A Mysphyt Revolution: The logical nature of spiritual enlightenment

YGGDRASIL: The Journal of Paraphysics, Volume 1, Issue 2, Summer 1997: 158-189, 1997

Just a few decades ago, intuition was a dirty word in objective reductionist science every bit as much as mind and consciousness were absent from psychological studies. However, a crack began to appear in the stone façade of the scientific worldview by about 1970. Things began to slowly change in all of the sciences, but nowhere as much as in physics which had always been the stalwart and mainstay of the logic based disciplines of science. It is safe to say that mind was virtually lost after the first decade of the Second Scientific Revolution and science did not begin to regain consciousness until the 1970s. In other words, objective science and the non-scientific subjectivism of non-scientific disciplines seemed to be approaching a more common worldview if not merging together in the form of mystical thought and physics, just those two disciplines that claim the final word on our experiential interpretation of reality. When this union of opposites finally happens, something new will appear - the MYSPHYT (pronounced misfit), literally a person who combines the conceptual methods of the MYStic and the PHYsicisT to further human knowledge. Although this article was written two decades ago and first published a few years later, it is more relevant today than ever before, which seems to verify the theory of the emerging MYSPHYT.

Alex S. Kohav, ed., Mysticism and Meaning , 2019

For the past forty years, “New Age” advocates have claimed that the old “dualistic” science of Newtonian physics was the fundamental source leading to the conflict of science and religion, and that today the “new science” (in particular, quantum physics) is converging in a general worldview and in specific theories with “Eastern mysticism.” This essay explores this New Age claim of the convergence of scientific and mystical claims about reality. The focus is Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta, and quantum physics. The issues covered include the differences in mystical and scientific subjects (i.e., the “beingness” of things in the world or their ontological source versus understanding how things work); the different intents of mysticism and science (i.e., soteriological goals versus disinterested understanding); the differences between mystical awareness and scientific observations; the misuse of science and the misunderstanding of Asian mysticism leading to distortions in comparisons; and the overall insubstantiality of the alleged conver¬gences. Examples include the different meanings of “emptiness” in mysticism and in science, the role of consciousness in quantum physics, and whether the Buddha can be classified as a “scientist.” The authors to be noted include Fritjof Capra, Amit Goswami, Ken Wilber, Deepak Chopra, B. Alan Wallace, and Neo-Buddhists including the Dalai Lama.

Christians in Science, Day Conference, 1991

No one philosoPher or scientist may be credited with the invention of the scientific method. However, the work of three men has come to symbolize this approach to physical reality: Bacon, Newton, and Descartes. Descartes, in particular, is associated in the New Age mind with all that is wrong with the way in which we view the world. Fundamental to the Cartesian approach is the role of reason. Descartes regarded his own rational activity as the ground of assurance of his own existence. Cogiro, ergo sum: 'I am thinking, therefore I exist'. In his Meditations he proceeds from that basis to prove the existence of God and of physical reality. He went on to propose a full-blown rationalism, i.e., that objective certainty is attainable by deductive reasoning from selfevident truths or innate ideas. Clearly this attitude to reason bears little resemblance to its role in the scientific method. Most scientists pay at least lip service to its traditional rival, empiricism, However, at thesame tirne Descartes introduced the distinction which was to be his single most important contribution to the scientific method: from the mere fact that I exist, and that I do not observe that any other thing belongs necessarily to my nature or essence except that I am a thinking thing, I rightly conclude that my essence consists in this alone, that I am a thinking thing, or a substance whose whole essence consists in thinking. And although perhaps . . . I have a body to which I am very closely united, nevertheless, because, on the one hand, I have a clear and distinct idea of myself in so far as I am only a thinking and unextended thing, and because. on the other hand, I have a distinct idea of the body in so far as it is only an extended thing but which does not think, it is certain that I, that is to say my mind, by which I am what Ilam, is entirely and truly distinct from my body, and may exist without it.1 Here we have the starting point for the division between mind and body, between thinking subject and extended object, which has come to dominate (New Agers would say 'plague') western thought; This 'Cartesian dualism made canonical a split in our vision of the world, which had the effect of setting rational, thinking humanity over against causal, unthinking nature, and soenthroned the human intellect within a separate world of "mental substance"? Arguably it was this mind-body dualism which was responsible for the scientific ideal of the detached observer. Like the Cartesian mind, the scientist is set apart from the

