Zen and the Art of Doing 'Nothing' - How to Apply This Secret in Everyday Life

When one possess Zen, the whole world looks very different.
This heightened awareness could mean enjoying at a deeper level, the innocent laughter of your child, the balmy, soft breeze at your porch or the park, being seduced by the exquisite beauty of a wild flower, as it's caressed by the wind and sun or pausing to marvel at the silent strength and majesty of an old oak tree on your way to the train station.
Whether your job is driving a truck, repairing cars, teaching school children, editing a newspaper, ministering to the medical needs of patients, prosecuting/defending legal cases, running an advertising/political campaign or operating a company, it means being fully involved and fully focused (mindfulness) on what you are supposed to be doing at the moment, to the extent that you and your work become one and indistinguishable.
If you are a sports buff, it could mean the joy over your triumph over fatigue and pain, as you fully involve your self at a higher and higher level. Doing things that are difficult strengthens your will power and self-control. It also strengthens your "mental muscles". And like any other muscles, the more you exercise them, the stronger they become.
It's all about achieving an ideal symmetry and unity of mind and body. The idea is to blur the distinction between object (your work or 'doing') and subject (you) so that thought and action blend into a unified, harmonic whole. By doing so, you become a more alert, resilient, motivated and superior person.
The high quality of your work is the product of that single minded engagement. In every human activity, at work or at play, a calm, clear, focused mind will always have an edge over one that is cluttered, tentative, and tense. That is quintessential Zen.
We are all familiar with stories about athletes being "in the zone" when they are so "locked-in" they can't seem to do anything wrong. The brilliant performances of great athletes like Michael Jordan, Roger Federer, Kim Yu-Na, and Alex Rodriguez during memorable, high stakes games highlight an effortless combination of grace and power; the doer and the 'doing' being in flawless unison.
We see the same unison and blurring of the 'doer' and the 'doing' in the art of ballet, when the dancers and the dance become an indistinguishable flow and patterns of movement.
HUNTER AND PREY
Zen is also present in the test of wills between a good hunter and a worthy prey, whether the chase is in a jungle in Brazil, a Savannah in Africa, or deep waters in the Pacific, when the hunter must enter the mind of his prey, identify with it, and 'become' the very object of his hunt in order to track it down, catch or kill it. Such deep identification with an object leads invariably to a kindred respect and empathy with it. That's why hunters always pay tribute to their fallen prey, silently and overtly, after defeating it.
At an institutional (combat) level, what stands out are the Samurai swordsmen of 17th century Japan who embraced Zen to calm and strengthen their minds for lethal combat, to the extent that whether in training or actual combat, the Samurai's sword seemed to be a natural extension of their bodies as they moved with powerful yet effortless grace, as if in a perfectly-choreographed dance.
Zen, like all Buddhism, frowns on violence and war, except as a self-defensive measure. Some Samurai, it could be argued, exploited Zen's hidden power to wage clearly offensive battles for personal gain.
'doing nothing' but engaging life fully as it comes, making it one organic unity of experience. Nothing more, nothing less.
It applies to countless aspects of human experience. What's more, harnessing and partaking of these gifts from life and nature come, in many instances, virtually free of charge. Most of us have taken for granted these priceless bounties, most of which are available for the taking practically throughout the year.
Those of us who are aware of nature's bountiful gifts and have made them a nourishing, healing balm in their lives are inevitably more focused, energetic, happier and healthier.

The author is a keen student of Zen Buddhism. A former journalist and diplomat, he lives in New York and travels to the Philippines where he is engaged in humanitarian work. He received an M.A. from Georgetown University, focusing in International and Strategic Affairs. His book, "The God in Einstein and Zen" is now available through Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com, Trafford.com, and in E-book. Article Source:

The Blind Climber, Enlightenment, and Zen

No one has a monopoly on truth. It is available to any determined seeker, even a novice, who will not be discouraged by the height of the mountain and the difficulty of the climb.
I think man's indomitable spirit is best expressed by Erik Weihenmayer a 42 year old American who refused to be defeated by his physical handicap. Blind since age 13, Erick climbed seven - not one but SEVEN -- of the world's tallest mountains, including Mount Everest, armed only with his tremendous fighting heart.
True there was a team of men with normal sight to aid him. But Erik had to climb like the rest. As if he had sight!
It was an exhilarating triumph of will and hope that spread around the world like a refreshing wind.
Not content with scaling tall mountains, Erik is also an accomplished skydiver, skier, long distance biker, para glider, marathoner and rock climber. He is also the author of best selling books, a sought-after motivational speaker and film maker.
In a very real sense, Erik is BLIND TO FAILURE.
On a lesser scale, there are many people with handicaps like Erick who rise daily to engage in activities once reserved only for the physically-able; faceless, unsung individuals who silently and stoically faced life's challenges with strength and grace.
We see them occasionally in the course of our work and travels. Not asking for pity or patronizing dole outs but just the right to live like the rest of us.
Enlightenment is Up to Us
Those of us who are fazed by life's unfairness, unpredictability and danger would do well to remember the hurdles faced by Erik and his kind. That those hurdles begin and end in the mind. Without a strong mind, physical barriers would be insurmountable. Unscalable.
It is the same with Zen, where practitioners will have to discipline and fortify their minds in order to find true wisdom and enlightenment. Developing inner strength calls for unwavering commitment. A long term commitment based on the belief that only a disciplined life can cope with its adversities and challenges.
Zen, which comes from the Chinese word, Cha'n, meaning "meditation," teaches that enlightenment is gained through the profound realization that one is born an enlightened person. Survival instincts, genetic factors, social conditioning, stress, and the demands of life, however, prevent us from seeing this important and obvious fact.
This awakening can occur gradually in deep silent meditation, shikantaza-zazen, favored by the Soto Zen school or in a sudden burst of pure awareness (satori) induced by koans ( advocated by the Rinzai Zen school).Whichever the case, it is the outcome of one's own transformative action. There is no God and deities in Zen. Books, teachers and scriptures can only partially guide us by providing some light along the road to wisdom and enlightenment. The rest is really up to us. There is no room and tolerance for mimicking in Zen.
Shikantaza is the deepest form of zazen meditation, a bare-bones kind, eschewing mantras, breath counting and koans, to calm body and mind by sitting in an erect lotus position; an alert, non-attached, non-clinging and non-interactive condition aimed at ushering enlightenment.
It is a demanding discipline that calls for serious, long-term commitment, unsuitable for seekers who lack inordinate patience and will.
Today, moving variations of meditation for the average seeker include popular meditation exercises such as yoga, tai chi, and qigong that are gaining popularity world-wide. Even Zen masters of both persuasions practice (Hatha) yoga and tai chi (including calisthenics, jogging, ping pong and other exercises) to strengthen their minds and bodies.
Rinzai's koans are terse conundrums or paradoxical questions that are deliberately illogical and must be answered correctly to have the desired effect: liberate our inherent intuitive or spiritual power by assaulting and stunning briefly our hyper-intellectualizing part of the mind.
"What is the sound of one hand clapping? " goes one koan. "What would the Buddha have said if there was no one to hear, and no one to teach? " goes another.
Through long years of interaction between the two schools, a kind of synthesis has developed that permits practitioners to combine and integrate zazen, shikantaza, and koans for better results. It's really up to one's predisposition and temperament. Some practitioners are more comfortable with long, sitting meditation while others prefer the relatively shorter path to enlightenment.
Is the quest worth it? It depends on the seeker and how much he or she is willing to go the extra mile to possess Zen. Because when one possess Zen, everything looks different. To cite an ancient saying, "flowers that looked mundane become prettier and the ordinary mountain stream is suddenly clearer and cooler."
This new power of heightened awareness of everything around us makes the journey of the search worth it.

This and similar articles and insights are expanded and elaborated upon in my book, "The God in Einstein and Zen" now available at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, E-book (nook and kindle), and Trafford Publishing

Masters of Rhythm and The Only Question

Masters of rhythm
Riding on sound
Vibrations of being
Pulsations surround
Flashes of brilliance
Amidst the destruction
Dimensions dissolving
The end of seduction
This chaos and fear
Somehow it's alright
The old ways are dying
Dispersed by great light
Shape-shifting all form
So bold is this mission
Creating reality
With instant precision
O', masters of rhythm
You see beyond light
Where all is so dark
Yet incredibly bright
Masters of rhythm
Finally you're home
The past is complete
The secret is known
The old ways let go
Fear is transcended
Light's taken over
The insanity ended
The Only Question
When the only question of
What to have and how much to have
Is how much is there,
Or how much can one afford,
There will be too much of everything for some
And not enough for the rest.
When the question is
How much does one really need,
There will be less for some
And just enough for all.
When we see how to live as if
We need only enough to be enlightened,
And not to be engorged,
There will be less for the engorged
And enough for the enlightened.
When comes the time when there's only
Enough to feed and clothe and support
Each of those here
In a normal and desirable way,
There will be just enough for all.
You may see this now,
Or you may still believe
You need to have much
To cover up the loss you feel
At not being able to see the truth.
Come to the light and you'll begin
To see what's important,
And know that all the rest is
Virtually useless.
Coming to this light reveals a path
Which goes far beyond the ordinary world;
Where you see more and more
Light each moment,
And need less and less
Of what isn't light.

