the screen’ and ‘behind the screen’ from what is received as from sense doors as manifestations of karmic energies; appearing finally as sensation, perception and cognition. The world created thus, seemingly consists of the properties of 3 spatial dimensions as length, breadth and height, with a fourth one too added to it as time. One such a world seen is always different to any other made in the same way. At a time when one wonders on the question what the term ‘world’ denotes, whatever that comes to his mind is the ‘world’. If he thinks again on the same question at another time, the ‘world’ appearing in his mind at that time would be different to the first one. This means, the ‘worlds’ differ to a person from time to time as seen in agreed truth. If two persons think of it at the same time, they would think of two different worlds. This shows that, worlds are different from individual to individual Page 52 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 53 of 144

and an individual witnessing different to worlds at different periods of time.(r) so that there cannot be one definite world, from thinking point of view. These worlds of different persons at different times are similar and different with one another according to laws of similarities, differences and sameness to be seen in any two objects, events or states(3.9)*as seen in agreed truth. 3.3 Internal World and the External World (1.2) When seen in agreed truth, the internal world is created initially from minute ‘shocks’ caused by molecules, atoms, particles or waves when they contact the sense organs, as caused by motion around physical bodies. Most of them originate as waves of light when they contact the retinas in our eyes, or as waves of air when they are in contact the eardrums in ears, while others originate with direct contact with other molecules that make our physical bodies. In this creation, when the touch of a flower petal is felt through fingers, it is not a flower petal which is really felt, but minute changes caused by ‘shocks’ the flower petal causes on fingers. Similarly, when Jupiter the planet is seen, it is not the real Jupiter seen, but changes caused by particles or waves of light which are assumed to have originated from a planet called Jupiter; in which activity, the retinas in the eyes do not have any contact with Jupiter. When the internal world is initially created from small ‘shocks’ made on sense organs, it is mistakenly thought using ‘logic’ and ‘reasoning’, ‘the world’ created thus represents an additional domain too that exist externally to it as the ‘external world’. The truth is, this ‘external world’ can never be known or experienced because it is ‘ignorance’ that creates the ‘internal world’ itself; and evidence cannot be found for an additional world in addition to that ‘internal world’. That internal world itself cannot be considered to have a valid existence because just as one is seen, it also gone too, never to reappear. Also, just as the real flower petal and the feelings it causes on fingers are not the same, so are the internal world and the external world are not the same. Just as it cannot be said a flower petal and the feelings it cause on the skin are the same, it cannot also be said feelings it causes on the skin even represents a ‘flower petal’. ‘Representations’, too, are seen according to the utilitarian expectations of the awareness of ‘I’ that manifest as karmic manifestations. If a thing is to consider as ‘represents’ another thing, there has to be a ‘person’ in the thinking element to consider so. No such a ‘person’ is there as a ‘receiver’ of sense data behind the processes of sensation, perception and cognition, similar to that, there is ‘no ghost in the machine’, as Ryle has put it. (Ryle 1963)† no ‘person’ is there in the thinking element to determine a phenomenon as it ought to be accepted or as rejected. If no such ‘person’ is there, not only the use of the term ‘representation’, but other terms like ‘acceptance’ ‘rejection’ ‘similarities’ ‘differences’ etc. too do not denote any meaning. What is seen as there when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth are only activities of one becoming the other, as seen in the phenomenon of ‘Domino Effect in Perception’.‡

*

Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9] Ryle G. (1963) The Concept of Mind ‡ ‘Domino Effect’ in the Creation of the Internal World [section 3.4] †

Page 53 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 54 of 144

If sunlight falls on an object and that object shines, the sunlight seen on that object can be shown as it represents the activity in the sun. It is because we are there to think so. However, it is only as our feeling the sunlight there is seen as representing the sun, because a utilitarian need is there within us to see so; to see how ‘the world’ changes as motion, for the purpose of which alone we see beyond what is there. If those karmic utilitarian needs are not there, then the need to see such relationships too are not there. This means, the object seen exists on its own and the sun exists on its own, changes in both of which take place within themselves. It is a thinking element alone that wants to see more than what is really there. Even as seen in agreed truth, the feeling itself of a flower petal in touch with the fingers and the ‘flower’ are not the same also because they are not one and the same bundles of matter.(3.9)To call two things same, they have to be one same bundle, an occurrence of which does not take place for the simple reason one bundle of matter cannot appear in two places at one and the same time. They are not ‘similar’ too because ‘similarities’ too are only conceptual seeing as has been.(3.9) Perception and cognition that take place similar to the phenomenon known as ‘Domino Effect’,* in perception and cognition, sense data is seen as flowing from one direction to the other, in which, a ‘receiver’ is there to accept or to reject. However, when seen in absolute truth, no such ‘receivers’ or ‘senders’ can be there. Only motion is there as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, in which, it only appears as certain phenomena as sent by a ‘sender’ and certain phenomena as received by a ‘receiver’. Deliberating on further it may be concluded, the internal world really is not the external world; nor does it represent an external world. What is left when seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth is only motion as ‘disintegration’, with no thinking element even to see anything as seeing in unification, which concept of ‘disintegration’, too, is nowhere in a last seeing.† 3.4 ‘Domino Effect’ in the Creation of the Internal World ‘Domino Effect’ is the activity in which when an object in a line of similar objects causes a change next to it in one direction, the one next in line too causes the same change in the one next to it in same direction, process of which continues until all objects in the line are affected by the same change. It can be compared with an activity of ‘chain reaction’ too. One can witness this by placing some rectangular sided objects like packets of cigarettes or boxes of matches (cylindrical objects like candles cannot be used conveniently for this purpose) vertically in a line in a way, when the first one of it falls on the second one next to it, the second one too falls causing a third one next to it too would fall, so that finally all in the line would fall one on other until the last one too falls. Process of this falling consumes some ‘time’ too. Only the initial movement has to be made to activate a ‘domino effect’. Nothing material goes from the first object to the last although the change made at the beginning of the line has made the same change at the end in line too which is seen as a motion is travelling in one direction.

* †

‘Domino Effect’ in the Creation of the Internal World [section 3.4] ‘Seeing in unification’[section 3.14] - Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R. (2011)

Page 54 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 55 of 144

Imagine, a person has to pass a message orally to another person using messengers from the place X where he is, to another place Y where the receiver of the message is. (See illustration. Fig. 3.4) First the person A at the place X, passes the message to the person at B, then that person passes it to the person at the place C so that, finally, the person D at place Y receives the message. Although it is one message that is passed, persons involved in are different. The voices involved, types of vibration etc. etc. in those voices, too, are different. Due to the nature of uncertainty to be seen in all activities everywhere all the time, the message has changed in the process of its passing. In a final seeing, nothing material or non-material has really passed from one place to the other.

Similar to this, nothing passes from an external world to an internal world through sensation, perception and cognition, the fact of which is seen even when seen in agreed truth*. Nothing of a flower petal is involved with brain activities when perceiving a flower petal although we consider it as at least some characteristics ought to have passed to the brain activities from the flower petal to brain in order to represent it. The process of sensation, perception and cognition is simply one movement causing changes in its adjoining one as seen in agreed truth, in which, nothing passes from one to the other. To apply this view to the process of perceiving and cognizing the universe; each time we think as we perceive something as far or near, we know only of the motion in the nearest place next to it towards ‘us’, not to anything away from it, which position is seen when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth.† Finally it is not that even ‘we’ ‘know of’ as something occurring in the adjoining area, but simply changes taking place in the place where the thinking element manifests to itself. The whole ‘conceptual world’(1.7) is such manifestation of motion taking place nearest to the thinking element, not away from it.

* †

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth [Chapter 6] Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth [Chapter 6] Page 55 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 56 of 144

When the universe is thought of as it is contained in a gigantic spatial area, which area is seen as globular in shape,* we do not know whether it really is so because the term ‘space’ and the term ‘globular’ themselves convey pure concepts, so that they can have no type of existence. To think of the universe as ‘globular’ itself is thinking in addition to what is already there, which concept denotes an activity of ignorant thinking. As explained elsewhere in this book, nothing is there in any phenomenon as the ‘whole’ of it, in addition to the parts in it†. When tsunami waves flow, water at the place the earthquake occurs does not travel to sea shores. Similarly, nothing goes from an ‘external world’ to an ‘internal world’ in creating an internal world. It is caused by a fallacy when it is thought using images, logic, language, an external world exists as related to the thinking activities taking place in us. One could rightly say, ‘I know nothing about China, although I think I know much about it through written media or electrical activities taking place in my television set or computers and other similar motion around me.’ Sometimes we think we control or make changes in the external world by using the logical abilities of thinking. Man’s seemingly changing of the world is really not the internal world changing the external world, but events of causes and effects, one happening after other as it is seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth; not one doing or causing some other thing. What is seen as ‘doing’ really are ‘happenings’ as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. If we consider the person D at the place of Y takes an action in accordance with the message he received as shown in the illustration (Fig 3.4 above), it is only a manifestation of motion in what is seen as matter as our manifestations of matter x; ‘happenings’, not ‘internal worlds’ making changes in ‘external worlds’. 3.5 Premises for and against the Existence of an External World One could resort to one of the following premises in accepting or rejecting the existence of an external world: i. Five senses and the brain that works with them are perfect in realizing what ‘truth’ is. Therefore, the ‘internal world’ created by them has to be perfect so that we cannot reject the real existence of it. ii. By the very experience of sensory perception and cognition we perceive and cognise the ‘External World’. Truth is only such sensation, perception and cognition. The term ‘truth’ does not require other meaning than experiencing the processes of perception and cognition. iii. Five senses and the brain activities that work on them cannot be perfect in realizing the truth situation of anything. They consist of cells, and they have acquired particular shapes, states and orders of arrangement that gives them an ability to receive phenomena called sense data; and to collect them and store them to come to decisions regarding their existence. They cannot contain a special ability to realize a phenomenon called ‘truth’. * †

The Door of the Creation: ‘The Screen’ and ‘Behind the Screen’ [section 3.1] The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’ [sections 3.10 – 3.11]

Page 56 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 57 of 144

The external word created by them need not have a real existence. iv. No way is there to determine truth is perceived by perceiving sense-data. Perception of sense data is utilitarian, not truth determining. The term ‘truth’ may not convey any meaning. The first position (i) here assumes brain activities and sensory experiences as perfect in realizing a phenomenon called ‘truth. It gives a superior value to our thinking which is related more to an idealistic view or religious belief than to a view of reasoning. If it is to accept we have an ability to determine a phenomenon called ‘truth’, the ability of which other manifestations of matter do not have, the basis of that belief is thinking being centred or a man centred. Therefore, to arrive at a conclusion in this regard, we have to first agree on whether the universe really is thinking being centred or man centred. As regards the second position (ii), we have to agree to call the phenomena we perceive and cognise as ‘truth’ without verifying it in an epistemological foundation. One could point out here, if there has to be an epistemological foundation to accept the phenomena arising as sensation, perception and cognition as ‘truth’, then there has to be another epistemological foundation for that foundation too, to accept such foundation too as truth. Such searching for foundations, and foundations for such foundations could then extend to infinity. Despite for some validity to be seen in this argument, the question remains why any phenomenon has to be considered representing another phenomenon called ‘truth’, without a need there to do so. This is especially evident in a background, it is from a very little of the phenomena of the external world that we are able to sensualise, perceive and cognise. We do not know whether even this little amount perceived and cognized represent a true world or not. The third one (iii) may be considered nearer a correct position. One problem in this is, it is by using some knowledge as ‘truth’ related to an ‘external world’ we come to the decision such knowledge may not relate to a phenomenon called ‘truth’, the background of which alone is expected to accept. In addition to this, once this position is accepted, such acceptance itself takes an appearance of ‘truth’. The last one (iv) can be the most correct, although strong opposition can be expected for it too. Like in the previous one (iii), the argument that can be raised against it is, the statement made to the effect itself is an attempt in arriving at a state called ‘truth’ related to an external world, so it contains the contradiction, while denying the existence of an ‘external world’ as truth, the statement made to that effect is expected to be accepted as ‘truth’. If ‘perception’ and ‘truth’ are not two but one, that argument would come nearer our view, the term ‘truth’ has no meaning in addition to the meaning in the term ‘perception’. While the position (iii) suggests ‘sensation, perception and cognition’ and ‘truth’ have separate meanings, the position (iv) suggests there is no meaning in the term ‘truth’. In an ultimate seeing, there is no an external world in addition to ‘perception’ and ‘cognition’, which two words are enough for our understanding as seen in agreed truth. In addition to the reason it is with a world of conceptual states we deal with, there cannot be an external world also because the state of uncertainty affects in a way that makes nothing to be seen as having any definiteness to make an external world of definiteness to appear. Uncertainty makes nothing to be seen as definite, or even as temporary.(f) No one or no thing conceptual, material or otherwise, is the same a ‘second time’. Therefore, nothing can be stated as they were there in the past, because the nature of all of them have become different when they are seen as present. In such a background of uncertainty no chance is there for an ‘external world’ to exist . Page 57 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 58 of 144

Same uncertainty affects the activity of thinking itself too so that, thinking itself cannot be seen as perfect or as being a definite state, or even as having temporary existences. What was thought earlier is not the same as what is thought now, nor are they similar or related to one another, because seeing relationships is also only seeing as it was seen previously. (3.3) Particles not behaving in an orderly patter, or the difficulty in studying their behaviour, too, are our ways of seeing caused by the state of imperfection in the ability to think, which state of uncertainty is evident everywhere. The inside of a black hole cannot be seen from the eye even by using the best of the telescopes. Using senses no one can know what ‘dark matter’ is, or the light rays beyond the levels of infrared or ultra violet; all points of which would show, it is not a real external world which is perceived, but only some phenomena as seen in agreed truth; about which, too, we do not know well. There are many such unknowable areas guessed as having existences like parallel universes, dimensions beyond the number of four, types of matter that haven’t been discovered, etc. etc., about which we only speculate by seeing in agreed truth. One could ask, if no one knows perfectly of anything about any phenomenon, why do we mention of such things? We mention about such things only as guesswork of the ‘internal world’, simply as ‘guessing the beyond’, the attempt of which has no use except that they give us some stimulation required for the continuation of existence. Those whose professions are related to such guess work benefits more by doing so in fulfilling their personal utilitarian expectations. Another important question that could arise regarding the existence of an external world is, ‘who’ is seeing even this ‘phenomena’ ‘we’ see as the ‘external world’ as seeing in agreed in truth. When seen an absolute truth, there is no one too to see anything (7.10) 3.6 An Argument for the Existence of an External World Many get baffled when it is stated the external world does not exist. Existence of the external world is definite to them despite for their seeing continuous changes taking place so that nothing is seen as the definite thing, and nothing recurring the same way again and nothing is there to be identified to give a name although we have named many. This nature of indefiniteness is there in the ‘internal world’ of thinking activity itself by which we come to all decisions. In addition to this, there is ‘no one’ too within the ‘internal world’ to see anything as the ‘external world’ or anyother. One could argue in a manner; ‘I see a table in front of me that I consider evidence for its existence. If I have doubts about this first evidence, I would touch it and feel it and take it as the second evidence for its existence. Then I lift it up and feel its weight and consider it as the third evidence for its existence. Then I make it fall and if a big sound comes the way I expect at the time it falls, then I take it as the fourth evidence for its existence. Thus, I realize its existence for a fourth time too. These four instances are enough for me to realize the existence of a table. So, I come to the conclusion, a table exists, and the area that table exists together with other similar phenomena too exist, to the areas of which existence including the table I call ‘the external world.’

Page 58 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 59 of 144

This argument does not solve the main epistemological problem already seen; (3.5 ii) the argument itself takes place in an ‘internal world’. All that is seen as this argument are only the process of sensation, perception and cognition used with the ability to use logic, all of which take place as an internal world which is subject to constant changes. There is nothing there as its having definite existence so that we could call it anything. There is no decision making body like a superior or inferior ‘being’ to determine the logic used there makes us arrive at a phenomenon called ‘truth’. If a person emphasises on the point use of logic used in that argument is enough to make us arrive at a state called ‘truth’, then that person ought to have a supernatural ability of cognition to come to arrive at such position. The expressions ‘the table’, ‘the external world’ ‘I’, all are conceptually created in this argument and the logic used there is used only to create an internal world, not an external world. Logic is an inherent characteristic of the internal world of thinking, which has nothing to do with an external world. If logic is believed to have an existence of some form, or it is considered representing laws that have to be with the motion of matter, type of existence it has, and how such existence manage to be independent without the involvement of thinking element, too, have to be explained. Our position is, nothing is there to call an external world because whatever thinking that goes to think of such a world becomes the thinking activity of the internal world itself. It is by creating an internal world within the thinking element a person believes in the existence of an external world. There is an external world as everyone feels, but it is only as feeling or guesswork, which feeling or guesswork themselves are only activities in the internal world. Existence of the external world is a belief because we think of it but we cannot prove its existence. Use of logic itself by which the existence of the external world or the truthfulness of the existence of anything is tried to be proved, is a characteristic within the internal world. Everyone is always dealing with an internal world. There is no valid foundation to decide the internal world exists beyond the feeling itself of its existence. If it is to assume the ‘internal world’ is created on the really existing ‘external world’, that assumption is similar to one like ‘the sea shore is by the sea, therefore the sea shore is the sea’ or, ‘the seashore represents the existence of the sea’, or, ‘the seashore is related to sea’. Some of these expressions may be seen as having some validity because wherever there is a seashore, there is also the sea. However, if not as seeing by the thinking element, there cannot be a relationship between a sea and a seashore, just as the sea shore is not the sea. A being (e.g. a fish) in deep sea that has never been to the surface of it need not think there ought to be a seashore because it is in the sea. There can be rocks instead of a sea shore in places where the sea ends as sea meeting the land, the fact of which that being in the deep sea doesn’t know. Such a being in the sea coming to the decision a seashore exists, is similar to a person believing an external world exists, both of which are made through using ignorant logic, decisions arrived at which cannot be verified.

Page 59 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 60 of 144

3.7 Why is the ‘external world’ is not the ‘external world’ Following are more reasons for not considering the ‘external world’ as having an existence: i. The doors by which the existence of the external world is determined are retinas in the eye, eardrums, skin (including those in the nose and the tongue) which are small cell bundles of sensory organs in the body. It is initially from the activities in these sense organs we consider something is there to call a huge universe! Using them as doors, we think we perceive not only a huge universe in a spatial dimension, but a temporal dimension too in it by having a lengthy past, a present and future as extending to infinity.*(5.1) Even if there really is a thing to call a universe existing externally, what is created by those small bundles of sense organs as ‘doors’ as it must be showing a very small and a very perverted view of it. Those ‘doors’ by which we view a universe cannot absorb the nature of ‘matter x’† to see it as having an existence. That means, they cannot perceive the smallest states of matter in the universe just as they cannot perceive the biggest state of it. If it is to accept the universe created by it exists from an origin of Big Bang to an end as a Big Crunch, such a universe could be a small part only of the real nature of it. There can be areas in universe where the phenomenon of gravity does not manifest point of which they can never ever know, or there can be areas in universe where no particles are there but only wave like forms two points of which show, there can be phenomena in the universe or otherwise that can never ever be determined in any manner of using sensation, perception and cognition. So, the real universe, if any, has to be different to or not the same with what is seen as an internal world by human beings. After the creation of the internal world in our minds, it has to be a world of its own that does not have an ability to transcend itself to know whether a corresponding ‘external world’ universe exists along with it. Therefore, the ‘internal world’ limits to itself in determining its own existence. No way is there to verify whether the ‘internal world’ created absorbs all knowledge of the universe, or what it witnesses as universe is one per cent universe or ninety nine per cent or ten percent of it. Even wondering on like this on its limitations itself may not have any relevance with the truth situation. Imagine of a phenomenon inside the earth that has the thinking element (a living being) the way we have it. It cannot come to the surface but it manifests as ‘feelings’ and emotions caused by vibrations or shocks that occur on the surface of the earth such as earthquakes, bomb explosions, impacts of sea water in turbulent weather conditions etc. etc. along with its other contacts with the external world by being exposed to types of radiation, including those coming from far away universe, gravity, and motions of particles like neutrinos etc. etc. that constantly flow through it If this ‘living phenomenon’ decides it knows a universe by using them, such a decision is made on ignorant utilitarian thinking. Such thinking has no relevance with a state called ‘truth’; so its perceptions are not ‘related to a state called ‘truth’. They cannot have a relationship even with a state called ‘false’. It is limited to a * †

Time and universe [section 5.1] Matter and Matter X [section 2.1] Page 60 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 61 of 144

domain of its own, and it cannot know the real situation of what is far away by the feelings caused by vibrations or waves other motion that it is in touch with it. The situation of this can be compared with Plato’s metaphor, a man’s perception and cognition of the world is similar to that of a man living in a closed cave witnessing its ‘external world’ by the shadows fallen on the walls in it. ii. As regards the existence of the external world, one may want to end up in the position ‘I think therefore I am’ leading us to the view, ‘I think, therefore what I see as the external world have to exist. According to this, if there is an ‘I’ what is felt as that ‘I’ perceives has to be the ‘external world’. The statement ‘I think therefore I am’ suggests, because there is the activity of thinking, an existence of a ‘doer’ for that activity too can be assumed as ‘I’. However, no logic is used in its initial position in the statement in assuming the existence of ‘I’ and then assuming that activity as ‘thinking’ is done by that ‘I’. It is after that only logic is used as, when an action verb is used to denote an action, the ‘doer’ of that action too has to be considered having an existence. Imagining of a phenomena first as it has an existence without using logic, and then justifying the existences of it through things related to it is fallacious thinking. On the other hand, if the notion of ‘I’ is to be accepted at the beginning itself, a need does not arise to prove its existence, because it has already been accepted. Added to these, even if logic proves a point as correct, nature of both inductive and deductive logic are based on ignorant thinking.*(3.12) The statement ‘I think, therefore I am’ is based on the position, ‘I’ have a superior (illogical) ability to use logic to decide, if an action is thought as performed, the ‘doer’ of that action too has to be considered as existing. The thinking element there determines the existence of ‘I’ using the same position created within itself, with nothing else or no one else to support the basis of it. Therefore, no validity is there in that statement to consider it denotes a state called ‘truth’. When it is said ‘The rain falls’ the question who causes it does not arise according to grammar because ‘falls’ is not an action verb. Why we should consider ‘think’ as an action very is predetermined there without logic involved in it. The notions of ‘I’ and ‘think’ are creations within a creation. One cannot answer the questions who or what this ‘I’ is that cannot be seen, heard, touched or cognised; only that it is felt as a ‘feeling’ or ‘awareness’ existing within each of ‘us’ separate from one another. If there is no ‘I’, then only ‘think, therefore think’ is left. The manner logic is used there is similar to a person thinking to wake up from a dream by pinching himself, which pinching too is done within the same dream. Let us create a view like this. The thinking element or the ‘I Consciousness’ that appears as same, is a bundle of smallest particles seen in unification, particles of which are so small they can be compared to the behaviour of neutrinos. Neutrinos are believed they can be mass less too. These particles manifest using the brain as the centre of it, in which, bundles of thoughts are born and die instantly always creating their succeeding forms, the process of which births and deaths of thoughts in brain is ceaseless until the death of the brain. It *

The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World [section 3.12] Page 61 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 62 of 144

continuously consumes particles in ‘matter’ around it in order to continue to exist, thus exists for ‘sometime’, and thing disappears by giving way to its successors. The process of this appears as ‘one I’ to itself because ‘it’ wants to see in unification. It appears like forms of radiation of what it consumes (eats) as matter being converted to other forms of states like ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’. In its thinking, nothing is the same again when seen in absolute truth, although the opposite of it is seen as those thoughts share sameness, similarities and differences to see in agreed truth. In an ultimate seeing, this seeing as thinking or ‘I consciousness’, is not an ‘external world’ nor is it an ‘internal world ’; nor can we say with valid reasons it can create an ‘external world’, or it represents an ‘external world’. iii.

After the internal world is formed, it is a ‘non-material’ or subtler forms of particles in formation appearing as thought forms like concepts, images, interpretations, thoughts etc. etc. They cannot have an existence because they vanish just as they are ‘born’, so that it cannot be called an existence. Their existence is not even ‘momentary’ because there is no time scale for ‘moments’ to exist.* One cannot say anything as ‘it exists’ if it ceaselessly changes its ‘shapes’ ‘states’ and ‘orders of arrangement in its parts’, leaving nothing to be seen anywhere to say anything as at rest, especially when those activities take place in a timeless background. If you see an appearance and think of it as ‘That is a man’, and just as you think so it turns to a ‘ghost’, and just as you think of it as a ‘ghost’ it becomes a ‘tree’, the thinking process of which continues without rest; then you end up in saying there is nothing to see as anything there. You may use an expression like ‘phenomenon ‘x '† there to denote it. Seeing such appearances as ‘man’ ‘ghost’ ‘tree’ at such a time are attempts to see in unifications in the thinking element, to represent which nothing is really out there, and ‘seeing’ of which in unifications has nothing to do with an ‘external world’. When the internal world subjected to such changes is seen as having ‘momentary existences’ or ‘momentary definite states’, there, too, it is seen so because it is seen in unification. Seen in unification thus leading to see an external world is a result of seeing through ‘ignorance’. However, nothing can be stated to be seen as an external world in the midst of such a process of changes. We cannot say the world created in the thinking element represents an ‘external world’ also because thinking is a process in which what appears now is never the same again. Thoughts are born and die each moment in which nothing stays as definite.(f,l) Same view is expressed by William James the American psychologist as, ‘consciousness is not a thing but a process’‡. Being a process, it cannot have any type of existence because, a process cannot have ‘shapes’ ‘states’ ‘mass’ or ‘time’ even temporarily. One cannot say anything as existing without its having qualities of ‘shapes’ ‘states’ ‘mass’ or ‘time’. What one sees as existing are only unifications in the thinking element that cannot be there in an ‘external world’; nor can they represent an ‘external world’. Sub atomic particles move and change at such rapid pace one can see nothing as definite objects or definite events with them. Nothing in them is the same at the next moment. What

*‘Time’ † ‡

and the ‘Three Dimensions’ [Chapter 5 ] section 2.1 Matter and Matter x The Problem of Consciousness Crick F. and Christof Koch (1997) Encarta Encyclopedia Deluxe 2004

© 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation Page 62 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 63 of 144

is seen are manifestations of matter x creating appearances only to ‘us’, which ability of seeing appearances depends on our karmic needs.(a) According to the famous statement of Heraclitus, the only thing that does not change is the changing process itself. With such a view of forever changing external world, one can see nothing because nothing stops the process of changes in them for us to see anything as something. What is left is the changing process that cannot be perceived or cognised, although we think we perceive and cognise things by seeing phenomena. When what is seen are only the processes of change in which nothing is seen as existing, there is no way for an external world to exist. iv. Our brains are still developing. Nothing remains static as in a developed state or in a developing state, the state of which has to be applied to the brain too. If the brain is fully developed, it might cease, or it might begin to digress like everything else. There cannot be formed a fully developed, ideal, static brain for mankind, as some of us expect to possess in future. Therefore, the external world created from such an undeveloped or non-static brain we have, cannot create for us a ‘real, static, external world’. The ‘world’ ‘man’ etc. are only ‘manifestations of matter x’ when seen in agreed truth, which means, they are what we see as made from the unknown states of a phenomenon we call ‘matter x’.* This expression ‘unknown states of a phenomenon we call ‘matter x’ used here itself is a creation in the internal world. Everything is such manifestation of the thinking element as the internal world. Nothing can be anywhere except as thinking. When seen in absolute truth, we cannot come even to such conclusive answers as to whether the ‘internal world’ or the ‘external world’ exists, through the activities of thinking. 3.8 A Person’s Relationships with the ‘External World’ A person’s relationship with the motion in the ‘external world’ can be seen in different attitudes as seen in agreed truth, some of which are as follows: i. If a person feels the external world as continuous change while he has a definite existence by being an entity like a non-changeable, eternal soul, he can be happy for the reason his existence is eternal though the external world changes. He can be happy also because he sees the unhappy things, persons, events, objects etc. disappear from his view because they too are subject to those continuous changes. He can be unhappy too when he sees that things he is attached with and he likes to see as existing would disappear from him at one time however much strong the attachments are. ii. If a person feels the external world or the universe as existing eternally, but she as a person is subject to disappearance by dying, or by not being an entity like a ‘soul’; then she becomes unhappy because she cannot exist forever in such a background. She gets unhappy also because she has to leave the seemingly ever-present world. However, she can be happy too by seeing that one day she leaves the phenomena that that makes her unhappy like some persons, objects, states or events. She can also be happy when she sees there is no soul to bear the burden of keeping or losing anything.

