Section 61 (last updated 03.31.2021)
(add to cosmological principle and earth as spaceship in Hebrew)
Quantum mechanics will not find full success in the materialism ontologies because it is fundamentally an ontological science.
Religious in the realm of science is concerned with the forms of conduct based on possibility of universal ethical principles. Religion means that included as part of science are the ethical principles of conscious experience.
Spirituality stripped off from traditions and customs behaviour is the recognition that reality is fundamentally abstract. This is why all religions ascribe as part of virtuous behaviour temperance in pleasures, not indulge in the physical needs because they are instrumental sustenances for experiences of life which are otherwise abstract in conception.
The progression in modern science finds no place in the method of impartiality where the subject observes from a distance the natural operation of the objects having no role to it other than cataloguing its natural operations. Quantum science fundamentally shows that the observer is already involved in the operations of the object such that the study of it is internally related to a determination of it. The observer is already engaged in the operations of his object means that impartiality is already a facade of a will determining the circumstances, as the circumference, of the experience. This does not mean that the subjective will brought the existence of the object but
The observer is conceiving how the object conceived itself and therefore the conception is objective. This is in fact what defines the term “nature” which means a thing that is self caused as opposed to something caused by an external source. Something that causes itself conceives itself. Both the conception of a thing and a thing’s conception are the same relation. To conceive an object and the object being conceived are the same. The conception that conceives itself is identical in substance to the external conception of it. To observe an object is to see how it sees itself, and it requires the conception of by an other… The observer is an objects way of conceiving itself or more appropriately the object is an observers way of conceiving itself. The human observer is a very advance formulation of this.
The intellectual wreckage may render the constructive building blocks for an ontologically sound ground
Heaven
Aristotle’s “on the heavens” is an ontological inquiry of cosmology. The universe for the ancient Greeks does not only involve physical aspects but ethical and asethical principles. In fact, the idea of “time” for the Ancient Greeks is an aspect of the universes ethical behaviour and merely part of its physical constitution.
The Ancient term “heaven” is an idealism of the cosmos which goes beyond a descriptive analysis of the universe but stipulates a teleological end for nature. This so called “end” is wrongfully taken as to predetermine nature but in fact it is the determinative aspect of nature, in purely physical terms it relates to time, the future wholly stripped of any content is itself an end for nature to arrive at. It is important to understand how the end is actually an aim rather than some predetermine destination to arrive at.
There is semblance of the Ancient Greek notion of the heavens retained in modern religious thought. We are normally ordained to the idiomatic reading of the monotheistic heaven as abstract realm detached from the physical world. While at the same time we are only able to associate heaven with a physical image that is some historically real time period or physical place to be arrived at derived. The idea of heaven is always associated with an abstraction from experience in time.
Catholics are notable for representing heaven with physical descriptions but heaven is not limited to some image because Heaven is the ideal aim that maintains the self relation of the trinity as the totality of existing. However in describing heaven as a physical place, they made it into a real place, the question becomes if heaven is physical, but it is not readily present at the moment, then it must be real as a potential moment. Heaven is an ideal moment of time in the future.
Pope John Paul II says: “The ‘heaven’ or ‘happiness’ in which we will find ourselves is neither an abstraction nor a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity.”
The holy Trinity is the one and only God in three forms; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God the father is the word or in the same way the ideal, the word is the idea of the world and is identical with existence. Christ is the flesh, the matter and content, the conception. The Holy Spirit is form, the energy and driving power.
heaven is the ultimate end and the realm of divine perfection, an end that already exists out there which the individual must strive towards arriving at. This physical description of heaven makes it a point in time. Point in time is different from place in space. A spatial place is always a point on a coordinate system meaning that it is a position on a group of pattern. A spatial point is equal to the surface of a plain at a particular position. The definition of position as the location of something- where something should be-presupposes position as the way something is ordered and arranged.
Distance the further or closer something is from the observer determines a disparaging in measurement between arrangement and location. For example, when we say so and so is located in a particular place we are assuming the location is a position whose motion to it is the surpassing of arrangements ordered towards the place whose destination is unique point from the order used to arrive to. When the distance is short, we see no expansive difference between the location and arraignment. To say for instance that my shoulder is in a weird position means that it’s arrangement is in a location improper relative to a previous order.
Time determines this spatial measurements because a Place in time is a potential point that is not on a coordinate because it lacks a definite position but that does not mean it is not a place. The place of time is the position where the spatial place is not. If my spatial place is at a specific location, then my time is all the places where I am not at, the potential points. It always takes time to arrive at a place in space. This means that time is the activity of space because the space is the particular position of time and time is the general place of space. (Add Heraclitus flux) when Heraclitus famously stated that “you can never step in the same river twice” means that no spatial position remains in the same location because even if a particular point on a coordinate occupies the same place, all the possible places it is not occupying constitutes it at a changing position due to their indeterminate possibilities. Even if hypothetical a point is not changing in the environment the environment is changing beneath the point.