Class Discussion: Worldviews and Dilemmas - We Are the Same, Yet We Are Not the Same

In my Personal Ethics in Organizations class this week, we are discussing worldviews and dilemmas using the characters of the play "Doubt: A Parable" by John Patrick Shanley. We had to read the play, and then respond to thought-provoking questions presented by our instructor.
The part of the question that I thought was most interesting:
"Each of the characters in Shanley's play, DOUBT, a parable, is involved in a moral dilemma. Presumably, each of these characters shares a Christian worldview. Do they define their dilemmas differently? Do they choose different relevant facts based on their Worldviews? What is a "Worldview?" Describe some key aspects of your own Worldview."
My response:
"One of the first classes I took was about inter-cultural communication, and how values and norms affect an individuals' perception of the world; otherwise known as their, "worldview." Even when two individuals share the same religious backgrounds, there can still be cultural clashes because every family has their own unique traditions and beliefs that come from more than just their spiritual background. The worldviews of each character in the play were very different and evident in the way they behaved, and responded to circumstances.
What kind of person would create lies to support their assumption of the truth without making certain that what they are assuming is true? What kind of person would stand there knowing full well that the other person was lying to justify their suspicion and assumptions. How does a man respond to one who blatantly slanders him? How people respond comes from their sense of right and wrong, which comes from their belief of how things should be. This perception of life comes from experiential conditioning since birth. We are all products of familiy traditions and beliefs passed down through the generations, as well as the good and bad we experience in life. It would make sense that a dilemma occurs when a person encounters a situation that does not align with their established worldviews, values, and norms. Therefore, there is a moment of not knowing what to think. Some may begin to doubt and question their beliefs; perhaps use critical thinking to take the situation apart and make sense of each element within the situation.
However, there are those who never learn from their mistakes and who are not open to questioning the "way things should be." For me, doubt is the beginning of new knowledge because without doubt, there would be no inclination to search for the truth."
Now, here are a couple of questions for you--my valued readers:
What worldviews do you have that are holding you back from achieving the transformation you so desire and deserve in your life?
What do you intend to do in order to close the gap that keeps you from realizing your full potential and personal fulfillment?
Things do not happen by themselves. It takes a dedicated and determined effort to figure out and take the necessary steps towards your desired destination in life. Someone will not deliver it to you on a silver platter. However, you can find people who will support you in your quest. Your vision of life will not happen until you first know what you want, figure out what it will take to get there, take that very first step, and then follow through all the way.
Take destiny into your hands and be the co-creator of your own future and vision of life. Go to the grave knowing that you did all you could do to detect and accomplish your mission and purpose in life--for when you do, you will have lived your life to its fullest potential with NO regrets.

Suzette West, ABR, EBA is an exclusive buyer's agent in Seattle and the surrounding areas of Western Washington who supports real estate buyers and investors through every step of their real estate investment journey. As an exclusive buyer's agent, she turns down listings in order to give buyers total loyalty and dedication in the spirit of partnership. Her mission to help her clients build wealth and achieve financial independence through real estate investing and through the creation of a supportive environment that comes from her vesting in their success, abundance, and prosperity. Her business, World West Investments serves the following areas in Washington State: Seattle, Bellevue, Tacoma, Port Orchard, Silverdale, Bainbridge Island, Poulsbo, Capitol Hill, Fremont, Phinney Ridge, and Olympia, as well as other areas within the South Puget Sound. Sign up to receive Suzette's free e-course, "Three Steps to Building Wealth Responsibly with Real Estate" at

Philosophy Of Plato

Plato is renowned as one of the world's greatest philosophers. Born in 429 BC around the time of the death of Pericles, he lived for nearly eighty years up until the period that began with the birth of Alexander the Great. He belonged to an aristocratic Athenian family who were by the standards of those days relatively rich. A large number of Plato's relatives played an active role in Athenian politics, but this was an activity that Plato himself shied away from.
During his youth he became fascinated by the teachings and thoughts of Socrates, so much so that he attended the academy that Socrates set up. Plato was only thirty years old when Socrates was killed in prison for committing crimes against the gods.
Though incredibly distressed by the death of Socrates, Plato set about writing down the conversations he had held with his teacher. Today, most of what we know about Socrates, the man and his thinking, comes from the texts created by Plato.
Over time, he began to develop his own concepts and ideas relating to philosophy. One of his most famous works is "The Republic". This is a text that describes his thoughts on how a better government could be formed than that what was in power in Athens at the time.
As was common amongst the ancient philosophers of that age he was not a fan of democracy. It was his impression that uneducated people should not have a say in electing officials that were to govern. He put forward a suggestion that the most intellectually accomplished in society should be those that hold power and make decisions. A cynic may say that due to his upbringing amongst the aristocracy he would always suggest that the elite class should govern.
Plato had a passion for the natural world and how biological systems interact and develop. He believed that all matter and thoughts had a perfect form. One of the most famous methods he used to explain his concepts was a metaphor relating to a cave.
He suggested that if there was a cave inside which there were a group of men chained up against a wall and they could only see the back of the cave and no more, all that would be visible to them would be shadows, and these shadows encompassed all reality. He proposed that if one of these cave prisoners was to escape and take in the beauty of the outside world, if he then returned to visit the remaining captives and tell them what existed outside, it is likely that he would be told that he was crazy and perhaps even hallucinating.
Plato suggested that we are all very similar to those men stuck in a cave. We believe that we know everything about the world and existence, but we are trapped in our bodies just as the men in the story were trapped on a cave. It was his mission to help people make more sense of the real world, both in practical and theoretical ways.

Philosophy Of Aristotle

Aristotle was born in northern Greece in the village of Stagira. He became the most accomplished product of Plato's educational system, spending twenty years of his life at Plato's academy. Upon the death of his own teacher, Aristotle travelled to Macedonia where he played a role in the teaching of the young Alexander the Great. With Alexander's approval he returned to Athens in 335 BC, where he set up his own school in the Lyceum. It was here that he lived out his days, writing, teaching, and researching.
The surviving works of this great man are perhaps only a small number of his total output. They include his opinions and thoughts on a wide variety of subjects; these include philosophy, logic, ethics, biology, physics, politics, psychology, as well as rhetoric. The style of his compositions points to the fact that he was thinking and developing his ideas constantly as he wrote. Because of this, it is often said that his work is not easy to read due to the lack of flow and consistency, nevertheless it is still an impressive body of knowledge that has played an important role in the development of modern society.
His logical treatises (referred to as the Organon) had the aim of developing a universal method of reasoning to understand all that is possible about the meaning of reality. For example, in the "Categories" treatise, Aristotle put forward a concept that would describe matter in terms of state, activity, and property.
Another famous work is the text "On Interpretation, Prior Analytics, and Posterior Analytics", in which he examines the real nature of deduction and inference, outlining a system that eventually became known as categorical logic.
Aristotle had a stronger fascination for science then either Plato or Socrates perhaps because of the fact that his own father was a reputed doctor. He integrated the logical methods taught by Socrates to develop an understanding of the way in which the physical world worked.
It is often said that he is the father of modern science. He had a special interest in biology, and actually worked on classifying hundreds of plant and animal species in a way that could be easily understood. In fact, when Alexander the great was travelling extensively through west Asia, he ordered his messengers to carry plants back to his teacher for his study.
Making order out of what initially appeared as chaos was one of the tenets of ancient Greek philosophy. Aristotle played an important role in the development of government. The system he created is still in use today, as is apparent when we analyze modern democracies, tyrannies, republics, monarchies, and oligarchs.
Upon the death of Alexander in 323 BC, Athens revolted against the Macedonians in a bloody slaughter. Anger was turned towards Aristotle due to his heritage and connections. He left his beloved school and fled Athens with a small retinue of followers. The last years of his life where spent in the north of the country close to where he had been born.