*

Matter and Matter X [Section 2.1] Page 63 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 64 of 144

iii. If a person feels both the changes in the external world and the changes within him are the same motion of matter, which matter really is his own manifestations of the unknown matter x, and he feels neither sides are affected differently by which ‘motion’; then he can be happy because he loses nothing in such a background; he knows he does not have a ‘self’ or ‘soul’ to lose anything. He feels nothing as ‘self’, ‘persons’ or ‘objects’ to cling to in such ‘motion’ seen as changes. No one is there to be unhappy too in such seeing, and there is nothing to be unhappy too in such seeing. When no future is to be seen, then what is seen is only motion taking place in the three dimensions as we see so in agreed truth, there is ‘nothing’ or ‘no one’ there to become. No reason is there to have expectations as going forward or achieving objectives or becoming greater or being at a ‘future’ time. Nothing is lost by not achieving an objective if there is nothing to call future. Such a person sees, what is within himself are there outside too in the same way; therefore, nothing is lost to the world by ‘his’ loss, which’ loss’ is the death when seen in agreed truth. Such a ‘person’ is ‘happy’ because ‘he’ knows no ‘self’ is there for him to lose or to be in unhappy. Whatever there is, they are motion seen as changes seen in a timeless state when seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. In such ‘motion’, no ‘being’ is seen as existing to be happy or to suffer. 3.9 Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations Regarding the concepts of ‘similarities’ ‘differences’ and ‘sameness’ seen through sensation, perception and cognition, three laws can be formulated as follows. They are seen only when seen in Agreed Truth. If X and Y are any two objects or places or states or events, they are always seen as; S i. similar in some respects. S ii. different in some respects. S iii. not the same in all respects. The same laws can be stated in their negation as they are; a. never similar in all respects. b. never different in all respects. c. never the same in all respects. These three laws can be applied to all that are seen in unification like any two particles, waves, incidents, human, animal or plant activities, or any such two phenomena. People in two geographical areas are seen as evolving with similar characteristics because of the first law (s i). They show differences because of the second law (s ii). Those who are waiting to see the ‘Industrial Revolution’ to take place in Sri Lanka as it happened in Britain see only from the first law. Those who see certain human races as not evolving in the correct manner have ignored the second (s ii) and the third (s iii) laws. Such ‘seeing’ seen through three conceptual states of ‘similarities’ ‘differences’ and ‘sameness’ does not have a corresponding existence

Page 64 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 65 of 144

outside conceptual activities in an external world because no an external world is there so there are no places or time for them to occur. The Big Bang explosion and a man made bomb explosion are similar in that, both make attempts to occupy more space; dissimilar in that, constituents of the explosions are different. Also, two activities of explosions are not the same. One may consider a bomb explosion as a different small explosion within the big explosion of the Big Bang which, too, shows, they have their similarities just as their differences. An atom in a far away nebula and any one atom on earth can be similar and dissimilar in certain ways. One may wonder how two oxygen atoms be dissimilar even if they are in two places. They are similar because when we think of two oxygen atoms anywhere, we think of two similar atoms. However, there ought to be some differences too in them that we do not easily witness because we cannot study the specific situations of them. For example, the ages of the two atoms or the behaviour of some particles in them could be dissimilar. Same three laws seen can be seen in the temporal scale too as follows: T i. Any one object, place, state or event share similarities in some respects when it is seen at two ‘moments’ in a time scale. T ii. Any one object, place, state or event is different in some respects when it is seen at two ‘moments’ in a time scale. T iii. Any one object, place, state or event is the same when it is seen at two ‘moments’ of time as seeing in agreed truth, although it is the opposite which is seen the same when seeing in absolute truth. (Despite for the innumerable and unfathomable changes that occur in any such object, place, state or event at two moments seen in a time scale, any one of them is considered the same at two times as seen in agreed truth. For example, the Eiffel Tower is the same as it was one hundred years ago, ignoring the changes that had been taking place in it throughout. The French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution are the same as revolutions; i.e., they brought about sudden, large scale changes. However, it is the opposite that can be seen when seen in absolute truth because nothing is the same when an object is seen at two points in a time scale.) Objects, places, states or events or any conceptual state we think of, always retain certain characteristics as ‘past’ the search for which ‘past’ extends to infinity when seen in agreed truth. It is these characteristics coming from past that makes us see similarities or sameness in any two phenomena as seen in a temporal scale. However, human thinking cannot see such similarities beyond a certain level. If a thinking element sees all states of past extending to infinity, such terms like ‘omniscience’ ‘God’ ‘buddahood’ ‘infinite intelligence’(4.3) and so on can be used to it. As Chopra* states, the human body contains something that never changes, according to which seeing, at the same time as it keeps some conceptual states, it changes at a rapid pace too. ‘ … if you could see the body as it really is, you would see it as constant change mixed with complete non change’ (137-8)

*

Chopra D. M.D.(1990.137-8) Quantum Healing – Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine Bantam Books

Page 65 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 66 of 144

This point of Chopra illustrates the ability to witness both the first two laws at one time. When a person says, ‘The man I met now is the same one I saw yesterday’, or ‘It was on this same earth the dinosaurs lived sometime ago’, both expressions show sameness seen in a temporal scale. However, when seen in absolute truth, no two phenomena are involved in the comparisons in these instances because, no object, no place, no state or no event can ever be the same temporally or spatially, although we agree to call two such phenomena as the same when seen in a temporal scale in agreed truth. A man can never be the same as he was yesterday because he has changed each moment, and the earth as it was at any one time in the past can never become the same again. There is no dimension called ‘time’ too, to see things happening in a temporal scale.(5.1) It is difficult to apply the term ‘sameness’ as appearing in any two objects to be seen in a spatial scale, although, sometimes, we see so when seen in agreed truth. No object, no place, no event or no state can exist in two places as the same, although we use the word ‘same’ in an instance like, ‘The actor who died yesterday is the same one appearing on this television screen now’. When seen in absolute truth, no two objects, no two places, no two events or no two states can be similar or same, nor can any one of them be called representing another. Nor can any one of them be similar or same in a time scale too, because they change momentarily, so that nothing is the same a second time. There is nothing called ‘time’ too to see such similarities in a temporal scale.(5.1) One cannot call any two of them as different too because no different object, place, event or state has come to occupy the same space or same ‘moment’ of time in any such an entity so that we could call them they differ. Added to all these, just as a phenomenon cannot appear the same way again, there is no ‘one’ too within our bodies to see things as same, similar or different, although ‘we’ think there is some ‘one’ who is seeing all these.

3.10

The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’

The ‘whole’ has nothing more in addition to the totality of its ‘parts’. Although this is the truth, the world is created by seeing ‘wholes’ have something more in addition to the totality of their ‘parts’. To illustrate this point, we may use here G. Ryle's* analogy, when a person has seen all parts in a university as the senate, the library, the lecture rooms and so on, after which if he still asks, ‘But where’s the university?’, he is looking for something more in addition to the totality of its parts which is not there. The question is asked there because of ignorance in thinking. To any house owner his home has something more in addition to the totality of its parts like rooms, kitchen, living room and so on. Something ‘special’ is there in his home to him in addition to the parts in it. If it is an unoccupied or abandoned house, one may not see, or see a little of this additional something. Not only in houses, but in villages, towns, countries, earth, solar system; in all these something more is seen ignorantly in addition to the totality of parts in them. When those ‘parts’ are taken separately and treat them as ‘wholes’, we see ‘parts’ within them too, in which ‘parts’ too, the ‘wholes’ contain nothing more in addition to the totality of their ‘parts’. Contemplating on this point further ends up in seeing nothing is there that constitutes a universe.(4.11) *

Ryle G. (1963) The Concept of Mind Page 66 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 67 of 144

According to Chopra*, a DNA contains intelligence. Then, as we mistakenly think, a man made of an innumerable number of such DNAs should have something more as intelligence than in the collection of all DNAs in him. In the same way a society ought to have something more than the collection of its people. The world should have something more than the totality of its nations. We may simplify the true view and the false view of this seeing of ‘parts’ and their ‘wholes’ as in this illustration. (Fig.3.10) According to the false view as shown in the illustration, ‘matter’ is shown as having more than its unrecognisable constituents considered as ‘matter x’ by representing it a in a bigger circle. Similarly, ‘DNAs’ have something more than their constituents of ‘matter’ or ‘matter x’, and ‘man’ has something more than the collection of all ‘DNAs’ ‘matter’ or ‘matter x’ that contain in *

Chopra D. M.D.(1990.137-8)Quantum Healing – Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine Bantam Books Page 67 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 68 of 144

him; all of which show the false way of seeing (i) as seen in agreed truth. In the true way of seeing, ‘matter x’ and the ‘world’ are shown as equal, as they are same in proportions, and ‘man’ and ‘matter x’ too are the same in proportions, because they are not two pairs of phenomena, but the same, though we see them in twos mainly because they have two names. This truth and falsity of the ‘part’ and the ‘whole’ in two ways of seeing can be presented as follows too: i. False: world > nations > societies > mankind > DNAs > matter >matter x ii. Truth: world =nations =societies = mankind = DNAS = matter=matter x In the first instance (i) each category is represented as ‘having something more’ or ‘bigger than’ (>) the total of its constituents, which is the false view. For example, it is a false view to consider ‘man’ (= mankind) has something more in addition to the totality of the ‘DNAs’ in him and less in addition to the totality of ‘societies’. In the second instance, all categories are considered equal or same (=) with others. For example, it is correct to think ‘societies’ have nothing more in addition to the totality of DNAs they contain. According to this view, ‘matter’ and the ‘nations’ are same; just as ‘matter x’ and the ‘world’ are the same. What is seen as ‘additional’ or more in the ‘whole’ than the totality of its ‘parts’ is only conceptually seen, with nothing additional there existing as ‘material’ or ‘nonmaterial’ as we see so in agreed truth.

3.11 The Part - The Whole: The Absolute Truth Absolute truth is in seeing there are no ‘wholes’. What is seen as ‘wholes’ are limited to imagination as caused by the nature of ignorance in thinking. When there are no ‘wholes’ there cannot be ‘parts’ to contain in them too. Ignorance causes seeing in ‘parts’ and ‘wholes’ because of the it makes the thinking element’s seeing through utilitarian values created in agreed truth. We see ‘parts’ in ‘wholes’ and imagine more there in the ‘wholes’ in addition to the parts in them. This does not mean the correct view is seeing only the processes of disintegration where ‘parts’ or ‘wholes’ cannot be seen. The process of disintegration, too, has to be first seen in unification (3.14) because, objects, events or states have to be seen first as unifications before considering them they are subject to disintegration. The biggest ‘whole’ we can think of is, ‘The universe is everything’. Then there are others too like, ‘The universe is created by God’ ‘The universe originated with the Big Bang’. These are also the biggest myths because; - They represent only man centred thinking, or thinking element centred thinking. When universe is seen as the biggest unification containing the totality of everything, the notion of ‘totality’ there is ‘I’ centred or ‘human being centred’ or the ‘thinking element centred’. Because of limitations in our thinking abilities, this totality seen as everything as one universe, too, has to be one of limitations. When it is said, ‘Big Bang is the origin of the universe’, no logic is used to think of what was there before that, because the thinking element has set limitations to itself by seeing a beginning and an end to the universe too, so that it could consider it as one ‘whole’. Page 68 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 69 of 144

- Nothing more is there as ‘universe’ or ‘God’ in addition to the totality of particles in it. What is seen as ‘Universe’ or ‘God’ are the same as the particles in them.. When it is stated the universe has nothing more than the totality of its ‘parts’ the ‘particles’, the same view can be applied to each such ‘particle’ too taking each one of them too as a ‘whole’ and see that each one of them, too, contains nothing more than the totality of its parts. Continued to view this way, nothing is seen as ‘wholes’ and nothing is seen as ‘parts’ in a final seeing, leaving only the unknown state(s) of matter x; the true view of which alone could be left as to contemplate on absolute truth. However, one cannot see that ultimate absolute truth through sensation, perception and cognition although it is through them the first attempts to experience the true view is approached. When the expression ‘true view’ is used here, it has to be taken in agreed truth, which means, it need not be taken as there is an ideal, definite state called ‘the true view’ that ‘exists’ somewhere even for a moment. Another big ‘whole’ is the unification seen as ‘I’ in the thinking element, in which, ‘I’ is felt as something more in addition to the totality of its parts like thoughts, feelings, emotions etc. etc. To one of these ‘I’s we give a name like ‘John Smith’ but that ‘John Smith’ other than the totality of its parts is only imagination, strengths and the abilities of seeing such a separate entity as ‘John Smith’ differ from ‘person’ to ‘person’.* The ‘wholes’ appearing as small like cells, DNA molecules, atoms and particles, denote nothing more in addition to the totality of their parts. What is seen as matter x beyond those smallest levels cannot be seen through senses or otherwise; no need too is there to see it /them. Even if man gets an ability someday to see beyond those smallest levels, one would not see anything as the smallest thing to see in unification. As Plato once said, if a thing is discovered as ‘the smallest’, and if it can be thought of as it can be divided to half or to smaller fractions, then it cannot really be the smallest. Since everything that exists by having a mass and occupying space can be thought of as being divided to fractions, there cannot be anything to call ‘the smallest’. That also suggests, there cannot be unifications and there cannot be ‘parts’ or ‘wholes’ when seeing from the levels of at matter x. Realization of this point makes us realize real ‘us’ too are a dissolved state of matter x as everything else is. In the final seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, we are only matter x. If we realize this truth by seeing the nature of unifications and disintegrations,† of seeing phenomena as consisting of ‘wholes’ and their parts’ through purely conceptual qualities of ‘similarities’ ‘differences’ and ‘sameness’ among them, then we do not indulge in seeing in unification. This does not mean we reject to see in unification, but we have realized the true state of it. We may not see disintegration too in the final seeing. Seeing in unification or seeing in disintegration ought to cease by themselves when the true situation of ‘parts’ ‘wholes’, ‘similarities’ ‘differences’ and ‘sameness’ are seen.

* †

There is nothing to call ‘I’ ‘me’ ‘my’ ‘mine’ within about the six feet of this body,. – The Buddha Unification and Disintegration R.Subsinghe (2011) Godage Publishers, Colombo.

Page 69 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 70 of 144

Not wanting to see in unification means seeing things ‘the way they are’.(g) If one sees the absence of ‘wholes’ or their ‘parts’ when in meditation, but still ‘sees’ or feels an existence as herself, then she is witnessing the ‘Absolute Silence’, which might be similar to what Chopra suggests as helpful in recovering from ‘distorted thoughts’ that causes many psychological disorders. Abnormal physical conditions occurring as manifestations of ‘distorted thoughts’ ought to disappear in such instances of experiencing ‘absolute silence’ because no type of thought is left at such a time of meditation to work on as ‘ignorance’ based thoughts. It is ignorance that creates ‘distorted thoughts’ which thoughts manifest as physical or mental disorders in a human body. Realization of this could be the state The Buddha has announced in a statement just after he attained the state of of buddhahood, ‘I have discovered the carpenter who was building this house’.(h) ‘State of rest’ when he told Angulimala, ‘I have stayed. It is you who are running, (after illusions and delusions)’(i) Nothing is destroyed or no one is disappeared by realizing this truth. Nothing is lost to the universe or nothing is added to it in the realization of it. Anyone could keep cherishing the things she cherishes the way she likes even after realizing this truth, provided she would still see them as ‘things’ left to cherish for her. The expression ‘absolute ‘silence’ need not be taken through an approach of seeing in unification, by seeing what is denoted by it as another ‘whole’ having definite or non definite forms of existence. There cannot be anything to call ‘absolute silence’ when seen in absolute truth too. Desire to see an end by attaining a definite state or occupying a state as the final rest, too, is a result of ignorance at work; because, with desires to possess them, we desire to end up somewhere where there is ideal happiness or joy; which ideal happiness or joy is expected to be realized after some era of ‘time’; seen in a scale of time. 3.12 The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World (6.3) The role logic plays in the creation and the evolution of the world as seeing in agreed truth is based on two premises. These premises are made on the ‘cause and effect’ relationship of how unifications are formed as explained in ‘patichcha samuppa:da’* in buddhist doctrine referring to the nature of a ‘being’. No other type of logic is valid as regards the creation and the continuation of the world. 1. If Y is an object, event or state existing as if occupying a moment or period in a time scale, it is a cause only of X - nothing else – as it is following its immediate previous moment or period of existence of that X. It cannot be a cause of any other thing as A or B or C. If there are A, B or Cs, each of them ought to have had its own similar previous state of existence that went to make it, same way X only could become Y. 2. If no X exists having one moment or period of existence, then no Y too could occur. Similarly, if their own previous moments of existences were not there, no A or B or C would exist. *

The 12 category Cause and Effect of a Life Form [pticcə smupp𝑎:ðə] Also: Subasinghe R. Unification and Disintegration (2011 p. 108-11)

Page 70 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 71 of 144

According to this, only its own immediate previous existence of an object, state or event, nothing else, is the logical foundation of its appearance. Thus, the present moment of universe is a result only of its previous moment, nothing else, temporal length of the ‘moment’ of which may depend on the reader’s way of comprehension. This is how the universe has an existence as it can be seen in agreed truth. Thus, the ‘Big Bang’, if it really occurred, is not a logical cause of the present universe; it is the cause only of its immediate preceding state. This type of logic suggests predictions for future cannot be made because anything is possible to happen in the next moment in future because of uncertainty and unpredictability evident in all occurrences.(4.8) It is only after X has become Y we can say X is the cause of Y, not before it. Our perception and cognition has no ability to predict by penetrating through the possibilities and probabilities as caused by uncertainty and unpredictability evident in all occurrences. A question can be asked here as, if D is a result only of its immediate cause C and C is a result only of its immediate cause B and B is a result only of its immediate cause A, then D ought to be a result of any of the causes of A, B and C too, not only C. This argument is invalid because, at the time of the occurrence of D, only C is there to become D not A or B. A and B at such times are fully dissolved in C by that time of its becoming D. According to this seeing, logical inferences made by using inductive logic or deductive logic cannot be considered as valid. When a statement is made on inductive or deductive reasoning and later it is seen as becoming true, it does not happen because of the nature of logic used, but as caused by the possibility for anything to happen.(4.8) When a prediction is made as ‘The sun will rise tomorrow’ it is made on past experiences of seeing the sun rising as a daily event which is using inductive logic. It is always possible the sun will not rise tomorrow due to hitherto unknown reasons that would be seen only by then, as dinosaurs were supposed to have faced such an event in the past as regards the appearance of the sun to them. Even when it is predicted the sun will definitely rise tomorrow, and it will happen so, it will not be the same sun that has reappeared, so such a prediction made cannot be considered as based on a valid logical foundation. In deductive reasoning made in instances like 2+2=4, or an angle in a triangle ought to have the value of 30 degrees when the values in other two angles in it are 150, they are not predictions made by using logic but conclusions taken on what is already there. Such deductive reasoning cannot be valid also because there are no ‘ones’ or ‘twos’ that go to make us see 2+2 as 4, or no ideal triangle can be made to measure the degrees in it. There are no ‘ones’ too to do so because no ‘one’ we see as ‘one’ is ever the same as any other ‘one’ as regards the constituents that went to make them, as explained in the laws above (S.iii) and (T.iii)* Also, no ‘one’ can show an ideal triangle to demonstrate deductive reasoning made on trigonometry. When seeing nearing absolute truth, the flow of universe has neither a beginning nor an end. Questions related to the beginning of universe or end of universe cannot be given logical explanations because the universe cannot be seen as having a beginning or an end, and its existence cannot be thought of as built on structures that correspond to logical structures which *

Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] Page 71 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 72 of 144

exist only as thinking. The ‘existence’ of universe is timeless as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. So the only valid logical ability seen with regard to the phenomenon of the universe is, it is the immediate previous state of it that is the logical cause of it, as seen in agreed truth. However, even this logical cause has no validity when seen in absolute truth; so, in a final seeing, logical thinking plays no role in the existence of the universe. 3.13 Change and Motion The term ‘change’ conveys the same meaning as ‘motion’, though some might prefer to think of them as it is ‘motion’ that makes us see ‘changes’ suggesting a duality in them. Both terms apply additional things to matter as, they move in relation to spatial positions, and it is by occupying a consecutive period of time only they manage to exist. However, both terms contain only conceptual meanings. Having only conceptual meanings also means having no real existence. It is with such ‘change’ or ‘motion’ that X is seen as becoming only Y and nothing else as seen in previous section.(3.12) Time dimension created thus makes us see three additional conceptual states as ‘past’ ‘present’ and ‘future’ that exist nowhere other than their being conceptual states. Motion is seeing changes in objects or particles in relation to other such objects or particles occurring in imaginary spatial positions. Such motion or changes are seen as, objects or particles attract, go away, spin, rotate, travel elliptically round and so on, centred on other objects or imaginary spatial positions. If we do not want to see a world for our utilitarian purposes, these phenomena seen as changes would not be there, and the universe would keep still the way it is, like absolute stillness that should be at matter X levels, or as the ‘Silent Witness’*(7.11, 7.15) with no person involved in as such witnessing. When seeing in absolute truth, such feelings of ‘stillness’, too, is only a way of ‘seeing’, seen in relation to change and motion in agreed truth. What makes us consider an object or a particle has occupied an imaginary spatial area, while considering at the same time such ‘spatial area’, has some form of its own existence? What makes us see ‘motion’ in objects only in relation to other objects, unless we want to see so to satisfy our utilitarian purposes in thinking? Phenomena need not be seen as changing because seeing changes is only a way of seeing. Matter x may not have the property of ‘change’ as a characteristic in it although matter has as we see in agreed truth. Concept of ‘change’ cannot be applied to the smallest levels of matter beyond a limit of their being small because, matter loses all attributes of matter such as having ‘mass’ or ‘form’ or ‘states’ or ‘orders of arrangement’ beyond such smallest levels. No ‘change’ can be seen at such levels because they are so small they cannot be conceptualised or cognised. As example, particles smaller than photons cannot be seen because light cannot be reflected from them, because of which no shapes can be seen in them. When a table is moved from its usual place in a room, we call it a ‘change’ because the ‘picture’ of the room in our imagination had to change. However, nothing was added or nothing was *

Chopra D. M.D.(1990)Quantum Healing – Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine Bantam Books …

Page 72 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 73 of 144

removed from the room in such a change, nor did anything special, different or extraordinary happened in the room because of such change; therefore, the change seen there becomes a ‘spiritual’ experience(2.1), which means, it becomes only a state of mind. Nothing of matter changed there in such movement of a table although we agree to call it ‘change’ or ‘motion’. Molecules of water in a flowing river behave the way they are. One cannot say changes take place in water in such a river because nothing is seen to denote the word ‘change’ there. If one has to call any event a ‘change’, it has to be an activity that happens against ‘the way the things happen’, which activities cannot occur. For example, water flowing upward in a river does not happen. Similar to that changes in the universe, too, cannot occur. This ought to also suggest meaning of the term ‘change’ has a contradiction in it indicating no validity is there in the use of it. When ‘changes’ have to be seen as activities that happen against ‘the way the things are’, it can also be seen nothing happens against ‘the way the things are’; therefore, the term ‘change’ carries no meaning in an ultimate seeing. ‘Changes’ or ‘motions’ are ways of seeing in the thinking element seen proportionate to ‘the desires for the existence and to enjoy pleasures’*, because of which desires, the need arises in the thinking element to create a world by seeing ‘changes’ and ‘motion’ to live with them(b,c). What is seen as those changes are changes only of conceptual states taking place in our minds, not as constituents or qualities in matter. The fact that a stone cannot see ‘motion’ or ‘change’ is not only because it does not have the thinking element to see so, but also because only a thinking element can create the ignorant concepts of ‘change’ and ‘motion’. No ‘change’ or ‘motion’ is there also because nothing stays at rest even for a nanosecond as definite objects or as definite particles, so that ‘changes’ or ‘motion’ could occur in them. This phrase used as ‘nothing stays at rest’ need not be taken to mean ‘there are things, they move so fast they cannot be at rest’, but it means, nothing exists so that there is nothing to be at rest. One finds nothing as a basic entity so that it could be subject to change or motion. In an ultimate seeing, nearing absolute truth, words or phrases denoting qualities of matter represent nothing because they are ‘purely conceptual’ creations applied on things that do not exist.(1.7) Even when seen in agreed truth, nothing is seen when things are seen as in motion because they exist beyond our abilities of seeing. Since ‘matter x’ cannot be seen in sensation, perception and cognition†, we cannot see whether changes or motion occur at such levels. It is similar to that, we cannot see an object ten metres ahead of us if it travels at a speed of one thousand kilometres per second. We may guess the motion of that object by using logic, but we cannot experience it using senses. Therefore, we cannot say such a thing travelling at such a great speed really exists, since we really cannot see it. When we cannot see it we cannot say ‘changes’ are taking place in it too. When things manifest through unrecognizable ‘changes’ in matter based on the unknown matter x, one cannot see activities to call ‘one becoming the other’ too because nothing can be identified to call ‘one’. ‘Ones’ are seeing when seeing in unification which is seeing in ignorance.(3.14) If Three types of desires: 1. desire to enjoy pleasures /kα:mə θΛnhα:/ 2. desire to continue to exist /bhΛʍə θΛnhα:/ 03. desire to cease the existence /wi bhΛʍə θΛnhα:/ † [section 2.1] Matter x is unknowable states of matter, unknowable through sensation, perception and cognition.- Subasinghe R.(2011.30) Unification and Disintegration *

Page 73 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 74 of 144

there are no ‘ones’ to become ‘others’, changes too cannot be seen as if occurring in them. This position is validated when considering the point no ‘persons’ too are there to see in unification; to see things as ‘one becoming the other’. Thinking activity itself is subject to ‘change’ or ‘motion’ as seen in agreed truth in which, no thought that appeared earlier, reappears the same way, similar way or different way. No definite particle is there even in the activities of thinking so that thinking that appeared earlier can reappear. Nature of thinking caused by such indefiniteness cannot determine whether there are phenomena called ‘change’ or motion’. Matter X may have the quality of stillness because it cannot be seen as having the quality of ‘motion’. Such ‘stillness’ is seen in relation to ‘motion’ as seen in agreed truth. Since matter loses all attributes of matter at the smallest levels of their being matter, to which state(s) we call matter X, they cannot be sensualised or cognised. Therefore, we think of matter X as still, because what is ‘still’ are what we think of as ‘still’, just as what is ‘motion’ are what we think of as ‘motion’, both of which ‘stillness’ and ‘motion’ are based on imaginary spatial positions and objects that are nowhere because they are only unifications created in the thinking element. The ‘existence’ of ‘stillness’ or ‘motion’ depend on sensation, perception and cognition; therefore, matter X ought to be still because we cannot sensualise or cognise it/ them. What we see as ‘motion’ in what we see as ‘matter’, are only our seeing. When one acquires the state of ‘seeing nothing’ in meditation, one might feel the stillness of matter X by which things manifest, not by matter the existence of which is only imaginary. Then such a person is not an ‘I’ as she thinks so by seeing in agreed truth, but the ‘Real I’(7.15, 7.16) which is devoid of ‘form’, ‘mass’ or ‘time’. However, the ‘stillness’ one faces at such a time need not be taken as a definite mental state where one feels at ‘rest’ through an eternal flow of time; it is experiencing only of the absence of ‘change’ and ‘motion’ in everything as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. 3.14 ‘Seeing’ in Unification* Unification is the ability of the thinking element to unify, to identify phenomena and name them as ‘this is x’, ‘this is y’ and so on, in which, a language may or may not be used for that. In unifying, things are seen as they are separate from one another and they occupy spatial and temporal areas in having their existences, type of thinking of which can be compared with perceiving things in a background of ‘figure- ground principle’ as put forward by Gestalt psychologists.† In addition to ‘space’ and ‘time’, other conceptual notions like ‘shapes’ ‘states’ ‘orders of arrangement’ ‘change’, ‘motion’ etc., too, are used to see things in unification, including the conceptual qualities of ‘same’ ‘similar’ and ‘different’(3.9) last group of which are used to compare and contrast them with one another. The ability to see in unification makes us first see ‘wholes’ and later ‘parts’ in them, and consider each of those ‘parts’ too as ‘wholes’ later on.

* †

Subasinghe R. (2011) Unification and Disintegration Barlow A.R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident Page 74 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 75 of 144

Such unifications seen are creations only in the thinking element, made with the expectation of fulfilling the desiresd) to exist further and to enjoy pleasures*. Bundles of matter are seen as they are separate from one another when they are seen using conceptual qualities of ‘shapes’, ‘states’ and their ‘orders of arrangement’.† Different colours show different shapes of light particles or waves. Similarities and differences are seen with them and then they are compared and contrasted along with images or symbols already in mind(1.8) as previous unifications existing only as memories. Nothing originates and ends except those seen as unifications; the ends of all of which are seen as originally through the processes of disintegration, and they end too into by dissolving in same disintegration. However, when seen in absolute truth, nothing is to be seen as unifications and nothing is to be seen as disintegration, which is the same as saying there is nothing that is created and there is nothing that can be destroyed. Activity of unification appears as working against the activities seen as ‘motion’ ‘change’ and ‘disintegration’ since unifications appear as having the characteristic of definiteness in their existences in an ‘external world’, while ‘motion’ ‘change’ and ‘disintegration’ are seen as against such definiteness. Since unifications are ignorance based, there cannot be any truth element in them; nor can the concepts of ‘change’ or ‘motion’ have any type of existence because they too are concepts existing only as thinking activities. Gravity is a unique phenomenon, uniqueness of which is seen in its ability to hold material things together, taking the word either Newtonian way or Einsteinian way. Similar to gravity, the thinking element - or the life force which is the same - is a unique phenomenon with an ability to unify phenomena and create a world of thinking out of the what is seen as continuous, ceaseless flow of disintegration. The ‘world’ is not ‘the world’ by any other ways other than seeing as unifications. These unifications are seen as existing in a spatial scale when tables, houses, etc. are seen, and in a temporal scale in an instance like ‘The table existed for three years’. ‘Seeing’ is ‘seeing’ in unification. As regards the activities of sensation, perception and cognition, we generally think two phenomena are involved in them as the ‘observer’ and the ‘observed’. However, ‘seeing’ is only ‘the observed’. There is no an observer to see. What is felt as the ‘observer’ is a feeling of the same ‘seeing’, a development of ‘pain’ that could have originated with the first cell forms of macromolecules when it is on earth, and continues in its present form as an ‘observer’. The ‘observer’ appears as a ‘person’ watching and unifying everything; seeing itself too as another unification. It feels of itself as, ‘It is this same ‘one’ who was there when ‘it’ was a child, but now ‘it’ exists as an ‘old person.’ However, when seen in absolute truth, ‘it’ cannot be ‘the same one’ (the child) that has become the ‘old one’. Only conceptual similarities have been passed to suggest it as ‘the same one’ which is seen only by the thinking element as one ‘person’ is passing through a time scale. Such ‘seeing’ of passing a ‘person’ in a time scale is a ‘seeing’ only.