Prior to 1600 or so, science and mysticism were mutually supportive, complementary approaches to advancing human evolution. However, most of the recent scientific work on consciousness and neuroscience has weakened the level of connection, and even led to harmful stereotypes about what mysticism actually is. This paper reviews that background, and provides a brief introduction to new developments in mathematical neural network theory, including a model of intelligence and mind which is fully compatible with mysticism (at least of the Pythagorean or Stoic schools). It is hoped that this new bridge between fields will help raise the appreciation of mysticism, and assist in its long-term mission of fostering the fullest flowering of human potential, including mind, body and soul. Reconstruire le pont entre la science et le mysticism Paul J. Werbos, Ph.D. Résumé Avant les années 1600 environ, la science et le mysticisme étaient perçus comme des approches en interaction et complémentaires à l'évolution de l'homme. Toutefois, la plupart des travaux scientifiques récents sur la conscience et la neuroscience ont affaibli cette interconnexion, créant ainsi des stéréotypes dommageables liés à la véritable nature du mysticisme. Cet article aborde cette question en plus de présenter une brève introduction des nouvelles avancées liées à la théorie mathématique des réseaux de neurones, y compris un modèle de l'intelligence et du cerveau entièrement compatible avec le mysticisme, à tout le moins avec les écoles de pensée de Pythagore et du stoïcisme. Espérons que ce nouveau pont entre ces deux domaines permettra une meilleure appréciation du mysticisme et contribuera à la poursuite de son objectif à long terme visant l'épanouissement du plein potentiel humain, notamment celui de l'esprit, du corps et de l'âme.

We examine that both science and religion were original products of the human imagination. However, the approaches taken to develop these two explanations of life, were entirely different. The precepts of evolution are well established through the scientific method. This approach has led to the accumulation of immense amounts of evidence for biological evolution, and much scientifi c progress has been made to understand the pathways taken for the appearance of organisms and their macromolecular constituents. The existence of spiritual beings has not and presumably cannot be documented via a scientific approach, no more than a fairy tale or a myth. However, science, education and knowledge coupled to proper actions are exactly what are needed to make the correct decisions so as to preserve and improve our common, shared biosphere which is currently confronted with two immense problems: human population growth and climate change.

