Threesology Research Journal: The Language Narrative
A Language Narrative
10th page

Flag Counter
Progressive Thinkers as of 12/1/2022

Language Narrative Series
~~~ Aesop's Fables ~~~
Preface 1 Preface 2 Preface 3
Prologue 1 Prologue 2 Prologue 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33      
Standard Cognitive Model series:
Page (#37) is most recent:
37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29
28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20
19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
Old numbering system(Hence, oldest writings)
1b 1c   1d 1e

Let's continue looking at different ideas in order to pay witness to the variations in which the "1- 2- Many" theme can play out in different cultures and time periods, using different words (Religion and Philosophy routinely attempt to use language which expresses a definitive generality as a defined uniqueness representing the notion of "finiteness for exploring a vastness"— such as one might illustrate with some notion of limits.) In other words, both religion and philosophy attempt to make the complexity of life accessible to the minds of common people, whereas in the case of Mathematics and other subjects, one must wade through specialized jargon or symbology to find basic patterns, unless one has a tool for such an analyses as that provided by the generality of the 3-patterned "1- 2- Many" model.

Please note: I am not advocating any belief presented by any Western religion or Eastern Philosophy. My view is that, speaking collectively of them all, they in fact represent a "Cognitive Many" from which human consciousness must move away form in order to attain a higher grasp of consciousness. I am not speaking of the notion suggested by the word "spirituality". And no I don't think that just because someone learns to levitate themselves and/or others, or trans-mutate matter, or engage in a personal means of transporting oneself via their mind to some other location, or have any ability such as telekinesis as being representative of a god-like consciousness. They would constitute an ability different from most, but would not constitute the person being a super-being or having a super-consciousness. While one might want to think such abilities constitute some superiority, it is such an interpretation which expresses an inferior means of making a correct deduction that consciousness has the ability to change, if given the right conditions. I would not want to have such abilities just to enable myself to pat myself on the back and think I was superior. What good would be such superiority be if it couldn't be used for a greater good, and not merely as an extension of the same attitudes and aptitudes expressed by most people? In other words, why have angel's wings if they are going to be used solely for flying to a store to get a six pack of beer and a package of cigarettes? Indeed, why have an ability to think faster than everyone else if it is going to be used for gambling? What good is a superior persuasability if one's primary usage of it is to express a greater level of greed?

It is of need for some readers to recognize how I see myself in the present Narrative, much of which has already been written but images keep attending themselves to the point of addressing the morning as a wakeup call. However, the following came to me as I was experiencing it as an actuality, yesterday afternoon (2nd January, 2023):

Those who reach a higher plane/stage/section of consciousness shouldn't expect anyone to be there with open arms to greet them. It is a place of serenity, without pain, sorrow, hate, anger, hunger, thirst or even love. The air is fresh and the skies are clear. One can travel the entire realm and meet no one. It is a point of transition. A way-station for a person to decide if they will return or go on to another level of consciousness by way of a personalized meditation. If your fate is sealed as it was for The Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed and others such as Gandhi, you will return for awhile to bring a message. When times require spiritual leadership, spiritual leaders arise. When times call for Philosophical leadership, Philosophers arise. Others are variation of different leadership requirements in their respective time periods. If you find yourself having returned with ideas that seem at a grasp beyond your former self; you have returned momentarily for your respective task. While the moment of your stay may seem long to some, it is a flicker of time for your destiny yet to come.

After I finished writing the foregoing while I was in the very place being described, the "time and place/space" I was occupying slowly sifted away. Shortly thereafter, in another moment of contemplative reverie, there appeared what can only be expressed as a "silent" but distinct "voice", which said: "others will be coming." I was honestly taken aback by the forthright forcefulness of the plainly spoken comment and then realized what part I am to play in the Narrative. Like a scarecrow set up at the edge of a field alongside a road... placed there to complete three tasks:

  1. One, as a warning against predators that justice will be swift and merciless.
  2. Two, as a sort of mile-marker for those many who travel the road, thinking they know where they are going.
  3. Three, as a means to point out a direction for those who have been seeking a specific path along the road others have also traveled on.