For example we give mere physical description to illness by identifying them as viruses and bacteria. Empirical science identifies a certain microscopic structure, a complex molecule, as a certain bacteria or virus, and from that deduce that these illness are merely physical as they enter they enter the body. Empirical sciences in the medical sciences does not care why or for what reason someone has a virus but merely is aquatinted with its molecular structure so that it can be indefinite do in a patient. Yet the way it is identified tells us more about it than its mere physical structures because if we would merely look at the molecular structure of a certain virus without knowing it is a virus, it looks like a particle much more benign than a cell because a cell that a virus infects is much larger. If we example isolate a virus particle from a mucus membrane, it is only through the induction of locating a virus on a mucus membrane that is located on a living organism who is engaged in certain activities. It is only from this inductive process that an anomaly is picked out that appears different than for example the cellular tissue that after deeper examination indicates as virus molecule.
Illness are experiences meaning that any physical precautions do nothing unless the activity is changed. Viruses belong to different activities for example hiv are only transmitted sexually, and so avoiding them means either being
If you want to avoid certain sickness you have to avoid certain behaviours it’s impossible to avoid illness while doing the behaviours that harbour it. Illness is naturally a moral consequence of ethical conduct. This demonstrates to us that any physical affect is fundamentally ethically caused. One example of how the conduct forms the physical. The physical growth of this illness or that illness is caused by certain behaviour. This example may be unfair because we are already dealing with preexisting matter that is merely transformed into something else by the behaviour which is not the same to say that the behaviour brought the matter into existence. But what it means for something to come into existence is itself fundamentally a transformation from nothing into being.
A spatial position assumes an activity that ranks or an ordered process, in Latin the term “co-ordinate” – co, for together and ordo, for order –literally means to “place in the same rank”. Spatial points are determined together in a temporal order means that Time is the ordering process of spatial points, the difficulty is the order in which time operates. A place in space exists in the present but in the present the distance between the departure and arrival is a duration from the past to the future, assuming that the arrival is the future and the departure is the past. Any spatial point is on a continuum of time. The continuum of time is however indeterminate outside the conception of certain spatial relations and therefore it is not linear but as we stated exhibits form. For example Death and life are not spatial points because Even if for instance we discern the moment and place a baby is born into life and the moment and place a person dies, these are abstractions because they are made from a conception that is in the duration of passing from being born towards death. Between being born and death someone somewhere in that duration is conceiving these extremes as beginning an end of his duration.
Heaven is a potential point in time relates to the notion of heaven as dimension where life passes into death is also known as life after death, which is interesting because this relation assumes that life follows death rather than having first life and than death. The idea of heaven as dimension separating life from death is usually understood by the mythical picture where the individual ego of a person, after the degeneration of the body, is maintained as it was before in that body in a different realm where it does not have the body it shed but still maintains the personality of it as an identity in the new realm. This implicitly intuits that the abstract conception of a consciousness cannot do away the identity it represents its action with I.e. The body, while at the same time assumes that the form maintained by the body can somehow be maintained without the body when it is discarded. This fails to makes sense because it does not explain how a thing remains the same while its physical composition changes, especially if the body is substrate representing the movements of the form. How can the change of a physical composition maintain the same form if the change of the matter is accounted for by the form? (Add to the soul simple or composite)
Unravel my own mind
I have to unravel my own mind, trace back the progressive developments of the idea through the random ply dispersed sections, and connect them together to formulate the proper development of the idea
God – Heaven infinity
The idea of heaven as a dimension for an after life characterizes the potentiality of the future. The story of resurrection wherein Jesus went to heaven but returned back from the dead denotes the necessary reemergence of life, that reality is not merely given but needs to be constantly reconstructed. One idea shared by monotheistic religions is that heaven is a non physical place because it extents beyond the physical skies. By our modern empirical standards we take this idea as to exclude materialism. However the notion that heaven is non physical place is related to Aristotle’s idea that form is the integral activity for matter. In meaning, Heaven going beyond the upper cosmos the continuity of it towards an ideal and is not to exclude the physical aspect of the world, this is more of a miscommunication of the previous age with the modern one based on the limitations of language, but To go beyond something is interpreted as overcoming it, exclude out, to leave it behind and this is the same meaning that is given to concepts like transcendental.
Hegel says
“take note here that philosophy has absolutely nothing at all to do with merely correct definitions and even less with merely plausible ones, i. e., definitions whose correctness is immediately evident to the consciousnes s that forms representations; it is concerned, instead, with definitions that have been validated, i.e., definitions whose content is not accepted merely as something that we come across, but is recognised as grounded in free thinking, and hence at the same time as grounded within itself.”
Philosophy which deals with meaning rather than merely communicating something across, demonstrates that going “beyond” refers to how the activity of becoming changes the being of phenomena. To be “beyond” something in metaphysics relates to Kant notion that transcendental is based on the order of foundation, a thing more fundamental than an other portrays its power of transcending it. To transcends something means to be more fundamental. Likewise to go beyond something means not to be limited by its physical composition, sound for example exceeds faster than solid and dense objects, in that case you can hear something at far distance away and sound being a more fundamental element.
The images of heaven that have been historically formulated makes it appear as some ideal physical place is really no more than abstractions of a potential. Heaven is not physical because it is a potentiality of the future, or an idealization of the past.
The notion that the end is already present for the beginning is an Ancient teleological notion concerning the origin of a thing. The religious investigation of the heaven as the end aim for life relates to the origin of the world in the beginning. in Christianity the idea of heaven is brought down to earth. The cosmos is connected to the earth in the sense that the earth is the teleological aim of the cosmos. The idealism of the conception, the idea of the future is taken as the end that actually generates the beginning and the advance towards actualizing it. The potential of the future is the end which the duration of the presents works towards fulfilling.