* †

The 3 basic desires (θnh:); 1. desire for pleasure (k𝑎:mƏ ) 2. Desire to exist forever (bhwƏ) 3. Desire to cease the existence (wibhwƏ) areas of images (ru:pakalapa ru:pə kΛlα:pə/ ) Page 75 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 76 of 144

‘Seeing’ in unification is not done by a ‘being’, nor is the ‘seeing’ a ‘being’. Feeling of the ‘being’ in ‘seeing’ is just another manifestation in the thinking element of the unknowable matter X. It is also felt as a ‘vacuum’ or a ‘hole’ in the manifestation of the ‘material world’, because, in its existence, it is not felt as composed of matter by being composed of mass, having shapes or arranged in orderly arrangement.(2.1) Imagine a person going upward or downward in a lift in a multi-storied building, in which, he sees nothing outside the lift. At each storey, the lift stops, the door opens and closes so he sees the building structure in each of the storey which is same in shapes and same in colours. If he does not know, or has forgotten, or has ignored the fact of going upward or downward in the lift, he would see it as it is the same storey he sees each time the door opens and closes though he sees a different one each time. He has seen many storeys there, and he was never the same at any two moments of such seeing. Similar to this, a person thinks he sees one thing for sometime when he sees it in unification, whereas, uncountable and unimaginable numbers of changes have occurred at such seeing, changing them so ceaselessly, any one thing ought to be seen as never the same again. Applying this seeing to the universe, it is never the same universe again as it was at any one time in the past. Thus, it is an ignorant wish to expect the universe will be same again at its ‘Big Crunch’ When a ‘stone’ and a ‘tree’ are seen as two things, it is only because of abilities of conceptual changes within the thinking element that one sees so. Those conceptual changes do not have an existence out there. It can be compared to that, a computer works with the flow of electricity in it when you type ‘A’ ‘B’ or ‘C’ in its keyboard, without the computer playing any role in such thinking. It is only you who see those letters in unification as they are the ‘first letter’ the ‘second letter’ and so on. Similar to that, the difference you see between a ‘tree’ and a ‘stone’ is not in the nature of matter or matter x, but only you as a person sees such differences in them. The universe is seen as consisting of ‘ones’ when seen in unification, which really are not ‘ones’ or ‘manys’. The concepts of ‘ones’ or ‘manys’ too are creations only in the thinking element. Therefore, those ‘ones’ or ‘manys’ cannot be measured in a three-dimensional scale as ‘this is two feet long’ or in a time scale as ‘this is one year old’ though most of our thinking is made by such thinking. Such seeing as ‘one’ or ‘many’ or ‘one day’ or ‘one year’ are only ‘seeing’ in the thinking element. A man seen at any two moments of time as seeing in unification ought to be two men because, many seen and unseen conceptual changes have occurred in him in the two instances. Not a single molecule, atom, particle or wave of the first man seen, remains same in the second man to see him as same; and they do not have other relationships too. Same point can be applied to the changes taking place as formations of thoughts in a person’s mind too. That means, just as there are one hundred per cent different conceptual changes that have to be seen among the ‘two men’ in two instances seen in a time scale, same changes have taken place in the formations of thoughts in his mind too. However, when seeing in unification in agreed truth, we consider it as only one man existed at two points in a time scale the point of which can be applied to the one who is observing so too.

Page 76 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 77 of 144

Thinking always is an attempt to unify. The world of agreed truth is made of such unifications along with the use of logic and seeing similarities, differences and other types of conceptual qualities in them. When you unify in meditation, too, it is the same.(7.11) Since making of a world of unification done in agreed truth is ignorance based, one has to contemplate and meditate on the nature of such ignorance in order to realize the absolute truth. One may wonder, if unifications are ignorance based, and they have no relationships with an external world, how could predictions based on those ‘ignorance based’ findings become true? When a person predicts ‘The sun will rise tomorrow again’ it becomes true. The argument has to be seen with the view, prediction of sun’s reappearance and it is becoming true are not inter connected. The point the sun is as rising each day makes such a prediction to be made, need not necessarily mean it could rise all following days. Newton’s theories and Einstein’s theories related to gravity are different; nevertheless, predictions made according to Newton’s theories could still become true within limitations, which limitations are related to the use of logic. It is only within the domain of logic it is seen some predictions becoming true; although such a thing as a prediction becoming true can never occur when seen in absolute truth because, a thing is never the same, similar or different again; neither are our thinking processes same at two points in a time scale to witness phenomena as predictions becoming true.(3.12) There is no a time scale, too, for predictions to become true. A thing cannot reappear in a temporal scale to reach a temporal area called ‘future’. A question one could raise at this point by showing things around her could be, ‘If there is ‘nothing’ or ‘no one’ to represent unifications, then what are these? ‘Who is this ‘person’? If unifications do not exist, that means there is ‘nothing’ and there is ‘no one’; then there really ought to be ‘nothing’ or ‘no one’ we can think of; but the fact that we think suggests there are things to think of.’ Answers to this question have been discussed elsewhere in this book too. There are no ‘things’ or ‘persons’ because ‘things’ or ‘persons’ are only ‘seeing’ by the thinking element. Concepts such as ‘things’ or ‘persons’ cannot have an existence beyond thinking in the thinking element, because they are only created out of concepts, which also means, there is nothing beyond the domain of the thinking element. This can be seen in another perspective too as, when the thinking element decides there is ‘nothing’ and there is ‘no one’, it is ‘nothing’ or ‘no one’ to itself. Nothing can be told about the states of ‘beyond’ the experiences of thinking so. There is no need, too, to attempt to see experiences ‘beyond’ a living being because, attempts made to see so are non utilitarian expectations of ignorance, seeing from ignorant seeing. In the true realization, it could be, we cannot unify ‘the beyond’ but we may become ‘the beyond’. However, one cannot think of such ‘being the beyond’ from present ways of thinking using the language of agreed truth. To think of ‘being the beyond’ using a language, too, one has to use same expectations of ignorant thinking like desires to gain tremendous powers or to get eternal happiness, or gaining ownership of parts of or the whole universe. Questions made above can be dealt with by looking for answers to the following questions too:  ‘How far is ‘a table’ ‘a table’, or ‘ a pen’ ‘ a pen’?  ‘How far am ‘I’ , ‘I’? Page 77 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 78 of 144

A table is not a table to an animal because it does not need it for its living. A table is a ‘house’ for children who play under it. A pen may look like a snake to an animal like a cat because it wants see whether it can be eaten. Thus, meanings of the words ‘table’ or ‘pen’ are not the same to everyone. Also, the particles, atoms, molecules and bigger chunks that go to form a table change each moment, so that they cannot stay in definite states to be seen as ‘one’ existing at any two moments. We cannot hold it in our minds by giving it a name although we do so by seeing ignorantly in unification. Therefore, a table as a definite object or as a non-definite phenomenon(f) does not exist; it is only that we see so when seen in unification. So is a pen. An regards the next question, not a single cell in a body, including those in the brain are made by a person called ‘I’ or ‘me’. So are the activities in them including those in the brain; they are not made by ‘me’ so they cannot be ‘mine’. They do not evolve in a way ‘I’ made them or ‘I’ can control them. Thoughts that ‘I’ think of at anytime, too, are not ‘mine’. Therefore, the term ‘I’ denotes nothing. By the realization of the feeling of ‘I’ not having an existence, it will be dissolved as a thought form, leading to the ‘the beyond’ in the thinking element. It has been said, the element of thought, the ‘world’, the ‘dhamma’* and the state of ‘buddhahood’ are unthinkable states(q) according to buddhism. By seeing the non existence of ‘I’, seeing in unification too will cease making nothing to be seen as seeing through ignorance. 3.15

Disintegration and Unification

Disintegration is the opposite activities of unification as seen in agreed truth by the logical element of thinking, as they take place in a ‘real world’.(Fig.1.8.) What is seen as unified are always seen as they end up as disintegration. Origins and ends are seen as they ceaselessly occur, with no ‘rest’ to anything with the processes of unification and disintegration. Despite for such reality, all phenomena are seen as they rest for sometime. Some unifications like the ‘soul’ or the ‘proton’ are seen as they exist for long periods of times, some of which are believed to exist eternally. Since unifications exist only as ‘seeing’ within the thinking element, ‘rest’ from such continuous changes, too, have to be ‘seeing’ as existing within the same thinking element. When seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, disintegration itself too, is seen as a way of seeing only appearing as ‘continuous motion’ in matter. They occur as if matter makes positional changes in the three dimensions. ‘Positional changes’ seen as if in unification creates the dimension of ‘time’ too, because of seeing phenomena as, ‘happened earlier’, ‘happening at present’ and ‘will happen in future’ by using further the ability of logic.(5.1) It is when things are seen in disintegration that the ‘time’ dimension too can be seen because after unifications disappear they are seen as ‘happened earlier’ and those that take place now as ‘happening at present’, and those that could occur later as ‘will happen in future’. Seeing ‘time’ like that too is ignorance based although we think we can make predictions on what would happen in future based on what has happened in the ‘past’. A thing or event happened in ‘past’ will never recur in ‘future’, the fact of which can be seen even when seen in agreed truth. Neither can they recur in a different way too as future because definite objects, definite states or definite events are not there to see them as recurring at another area of ‘time’.

*

dhamma = laws of physics on which everything is seen as ‘exists’ and functions as seen agreed truth Page 78 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 79 of 144

Instances shown to the effect of seeing ‘sameness’, ‘similarities’ or ‘differences’ between any two phenomena show only ways of seeing using conceptual characteristics. When seen in absolute truth, no two phenomena are neither same nor similar; nor are they different; neither are they ‘one’ or ‘two’ so that even ‘disintegration’ too can be seen in them. Just as in seeing in unification, disintegration too is seen only when things are seen as having ‘sameness’, similarities’ or ‘differences’, as if they contain qualities like ‘motion’ and ‘change’. No need is there for one to be unhappy over the changes seen as ‘disintegration’ because it makes everything to disappear. Seeing of disappearances, too, is only a state of seeing. What is seen as unifications are really not there to be subject to disintegration because, unifications are only imagined. They are seen so because of the base of ignorance in the thinking element. When unifications are not to be seen, no disintegration too can be there to be seen. When seeing in absolute truth, nothing can be created by seeing in unification; nothing is lost too when things are seen in disintegration. 3.16

Ignorance in Seeing in Unification

When in its pure form, thinking element may be compared to a white board as seen in agreed truth. When areas on this board are made darker and other areas less dark in varying degrees, a picture is seen on it. Origin of our thoughts, too, is created by similar impacts made on the thinking element. Pictures thus appearing as creations in our minds do not represent anything although we feel as they represent an ‘external world’. It is ignorance that makes it seen as a ‘world’ because it is created only by the desire to fulfil the utilitarian aims emanating from karmic needs as caused by the three basic desires.* When thinking element in its purity is considered a white board, it need not be taken as the mind of a baby just born ought to have nothing except ‘purity’ in it. In fact, the ‘mind’ of a baby just born has all that an adult mind has, because, his brain contains the whole history of matter behind it just like any other thing has, and it has everything as manifestation of matter X as matter. It is only that matter in the brain of the baby begins to think to absorb other matter round it, to satisfy his desires for further existence and to enjoy pleasures. What it begins to create thus is in accordance with the mechanism within it, in which, he as a baby creates nothing new. The ability a baby has to drink milk from his mother just after he was born shows he did not learn anything from anyone, but simply displays the history behind matter and all life forms which were there with him all the time. It is ‘ignorance’ that creates a world by seeing in unification. One could wonder how ‘ignorance’ creates anything out of nothing because the term ‘ignorance’ itself, is only a concept. It is so used to suggest the world seen is a creation only, with nothing ‘out there’ to represent what it creates, although the same thinking suggests it represents a real ‘external world’. This world is formed according to karmic energies within as caused by the three desires. Since the world is created out of ignorance, then such creation is nothing. What is seen through sensation, perception and cognition create deceptions. Basis of the mechanism how this ignorance manifests is natural, but its creations are false, because the *

The 3 basic desires (θnh:); 1. desire for pleasure (k𝑎:mƏ ) 2. Desire to exist forever (bhw Ə) 3. Desire to cease the existence (wibhwƏ) Page 79 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 80 of 144

purpose of creations is only to enjoy and to exist eternally as a being, which desires have nothing to do with a state called reality. People in a bus who do not know a bomb is there in it about to explode, think they are secure by themselves. They are ignorant of the explosion that would occur. The base of ignorance in the creation of the world in the thinking element, too, is one like that. It is ignorance that makes us subject to suffer from continuous deceptions caused by seeing the disappearances of all seen as unifications. When a person suffers from sorrow at the death of a loved one, such sorrow is natural as seen in agreed truth, but if that person carries on feelings of sorrow for too long, such a person is ignorant because she hasn’t realized the nature of truth of death. Worrying over the death of a loved one even at the moment of his death shows being ignorant of ‘the way the things are’ as seen in absolute truth, provided that such death is not caused by volitional involvement of the one worries. It is ignorance that creates notions like things are seen and owned by a ‘person’ to consider them as ‘my’ mine’, which thinking is a misinterpretation. Mental state of sorrow too is caused as such misinterpretation. Ignorance is needed to exist as beings because, it is ignorance that makes them expect better things to happen which are always expected to happen at a future time. After the true realization, the need to continue with such an existence disappears. If one wants to remain in ignorance to continue existing with births, decay and death - which is the same as seeing in thinking in unifications and seeing the disintegration of them - one may do so by refusing to know and refusing to realize the true situation. Overcoming ignorance need not mean achieving a state like omniscience. It is knowing and realizing of the true nature of ignorance at work as thinking. Such knowing and realization of the true nature of ignorance makes us see ‘the way the things really are’, that makes us be content with what we are, and be happy with what we really have, which contentment makes us happy. Overcoming ignorance is the same as the overcoming of dissatisfaction with life and accepting happiness or sorrow the way they are, as nothing. It is in the environment of ignorance that dissatisfaction, discontentment and sorrow result in. Overcoming ignorance makes us be with the ‘purity’ of ‘light’ in the thinking element which is only an experience one has to gain; in which, one gains absolute relaxation as needed by any being. 3.17 Unifications and Fear(ah), Seeing through Chaos When encountered with an unknown phenomenon for the first time like an unknown object, unknown area, unknown creature or other such unknown phenomenon, feelings a person first gets might be fear, strangeness or mysteriousness towards it because, it is seen as different to what is stored within as memories as needed for the fulfilment of karmic utilitarian expectations. Not only when encountering such strange phenomena, but when encountering new states caused through the nature of disorderliness and uncertainty, too, similar feelings arise. When an unknown metal or a new basic element is discovered, it is only after those initial feelings of hostility, and after being sure that element is not threatening for existence, the person would begin to wonder how to make use of it for the benefit of him and other people.

Page 80 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 81 of 144

When dealing with those hostile feelings, some people ignorantly attribute the existence of that phenomenon as related to a superior being who resembles a being like them but having more power, so that they can have some relief from the original feelings of uneasiness caused by submitting to him. Then they make attempts to communicate with that supernatural being so that they could include it, too, in their storage of memories in fulfilling their karmic needs. It may be considered a god, an angel or a demon who can interfere with the lives of people. Such spiritual beings were seen as one God later as some communities have developed it to that extent. A changed version of the same is now seen with speculations on aliens as visitors from other planets. Some such aliens are seen as friendly, while others are seen as they have to be dominated over by having conflicts with them and overpowering them. Ethnic conflicts, too, are results of attributing similar feelings towards people of other cultures by seeing them as different, and as they possess unacceptable and strange behaviour. Desires to dominate over such communities by being offensive, or by making attempts to be protected from them to be defensive, creating hostilities with them and even by being over friendly, too, are attempts made to overcome feelings of fear, strangeness or mysteriousness towards them. One reason man sees origins and ends to himself, to mankind and to whole universe is seen in this need to give outlets to the feelings of fear, strangeness or mysteriousness caused by uncertainty and disorderliness seen with everything.(af) States of uncertainty and disorderliness cause feelings of continuous failure in the thinking being which is seen as obstructing attempts of achieving objectives emanating through desires. By seeing beginnings and ends and interrelationships among them, man creates some confidence by seeing definiteness and orderliness in his existence. By seeing such definiteness and orderliness, he gets an ignorant satisfaction although it, too, ultimately dissolves in the states of uncertainty and disorderliness. However, such satisfaction is always temporary. Man always fails in attempts of overcoming fear by creating unifications and seeing some definiteness and orderliness with them. He unifies everything as having some definiteness, for example, he thinks he owns a period in time dimension by having a birth and a death; such confidence ends in facing the fear of death. When one unification ends like that, he creates a new similar one to overcome the fear caused by it. Continuity of this is the continuity of sansara*,(y) of being born and dying in a cyclic existence. Each a thought form too has such a birth; then it lives and dies at the same time . Therefore ‘sansara’ is there all the time within the thinking element itself. Nature of ignorance in thinking in creating fear is seen in an instance when a man thinks; “The fact that ‘I’ would die some day and after that ‘I’ will have no more existence makes ‘me’ fear; the fact that the universe existed before ‘my’ birth the way it was all the time, and after my death too it will be so, cannot make ‘me’ happy.” Ignorance here is ‘I’ do not welcome the existence of the universe without ‘me’ because the universe ‘I’ see is ‘I’ centred. Since there is nothing to call ‘I’ or ‘me’, and since nothing is added or lost to the universe materially or conceptually because of ‘my’ birth or ‘my’ death, only the base of ignorance as a false thought remains in such thinking.

*

/sns𝑎:rƏ/ = being born, living and dying as a ceaseless activity Page 81 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 82 of 144

It makes us fear to think that, the universe and the life forms have disorderliness, uncertainty and unpredictability as ultimate characteristics of them because of which nothing would be same, similar or different again. No definite rule can be established to explain ‘the way the things are’ and no ‘origins’ or no ‘ends’ can be seen with anything. However, states of disorderliness, uncertainty and unpredictability, too, are seen through the same base of ignorance caused by the desires to exist and to enjoy. It is through the same disorderliness and uncertainty that creations or creativity are seen. If it is mechanical order or certainty to be seen in the universe, and predictions can be made on them that could definitely become true, then such a universe does not have a place for creation or creativity, making us feel imprisoned with the notion of the ‘person’ by which we feel the existence. However, such order and creativity seen are only creations in the thinking element seen only in agreed truth, therefore they are not related to reality. This fear man faces itself is a unification manifesting as an emotion. Man ignorantly thinks that, if he does not unify, he would be helpless in satisfying his desires ‘to enjoy the pleasures and to continue to exist eternally’ so he continues to unify out of fear. On the other hand, if he does not have such fear, he does not need to create unifications too. So he needs both fear and creations of unifications. Thus, fear and seeing in unification are seen as working in a vicious circle, one causing the other, all emanating in the desires originating through ignorance.*(Fig 3.17)

The thinking being has to see in unification because she sees that she has to leave everything she is attached with, and any thing, process, or conceptual state as she owns could disappear from *

the3 basic desires (θnh𝑎:); 1. desire for pleasure (k𝑎::mƏ ) 2. desire to exist forever (bhʍƏ) 3. desire to cease the existence (ʍibhwƏ) Page 82 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 83 of 144

her at any time. So it gives her some solace to engage in seeing things in unification; in seeing things as having definiteness and orderliness, and by seeing origins and ends existing in a time scale. Man extends the ability he has to create unifications, to create ultimate states for his existence too; so that he feels comfortable in seeing absolute definiteness in his existence. Thus, he imagines states of no change or no disappearance by creating states like ‘eternal existence’ ‘nirvana’ and ‘Heaven’. Such ‘ideal existences’ suggest new beginnings man can achieve, ignorantly hoping such states bring them joy. According to such wishes, states like ‘eternal satisfaction’ or ‘eternal joy’ are there as ultimate states that can be achieved. Present day expectations like ‘colonization of other planets or other galaxies’, ‘ideal classless societies where man has exploited matter to make use of it to the maximum’; ‘discovering and making use of other dimensions in the universe’ ‘possibilities of jumping over to other universes in parallel universes and make use of them’ etc. etc., too, show the same tendency to avoid the inevitable disorderliness, by continuing with creations of making unifications. Any one who presents a broader view than the existing ones on mankind and the universe is admired and respected because of this tendency in seeking origins and joyful ends. Philosophers and scientists too gain such places the religious leaders began to get earlier. All their findings and responses made to them by their followers originate in the emotion of fear(ah) emanating in seeing in unification; therefore, those findings and those responses too become only creations of mind. Despite for ceaseless efforts made in this regard, none of them give redemption from fear because they are based on ignorance. Unifications seen as seeing an origin and end for the universe, seeing ‘singularity’ ‘unified field’ etc. etc., all originate in the same way, out of ignorance. Base of ignorance in the thinking element creates attachments with the phenomena seen that makes an imagined being to be continuously in fear and suffer thereby, to escape from which such unifications are created further as if they have origins and ends; thus solace is sought through them. These additional creations of unifications too cause further such fear. However, the thinking being at one stage begins to use the same thinking ability to see, nothing possesses definiteness that include the notion of one’s own individuality; after which, he is redeemed of creating further unifications. Unifications are seen not only by seeing objects as if they possess length, breadth and height, but also by seeing beginnings and ends for them seen in a time scale. By seeing the true situation as the four dimensions are purely conceptual states, which also means they have no type of existence; all bondages with the shackles of four dimensions are broken and ‘the way the things is/are seen’; and relief is reached from fear by seeing in unification. Everything is continuously being scattered; everything is continuously in disintegration. There is chaos within and chaos without.(af) Creations or creativity is seen only through such chaos, just as disintegration too is seen through them. __________________________________

Chapter 4 Page 83 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 84 of 144

Life form, Consciousness and Universe 4.1 Consciousness, Conscious and Subconscious 4.1.1 Origin and Evolution Basic nature of thinking encompasses everything; it is ‘everywhere’ ‘all the time’. However, thinking at the level ‘we’ experience as seeing through desires* make a world seen with limitations, as; i. Things ‘exist’. ii. They occupy spatial areas for such existence. iii. They exist in a scale of time as seen through the ‘motion’ in them. It is because sensation, perception and cognition have their limitations the ‘world’ is seen as one of limitations. Thinking activity now seen on earth can be assumed to have begun with some macromolecules or bundles of them in the ‘primordial soup’† (Fig 4.1) beginning to get an ability to borrow ‘shapes’ of qualities or ‘bhutha’,(j)‡ (generally known as matter as explained below) from what they were in immediate contact with, to use them as replacements for what is continuously lost to them through the activities just begun to occur in them as attempts to continue with the feeling of existence, because it was felt enjoyable. The feeling of existence is the same as releasing energies in desiring to continue and to enjoy. They could have been formed of smallest particles with least mass or probably no mass in them that emanate only when some material forms are in particular orders of formations. When thinking as life forms thus appeared on earth, they began ceaseless absorptions from matter around, at the same time as shedding away ceaselessly of those that became useless in the continued attempts to exist and to enjoy. What was so absorbed as ‘shapes’ of qualities from what was around manifest to us as material as molecules, atoms, particles and waves; and they were modified and re-arranged within themselves in such absorption. Thus they managed to keep up with the feeling of existence as unique from the rest of the matter. Formations of those original macromolecules as life forms could have been in such a way, it was inevitable the origin of life form would begin in them at that particular period of time in the evolutionary process of earth. These life forms later learnt that such borrowing of qualities from around can make them spread in a bigger spatial scale and longer time scale. Thus, the original cause of life form on earth was the desire that arose in the thinking element to continue to feel as an existence and to enjoy pleasures§ seen as entailed in it, at one time in the evolution on earth.

3 desires : 1. desire to enjoy the existence 2. desire to continue with the existence 3. desire to cease - (1. ka:mƏ θnha: 2. bhʍə θnha: 3.ʍibhʍə θnha:) Origin and Development of Life Form on Earth [ Fig. 4.1 ] ‡ shapes =‘roopa kala:pa’ /ru:pə kl𝑎:pə/ created out of qualities of ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’ [/𝑎:po:/ /θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎:jo:/ /pthƏʍi/ ] § k𝑎:mƏ θnh𝑎:, bhʍə θnh 𝑎: (see related footnote above ) * †

Page 84 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 85 of 144

Qualities mentioned here are basically liquidity, heat, diffusion and hardness.* They found that continued existence and enjoyment entailed in it depended on ceaseless absorption of similar qualities from what was around and mixing them to create the required order. Although it was qualities or ‘bhu:tha’ they borrowed from around, they are seen by us in ordinary seeing as borrowing molecules, atoms, particles and waves as seen through sensation, perception and cognition. To use the ordinary language, such borrowing is ‘eating’ and ‘breathing’. The qualities or ‘bhutha’ in simple terms are ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ and ‘earth’, which words symbolise the qualities in them. ‘Water’ absorbs heat (fire) and carries things from place to place in modifying or reforming things; ‘fire’ turns anything else to itself by consuming it; ‘air’ makes things spread in spatial directions bringing changes in them accordingly and the ‘earth’ holds things together firmly making changes in them. It is with these conceptual qualities or ‘bhutha’ we deal with when we talk of the origin and the continuance of life forms, not what is seen as material manifestations as them because such material manifestations are only seen through ignorance. The manner of borrowing qualities from matter around by life forms can be illustrated with an instance of a man making a fire using two pieces of dry wood, in which, he changes the quality of hardness in dry wood into the quality of heat as fire. Similar to that, the life form acquired the ability as thinking to turn the qualities borrowed from those in touch with seen as matter, to replace them with those they lose each moment because of the attempts for existence and enjoyment; in which process, what was borrowed were modified, rearranged and tried to be kept in same orders of arrangement as those life forms were formed of. In doing so, what became useless were shed. This process made them happy because they felt they continued to expand in a spatial scale and a time scale, and they saw a universe as if centred on them. Despite for this origin and continuance, ceaseless process of disintegration evident everywhere at all times was a continuous obstacle in their attempts, making some of them to cease after some time of existence. In fact, it is the same processes seen as unification and disintegration† they were using to exist and to continue to exist by borrowing qualities from around; therefore, whatever was unified like that, had to face its ultimate disintegration too. As a development of the strategy of confronting the processes disintegration,‡ some of them acquired another ability as to exist in twos by absorbing qualities for twos at one and the same time. Two life forms thus formed extended the same ability later to make two more separately from each one of them too; thus there began many life forms as in one life form, holding onto one another to appearing as one. This activity of making copies in pairs at one and the same time is now seen as ‘cell replication’. The manner of cell replication can be compared in a way to an instance when we make many copies of a picture in a document in a computer. First when we copy and paste a picture we make two of them; then those two can be copied as one again and

1. liquidity 2, heat 3. diffusion and 4. hardness [ ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’ - /𝑎:po:/ /θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎:jo:/ /pthƏʍi/ ] see immediate previous footnotes too † Subasinghe R. (2011) Unification and Disintegration (This book deals with these two processes) ‡ Subasinghe R. (2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration(This book deals with these two processes) *

Page 85 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 86 of 144

diagram continued

Page 86 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 87 of 144

Page 87 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 88 of 144

pasted to make four of them; then those four can be copied together and pasted to make eight of them, thus we can make copies as sixteen, thirty two and so on. However, all of them still appear in one document. So, although pictures are many there; all of them together can be seen in unification as one too. Thus, life forms grew spatially, which means, not only did they get bigger spatial appearances, but they began to multiply in numbers too. Those original life forms later learned, they could not become larger as individuals beyond a limit of growth. Increase in spatial sizes beyond a limit makes them unable to make adequate motions required to continue with absorbing qualities from around. To face it, they acquired another revolutionary ability as to make very minute separate bundles within themselves containing all records required to grow new ones to appear the same as them, and releasing them later to have independent existences on their own. Thus, the joy of existence and enjoying of pleasures can now be passed as from one life form to new similar forms. This activity is now called ‘reproduction’, and such storing of records in small bundles are now seen as taking place in ‘sperms’ ‘ovums’ and ‘genes’. Later they acquired another strategy as two of them involving in one process of reproduction so that what was so reproduced contain the characteristics among all in the same species. These developments led to life forms now seen as, ‘tribes’ ‘races’ and ‘one mankind’. (Fig. 4.1 above) Original macromolecules involved in as these life forms were made of ‘bottled up matter’* as seen in agreed truth, to which we may also call ‘hard matter’, and the energy form released from them in making and decaying of those molecules was the ‘thinking’ process or the real ‘life form’. So ‘life form’ here really is the emitting stage of the processes of absorbing, modifying and emitting, not ‘hard matter’ which are the macro molecules where they originate. (See no 3. in Fig 4.1 above ) ‘Hard matter’ here is not the life form but the supporter of it. Since it is impossible for any phenomenon to be same as any other,† (3.9), what was so reproduced as copies in ‘cell replication’ and ‘reproduction’ were not really ‘same’ but ‘similar’ with their originals. So what is seen as modifying and reforming the existing situation by borrowing qualities and making new copies as ‘replication’ and ‘reproduction’ really show inability of any phenomenon to be same as any other; so that, life forms had to be satisfied by making their copies ‘nearest similar’. This made the evolution of life forms to be a process of wide variety so that, a species today will not be seen the ‘same’ after a period of time. This manner how the life form began on earth can be compared to an instance of water in a river joining the water in the sea. After joining the sea, water in the river mixes with salt and other chemicals and experiences a new type of motion too as waves. Molecules of water that come with river have to be arranged in different orders by mixing with salt and other chemicals, but it still is same water that was in the river. It is only through our purely conceptual seeing changes are seen there as, one is the river and the other is the sea. Similar to that new state of river water when in the sea is seen as unique, appearance of life forms on earth too are seen as unique. However, it is seen so only by a thinking element, with nothing special in them when seen in absolute truth.