Very many people have traveled the same road coming from different directions but have not reached their sought for destination. As is often the case, expectations can be over-valued and unrealistic, because that being sought for is neither appropriately labeled nor articulated with the degree of sensibility necessary to calm one's enthusiasm so that the quietude of realization can provide an enhanced understanding. So very many who have journeyed the same road from different directions do not know that they are at a crossroads and continue to make the same incorrect choice which keeps them from venturing beyond the point they wish to depart from. Those who come to realize they are at a crossroads, have a decision of whether to choose the pointed-out direction or not.

Psychokinesis... also called Telekinesis:

In parapsychology, the action of mind on matter, in which objects are caused to move or change as a result of mental concentration upon them. The physical nature of psychokinetic (PK) effects contrasts with the cognitive quality of extrasensory perception (ESP), the other major grouping of para-psychological phenomena. Levitation is said to result from powers of Psychokinesis; such displays are common, though fraudulent, in theatrical magic. In PK tests, the subject attempts by thinking or willing to influence thrown dice, causing a certain die face to turn up or causing the die to land in a certain area. Experimental results, as with other para-psychological phenomena, have been inconclusive. ("psychokinesis." Encyclopædia Britannica. )

In getting a taste of what is thought to be a distinction between a higher "enlightened" consciousness and contemporary higher "educated" consciousness, one might look at the following which describes a difference between early Indian thought processes and that of its contemporary Western counterpart. Please note that there is a usage of language differences such as might be expressed in meditation chants, hymns, prayers, etc... Such verbal devices used in a given language suggests that language and cognition have an unrecognized affinity resembling an earlier symbiosis. However, if the processes of cognition are in what I believe to be the cusp of development between babbling and word usage, then such verbal devices will necessarily change, along with the language. Humanity has a unique opportunity to devise for itself a Universal Language of cognition. The sacred texts from all religious and philosophical perspectives are being used as teething rings and over-head mobiles by a cognitive infancy that is getting to big for its crib and must be permitted to crawl outside of it.

Sacred texts being used as an oral tradition, just as many other types of literature being used in a similar (repetitive) way; needs to be understood in terms of a developmental cognitive appreciation and not the psycho-sexual perspective of those whose orientations are transfixed on equating a necessity of development passing through physiological transitions coupled to the present state of incremental environmental deteriorations which exceed customary views pertaining to human caused pollutions. Psycho-sexual orientations of development are part of the same cyclicity which impresses upon humanity to persist in the usage of oral traditions which hamper development of human cognition beyond this obsession. Sacred texts are part of an oral tradition aligned with a level of cognitive development akin to the babbling state of development coupled oral fixations being recited as infant oralilty called reduplication in place of the term "repetition".

Significance of Indian philosophies in the history of philosophy: ("Indian philosophy." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

In relation to Western philosophical thought, Indian philosophy offers both surprising points of affinity and illuminating differences. The differences highlight certain fundamentally new questions that the Indian philosophers asked. The similarities reveal that, even when philosophers in India and the West were grappling with the same problems and sometimes even suggesting similar theories, Indian thinkers were advancing novel formulations and argumentations. Problems that the Indian philosophers raised for consideration, but that their Western counterparts never did, include such matters as the origin (utpatti) and apprehension (jnapti) of truth (pramanya). Problems that the Indian philosophers for the most part ignored but that helped shape Western philosophy include the question of whether knowledge arises from:

  • Experience or from Reason and distinctions such as that between...
    • Analytic and synthetic judgments or
    • Between contingent and necessary truths.

Indian thought, therefore, provides the historian of Western philosophy with a point of view that may supplement that gained from Western thought. A study of Indian thought, then, reveals certain inadequacies of Western philosophical thought and makes clear that some concepts and distinctions may not be as inevitable as they may otherwise seem. In a similar manner, knowledge of Western thought gained by Indian philosophers has also been advantageous to them.