In one sense heaven is a physical place Is related to the conception of the cosmos above as the heavens but moreover heaven forms a continuity with life on earth. Heaven as relation of the cosmos to life on earth is found in the more grounded idea of the “coming world” also called heaven on earth. The idea of heaven on earth is the belief that the limitations and flaws of the current age will be replaced in the future by a better age. This image of paradise is an idealization of the future. Heaven in Christianity characterizes the future, the notion of potentiality because a) they found that looking up into the skies exhibits a sense of potentiality because of the infinite, that the future is found in the infinite possibilities, and b) this potential of the cosmos does not merely remain out there but comes down in relation to that which conceives it from earth, the future of the cosmos is found in earth. Specifically the future is the ideal conception of the present.
Add to the word as reality in Christianity Logic (from the Ancient Greek: λογική, translit. logikḗ), originally meaning “the word” or “what is spoken”, but coming to mean “thought” or “reason”, is a subject concerned with the most general laws of truth, and is now generally held to consist of the systematic study of the form of valid inference.
The word is ultimately the communication of a thought and is fundamentally an idea.
(Add to Islam samawat) In Judaism, “shamayim” is the Hebrew word for heaven, plural for heavens. The etymological origin of the word goes back to the ancient Akkadian word samu derives “sham” meaning sky and in Hebrew “mayim” meaning water. In modern Arabic samawat is derivative of samu and and my’I derivative of mayim. In Judaism the cosmos is divided into three hierarchical parts, heaven is one component and the other elements being erets (the earth) and scheol the underworld. (Add here earth as space ship in cosmological principle)
The three part tiered division of the cosmos is early attempt at qualitative ordering of the universe. It is an archaic astronomical inductive method that conceives the earth as the centre point between an upper heaven and lower realm. The image of heaven as “above” and underworld below is shared by all monotheistic and earlier religions because it is natural from the perspective of someone on earth looking up into the skies to see what appears to be multitudes of worlds, today we know as stars, galaxies etc.
The most obvious of these worlds and closest in distance is our sun in Hebrew called “shemesh” literally means daylight or sunrise or sunset, related to “shams” the Arabic word for sun. The Arabic word “shams” is a derivation from shamayim, which in the latter sense involves the more general meaning of all objects in the sky, the sun, earth and underworld, in Arabic, the meaning of sky retained in the word “shams” has the greater emphasis on the sun, that the sun is the quality of the sky. There is a more cosmological progression with the recognition that the sun is a unique object in the sky and not a mere object among objects.
(Put before) The term shemesh is interesting because it does not conceive the sun as a mere quantity in the sense of being just an object, but rather as a quality, the term takes the activity of the sun, its sunlight to define the object. The movements of the sun rotating up and down define it as a distinct object, so that when it rises we know it is there and when it sets we know it is not present. (On the heavens 17;00) at the same time the observation that the sun rises and sets preludes the notion of an underworld. The ancients deduced from the motion of the sun an under realm opposite to the sun- there is an alteration when the sun sets the underworld rises and when the sun rises the underworld sets. If we strip away from the idea of an underworld the superstition of ghosts and realm of the dead, which is really an intuition about the life that was once there during the light from the sun, the under world is really an induction of space below and all around the earth adjacent to the motion of light and this constitutes the motion of body. A very obvious fact for modern standards but an early fundamental discovery of the concept of space and motion of body with it.
Earth is taken as standard for heavenly motion because the observation of the moving stars is derived from it, from what appears to be static earth is rendered from a stable conception of that relationship, as to whether the ancients were unable to differentiate their stable observation from an earth that is itself a moving body is not all that clear because the earth is described in other places as moving disk. What the Ancient did poorly to differentiate is a stable conception of the universe from a moving earth.
In Christianity we see a progressive continuity of the whole cosmos connected down to earth. The cosmos is connected to the earth as process.
Papias writes that “there is this distinction between the habitation of those who produce a hundredfold, and that of those who produce sixty-fold, and that of those who produce thirty-fold; for the first will be taken up into the heavens, the second class will dwell in paradise, and the last will inhabit the city”. These three stages of heaven in Christianity constitute a cosmological ordering of the world into three time periods of developments. The Christian conception of heaven was a prophecy of the future and an understanding of the past.
The first layer is called “heaven” and refers to the cosmos, and heaven as the totality of the universe. The heavens
(Add shemesh here)
Second heaven is referred to as “paradise” which is a depiction of nature and natural life on earth.
An idealization of the past. The conditions of nature. (Add sun is god, in ancient Egypt and Christianity)
Amazon the beginning of human kind
Hegel famously writes that the only thing “We learn from history is that we do not learn from history” and this claim is especially relevant today because our historical accounts are partial to say the least. Archeology which is suppose to be the science of providing a coherent timeline of history has failed to provide a conclusive historical account of the development of human civilization missing half of the story. This deficiency is mainly derived from the methodology by which a historical record is established. The empirical side of science governs the ontological assumption which many archeologist operate under, which is a kinda of equation; the quality of the artifact in relation to the time period it was derived from relative to the time it was discovered in. how old an artifact is, the age of a discovery, determines the time period it was created and used in. This is a completely rational assumption if we make the determining factor of a historical time period fully dependent on the quality of the artifacts discovered. Tools determine their time period, not the time period determines the tools, from the viewpoint of reflective history.