* †

phrase picked from The Mysterious Universe - James Jeans Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] Page 88 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 89 of 144

If appearance of life forms on earth can be seen as a ‘special activity’ ‘greatest activity’, ‘supernatural activity’ ‘spiritual existence’ and so on, it is seen so only in agreed truth. When seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, such appearances, too, are the same as seeing the continuous changes through the states of unpredictability seen in all occurrences, with no speciality in any one of them. Seeing from beyond the borderline of agreed truth towards absolute truth, nothing at all would be seen as different as ‘life forms’ or the ‘thinking form’. Both ways of seeing as life form is unique, or as the same as any other motion, are only ways of seeing in an ultimate seeing, to no one of which one can say one is ‘truth’ and the other ‘false’. When matter x is seen as making appearances as material, it is in thinking only we do so. The real nature of which matter x is unperceivable, so unknowable. In the final seeing in absolute truth there has to be nothing to call ‘matter x’ too. Because of its ability in making formations from atoms or particles by absorbing, modifying, emitting and shedding them, (see illustration4.1) thinking element is seen as creating new types of matter from matter x. As Chopra points out, genes in the human body have abilities in creating particles in curing diseases or in creating diseases.* Manner of this creating matter, too, can be compared with the example given earlier; when a river has joined the sea, the new state of water came from the river and added to the sea can be seen as displaying a creative activity, at the same time as its showing only a cause and effect relationship. Since they could not reproduce ‘same ones’ but only ‘similar ones’†, reproductions as continuation of life forms began to appear similar and different at the same time with the original ones. Similarities are seen as a result of the attempts of thinking to be the same as the preceding ones, differences are the inevitable effects of the nature of uncertainty and unpredictability seen as disintegration. It is these differences that make us see a process of evolution in life forms, in which, tremendous variety is to be seen. If they produce only ‘sameness’ in their copies, there would be nothing to call ‘evolution’, and state of affairs in all biological processes would be ‘same’ all the time, state of which hasn’t become a reality. However, the thinking need to be ‘same’ as an achievable expectation retains even now because of ‘ignorance’‡ behind it. The desire to be same as now forever, can be seen now in the aims of religious teachings or future expectations of mankind seen through sociological expectations or scientific thinking. Examples are in the desires to exist eternally or existing eternally with God, colonisation of other planets or galaxies for human expansion, classless societies where nature of matter is exploited to the maximum, etc. etc. Notion of ‘God’ used in these examples can be taken as an ideal state of ‘I’ or ‘me’; thus the desire to exist together with God is the same as the desire to exist forever as same ‘I’ or ‘me’. Desire to colonise other planets show desire to keep the image of man eternally in the universe believing it as a possibility though it has to be done only by confronting the processes of disintegration. Even if any such state is achieved, still the activities of disintegration has to be confronted. Activity of cell replication that began in macromolecules may be seen as too complex for * † ‡

Chopra, D. M.D.(1990) Quantum Healing -Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] ignorance = /ʍiðy 𝑎:/ not knowing what is really happening Page 89 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 90 of 144

comprehension if they are seen closer to matter x level, but when at matter x level nothing ought to be seen because conceptual* qualities of ‘motion’ ‘mass’ ‘shapes’ ‘states’ or ‘orders of arrangement’ cannot be seen at that level.† Therefore, nothing would be seen as origin of life forms, or as ‘same’, ‘similar’ or ‘different’ when seen at matter x level, because of which, ‘existence’ at such levels have to be called ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’.‡(2.1). Such seeing nothing is seen at matter x level can be compared with an instance like; a phenomenon cannot be a ‘table’ if it does not have the properties attributed to a ‘table’. Similar to that, when properties attributed to matter as having shapes, containing mass, subject to existence in a scale of time etc. cannot be seen at matter x levels; so they cannot be called matter. Thus, in the final seeing, life forms possessing consciousness is a non–material or ‘spiritual’ manifestation as seen at matter x levels, showing the absolute nature of ‘consciousness’. 4.1.2 Consciousness Complex variations could have been developed within these life forms later on, now seen in the phenomena ‘feelings of pains’, ‘sharing of different functions by performing different roles to be parts of the organism as seen in bone cells, neuron cells’ ‘blood cells’ etc. so that all of them could function collectively to continue as one with the feeling of existence and enjoying pleasures; ‘discovery of lingual thinking’ ‘acquiring abilities to use languages’ etc. etc..(b,c,d) To all of which activities the term ‘Consciousness’ can be used. What is experienced as ‘seeing images’ ‘feeling the awareness of existence’ ‘occurrences of thoughts’ etc. etc. too belong to ‘The Consciousness’ as one term that can be used to them, by which term no one definite thing is denoted. Since the thoughts that constitute ‘consciousness’ have only conceptual existences, what is created as ‘consciousness’, too, has to be only conceptually seeing; so creations made by it as ‘the world’, too, is only conceptually seeing, all of which also suggest, the ‘world’ created by the consciousness is non existing, as seen through sensation, perception and cognition. If this point is seen as denoting a paradox, the confusion created therein can be removed by seeing the same point in two separate ways as i. by seeing in agreed truth and ii. by seeing in absolute truth.§ In those two ways of seeing, ‘consciousness’ would be seen as it is everywhere and at all times when seen in agreed truth, but it is nowhere when seen in absolute truth. It may also be stated, such manifestation of ‘consciousness’ cannot be limited only to earth or to any area in space; it has to be ‘everywhere’ and ‘all the time’ seen in a background of the ‘spaceless’ and ‘timeless’ nature of the universe and thinking. When it is witnessed through sensation, perception and cognition it is through limitations only it is done. Added to the same point, it is because of limitations in thinking abilities that the ‘consciousness’ is seen as it exists only within ‘us’ and not everywhere. To follow the Marxist view as regards a life form, ‘consciousness’ originated when certain See also ‘purely conceptual states’ Subasinghe R. (2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration Matter x = ‘non-perceivable and non-cognisable states of matter that cannot be comprehended by any attempt of using sensation, perception or cognition’. [section 2.1] ‡ ‘matter’ becomes nothing by which is made of, which means, what is seen as matter ultimately is ‘spiritual’ [section 2.1] § Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth [1.sammuthi sathya /sΛmmuθi sΛθjə/ 2. paramarthha sathya /pΛrəm𝑎:rθhə sΛθjə/ [Chapter 6] * †

Page 90 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 91 of 144

bundles of matter began to react to other bundles of matter as ‘reflection’.* To react so to any other, as we see, such bundles of matter have to think of themselves as one in unification, type of which thinking has to be ‘spiritual’ because qualities like ‘mass’ ‘state’ ‘forms’ or ‘time’ seen in material manifestations cannot be seen in them. So the ability conceived as ‘reflection’ have to be considered the same as the ability for selecting from around similar qualities as we pointed out. According to this, the original macromolecules or bundles of them as life forms had to first consider themselves as unifications, as they were unique in existence from the rest of the matter around them. The marxist view is extended later to show, the ability acquired as ‘reflection’ was later developed progressively to further states as ‘irritability’ ‘excitability’ ‘unconditional reflexes’ ‘conditional reflexes’ and the ‘psyche’ in being life forms. When it is considered the state of ‘unconditional reflexes’ is later developed to ‘conditional reflexes’, the latter activities are seen as centred on the region of cerebral cortex in the brain, in which ‘cortical thinking’ occurs. Prominent activity there is the use of logic and reasoning to express them in a language. While seeing the legitimacy of marxist thinking on the development of the consciousness as it is related to earth, it can be added, it is the ability that began as to absorb, modify and adopt to become itself using the other matter around to grow spatially and temporally; which is the original state of thinking form of humans, animals and plants on earth, same desires to do which is still being continued. If a question is asked whether plants too think because they too are included as life forms therein, the answer is, yes; cell replication in plants also is thinking. What is seen as ‘consciousness’ is an appearance as it manifests to itself, i.e., activities of thinking element manifests to itself as a ‘consciousness’. However, ‘Real Consciousness’ seen as absolute truth ought to be everywhere and all the time similar to or may be the same as the existence of ‘The ‘Real I’ as explained elsewhere in this book† (7.15-7.16), although such point cannot be seen in sensation, perception and cognition. When the ‘consciousness’ is felt, the rest of the matter is not seen as in it because it is the state of ‘ignorance’‡ that makes the rest of the matter to be seen. Both the ‘consciousness’ and the rest of the manifestations of matter are ‘timeless’, ‘mass less’, ‘space less’ matter x; reason to call them ‘timeless’, ‘mass less’, ‘space less’ is, they cannot be seen in sensory perception and cognition as what they really are. It is through sensory perception and cognition only we think of the conceptual states of ‘time’ ‘mass’ ‘shapes’ or ‘states’, as they are indispensable characteristics in the manifestation of material things. 4.1.3 Unconscious, Sub coconscious, Hidden Areas of Consciousness Freudian psychology in the previous century emphasised on the importance of ‘subconscious’ as it relates to ordinary life. The ‘subconscious’ contains memories in a hidden form which are ready to surface in given situations. How they ‘exist’ in hidden form so that they manifest at times is not evident in seeing through ordinary sensation, perception and cognition. Memories in the subconscious cannot be easily recovered and some of them may never be recovered. To adopt the Freudian view in our context, subconscious or unconscious ought to contain all repressed * † ‡

Sheptulin A.P. (1980.115-7) Marxist Leninist Philosophy (1980) Progress Publishers Moscow : ‘Real I’ as seen both in Agreed Truth and in Absolute Truth [sections 7.15 and 7.16] ignorance - avidhya: / ʍiðj𝑎::/ = the state of not knowing Page 91 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 92 of 144

karmic energies.* They have an ability to manifest whenever opportunities are there for it. The manner of such manifestation can be compared to an instance of opening a file in a computer as ‘recovering a work of past’. In such ‘recovery of past’, nothing can be found in computer components or its activities to say past is stored in them in some form so that they can be retrieved. What is happening when a person does so is only electricity passing through the computer components as they are pre-arranged, which activity is manipulated by the person according to such pre-arrangement, in which, nothing to call as ‘past’ involved with the computer, its activities or with the man. The same point can be applied to the way karmic energies manifest in which no storing area is anywhere involved in such manifestation. When past as memories in the sub-conscious are probed into, some of us may extend such probing to the beginning of births of the subjects, or early years of them, when others could extend them to experiences of other creatures existed in the historical processes of evolution. There can also be those who extend such probes to the experiences in original macromolecules when they began to be life forms in the ‘primordial soup’. (Fig. 4.1 above) Still others may extend them to previous existences of the life forms before their present life forms as they believe so. In the actual seeing as regards beginnings and ends in such probes, searches for memories in the subconscious ought to extend to infinity in past as seen in agreed truth; which also means, there cannot really be any such end that can be seen in a time scale. The ‘earliest memories’ ought to come from first cell forms and beyond them too; the search for which could extend to the original ‘atom’ that made the universe, (assuming the universe began that way); but it can extend still beyond, because the subconscious ought to contain the infinite ‘history’ of matter like anything else that contains so. This means, a search for the basis of past of memories in the sub conscious ought to extend to infinity when origins or ends are searched, which also means, there cannot be beginnings or ends in such a searches. When a division is seen in the ‘consciousness’ as the ‘conscious’ and the ‘sub conscious’ as seen in agreed truth, it is our inability in having access to all memories as ‘consciousness’ that such a division has to be thought of. The domain of memories we are aware of, think of and feel is considered the conscious whereas the domain of memories we cannot think of and feel though they make impacts on our existence unknown to us is the subconscious. However, all that seeing is when seen in agreed truth. Since no domain is there to call ‘past’ for memories to exist which point is seen in absolute truth, what is seen as the ‘subconscious’, too, has to be seen as it exists only within the present moment, although it cannot have an existence as material. One may not see ‘consciousness’ too when seeing nearer the borderline towards absolute truth, ‘Memories’, ‘thoughts’ ‘experiences’ ‘potentials’ ‘abilities’ ‘skills’ ‘intelligence’ ‘imagination’ ‘perception’ etc. etc., all are different manifestations of thinking that make us see them in the division of the ‘conscious’ and the ‘sub conscious’. However, nothing of ‘past’ is there when they go to make us see as thinking. Gestalt psychologists saw this with their view, what is to be dealt as psychology is what is experiencing only now in a person. According to Asch† it is ‘the data of immediate experience’ that has to be taken as the totality of the organism of a human Buddhist teachings mention of a hidden areas of ‘consciousness’ named ‘bhawanga’ wherein karmic energies are stored . ‘bhavanga’ = ‘bhava’ + ‘anga’(‘bhava’ =‘existence’ or ‘being’ ; ‘anga’= areas or parts) /bhʍŋɡƏ/ *

†

Asch (1970, p. 170) / Barlow Allen R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident Page 92 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 93 of 144

being. In a buddhist way of explanation, one thought moment contains everything that can be thought of as the universe, which thought moment dies just as it is born giving way to its succeeding thought moment. The whole consciousness is always in one such thought moment. The fact that the subconscious is seen as existing from infinity in the past and continue towards infinity in future need not mean a person could have the potential to recollect all or even some of them easily or even with difficulty; or, there have to be persons who could see all or many as the contents in the subconscious, except for those ‘persons’ having an ability of ‘omniscience’. There is no need, too, to explore such infinite states of the subconscious because such a search serves nothing as fulfilling the utilitarian expectations of life forms. Depending on karmic abilities, certain persons seem to have more abilities than others in recovering memories latent in the subconscious although no one can have the abilities to see all. All knowledge the DNAs contain as memories, too, can be seen as ‘our’ ‘deepest subconscious’ as seen in agreed truth. As Chopra says, DNAs have the ability to create particles required for the existence and continuation. DNAs are active all the time with this creative ability, therefore the infinite nature of the subconscious too has to be active all the time through them although one cannot be cognitively aware even of little of such abilities. An entity called ‘bhavanga’*(m) is mentioned in buddhist literature according to which, latent characteristics of life forms are there hidden in an area in the ‘consciousness’† that has the ability to pass from one state of a life form to its next one. Despite for what is so conveyed related to the nature of the subconscious, it is opposite which is seen when seen nearer the borderline towards absolute truth. The terms ‘conscious’ and the ‘subconscious’ convey nothing when seen in absolute truth.(6.7) In agreed truth, ‘consciousness’ is what appears at one ‘moment’ of thinking with the feelings of ‘I’ or ‘me’‡, or; as Gestalt psychologists§ see it, the mind of a person is what she perceives at one moment it. However, both the conscious and the subconscious convey nothing when seen in absolute truth. What is seen as at one moment of ‘consciousness’ is always similar to what is supposed to have been its immediate previous moment as seen in agreed truth; and each of such previous states of it existed as past could have had all their immediate previous states too similar to each of them. Thus, using logic, a link can be created as consisting of all previous states of mind by seeing it as extending to infinity, each of which moments containing the conscious and the subconscious. However, what is seen as such infinite history of the ‘consciousness’ occurs only within one fraction of a moment of present as thinking. It is because a vast expansion seen as ‘time’ is created through ignorance that the existence of the consciousness is seen as having an infinite past. Since such ‘vast expansion of time’ is a ‘purely conceptual’ creation, it has no type of existence ‘out there’, the conscious and the subconscious created using such thinking, too, have to be considered as they do not exist. Even when seen as within one moment as seen in agreed truth, appearance of the ‘consciousness’ need not be seen as one single entity, but containing only variety. It is in unification that the ‘bhavanga’ = ‘bhava’ + ‘anga’(‘bhava’ =‘existence’ or ‘being’ ; ‘anga’= areas or parts) /bhʍŋɡƏ/ Consciousness = /ʍiɲɲ𝑎::nƏ/ ‡ Feelings of ‘I’ or ‘me” - [Chapter 9 Subasinghe R. (2011) Unification and Disintegration ] § Explained on the previous page too * †

Page 93 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 94 of 144

‘consciousness’ is seen as one entity, like all other things seen in unification. To explain further, when activities in a human brain are looked into to search for ‘singularity’ in it, what one finds is only plurality or variety. Such variety can be seen, for example, in the division of brain activities as those of the ‘right hemisphere’ and the ‘left hemisphere’, or such areas like the ‘frontal lobe’ ‘temporal lobe’ ‘occipital lobe’ ‘parietal lobe etc. etc. each of which does its particular role as thinking activities. To add to this, the importance given to the ‘limbic system’ along with the special role played by the area called ‘amygdala’ as shown by Goleman*, too, shows the variety seen in brain activities. This variety in brain activities suggest, nothing is there to denote the feeling of unity seen as centred on an ‘I' or ‘me’ in a mind. In the final seeing, what is seen as unity in consciousness is seeing only, seeing only in agreed truth. Since it changes moment by moment as seen in agreed truth, too, one cannot trace any one thing as ‘The Consciousnesses’. It is seen as a continuous process of motion containing only variety, the basic material entity or entities that cause which motion cannot be found. What actually seen there as ‘motion’, too, cannot be recognized. Hence images like ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ and ‘earth’† are used in showing, it is through a complex mixture of them the consciousness or the ‘world’ is felt. When seen as a process only, too, it cannot be seen as having any material existence. Neither can it have a ‘non-material existence’, because when nothing is there to call ‘material’, there cannot be anything to call ‘non-material’ too. Same is seen when looking into the nature of ‘subconscious’ too; one cannot find any one definite state to call it the ‘subconscious’ too. A person's attempt to recover what is in the subconscious as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth is similar to a person going to a kitchen and doing some cooking using food and utensils brought previously, and states he recovers memories of past when he does so because he thinks it is with the food and utensils appeared in the past that he is involved with as at present. However, what such a person does in such an instance is not recovering past, but dealing only with present forms of matter, the past of which is only a term; therefore those what is seen as ‘past forms’ really denote nothing. ‘Previous forms’ of manifestations have no existence now to call them even as ‘previous’, although we think and imagine there are such states to call them ‘previous’. Therefore, when memories are thought of as recovered from sub conscious, nothing really is recovered there as from past; only the nature of matter x manifests at such times as our manifestations of the complexities created out of the qualities of ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ and ‘earth’. Matter x that manifests to us as consciousness does not have ‘mass’, ‘space’ or ‘time’; not even ‘motion’; because ‘motion’, too, is only ‘seeing’ ‘things’ making ‘us’ see as if they cause changes in relation to one another. ‘Motion’ makes us see phenomena as they occur in spatial positions, which ‘spatial positions’, too, are only imaginary. When a baby is born, his mind has to be blank with thought forms as we think so in agreed truth; so we think it has to be filled with experiences to make him a man. According to a prevalent view, a part of a person’s mind shows hereditary characteristics and the rest is formed on sense data gained from the environment. Such an attitude of seeing in a division of ‘heredity’ and *

Goleman D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence (1996) Bantam books bhu:tha [/bhu:θə /] those qualities that go to make the manifestations of matter = liquidity /α:po:/(water), heat /θe:ɡo:/ (heat), diffusion /ʍ𝑎:jo:/(air) and solidity /pthəʍi/ (earth) †

Page 94 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 95 of 144

‘environment’ is based on the ignorant assumption, a person is what he or she has brought from a domain called past and what he or she receives from the environment as at present. However, a baby has all he has brought at the conception itself taken place in a womb, the point of which can be seen even in agreed truth. What is seen as growing is the re-manifestation of knowledge and experiences of memories contained in the infinite nature of matter X that went to make him, in which activity, nothing new is added as his growth. Just as a baby is born, she gets the ability to suck milk from his mother which ability has an infinite existence containing in matter X. In the same way, she learns nothing new from a new environment when she is growing. When a baby recognizes her mother it is not a new experience to her, but what is already in her. It is only that we see as if she gains a new experience there. When a child grows, it is not that she is acquiring information or absorbing knowledge and experience from around, but exhibiting herself what is already with her. What is seen as learning new things by new environments is seeing only in agreed truth. It is not that a jak seed has the potential to be a jak tree, but the jak seed is both the seed and the tree. (the object+ its potential = the object) It is only because the manifestation of the jak tree is not there in the jak seed we do not call a jak seed a jak tree, which shows the ‘ignorance’ * in our seeing- the ‘ignorance’ in seeing in agreed truth. Whether it is in the jak seed or with a baby, or even with a stone or a river, it is infinite history of present and infinite future we see, as they are in one moment, not what is generally seen as growing or acquiring anything, or staying the processes of anything. The infinite consciousness exists in them all the time as we see so when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. 4.2 Intelligence ‘Intelligence’ is displaying of thinking abilities proportionate to the levels of karmic abilities, expressed conspicuously in cortical thinking when it is with human beings. It manifests as energies caused by the utilitarian expectations of the desires to exist and to enjoy pleasures†. It is the same ability of thinking that began originally in macromolecules in the ‘primordial soup’(4.1) which is seen as ‘intelligence’ now when it is on earth in varying proportions among various organisms, when they manifest as species and as individuals in them. ‘Particles’ and ‘matter’ are our manifestations of ‘shapes’ and ‘states’ appearing as they are constituents in bundles of matter, and they are seen as arranged in particular orders to make their particular appearances. However, they exist only as thought forms in our minds though ‘we’ ‘think’ they are matter existing externally and appearing as manifestations of matter x. They are seen as different from one another according to particular situations and particular backgrounds in the thinking element. In a given situation, matter x appears in the shape of an electron, while in another situation it appears in the shape of a proton. It is the ‘desire to exist’ and ‘desire to enjoy’ that make us see them as different. The abilities of the thinking element to see phenomena as they are different to from one another, they perform different roles in different situations with different types of motions in them, are caused by karmic utilitarian expectations, the abilities of which are called ‘intelligence’. * †

ignorance - avidhy 𝑎: / ʍiðj 𝑎:/ 1.ka:ma: thanha; 2.bhava thanha: /k𝑎:mƏ θnh 𝑎:/ / bhʍə θnh 𝑎:/ Page 95 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 96 of 144

Complexities are seen as involved with ‘intelligence’ in the ordinary understanding of it. Bono* identifies abilities of thinking as ‘strategic thinking’, ‘sequential thinking’ and ‘insight thinking’ and, in a different context, ‘lateral thinking’; showing different thinking abilities are there to consider under ‘intelligence’. These divisions in thinking abilities make us identify no one single ability there to call it ‘the intelligence’, but only variety is seen in it too. Many types of intelligences are now under discussion as ‘emotional intelligence’ ‘intuitive intelligence’ ‘physical intelligence’, and so on.† Golemen‡ gives prominence to ‘Emotional Intelligence’. Chopra§ defines ‘intelligence’ as ‘know how’. The expression ‘cortical thinking’ suggests the thinking activity appearing as ‘lingual intelligence’ that involves the use of logic with reasoning and abilities to express them in a language. Thus ‘Cortical Intelligence’ rationalizes and expresses those rationalized thoughts in a language. At times it occurs as ‘internal monologue’**, which activity writers like James Joyce used to develop a writing technique as ‘stream of consciousness’ used to express the thoughts of the characters in fiction. Such lingual thinking, too, is used only to achieve utilitarian karmic expectations. Some of us tend to use only this ‘lingual intelligence’ which is displayed in their over emphasising on slogans as the only thinking that expresses intelligence, thus their thinking deviates from reality by ignoring the impacts of emotions and primordial thinking element. Their thinking is the same as ‘slogan thinking’†† Edward de Bono refers to. Goleman points out the importance of emotions as thinking along with the impacts of primordial thinking which is behind all intelligence. ‘Slogan thinkers’ create slogans and repeat them using logic to see interrelationships among them, in which they deviate from reality as it was very much evident in Sri Lankan politics for more than a century. Such thinking has only created deviant views to dominate the political scene in Sri Lanka. Bono refers to a practice of thinking as ‘adversarial thinking’ by which he means arriving at conclusions in debates by two teams by agreeing to to extreme views on one point He calls it harmful. ‘Slogan thinking’ can also be called ‘fossilised thinking’ because they play with thoughts that appear as inactive or ‘fossilised’, so that they cannot be fitted to existing reality. Animals, too, seems to have some cortical intelligence coming probably from the memories contained in their DNA molecules, though the use of language is not very obvious with them. According to Chopra, intelligence is active at quantum levels in a DNA molecule (1990.102)‡‡ according to which, the whole physical body is a creation of intelligence, displaying an ability to create particles for its existence and continuance, sometimes causing abnormal conditions too by creating ‘distorted thoughts’. Matter X is infinite in the sense it has neither a beginning nor an end because it cannot be seen in a time scale. For the same reason it cannot be seen as in a present moment too, because no time scale is there for a ‘present moment’ to exist. Matter x is timeless just like the universe is * Bono Edward De (1968.9) The Five Day Course in Thinking Allen Lane The Penguin Press, London † Postle Denis (1989.69,71,75) The Mind Gymnasium Macmillan London Ltd. And Papermac ‡ Goleman Daniel (1996) Emotional Intelligence Allen Lane The Penguin Press, London § Chopra Deepak M.D. (1990) Quantum Healing --Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine (1990) Bantam Books ** monologues or dialogues taking place only within the mind, in which, no words are uttered from mouth. †† Bono Edward De (19-----) Teach Thinking ----------‡‡ Chopra Deepak M.D. (1990,102) Quantum Healing --Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine (1990) Bantam Books Page 96 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 97 of 144

timeless, because time concept cannot be applied both to matter, matter x(5.1), including the universe too as matter when taken it as one whole. The same way ‘Time’ concept cannot be applied to the nature of intelligence too, because it arises from levels of seeing matter x like anything else seen. The term ‘intelligence’ is used here is in accordance with the utilitarian purposes of thinking with limitations evident in it; however, ‘intelligence’ ought to be there ‘all the time’ and everywhere as matter, the point of which can be seen even in agreed truth. Let is imagine an instance, one of our ancestors seeing some dry pieces of wood and dry leaves at a time he has the need to create fire. He knows already, when hard, dry things are made to brush past one against the other with some effort, they produce heat, and imagines that the heat produced thus could become fire when it is done with a stronger effort by taking more time. Accordingly, he makes those pieces of wood brush past one another and creates fire as he hypothesised, converting the quality of hardness thus into the quality of fire.* The person has not only identified the objects required using intelligence, but also saw complex relationships with the nature of them so that he could use them in the fulfilment of some of his utilitarian needs. Such intelligence manifests differently in different environments so that no one definite activity can be identified as the intelligence. Imagine a group of people not known to one another go to a new area to settle down, and they have to live there thereafter. They are guided by no one as to how they ought to behave, so they are free to live the ways they like without being bound by rules. After sometime of such settlement, instances could be seen like one of them who had not shown leadership skills previously performing as a leader. Some who were leaders previously doing menial jobs under others. Some may have acquired new types of wisdom to guide others. An active extrovert may be performing in a passive role of an introvert. Similarly, others too engaged in diverse roles they haven’t done previously. These changes in the people would show, intelligence manifests depending on environments, in which, no one definite entity is there to call intelligence. In other words, x, who could be anybody, can become anyone depending on the background. Similar to that, matter x, that has no divisions or conceptual qualities attributed to matter like ‘having mass’, ‘occupying space or time’, manifests differently as ‘intelligence’ in different situations and different environments. Intelligence is what is seen as ‘know-how’ to adapt to different situations, which ‘know-how’ is everywhere and all the time when seen in absolute truth. It is a manifestation of matter x as being a timeless, space less mass less existence as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. Intelligence is involved with infinity because it contains the quality of infinity in itself. The term ‘infinity’ here denotes ‘timelessness’ as seen in absolute truth; not that there is ‘time’ and that ‘time’ exists as a dimension without a beginning or an end. In the absence of ‘time’, ‘intelligence’ can have no ‘beginnings’ nor ‘ends’; thus it can be seen as an immortal state because, to see things as mortal, they have to be seen through the conceptual state of ‘time’. Such infinite intelligence can create ‘anything’ because state of infinity is there enabling anything to occur in it. When it is said it ‘creates anything’, it need not be taken as someone is somewhere using ‘intelligence’ to ‘create anything’, although the verb ‘create’ there suggests a * 4 basic qualities: 1. liquidity 2, heat 3. diffusion and 4. hardness [ ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’ - /𝑎:po:/ /θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎jo:/ /pthƏʍi/] Page 97 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 98 of 144

‘person’ has to be behind if it is a creation. The grammar rule the transitive verb ‘create’ has to be used with a doer for that has to be ignored in this context. ‘Intelligence’ as we see it originates with the thinking ability seeing forms of matter as changing into other forms of matter as ‘creating’ ‘phenomena’. In such seeing, infinite possibilities, and infinite probabilities* are seen as emanating through matter x. Such possibilities and probabilities are seen because, the nature of existence of matter x is timeless and limitless, because of which, anything could occur at a next moment against what is witnessed now. In such appearances of intelligence, use of logic and reasoning and language are only secondary expressions of seeing. The abilities of ‘intelligence’ appear without a ‘person’ or ‘persons’ involved in it. In such seeing, it is always possible to see anything as that could happen, and it is always probable anything could be seen as reappearing.† Possibility to happen anything is there because, it is possible anything could happen when matter x is seen as turning one thing to another all the time without affected by pre-determined conditions because of the nature of unpredictability seen from levels of matter x. Probability for anything to happen is there because, infinite number of things happens in the timeless, uncertain, unpredictable, disorderly states of the universe as seen in agreed truth. Such infinite probabilities could occur when seen in agreed truth while infinite possibilities can be seen when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. Anything is possible to happen and anything is probable to happen in a timeless situation, when seen in agreed truth, because there is seemingly ever-present non-ending ‘motion’ and ample ‘time’ in a timeless background for anything to happen, which happenings are seen by intelligence as creativity occurring everywhere and all times. Therefore, state of intelligence can be called ‘infinite intelligence’ as seen in agreed truth. These views on intelligence are made when they are seen in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth, however, there is nothing to call ‘intelligence’. 4.3 Infinite Intelligence Nature of intelligence can be discussed further basing on three expressions used in ordinary usage:   