  • Vedic hymns, Hindu scriptures dating from the 2nd millennium BCE, are the oldest extant record from India of the process by which the human mind makes its gods and of the deep psychological processes of myth-making leading to profound cosmological concepts.
  • The Upanishads (speculative philosophical texts) contain one of the first conceptions of a universal, all-pervading, spiritual reality leading to a radical monism (absolute non-dualism, or the essential unity of matter and spirit). The Upanishads also contain early speculations by Indian philosophers about nature, life, mind, and the human body, not to speak of ethics and social philosophy.
  • The classical, or orthodox, systems (darshanas) debate, sometimes with penetrating insight and often with a degree of repetition that can become tiresome to some, such matters as:
  • The status of the finite individual; (Defining limits such as is described by the "1" and "Many").
  • The distinction as well as the relation between the body, mind, and the self; (A "1- 2- Many" model).
  • The nature of knowledge and the types of valid knowledge; (A description of limits and centrality.)
  • The nature and origin of truth; (A "1" and centrality cognitive approach).
  • The types of entities that may be said to exist; (an attempt to define the existence of a "1- 2- Many" model).
  • The relation of realism to idealism; (another cognitive attempt to define a "1- 2- Many" model).
  • The problem of whether universals or relations are basic; (whether the limit of "Many" has a counter-part limit of "1").
  • The very important problem of moksha, or liberation (literally "release")—its nature and the paths leading up to it. (how the undefined "1- 2- Many" model may present itself as a model of potential liberation).

Need I point out the above list as representing a preponderance of dualistic thinking by not advocating the presence of a third? Using references from philosophy and religion to highlight the recurring themes of "singular, dual and triple"... as well as "Many" ideas helps to define how big an issue the "1- 2- Many" theme actually is; since it is using far more "elements" of thought than which Early philosophers did when pursuing some simplistic notion of fundamental properties (involving earth, water, air, fire) to explain the origin of the World and Universe as they saw it. While there efforts were a Naturalistic philosophy from which religion took many ideas, their fundamental patterns could only take them so far due to the lack of knowledge at that time. The later themes of basic enumerations were expressed with words such as monism, duality, many or poly-theism, (though such ideas as pantheism, panpsychism, hylozoism should be listed).

By looking at the subject of dualism we can get a glimpse of the "1- 2- Many" model being cognitively played with, like an infant using its mouth to explore its world by putting everything into its mouth. It is an "oral" orientation to an exploration of reality. We see this in the usage of the oral traditions, like oral habits, being used. The retention of old "sacred" texts is an "oral" tradition otherwise to be noted as an "oral habit". Thousands upon thousands of people are using an "oral" habit for exploring reality without realizing they are in a stage of cognitive infancy. Humanity must be set outside its crib (Earth, solar system, galaxy) so that it can practice cognitively crawling before it takes its first step into the realm of cognitive walking.

Nature and Significance of Dualism:

In religion, dualism means the belief in two supreme opposed powers or gods, or sets of divine or demonic beings, that caused the world to exist. It may conveniently be contrasted with monism, which sees the world as consisting of one principle such as mind (spirit) or matter; with monotheism; or with various pluralisms and polytheisms, which see a multiplicity of principles or powers at work. As is indicated below, however, the situation is not always clear and simple, a matter of one or two or many, for there are monotheistic, monistic, and polytheistic religions with dualistic aspects.

H.O.B inclusion:

  1. Variations of the "1": One, Oneness, Monism, Monotheism, Singularity...
    • (Transitional states can exist involving different labels and symbols)
  2. Variations of the "2": Dualism, Duality, Dyad, Contrast...
    • (Transitional states exist, such as use of the "3" in its different forms can be used either as a "2"-dual portrait or "Many" profile... it can be used to demark a transitional state of proposed being.)
  3. Variations of the "Many": Plurality, Pluralism, Polytheism...
    • (Transitional variations of the "1/Many" (or Many/1): (Excluded middle models, models stressing extremes, E Pluribus Unum...)