The Holocaust That Never Was - And Why Nobody Died When the Titanic Sank

The holocaust, that terrible carnage that claimed the lives of an estimated six million Jews in Hitler's oven's and concentration camps never really took place; and nobody perished in the nuclear blasts over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Likewise, nobody actually died when the Titanic sank after striking a glacier. Similarly, the huge human toll exacted by natural disasters like the 2004 Tsunami in Southeast Asia, and the more recent earthquake in Haiti, never happened. All that really occurred were insignificant energy conversions.
The same applies to all deaths on Earth since the emergence of man.
Indeed, in the mind-boggling vastness of the universe, even the death of our solar system or even the entire Milky Way galaxy would be less than an energy flicker. Going further, in a multiverse of endless universes science now boldly thinks of, the very death of our particular cosmos would also be an unnoticeable and meaningless event.
These and other insights are all children of Albert Einstein's famed equation, E=mc2. It is a turbulent, bewildering universe of ceaseless energy movements and transformations from you and me, to the stars. It is also a universe without a personal God that is moved by prayer and intervenes in human affairs.
Why did the greatest mind the human race ever produced think this way? Let us turn back the pages of history to get a clearer picture.
Einstein's views on God could be briefly summarized in his memorable, often-quoted words: "God does not play dice with the universe."
Einstein believed that the dynamics of the universe, from the large bodies of Newton to the sub-atomic realm of quantum mechanics are governed by the deterministic laws of causality. That our tendency to perceive of 'uncertainty' and randomness' in quantum particles is due to our lack of predictive knowledge (epistemological) and does not invalidate causality at that level (ontological). In short, "God does not play dice with the universe."
The great scientist also publicly stated his agreement with 17th century philosopher Baruch Spinoza's ideas about God, nature, and reality. Einstein named Spinoza as the philosopher who had the deepest influence on his world view. In a widely reported telegram response, to a query, whether he believed in God, his answer was that he believed in "Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."
Spinoza had a pantheistic, deterministic view of God, equating God with Nature, that bore a family likeness with Einstein's belief in an impersonal God.
Furthermore, Einstein thought man's limited intellect could never comprehend God but could only have glimpses of the universe' master architect through the prism and language of science.
He could not imagine a God who rewards and punishes the children of his creation, whose morality and purposes are modeled after our own--a God, who is but a mirror of human weakness. Neither could he I believe that the individual survives bodily death, "although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."
When Einstein came up with his astonishing view of the workings of nature in special theory of relativity in 1905, physics was in clueless, disarray. For two centuries, the world had been mesmerized and content with Newton's static, unchanging universe. But the mechanistic, clock-like universe of Newton had a major drawback. It had no answer to the mysterious movements of radioactive, x-ray, and electron particles scientists began to observe in nature at the start of the 20th century.
Into this daunting, bewildering realm of invisible matter that flustered the greatest physicists of that era entered a brash, ingenious young man who saw nature through powerful, radically different eyes. When he was done with his work, our astounded world was changed forever.
LIFE AND THE UNIVERSE COMES FROM E=mc2
Einstein's profound, breakthrough insight about the workings of the universe was the key that opened the door to a true understanding of nature, existence, and reality. It was 'mystical,' born of intuition--but within the ambit of reason and therefore verifiable by empirical means.
His elegant equation E=mc2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared), meant that mass and energy throughout the universe are interchanging forms of the same thing: energy is transformed mass; mass is potential energy. Einstein's view that mass can be converted into pure energy was a huge boost to our understanding of the tremendous and enduring power of stars, like our Sun. It also led to the harnessing of the mighty atom in countless applications the modern world cannot do without.
In thermodynamic perspective, this formula meant the sum total of energy in the universe always remained constant and can be altered or transformed but never created or destroyed.
The simple, elegant formula distills in four figures the workings of radioactivity in the entire universe. Nowadays we know radioactivity to be a property harbored by some unstable elements, such as isotopes of plutonium or uranium of spontaneously radiating particles as their atomic nuclei crumble. They are utilizing and transforming mass into energy all the time, governed by Einstein's equation.
Einstein's equation is so familiar in modern times that High School students are routinely taught that stars (like our Sun) and all elements they bestowed on the Earth, including all life forms such as us, are virtually inexhaustible energy sources or endless E=mc2 wombs.
Everything using nuclear energy, such as modern submarines, aircraft carriers, nuclear plants and atomic weapons are products of Einstein's equation. E=mc2 explains the invisible electromagnetic radioactivity in cell phones, radio, television, personal computers, x-ray scanners at airports, PET/CT scans in hospitals and our very origin, the Big Bang.
We modern humans are all immensely indebted to Einstein for explaining how all things in the universe work. Of course there are critics. There always are.
When a good friend warned Einstein that his deterministic universe brought down humankind's carefully built moral edifice that was premised on free will, Einstein purportedly winked and said although he deeply believes in determinism, he must be practical because he must function in world that does not.

This article and similar insights are expanded and elaborated upon in my book, "E=mc2, The God in Einstein and Zen," now available at Trafford.com, Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble and E-books (kindle and nook). The author is a retired diplomat and journalist and regularly travels to the Philippines where he is involved in humanitarian work. He received an M.A. from Georgetown University, focusing on International and Strategic Affairs.

The Renaissance, the All Seeing Eye and the Constitution of the United States of America

The All Seeing Eye of ancient Egypt, depicted upon the Great Seal of America, represents a fractal logic concept of political Liberty that is now re-emerging into a new global understanding. The ancient concept revealed its lost mystery when the science of quantum mechanics was extended into the evolutionary life-science of quantum biology. There is now an obvious advantage that various religious denominations and secular institutions, might gain, by sharing a moderate rigorous ethical understanding of the optic principles upholding spiritual reality, existing within a holographic universe.
The ancient Mystery Schools of Babylon and Egypt shared a common denominator with other ancient Eastern philosophies, which helped bring Western Classical Greek life-science into existence. This essay focusses upon the ancient civilisations of Egypt and Greece, but it is relevant to a multitude of global spiritual aspirations, based upon that common denominator. It is namely, an intuition to employ fractal logic reasoning in spiritual matters. That intuition is now re-emerging as a fundamental aspect of the new quantum biology science of life.
During the Egyptian 1st Kingdom, geometrical knowledge was needed to resurvey boundaries of rich fertile farms, lost during the the annual flooding of the Nile. Another, separate sacred geometry existed, one that extended its logic into the infinite world of fanciful immortal Egyptian gods. During the 2nd Kingdom, this ancient fractal geometrical logic became the basis for integrating concepts of mercy, compassion and justice into Egyptian political law. When the Greek philosopher Pythagoras, went to study political ethics at the Mystery Schools of ancient Egypt, he successfully devised an experiment in harmonics, known as the Comma of Pythagoras. This aspect of the Pythagorian Music of the Spheres discoveries, associated 'Liberty' with the political mathematics belonging to The Eye of Horus, the All Seeing Eye.
The only geometrical logic known to extend to infinity is now recognised by science to be fractal logic. Since the 5th Century until now, the Western religious World-view prohibited any life-science to be linked to such pagan logic. This was shown to be superstitious ignorance when optical nanotechnology revealed the Platonic fractal optics to be functioning within the human DNA. The NASA High Energy Astrophysics Division has published papers arguing that the Classical Greek Era's science of life was based upon fractal logic. The fractal concept of political liberty is depicted on the American one dollar bill, and it refers to the Comma of Pythagoras experiment. However, at the time of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America, a grave scientific error occurred, resulting in an unbalanced scientific confusion.
One of the founding fathers of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, explained this problem. He did indeed, write that Liberty was associated with physics and geometrical principles. However, the Constitution was based upon Sir Isaac Newton's published physics principles. Newton's unpublished Heresy papers were not discovered until last century. Sir Isaac Newton's conviction of the existence of a "more profound natural philosophy to balance the mechanical description of the universe..."was based upon Platonic physics and mathematical principles.
The Christian Church outlawed the balanced World-view political liberty concept during the 5th Century, some thirteen hundred years before the drafting of the American Constitution, Newton's balancing fractal World-view, now at the cutting edge of quantum biological politician science, had been omitted, leaving a confused understanding of Pythagoras' mathematical proof, which concerned itself with human liberty within a material universe balanced by the functioning of a spiritual or holographic reality. The relevant technologies are now known to be essential prerequisites for healthy biological growth and development through space-time
During the reign of Pope Cyril of Alexandria during the 5th Century, a Christian mob burnt several centuries of fractal logic research scrolls at the Great Library of Alexandria, raping and murdering it's custodian, the mathematician Hypatia. St Augustine, at that time, officially recorded that her fractal logic mathematics was the work of the Devil. In his book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon wrote that Hypatia's death marked the beginning of Western Civilisations' Dark Ages.
Western civilisation is only now beginning to emerge from the Dark Age corruption of Plato's spiritual optical mathematics (revised for physics by the father of optics Ibn Al Haytham during the 11th Century). That lost logic is now an indisputable component of the new Platonic-Fullerene Chemistry of fractal quantum biological medical science, now emerging throughout Europe and America. Fullerene Chemisty, is based upon the holographic engineering principles of Plato's spiritual optics as is noted by Harvard University's Novartis Chair, Professor Amy Edmonson, in her online essay The Fuller Explanation.
The Christian Church hierarchy, long a sworn enemy of political democracy concepts being based upon spiritual fractal logic science, has not yet relinquished its role in the corruption of such physics logic. This attitude denies open debate in the affairs of global politics. in complete contempt of the 3rd Century BC Platonic Science of Universal Love, of which the Knights Templar and later Freemasonry (rightly or wrongly) linked to the teachings of Jesus Christ, as in the Jefferson Bible, held within the American Congressional Library.
Civilisation can be seen to be still in the Christian Dark Ages, This is collaborated by the fact that Cambridge University, since 1932 up until the present time, internationally requires the basis of fundamental student Core Curriculum studies, to be linked to the essay by the philosopher F M Cornford. entitled Before and After Socrates. This essay contains the ridiculous claim that Plato can be considered to be one of the greatest fathers of the Church, when his fractal logic spiritual mathematics was cursed by St Augustine as being the work of the Devil.
To add insult to injury, Western culture forbids the linking of life science to fractal logic because 20th Century science was governed by an inadequate understanding of the second law of thermodynamics, which demands the complete destruction of all life in the universe, forbidding any Platonic fractal-life science to exist. That law, still governing modern science, was derived from the Church's 13th Century unethical (later witch burning) policies of St Thomas Aquinas. Reverend Thomas Malthus used Aquinas' policies as the basis of the East India Company's ruthless economic policies, which, during the 18th Century, were cited by Charles Darwin as being synonymous with the second law of thermodynamics, now enforcing a financial Hell on Earth.
During the 1980s the Science-Art Research Centre of Australia used ancient geometrical logic to prove the existence of new life-science physics laws associated with the Pythagorean Music of the Spheres. The proof mathematics were reprinted from Italy's leading scientific journal, Il Nuovo Cimento, as an important discovery of the 20th Century by the world's largest technological research institute, IEEE Milestone Series in Washington. Despite that published fact, most scientists refused to consider the claim that the work was based upon the forbidden fractal life-science logic.
However, in the eminent science book, The Beauty of Fractals-Images of Complex Dynamical Systems, by H Peitgen and P Richter, a chapter about extending quantum mechanics to quantum biology is entitled Freedom, Science, and Aesthetics, written by Professor Gert Eilenberger, the Director of a German scientific institute. Within his profound article he wrote about the bridging of "rational scientific insight" with "emotional aesthetic appeal" through optical fractal logic. This appears to echo the ancient geometrical fractal reasoning of Pythagoras, when he associated the All Seeing Eye optical mathematics with the concept of political freedom.
The Church surely, is now honour bound to cease its corruption of science practices. The earth does revolve around the sun and was never the centre of the universe. Spiritual reality now refers to ethical or God-like holographic reality and we can all pay homage to the devout Christian scientists who were later punished for trying to explain about the Platonic Science of Universal Love, once taught throughout Italy during the1st Century BC, as recorded by the historian Cicero.