The spiritual sages of antiquity have already archived in the texts of the sacred scriptures of the world THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING by esoterically amalgamating Celestial and Quantum Mechanic to Esotericism: i.e. The Esoteric Science. The argument that only mathematics can be use to transmit complex conceptual data modules across the epochs of time and space is debunked by the extraordinary complexities that are enshrouded in THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING as envisaged by the ancient esoterists. Mathematics is too limited a branch of science to convey to the human psyche the complexities of the world around it; thus, physics is wrong in believing that THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING can be brought down to a single algebraic equation unless of course physics can convey through it algebraic equation that everything, bar nothing, defines and explains the singularity. Just as modern physics breaks down Einstein equation E=MC², which is a symbolic and alphanumeric algebraic equation denoting that ’Energy equal matter times the square of the speed of light” so too does the sacred scriptures cram pack every indigenous letter of the texts symbolically and alphanumerically for the sole purpose of transmitting to the soul (the lone individual) THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING. In other words the soul: i.e. the MONAD self-defines itself. The singularity can only be defined by everything, for that is its inherent nature. In every sense physicists are unknowingly trying to define God, which cannot be iconically classified by a single algebraic equation; rather, the singularity can only be defined and understood through the mythoi of incalculable esoteric examples for to limit the Theory of Everything to a one or an assortment of examples is to limit conceptually its overall theme. From the outset of this paper, let me declare that I will be introducing empirical evidence of abstract spiritual laws that literally defy the so-called laws of materialistic physics and it is through these abstract laws that I will prove THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING. It should effectively bring down the house of cards that physics has built for itself under the rubric of Celestial and Quantum Mechanics: i.e. The Theory of the Big and Small. This paper is all about the Theory of the Big and Small; however, this thesis is about the spiritual and the transcendent. THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING is the main focus of this paper; however, the reader has to be somewhat educated into the sophisticated mathematical and grammatical sciences: i.e. Seven Liberal Arts: Arithmetic, Music/Harmony, Geometry, Astronomy/Astrology, Grammar, Rhetoric and Logic/Dialectics: the Esoteric Science (mystically hidden) symbolically integrated as one unified system of thought into the textual materials of the Judeao Christian Scriptures in order for the reader to have a sense of my theses on this subject matter. I have no intentions of proselytizing anyone into believing in the existence of God and the transcendent; though, I will have to prove the existence of the transcendent in order to prove THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING. This Esoteric Science that I will be introducing in this paper is relatively new to modernity at least in the modern format that I present it. This Esoteric Science has been known by the spiritual elite since time immemorial: thus, The Theory of Everything has always been known by those with the mental acuity to understand and intellectually grasp spirituality and esotericism. These two themes are not interchangeably the same concept. Spirituality is exclusively Christ-consciousness; whereas, one can have knowledge of the Esoteric Science and be years into researching it never acquiring Christ-consciousness. Over a period of forty years I have self-taught myself, somewhat, the Esoteric Science that is exuded symbolically and alphanumerically from the texts of the Judeao Christian Scriptures from a scientific point of view. In no way have I fully developed this Esoteric Science; however, I have developed esotericism enough to demonstrate definitively its existence, which will become clear as this paper unfolds. For the reasons of the numerous complexities of the subject matter: i.e. The Theory of Everything and the complex concepts that have to be envisaged by the reader I will have to present a great deal (overabundance) of my empirical research via my analysis of the esotericism of the sacred scriptures accompanied with sacred geometry to augment those interpretations. I believe wholeheartedly in demonstrable evidence and this is the reason that I put forth so much material. If the Esoteric Science was known to modernity I could easily reference these materials, as I will reference my published books and those papers that I published online (in modernity there are no other reference materials on esotericism worth discussing); however, in this case I have to be absolutely certain that I am not vague in my presentation of these spiritual and transcendental concepts. I feel it is best that I produce an overabundance of my research to augment my theses then to discuss too little of it and not get my point across. What physics calls the universe I would suggest is the generic archetypal image of the singularity itself. Another conceptual understanding of that statement is that all, bar nothing, is derived from the MONAD: i.e. the number one (#1) or the all. I care nothing for materialistic physics for it deals solely with what PHYSICISTS BELIEVES is Celestial and Quantum Mechanics as the end all and be all of human understanding of existence: i.e. The Theory of the Big and the Small, which is solely from a materialistic perspective. Physics, literally, throws the baby (singularity) out with the bathwater. From my perspective, and this is not intended in any way as an insult, the science of physics is analogous to looking at a single atom via a microscope (tunnel vision) totally oblivious of everything around it. It is very much like being in a room reading a book totally oblivious of the people and/or the conversational noise around you. Actually, there is no material world other than the phantasmagoria of the mind. Each individual psyche is a separate autonomous universe , in and of itself, that’s a given. Physicists will never be able to wrap their minds around this real-time and symbolic argument; for the reason that, their intellectual egos will not allow them to go there. This will become an extremely important factor in my overall theses both in real time and esoterically. Each solar system, with a sun and its planets is, actually, for all intent and purpose, a separate universe. Each solar system is, merely, the tip of the iceberg; because, there is an infinite universe behind each star system that neither can be seen with human nor technological senses; though, there are other empirical factors (spiritual and material) that infer an infinite universe behind each star system. Each star system is analogous to the psyche: ego-consciousness and the unconscious mind. In proportion to humanity’s knowledge of the unconscious mind in that proportion will it understand THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: Celestial and Quantum Mechanics: The Theory of the Big and the Small in relationship to the singularity and the transcendental reality.