Various distinctions may be discerned in the types of dualism in general. In the first place, dualism may be either absolute or relative. In a radical or absolute dualism, the two principles are held to exist from eternity; for example, in the Iranian dualisms, Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, both the bright and beneficent and the sinister and destructive principles are from eternity.

In a mitigated or relative dualism, one of the two principles may be derived from, or presuppose, the other as a basis; for example, the Bogomils, a medieval heretical Christian group, held that the devil is a fallen angel who came from God and was the creator of the human body, into which he managed by trickery to have God infuse a soul. Here the devil is a subordinate being and not coeternal with God, the absolute eternal being. This, then, is clearly a qualified, not a radical, dualism. Both radical and mitigated types of dualism are found among different groups of the late medieval Cathari, a Christian heretical movement closely related to the Bogomils.

Another and perhaps more important distinction is that between dialectical and eschatological dualism. Dialectical dualism involves an eternal dialectic, or tension, of two opposed principles, such as, in Western culture, the One and the many, or Idea and matter (or space, called by Plato "the receptacle"), and, in Indian culture, maya (the illusory world of sense experience and multiplicity) and atman-brahman (the essential identity of self and ultimate reality).

  • Dialectical dualism ordinarily implies a cyclical, or eternally repetitive, view of history.
  • Eschatological dualism—i.e., a dualism concerned with the ultimate destiny of humanity and the world, how things will be in the "last" times—on the other hand, conceives of a final resolution of the present dualistic state of things, in which evil will be eliminated at the end of a linear history constituted of a series of unrepeatable events instead of a cyclical, repetitive one.

H.O.B. it is ridiculous to think of not being involved with a repetition when the Natural environment is viewed as having a cyclical year and the Artificial environment of created societies, cultures and traditions are created as reminders and emphacizations thereof.

The ancient Iranian religions, Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, and Gnosticism—a religio-philosophical movement influential in the Hellenistic world—provide examples of eschatological dualism. A type of thought, such as Platonism, that insists on a profound harmony in the cosmos, is thus more radically dualistic, because of its irreducibly dialectical character, than Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, with their emphasis on the cosmic struggle between two antithetical principles (good and evil). Midway between these extremes is Gnostic dualism, which has an ontology (or theory of being) of an Orphic-Platonic type (see below Among ancient civilizations and peoples) but which also affirms the final disappearance and annihilation of evil with the eventual destruction of the material world—and thus comprises both dialectical and eschatological dualism.

In philosophy, dualism is often identified with the doctrine of transcendence—that there is a separate realm or being above and beyond the world—as opposed to monism, which holds that the ultimate principle is inside the world (immanent). In the disciplines concerned with the study of religions, however, religious dualism refers not to the distinction or separation of God and the world but to the doctrine of two basic principles, a doctrine that, moreover, may easily be compatible with a form of monism (e.g., Orphism or Vedanta) that makes the opposition between the One and the many absolute and sees in multiplicity merely a fragmentation (or illusory obliteration) of the One. ("dualism." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

"Moksha" or "moksa" or mukti, also spelled moksa:

In Indian philosophy and religion, liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth (samsara). Derived from the Sanskrit word muc ("to free"), the term moksha literally means freedom from samsara. This concept of liberation or release is shared by a wide spectrum of religious traditions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism.

About the middle of the 1st millennium BCE, new religious movements spreading along the Ganges River valley in India promoted the view that human life is a state of bondage to a recurring process of rebirth (samsara; see also reincarnation). These movements spurred the eventual development of the major religions of Buddhism, Jainism, and (during subsequent centuries) Hinduism. These and many other religious traditions offered differing conceptions of bondage and diverging paths to moksha. Some, such as Jainism, posited an abiding self that became liberated, while others, such as Buddhism, denied the existence of a permanent self.