* †

Supreme Intelligence = connotes intelligence is superior and it is separate from universe or matter although it exists along with them. Cosmic Consciousness = suggests intelligence is superior enveloping whole universe, but keeping an existence above it; and it is separate from matter. Infinite Intelligence = suggests it is intelligence as thinking that creates manifestations of matter seen as arising from incomprehensible levels of matter x. Nature of matter x gives it the quality of infinity because of its timeless existence and its possessing no material qualities by having ‘states’, ‘shapes’ ‘orders’ ‘time’ and ‘mass’ as they are seen in agreed truth.

possibility= it is possible any unexpected thing could occur: probability= any hypothetically or theoretically expected thing could occur possibility = it is possible any unexpected thing could occur: probability = any theoretically or hypothetically expected thing could occur Page 98 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 99 of 144

According to these expressions and their connotations, the first one may not be accepted because it makes us imagine the ‘existence’ of phenomena as above matter, matter x or the universe. To call anything ‘supreme’, there has to be a Supreme Being or many Supreme Beings or a Supreme Element above matter or matter x to determine so; or, man ought to consider himself as superior in having an ability to judge certain states as ‘supreme’. Second expression ‘Cosmic Consciousness’ suggests ‘consciousness’ as having the quality of superiority over matter or matter x or universe which quality does not manifest in them. Richard M. Bucke deals with this expression as the theme in his book Cosmic Consciousness, according to which, Cosmic Consciousness is a ‘higher state’ of living beings that appears with spiritually advanced people with strong intelligence, morality and physique.* It does not suggest there has to be a Supreme Being behind such intelligence. If it is suggested there has to be a Superior Element which is above matter or matter x so that the consciousness it possesses can be called ‘cosmic’, such suggestion denotes a belief or a ‘faith’ having nothing in it to do with knowing and realization phenomena. To think of such a possibility itself, too, there has to be a Supreme Element as thought form, or there have to be one or many Supreme Beings; or man has to consider he has an inherent ability to determine states which are supreme. Except as creations within the thinking activity itself, one cannot see such possibilities for existence of superior Elements or Beings; or think of oneself as having an ability to determine her intelligence as supreme. This need not mean intelligence has to be considered inferior too. Since both the first and second expressions ‘Supreme Intelligence’ and ‘Cosmic Consciousness’ denote a view of superiority of ‘consciousness’ over matter, they may be considered unacceptable. The third expression ‘infinite intelligence’ can be considered somewhat acceptable because it shows the nature of ‘intelligence’ as a manifestation of the same matter x. Since such nature of matter x has an infinite existence seen in a timeless background, so is the manifestation of such intelligence too; it ought to be infinite in nature. The thinking element with its potential of being everywhere and having a timeless existence itself is the ‘infinite intelligence’. It is an ability having a conceptual existence only, rather than having material characteristics in itself. So, it is boundless, timeless and space less, because matter x that goes to form brain cells and all other cells out of which the thinking element manifests also are boundless, timeless and spaceless, so, in being timeless, it extends to infinity. Its infinite nature makes it to appear or disappear (to reappear) as ‘our’ manifestations at any ‘time’ without its being originating or disappearing in a time scale, which also means; it neither is born, nor does it die;(l) so it is subject to a deathless state†. One may feel to ask about this nature of ‘Infinite Intelligence’, ‘Is it like God?’ The terms ‘God’, ‘Buddhahood’, ‘Cosmic Consciousness’ ‘arhathhood’, all convey they have some relationships with ‘infinite intelligence’, but the attributes of ‘Personal Nature’ ‘Personal Love’ ‘Dominance over man and animals’ ‘Personal Kindness’ ‘Personal Attachments’ attributed to a God may not be seen with this ‘infinite intelligence’. If ‘infinite intelligence’ is a ‘Person’, or possessed or * †

- Marrs, Texe (1988.125) Dark Secrets of the New Age Crossway Books - Bucke, Richard M. (1901) Cosmic Consciousness NewYork: E.P. Dutton ajara, amara (no decaying, no death) /gərə/ /mərə/ Page 99 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 100 of 144

dominated by a ‘Person’, we ought to be able to communicate with it as a ‘Being’ separate from the rest of the phenomena. However, nature of infinite intelligence and the characteristics attributed to it cannot be seen as possessed by such one ‘Person’ or many‘persons’. This also means, existence of ‘infinite intelligence’ can only be logically guessed as it is done here; although such logical guessing is a weak mode of knowing anything. However, there is the possibility it can be witnessed as an experience gained in a state like meditation. The five senses cannot witness it, but it is everywhere; it manifests everywhere, feeling of which can be felt by being detached with what we are attached to through the desires for existence and to enjoy pleasures*. However, not all can feel the nature of intelligence with their states of thinking abilities because the thinking element as we generally possess are limited by karmic abilities and they are inadequate to see or to feel beyond a limit. The animals too have some intelligence, but it is limited according to their karmic manifestations; so they are not aware of their proportion of intelligence. 4.4 Mind seen in Unification Divisions in mental phenomena are explained in Freudian Psychology in such terms as, ‘the Conscious’ ‘the Subconscious’ ‘id’ ‘ego’ ‘super ego’ ‘libido’ ‘the death instinct’ and so on. Gestalt psychologists consider all mental phenomena as one single entity, in which, parts taken and analysed separately are inadequate.† As regards ‘the whole’ of a human being, gestalt psychologists end up in expressions like the ‘immediate experience’ of now‡ of a person. (3.10) So are humanistic psychologists; they saw something more than the totality in a human being, the ultimate need of which human being is to be a ‘self actualizer’. Goleman§ mentions of ‘Emotional Intelligence’ ‘Cortical thinking’ and manifestation of primordial states of mind when discussing the domains of mind. Postle** sees divisions of intelligence as ‘Emotional Intelligence’ ‘Physical Intelligence’ ‘Intuitive intelligence’ ‘Intellectual Intelligence’ and so on. In buddhism, in addition to describing ‘the mind’ as thought processes which are subject to instant births, decay and deaths,††(l) an area of mind consisting of thoughts displaying the experiences of ‘previous existences’, too, is mentioned as ‘bhavanga’(m), existing within the same thinking process; thoughts arising in which, too, are born, decay and die instantly. This also means that, a ‘mind’ seen at any one moment would never reappear to call it the same again. It transpires from this point, at the same time as the ‘mind’ is not one definite entity to call it anything, nature of intelligence witnesses it by staying out of it. As William James has thought, consciousness is only a process‡‡ which, too, suggests, it is a process only, so that there can be nothing to call ‘material’ there. Attempts made to see the mind in divisions or as one process or many processes would show, it is not one definite entity, nor does it contain multitudes of definite entities, but we only see it as one entity because of seeing in unification. The views of the gestalt or ‘humanistic’ ka:ma: thanha; bhava thanha: /k𝑎:mƏ θnh𝑎:/ / bhʍə θnh𝑎:/ The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’ [section 3.10 ] Barlow A.R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident § Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence Allen Lane The Penguin Press, London ** Postle, D. (1989) The Mind Gymnasium Macmillan London Ltd. And Papermac †† A thought moment has three stages of ‘life: 1.‘birth’ 2. decay 3. death (udaya, vya, bhanga) (/uðƏjƏ/ /ʍyƏ//bhŋgƏ/) ‡‡ Crick, F. and Christof Koch (2004) The Problem of Consciousness * † ‡

Page 100 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 101 of 144

psychologists mentioned above show such attempts to see in unification. However, nothing more can be there in a ‘whole’ in addition to the totality of ‘parts’ in it, as we have stated previously(3.11), so, no one thing can be seen as ‘The Mind’ in addition to its parts. ‘Parts’ thus seen in agreed truth, too, become nothing when their parts too are analysed into by taking them separately, continuation of which will lead to see the absolute truth of nothing to see as a final seeing. Thus no unity is seen in mind when seen in absolute truth, which means, one person could behave in different ways at different times. Seeing unity in mind or man is seeing a myth, although it is how everyone sees in agreed truth. A state of disordered mind, too, is seeing only when seen in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth the term ‘mind’, has no meaning because it does not consist of a definite state; it does not have definite shapes or definite orders of arrangement because of which we cannot say ‘it exists’ even. Nothing definite is there to identify as The Mind. This need not be understood as there is ‘mind’ but it has no definite existence, but there is nothing as material or non material to identify as ‘mind’ as seen in a final seeing. Then, to the natural question one would ask, ‘What do we talk of when we think of or talk of as ‘the mind’?’, the answer is, there is something seen as the ‘mind’ when seen in agreed truth, but there really is nothing to call one like that as seen an absolute truth. 4.5 Cosmos seen in Unification Qualities that go to make matter and man according to buddhist literature based on then Indian thinking were known as ‘bhu:tha’* which are liquidity, heat, diffusion and hardness. Two other qualities too have been sometimes mentioned as qualities of space and consciousness.(j) It is when these ‘qualities’ are a mixture in fusion that we see a world which is not a world of matter although we agree to call it so. The world does not consist of things having ‘shapes’ ‘states’ and their ‘orders of arrangements’, and possessing consecutive moments of time as seen in a scale of time. A human body seen as made of ‘matter’ really is the arrangement of these qualities seen as if they are arranged in some order, like everything else seen as material too. From Aristotle, Plato, Democrates in ancient Greece, to Heisenberg, Einstein and Hawking in modern Europe, there had been so much effort to unify the universe by studying the smallest levels as atoms or particles by which bigger entities are believed to have structured to make the universe appear. Such entities which are thought of as they go to make the universe is also considered it exists using the four dimensions ‘lengths’, ‘breadths’ ‘heights’ and a scale of ‘time’. The accepted view now is, the biggest level in this universe began with the ‘Big Bang’ and it would one day end in the ‘Big Crunch’ as it is seen in the time scale. From one of a first ‘theory’ of a tortoise holding the earth on its back, (Hawking considers such a view as having the characteristics of a theory)†, up to a kind of ‘strings’ producing particles have been presented throughout these attempts of seeing the universe in unification‡.(3.14) Cosmologists search for such states like ‘the unified field’, ‘singularity (in the universe)’ ‘singularity (in a black hole)’ ‘Big Bang as the beginning of universe (singularity originated)’ ‘universe becoming one black hole’ etc. etc. in their attempts to see the universe in unification. Even the conceptual * † ‡

4 basic qualities:1. liquidity 2. heat 3. diffusion and 4. hardness (‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’) /a:po://θe:go:/ /ʍa:jo://pthƏʍi/ Hawking S, (1988) A Brief History of Time Bantam Books ‘Seeing in unification’[section 3.14] - Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R. (2011) Page 101 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 102 of 144

state of ‘time’ has been unified as having a beginning and an end. Almost all these attempts of unifying made in the past had to be modified later on, showing uncertainty, disorderliness and changes affect all such findings so that no one statement made on the nature of universe at any one time in the past or at present can be considered a definite statement as valid for all times. Man expects to see an end to his search by discovering the basic entity by which everything ought to manifest. However, that attempt is made through ignorance* originating in submitting to desires to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures. Despite for the fact the universe changes ‘moment by moment’ leaving nothing to be seen as re-manifesting the same way, a similar way or even a different way† - because these three ways of seeing are seeing only - we think there ought to be one basic entity or such other phenomenon by which everything manifests to us; upon which basic entity or phenomenon only everything is built on. If anything is there that went to form the universe, they are the qualities mentioned as ‘bhutha’‡ which are conceptual qualities existing only as thinking without their having a material background for them. However, the universe seen as a mixture of qualities or ‘bhu:tha’(j) itself, too, is seen in agreed truth of ignorance, as a last seeing seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. Even if it is to assume a basic entity is there by which the universe is made of, limitations in karmic abilities in seeing through sensation, perception and cognition and compared with the timeless infinities in the universe as seen in agreed truth, cannot make us discover it. Hawking mentions creating some humour too, Nobel prizes are continuously being awarded to people for discovering the universe is not that simple.§ If a person thinks of the possibilities of discovering all smallest states of matter and all laws governing them, such thinking is not second to the belief God knowing everything and God doing everything. Both the smallest possible material element(s) and the concept of God remain only as unverifiable beliefs. When feeling helpless in the search for seeing the universe in unification, even scientists tend to cling to a belief like a Creator God, probably being influenced by thinking habits coming from their ‘past’ rather than because they find it a reasonable explanation. Following statements can be presented to illustrate this point, first one of which from Albert Einstein is taken from a Readers’ Digest magazine and the other two from ‘A Brief History of Time’ by Hawking; showing the tendency to turn to a ‘Personal God’ even by scientists when feeling helpless in probing ultimate realities : ‘God is subtle; He is not malicious’ - Einstein ‘God does not play dice’ - Einstein ‘God abhors naked singularity’

Cosmologists ought to have looked into the nature of the thinking element itself by which they came to decisions before laws or theories were established on the ultimate realities. Biggest obstacle one faces when establishing valid laws or theories for all times is, the thinking element itself, including the physical body on which it manifests, does not have any definiteness by *

ignorance - avidhya: /ʍiðj𝑎:/ Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9] 4 basic qualities: 1. liquidity 2, heat 3. diffusion and 4. solidity (‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’) /𝑎:po://θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎:jo://pthƏʍi/ § Hawking S. (1986) A Brief History of Time - Bantam Books † ‡

Page 102 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 103 of 144

having a definite existence that would last even for a nanosecond. In such a background definite theories or laws may not be established. After the appearance of life forms on earth, our solar system has not gone even one circle round the centre of its galaxy as we see so by seeing in agreed truth. We do not know how many such rounds it can go before the earth or the galaxy itself dissolves into some other phenomenon. We do not know what type of changes or how many changes would there be in the universe during that period. Compared with such phenomena at such macrocosmic levels, existence of the thinking element as life forms on earth appears as nothing to itself. No valid judgement can be made on the nature of universe from such minute and negligible states of existence of thinking as human beings have it. In this background of insignificance in our existence, one of the following two approaches can be taken towards the existence of the universe: i. It is ‘we’ who create universe as done through conceptual seeing. It is only this conceptual universe we know of. ‘We’ create it because ‘we’ think ‘we’ enjoy our existence, and we can continue to enjoy so through further such creation; which activity can be compared to water flowing in a river that (let’s assume so) ‘thinks’ it ‘wants to’ flow until it reaches the sea. Similar to that ‘flow’ of water having such a purpose of reaching the sea as assumed, we see a conceptual universe for the purpose of satisfying our desires. However, we cannot cease such satisfying desires because we do not like to end up in it unlike the water in the river that ends at reaching the sea. After reaching the sea, the water in the sea has nothing to do with the river. Similarly, the universe appears as it exists for each one of us, but it would end as nothing at the end of each one of us. The ‘universes’ there exist only in our minds as conceptual creations and they ought to cease after our disappearances. Thus the universe appears only for the utilitarian purposes of desires to exist and to enjoy pleasures, which really are not universes representing a state called ‘reality’. When the terms ‘we’ or ‘us’ are used in this instance, they need not suggest they are ‘persons’ or ‘beings’ but as states of thinking forms as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. We cannot guess what could be seen as ‘I’ or ‘we’ when seeing from beyond that borderline of thinking because nothing denotes meanings at such levels. So such a universe seen is finally not there as we realize so when seen in absolute truth.

ii. Even if it is considered the universe really exists, nothing definite can be established on it because of uncertainty and disorderliness seen through constant chaos in it creating only conceptual awarenesses of the ‘phenomena’ that we cannot really know of. Nothing can be stated about the universe because of our inability to arrest the phenomena in our minds even for one moment of their ‘existence’, although we think we do so. It is because the abilities of sensation, perception and cognition as karmic abilities have their limitations in seeing. Even what is considered as seen through such limitations cannot be based on what really exists because they are caused out of ignorance by the three desires. So even if the Page 103 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 104 of 144

universe does exist in definite or non-definite states, there is no way to know of it. No fundamental entity as ‘the basic entity’, can be found in such seeing. Religions based on ancient Judaic thinking consider the beginning as the God’s Creation and the end in an event like the ‘Armageddon’ or ‘The Dooms day’. Such an end thus, is a beginning of something later to appear on too. Hinduism too contains similar teachings of creation and destruction by Superior Being(s). Such ‘seeing’ are results of the tendency to see the universe in unification; to see it as having a definite status with definite beginnings and definite ends, containing qualities like orders, beauty, truth, justice and a place for man, because of which, we expect to realise our hopes of continuing our existences by enjoying it as much time as possible. In such seeing the universe, it is seen as having attractive creations, hidden mysteries, revelations of which mysteries appear like activities of pastime presented to the beings by one or many Superior Beings. The more the mysteries are resolved, the more the abilities we get to exist better; then the happier and the stronger we become. Even if it is to assume such mysteries are there and they will be revealed one after other, thinking beings cannot have ultimate satisfactions by witnessing them, because of which they continue to create further such wishes until some day some of them realize futility of trying to get satisfactions like that. Instead of saying God created everything, and by attributing feelings of ‘fear’ ‘love’ or ‘mysteriousness’ towards Him who exists as a ‘Person’ external to ‘me’ or ‘us’, scientists unify by trying to discover undiscovered ultimate truths, and present them as having definiteness in being valid. They think such definiteness can be applied to their thinking abilities themselves. Instead of thinking of an Omnipotent, All Merciful Love of a Creator, sociologists think of societies where all could be equal and love one another, taking concepts of ‘love’ and ‘equality’ as the basis of thinking. The philosopher Karl Marx proposed a society where no higher and lower class divisions are there or no exploitation of man by man. His adopts the qualities of ‘all mercifulness’ and ‘all love’ attributed previously to a Creator as if acquired now by man for himself. So are humanistic psychologists who consider mankind as inherently good, and there is more in humankind than the totality of its parts.(3.11) The more in the totality of a man is seen by them in the realization of the need to be a self actualizer. One could rightly ask, ‘What’s wrong in unifying? It is the same as thinking.’ If the nature of unification is to be explained again,(3..14) ‘it is the activity in the thinking element arising out of its desires to enjoy the pleasures and further existence’.(b,c,d) If not for those desires, the thinking ability the way it is with us, does not arise. When this is realized with the realization no ‘I’ or ‘we’ are there as ‘doers’ to do such thinking, indulging in such ‘seeing in unification’ would cease, and ‘the way the things are’*(g) will be felt the way they really could be. It need not suggest the ideal existence is to reject thinking and to live without unifying. When it is realized there is no one to think of, that also means there is no one to reject too. The thinking process of creating unifications continues even after the realization it is ‘ignorance’ that causes it, although the attitude taken towards such continuance is in opposite direction.† after * †

‘thathagatha’ = ‘the way the things are’ (thathha = reality, truth: ‘gatha’- on the way). This is a word The Buddha used to denote himself /θθh𝑎:gƏθƏ/ Ethical Values seen after the Realization of Absolute Truth [section 4.12] Page 104 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 105 of 144

such realisation. Thinking that could occur after such realization may be in a stream of thoughts like, ‘If things happen the way they are, let them happen the way they are; there’s no one to accept them or to reject them’. In such thinking no one is seen as to value things or events as ‘superior’ ‘inferior’, ‘true’ ‘false’, ‘existing’ ‘non-existing’ etc. etc., therefore, when one is occupied with thinking even after the realization of absolute truth, she does not think some one is ‘out there’ to suggest her to do so. Seeing ‘orderliness’ in the universe, too, is a result of seeing in unification. If not as an expectation in the thinking element, there cannot be any orderliness in the ‘external world’. Even if there is a God, why should He create things orderly? Why should not ‘disorderliness’, too, be considered ‘the way the things are’? Beauty can be seen in disorderly happenings just as disasters too are seen with them. Man’s seemingly transcending brainpower over matter, his increase in numbers, his seemingly having power over nature that made him successfully dominate over all animals and plants, may have arisen by chances caused through disorderliness rather than through an orderly creation. Creation of a new world in which the Europeans began to dominate the scene from about the sixteenth century can be a stage created out of disorderliness, to which, causes like demand for spices and other goods from south Asia, and the spread of Islam could be only secondary causes. Even if it is to accept a God has created the universe, that God could have done so with uncertainty and disorderliness as qualities in it. ‘Evolution’ taking place through ‘disorderliness’ and ‘uncertainty’ can be seen through origins and developments of languages too. A prominent person in a human group accidentally utters some vocal sounds as symbols to denote an object. Others in that human group, too, later on begin to use same vocal symbols to denote the same object, because they were influenced by that person. After sometime those vocal symbols will be established as a common word in their language to denote that object. What that prominent person has accidentally uttered became the norm or order of the language they used later on. All rules of grammar and other devices used in languages, it can be presumed, have such accidental beginnings; they do not fall into orderly predetermined structures, organizing or planning. When a human group speaking one language is divided and begin to live separately in two geographical areas, the one language both groups spoke will become two different ones after the separation because, different accidental utterances they make cannot be shared by them after the separation. It happens so because development of a language is not governed by definite rules or definite laws but by accidental occurrences. Accidental utterances occur through uncertainty and disorderliness. If languages stay static or originate according to predetermined orders or rules or laws and they are governed by them, those people should speak the same language even after the separation. 4.6 Man’s place in the universe seen in a temporal scale according to a ‘Big Bang - Big Crunch universe’ (seen in agreed truth) This view is made on the assumption, the universe is limited to The Big Bang and its end, and it exists within spatial boundaries created by itself; the period of which is from its origin the Big Bang to its end Big Crunch. However, it is possible to hypothesize, such a Big Bang and a Big

Page 105 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 106 of 144

Crunch may not show the real boundaries of the universe although it is the maximum possible man could think of it as now . PAST: i.

The universe began with the beginning of expansion of a mass less, pointless state of an ‘atom’ with extremely infinite density and infinite heat energy in it, the state of which atom before the explosion cannot be imagined of. Only the quality of heat (fire)* was there believed to have existed at this stage. ii. Particles were made that went to form the atoms. Quality of hardness (earth) has begun to manifest. iii. Stars were formed from atoms and particles. iv. Dense objects like planets, asteroids, comets etc. were formed. Qualities of liquidity (water) and diffusion (air) begun to manifest. v. Macromolecules were formed with dense objects in some of began the thinking form or the life form as feeling the existence with desires to enjoy and to continue with such existence.(Fig.4.1) vi. Life as plants began on earth from bundles of those macromolecules. vii. Life as animals began from the same sources of plants. viii. Life as human beings began on same sources of animals. ix. Non-perceivable, non-cognisable ‘particles’ as thinking element were formed in such a way, some animal and human forms began to feel a developed state of thinking as ‘I’ ‘me’ or ‘I Consciousness’. x. ‘I Consciousness’ was developed that began to feel of itself as separate from other phenomena.

FUTURE (subject to the possibility of not becoming true as explained in 4.8† i.e. no correct prediction of future can be made by any one.) xi. Mankind gives up, giving way, to other similar or different (3.9) ‘higher’ or ‘lower’ forms of life. (However, even those higher or lower life forms are still ‘us’ as it is the same processes of life form that is so continued.) xii. All life forms have given up except those who could be unimaginably different to ‘us’. xiii. As happened throughout, everything is still, nothing of which originates or nothing of which disappears because only the conceptual states of matter as manifestations of matter x are seen as born and disappear, which conceptual states occur only in a thinking element. xiv. New things appear in similar ways and in different ways(3.9) so that, as always, nothing is born and nothing is disappeared as regards the universe. In the stage of The Big Crunch supposed to occur in future, there will still be matter x, in which, every thought we now have as matter as manifestations of matter x and as ‘I’ ‘me’ ‘mine’ are there, but they do not appear in same states as experienced now, so that they cannot be called ‘I’ ‘me’ ‘mine’. So when dwelling on points like whether it is the same ‘I’ who could reappear in a re-emerged universe after the next Big Bang becomes a futile exercise to engage in because they do not serve any purpose of existence. 4 basic qualities or ‘bhutha’ /bhu: θƏ/: 1. liquidity 2, heat 3. diffusion and 4. solidity (‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’) /𝑎:po://θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎:jo://pthƏʍi/ Seeing Infinities through Uncertainty and Disorderliness [section 4.8]

* * †

Page 106 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 107 of 144

For the same ‘I’ that ‘I’ call ‘my’ ‘mine’ to reappear after the next ‘Big Bang’, the present ‘I’ should be in a definite state now consisting of definite material or conceptual states. However, since the present ‘I’ does not have such definiteness, there really is nothing to reappear like that after the next Big Bang explosion or at any other time. Even if it is possible the same ‘I’ or “me’ would reappear, if it is to believe they could reappear so after the next Big Bang, it will not be the same ‘I’ or ‘me that will be there; neither has it to be different because similarities and differences are only conceptual states that cannot be applied to a reality. Why cannot there be another one if there was a Big Bang once? If there can be another Big Bang like that, why cannot there be many such too, the process the thinking of which could extend to think of many of them. What makes us think the processes seen in the universe as they have to ‘begin’ and they have to ‘end’? One reason we think so is, there are beginnings and ends to everything seen as purely conceptual states, beginnings and ends of which are seen through yet another conceptual state called ‘motion’. Such beginnings and ends do not have a basis of reality when seen in absolute truth. There cannot be ‘things’ having beginnings and ends other than those conceptual states that go to make a world that appear only in a thinking element. When seen in absolute truth, there can be nothing that began and there can be nothing that ends. The end of the universe seen as ‘Big Crunch’ is an end seen only in relation to man’s extreme knowledge as at present, showing that, whenever the universe is imagined, it is seeing in unification as it should have limitations as spatially and temporally. Our sensation, perception and cognition always have their limitations in the abilities in seeing. We are incapable of seeing infinities. 4.7 The Universe and The Life Form The origin of the universe is believed to be an ‘atom’ getting an ability to expand as caused by a ‘Big Bang’. Such a Big Bang is seen as an ‘origin’ because many new things happened in it within a very short period of time as seeing in agreed truth of seeing. If those events in the first moment took trillions of years to take place, then we do not call it an ‘origin’, but relate it to its preceding and subsequent states as the same, and see it only as evolving. Therefore, such an origin seen in the universe is an ‘origin’ seen in mind only; a ‘seeing’ only of many things happening in a short time. It is similar to that if the French Revolution took one hundred years to take place from its start to its end, then we do not call it a revolution, but consider it with the other processes of evolution. It is difficult to comprehend what faculty of mind, or what type of thinking has to be used to imagine how this ‘original atom’ ‘existed’ before its explosion without its having material qualities of ‘mass’, ‘volume’ or ‘space’ and with its heat extending to infinity. Even guesswork using ignorant logic cannot create a visual image to the effect. The concept of zero can be imagined as a visual picture first by thinking of things with shapes and constituents in them, and then imagining the absence of them in the same background in an empty space, but the nature of this ‘original atom’ cannot be imagined like that because it is supposed to have no volume, no mass, no space but only heat extending to infinity. In a background of the inability to create a visual image of this ‘original atom’, what is left is only logic and language to think about it, which logic and language too are only conceptual states, and they are improper tools in seeing or Page 107 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 108 of 144

experiencing. The idea of an ‘original atom’ ‘without mass, without volume, without space and with ‘heat extending to infinity’ exhibits limitations in our thinking abilities in getting a final and a definite picture of the universe. Assuming the origin of the universe really was this Big Bang, the constituents of it before the explosion can be considered similar to matter x* the way it is defined in this book as it cannot be perceived or cognised. The question what faculty of mind went to imagine the original state of the universe can be raised as regards the nature of what is considered here as ‘matter x’ and ‘spirituality’ too.(2.1). Therefore, beyond saying matter x cannot be perceived or cognised, whatever is stated as constituents of it, too, have to be considered purely speculative. Two other questions that arise on the Theory of Big Bang are, (i) What force was there in it previously holding it as one, without allowing it to explode at a previous time? (ii) What made that force to be weakened at one particular moment so that it became ‘The Big Bang’? Both questions can be answered as, the universe could have been in a contracting stage previously so that what force was there inside it previously without allowing it to explode or what made it to explode suddenly at one particular moment does not arise. After the previous period of contraction was over, there could have been a period of stillness after which, it ought to have begun to expand again. This view is suggested by Paul Davies † (1984) in his book, ‘God and the New Physics’. A similar cosmological view appears in buddhist literature too as the eons of universe consisting of four stages as, i.expanding stage ii. expanded stage iii. contracting stage and iv.contracted stage.‡( ab) In the scientific thinking process of searching for the smallest unit in matter from Leucippus (after him Democrates) to modern scientist, the first one sees the end in such search in an atom, and the last one sees it in a picture of particles produced by a kind of ‘strings’ §. This sort of formulating hypotheses or theories or laws may go on until the ‘end’ of the development of mankind from ‘simple’ to the ‘most complex’ without arriving at definite answers. Therefore, matter x would remain matter x forever, without ‘our’ getting an ability to comprehend anything regarding the universe as matter x. The notions behind the term ‘end’ or the phrase ‘from simple to most complex’ used herein themselves arise in ignorant utilitarian wishes seen in agreed truth. When seen in a three-dimensional scale ignoring the ‘time’ as a dimension, the motion in matter cannot be seen as having beginnings or ends, and it is the thinking element only that sees things as having ‘beginnings’, and as they ‘develop’ ‘from simple to (the most) complex’, or they to come to their ‘ends’. Less than one century of years of life span of a man is absolutely nothing when seen in relation to infinite eons of the temporal universe as seen in agreed truth. Less than two meters of his body * Matter x = ‘ non-perceivable and non-cognisable states of matter that cannot be comprehended by any attempt of using sensation, perception or cognition’. [section 2.1] † Davies, P. (1984) God and the New Physics (back cover) (1984) Simon & Schuster ‡ Ref. Agganna Suthra in angutthara nikaya: expanding stage (vivatta kappa /ʍiʍΛttə kΛppə/) contracting stage (sanvatta kappa/sΛŋʍΛttə kΛppə/) § J. Richard Gott J (1991) Page 108 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 109 of 144

height, too, is nothing compared with the infinity of spatial dimensions seen in agreed truth. Even the whole history of evolution of life forms on earth is nothing compared with infinities seen in the existence of the universe as seen in agreed truth. If any worth is seen in the ‘human being’ compared with such hugeness in the universe, although the premise of such seeing too is affected by ignorance in seeing in agreed truth; it is ‘man’ ‘humankind’ or ‘I’ are the same matter x manifesting in the thinking element as ‘beings’ made of matter. In such seeing, we ourselves are the universe, not as parts of it, or as ‘the whole’ of it, or as ‘beings’ or ‘souls’, but as matter x itself. The ‘beings’ or ‘souls’, too, are only seeing. When it is said ‘beings’ or ‘souls’ are seeing only as seen in absolute truth, it need not be taken as what would then be seen ought to be a ‘dead universe’ because of the absence of ‘beings’ or ‘souls’ as life forms in it. Even such seeing, too, is seen only when seen in agreed truth, which means, it, too, denotes nothing in relation to reality. In the real seeing of the absence of ‘living beings’, there would be nothing to see as ‘processes of life forms’, just as there would be nothing to see as matter too. So, the need is not there to consider the view of the absence of life forms as a pessimistic view, because a ‘dead universe’, too, is only seeing. Life forms do not have a special place in relation to other phenomena. If the ‘life form’ is seen as having a special place, it is because ‘I’ consider ‘I’, as a life form, am greatest in existence; because ‘I’, like everybody else like ‘me’, has to continue forever with ‘my’ and ‘our’ existences as ‘I’. When ‘I’ am the greatest, everything needed for my existence too ought to be the greatest. If a thing is thought as existing beyond the domain of ‘my’ perception and ‘my’ cognition (e.g. an unknown star or a planet near us faintly discovered), it arouses ‘my’ feelings of fear, awe, mysteriousness or strangeness towards it, that makes ‘I’ want to be close to it with the purpose of dominating over it so that ‘I’ could use it for ‘my’ existence, or I try to destroy it if it is against my existence. It is this attitude which is displayed towards the phenomena considered as ‘aliens’, or real or imaginary ghosts the way they come across in beliefs or news or fiction. When being ‘I centered’ does not have a special value in relation to the universe, it does not mean ‘I’ ought to consider ‘myself’ as valueless too, because, all concepts of ‘having values’ or ‘being valueless’, both are ignorant creations made in the thinking element. When ‘giving value’, is seen as an ignorant creation, considering ‘valueless’ in relation to it, too, has to be considered an ignorant creation. Values seen in agreed truth have no foundations just as all other seeing too have no foundations as we see so even by seen in agreed truth. If the universe can be seen by being detached with it, by seeing the life element as having neither value nor non–value, then a unique type of value for life form would emerge because of such detachment, which is an experience one has to realize by seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth.* To get the real meaning in the phrases used herein as, ‘unique type of value’ or ‘neither value nor non value’, the meanings in individual terms in them have to be overlooked after getting the holistic meanings in them. It is such a ‘unique type of value’ that one tends to adopt after realizing the absolute truth, by which seeing, all other values would be seen as insignificant.