Of course the older we go back in time the less qualitative the artifacts appear and the more ambiguous the time period becomes evident. fossils and tools dating back hundred of thousands of years can only provide an ambiguous time span of its period, a range of years, and because the oldest fossils are found in Africa, modern archeology argues that life of man kind has initially begin in Africa. The oldest fossils of anatomically “modern” humans remains is discovered in Morocco Africa dating about 300,000 thousand year old. Modern archeology however does not offer a historical time period of human civilization between the oldest fossil of man found in Africa all the way approaching the Sumer civilization. The gap between hominoids from Africa until ancient Sumer is left unexplained by lack of evidence from Africa.
Contemporary archeologist insist strongly that life began in Africa, they impose this dogma against anyone arguing otherwise namely because Archeology has made reasonable advancement in the historical period of ancient Babylon, Ancient Greece, ancient Egypt, Persian empire, Ottoman Empire and of course Europe because we have artifacts from that age that are in reasonable enough condition to provide evident accounts. We claim that the Sumerian tradition was the first civilization because it presents the first evidence of written language and therefore it is true that it is the first literate civilization. However to say that it is the first civilization to develop the faculty of human understanding is an untrue claim.
Modern archeology becomes lazy and satisfied with the historical account it has provided dating back to roughly 7000 years ago, but finding comfort in this picture of history not even provides 10% of human history given the proposition that human civilization may span back to 100,000 thousand years old.
Modern archeologist make excuses as to why the Amazon is not a good place for the arrival of human civilization but really it is a fear and hesitation from venturing into the complexity of the Amazon, serves as a fundamental challenge to the development of our own culture if we find true that the Amazon was a product of man.
More recent archeologist like Graham Hancock maintain that the unexplored massive landmark area of the Amazon is the missing link for a rich historical time period where humans truly had a beginning. Archeologist dismiss the view that the Amazon harboured human civilization because of the true fact that Amazonian soil was infertile. Hancock argues that ancient Amazonian civilizations invented a soil named by the Spaniards “terra preta” or “Amazonian dark earth”. This manmade soil is a biochar mixture of charcoal, bone, broken pottery, compost and manure to the otherwise infertile Amazonian soil.
The significance of this soil is that it enabled the Amazonian to feed their extremely large population speculated to be around 20 million people. It is not entirely understood how these ancient Amazonian managed to make the soil fertile. Black earth is achieved in part by a method called “wet burning” which is burning the soil content in smoulder rather than intensely which instead of producing mere charcoal creates biochar. The mystery concerns not how they made biochar but how they managed to change the molecular structure of the earth to bear microbes that can produce the many kinds of trees seen in the Amazon that was not initially native to that region. Speculation reveals that it was an advanced form of composting but as to what is being composted remains unclear. One way to figuring this out is to look at the more recent Mayan civilizations custom.
It is a widely known fact that Mayan civilizations had a strong custom of human sacrifice which in part is argued to result in the collapse of the civilization at large due to the spread of disease from the dead and the killing off the productive class (find where you talk about Mayan killing off productive class). It is also an archeological mystery as to why the Mayans sacrificed so much. For one reason, they had the strong superstition that human scarface would entice the gods to provide nourishment and food to the population. Some theories suggest that sacrifice, especially of children, catch the attention of beings at different dimension. the combination of psychoactive substances with lewd acts like murder, bring about these extraterrestrial beings, the reason why lewd acts bring them about, is because killing of children has the consequence of killing off, or ending the human species, and the human species is supposedly the creation, or the product of these beings, which only makes sense why they come in to intervene somehow.
At first glance human sacrifice seems to be an entirely irrational and superstitious, which it is, but it becomes more clear why it occurred so much if we realize that the reasoning for this was that the Mayan’s tried to recreate what the older Amazonian cultures achieved but ultimately failed due to their cultural scientific inaptitude. The ancient Amazonian civilization before the mayans had a more underlining scientific foundation in their religious ritual and ceremonies. For example, the dark soil was moreover a discovery of the chemical composition of natural soil than it was an invention out of nowhere. Natural soil is fertile when it also serves in the task of composition of dead life matter. The microbes present in the soil that decomposes dead animals is not present without the life stock itself, in other words, the microbes that decompose the body of a life form already preexist in the body beforehand. What the ancient Amazonian’s realized is that if the dead is properly cremated with the soil they are buried in, this synthesis somehow changed the microbial structure of the soil making it fertile. Fertility is ultimately defined as the capacity to conceive. Human composition is the key ingredient in the making of the soil fertile. Once dark soil is fertile it remains so for thousands of years.
The idea that life began in Africa is however a modern proposal and one which is not for example shared by the ancients. Christianity garden of eden is not merely mythical account of the origin of man but is also a historical account. the Adam and Eve story, the garden of eden was the ancients historical account of their ancient people, particular the civilization of the Amazon.