An Exposition of a Personal Philosophy of Life

In life, existence is only good when you can genuinely benefit yourself and other people. That in itself is the life and existence of a genuine value producer, in that order. The only time something counts as not valuable is when it is genuinely destructive. Nothing genuinely has the intention of being consciously totally destructive to themselves and others from the start or get go. But everyone wants to feel good and benefit, that in itself is the secret of life, and the question of existence answered.
Logically, self benefit is what we all live for, some go about it rationally, some go about it irrationally. Irrationality is inherently destructive. Rationality is inherently productive. Rationality keeps you "in the loop" or in the action of life. That is where we are going with this article, to the rational. We are discarding the irrational, destructive and unhappy here. From beliefs in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny to the most subtle irrationalities like eating too much sugar, irrationality needs to be banished from life in order to be genuinely successful in life. I know, I sound extreme. But I am using such extreme reality to expose the eminent benefits of being rational in life and existence. Sure, like anyone I am not rational one hundred percent of the time, but a majority of the time, I do my best to be rational, sane and realistic. Because perfection, as they say must be earned and self made, not given or created by others. Yes, perfection is an idea of what works genuinely, in that sense as a concept, it is rationally possible.
Everyone wants the key to happiness, but not the key to sadness, so the key to happiness is rationality, the key to sadness is irrationality. No wonder everyone searches for the key to happiness, but it is always found in one place: In the rational action. Rational action is where the happiness is at, that is where I am going with this article. I am not saying this dispassionately either or even analytically, although I am balancing positive emotions with realistic analytical thought in this article. Rationality allows a broad spectrum of positive actions and good feelings, where irrationality, no matter what the short term "benefit" does not give anything of any real value, positive or negative, in reality.
When I think of honest and real, tangible value, no matter what I feel, it is always rational. Values, no matter what the feelings, are tangible rationality. That in itself is a higher value than anything irrational. So, here I rest my case, for what is rational works, what is irrational does not work.

My name is Joshua Clayton, I am a freelance writer based in Inglewood, California. I also write under a few pen-names and aliases, but Joshua Clayton is my real name, and I write by that for the most part now. I am a philosophical writer and objective thinker and honest action taker.
I also work at a senior center in Gardena, California as my day job, among other things, but primarily I am a writer.

Left & Right-Wing Brains

Several weeks ago a friend challenged me to explain the difference between left and right-wing ideologies.
"Can you do it?" challenged friend. "Moreso, can you do it fairly and without the usual right and left stereotypes and with the history of where these ideological groupings come from?"
Sure. Why not. There's no resolving the esoteric spectra of political ideology - Marxism, communism, socialism, liberalism, classical liberalism, libertarianism, conservatism, neo-conservatism, neo-liberalism and fascism, to name just a few - if we can't even tell left from right. If we can't say why we keep leaning either way.
Let's put aside the history of our political divisions, though. History can't explain why people keep slanting left or angling right - while knowing next to nothing about history. In fact? It almost seems like people can't really help their own political inclinations.
That's what research has shown. When it comes to left or right political leaning, people don't just forget their history. They disdain plain facts and otherwise common sense. Both those leaning left and those leaning right will consistently rely on the identical facts when justifying how they lean. Which can only suggest complete disregard for facts. For how consistency gets sacrificed when it comes to political leaning.
Yet more astonishing has been research showing significant, detectable brain differences between people leaning politically left and right. Research so remarkable that mainstream media headlines blared: "Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain".
Could significant brain-differences mean that political inclination is inborn? Genetically hard-wired?
Better not get carried away with that joke. Finding brain differences doesn't mean that political inclination is hard-wired. That it isn't learned. Since learning too, just as well, may account for brain differences. Since we know that learning can and does correspond with presumably structuring events in the brain. Since learning is precisely not inborn or hard-wired. Learning is everything we acquire - albeit not only - by experience.
For the most simplistic analogy, it may be possible to significantly distinguish computers by their operating systems. Would we then conclude operating systems are hard-wired? Of course not. Operating systems are precisely not hard-wired.
What surprises is not that learning or knowing can correspond with variance in people's brains. Rather, it is how deeply fundamental our political leanings must therefore be. How persistent, reliable and robust a division political leaning must constitute. In order to correspond with real, significant brain differences, leaning left or right politically must divide us - how we learn, how we know -- fundamentally.
It would not be surprising to find significant brain differences between, for instance, people who distinguish right from wrong - and people who do not. But we would not expect significant brain differences between people who think it's right to vote for Barak Obama - and people who think it's wrong to vote for Obama. That's what's surprising. How much deeper than just voting choices our political inclinations must go. How political inclination now seems more like being able to tell right from wrong. In terms of the prior analogy, political leaning isn't just elective software. How we lean seems more like a module of our operating system.
Taking a minute to think about it, though? There should be no surprise. Because, in Western societies, political inclination is predicated on our understanding of fairness - and because fairness has replaced god when it comes to telling political right from wrong.
Right and wrong used to be functions of god-given truths. But at least since the American and French revolutions - if not since yet earlier during Western Enlightenment - we have lost every faith in the truths god gave. And absent definitive, pre-ordained, absolute truths to sanctify each social injustice? The alternative has become culturally ingrained in Western societies that humanitarian fairness must decide public morality.
Now, in the West, fairness is the needle in our public morality compass. Fairness has become the vane of political legitimacy. On this much, in the West, we can agree. We have got to be fair.
But fundamental and imperative as fairness has become? We totally can't agree on what it means. When it comes to our understanding of fairness we are utterly divided.
On one hand, there is the belief that fairness must mean relative parity. Such that, whenever observing material non-parity, we have to conclude non-fairness. Any inequality, in itself, must therefore constitute evidence of discrimination, of oppression, of exploitation - of prevailing social injustice.
On the other hand, there is the belief that fairness must mean not only relative parity - but must also reflect relative merit and virtue. Such that we cannot conclude non-fairness from material non-parity alone. Since inequalities could always stem from differences in relative merit - rather than any social injustice prevailing.
The more we believe material non-parity entails injustice - the farther left we have to lean politically. The more we believe material non-parity does not entail injustice - the farther right we have to lean politically.
And when we lean too far - either way? That's when our ideals of fairness turn ideological. Because it is false, absurd and harmful to believe merit has either nothing or absolutely everything to do with people's material circumstances. Sometimes people can shape their material circumstances - whereas, at other times, circumstances can overwhelm anyone.
It comes down to this. Western ideals of fairness are most admirable. Absent such ideals - had we kept faith with god-given truths or just relied on might determining our relative rights - there could never have evolved even partly free and democratic Western societies. But Western ideologies of fairness are turning uniquely absurd - and damaging.
Right-wing brains believing only merit can truly determine what's fair ought to remember that no society can thrive which turns its back on those most overwhelmed by circumstance through no fault of their own. Whereas left-wing brains believing merit has no bearing whatever on fairness had better remember that societies collapse and fall when turning blind eyes to how enduringly only human self-determination and free-enterprise can improve, enhance, augment and ultimately transcend every possible circumstance. That's right - ultimately transcend. Because circumstance and human conditions hinge not only on potentially alienable means of production - but yet more so on potentially inalienable productions of meaning. Because absent comprehensive appreciation for human production of meaning - there can be no real conception of human productivity.
Ideologies of fairness are absurd artifacts produced by genuine cultural ideals of fairness. Ideals of fairness but for which there could never have emerged even partly free and democratic Western societies. And our most extreme ideologies of fairness are also uniquely Western.
Could left and right-wing brains have preceded our ideals and expectations of public fairness? Could there have been left and right-wing brains prior to left and right political alternatives even existing? Even now, can there be left and right-wing brains in the totalitarian Middle East or North Korea? Of course not. There can be no meaningful left or right political alternatives in totalitarian societies. No political alternative can have coherent totalitarian meaning. Since the meaning of totalitarian is to deny all alternatives.
Our ideals of fairness are at the cultural roots of relatively free and democratic Western societies. Yet our ideologies of fairness - ideologies at the expense of real fairness - like rot, are beginning to erode Western societies from inside out. Can Western societies recover - or will left and right political ideologies continue dividing us until we can no longer work and live together?
That's the real question the survey was meant to address. Not whether Bush or Obama hatred has been worst - responses to which, either way, likely reflect only prevailing ideological devotions. Rather, whether any significant proportion of respondents might indicate some rejection of ideology by choosing the third option: "Ideologues left and right are all a pestilence on democracy." Unfortunately, to date, the third option accounted for merely 8% of responses. Meanwhile, the first two - ideologically divisive - options accounted for over 85% of responses.
By way of bad news, these numbers shout for themselves.