Some Indian traditions also place greater emphasis within their respective paths to liberation on concrete, ethical action within the world. Devotional religions such as Vaishnavism, for example, present love and service to God as the one sure way to moksha. Others stress the attainment of mystical awareness. Some forms of Buddhism and the monistic theologies of Hinduism—e.g., Advaita (non-dualistic) Vedanta—consider both the mundane world and human entrapment within it to be a web of illusion whose penetration requires both mental training through meditative techniques and the attainment of liberating insight. In this case, the passage from bondage to liberation is not a real transition but an epistemological transformation that permits one to see the truly real behind the fog of ignorance.

Some traditions present the plurality of Indian religions as different paths to moksha. More frequently, however, one tradition will understand its rivals as lower and less effective paths that ultimately must be complemented with its own. ("moksha." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Here is another reference, which highlights both a triad and a supposed system of endless dualities, and yet the recurrence of the 2 with the 3 is not discussed as part of an underlying pattern needing to be re-framed into a larger consciousness of realization:

Karma → Samsara → Moksha

Hindus generally accept the doctrine of transmigration and rebirth and the complementary belief in karma. The whole process of rebirth, called samsara, is cyclic, with no clear beginning or end, and encompasses lives of perpetual, serial attachments. Actions generated by desire and appetite bind one's spirit (jiva) to an endless series of births and deaths. Desire motivates any social interaction (particularly when involving sex or food), resulting in the mutual exchange of good and bad karma. In one prevalent view, the very meaning of salvation is emancipation (moksha) from this morass, an escape from the impermanence that is an inherent feature of mundane existence. In this view the only goal is the one permanent and eternal principle: the One, God, brahman, which is totally opposite to phenomenal existence. People who have not fully realized that their being is identical with brahman are thus seen as deluded. Fortunately, the very structure of human experience teaches the ultimate identity between brahman and atman. One may learn this lesson by different means: by realizing one's essential sameness with all living beings, by responding in love to a personal expression of the divine, or by coming to appreciate that the competing attentions and moods of one's waking consciousness are grounded in a transcendental unity—one has a taste of this unity in the daily experience of deep, dreamless sleep.

Dharma and the three paths

Hindus acknowledge the validity of several paths (margas) toward such release. The Bhagavadgita ("Song of the Lord"; c. 100 CE), an extremely influential Hindu text, presents three paths to salvation: the karma-marga ("path of ritual action" or "path of duties"), the disinterested discharge of ritual and social obligations; the jnana-marga ("path of knowledge"), the use of meditative concentration preceded by long and systematic ethical and contemplative training (Yoga) to gain a supraintellectual insight into one's identity with brahman; and the bhakti-marga ("path of devotion"), love for a personal God. These ways are regarded as suited to various types of people, but they are interactive and potentially available to all. ("Hinduism." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Atman: Sanskrit- "self," "breath"

One of the most basic concepts in Hinduism, the universal self, identical with the eternal core of the personality that after death either transmigrates to a new life or attains release (moksha) from the bonds of existence. While in the early Vedas it occurred mostly as a reflexive pronoun meaning “oneself,” in the later Upanishads (speculative commentaries on the Vedas) it comes more and more to the fore as a philosophical topic. Atman is that which makes the other organs and faculties function and for which indeed they function; it also underlies all the activities of a person, as brahman (the Absolute) underlies the workings of the universe. Atman is part of the universal brahman, with which it can commune or even fuse. So fundamental was the atman deemed to be that certain circles identified it with brahman. Of the various systems (darshans) of Hindu thought, Vedanta is the one that is particularly concerned with the atman. ("atman." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

In multiple instances we find belief systems having created their own histories called "sacred texts" that one is not permitted to refute, because so often in doing so one can find a flaw in the practiced belief structure. The older, the more ancient a text is presumed to be, the more profound is thought to be its message. Age thus becomes the primary determination of a desired truthfulness like finding a fossil and interpreting it as a justification for believing anything said by its proponents and presenters is justifiable... that it represents some unfalsifiable missing link between some supposed originating whole or holiness. In other situations, the quantity or quality (social position/wealth) of a believing membership comes to constitute a history of a given text or item. Let us take an example of this hypocritical nonsense from a view on Indian Philosophy. In very many cases we see what appears to be a reference to the origination of language described as a word, or logos, or breath, or audibleness, etc... Notice how the word "Brah-ma" is reminiscent of an infant's babbled expression, as no doubt other words in other languages.