The Amazon was originally a desert like Africa, but unlike Africa, man succeeded in the Amazon by operating as homogenous hive mind. The Amazon people did not develop awareness of themselves as distinct individual from the tribe. (Add find Carl young, savage people, see the sunset)
They made the soil by selectively choosing their dead and burning them with the ground, or they had such a homogeneous culture that people generally lived a good life where the people’s genetic information affected the soil in the ground changing its microbes to bear life.
(Add where else you say Mayan) The later Mayan civilization tried to recreate the old methods of bearing soil to produce food, but their culture was corrupt so they sacrificed their productive class, thinking that the mere act of sacrifice would bear fruit instead of the chemical reaction of fire, earth air with the flesh, in a sense the later mayain civilization was more superstitious whereas the older Amazonian civilizations are more scientific and have a basic grasp of chemistry and biology.
Their grasp of universal principles of mathematics and logic was not expressed through writing or communication but was expressed by labour, in other words, they expressed scientific principles by implementing them in their very work, by how they built their structures etc.
What determines ancient Babylon as the start of civilization is the simple fact that it was the first to read and write, or rather express its thought in script. This feature although did not belong to the civilizations of the Amazon, and therefore is not considered civilization by this standard, still grasp fundamental scientific principles and express them in different ways. The ancient civilizations of the Amazon did not express their science by writing and communicating, but rather expressed the truth in their very labour- the way their civilizations are structured. There is evidence of the idea that most of the diverse vegetation of the Amazon was man made, in other words a human created fertilizer was found constituting the base of most tree types in the Amazon.
Their conception of universal truth was conceived all at once with the same mind, their nature was more insect like, they printed what they conceived as a species into the very structure of their civilization, which we are finding out constitutes the entire base of the Amazons. Their thought was simultaneous with their action. the death and extinction of these people was said to be caused by the chicken pox brought down by the first explorer Spaniards
What we mean by a developmental process has to be reassessed from the idea that periods later in time are more advanced than previous ones, to the idea of development as simply the notion that there is a connection between a past time and a future one such that one constitutes the grounds for the other. In the latter claim of development there is no necessary qualitative distinction between periods of time in terms of which is more advanced because there will always be a bias from the later period that it is more advanced than the previous. But if we assume that a developmental process belongs to an eternal state of time, then it does not make sense to say that the end point is more developed than a beginning state because both end points would form a relation that is part of another point. Durations rather form a growth cycle, which peaks in advancement and descents.
The idea that later civilizations are more developed than past ones is true in the sense that future generations have the resolutions to problems predecessors dealt with. But this recognition is constantly arrived at and reaffirmed during the present age and so the problems of the past if they are prevalent to the present age are universal contradictions and in that sense older civilizations dispensing and resolving them makes them “ahead of the curve” per say, more developed in that sense than later times.
Golden gate- heaven “the city”, prophecy of the future
The third layer refers to heaven as “the city” which is particularly interesting because the idea of heaven as above in the sky, and paradise culminate as the kingdom of god, Papias writes the third layer of heaven is “the city”. This top-coming-down vision of heaven in Christianity clarifies the ambiguous notion of Heaven as a physical location where individuals go after death, because where they go is the potential of the future. The formulation of the heaven as “the city” is foresight of the future. The potential of the cosmos is found in the future on earth.
; and that on this account the Lord said, “in my father’s house are many mansions: john 14:2 for all things belong to god, who supplied all with a suitable dwelling-place […] that a share is given to all according as each one is or shall be worthy” (Papias fragments 5:1)
This is why in Christianity we see the imagery of heaven as an open gate.
This vision in Christianity is a prediction of future, which being the ancients future constitutes modern present. The problem is that Christianity lacks the notion of evolution as development through time, that it takes time to build the future and so their notion of future is eternally now. Many individuals to this day hold on to the belief that the kingdom of god is coming to earth within their lifetime, or in extreme opposite case doomsday, the end of the world seems to always be coming during the lifetime of the individuals professing it.
The Christianity vision of “the city”, their conception manifests as the reality of the modern age. This is how the conception of reason constitutes the form of matter. The Christian idea passes epigenetically through generations constitutes a slow building of the idea into the edifice of history. History is shaped by the sea conceived by the predisposed and actualized by their offspring. To use another idea the Ancient notion of telepathic communication is an intuition of the telephonic communication. We see a lack of connection because the previous is a speculation and so the details are off but we can see the connection in generality. For example in telepathic communication ancient prophesies that people within long distances from each other will be able to communicate by hearing the other in each mind. If an ancient would of seen that a technology enables that would be difficult to disway him from maintaining that form of communication as telepathic. If an ancient person saw individuals communicating using telephone he would sure classify that as telepathic.
Islam heaven
The Islamic notion of heaven is similar to Christianity because it also first concerns conception of the cosmos above. The Arabic word for heaven is samawat which is plural for sky, means many skies. The Islamic notion advances the Christian concept of heaven by looking at the stars above and observe an infinity of worlds and like the Christians the infinity constitutes potentiality but the Islamist did not place this potentiality as the future of earth, they instead wondered what can be abstracted from earth that defines the infinite proper nature?
The seven layers of heaven is formulated to define this. first of the lowest layer is interpreted as the observable universe and last goes beyond human conception and in the incomprehensible realm of God. In Islam we see a fundamental correlation of heaven with the infinite.