Sharing My Knowledge on Vedanta - 3

This is intended to be a series of articles on the basics of Vedanta, gradually moving on to the depth with details. Please feel free to comment, ask questions related to the articles. Your comments are the thermometer for my writing skills and contents. I will do my best to write on subjects that interests you. Hope you enjoy my articles.
1. Anubandha- catustaya: The four preliminary considerations with respect to vedantic texts. They are Adhikari, Visaya, Prayojana and Sambandha.
2. AdhikárÄ«: Qualified aspirant. The personalities of an individual, qualified to study the vedantic texts.
3. Viveka: The ability to differentiate between the Permanent & impermanent. (Understanding that Brahman alone is permanent and worldly objects including body, mind & intellect are appearing as real) This is the basis/foundation to climb the spiritual ladder.
4. Vairágya: It is the readiness to lose anything at any time. (Recognizing that except Brahman, everything has a beginning & end. A strong conviction of viveka will support Vairágya)
5. Uparama: The ability to withdraw oneself from the worldly attractions. (Be a part of the world yet, being apart -detachment. When viveka & Vairágya are strong, uparama is effortless)
6. Titiksá: The capacity of the mind to take all kinds of pain and sorrow objectively. Equanimity in situations without forbearance (Ability to forgive & forget and not be affected/carried away by the obstacles on the spiritual path)
7. Samádhána: Single-pointed ness. Ability to stay focused in the spiritual path. (If the mind & senses are managed properly, developed the ability to be detached from the worldly attractions for such a person, Samádhána is an effortless act).
8. MumukÅYutvam: A desire for Liberation. (An intense desire to get out of the cycle of birth & death.)
The defects of worldly enjoyments...
- They have a beginning & end - They cause pain - They sap energy - They give a sense of incompleteness at the end - They lead to a cycle of birth & death - due to attachment through pleasure, memory and an illusion.
Differentiation between Sama from Dama.
Sama is mastery of mind. Mind can travel faster than light and in all directions. To manage the thoughts and keep the mind as your servant is a challenging task. Keeping the mind away from the desires of the worldly attractions and in the spiritual path is Sama. (Mind starts with experiencing the pleasure, to the memory of the past pleasure (recalling) to the yearning of the experience again and when not possible, getting agitated, losing clarity, increases anxiety, thus loses calmness and gets detoured from the spiritual path).
Dama is mastery of senses. Information flows from the senses to the mind. Senses are the entry points/gateways to the mind. If these senses are trained properly in the right directions, managing the thoughts and mastering the mind is not difficult. Monitoring and managing the senses is the beginning step towards the spiritual path to recognize Brahman.
Comparison between 'blind belief' and 'sraddhá
The two terms 'blind belief' and 'sraddhá' are vastly different.
Blind belief is a concept, temporary in nature and does not have to have a truth. It has no logic and gets shattered in a difficult situation. My personal experience is: When I was little, I believed that my parents would be there with me forever. On the contrary, when they passed away, I recognize that the belief that I had, isn't true. My father's sudden demise let me questions as to 'where did father go?' 'Will this happen to everyone?' 'When will I go and where?' "Why did I come here from where?"
Sraddhá / Faith is a trust. The faith that I had & continue to have in God, strengthened me (the ego to be humble) leading to an enquiry mind with an ability to intellectually recognize the permanent from the ephemeral, leading to inner peace. Faith is simply trusting that something IS, even though you cannot necessarily see it or prove it.
From the spiritual point of view, a blind belief is a belief based on pure ignorance. Before Sankaracharya, people had blind believes, practiced rituals without understanding the meaning of Vedanta. Once we learn our philosophy, it gives clarity that performing mere rituals alone is not the life's goal. They're only a means to steady our mind and stay focused and elevate us towards the higher goal - Self Realization.
Unfortunately lots of people's beliefs are of this sort, they let themselves be taken by the popularity of something and they have no idea of what the principles or basics of which those beliefs are built upon. They get attracted to the wealth, fame and popularity due to their belief of what they believe is real in life and gets detoured from the spiritual path.
Blind belief reminds me of blind obedience. When a child is put in that situation & the parents are suddenly out of the picture, the child is unable to survive independently because he/she is raised to follow direction. Faith on the contrary is like a child raised to use his critical, analytical, logical thinking and make the choices of his life.
Regular consistent spiritual practices, study of Vedanta, viveka, vairagya, and single pointed focus on self-enquiry will take us to a higher elevation on the spiritual path under the guidance of a Guru and the grace of Lord.

Awesome Power is an organization committed to encourage, motivate, inspire, coach and support individuals to believe in themselves and reach their fullest potentially in life.
The author of this article is a motivational speaker, a professional writer, personal coach dedicated to public speaking, writing articles to make a difference.
The author is also deeply interested in spiritual studies and believes our life is the consequences of our own actions and that the spiritual study is the way for inner peace. We are on this earth to realize that all is ONE and that ONE is in all.

Sharing My Knowledge on Vedanta - 2

Sastra granthas are texts that cover several topics pertaining to a subject whereas prakarana-granthas focus on a specific topic in detail. Ex: Prakarana grantha is like covering Arithmetic, Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry, and Calculus individually whereas sastra grantha is like covering Mathematics as a whole.
Prakarana grantha support the students to focus on a specific topic that she/he is interested in and avoid non-essential topics, which may not pertain to the interest of the student, who wants to go deeper into one specific subject to a particular topic.
Mangalacarana is an invocation of the Lord and/ or the Guru or both before we start any event/challenge/projects. Sometimes one single word is used to invoke both the almighty and the Guru.
Ex: Sankaracharya mentioned the term 'Govinda' as a single word to invocate both the paramatma and his Guru Govinda Bhagwat pada in Vivekachudamani. All vedantic texts start with mangalacarana. Why?
To remember the Lord and the Guru before any challenge or event is to make one humble, pure and devoted have the strength to undertake the challenge. We can accomplish all things only by the Grace of the Lord and guidance of Guru. This also diminishes the ego in one, as one believes that we one need the grace of the Lord & Guru for the outcome.
I read somewhere Lord Krishna's flute symbolizes this. We all are like the hollow flute thru' which flows the enchanting music of Lord flows. It is His power that animates this body.
Prakarana grantha in the very beginning states explicitly the four preliminary considerations with respect to vedantic texts. They are:
1. Adhikari: A person who is qualified to receive the knowledge imparted in the text.
2. Visaya: The subject matter of the text
3. Prayojana/Phala: The results achieved by studying the text
4. Sambandha: The relationship between the subject matter and the text.
Every text is normally given to a certain class of students that have a set of qualities who alone can benefit from. For ex: Anatomy & physiology are directed to health professionals, Physics & electrical/electronics to engineering students, Accounting & Finance to commerce students. So also qualified aspirant alone can benefit from the study of Atma Bodha, while others are encouraged to aspire to study the text.
Sankaracharya says students who are fit to study Atma Bodha need to have certain discipline.
1. Adhikari:
An individual who has
1. Weakened his wrong tendencies and purified his heart through spiritual practices and study of scriptures - Ksinapapanam
2. One who has found mental calmness without any agitations - santanam
3. One who has developed detachment from worldly objects, relationships and situations - vitta-raginams
4. One who is s a sincere seeker, wanting to liberate oneself from one's own bondages and the cycle of birth & death - mumuksunam
- alone is fit to study Atma bodha, says Sankaracharya.
2. Visaya:
Atma (Self) Bodha (knowledge) is the study of self-knowledge. This is the knowledge of one's identity with the Brahman (the all pervading consciousness), which is termed as jiva-brahma-aikya.
3.Prayojan/Phal:
The result of the study of Atma bodha is indicated by the phrase 'mumuksunam apeksyo yam' which is the purpose of seeker's liberation. This liberation is the freedom from the cycle of birth & death. This is the supreme (highest) result of the study of Vedanta.
4.Sambandha:
The relationship between the text and the subject matter which is defines as ' bodhya-bodhaka-bhava-sambandha' is the relationship between the explainer and the explained - the grantha and its content.
Example given in this chapter is if one is hungry and does not know the food that is available can remove hunger, he will not make any effort to eat it.
It is important that we impart the consequences of every action - both benefits and otherwise so that youngsters can make appropriate choices. If they do not know the consequences, they do not allow themselves to choose the right response to any situation.
Studying the Vedanta is a choice and one will choose to read if they know what they'll get out of it.