All "orthodox" (Indian) philosophies can trace their basic principles back to some statement or other in the Vedas, the texts that are generally awarded the status of scripture in Hinduism but not in Buddhism or Jainism. The Vedanta schools, especially, had an affiliation with the authority of shruti (literally "that which is heard"; texts that are taken to be revealed), and the school of Mimamsa concerned itself chiefly with the questions of interpreting the sacred texts. The Hindu tradition regards the Vedas as being apaurusheya—i.e., not composed by any person. Sayana, a famous Vedic commentator, said that this means an absence of a human author. For Sayana, the eternality of the Vedas is like that of space and time; no human being experiences their beginning or their end. But they are, in fact, created by Brahma, the supreme creator. For the Advaita Vedanta, because no author of the Vedas is mentioned, an unbroken chain of Vedic teachers is quite conceivable, so that the scriptures bear testimony to their own eternality. The authoritative character of shruti may then be deduced from the fact that it is free from any fault (dosha), or limitation, which characterizes human words. Furthermore, the Vedas give knowledge about things—whether dharma (what ought to be done) or brahman (Absolute Reality)—which cannot be known by any other empirical means of knowledge. The authority of the Vedas cannot, therefore, be contradicted by any empirical evidence. Later logicians of the "orthodox" schools sought to give these arguments precision and logical rigour. ("Indian philosophy." Encyclopædia Britannica. )

Please don't misunderstand me. The beliefs being espoused can and do provide some people with an enlightened view of realization within the context to which they are applied. But such beliefs do not permit believers to move beyond such beliefs, if such a move requires them to abandon their religious or philosophical beliefs. What I am describing is not an abandonment of one's morality, because morality has nothing to do with religion. Religions want to claim morality as their own just as they do some idea concerning a supreme being or essence. One tenet of belief is to "have no other gods before me" and that the belief system is fundamentally THE most sacred of all texts claimed to be sacred throughout the consciousness of humanity. In other words, there is no need for someone to look beyond that which is defined as an Extreme position of a view... so long as they remain in the context which makes such a statement appear valid and life-affirming. With respect to the aforementioned condition of a history being developed due to conflict, the following excerpt is fairly typical of many situations for the establishment of a ideological flavor or flavors:

The pre-logical period

In its early pre-logical phase, Indian thought, freshly developing in the Indian subcontinent, actively confronted and assimilated the diverse currents of pre-Vedic and non-Vedic elements in the native culture that the Indo-Aryan-speaking migrants from the north sought to appropriate. The marks of this confrontation are to be noted in every facet of Indian religion and thought:

  • In the Vedic hymns in the form of conflicts, with varying fortunes,
    1. Between the people referred to as "nobles" (arya) and the people already living in the land and;
    2. In the conflict between a positive attitude that is interested in making life fuller and richer and a negative attitude emphasizing asceticism and renunciation;
    3. In the great variety of skeptics, naturalists, determinists, indeterminists, accidentalists, and no-soul theorists that filled the Ganges Plain;
    4. In the rise of the heretical, unorthodox schools of Jainism and Buddhism protesting against the Vedic religion and the Upanishadic theory of atman;
    5. In the continuing confrontation, mutually enriching and nourishing, that occurred between the Brahmanic (Hindu priestly) and Buddhist logicians, epistemologists, and dialecticians.

The Indo-Aryan speakers, however, were soon followed by a host of foreign invaders, Greeks, Shakas and Hunas from Central Asia, Pashtuns (Pathans), Mongols, and Mughals (Muslims). Both religious thought and philosophical discussion received continuous challenges and confrontations. The resulting responses have a dialectical character: sometimes new ideas have been absorbed and orthodoxy has been modified; sometimes orthodoxy has been strengthened and codified in order to be preserved in the face of the dangers of such confrontation; sometimes, as in the religious life of the Christian Middle Ages, bold attempts at synthesis of ideas have been made. Nevertheless, through all the vicissitudes of social and cultural life, Brahmanical thought has been able to maintain a fairly strong current of continuity.

