Greetings, Dwai --
> I'm trying to follow a pattern here -- for those who
> cannot see it. Let's see if it elicits some response.
You present a poignant bit of Vedantic prose that recalls the first chapter
of Genesis. It's a dramatic, enigmatic account of the Beginning. It's also
very descriptive where description isn't logically possible. Like most
Eastern mystical writing, it raises more questions than answers.
I would question, for example, this line:
> Darkness there was: at first concealed in darkness
> this All was indiscriminated chaos.
Why is there "chaos" or "darkness before beingness?
I prefer this "symmetric-deistic" analysis of Creation by the Israeli art
critic Tsion Avital, from which I quote in part:
"In a humorous vein, one might suggest a different opening for the first
chapter of the Bible: In the beginning God was very bored amidst Perfect
Symmetry, in which absolutely nothing happened. Then accidentally He sighed,
"Oh No!" This created the first Asymmetry, which brought into being the
other mindprints ...and the rest is History. In other words, there is no
symmetry without asymmetry, and there is no asymmetry without negation;
therefore negation is a precondition for Symmetry-Asymmetry, and the same
can be shown with regard to all the other mindprints. In a final
regression, the negation of negation is perhaps what created Being, and this
is perhaps the significance of the proposition that Being was created from
nothingness. There is nothing new about this, since the idea already arose
in the creation myths and in philosophy, in Western and Eastern cultures,
and also in modern physics. ...Not only is epistemology impossible without
negation and double negation, but neither is ontology possible without this
mindprint. That is to say, there is no Being at all levels without its
complementary opposite, nonbeing or nothingness. In both cases, in the
noetic world and also in the material world, negation creates otherness: it
splits unity and simplicity and thus creates diversity and complexity."
--Avital, Tsion: Mindprints: Negation-Double negation, www.mi.sanu.ac.yu
This at least suggests a dynamic principle (negation) to account for
difference (division and relations), as well as supporting the plausibility
of "intention" on the part of the Creator.
But, then, I don't know exactly what specific "pattern" you wish to follow.
Thanks for the reference, Dwai.
--Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