Yggdrasil: The Journal of Paraphysics, Vol. 1, Issue 1, Winter Solstice 1996, 1996

During the last half of the nineteenth century a confluence of intellectual, cultural and scientific notions gave rise to the practice of modern spiritualism. Past histories of science and culture have considered the events surrounding modern spiritualism as a historical aberration especially when placed in the context of the science of the era. Yet modern spiritualism was as much a consequence of the successes of Newtonian science as was the Second Scientific Revolution. Several of the factors in its development are noted; The rise of evolution, conservation laws in physics and chemistry, the ‘Naturphilosophie’ ideas of convertibility of forces and unity of nature, the Romantic notions of organic nature as opposed to a strictly mechanistic view of nature, the Principle of Continuity, the mind-matter paradox, aether theories, Riemannian (non-Euclidean) geometries and other geometries of hyperspace, as well as older forms of occultism and spiritualism. Among these notions, the Principle of Continuity is identified as a “unit-idea” which has influenced the intellectual development of mankind since the early Greek era. But to a far greater extent, the rise of modern spiritualism was a continuation of scientific speculations on the interaction between mind and matter which only occurred when Newtonian science was well enough advanced to once again consider the role of mind in nature and science. When considered within this context, both the development of the scientific aspect of spiritualism and psychical research in the final decades of the nineteenth century can be viewed as a valid scientific endeavor as well as an integral part of the overall development of science.

2015

In this article, the author explores the mystery of the soul. “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul” (Mark 8:36). The soul by common definition is the spiritual or immaterial part of a living being, regarded as immortal. To find a possible metaphysical link between religion and science, the author suggests that the soul is the immaterial aspect of electromagnetic energy (“electromagnetic soul”) that can transform but cannot be destroyed. According to this suggestion, the soul attached to a living being fulfills the being’s desire through electromagnetic interactions, and, upon completion, the soul is released through ultra-weak electromagnetic radiations that coalesce with the universe.

2014

This study sets out to reclaim the ontological epistemology of Saint Thomas Aquinas which serves as a unifier of knowledge in being, within the philosophical milieu of being's forgottenness. Post-Humean and Kantian thought made appearance rather than being solely accessible to the thinking subject. The consequence has been the marginalisation of being as reflected in truthinfluenced by scientistic and postmodern paradigmswhich has contributed to both the paucity of meaningless metaphysics, and the conceptualisation of science and faith as necessarily opposing categories. To the end of establishing that science and faith have points of intersection, it is argued that the reclamation of Thomist natural philosophy leads to the defence of a clarified form of realism. Establishing the "real" implies that the metaphysical dimensions of the problem of existence can be explored. Within this realist model, the "pre-Modern" Thomistic theory of "scientia" is employed to bring physical and natural science and metaphysics into relationship as components of true knowledge of being. Consequently, the author puts forth that "scientia" is exemplified in, amongst others, the particular science of cosmology since the rudimentary point of engagement between physical and metaphysical science occurs in the act of creation, that is, when being comes into existence. Whilst metaphysics is often disregarded, it is consistently proposed that the causal nature of being demandsby its presencea more robust account than physical and natural science can offer. The contribution made by this work rests in its ontologically-formed iii epistemic typology whereby "hard" science and faith are related in boundary areas of knowledge, that is, when metaphysical problems emerge from within physical and natural science. By reimaging "hard" science and reasonable faith within "scientia", both approaches are conceived as adequating to truth when their content is reflective of being.