In the chaotic intellectual climate of the pre-Mauryan era, there were skeptics (ajnanikah) who questioned the possibility of knowledge. There were also materialists, the chief of which were the Ajivikas (deterministic ascetics) and the Lokayatas (the name by which Charvaka doctrines—denying the authority of the Vedas and the soul—are generally known). Furthermore, there existed the two unorthodox schools of yadrichhavada (accidentalists) and svabhavaha (naturalists), who rejected the supernatural. Kapila, the legendary founder of the Samkhya school, supposedly flourished during the 7th century BCE. Proto-Jain ideas were already in existence when Mahavira (flourished 6th century BCE), the founder of Jainism, initiated his reform. Gautama the Buddha (flourished c. 6th–4th centuries BCE) apparently was familiar with all these intellectual ideas and was as dissatisfied with them as with the Vedic orthodoxy. He sought to forge a new path—though not new in all respects—that was to assure blessedness to man. Orthodoxy, however, sought to preserve itself in a vast Kalpa-sutra (ritual) literature—with three parts:

  1. The Shrauta-sutra, based on shruti (revelation);
  2. The Grihya-sutra, based on smriti (tradition);
  3. The Dharma-sutra, pertaining to rules of religious law...

...whereas the philosophers tried to codify their doctrines in systematic form, leading to the rise of the philosophical sutras. Though the writing of the sutras continued over a long period, the sutras of most of the various darshanas probably were completed between the 6th and 3rd centuries BCE. Two of the sutras appear to have been composed in the pre-Mauryan period but after the rise of Buddhism; these works are the Mimamsa-sutras of Jaimini and the Vedanta-sutras of Badarayana (c. 500–200 BCE). ("Indian philosophy." Encyclopædia Britannica.)

One is either encouraged to join in the Oneness, whereas in other perspectives this is flip-flopped and it is viewed that the Oneness already exists in everyone. In any case, duality is being used to move between the idea of singularity and multiplicity, each cycle of a believed-in transcendence of possible achievement, typically obtainable in the views of believers if one submits to a given retinue of behavior... very often involving the sacrifice, the giving, the bestowment, the charitableness, the tithing, the offering, the tax, (or whatever label is used) to provide an excuse, a reason, which helps in the survival of a given set of belief practitioners.

Let us take an example... in present day terms there are those who think they are at the threshold of developing a new consciousness by believing in the "oneness" of homosexuality/Lesbianism, while others think this is being achieved by catering to the view of some model of bisexuality, and others think that some type of multiplicity is best to achieve some greater openness, some greater or lofted sense of humanity, of intelligence, of compassion, of righteousness. Such expressions of the "1- 2- Many" are individual expressions of an underlying consciousness which has turned towards an inner world, and appears to be a larger reality of personal accomplishment. But it is not a species-wide involvement of consciousness development to a presumed higher plane of existence. It is the language of a personal consciousness and not that which can be applied to the whole of humanity in terms of expanding the consciousness of a Nation, of a species by its observed practices.

The idea that duality is the go-between, the middle-man, the bridge between conceptual frames of singularity and Multiplicity does not mean it has to be used, since the singularity/multiplicity is itself a dichotomy. Whereas the "three" might well be described as the outermost edge of a higher consciousness development, how is the next cycle to be better if the cultural environments of the world are filled with laws and institutions which want to maintain the equilibrium of an old higher consciousness achievement?. If all social leaders can not grasp the presence of a New Age that can unfold if we want it to, but they either don't want it to or do not have the vision to permit its expression, then individualized achievements of a higher consciousness will be sought, only to find that they too are confined to a level of expression permitted within the parameters of those who claim a like-mindedness, but do not actually share an ability to achieve it. When humanity lives in a world culture which does not seek to achieve a higher consciousness, that many social leaders don't even have the slightest contemplative notion of what this might mean; how is it possible for humanity to grow beyond its present fingertips unless it is by way of being forced, by injury, accident, or disease?