*

Ethical Values seen after the Realization of Absolute Truth [section 4.12] Page 109 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 110 of 144

Seen from another perspective, less than one century of our life span, too, is a part of the universe. From a cosmological view, we are not separate entities of the expansions and the contractions of the universe, but we are those expansions and contractions themselves, because we are the same matter x by which everything manifests. Since matter x is mass less, space less and timeless, there is no way ‘we’ can be seen as separate from the rest of the universe made of it. It is only those that have conceptual characteristics of ‘mass’, ‘space’ and ‘time’ that can be seen as having separate existences, not the state at matter x level. It is ignorant thinking in agreed truth that makes us think a person’s value as limited to less than one century as measured from the numbers of the earth’s travelling round the sun. Such a feeling as we are the universe may make us feel we are great. However, such greatness cannot be shared by the ‘being’ that is created on ignorance, because it is a delusion only. Also, the realization ‘we’ are the universe need not make us feel powerful or superior. It is only that we know and realize ‘the way the things are’*(g), and we can become a person like ‘one who has won the infinity’†(g) by realizing ‘the way the things are’. An act of seeking powers to show we are superior is baseless, because such acts appear only as expectations of ignorance in thinking. 4.8 Seeing Infinities through Uncertainty and Disorderliness The basic nature in the universe is uncertainty and disorderliness evident in all its activities as it is seen in agreed truth. In such a background predictions made on future have to always go wrong, although we often see as some of them becoming true. When some predictions are seen as becoming true, it does not happen so because of the validity of the logical thinking that goes to see so; because logical thinking can do nothing with them. When seen in absolute truth however, the universe contains neither ‘certainty and order’ nor ‘uncertainty and disorder’. Our predictions are always based on thinking as using inductive logic or deductive logic, premises that go to make them are always past based, that do not exist at present. When those premises do not exist, predictions made on them too cannot occur because they ought to be valid only in their background of past that has changed to become present. ‘Past’ ‘present’ and ‘future’ are not the ‘same’; neither do they share similarities with one another. As already seen, similarities and differences too are only seeing.‡ Conceptual states of similarities and differences cannot be attributed to have an existence in an external world because, nothing consists of definite elements, definite states or definite events as if they exist in an external world; so that, nothing can be there as sharing similarities and differences. So the use of logic and reasoning leading to make predictions by seeing similarities and differences cannot happen, although we think we see phenomena as predictions becoming true. Logic and reasoning used in making predictions are improper tools too in arriving at a state called ‘truth’. No validity is there at all in arriving at a state called ‘truth’ through them although the general acceptance is they are there to arrive at a state called ‘truth’. Thinking made as logic and reasoning themselves have only conceptual existences§ and what they deal with are only conceptual states, which conceptual existences and conceptual states are not ‘out there’ so that thathha:gatha = ‘the way the things are’ (thathha = reality, truth: ‘gatha’- on the way). a word The Buddha used to denote himself /θθh𝑎:gƏθƏ/ anantha jina = one who has won infinity (anantha = infinity jina = won )/nnθə ginə/ a word The Budhdha used to denote himself ‡ Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] § See also ‘purely conceptual states’ Subasinghe R. (2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration * †

Page 110 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 111 of 144

they become limited to be conceptual only, because of which, they cannot be considered as having any validity in arriving at a state called ‘truth’ or ‘reality’.* Thus, when it is predicted the sun would rise the following day and when it really happens so, it becomes true not because of the validity of logic used. It is always possible the sun will not rise in a following day after a prediction is made to the effect, just as it is always possible it could rise the following day whether predictions are made to the effect or not. If a person witnesses a phenomenon five times as it occurs at every ten minutes, she would predict the sixth occurrence of it too after ten minutes after the last one. However if the nature of that phenomenon is it occurs only five times; or if it occurs in different numbers at different times, then her use of inductive logic there does not become valid. This position can be applied to the nature of all predictions made using inductive logic. As regards predictions made on deductive logic, too, the situation is same. If premises of a syllogism are not truth based which is deductive logic, conclusions arrived from it, too, cannot be truth based. Since all premises of a syllogism denote past based experiences, they cannot be valid to a ‘present’ or a ‘future’, so that deductions made on them cannot become true. Also, conclusions arrived at in using deductive logic are always repetitions of something that is already known. When one angle in a triangle is 700 and the other is 600, then we know the other is 500 simply by reusing a premise already known; which conclusion has nothing to as a prediction. When Kepler made the ‘prediction’ of an undiscovered planet using mathematical deductions, he was reusing thinking he already had. Just as a planet was there in the area as he guessed, there could have been no planet too there due to other reasons nobody had discovered by then. Despite for this background, inductive logic and deductive logic are used all the time in most of our thinking, and we are satisfied in believing conclusions arrived through them denote reality. The only logic that can be applied in determining the nature as we have already seen is ‘Y follows only X not any other’, †which position, too, is true only when seen as last when seeing at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. According to this, only the thought moment X as seen now, would become the thought moment of Y at its next moment, nothing else. When seen in absolute truth however, it is not even X becoming Y or any other because what is seen as X and Y do not have definite existences, so that they cannot reappear in a time scale to be compared and contrasted. It is his inability to predict that makes man attempts to predict, which also means, we predict because we cannot predict. Thus, by the act of predicting itself we admit we cannot predict. What remains as truth finally is our inability to predict anything. The inability to make valid predictions because of the states of uncertainty and disorderliness can be seen in other perspectives too as follows: i. To predict any one event, one has to study all causes of it in its background. If one such cause is ignored, the prediction may not become true because of the ignorance of it. Since * †

The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World [section 3.12 ] The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World [section 3.12 ]

Page 111 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 112 of 144

any one phenomenon ought to have an innumerable number of causes behind it extending to timeless infinity, arranging those causes to make a prediction becomes practically impossible. Beyond a point, no one could know any cause behind in making such a prediction. Therefore, one can never predict future because one can never know all previous causes behind to make one. ii. State of uncertainty has already affected all causes when they are used in making a prediction; therefore, one cannot find valid causes to make predictions. Even if the ideal expectation of knowing all causes behind a prediction is achieved, uncertainty has already affected them when they have become present, so that, such prediction cannot become true. Everything emanates from such states of uncertainty of formation which point is seen from sub atomic levels of existence to ‘one universe’ levels of existence. Anything could have happened in the past other than the ways they are thought of as happened, because of uncertainty is evident in all seeing. Also, it is possible anything could happen in future other than the ways they are expected to happen. iii. Even by realizing the ideal expectation of knowing all causes of a phenomenon supposed to have occurred in the past, and even if it is established there is certainty in the happenings at atomic levels and cosmic levels, karmic limitations of perception and cognition are not adequate enough in handling them all in making valid predictions. By being incompetent so in the use of logic and reasoning because of being limited in karmic abilities, along with the inability in handling all causes behind a prediction because of same limitations, any prediction ought to go wrong. iv. Before a prediction is made, one has to see the phenomena involved as they have definite existences, and what one deals with at such times are definite objects, definite events and definite states governed by definite laws, so that predictions could be made on such solid foundations. Phenomena ought to exist as at rest in definite states and in definite present moments so that predictions can be made even if such existences are for fractions of moments. Since nothing stays at rest like that even for a fraction of a moment by having the status of definiteness, the point of which can be applied to thought forms themselves too by which they are thought, there is nothing in present that could be used to predict as future. If a person makes a prediction on what she considers as definite states of objects or definite states of events that exist in a definite present, and demonstrates the prediction made on them has become true, what is seen as the materialization of it is only seeing, not caused by the logical relationship seen. Even what has been seen as such materialization, too, cannot stay in a definite state even for a nanosecond or lesser fraction of a moment than that. One actually sees nothing there as that has become true although he ignorantly thinks he has seen a prediction becoming true. It is ‘seeing in unification’* that makes it seen as a prediction becoming true because, there is the karmic need within thinking element to see phenomena in unification. The ability some of us claim as they have predicted successfully is only an ability of ‘seeing’ in the thinking element that does not have a corresponding

*

Seeing in unification’[section 3.14] - Unification and Disintegration Subasinghe R. (2011) Page 112 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 113 of 144

existence in a ‘material world’. It is an appearance only, not caused by an ability to capture any type of definiteness in the phenomena. v. Nothing is there to call future for anything to recur. If anything appears as reappeared as in future, it cannot really be same, similar or different* with the one considered as its previous state. Since nothing reappears the same way, a similar way or a different way, what is predicted as future by considering the present has to be applied only to that present itself, because of which, it cannot really be considered a prediction has come true as taking place in future. Such seeing, too, is seen only when seeing in agreed truth. vi. No orderliness is there in the phenomena to be seen so that any prediction can be made successfully. Orderliness is a conceptual state, not a characteristic in matter or matter x. What is seen as orderliness is only our way of seeing; an ignorant creation in the thinking element. Seeing ‘no orderliness’ or ‘disorderliness’ is another way of seeing the state of uncertainty, though none of these terms can be used when seeing in absolute truth. (point ii above)

If it is certainty that can be seen in the occurrences arising from matter x level, the universe based on it ought to be deterministic by having orders and certainty in everything in it. Thinking element is not needed then for the continuation of that universe because everything happens there are already orderly. If such a universe exists as creation of an ‘Omniscient, Omnipotent Being’ He (She/ It) need not do anything with it because it has its deterministic order at work; then what that Great Being causes on it would be interfering with the certainty in it; which also means, no certainty has to be there in such a universe if He (She/ It) does so. So both, a deterministic universe and its being under an ‘Omniscient, Omnipotent Being’ cannot happen at the same time. If the universe has a deterministic order with certainty evident in all its events, what thinking beings do in it as thinking and acting on them are not changing it or discovering things, but being one hundred percent passive participants of that deterministic order about which they may or may not be aware of. When they think they use their ‘freewill’, they really do not have such an ability to do so in such a background. The fact that the universe does not evolve in an orderly manner, and states of uncertainty and disorder in it can make anything to happen in it at a next moment, can be discussed along with what had been referred to as ‘punctuated equilibria’ in the field of the theory of evolution.† Those who study the theory of evolution find some stages in the processes of evolution take too long periods of times while others less. Some species take millions of years to evolve from one stage to the next, while others take only few thousand years for the same evolution. Extreme views in this regard points out some stages have taken place as if instantly, which word ‘instant’ has to be seen compared with eons in the universe. However, although it is seen as one species take millions of years while others only two or three thousand, all activities that ought to have been working behind them are not known to find the exact reasons why. What is seen as evolution through sensation, perception and cognition may be only a superficial way of seeing that cannot comprehend all causes behind any phenomenon. *

Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] ‘punctuated equilibria’ – phenomenon discussed on the theory of evolution, questioning how some stages in the process of evolution had taken too long periods of time while others less. †

Page 113 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 114 of 144

What happens in this evolution could really be, no rules or laws at all are there governing the process of evolution, but only uncertainty and disorder in everywhere and in everything; because of which, things or happenings need not be seen as involved with any rule or law; because rules and laws are only seeing with a thinking element. Anything is possible to happen in the universe at a next moment,* and when it happens so, it is not caused by any previous cause but only as X becoming Y†, only one moment of a phenomenon becoming next moment wherein no logic or order is involved there. We now see two types of universes as ‘orderly’ and ‘disorderly’, seeing both of which become only ‘seeing’ when seen in absolute truth. These two can be represented in an illustration as follows.(Fig 4.2).First section in this illustration (i) shows, the universe is seen as orderly, in which, there is an origin to the universe ( the ‘Big Bang’ as now theorised), and everything started from this first point and continues to follow an orderly pattern by being governed by laws, changing from simple levels to complex levels of formation seen in a time scale, which is also seen as ‘progressing’ from disorder to order as some hold this view. It is in this progression of ‘evolution’ man originated as a life form and continues to exist so by proceeding from a path of ‘simple’ to the ‘complex’ as governed by seen or unseen laws. The end of such evolution of mankind according to some is his becoming eternal, or reaching a similar ideal state such as forming societies where men do not exploit one another. However, some who see the universe as orderly like this, may not believe in such an ideal end to the mankind. This ‘orderly universe’ can be seen in another way too as it need not have a beginning nor an end so its existence is timeless; in which, ‘orderliness’ could emanate from the matter x level in it. In this seeing, what is considered the beginning as ‘Big Bang’ and the end as the ‘Big Crunch’ may be considered a part only of a bigger, orderly universe. Thus, the orderly universe can be seen in two ways; (i. a) that began and that ends (i. b), that neither begins nor ends. (1.a and 1.b Fig, 4.8) In a non-evolving universe as shown in the illustration (Fig. 4.8 ii ), it is just existence witnessed that can be seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. No ‘time’ dimension is seen there so that nothing as ‘linear’ or ‘evolution’ can be seen in it. Everything is still in the background of a temporal scale; but as to what constitutes ‘stillness’ nothing could be found. Nothing would be seen there as ‘mass’ ‘time’ ‘material states’ or ‘non material states’ in which, what would then simply be is matter x, about which no statement can be made in a language. No thinking element too ought to be there to see anything as itself. Regarding Heisenberg's ‘uncertainty principle’ and the belief of determinism being affected because of it, Hawking‡ (1988.61) suggests the possibility of the existence of a Superior Thinking Being who knows everything, who alone can correctly predict future, because such a Being knows every movement of each particle. Such a being knows the nature of the universe without a trace of uncertainty about it. Naturally, Hawking himself considers it as fancying. If there is such a Being who knows everything, why should such a Person get a need to think of future at all?

* † ‡

possibility = it is possible any unexpected thing could occur: probability = any theoretically or hypothetically expected thing could occur The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World [section 3.12] Hawking S. (1986.61) A Brief History of Time - Bantam Books Page 114 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 115 of 144

If there is such a Person, and if He (She/It) predicts future for the use of others with lesser abilities of thinking, He (She/It) changes the existing situation of orderly universe by the act of predicting itself, because, a thinking being who predicts does so because He (She/It) wants to make changes in the existing situation. A universe in which a Superior Thinking Being exists who could predict any event, could take place only if the universe began and ends as shown in (i.a) in the illustration. No prediction can be made on a universe that has neither a beginning nor an end, because, the thinking element has to think eternally to make even one prediction on such a universe, because it has to consider all relevant factors seen in the endless temporal dimension, to make one such prediction. Page 115 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 116 of 144

Sometimes we think we make changes in the orderliness of the universe by making a prediction. For example, when a person predicts an earthquake, residents in the area of the earthquake leaves that area making a change in the existing orderliness. If changes can be brought about in the existing orderliness by making a prediction, then we couldn’t have thought of it as there was an orderliness there previously. The belief the state of orderliness can be changed by making predictions has a contradiction in itself as no orderliness had really been there if an act of making predictions can change it. One could point out, such changes caused by a prediction, too, can be included in the same orderliness so, orderliness is not affected in an instance of predicting. This suggests, there is orderliness, but when that orderliness is seen as changed, it is still the same orderliness that was there all the time; thus the change seen was only false seeing. With such extension of the meaning of ‘orderliness’, anything that happens, including events as caused by uncertainty, too, have to be considered along with orderliness. This makes the term ‘orderliness’ to lose itself to a point of a fanciful zero level, reducing it to an invalid concept. Such a meaning in ‘orderliness’ ultimately relates to what is referred to herein as ‘the way the things are’*, g) which means whatever happens, it has to be accepted as ‘the way the things are’. If everyone predicts, such a universe cannot be deterministic. By the act of predicting itself everyone creates chaos in the universe, because thinking that goes to predict is used to cause changes in ‘the way the things are’. ‘Change’ means changing of orderliness, which orderliness is only ‘seeing’, and which does not ‘exist’ ‘out there’. What is seen finally is, the universe is ‘disorderly’ when seen in agreed truth, and it is neither ‘orderly’ nor ‘disorderly’ when seen in absolute truth. No orderliness is there to make predictions when seen in agreed truth, although we think we see some orderliness in our existence that makes us predict to see whether changes can be caused in it to get our karmic utilitarian expectations fulfilled. If a person can make accurate predictions for future, such a ‘Person’ would not want to exist too, because knowing everything to make accurate predictions means ceasing, a state like the ‘buddhahood’. Existence of such an Omniscient Being is not needed for the universe or for ‘Himself’, because no ignorance is left with Him to know or do any further thinking. Existence of such a person would be ‘existence for the existence’s sake’. It has to be actually, the universe alone ‘knows’ ‘everything’ as regards its existence, but such ‘knowing’ is not the way the thinking beings know things, but a state beyond such thinking.(q) The need to predict future is a utilitarian need of thinking beings whose thinking is governed by ignorance, because of which, predictions are made only to use them to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures. It is only for karmic utilitarian purposes that we desire to know what happens inside an atom, or what happens far away in the universe, and make predictions on the findings on them. Without using a laboratory to do research on particles, The Buddha declared ‘uncertainty’ as governing everything as regards what is seen as the life form, and made it one of the three characteristics of what is seen as the ‘world’†(w), using which three states people are advised to contemplate on and to meditate on in order to be the ‘real ones’.(g) Other two characteristics he * †

thathha:gatha /θθh𝑎:gƏθƏ/ - (thathha = reality, truth: ‘gatha’-=on the way). This is a word The Buddha used to denote himself uncertainty, suffering, soullessness (anithya, dukkha, ana:thma) /niθjƏ/ /ðukkhƏ/ /n𝑎:θmƏ/ Page 116 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 117 of 144

mentioned along with it are the ‘inevitability of suffering’ and ‘being soulless’. These three characteristics show, what is finally left is uncertainty and disorderliness in a life form, which are evident within the ‘self’ itself that is supposed to exist for sometime. There is only chaos within, and chaos without* (af) when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. It can be presumed; only infinity (endlessness) is seen in any of the areas we think of in agreed truth, in which endlessness, one cannot see beyond a limit, and because of which, nothing would be seen the same a second time. It has been seen previously, a phenomenon cannot appear ‘same’, ‘similar’ or ‘different’ with any other phenomenon,† or with the same phenomenon seen at two moments of time of its appearance as seen in agreed truth. (3.9) We cannot be sure even of what is seen as present moment because, we cannot comprehend infinities through our limited abilities of perception and cognition; the fact of which becomes complex when such perception and cognition themselves are the same as manifestations of such infinities. This means, our abilities of perception and cognition cannot see the nature of infinities within themselves. If any one type of motion can be seen as exhibiting or containing even one definite rule or one definite law with its validity lasting even for a limited period of time, that, too, ought to be only a way of ‘seeing’; seeing of which occurs only because of seeing through limitations. When it is ‘seeing’ only by a thinking element, such validity seen as definite cannot be ultimate; argument to the effect of which leads to the position nothing is there to call the ultimate. This inability to see ultimate states can be seen in two ways: i.

ii.

If there are ultimate states, sensory and cognitive abilities have their limitations in seeing them. Sensation, perception and cognition are there to fulfil the utilitarian needs, not to probe into ultimate states. There is nothing to call ‘ultimate states’; they are only seeing.

If the thinking element sees ultimate states it becomes God-like, then it does not have any problem to solve. If it does not have problems to solve, it does not need to think too, which also means, it does not need to exist too. It could also mean, it is in a birthless and deathless state in which no longer is there the dissatisfaction related to the existence. Thinking ability originated on earth as it ought to be so when it originates in any other place, too, is based on the desires that makes it create material formations;(j) and it continues to do so by replicating and reproducing themselves by using the qualities around them(4.1) Such a thinking ability cannot see ultimate states because searching for ultimate states is not in accordance with its utilitarian aims created by those desires.

If it sees ultimate states, it has to end up its thinking and become like the universe itself, having no need to see a world as a creation. However, the infinite state of existence of the thinking element cannot see itself because infinite things have no beginnings or no ends. The thinking * †

There are chaos within, and chaos without. Everything is in disorder. Order is only in cognitive seeing. (antho jata bahi jata) /nθ0: gt𝑎: bhi gt 𝑎:/ Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 s. iii] Page 117 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 118 of 144

ability as it manifests in us, works with its karmic limitations that makes it see nothing beyond a limit. The point that thinking ability sees with karmic limitations suggests, it ought to ‘see everything’ if it is not bound by those limitations. In such ‘seeing everything’, ‘seeing’ ought to be different to present ways of seeing through sensation, perception and cognition. Such ‘seeing of everything’ may not be seeing ‘matter’ ‘matter x’ or ‘the cosmos as a whole’, but seeing everything related to the existence of ‘the being’ using same perception and same cognition but functioning as if in an ideal level. 4.9 Ceaseless Motion and Absolute Silence in the Universe If a person can see a visual picture of the universe as ‘one whole’ by staying out of it, (which has to be done in imagination as you may have already done so now when reading this), she might see the universe as absolutely still. However, such a real picture of the universe cannot be seen through the naked eyes not only because of the practical impossibility in doing so, but also because no a ‘beyond universe’ can be there for a person to go there to see like that. It is impossible also because the nature of the speed of light does not allow us to see a holistic picture at one time wherein only past is seen when things are seen as far away thus affecting the real view. In addition to this, we cannot surpass the limitations of sensation perception and cognition required in such seeing. However, when an attempt is made to see so, an imagined picture is created in our minds on which only we can deal with to consider the universe as one whole. In such seeing, motions in spatial bodies inside the universe cannot be thought of like motion in a travelling vehicle cannot be seen when it is in a photograph. If one wants to imagine of even little of motion in a holistic visual picture of the universe, it would take eons for him to think of it; which means, it cannot be done as practical experience. Our abilities of sensation, perception and cognition are almost one hundred percent incapable in seeing any type of motion in such view of the universe. In addition to such stillness that can be seeing, nothing is perceived as auditory perception in such a picture because vibrations of air are not involved in it; thus, one would witness absolute silence too at the same time of such seeing. Feelings caused by such absolute stillness and absolute silence is an experience one can contemplate on and meditate on to realize the nature of existence as life forms in relation to the universe. Such a picture one imagines can be one of the last one can see when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. When absolute silence is seen in the universe like that with no motion in it, nothing else is there around it to compare and contrast it with, unless the thinking activity itself at motion is considered as separate from it. If it is to suggest the universe travels too as one whole along with its constituents, extending such thinking even to suggest speed at such travelling is infinite, such hypotheses cannot be verified because no other manifestation is there around it to witness such possibilities. So, it can conveniently be assumed, the universe as one ‘whole’ does not move at all, so that a picture one sees at such a time ought to be absolute stillness creating a feeling of absolute silence as at its background.