In Islam however the idea of heaven remains above and is not grounded like it is in Christianity and so a vision of the future lacks foresight. But like Christianity we have the abstractions of sensibility derived from the nature of man associated with heaven. In Christianity the essential cause for the world. This positive aspect of mind, the capacity to postulate reality, is the feature of god. In Islam however we see the negative element of mind, its power of negation, that constitutes its positive generative power.
The bottom-up approach of Islam means that the cognitive faculties of mind are placed to describe the incomprehensibility of heaven. In Arabic heaven is also referred to as Jannah is a very interesting word because the plural for it is the term for redundancy which informs incomprehensible, or specifically in Arabic the meaning is insanity or madness, known as junna, “to be mad”, more informally majnūn. The negative connotation of the word madness makes it confusing as to why it is associated with the idea of heaven. However the positive connotation is found in the similar word yjnun, which precisely means madness caused by beauty. The term for beauty in Arabic is Jamal. In this sense junna of heaven is not the negative connotation of meaning madness from some illness but rather madness due to beauty, yjnun.
The madness from beauty concerns the fact of heaven as incomprehensible place due to the redundancy of the infinite. In Islam a cognitive element is introduced to the notion of heaven. This cognitive aspect is the mind’s incapacity to grasp the infinite, we still see in Islam that the redundancy of the infinite is taken as the power of god. In Christianity the spoken word of god causes reality, likewise in Islam god becomes whatever he thinks, the spoken word becomes desire.
heaven is the subject of thought, so far as someone in heaven whatever they think simultaneously manifest before them as object, their thoughts are at the same time their circumstances. The infinite aspect of heaven in conjunction with cognition is the capacity to manifest infinite thoughts into reality. This is why in Islam heaven, it is said that when someone goes to heaven, whatever thoughts they desire comes into being. In Islam however the notion of thought is not differentiated like it is in modern times and so aspects like the imagination and memory are not seen as functional parts of an evolutionary organism and are taken with the same validity of producing reality as the substantial rational forms that constitute the principles of reason.
As we adopt as one of our ontological principles what is rationally capable of being conceived is for thought the principle of reason, the meanings for existing. The lack of specification in what constitutes forms of thought leads to the confusion of heaven as desire depicted in the image of heaven as a garden filled with beautiful women, fine foods and rivers made flowing with honey. Except heaven has the feature of incorruptibility and eternity and so fruits never spoil and women always remain virgins. Introducing the rational principle of cognition into the notion of heaven is completes the monotheistic doctrine of God but its crude introduction bring the vices of hell surrounding the pleasure of mortal life that being suffering into the realm of heaven, except in heaven these mortal desires take on an eternally ideal state. Where the idea of reason as essence in things end, and where the people’s imagination using the concept begins, is a difficult line to distinguished in religious thought.
God
The ontological proof of god simply means the study of gods being, not merely whether god exists or not but the nature of gods existence or lack of. The very subject matter presupposes god’s existence and the inquiry suggests the task of already going ahead with figuring out the nature of God. While most ontological proofs are busy trying to prove the existence of god, they forget the fact that how can you prove the existence of something already presupposed? A presupposition requires that you uncover the nature rather than concern yourself with whether it exists or not.
P.96. (The conception changes the phenomena)
” It may seem that in thinking, where it constructs syllogisms, this starting point may seem to remain and to be left there as a fixed foundation one that is just as empirical as the material is to begin with. In this way, the relation of the starting point to the point of arrival is represented as affirmative only, as a concluding from one [reality] that is, and remains, to an other that equally is as well. But this is the great mistake: wanting cognition of the nature of thinking only in this form that is proper to the understanding. On the contrary, thinking the empirical world essentially means altering its empiri cal form, and transforming it into something-universal; so thinking exercises a negative activity with regard to that foundation as well: when the perceived material is determined by universality, it does not remain in its first, empirical shape. With the removal and negation of the shell, the inner import of what is perceived is brought out (cf. §§ 13, 23).”
The problems with these argument is that they take the distinction between the premises constituting the same arguments as individuated pieces whose equal presence in the argument somehow excludes the conclusion as the synthesis of the distinct premises in their logical movement to one another. For example when we take the world as series of contingencies not only do we isolate particular things as bearing no necessary relation, but the sum total of all relative things sharing in the same feature of having being, are maintained as isolate from their counter part of non being, which nothing cannot by itself be maintained without itself also having the being of the negative of something; all the while things who are only in common due to the fact that they have being cannot be merely assumed without the previous point that being is fundamentally shares the similarity of existing with nothing whose similarity with being is also existence, both being and nothing exist.
Hegel points out two arguments extreme to each other when laying the foundation for a proof as to whether god exists or not.
“First of all, where this elevation is given the form of syllogisms (the so-called proofs that God is there), the starting point is always the view of the world determined somehow or other as an aggregate of contingencies, or of purposes and purposive relations.”