Awesome Power is an organization committed to to encourage, motivate, inspire, coach and support individuals to believe in themselves and reach their fullest potentially in life.
The author of this article is a motivational speaker, a professional writer, personal coach dedicated to public speaking, writing articles and books to make a difference.
The author is also deeply interested in spiritual studies and believes our life is the consequences of our own actions and that the spiritual studies is the way for inner peace. We are on this earth to realize that all is ONE and that ONE is in all.

Sharing My Knowledge on Vedanta - 1

Of all the creatures in this universe, human birth is very rare. A human being with sattvic qualities is rare and the one who is on the path to dharma with a total commitment and steadfastness is much rare.
The verse written by Sankaracharya 'Vivekachudamani' lists nine blessings. They're:
1. Human birth (nara-janma)
2. Manhood (pumstvam)
3. Sattvic attitude in life (Viprata)
4. Steadfastness on the path of righteousness (vaidhika dharma-marga-parata)
5. Correct knowledge of the deep significances of Vedas (vidvattvam)
6. Differentiation between the Self and not Self (atma-anatma-vivecanam)
7. Direct experience (svanubhavam)
8. To be established in the awareness of the identity of the Brahman & Atman
9. Liberation (mukti)
Among all creatures in this universe from unicellular amoeba to ants, elephants, birds and all species, human birth is considered to be very rare. Not because of the physical or the intellectual power, though, they're admired, but human birth is considered noble because of the following reasons.

1. Only human birth is blessed with the ability to observe one's own thoughts, words and actions. They alone have the ability to change their thoughts and recourse the way they think.
2. All living beings live in an instinctive mode. Human beings alone have the power to choose their responses to a given situation.
3. Finally, they alone have the ability for diving pursuits. They alone can question their existence, reflect on their thoughts & behaviors, question the purpose of their existence and ask 'who am I? Where did I come from? Where am going?'

Pumstvam' (manhood) is a firmness of determination, detachment, intellectual hardiness, steadiness of composure (emotional management). These are not the softness, attachment and sentiments that normally some possess.
Thus pumstvam' (manhood) is not in reference to the physical body but to the intellect that is free of attachments. Manhood in spiritual context simply means courage, strength, constancy to pursuer with steadfastness, dedication, commitment and the strong will to pursue in the spiritual path.
Bhagvad Gita describes Viprata/sattvic attitude as self-restraint, austerity/strictness, purity, forgiveness, righteousness/honesty, straightforwardness/truthfulness, knowledge and intense belief in God. A human birth with all these values is considered to be a 'brahmin' - a rare combination of all divine qualities.
Due to our action in our past several births, we have come this point to focus on spiritual path.
Therefore, it is our responsibility to pursue in this path until we reach the destination of Self-knowledge which can liberate us from the bondages and finally from the cycle of birth & death (samsara)
Manhood and noble attitudes in life are good and will lead us to Godhood as we steadfastly pursue in that direction.
Practice of spiritual disciplines is the ritualistic approach and is a good stepping-stone to Godhood but we cannot stop there. We should develop the habit of reflecting on our existence, question our existence, and try to find who we are. We can observe our thoughts by meditating and be a witness to our prana/breathing & our thoughts. We're not the body, mind or intellect.
Worship, prayer, bajan can help us purify our mind and are actions based on the belief to reach the higher goal. Understanding the deeper meanings of the scriptures is the action at the intellectual level. Fall is eminent, we need to be constantly aware of our position and commit to move forward in the spiritual path. In this world of maya, distraction is plenty.
Vedanta is deep and needs a faculty of perception to understand the deeper logic. People who reach this level of understanding are much more rare than the people who follow the spiritual disciplines without having a deeper understanding. When one reaches this level of vidvattvam, should focus on the next level to be able to differentiate between the Self (the pure consciousness that resides in the physical body) from the material objects outside the body and the body itself & the mind. 'Self' separate from the BMI (Body, mind and intellect) - 's' is the non-Self. Those who are able to reach this level of differentiation have further advanced in the spiritual path. This is again at the intellectual level.
Svanubhava is the personal experience (subjective experience which cannot be described) is higher than the intellectual understanding. Reaching this state is extremely rare.
A person may experience a flash of awareness but that is not enough. One must continuously be aware of Self, as the witness in the physical body and abide in the understanding of this Self in me, 'Atman', the Self - is the same 'Brahman' everywhere. That realization is the purpose of this human birth. Such a person is glorified as jivan mukta in Upanishads, Shista-pragya (one who has transcended the three gunas Sattvic, Rajasic and Tamasic). Such a person is totally liberated from all desires & bondages, is selfless and has no rebirth.
Sankaracharya declares that his state cannot be had without thousands of lives lived with commitment to spiritual advancement.

Awesome Power is an organization committed to to encourage, motivate, inspire, coach and support individuals to reach their fullest potential.
The author of this article is a motivational speaker, a professional writer, personal coach dedicated to public speaking, writing articles and books to make a difference.
The author is also deeply interested in spiritual studies and believes our life is the consequences of our own actions. We are on this earth to realize that all is ONE and that ONE is in all.

Determinism and Punishment

An attempt will be made to discriminate between a compatibilist and an incompatibilist account of free will. To complete this objective, a description of determinism must first be presented. The following questions then arise: to what extent may punishment be defended, and what role it should play in these worldviews?
Determinism is defined as the idea that all events are simply the effect of a previous causal incident in combination with the laws of physics or nature. Every present and future occurrence are necessitated and could not have occurred in any other way. If it is decided that determinism is a true account of reality, then one is confronted with the issue of free will.
Free will is the question of whether rational agents exercise a freedom of control over their own actions and thoughts and thereby decisions. An individual who maintains the belief that determinism is in accordance with reality, and that rational beings do maintain control over themselves is convinced that free will is congruent with determinism, and are called compatibilists. One who believes in determinism and yet does not believe in free will is named an incompatibilist. To further articulate the differences between the two, a more in depth description will be given for each account.
The classical compatibilist view is that a person exercises free will only when the person wills an act and when other acts are capable of being done. It was classically agreed upon that a person's free will is deprived during acts of rape, imprisonment, murder, and other forms of constraint on the person's actions. This coercion overrides free will. It was also argued that even though the options for the person are restricted in these circumstances, irregardless, they still make decisions based on their own desires and preferences. Later compatibilists expanded the debate further by introducing the hierarchical mesh idea of first-order and second-order desires. All three alcoholics may have no choice in having another drink. But below that, in the second-order, one may not want to drink it, one may want to drink it, and one may not even consider the second-order desires. The basic notion is that a rational agent is capable of acting in a multitude of ways that are unpredictable to others.
Incompatibilists would say that any action taken by the rational agent was predetermined by outside forces, including genetic, neurological, and environmental reasons, the laws of nature, and past events. The main argument for the incompatibilist view is one of a causal chain. Whether a rational being can make voluntary choices or not is not the issue, but whether they are, themselves, the prime initiator of this choice. For this to be the case, then one must dismiss all of the preceding events and actions taken, and all of the reasons previously listed. The issue generated by incompatiblism with the largest impact is one over the view of responsibility and punishment.
Society holds people accountable for their actions and delivers praise or blame, except for some cases of mental retardation and psychosis. But for this to be the most appropriate way of handling punishment and reward, one must accept that people have free will. Incompatibilists find it hard to justify punishing someone who's actions were already predetermined since the birth of time. The question is one of how a person can assume moral responsibility for actions out of their immediate control. Some incompatibilists will even give the notion that the person possibly had options and made the wrong ethical choice in that present moment, but that doesn't excuse determinism from the situation. They were still forced into the situation and then many outside issues helped form the decision made. On the other hand, compatibilists say that determinism is a prerequisite for assuming moral responsibility for one's actions, otherwise the decision was governed by a random process in the central nervous system. A view that seems to reconcile both sides it that is a person is determined to act in a specific fashion due to the past and his surroundings, then punishment plants the seeds to change his future actions for the better.