So where does the "Higher Consciousness" cycle come from? Is it little more than an expression of some underlying biological process connected with survival, but has no real existence... even though our description of the unrecognized biological activity seduces us to believe otherwise? For example, a person may be intelligent enough to convince themselves to commit suicide, but are not instructed to think about being intelligent enough to outwit themselves in this proposed commitment. In other words, if you are intelligent enough to convince yourself that killing yourself is the right thing to do, though a question of morality or one's short (human) life span may not come into review during such contemplations, then you should be intelligent enough to talk yourself out of such a commitment. Persuasive thoughts should not be permitted to persuade you into thinking they are a god you must defer to without question or applying a different, counter-logic to the stream of consciousness speaking to you in such convincing terms.

If the 1- 2- Many cycle of thought involved in the development of a defined higher consciousness is the mere exercise of an underlying biological activity as one might describe one's body temperature, blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation, etc., then is it possible to fine-tune the cycle as one might develop the physical strength, stamina, skill for a given task? Can be create the circumstances which will help assist all of humanity into such a condition? Yet, is there a possibility for humanity to actually develop a higher consciousness as described by that to be achieved beyond the human condition, or is this mere rationalization as part of the survival strategy of a species living under conditions of an incremental deterioration?

While some might want to consider that the idea of three types of consciousness acts like a 3-legged stool which expresses symmetry, what if this idea is a knee-jerk reaction being performed by the mind, and the usage of three in this context in this way is like repeating an echo from the depths of a chamber where both language and consciousness arose in... (metaphorically speaking)? The first three are Sigmund Freud's variety, the next is a hodge/podge of collected ideas using different prefixes:

  1. Unconsciousness
  2. pre-consciousness
  3. Consciousness

  1. (un/sub/pre/proto/lst/inferior)-consciousness
  2. ("common-erior")- consciousness (individually described, such as a person being socially oriented)
  3. Superior/Hyper/Ultra/- consciousness

Is Consciousness the symmetrical counter-part to Language? Or should we switch this around? Or are they one side of an unrecognized coin and we have yet been able to see... much less label a counter-part to them, since such a counter-part is in the making... to a higher degree in some than others? It should not be difficult to conceptualize the idea that Language and Consciousness may well be the symmetrical counter-part to one another... since humans are a bilateral creature, and even though there are organs which are singular... or so we think and might want to say for example, that the liver is singular even though it has a rough triangular shape (commonly referred to as a wedge-shape), triangular ligaments and otherwise might look to the artistically inclined like a snail dragging its shell. Then again, if we are to play a game of intellectual assessing the developmental coincidence of anatomical structures to the activities of language and consciousness, do we conclude from their emergence in behavior as an indication that they appeared after the development of physical structures and therefore should not be committed to a one-to-one correspondence? In other words, there is not valued parity to be accurately accessed? While such questions and their type may vex some readers, they are important considerations just as in choosing which bait will be used at which fishing hole containing an assumed type of fish one is after... or simply fishing for any type of fish... though all have a similar body plan?

Anyway, the point here is to consider whether or not we are dealing with a phenomena of symmetry when regarding Language and Consciousness or is it best to consider both separate and accept the idea of a tripod floor plan for both, even though language is not viewed as having three types. There are multiple kinds (English, Chinese, Russian, Icelandic, Spanish, etc.), but no one has put forth the notion that there are three types as we see when consciousness is discussed. Unless of course we want to think in terms of:

  • Proto/Simple/"Mother" tongue
  • Adult babbling/Tower of Babble- (the stage of speaking humanity is in at the present)
  • Superior Language/communication (Whether it be speech, mental telepathy, or whatever)

Date of (series) Origination: Saturday, 14th March 2020... 6:11 AM
Date of Initial Posting (this page): 3rd Jan 2023... 6:14 AM, AST (Arizona Standard Time); Marana, AZ.