First, the argument against god’s existence usually reduces the world into contingencies, things that randomly happen for no reason, in other words their reason for happening is unspecified. If this argument is adopted than there does not exists implicit within the world a genuine truth, I.e. God. Hegel says:
“The metaphysical proofs that God is there are deficient explanations and descriptions of the elevation of the spirit from the world to God, because they do not express, or rather they do not bring out, the moment of negation that is con tained in this elevation-for the very fact that the world is con tingent implies that it is only something incidental, phenomenal, and in and for itself null and void.” This elevation of the spirit means that although being certainly does pertain to the world, it is only semblance, not genuine being, not absolute truth;”
Hegel points out that the flaw in the proof of god relaying on the world as contingent is illogical by failing to account for the function of the negation; which if things are brought into being randomly there existence is not supported by anything but a nullity which so far a nullity is still a negation to things with being, the presence of something having being in something lacking being is itself the transition of becoming whose mediation from one to the other constitute it as not accidental but as rational determination.
The second argument used as proof for the existence of god explains the world as only full of purpose because it is summoned by being whose concern and aim is identical with nature. Hegel says:
“for, on the contrary, the truth is beyond that appearance, in God alone, and only God is genuine being. And while this elevation is a passage and mediation, it is also the sublating of the passage and the media tion, since that through which God could seem to be mediated, i. e., the world, is, on the contrary, shown up as what is null and void. It is only the nullity of the being of the world that is the bond of the elevation; so that what does mediate vanishes, and in this media tion, the mediation itself is sublated.”
In this second argument the bring of the world is not random and therefore has an aim for its cause has the power of claiming that the becoming of the world is identical with and ultimate being for its conception, but by doing this at the same time conflate god with the world and exhibits no ground for their distinction.
Add Spinoza pantheism
The question Spinoza leaves out is in what sense is the environment extension of thought
God is the universality of the particular which because its nature is universal has to meditate an absolute synthesizes between all opposing determinations. Whereas the particular can easily maintain one determination against all others. The relation between the universal and particular, God and man, has always been an ethical one where the universal determines all the possibilities wherein the particular must decide upon the actualization of a single determinations. In the grand scheme of things, the totality, the relation between universal and particular is defined by the relation of the infinite and finite, the infinity of finites where the essential nature of the universal in each particular determines their total relations. And so when god told Abraham to partake in obscene individual behaviour not initially known for the particular perspective, God does so with the knowledge of all possibilities to which a certain action may not appear reasonable at a particular moment but is ultimately reasonable to the duration of all events that follow.
(Add to how the word “reason” means structure or form like rational conception and also purpose and aim, the reason for something)
45 “Now, it is reason, the faculty of the unconditioned, that sees what is condi tioned in all this empiricial awarenessb of things. What is here called ob ject of reason, the unconditioned or in nite, is nothing but the self equivalent; in other words, it is that original identity of the I in thinking which was mentioned in § 42. This abstract “1,” or the thinking that makes this pure identity into its ob-ject or purpose, is called “reason.”
God is redundant novelty, but novelty cannot be redundant because it’s very reoccurrence is r a redundancy but rather a progression such that it looses the sense of itself as an other. In the notion of novelty is only grasped as an other because proceeding beyond itself means that it is not reputation of itself but a change that never fails to surprise.
The emphasis of monotheistic religions that god is only one is an antithesis to the Sumerian idea of a group of extraterrestrial beings.
It is an agreed alone fact by all monotheistic religions that god is the realist of all principles. In all monotheistic religions god is always fundamentally understood as “the one”. We see in Islam a greater emphasis of god as the “absolute one”. God is strictly singular (tawḥīd ): unique (wāḥid ), inherently One (aḥad). God is said to be alone, that there is only God in the world but also there are 99 names of god. The 99 names of god explains that god describes the infinity of things. It is interesting because the 99 names are not meant to describe god but god is indescribable is taken as the predicate that describes all these 99 names. According to the Quran “No vision can grasp god, but god’s grasp is over all vision: god is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things”. There is a sense of pantheism in this idea , that god is all things, but this is not quite correct because the 99 names are only positive and if god is all things that includes all negative things in the world. god is only the positive aspects
Of the world . God is not any names but only “the best names” and “the most beautiful of names”. This notion at first seems illogical and constitutes one of the main atheistic critiques of monotheism. Where do the bad aspects of life come from if god is the creator f ally things?
god is not any being but is the positive quality of reality, it’s ideality. This leaves the question of what it means for a being to be independent from god? The idea of infinity defines the potentiality of the future which so far as the logic of the potential goes to involve either positive or negative outcomes, in religion the notion of the infinite as activity irregardless of any outcome is necessarily positive ideal . in Christianity reality is primally starts off negative because it is exceeded by future that is potentially more positive because it is not limited to being determined in particular way. we see this in the idea of original sin which is normally understood as the descent of humankind because of consuming the forbidden drier from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
This myths indicate that the knowledge of good and evil means to have the freedom to choose one over the other. In this way reality is a kind of determination in a particular way is a kind of a falling from divinity because birth into the world being a kind of particular determination is attributed as morally negative because it a kind of fall from infinity into finitude. The philosophical significance extracted from all the details of the myth relates to the notion of limiting infinity into a finite. The idea of “the fall”, the fall of man is generically explained as the transition of first man and women, Adam and Eve, from a state of innocent obedience to god to a state of guilty disobedience.
In the story of Adam and Eve, it was eve that was tempted by the snake to eat the apple and open “Pandora’s box”, defined as the revealing or generating many complicated problems as result of unwise interference. The fall of man is called “sin nature”, the nature of sin, is really an explanation of how the knowable world the natural world is a finitude from an unknowable infinity which usually defines divinity and god. In the story of the “falling angle” found in the book of Enoch verses 6-9 references heavenly beings called “watchers” in Ancient Greek term Gregorio’s translated as “wakeful” are “holy ones” who “fell” after they became “enamoured” with human women and had intercourse with them them.