How to Read a Philosophic Text

Philosophy, the pursuit of wisdom, can be an extremely rewarding subject, if the student studies it in a manner conducive to learning. Unfortunately, many new students to philosophy do not understand the deep reading required for an in-depth study of the subject. As a result, many perfectly capable would-be philosophers are discouraged from further study because of frustration over their lack of understanding. By following some simple guidelines on deep reading, however, anyone, given enough patience, can understand, even the most complicated philosophical topics.
In elementary or primary school, most of us are introduced to one method of reading: extensive reading. Such reading is done purely for the pleasure of reading, and we are not always required to absorb all of the information. Such reading is conducive to pleasure reading, e.g. reading novels, comic strips, magazines and newspapers. In these situations, we are simply reading for the pure pleasure of reading. What most people do not realize, however, is that extensive reading is not a good way to read for academic subjects and that another method of reading is needed if we are to fully grasp the essentials of any academic text, especially a philosophical text.
We need to read a philosophical text in such a way that we are able to absorb the details the philosopher is putting forth without loosing sight of the big picture. The type of reading we need is intensive reading. When we read intensively, we are reading for details and information and, as a result, need to shift our attention fully to the text at hand. While you may have been able to read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn in a public park or while a relative is watching television in the same room, such practices will only serve to distract you attempt to read a dialogue of Plato or a treatise by Nietzsche. There are several steps we can take to ensure we are intensively reading at our maximum potential.
First, make sure you are in a quiet area where you are unlikely to be disturbed. Family, friends, roommates, television, and pets will only serve to break your concentration and force you to examine material again you have already covered. Philosophy, and any academic subject for that matter, is best studied without interruption so you can fully absorb the material at hand.
Now, research some background on the philosopher, work, and subject at hand. If you are reading Plato's allegory of the cave from The Republic, you could research and find out that Plato was a student of Socrates and often wrote in a dialectic style with a fictional representation of Socrates as the main character. You could research the significance of The Republic as a political work and the allegory itself as it has influenced various philosophers through the centuries. You could also research the significance of caves as a symbol in philosophical works. What have caves represent in philosophy? At this stage in your study, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, published and maintained by the Stanford University Philosophy Department, is an invaluable resource, and one of the few reliable philosophical databases on the web.
When you are finished with the background stage, you should skim the reading at hand to get an idea of what it is about. Look at the table of contents and read the titles of the chapters in the work. Read through the chapter or passage and look for keywords and headings in the piece you are examining. Read the first sentence of each paragraph to get an idea of what is actually said in the work. By skimming the work, you will not have to concentrate so much on what is being discussed and can focus more on the details of the work at hand.
Now, read the selection completely through once, not worrying much about absorbing details yet. At this stage, you are continuing to gain familiarity with the work and are not so much concerned about the details as you are the big picture. When you are done with this, take a thirty minute break to recharge and gain a fresh perspective. You will be surprised how much difference in comprehension a short break will bring, and you will feel refreshed and recharged for another round.
When you have finished your break, get out your highlighters and a pen: it's time for deep reading! Read the work once again, paragraph for paragraph. As you read each paragraph, highlight the main idea in one color. Highlight any ideas you find personally interesting in another color. Some people find it helpful to write marginalia in the work, or questions and comments that come to mind as you read. Others prefer to write notes in a study notebook for future reference. Whatever your style, make sure you are recording your thoughts about the text as they come to you for future reference.
After the deep reading, it will help if you attempt to summarize what you have just read. Some people like to verbally summarize the material to another student, a friend, or a family member. Others write paragraph summaries of the material they have just read. Still others like to outline the material for future reference. Whatever your prefered method, you should make sure you can summarize what you just read; it will tell you how well you have comprehended the work and whether further study is warranted. If you cannot adequately summarize the material, repeat the above steps as many times as necessary until you feel you feel confident in your grasp.
Above all, utilize your professor, teaching assistant, and other students. Bring your notes and questions to class and don't feel shy about raising points in class. You will not look stupid for asking a question and, in fact, will be engaging in the very spirit of philosophy as championed by Socrates. There is never truly a dumb question in philosophy because questions lead to discussion, discovery, and reinterpretation.
Philosophy can be one of the most rewarding academic disciplines you can pursue, and the skills you will learn from intensive reading of philosophic texts will help you the rest of your life. (It's one reason why so many philosophy undergraduates go to law school.) With a little patience and discipline, anyone can properly read and understand the writings of the great philosophers and share in the wisdom they have passed down to us through the ages.

Christopher A. Rothbauer holds a B.A. in Philosophy and English from Indiana University Southeast and is currently a postgraduate student in Philosophy at the University of Sheffield, where his interests lie in metaphycis, personal identity, philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, and philosophy of film. In his spare time he enjoys traveling, hiking, and watching films. His webpage is located at http://www.redfarmer.net, where he records his thoughts

An Overview of Ayn Rand's the Fountainhead

"The Fountainhead" is a book which Ayn Rand uses as a vehicle to express her philosophy. Her philosophy may be summed up as follows: A man should live for himself, rather than for others. The mind of a single man is the most powerful thing that we know of, and all great achievements and works of art throughout history have risen out of the mind of a single man. The virtue of altruism is a disease, a great evil of our world, which encourages mediocrity.
Ayn Rand is well known for her philosophy of "Rational Selfishness". At first glance, selfishness as an ethical code appears contradictory and absurd. One thing that is important to understand is that Rand doesn't use the word "selfish" in exactly the same way as everyday usage. For example, stealing isn't selfish behavior in her sense of the word. Rand would never approve of stealing. Stealing is taking something from someone else. A truly selfish man doesn't concern himself with others. He would never take or expect anything from them.
The book is divided into 4 major sections, each titled after the 4 main characters:
Part One: Peter Keating
Part Two: Ellsworth Toohey
Part Three: Gail Wynand
Part Four: Howard Roark
Peter Keating spends his life chasing success, but he does so by pleasing others. He gives up his early dream of becoming a painter to become an architect. He ends his life dejected and unfulfilled.
Ellsworth Toohey is a man that chases power by manipulating others. He encourages men to adopt the ideals of altruism, charity, and service. He tries to destroy all great men such as Roark by calling them selfish egotists.
Gail Wynand is a man that begins life as a poor man, but he climbs to the top of society on the strength of his own industriousness. He becomes the owner of a newspaper and media conglomerate. He is a man of great taste, but he "sells his soul" by giving people what they want in exchange for money and power.
Howard Roark is the hero of the story. He is a talented architect who thinks that Greek, Roman, Classical, or Gothic architecture were great - the first time they were done. He has no desire to produce replicas of them as all his peers do, and so he finds it very hard to find any work. Roark is the perfect man in Ayn Rand's eyes. He is a man of integrity who never compromises his ideals. He always lives for himself and never for others.
"The Fountainhead" is a good book and a great place to start for anyone interested in learning about Ayn Rand's work. Her most famous work is "Atlas Shrugged," which is much longer and is a further elaboration of her philosophies.

One thing that confused me about the book was that such little emphasis was placed on the types of trash cans used by the characters. To make up for this deficiency, I have created two websites. One is about the Rubbermaid trash can, and the other is about the competing

Can One Place Plato's Allegory to Be Accurate?