Page 118 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 119 of 144

Anything called ‘past forms’ of the universe cannot be seen in such a view, except those imagined through logical guessing as the past states of the universe which really are based on imperfect theories or hypotheses, limited to seeing through sensation, perception and cognition. Added to that, since it is the same past that ought to have become the present, such past forms have no type of existence, to think of it. So is future; it does not exist because it is the same present which has to become so. These points makes us witness only absolute stillness and absolute silence in the universe as last visual pictures that can be seen before realizing the absolute truth. When no motion is seen when it is seen as one whole, then we talk of nothing as motion at such a time. When it is seen there have to be motions in the universe though they are not witnessed at such a time, such seeing of motion becomes only imaginary. If it is to suggest the universe cannot be seen without motion because the universe and motion are two sides of the same coin, it makes us think of a non- sensual picture of a universe of motion too and compare it with the absolute stillness and absolute silence witnessed herein. Since such universe of motion is only hypothetically or theoretically guessed as regards a universe seen as one whole, it cannot be witnessed in sensation and perception. If it cannot be seen in sensation and perception, then it cannot be anything. Then what is seen as motion in the universe at such a time is simply seeing of purely conceptual states that have no type of existence beyond their being conceptual alone. Such seeing of universe without motion is so simple as seeing a table sometimes. We do not see the changes taking place at molecular, atomic or sub atomic levels in a table when we perceive one because we do not have a karmic or utilitarian need to do so. Although ceaseless changes take place as motion in particles in atoms of a table resulting in the table to disintegrate into other things later on, we do not see them when we see a table. Therefore, a table, too, can be seen as still and silent when it is seen in unification. A question arsing at this point is, if the universe is infinite in proportion, it cannot be imagined of as one ‘whole’. It cannot be ‘one’ or ‘many’ when the nature of infinity as proportion is taken into account. However, even if it is infinite, and even if it is timeless, it is always a universe with limitations in space and limitations in time the thinking element is able to apprehend. The universe does not exist if it is not thought of, therefore, what is thought of as the universe is always the universe, not the one of infinity in proportion and infinity in time, which views are only hypothetical. When a universe infinite in proportion is thought of, it is a universe no one knows of. A contradiction may be seen in the statement ‘We cannot think of an infinite universe.’ because the universe always is what we think of it as it is. There cannot be a universe in the absence of all thinking beings because the thinking element itself is the universe. Therefore, ‘an infinite universe’ is a phrase in language only, another creation of ignorance.* Although it is a still universe seen when it is seen as one whole, it is the opposite when it is seen as maximum motion at its smallest levels. These two types of seeing of absolute stillness and maximum motion are there in the universe at one and the same time as seen in agreed truth. While particles appear as moving at fast speeds at smallest possible levels, they appear as *

ignorance - avidhya: /ʍiðj𝑎:/ Page 119 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 120 of 144

moving slowly at bigger levels which slow movements extend to maximum stillness at the biggest level. It is true, such ‘absolute silence’ is only seeing. So are the particles at smallest states which are only conceptual states. When a biggest state of the universe is seen, such seeing is limited to our imagination. So are the motions seen at the smallest levels; they too are only seeing. However, some definiteness is seen there in some of the motion as evident in the speeds of particles of light. The size of the universe seen as to whether it is small or big, depends on seeing in our karmic abilities of the desires to exist and to enjoy pleasures. Those who have greater karmic abilities see greater universes, some of whom may see shapes even of microwaves that ordinary people cannot see. One cannot have an imagination or logical abilities to see beyond the levels of her karmic abilities. So, each time a person thinks of the universe, it is a universe limited to her seeing; so the biggest universe we imagine of is biggest only to the person who sees so; the ‘bigness’ or ‘smallness’ of which depends on the karmic needs manifesting as the thinking element. The universe is big to us because we are small. It would be neither big nor small to a thinking being who is as big as the universe. This approach towards the ‘perception’ of the ‘holistic universe’ raises a question related to ‘truth’ too. Which way of seeing is truth; seeing stillness and feeling absolute silence at the biggest level, or seeing ceaseless, continuous motion at the smallest levels? If this question is dealt with the premise ‘the whole has nothing more than the totality of its parts’,*(3.10, 3.11) the latter view of speedy ceaseless motion appears as showing the true situation as seen in agreed truth. Restless changes taking place at infinite speeds at smallest levels is the actual state when seen in agreed truth, whereas what is seen the universe in a holistic view is only an imaginary appearance. Two types of seeing appear as ‘truth’ within two different contexts of seeing, but when seen in absolute truth, none of these two have a relationship with a state called ‘truth’. Awareness of a silent universe at the biggest level can give us an absolute rest to the mind when it is seen in meditation, especially when we feel being ‘selfless’ or ‘soulless’† at such mediation. When the universe is seen as still and static, it would make us feel comfortable regarding our existence, making us feel the spatial areas we have occupied as individuals, too, as having such definiteness. This seeing of absolute silence at the biggest level and the restless speedy motion creating uncertainty and disorderliness at the smallest levels resemble what Chopra once mentioned‡ while referring to what he sees in a human body; there is something non-changing within everything that changes.(3.9) Since a holistic view of universe can never be experienced sensually as a real life situation, what is seen so is only guesswork made by using only ignorant logic. However, changes, disorderliness, motion and uncertainty seen at smallest levels can be experienced to a certain extent through sensory perception. Motion seen at smallest levels can be considered the continuance of same motion that began with the Big Bang explosion, making things to manifest from non perceivable and non cognisable matter x levels to our levels of perceivable and cognisable thinking levels. According to the Big * † ‡

The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’ [section 3.10] The Part - The Whole: The Absolute Truth [section 3.11] ana:thma = nothing to call ‘soul’ within the body /n𝑎:θmƏ/ Chopra Deepak M.D. (1990,102) Quantum Healing -Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine - Bantam Books Page 120 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 121 of 144

Bang theory, maximum motion which was in condensed form at the original point of universe, began to spread in all directions at one point, and later they pocketed into spatial areas as a result of that expansion, creating galaxies, stars, solar systems and so on; smallest of which pocketed areas are atoms and particles in them. It ought to be a Big Bang of motion of matter x level that could have been there at the beginning rather than of motion of matter as it is seen now. What appears as matter now are only our manifestations, what the thinking element alone sees, which seeing is limited to itself as ‘only seeing’. If all motion were to be ceased again in future as it is supposed to happen at the last phase of the Big Crunch, the same universe would not manifest again to ‘us’, to the karmic ‘thinking element’ of our present states. The universe that would become the original atom again has to be a state of mass less, pointless and timeless ‘existence’. 4.10 Universe with No Reappearances(af) Since no object, no event or no state is reproduced a second time, what is stated as future cannot be ‘true’ when seen in absolute truth; they are ‘neither true nor false’ when seen in agreed truth. Future cannot be created or thought of because when it is so thought of or created it is done so at present so they cannot be applied to a future which has to be different. Premises on which future built have to be found from same future that cannot be found at present. No one can think of or create future* because no such thing is available to do so as at present, although it is seen by thinking beings as we can think of future and we can create future. Added to this, nothing is there to call a ‘present moment’ too to see it as it consists of definite objects, definite states and definite events and they are governed by definite rules so that premises can be built on them to think of them as present. Even if it is to consider phenomena occur in ‘present moments’ of definiteness as they have temporary existences, they cannot have come from a ‘past’, because there is nothing like that consisting of definite objects, definite states and definite events and governed by definite rules, because what is thought so as ‘past’ themselves have become present. Same position can be extended to the formation of future too. Thus, what is thought of as a universe of future is ‘imagination’ only. If ‘Big Bang’ explosion was there in the past, it cannot be here in the present moment. If it is not in the present moment it cannot be called it is or it exists. If it does not exist then we only think of it. Then Big Bang is something that we only think of. Any law or properties applied to the nature of that Big Bang need not be applied to the present state of universe too because the nature of ‘matter’ and the ways of arrangements of parts in them have become different. We only guess the nature of this Big Bang or any such beginning that can be thought of by using premises made on the basis of present states, which is an act of ignorance.

The sun is expected to rise tomorrow because it has risen for all the days we know. In such seeing of sun rising in 'tomorrows’, we conveniently forget the facts it will be one day older and it will have different rays of light in each such a ‘tomorrow’. Possibility is always there it could vanish tonight due to reasons we are ignorant of now. Dinosaurs were supposed to have * Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] Page 121 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 122 of 144

experienced such an unexpected happening that made the sun not to appear for them for sometime. We disregard such facts when the sun is expected to rise in all tomorrows, because we think everything will be same, similar or ‘nearly the same’ in future. Universe we see at present will not be same or similar or even ‘nearly the same’ again; and it will not be different too again, because sameness, similarities and differences are only conceptual seeing.* Orderly arrangements seen in the universe by building hypotheses, theories or laws ought not be applied to tomorrows, although we do so and have confidence in believing in them as valid for all times as we see so in agreed truth. Some incidents took place in the world recently would show that, events happen unexpectedly due to uncertainty emanating from matter x level, making us see different universes each time we witness it. Here are some examples: i. Before atom bombs were fallen on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, no one expected the type of destruction, the type of energy release that could be manipulated by man. ii. No one expected New York city to be vulnerable to bomb attacks before it happened on September 11, 2001. iii. Prior to 2004, no one in Sri lanka thought of an impact from a major earthquake could affect as tsunami waves as happened in that year. iv. No one expected man to land on moon even one hundred years ago, v. Witnessing visually of a meteorite falling on Jupiter was not expected even 100 years ago. vi. Getting information and sending them via websites, use of mobile phones by which one could contact anyone anywhere else in the world at anytime were not even imagined 100 years ago. ……………………………………………………………….……………………… Innumerable number of such unexpected events occur each day from particle levels of changes to bigger levels of changes suggesting, it is a different universe that is witnessed at each moment, in which, nothing is reproduced and nothing exists as same again. Our solar system has not gone even one of its circular motions round the centre of its galaxy The Milky Way after the appearance of life forms on earth. No possibility is there at all of thinking to go back to, or locate the same spatial place we were at the time when we became the first life forms on earth, in the solar system’s travelling on the centre of its galaxy; because, the universe cannot appear the same, similar or different again. It happens so also because nothing is there to represent ‘space’ to go like that, so that we could re-discover ‘spatial positions’ where things were earlier. In an ultimate seeing, the universe is not even different too with its previous states because, differences, too, are only seeing. One may believe such locating or going back to a place in a spatial dimension is possible in the contracting phase of universe expected to occur when it is becoming the ‘Big Crunch’, because, as it is hypothesised by some, motion seen in the universe from particle levels ought to function in opposite directions in such a contracting phase of the universe. In such motion as in exact reverse directions, it ought to be possible an old man living now becoming the baby he was again, resembling seeing reverse motion when watching a film now. * Laws of Similarities, Differences and Sameness in Material Manifestations [section 3.9 ] Page 122 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 123 of 144

If motions work in exact reverse directions in such a contracting phase of the universe, we ought to reappear, in which, our present thoughts too should reappear in the way reverse in their linear, circular, wavy or other paths of motion. However, such fancying ends as fancying ‘signifying nothing’ as Macbeth utters those words in the Shakespeare’s play. If a man could reappear in the reverse process of growth in such reverse motion, one could ask, ‘is it the same old man who becomes the baby, in such a reverse process of motion? It is the same question previously asked regarding the process of life of a person,* ‘Is it the same baby who becomes an adult?’ Just as we come to the conclusion now it is not the same baby, we can also say here, it is not the same old man who becomes the baby in such reverse process too. Matter as manifestations of matter x makes all its motion, in an imaginary, still space, to which ‘imaginary, still space’ only we call the ‘universe’; and what we think as matter manifesting as galaxies, stars, nebulae, planets etc. etc. all are seen as they have occupied such space. Such a ‘spatial universe’ does not change in its seemingly ‘eternal’ ‘existence’ (it is ‘eternal’ because it has only a conceptual existence because it does not have a material basis; therefore, it is not subject to decay because ‘time’ has nothing to do with it) but the constituents in it as galaxies, nebulae etc. change each nanosecond and in big or small time units, making such changes similar to those seen in a cloud when it is blowing in the wind. Just as it cannot be said the same cloud that is seen now can be witnessed after some time of seeing it because it changes its shapes and its constituents all the time because of being carried away by the wind, it cannot also be said the same universe can be witnessed at any two points in a time scale. Material things appear as they become different each moment. It may be because of this that when researchers are about to establish the nature of a virus, they find it has changed. Particles like protons are said to exist for long periods compared with others. Electrons are the way they are for long periods. However, even these long periods require continuous changes occurring within themselves at a ‘timeless pace’, although some of them are seen by us as existing longer periods than others; and laws governing them are seen as they are static for all times. When definite shapes, definite states and definite orders of arrangements are seen in the constituents of the universe along with definite rules governing them, such seeing is like children imagining their toy houses real. We see so because we believe the world we create in thinking as having a true existence. Since the universe does not have definiteness in anything, nothing is there to reappear as existed earlier, although it is agreed upon, the universe witnessed has some definiteness if it is not permanent definiteness. At the very moment the universe is thought of as existing in the present moment, all objects in it have changed their distances from one another by countable or uncountable numbers of kilometres or other measurements of distances. Therefore, a picture of the ‘present moment’ created in our minds has to disappear at the same moment as it is created, and it can never reappear even if it is in a contracting phase of universe as believed to take place in the period of its becoming a Big Crunch, opposite state of the Big Bang.†(4.7) Such reverse direction of motion in the universe believed to occur as ‘Big Crunch’ could be seen in another way too as it could occur only with ‘the whole’ of the universe, not in its ‘parts’. Seen * †

Perception and Cognition [section 1.5] Man’s place in the universe seen in a temporal scale according to the ‘Big Bang - Big Crunch universe’ [section 4.7] Page 123 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 124 of 144

from such a view, no reason can be found asto why motion seen from particle levels must turn in opposite directions in addition to what takes place at the biggest level as the contraction. Particles that had been decaying in the period of the ‘Big Bang’ could still have been decaying the same way in such contraction too. So no possibility is there for the same pictures seen in the present moment would reappear in the phase of the ‘Big Crunch’ believed to occur in future. Motion in such a ‘Big Crunch’ can be seen in another way too as, after becoming the ‘Big Crunch’ all matter that had previously been there have lost all properties pertaining to matter like being formed of mass, subject to exist in a time scale etc. etc. so that the state of it cannot be comprehended in our sensation, perception and cognition. Then, if there would occur another Big Bang after that, what it would create as matter would be totally new types of X, so that nothing of past could be seen in it. In such a Big Bang, nothing would be reproduced the same way, a similar way or even what can be seen as in a different way, because everything emanates from a state of ‘pointless, mass less’ and ‘heat extending to infinity’,* as another ‘original atom’ as the end of ‘Big Crunch’. Nothing can be discussed about such a next universe because after becoming the ‘smallest atom’ again, all conceptual states that were seen previously ought to have been lost. There could be states in the universe in future as it could have been so in the distant past too, that in no way resemble anything witnessed by us now, including all that is stated in this book by seeing from present ways of perception and cognition. Type of perception and cognition we have now itself could be one hundred percent different by that time. If it is to assume our future generations have survived by that time; there would be nothing to call perception or cognition with them as we have now. Discussions made on such a different universe have to be one hundred percent useless too, because, they are one hundred percent impossible to continue with, and one hundred percent non-utilitarian too. When he sees everything vanishing without leaving traces, including smallest particles that include protons which are supposed to stay ‘same’ for longer periods than others, man looks into the deep space with the hope of establishing definite rules and definite laws on what is observed there, so that he could have some solace in fulfilling his utilitarian expectations. It is only with such definiteness, the universe could be seen as reappearing the same way as it was at a previous time. However, such definiteness and certainty may not be found as characteristics in any phenomena. Thus, the universe we now see will not be same a second time, so that the universe in future will not be ours even when seen in agreed truth, just like the universe we see to day is not the same one of dinosaurs. If a person at the age of sixty years visits the school he studied as a child, he cannot say it is his school because he sees many changes in it, and he himself is not the same student in it when seen materially or conceptually. But that person tends to call it ‘my school’ by seeing in agreed truth, and others around him too agrees with him because it is in accordance with the accepted way of thinking and communication seen in agreed truth. Suppose that, an intelligent species was there on earth one million years ago who wanted to imagine the future descendants of earth one million years ahead of their existence, that is, the *

Hawking Stephen (1988) A Brief History of Time Bantam books

Page 124 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 125 of 144

present state of us. What they ought to have imagined as ‘us’ could have been much different to what we really are now, because their state of imagination applies only to their background. They could not have even dreamed of what we are to day because of that. Similar to that, what we imagine as our future descendants, too, ought to be very different to our present ways of seeing because the universe of future cannot be seen in present ways of seeing. This means, the universe of future will not be the same as the one we exist now. Uncertainty is the true state of the processes evident everywhere which could be so especially when seen it at matter x level. Absolute uncertainty may be there at matter x level because of which, nothing can be predicted based on any phenomenon. ‘Orders’ seen are purely conceptual states that manifest only in a thinking element. When cosmologists search for a ‘unified field’ ‘the smallest particle’, ‘gravity constant everywhere in the universe’ etc. etc., they make attempts to create orders for the universe to feel comfortable in satisfying their desires to continue to exist and to enjoy pleasures, believing, their utilitarian expectations can be satisfied through them. However, in the background of uncertainty, one cannot say the universe witnessed now would be same or similar even after one ‘moment’ one is witnessed. One could show instances where some orderliness is seen, or types of definiteness to be seen in certain things if not in everything; or show certain people as possessing abilities to make statements on future that became true showing some definiteness is to be seen. One could argue, when a person has predicted an event and that prediction became true at a later time, it shows an instance of a prediction becoming true, proving there is some orderliness and certainty in the universe; and the universe we witness is one and the same all the time. Such an argument does not create a true picture because the universe changes each moment, and it does not consist of anything that can be called as having definite existence. Appearance of the universe can be compared to a cloud carried away by the wind, which cloud is not in the same shape when you see it after sometime. That cloud will no longer be there when molecules of water in it join with one another and fall down as rain. Similar to that, the universe is not the same when seen it at any two moments as seen in agreed truth. Nothing is there in the universe as a fundamental entity for it to become another thing, occurring and disappearing as if travelling in a time scale. It is out of nothingness that an appearance of a universe is seen, which state of nothingness is already there at the level of matter x. It is this matter x that manifests to us as matter. When the universe like that is thought of as having a definite existence, there is no way to verify that statement so that we only agree to think so. If no definiteness is there in the existence of anything, one cannot make statements too as to what they really are, or what it ‘will be’ as seen in the dimension of ‘time’. Before the beginning of the Big Bang, the universe was nowhere; and after the end of Big Crunch too, the universe will be nowhere according to some theories as seen at present. A character, an officer in an army in the play ‘Mother Courage and Her Children’* (English Title) of Bertolt Brecht says, there have to be wars so that orders can be created on the society because of them. When there is a war, the government has to take census, keep records of *

Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children’ (English Title) Page 125 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 126 of 144

statistics, create jobs in the army, maintain that army and keep discipline with them, create more jobs and find more money to continue with the war thus creating an order there. There will be business for people, everyone will have something to do for a living, people can be given supports as to earn more in order to win the war. This view illustrates the point it is the societies that create order to face the reality of disorder and chaos. It is on a base of disorder that order is created which order is only seeing creations. Such order seen through chaos are appearances only in cognitive seeing created out of disorderly states. As seen in agreed truth, such orderly patterns seen in the universe can be compared also with the orderly patterns seen in the chaotic sea when there is a storm, in which, those patterns disappear just as they appear. With such disorder and uncertainty the universe never stays in a definite state, so that what is thought of as universe at this moment is not the same at a later moment. There is no reason to give it a name even like ‘the universe’. There is no reason to do so also because no ‘one’ is there within out bodies to give it a name like that, although we think, ‘we’ can see so. Then, nothing will be there to call the ‘universe of future’, so an attempt made to live in a ‘future’, too, becomes an act of ignorance made on a delusory expectation. 4.11 No Universe When we think of the universe at anytime, it is always a seeing from our ways of seeing based on our karmic thinking abilities. It is always a universe as appears in a thinking element. Imagining of it, naming it, determining its constituents and properties, comparing and contrasting the phenomena in it with one another, all depend on the nature of the thinking element that manifests on the states of karmic energies in it. No way is there to verify whether the universe seen so depicts a ‘real’ universe or not. One cannot come to the conclusion the world seen through sensation, perception and cognition depicts even some truth, if it cannot be called it depicts one hundred percent truth. If it is to believe the universe seen like that is a true universe, the position of which is arrived at by logical thinking, such ‘logical thinking’ is similar to illogical thinking used in accepting religious beliefs. Logical background of a religious belief is based on a premise like, ‘we know some truth while complete truth is at the hand of a Great Being’; or, ‘complete truth can be realized in future by leading an ideal life’. Such positions convey only vague expectations. The real universe may never be known even if there can be such a one. More than ninety five percent of an atom is empty space as seen in agreed truth. If all the mass on earth is collected to form a ball without allowing any empty spaces in it, it could be around one kilometre in diameter. However, the picture in our imagination of the earth is, it is a huge globe on which multitudes of things take place, because, ‘emptiness’ ‘space’ and ‘time’ too are included with them as if they are needed for existence of anything. It can be seen there, much more is imagined regarding the existence of earth in addition to what is really there as mass. Less than five percent of an atom seen as ‘mass’, too, cannot be known as to what they really are because they, too, are only our appearances of matter exist; ultimate states of which matter x cannot be known through sensation, perception and cognition. What appears as particles or waves in atoms, too, are our manifestations of matter x, seeing all of which depends solely on the karmic nature of the thinking element. When these points of empty space in an atom and our Page 126 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 127 of 144

inability to see mass in it are taken into account to contemplate on the universe, nothing at all would be seen finally. In the final seeing, everything ought to appear only as manifestations of karmic energies. Asto who witnesses those appearances, no such ‘persons’ or ‘souls’ are found to say they witness so, although it is felt as everything is witnessed by ‘persons’, ‘persons’ of whose states appear only as inherent characteristic in what is seen not external to them. no ‘beings’ are there that exist within each of ‘us’, calling themselves ‘I’ or ‘me’, although our thinking is based on seeing such persons. When the five percent of mass in an atom is considered some phenomena that really exists in the universe because of their being ‘mass’, even that cannot be true because, nothing exists as condensed or definite states as mass or other since nothing exists without motion. The term ‘condensed’ used there denotes ‘seeing only’, ‘seeing in unification’*; seeing the quality of hardness only out of the four qualities.† Nothing can be seen when a thing is in motion because the basic entity called mass cannot be seen when in motion; just as it doesn’t exist when there is no motion too, Motion has to be an inbuilt quality in it by which it makes its manifestation. Seeing either way, nothing is seen as the universe; it is only that ‘we’ think ‘we’ see a ‘thing’ like that. There can be nothing left as mass when a thing is in motion also because, it is only after the retina level of visual perception such motion is seen as unified, as if they exist in ‘ones’, and ‘twos’, in which, ‘shapes’ ‘states’ and ‘orders of arrangements’ are seen in them, leading to create imaginary worlds of mass using imaginary conceptual formations on them. No way is there to verify the position the world seen in such unifications represents a true world or not. Finally, the unknown state of matter x remains when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth; which means, everything is based on nothing from the point of view of the ignorant thinking element as it sees itself. As physicists point out, some particles in atoms behave in ways space is not a bar to them. ‡ They appear and disappear without being affected by ‘distances’ seen in a ‘spatial dimension’. Matter and anti-matter respond to one another as if space is not a bar in having their relationships. As Chopra§ suggests, new particles appear in the working of the immune system of a human body in curing diseases or creating diseases. Such appearances of particles from nowhere suggests, either the spatial dimension is not a bar for the behaviour of those particles or, there is nothing to call ‘space’ although ‘we’ are bothered about it. If the moon is to be reached, atmosphere of the earth has to be crossed first, and then the ‘empty’ space, without crossing both of which the moon cannot be reached. Thus the ‘empty space’ denotes something there, so it does not really appear as empty; it can be crossed through. However, the ‘space’ seen like that is seeing an appearance only, seen in addition to what is seen as matter or the motion of matter, unifying the concept of ‘emptiness’ too along with what is seen. Then it is considered, that ‘space’ ‘exists’ ‘out there’. The term ‘space’ there is something more in addition to what is seen as ‘matter’. Such ‘empty space’, is a manifestation in the thinking element only, which means, it is non-existent. Therefore, when the empty space in ‘Seeing in Unification [section 3.14] Subasinghe R. (2011) Unification and Disintegration 4 basic qualities: 1. liquidity 2, heat 3. diffusion and 4. solidity .(‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ ‘earth’) /𝑎:po://θe:go:/ /ʍ𝑎:jo://pthƏʍi/ Talbot The Universe as a Hologram § Chopra M.D. (1990) Quantum Healing -Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine - Bantam Books * † ‡

Page 127 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 128 of 144

an atom is taken, only ‘the motions of particles’ are there without ‘space’ in them as it can be seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth. One cannot see what entity or entities are involved in such states of motion also because conceptual states of ‘shapes’, ‘states’ and ‘orders of arrangement’ in them change when they are with motion, so that nothing of them could reappear the same way again and nothing would be seen as having definiteness in existence. Even if all motion in them ceases, too, nothing ought to be seen as left because nothing as basic entities would be seen when they are without motion too. Thus, nothing can be seen as the universe in a final seeing. Only conceptual states are seen about the types of which one cannot state anything. Added to this seeing ‘nothingness’, when our abilities of karmic thinking themselves are seen as the same motion as material manifestations, we are looking at ‘ourselves’ when we see nothingness as the universe.

When the phrase ‘the motion of particles’ is studied, too, nothing is seen as denoted by it finally, which means, the universe consists of nothing. The terms used in this phrase like ‘the’ ‘motion’ and ‘of’ denote nothing as material, as if they exist ‘out there’ in an external world because they are only ‘purely conceptual’ concepts.* The term ‘particles’ there too denotes nothing in the *

See ‘purely conceptual states’ Subasinghe R. (2011.170-2) Unification and Disintegration Page 128 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 129 of 144

final seeing because they denote only the purely conceptual concepts of ‘shapes’ ‘states’ etc. seen as at the smallest levels of matter fused with the purely conceptual state of ‘motion’. Thus, what finally appear as ‘particles’ ‘out there’ is nothing in relation to thinking. So the holistic meaning conveyed by the phrase ‘the motion of particles’ cannot be there as seen when the parts of it are studied analytically. As it has already been seen ‘the whole denotes nothing more than the totality of its parts’*. The universe has nothing to be seen as if in unification although phenomena are seen as representing things that exist in an ‘external world’; therefore, it is universes with no existence we see every time when we think of it and talk of it. The term ‘existence’ itself ought to be a purely conceptual creation. All these become nothing again when it is seen no ‘persons’ are there within our bodies or brain activities to see anything as an ‘external world’ or even an ‘internal word’. When no such ‘persons’ are there to see anything, what is seen as the universe cannot be ‘mine’. When it is not ‘mine’, there is no ‘I’ to state anything about it. It is ‘nothing’ that ‘I’ or ‘we’, the ignorant creations in the thinking element consider as ‘something’. Finally what would be left is only ‘spirituality’† state of which cannot be explained in the language of agreed truth, but any one who makes the proper attempt, can experience it as the realization of absolute truth. 4.12 Ethical Values seen after the Realization of Absolute Truth It is seen by now, the laws discovered about matter and motion, like everything else that have been discovered on them, will not be the same as they were at any other time. A long time has passed since Aristotle’s earth centred universe and the teachings on a Divine Being ruling over everything were considered valid. Even the laws of gravity of Isaac Newton or theories on atoms of Democrates are no longer considered as having stable foundations. So will be the theory of relativity of Einstein in future. It is possible to predict here, while admitting this prediction itself is subject to same uncertainty and disorderliness, all views seen in the past as centred on the earth centred universe’, ‘Divine Rule’, ‘theory of relativity’ etc. etc., will be seen by ‘human’ or other intelligent beings that could appear in future, with a similar attitude we have now towards the ‘theory’ of a tortoise holding the earth on its back. When definiteness is searched through theories and findings like ‘unified field’, ‘super strings creating everything taking the place of God who was believed to be the Creator earlier’, ‘multi dimensions in the universe that can be used for utilitarian purposes’ ‘parallel universes’ etc. etc., we fail with them because all theories and findings themselves are subject to the nature of uncertainty and disorderliness. They become our creations only. So are the ethical values; they denote our expectations only. No definiteness could be established on ethical values too. These ethical values seen in agreed truth can become different with those one adopts after the realization of absolute truth. Religions have given their sets of ethical values according to their teachings on the nature of the world and man, in some of which, the need to look after animals, plants, environment and the earth, too, are taken into account. According to some of them, animals, plants and the * †

The ‘Part’ and the ‘Whole’ [section 3.10] The Part - The Whole: The Absolute Truth [section 3.11] ‘spirituality = the state(s) of matter x - Matter and Matter X [section 2.1] Page 129 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 130 of 144

environment have to be looked after only because of the need to consume them as food or they help our existence. There also are those who consider animals and plants have their own rights for independent existences. The ‘materialist’ philosopher Karl Marx created a philosophy of life based on the ending of exploitation of man by man, displaying an on non religious ethical values. Scientists too make attempts to use the knowledge and experience they gain for the ultimate benefit of man by introducing some ethical values for that purpose. Since some karmic energies are still left even after the realization of absolute truth, some ethical values, too, are needed when leading a life after the realization of absolute truth. Such ethical values cannot be blinded by ignorance because the impact of the realization of absolute truth ought to be active behind all thinking of a person after she has realized the absolute truth. In this background, two sets of ethical values are to be seen as: i. those that are created on the nature of existence as seen in agreed truth ii. those that involuntarily arise after the realization of absolute truth Since ‘I’ have many needs required for ‘my’ continued existence and to enjoy pleasures, ‘I’ consider everything as ‘I’ centred in my seeing in agreed truth. ‘I’ am reluctant to accept the existence of any ‘other one’ as central in such thinking, but only ‘me’, though ‘I’ see, it need not be so when seeing logically. However, after the realization of absolute truth, ‘I’ do not see any speciality with ‘me’ in relation to any other phenomenon. Neither do ‘I’ see any worthlessness in ‘me’ too, in relation to any other phenomenon. When seen in agreed truth, it is seen as there is an ‘I’ to think as ‘I’ am superior, so that, that ‘I’ ought to exercise an ability to dominate over other phenomena seen. Ethical values created in such a background in relation to the existence of others is, if ‘I’ do not respect the needs of ‘others’, ‘they’ too will not respect the needs of ‘my’ existence; therefore, ‘I’ have to respect others. However, when seen in absolute truth, ‘I’ respect ‘others’ because ‘I’ do not see any difference between ‘I’ ‘others’ or the ‘universe’. Therefore, it will be seen as, ‘we’ have inborn ethical values by ourselves, because of which we are concerned with the existences of any other the same way we value ourselves . Ethical values that manifest after such realization surpass those created in agreed truth in being ‘flawless’ because of the absence of ignorance in the thinking behind them. After the realization of absolute truth, things would be seen as nothing is there to call ‘false’.* After the realization of absolute truth, ‘I’ accept the phenomena of ‘I’ or ‘me’ as having no definite or temporary existences, though feelings to the effect still remains. As seen previously, ‘I’ or ‘others’, all are the processes of the ‘Big Bang’ and the Big Crunch as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth, provided the theory of ‘Big Bang’ and the Big Crunch show the true nature of the universe. The more the removal of ignorance, the more removed is ‘I centeredness’ in thinking. The person who has realized this, changes his ethical values too as related to such realization. Such a person not only knows ‘the way the things are’ but has realized it too, but still he lives a life seen in agreed truth because of the impact of karmic energies still left with him. Such a *

Nothing would be seen as false after the realization of absolute truth- The Buddha Page 130 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 131 of 144

‘person’ ‘enjoys’ by giving things to ‘others’ because he knows the things really are not his alone. ‘I’ or ‘others’ do not make a difference to him when sharing things. Such ‘giving’ relieves him of what was felt in him earlier as a burden; the feeling of ‘I’ has an existence, and it has to possess the things around it to enjoy that existence, which notion is created through blind ignorance .

Part 1 ends here. PART

2 OF THIS BOOK WILL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS 5. ‘‘TIME’ AND ‘ THREE DIMENSIONS’ 6. AGREED TRUTH AND ABSOLUTE TRUTH 7. CENTRE - LIFE AS ‘I CONSCIOUSNESS’ 8. SUFFERING AND ITS CESSATION 9. MEDITATION: EMANCIPATION FROM CREATION 10. SUMMARY 11. APHORISMS ON UNIVERSE AND ITS BEINGS

R.SUBASINGHE

24 JULY 2019

Page 131 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 132 of 144

Chapter 11 Aphorisms on Universe and its Beings

11. Aphorisms Matter 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7.

Matter becomes nothing by which it is made of. Matter is our way of seeing matter x. Matter x differs from matter in our inability to sensualise it or to perceive it in any manner. Phenomena seen are not constructed on ultimate basic elements because, there cannot be such things as ‘ultimate’ or ‘basic’. Phenomena are seen as combinations of qualities of ‘water’ ‘fire’ ‘air’ and ‘earth’, which are conceptual qualities; when they are seen as material it is secondary seeing seen in ignorance in agreed truth. When material objects are seen as involved in with a dimension called ‘time’, it is an ignorant creation in the thinking element. Man, plants, mountains, rivers, animals are material when seen in agreed truth, but ‘non material’ or ‘spiritual’ when seen in absolute truth.

External world ‘External word’ does not exist. Everything is ‘seeing’ in a background where there is nothing to be seen, and no ‘person’ involved in ‘seeing’. 10. It is not that the brain activities create an ‘internal world’, but the ‘internal world’ creates a ‘brain’ as an image with a shape, as if it is composed of innumerable number of more shapes within it called ‘molecules’ ‘atoms’ and ‘particles. 11. When any state is thought of as the ultimate state of matter, it really is the ultimate state of matter, because there cannot be ultimate states other than what is thought to the effect. 12. There is no an ‘ultimate state’ when seen in absolute truth,. 8. 9.

Thinking 13. Thinking ability is the life form. 14. Basic nature of thinking encompasses everything; it is ‘everywhere’ ‘all the time’. 15. ‘Thinking’ as a dimension applied to the universe is infinite. Universe is a property of the ‘thinking’. 16. Thinking manifests on the ability to identify (or unify which is the same), formations of qualities or ‘bhutha’ from matter x, so that they can be used for continued existence and to enjoy pleasures. 17. Things as material are seen as they exist in a ‘spatial’ domain. 18. Motion seen as disintegration makes a ‘temporal’ dimension too to be seen in what is seen as the material. 19. Thinking can be compared to a state like gravity, composed of extremely small particles like neutrinos, probably massless, with an ability to be everywhere, appearing and disappearing then and there like radiation; but not owned by ‘beings’ or ‘persons’ Page 132 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 133 of 144

20.

21.

22. 23. 24.

25.

or ‘souls’. The nature of thinking element when seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth is, the ability to see changes as if they occur in logical orders and logical arrangements; and seeing things as they appear in domains called ‘past’ ‘present’ and ‘future’, without ‘persons’ involved in such seeing. If we do not see in unification, we do not see disintegration too. If there is no disintegration, we do not see unifications too. Both seeing in unification and seeing disintegration are only ways of seeing when seen in absolute truth, that have no existence in an external world. What is central is ‘thinking’ as ‘life forms’, not ‘I’ or ‘we’ as ‘individuals’ or ‘groups of life forms’. The world seen as a creation is an unreal manifestation because, ceaseless activities of disintegration and unknowable nature of matter are not taken into account in it. When it appears paradoxical to see there is nothing to call ‘thinking’ at the same time as the decision made to that effect is seen as ‘thinking’, the paradoxical nature seen can be cleared by seeing, nothing is there as ‘thinking’ when seen in absolute truth, though thinking made to the effect is seeing in agreed truth. When seen in absolute truth there is nothing that ‘exists’.

Logic 26. Rules and laws governing the physical world or human behaviour as seen in agreed truth, are rules and laws unto themselves. 27. Rules and laws manifest only as thought forms within the thinking element. 28. Since rules and laws always have their limitations in being them, seeing them end up as seeing disorderliness seen everywhere. 29. The ability of logic consumes itself while in the process of realizing absolute truth, so that nothing as logic remains after the realization of absolute truth. 30. The only valid logic as seen at the borderline between agreed truth and absolute truth is, the only logical cause of a phenomenon is its immediate previous state, nothing else. Thus, D is the result of its immediate previous state of C not A or B. Y is the result of its immediate previous state of X, not any other. * 31. Things, seen as ‘material’ or ‘purely conceptual’, exist with nothing to see as their causes or their effects.

The ‘Being’ 32. A life form is a manifestation of attempts of a bundle of macromolecules in trying to be in the same state as it is in its present form. 33. The feeling a ‘person’ exists behind thinking is a feeling only without an ‘owner’ to it. 34. The feeling a ‘person’ exists behind thinking is not an ‘owner’ a ‘soul’ a ‘self’ or a ‘being’. 35. What is seen as a life form when seeing as last before seeing nothing, is a manifestation of ‘motion’ seen by another type of same motion as the former having a unique existence, in which, no ‘beings’ are involved in such seeing. 36. The life form that consists of ‘motion’ as seen in agreed truth is only ‘seeing’, which *

The Role of Logic in the Creation of the World - [section 3.12] Page 133 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 134 of 144

‘seeing’ is not seen by a ‘being’. 37. General view is, if ‘I’ do not exist, then there is no ‘I’ to do the thinking. However thinking exists without an ‘I’ to do it. 38. When detached with everything when in meditation, what is felt as ‘I’ is the ‘spirit’ by which everything is created, which is not a ‘person’; and it exists in a timeless background. 39. ‘I’ am not a resident in the physical body, but a consumer of it seen as consuming itself.

Truth 40. The world created in agreed truth is created on ignorance*. 41. The ability to see the real nature of the ‘being’ and the real nature of ‘thinking’ transcend the world created in agreed truth. 42. It is not enough ‘the way the things are’† seen using only sensation, perception and cognition; it has to be experienced in meditation, too, to make it a realization. 43. Agreed truth is a disguised form of absolute truth that arises when ignorance is manages thinking. (ref. footnotes) 44. In the realization of the world agreed truth dissolves itself into absolute truth. 45. Absolute truth is the realization of the true situation of the ‘being’ by the same ‘being’, in which, it dissolves in itself. 46. Absolute truth does not make anything to be seen as sensation, perception and cognition and nothing to be seen as happening in a time scale. 47. The most natural state a thinking being is inclined to ‘desire’ as ‘final’, is the realization of absolute truth. 48. There is no one to see absolute truth too in the ultimate seeing. 49. No meaning is there in the expression ‘absolute silence’ because no material, conceptual or temporal state is there to contrast with such a state. 50. ‘Absolute Truth’ is in seeing no thing, no particle or no person is there as having definite or indefinite states of existences. 51. One who has realized absolute truth is detached with the created ‘world’, and be with ‘the way the things are’ as felt in the thinking element. (ref. footnotes) 52. If one refuses to see in absolute truth, it is refusal also to think beyond the values created on the desires to exist forever and to enjoy pleasures.‡ .

Ethics 53. After the realization of absolute truth, a new set of values involuntarily emerge with the person who has realized it. 54. ‘Realization of Truth’ and ‘good behaviour’ appear together because they appear only in minds at peace; ‘bad’ characteristics caused by jealousy, hatred, conceit, lust, anger, stupidity§ appear minds are not at peace. . 55. All ‘bad’ characteristics arise from the desires to exist forever and to enjoy pleasures.** 56. If all individuals in a society have realized absolute truth and be with ‘the way the *

ignorance (avidhya)- the state of not knowing /ʍiðj𝑎:/ The Buddha referred to himself as one who has entered ‘the way the things are’ (thatha:gatha) ‡ desires (θnh𝑎:): desires that go to cause a being: 1. ‘desire to continue to exist’(bhʍə θnh𝑎:) 2. ‘desire to enjoy pleasures’(k𝑎:mƏ θnh𝑎:) There is also a third desire, desire to cease the existence (ʍibhʍƏ θnh𝑎:) § negative characteristics that arise in thinking that cause suffering: lust /r𝑎:gƏ/; anger /ðʍe:ʃƏ /; inability to see /mo:hƏ /; greediness /lo:bhƏ/; jealousy /i:rʃj𝑎:/ conceit /m𝑎:nƏ / etc. etc. ** kama thanha (desire to enjoy pleasures) bhava thanha (desire to exist forever) wibhava thanha (desire to cease the life form) †

Page 134 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 135 of 144

things are*’, there will be no conflicts; there will be no exploitations of one by other among them.

Four Dimensions 57. Nothing is there to call four dimensions, or even one dimension when seen in absolute truth. 58. ‘Births’ and ‘deaths’ seen as if they occur in a time scales are seen in ignorance. 59. Nothing is there to call ‘time’; therefore, nothing is there to be re-born or to die.

The Ultimate 60. ‘Buddhahood’, ‘God’, ‘matter x’, ‘arhathship’, ‘spirituality’, all ultimately denote the same phenomenon, however, different people view them differently in their different abilities of seeing. 61. Everything is ultimately ‘spiritual’, in which state of ‘spirituality’, ‘nothing’ is ‘seen’ the way they are seen in agreed truth. 62. Detachment is not rejection or giving up anything because, no ‘one’ is there to ‘reject’ or to ‘give up’; and nothing is there to be given up or to be rejected. 63. Final thought moment that occurs in detachment is the ideal thought moment, in which, one ought to feel no mass, no matter and no form. 64. When the world consists of people who are neither attached with nor detached with, ‘heaven’ is established in that world. ************************* 24 July 2019 MS Word count -----------------

*

The Buddha referred to himself as one who has entered ‘the way the things are’ / θθh𝑎:gƏθƏ// [θθh𝑎:/ reality /gƏθƏ/-on the path] Page 135 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 136 of 144

References as they relate to The Pali Thripitaka (Following explanations except points (z) and (aa), are based on buddhist texts in The Pali Thripitaka. Some of them may be different with the commonly accepted explanations on them. The author regrets the inability in naming exact sources.)

Key to Pronunciation of Pali/ Sanskrit words

a.

karma /krmə/= Things happen according to past thoughts and their actions. Karmic needs are the needs that arise with such a karmic background. ‘Thinking itself is karma’.

b.

bhava thanha = /bhʍə θnh𝑎:/ One of three basic desires. Everything arises from the desire to continue to exist [See also (c) and (d)]

c.

kama thanha /k𝑎:mƏ θnh𝑎:/= the desire to enjoy pleasures [See also (b) and (d)]

d.

thanha /θnh𝑎:/ = the desires that go to cause a being [See also (b) and (c)] The ‘desire to enjoy pleasures’ (c) and ‘desire to continue to exist’ (b) are based on ignorance. There also is a third desire, the ‘desire to cease the life form’ /ʍibhʍƏ θnh𝑎:/ which, too, is based on ignorance.

e.

The Buddha once advised, just because some teaching helps a person to achieve an objective, there is no need to be unnecessarily attached with that teaching after achieving the objective. He compared it to a man carrying a canoe on his head thinking he has to do so because it helped him to cross a river.

f.

nithya saggna /niθjƏ sɲɲ𝑎:/ = definite signs - Nouns denote nothing definite or temporary. Nothing exists as definite objects, definite events, or definite places. Therefore, nothing is there as representing names or words.

g.

thathagatha /θθh𝑎:gƏθƏ/ = ‘one who has entered the state of the way the things are’ /θθh𝑎:/ = reality, truth: /gƏθƏ / - on the way). This is a word The Buddha used for himself. Another word The Buddha used for Page 136 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 137 of 144

himself was ‘the one who has won infinity’ (Anantha Jina) ‘…Gahakutang wisankhathang…’ /ghku:tŋ ʍisŋkhƏθŋ/ = ‘The main beam in the roof of house is destroyed…’ A phrase from the pronouncement Lord Buddha declared expressing his joy of discovery in gaining the status of buddhahood. It is stated in the same pronouncement, ‘I have discovered the carpenter who is building this house’, to mean he found the cause of the life form. Angulimala /ŋgulim𝑎:lƏ/, who was killing people to fulfil a rite as instigated by his teacher because of a misunderstanding, was running after the Lord Buddha ‘to kill’ him. The Buddha is said to have performed a miracle that made Angulimala to run after him, but The Buddha appeared as standing still. This made Angulimala to shout, ‘O monk stay!’, to which The Buddha’s answered ‘I have stayed. It is you who are running’. By creating this situation Lord Buddha made Angulimala to engage in a conversation with him regarding the nature of human existence. h.

bhutha /bhu:θƏ/ = four types of manifestations of matter as qualities not as matter: i. WATER liquidity (Apo/a:po:/) 2. FIRE heat (thejo - /θe:go:/) 3. AIR diffusion (wayo – /ʍa:jo:/) 4. EARTH solidity (pathavi /pthƏʍi/).

i.

chiththa niyama /ciθθƏ nij𝑎:mƏ/ = Laws of the thinking element. (niyama = laws) Thinking element works according to the laws of thought. There are other such laws too as, laws relate to physics, laws relate to karma, laws of cause and effect and laws of seasons or eras appearing and disappearing

j.

birthless, deathless state - One who has realized nirvana has conquered death. ‘There will be no births or deaths for me hereafter’.- The Buddha. Each thought moment has three stages of ‘life’ as birth (udaya /uðƏjƏ), decay (vya /ʍjƏ) and death (bhanga /bhŋgƏ). The real death is the deaths of thought moments when seen in absolute truth. The ordinary death is death seen only in agreed truth (sammuthi marana /smmuθi mrƏnƏ/) ‘The person who sees life as a bubble, or a mirage, has conquered the death.’

k.

bhavanga /bhʍŋgƏ /. = (bhava= life form or being; anga= parts)

l.

an 'ahosi (ho:si) karma’ = the type of karma that cannot manifest because of its weak strength, and stronger ones are there that could overpower them. In ‘ahosi karma’, the karmic energy cannot make an appearance.

m. Most of the questions on the nature of life or the universe cannot be answered as ‘true’ or ‘false’. Four types of verification of truth have been arisen as; i. true ii. false iii. true and false iv. neither true nor false. n.

Two types of meditation: i. Samatha /smƏθhƏ/ Meditation = meditation of concentration to achieve states that can be useful to live a good life as seen in agreed truth ii. Vidharshana /ʍiðrʃƏn𝑎:/ Meditation = meditation to realize the absolute truth. To realize the true situation one has to contemplate on the three states of impermanence (or disorderliness), suffering and soullessness.

o.

4 unhinkable states: 1. The world (loka /lo:kƏ/) 2. laws of ‘physics’ (dhamma /ðhmmƏ/) 3. state of buddhahood 4. state of the thinking element (chiththa /ciθθƏ/)

p.

different physical manifestations as different living bodies have different mental set up (nanaththa kaya; nanaththa saggna (n𝑎:nθhƏ k𝑎:ja:, n𝑎:nθhƏ sɲɲ𝑎:) =.

q.

niramisa preethi (nir𝑎:misƏ pri:θi) = enjoyment by being detached Page 137 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 138 of 144

r.

There is no need to look into the external world because truth lies only within the six feet of this body

s.

Four qualities that go to make a higher being or ‘brahma’ /brhmƏ/: 1. Love (meththa /meθθ:/) 2. Empathy (muditha /muðiθ:/) 3. kindness (karuna /krun𝑎:/), and 4.‘unmoved by events’ (upekhkha /upe:kkha:/)

t.

One line of Nibbu:tha pada /nibbhu:θƏ pðƏ/ or Lines of Serenity): ‘The mother who has a son like this, has to be one who is calm and happy.’

u.

Three characteristics to be seen in vidarshana (ʍiðrʃƏn:) meditation ( ‘beyond seeing’) meditations: i. anithya (niθjƏ) = Disorder, impermanence. Nothing happens in an orderly manner. No definiteness in objects, states and events. All thoughts (sanskhara /sŋsk𝑎:rƏ/, too, are impermanent. ii. dukkha (ðukkhƏ)= suffering iii. ana:thma ((n𝑎:θmƏ (soullesness)

v.

The Middle Path (6.14) One need not go to extremes in thinking but select one in the middle (One may not think either absolute truth or agreed truth as the one and the only path.) ‘The Middle Path’ is also the ‘The Central Path’ and ‘The Main Path’.

w.

Sansara /sns𝑎:rƏ/– Continuous cyclic existence of having continuous births and deaths. Fear and suffering are the characteristics in this cyclic continuance. By ending it one becomes the ‘Real I’ after which he neither dies nor born again.

x.

‘Ananda’ leads to praggna’ /𝑎:nΛnðə/ /prΛgɲ𝑎:/= ‘appreciation of beauty’ leads to ‘wisdom’

y.

Appreciation of beauty in a folk song sung by women planting paddy, led a monk to attain enlightenment. This is an incident mentioned in Saddharmalankaraya, (sðhrm𝑎:lŋk𝑎:rƏjƏ) ancient Sinhala book of buddhist stories.

ab. Eons of the Universe as mentioned Agganna Suthra in Anguththara Nikaya /Λŋguθθərə nik𝑎:jə/ i. expanding stage /sΛŋʍΛttə kΛppə/ ii. expanded stage iii. contracting stage /ʍiʍΛttə kΛppə// iv . contracted stage ac. Thinking itself is karma. ad. ‘samma dhitti’ (smm𝑎: ðhitti) and ‘mithyha dhitti’ (miθhja: ðhitti) = ‘correct seeing’ and ‘false seeing’ ae. Talking about the real nature of a life form as Dhamma is a noble act one ought to engage with. (kalena dhamma sakhachcha) /k𝑎:le:nƏ ðhmmƏ s𝑎:kcha:/ af. There are chaos within, and chaos without. Everything is in disorder. Order is only cognitive seeing. (antho jata bahi jata /nθ0:gtha: bhi gth𝑎:/) ag. Akaliko (k𝑎:liko:) = timelessness Feeling the truth as being devoid of time. This is different to feeling an ‘Eternal State’ because ‘eternal state’ suggests there is time and things exist within that time extending from infinity to infinity. ‘Past is nowhere; Nothing is there to become.’ Khenang puranang navan nathhi sambhavang /khi:nŋ pur𝑎:nŋ nʍŋ nθhi smbhƏʍŋ): Kheena = lost; purana = past

Page 138 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 139 of 144

ah. Not only is there suffering (dukkha ), there also is fear too. (bhayang /bhjŋ/) (pe:matho jayathi so:ko: pematho jayathi bhayang). /pe:mƏθo: g𝑎:jƏθi so:ko: pe:mƏθo: g𝑎:jƏθi bhjŋ/ Four Truths as they relate to human or other beings: i. dukkha sathya ((ðukkhƏ sθjƏ) = Truth of suffering, the first truth as it relates to the existence of a being. ii. samudaya sathya (smu ðƏjƏsθjƏ) = Truth of the cause of that suffering iii. nirodha sathya (niro:ðhƏ sθjƏ) = The truth of redemption of suffering iv. marga sathya (m𝑎:rgƏ sθjƏ) = The truth the path of such redemption of suffering ai. klesha (kle:ʃƏ)= (sanska:ra); thoughts which are not pure; thoughts which are useless; impure states of the thinking element aj. ‘dhyanas’ (ðhj𝑎::nƏ)= levels that can be attained in meditation ak. LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN VIDARSHANA MEDITATION: Following levels can be progressively achieved in vidarshana meditation. One has only to experience the first level to gain confidence in attaining the rest. Nirvana is achieved after all these levels are achieved. Roopawachara (with images) (ru:p𝑎:ʍƏcƏrƏ) 1.

2.

3. 4.

Prathhama dhyana (prƏθhƏmƏ ðhj𝑎:nƏ): Achievement: Feelings of joy /pri:θi/, comfortability /sukhƏ/, and ‘feeling oneness’ /e:k𝑎:ɡrƏθ𝑎:/ with logic /ʍiθkkƏ/ and reasoning /ʍic𝑎:rƏ/ involved. Dhveethieeya Dhyana (ðʍi:θi:jƏ ðhj𝑎:nƏ): Achievement: Feelings of joy, comfortability, and ‘feelingoneness’ without logic and reasoning involved. Thrutheeya dhyana /θruθi:jƏ ðhj𝑎:nƏ/: Achievement: Only comfortability, and ‘feeling oneness’ is felt. Chathurthha dhyana /cθurθhh ðhj𝑎:nƏ/: Achievement:Only the ‘feeling oneness’

Aroopawachara (without images) /ru:p𝑎:ʍƏcƏrƏ/ 5. Achievement: ‘feeling endless space’ = akasanangchayathana /𝑎:k𝑎:s𝑎:nŋ c𝑎:jƏ θƏnƏ/ is felt. 6. Achievement: ‘feeling of endless consciousness’ = wigngnangchayathana /ʍiɲɲ𝑎:nŋc𝑎:jƏ θƏnƏ/ is felt. 7. Achievement: feeling of ‘neither signs nor no signs’ (newa sagngna na sagngnayathana /ne:ʍƏ sɲɲ𝑎: n𝑎:sɲɲ𝑎:jƏθƏnƏ/) is felt. 8. Achievement: ‘feeling of nothingness’ = (akingchanggnayathana /𝑎:kiŋcɲɲ𝑎:jƏθƏnƏ/) is felt. Final Level: 9. Achievement:state of devoid of signs or feelings (sangnavethaitha nirodha sɲɲ𝑎: ʍe:ðƏji θƏ niro:ðhƏ) is felt. al. As to whether it is the same person who is reborn after a person’s death, the answer is neither the same one nor a different one . am. A person has to pass 4 stages before she becomes an arhath: 1. sovan /so:ʍ𝑎:n/ 2.sakruthagami /skruð𝑎:ga:mi/ 3. anagamai /n𝑎:g𝑎a:mi:/ 4.arhath. [anagami’ = no turning back (na = not; gami = going towards)] an. All have traces of insanity except the Buddhas and the arhaths. ao. Two Types of Truth: There is truth which is truth only because we agree upon to call them truth, because they fulfil our utilitarian needs arising from our desires.There is the Absolute Truth that can be seen by transcending the world seen in agreed truth, which is also the realization of the real situation of seeing in agreed truth. Page 139 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 140 of 144

(Sammuthi sathya /smmuθi sθjƏ/ and Parmartha sathya / prƏm𝑎:rθhƏ sθjƏ/) Absolute truth is in nirvana because nothing is to be seen as false or suffering there. –The Buddha ap. A human body consists of five components as 1. images (ru:pa /ru:pƏ/) 2. physical pains or feelings (we:thana: /ʍe:ðƏn𝑎:/) 3. signs sagngna (/sɲɲ𝑎:/) 4. interpretations made on signs and pains (sanska:ra (/sŋsk𝑎:rƏ/ /) 5. consciousness (wigngna:na (/ʍiɲɲ𝑎:nƏ/ ) aq. Nama Rupa - A being consists of 1. ‘na:ma’ /n𝑎:mə/ and 2. rupa /ru:pə/. The ‘ru:pa’ is in the material domain of the process of being born, decaying and dying, whereas ‘na:ma’ remains in a timeless nonmaterial level. ‘na:ma’ is to be found at the level of matter x, whereas ru:pa is to be found as material manifestations. ar The nature of the Buddha’s teaching: ‘can be seen then and there’ /snðithiko:/; ‘timeless’ /k𝑎:liko:/ ‘can be realized then and there’ /e:hi pssiko:/; ‘can be felt then and there’ /pΛccΛθθΛŋ ʍe:ðiθΛbbo:/

==================================

Glossary Arhath (rhθ) = an arhath has experienced the state of nirvana without becoming a Buddha Buddhahood = the ultimate levels of thought form by realizing and achieving which nothing would remain as mystery Conceptual = a type of ‘non material’ state as seen by the thinking element that creates the ‘world’. The phrase ‘non material’ here means inability to sensualise or cognise. Emotion = energy manifestation of the karmic activities. Ignorance = The state of not knowing that creates a world of falsehood. Karma = causes of past activities manifesting as energy forms in the thinking element that creates a false world Matter = everything that appears as matter seen through sensation perception and cognition and perceived as material by the consciousness in accordance with its karmic needs Matter x = non perceivable, non cognisable levels of matter by which matter manifests to us Mystery (Mysteriousness) = conceptually guessed area or areas that cannot be seen properly through sensation, perception and cognition Non-material (or spiritual) = any phenomenon we think as existing other than what is seen as material, which are not seen through perception and cognition. Qualities seen in material formations such as having ‘forms’ or ‘mass’ or subject to ‘time’ are absent in them Sansara = non ending processes of cyclical births, decay and deaths of life forms Seeing = perceiving and cognising the world (see = perceive through senses, appear as phenomena); how the phenomena appear in the thinking element Spiritual (or Non-material) = any phenomenon we think as existing other than what is seen as material, which are not seen through perception and cognition. Qualities seen in material formations such as having ‘forms’ or ‘mass’ or subject to ‘time’ are absent in them

Page 140 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 141 of 144

Thinking element = Non personal element that causes the appearance of a being, the state of which is unthinkable, therefore it is indefinable. Unifications = the activity of seeing objects, events and states as if having separate identities for themselves that go to create a world. (sankhara or sanskara) World = Everything seen as one as creations of the thinking element

References: Barlow Allen R. (1981) Gestalt-Antecedent Influence or Historical Accident

Bono, Edward De (1968) The Five Day Course in Thinking Allen Lane The Penguin Press, London Bono Edward De (1987) Teaching Thinking Bucke, Richard M. (1901) Cosmic Consciousness (NewYork: E.P. Dutton) Chopra, Deepak M.D. Quantum Healing -Exploring the Frontiers of Mindbody Medicine (1990) Bantam Books Crick, Francis and Christof Koch The Problem of Consciousness Encarta Encyclopedia Deluxe 2004 © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation Davies, Paul God and the New Physics (1984) Simon & Schuster Dharmasiri G. (1972) Dharshanika Prashna Educational Publications Department, Sri Lanka Gnanananda, Katukurunde (2005) Niwane Niveema (8th volume) Board of Trustee Colombo Goleman, Daniel: Emotional Intelligence (1996) Bantam books Hawking Stephen (1988) A Brief History of Time Bantam books Jeans, James: The Mysterious Universe (Adapted and edited: George F. Wear) Longman Green Co. Ltd. Júlio Rocha do Amaral, MD & Jorge Martins de Oliveira, MD, PhD Limbic System: The Center of Emotions-The Healing Center On-Line.

Marrs, Texe (1988) Dark Secrets of the New Age Crossway Books Postle, Denis The Mind Gymnasium (1989) Macmillan London Ltd. And Papermac Ryle G. (1983) The Concept of Mind Sheptulin A.P. Marxist Leninist Philosophy (1980) Progress Publishers Moscow Subasinghe R. Unification and Disintegration (2011) International Division -Godage International Publishers-Colombo www.godage.com- [email protected] Talbot M . (---) The Universe as a Hologram Taylor J. Black Holes The end of the Universe - Fontana Publications

______________________________________

Page 141 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 142 of 144

INDEX (not done ) A

emotions (ordinary and sudden )

Absolute Silence

enjoyment (attached and detached)

Absolute truth

ethics

Agreed truth (definition)

experience (final )

animals

external world

arhath, arhathship

evolution

art atom (original)

F

attached enjoyment

fear

B

G

Becket Samuel

generalizations

behaviour (human)

God (Omniscient Person)(Supreme) Being

beyond (The)

Goleman, Daniel

being

Gott J. Richard

bhavanga bhutha (qualities)

H

big bang (big crunch)

happiness

big crunch (big bang)

heaven

Bono Edward De

Hawkins

borderline (between agreed truth and absolute truth)

Heisenberg

Buddha, The

Heraclitus

buddhahood, the state of

human behaviour

buddhism

I

Behind the Screen

I Consciousness

brain

ignorance

Brecht Bertolt

imaginary World immune system C

intelligence (emotional)

Caucasian Chalk Circle

infinite intelligence

cell replication

interference

change

intelligence

chaos

internal world

Chopra D. circularity in ‘seeing’

J

cognition

Jeans (James)

concepts (conceptual)

joy

conceptual (purely) Consciousness, The

K

contentment

karmic (need energy)

cortical

klesha

Created I creation

L language D

Leucippus

death

levels of achievement in meditation

Democrates

life form

Descartes

logic

desires, three detached enjoyment

M

dhyanas (levels of achievement in meditation)

man

differences (the laws of)

marxism (Marx)

dimensions (four)

material

disintegration

matter

disorderliness

matter x

distorted thoughts

meditation

DNAs

memories

Domino Effect

meta physical mind E

Einstein

moment (present) motion

Page 142 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 143 of 144 mysteriousness N nirvana

S

‘no turning back’

sameness (the laws of)

non material

sansara

‘no one’

Screen (The) (On the)(Behind)

‘nothing’

seeing serenity O

Shelley

Omniscient Person (God)

Sheptulin

oneness (feeling of)

silence (absolute)

optimism

similarities (the laws of)

orderliness

space

original atom

spiritual . stars P

strings (physics)

‘part’ (The) (and the ‘whole’)

Subconsciousness The

particles

submission

perception

suffering

pessimism

symbolic world

physical physics (quantum physicist)

T

Plato

‘the way the things are’

present moment

thinking .

predictions

Third Force The

primordial soup

thought element (thinking)

primordial I s

thoughts (distorted)

psychology (Freudian)

time

purely conceptual

transition truth Q

qualities (bhutha )

U

quantum physics

uncertainty principle unification (unify) R

universe

Real I Real World redemption (from suffering)

V vidarshana meditation

rejection

W

regression (to past)

Waiting for Godot

religions

waves

replication (cell)

‘whole’ (The) (and the ‘part’)

Ryle G.

world world (external) world (real)

Page 143 of 144

Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth Part 1 - © R.Subasinghe A Philosophical Outlook on the nature of Beings and the Universe on a Buddhist Perspective 24 July 2019 Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ page 2 of 144

Other books by the same author

Unification and Disintegration R.Subasinghe ‘…profusely illustrates how this very suffering nature can be turned into enlightening experiences…’ ‘…a powerful statement…could teach us powerful lessons…’ - Professor Gunapala Dharmasiri

now released as an international edition by Godage Publishers, 675 Maradana Road, Colombo E-mail [email protected]

www. godage.com

‘Life Force’ and Emotions Godage Publishers Road Colombo in675 theMaradana Classroom a book on education

Impact of Psychology on a a Modern Classroom be ? , 675 Maradana Road Colombo

Freedom A book of two English plays Page 2 of 144