The allegory of the cave is a story from the book 'the republic' written by Plato, in it consists of two characters the Socrates who is a philosopher and his young follower named Glaucon. He explains to him that human beings are ignorant with the knowledge of knowing only what they have been told, and in the quest to know the truth, when faced with a little challenge they back out, in the sense that they go back to their ignorance. The Allegory of the Cave can be interpreted in many ways; one way is to make a comparison between the story and the way of thinking by individuals in a closed society. Socrates states that the cave is a world many of us would like to see, but are not really how the world is. It is almost like the movie "The Matrix", where Neo, the main character is to discover that the world he lives in is not the real world, but a world generated by machines and computers. Only in Socrates' allegory, the world is not created by computers, but by individual minds. Socrates wants Glaucon to be a wiser, better-educated man, who will later become a ruler of the State. He wants him to know not only the right, but also experience the wrong, because only a man, who knows the bad, can truly understand and appreciate the good. Socrates does this by telling him a story, to let him better understand the principles of life.
He illustrated what he meant by an example he gave saying the prisoners in a cave from their childhood whose limbs and heads have been chained, will see their shadows reflected by a ray of light from an opening as other people and when they hear the echo of their voices, they think it is the people they see talking. And if one of them is released, when he realizes that all he saw was an illusion he will definitely take what he has believed in since childhood until he is forcibly dragged on to see the real thing then he'll come up with certain theories. And a personal understanding of his illustration is him using the cave as the world, and the shadows cast on the wall are the particular things of the world. The fire in the cave is the sun. Outside the cave is the world of ideas. The prisoners who can only see shadows are non-philosophers who can only know the individual things of the world which are only shadows of the essential things. The prisoner who escapes and goes outside the world is a philosopher who rises above this world of senses and goes into the intelligible world, the ideal world. The chains on the prisoners are passions, prejudices, and sophistries.
The metaphysics which deals with the essence of being and the study of ultimate reality is explained with the idea of the released prisoner seeing what is reality deals with the metaphysics and also where he is able to discover the sunlight and other earthly bodies was the metaphysical knowledge of plat the writer and Socrates the story teller. We are all prisoners watching shadows in a cave this metaphor contains a puzzle. The specific platonic form of the philosophical predicament of attempting to say that if we are prisoners in the cave watching shadows, how could we have known that this is the case? If we only have experience of the shadow world, how can we come to see how it really is? They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows. So when the prisoners talk, what are they talking about? If an object (a book let us say) is carried past behind them, and it casts a shadow on the wall, and a prisoner says "I see a book," what is he talking about? He thinks he is talking about a book, but he is really talking about a shadow. But he uses the word "book." What does that refer to? Plato gives his answer at line (515b2). The text here has puzzled many editors, and it has been frequently emended. The translation in Gruber/Reeve gets the point correctly:
"And if they could talk to one another, don't you think they'd suppose that the names they used applied to the things they see passing before them?"
Plato's point is that the prisoners would be mistaken for they would be taking the terms in their language to refer to the shadows that pass before their eyes, rather than (as is correct, in Plato's view) to the real things that cast the shadows. If a prisoner says "That's a book" he thinks that the word "book" refers to the very thing he is looking at. But he would be wrong. He's only looking at a shadow. The real referent of the word "book" he cannot see. To see it, he would have to turn his head around. Plato's point is that the general terms of our language are not "names" of the physical objects that we can see. They are actually names of things that we cannot see, things that we can only grasp with the mind. But if we are prisoners of a bench watching shadows we take for reality, Plato is also a prisoner and finds himself watching shadows, so Plato's description of the cave is just another shadow, and if it is a shadow, it cannot also be a true description of how things are. And if it is not a true description of how things are then, then Plato's theory of things not being in true physical is not the true description as he himself watches shadows too. So that could initiate that there is no truth.
The epistemology questions the certainty of knowledge, that is whether knowledge is possible or not. It deals with such issues as sources, scope, validity and limits of knowledge. Well in the allegory of the cave, we see that the prisoners acquired their knowledge through what they saw, therefore we could tell that it was actually not real that it was all illusions; hence we say their knowledge wasn't valid. Also their knowledge was limited in the sense that all they knew was what they had seen in the cage they had not been able to explore more in other to acquire a quality wide and valid knowledge. Suppose they were aware of the outside world beyond the cave, they would have sort or search out ways out of the cave as man's curiosity and search for knowledge is in his nature and cannot be denied. However, that search for knowledge was not possible as the cave was seen as the only home in existence and thereby they used their physical sense as the source of their knowledge. Plato maintains that true knowledge, is not acquired through sense perception because true knowledge is universal, objective and infallible. Hence the object of knowledge must be stable.
Plato believes that most people live in mental caves of ignorance and never perceive the truth. Assume, for sake of argument, that Plato is correct. How can the study of philosophy help remedy this situation?
Assuming Plato is correct is assuming that to attain the status of being able to see the truth, you have to be able to see past the shadows on the wall and realize that you can turn your head to the minds reality and see that there is more to the truth of being then what you can physically see with your own two eyes. In other words the study of philosophical means enabling our minds to see the truth about reality. Also, if Plato is correct, the soul of man inherently contains knowledge of good but can only perceive this in degrees of experience until the highest level of knowledge is attained. Does it have mathematical meaning, explain a vision of the whole world, or is it just a comparison to the field of social work? I personally feel that "The Allegory of the Cave¨ is a great explanation of how people in the world live. People are just like the men chained inside the cave, people only know and believe what he or she might have seen.
Well religion has to do with the study of the nature of religion and religious beliefs. During the life time of Plato he said wonder was the beginning of philosophy and religious philosophy came as a result of wonder. It was also contemplated through thoughts in which the things of time participate. Before the theory of the allegory of the cave, Plato said there is something above called "essential form of good". Plato had many ideas on how one's mind, body, and spirit came together to perform actions and thoughts. One important idea he broke down, was the conception of the soul in "Allegory of the Cave". He broke this idea into three different parts and each of these parts played a role in the feelings of man. These parts were referred to as the sun, the line, and the cave.
The sun symbolized the Form of the Good; the ultimate object of knowledge, according to Plato. The prisoners in the cave looked at nothing but shadows on a wall from the statues which was made to make them believe that the shadows are the most real things that are in the world. In order to reach the Form of the Good, you must be able to see what's real, resulting in a prisoner's release to the outside world.
The prisoner released is now able to look at the fire and the statues, but is in disbelief that the shadows are not the most real things in the world. This is where the line comes in. The line represents the four stages of cognitive activity that a human being is capable of doing. The prisoner now believes that the fire and the statues are the most real things in the world.
After the prisoner is dragged into the outside world, he sees real objects. The cave illustrates the effects that education has on a human being. The prisoner doesn't have to imagine what real things are because he now knows what the most real things in the outside world are. He sees real trees, real flowers, and even the sun, which he learns is the cause of the real objects being seen.
The Allegory of the Cave is a process of the growing mind. We grow from imagination, to belief, to forms, and finally, we grow to understanding. This is the closest thing in Plato to traditional conceptions of God.
Plato's aim in the Republic is to describe what is necessary for us to achieve this reflective understanding. But even without it, it remains true that our very ability to think and to speak depends on the Forms. For the terms of the language we use get their meaning by "naming" the Forms that the objects we perceive participate in. The prisoners may learn what a book is by their experience with shadows of books. But they would be mistaken if they thought that the word "book" refers to something that any of them has ever seen. Likewise, we may acquire concepts by our perceptual experience of physical objects. But we would be mistaken if we thought that the concepts that we grasp were on the same level as the things we perceive. This hereby explains the saying of man's nature seeing is believing as Plato believes that what you see is inferior to what you believe which explains the fact that the eternal holds more hope for the non philosophers than the physical...
Politics' focus is on one social institution- the state and seeks to determine its justification, ethical composition, and organization. And also who should rule, and how best to rule. In the allegory of the cave, I really don't see any relations to ruling except that; the people who chain these prisoners should let them go so that they can be able to discover the truth. That is the people of this world should set free and go in search of the truth they should become philosophers and be no more ignorant of reality and the truth. Plato is of the view that non-philosophers should have no place in government as they are still in shadows and have no knowledge of the light. He believes that those who should be in power are people in experience. A philosopher king should be the one to rule. He believed that the unlearned should not have any business in government whatsoever as they will only act on impulse and not with knowledge. He believed that those who are to govern must visit the dark after the light so that they can be ten times better than those in the dark. He says that;
"And you will know what the several images are, and what they represent, because you have seen the beautiful and just and good in their truth. And thus our State which is also yours will be a reality, and not a dream only, and will be administered in a spirit unlike that of other States, in which men fight with one another about shadows only and are distracted in the struggle for power, which in their eyes is a great good. Whereas the truth is that the State in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern is always the best and most quietly governed, and the State in which they are most eager, the worst."
He believed that the only life which looks down upon the life of political ambition is that of true philosophy and that those who govern ought not to be lovers of the task for, if they are, there will be rival lovers, and they will fight. He believed that those whom they should have as leaders should be the men who are wisest about affairs of State, and by whom the State is best administered, and who at the same time have other honors and another and a better life than that of politics. Plato was an idealist who believed in an ideal state

The Concept of Absurdism

The theme of absurdism has been replicated through out the novel with the categorization of Meursault in the Novel," The Outsider". In this context, Albert Camus has considered the philosophy of the novel as lonely and sensual by highlighting Meursault's characterization in light of absurdism and existentialism. As per authors view, Meursault has refused to hide his feelings and the people of society felt panicky because of worldly involvement with actions and reactions as a normal flow life. The people who live luxurious lives have no faith upon truth happening in the present or in future moderation. In considering an outsider, he has tried to detect the truth of compilation as because he has minutely lived and thought about some outskirt styles of absurdism in effect in his sky of absurdism as well as existentialism. He has led his efforts in a separate philosophical banner where he finds a picture of societal actions. Hence the author has remarked, "As I always do when I want to get rid of some one when I am not really listening to, I gave the impression that I was agreeing with him. To my surprise he was exultant".
In order to perpetuate the memory of his mother, he has never hesitated to reflect the model and characteristics of his mother. Absurdity has been reflected in the novel 'Outsider' with different inner sequences as a symbol of loneliness in course to instinct, existentialism, and excitement, inertness of spontaneity and overall growth of desolate exp-unction of life. The author here expresses some outpourings of common absurdism which does not cope with his own demonstrative voice towards his mother in course of performing her funeral. He wishes to have her blessings and graceful responses so that he becomes stronger to live alone far away from societal actions and reactions in this eternal world. In culture, friendship and love he finds breach of trust, lies, magnetism of wealth, too much greed and jealousy which spoils his luxurious goal. Far from lacking all sensibility, he is controlled by a tenacious and as such profound passion, the passion for an absolute and truth to retaliate his real life situation. As per style of author's philosophical attitude and feelings, the truth which is publicized as a negative effect, the author may be considered as a veteran truth-born lively fellow, but without which no triumph over the self or over the world will ever be outweighed. Suffice it to say, it is evident that if a man is habituated in such deeds full of absurdism where the definition of life has perpetual meaning. It is evident that he is a very hardened soul man because the magistrate doesn't find any reason why Meursault is agreeing to admit that he is wrong and he wouldn't lie about his fault, the writer has set out some ethical prospects with which he yearns to be adorned with various qualities of human ornaments. In this context, the author says," The sun was getting low outside and it was not hot any more- differentiates the guilty and not guilty"
In view of the above, it is evident that the presentation of the theme absurdism as well as its social reactions has been highlighted in the novel on a large scale. One wouldn't be far erroneous in judging the outsider who without any heroic pretensions agrees to die for the truth. According to the author, a man who is fighting for a just cause is always a great man. The author has reflected a character like silhouette which enmesh everyone to be dispersed from worldly affairs. Despite all deeds revitalized in the novel, the author has virtually pointed out some defects of social and cultural life tentatively. This is the philosophy of the novel, "Outsider". In this virtual event, the author says," For the first time I realized that I was guilty". In fine, the philosophy of social absurdism has been vivaciously reflected throughout the contrasts of Meursault's characterization.

Kh. Atiar Rahman is a distinguished author and a poet. He has many publication in national and international media.