The offspring of these unions where given knowledge that corrupted human beings and the earth. For example the fallen angel azazel is eminent for introducing man to “forbidden” arts. In Christianity there is this very interesting notion that labels any kind of knowledge whether it be art, morality or philosophy as an original sin. At first this may seem as anti science narrative and is normally taken this way by theistic dogmatist and atheist but at a closer investigation it relates closely to an explanation of how infinity is determined into finitude. The relation between the infinite and the finite constitutes the basis For understanding the nature of the conception and object.
(Add abstraction light sun)
. But in Christianity we see that reality still exhibits the possible element of the future with the idea of resurrection that even if reality is primarily negative there is within it the positive of potentiality- that Christ is embodied in each soul. In Islam the positive aspect of the potential is never found in reality but is in a world beyond . Reality is the worship of ideality.
Alan watts – (YouTube vid happiness choice)
The emphasis in western religion is on right belief and only secondarily on right action.
The central principle of incarnation in Christianity suggests that material is not inconsistent with spirituality, which goes against the common misbelief that these are separable. Incarnation is the idea that in Christ, all mighty God did in fact become material and by this caused a transformation in the world. In the words of saint Athanasius of Alexandria “god became man that man might become god”.
the emphasis of religion on faith is derived from the notion that god can never be known, god is never an object of knowledge.
“Gnosis” in Greek is word for knowledges, means knowledge of something unknown, “dark” knowledge. For example the book theologia mystica by St.dionysius is a treatise on the higher knowledge of God, especially in the last section is a series of negations, says what god is not. In the book he denies that any conception of god is not a conception of god including the idea that god is One because any conception of god truly understood is only a being closer to but less than god.
(quotes from theologia mystica chapter II)
“Unto this Darkness which is beyond Light we pray that 5 we may come, and may attain unto vision through the loss of sight and knowledge, and that in ceasing thus to see or to know we may learn to know that which is beyond all perception and understanding (for this emptying of our faculties is true sight and knowledge), and that we 10 may offer Him that transcends all things the praises of a transcendent hymnody, which we shall do by denying or removing all things that are–like as men who, carving a statue out of marble, remove all the impediments that hinder the clear perceptive of the latent image and by this 15 mere removal display the hidden statue itself in its hidden beauty. Now we must wholly distinguish this negative method from that of positive statements. For when we were making positive statements5 we began with the most universal statements, and then through intermediate terms 20 we came at last to particular titles,6 but now ascending upwards from particular to universal conceptions we strip off all qualities in order that we may attain a naked knowl- edge of that Unknowing which in all existent things is enwrapped by all objects of knowledge, and that we may 25 begin to see that super-essential Darkness which is hidden by all the light that is in existent things. “
Just like a sculpture reveals an image by removing stone. Dionysius explains that the knowledge of God is attained by discarding concepts, by discarding it one reveals the concept as what it is not, positive knowledge from the method of negation, Hegel calls “negation of negation”. Hinduism also do this when exposing god they say “not this, not this”.
The highest state of consciousness in Hinduism is called nirvikalpa samadhi is a meditative state where the mind becomes still by attaining non-conceptual knowledge. Alan watts explains that this is misunderstood as to mean the acquisition of a blank mind from which you first discard thought, perception and then any thing sensory until you are aware of nothing. In Buddhism it is a mistake to confuse sunyata the term for void with nothingness.
Void is nothing that is something similar to space in the sense that it contains everything but not altered into something it is not by those things. In the same way mind contains everything but is not stained by what it contains. Consciousness is associate with complete purity which is not empty of things but includes everything but remains distinct. Watts explains the idea that a blank mind is the highest state of consciousness is no different than a lump of rock because than it would be an exclusive state of mind, shuts everything out, which is impossible because it is always a something doing that. Not one because t excludes many, not nothing because that excludes something, not being because being excludes not-being. The proper meaning is non dual, that which does not excludes anything and therefore contains everything. This nature of consciousness has no outside, it is self-external and therefore always contained by itself, like space it has no outside, there can only be outsides inside space.
In Islam we see an absolute contradiction in the name of god: lā ʾilāha ʾillā llāhu “There is no god but God”.
there is no god but the god, which can mean that there is no any idol gods the many gods are not real gods but only one god. But the deeper understanding is that there is no god but god means contradiction, that god is alone, the only thing, ahad .
What is god? Why is god? How is god? Where is god? When is god? According to Islam god constitutes all these questions simultaneously. The difficulty is not whether god exists or not because his existence can be inferred in the same way dark matters existence is inferred from the existence of ordinary matter but similarly to dark matter a satisfactory explanation of what it is lacks. God’s existences is inferred from man’s consciousness, but as to what it is remains mystery.
We have either idea of god as one the notion that the Self is the ultimate principle in the world but the contradiction confronting the self is that the self is only an other, the other is lack of itself from itself the presence of itself in the place of the other. God as the relation of self and other is very interesting because in Islam god is what explains everything but cannot be explain by anything. The idea that god is inconceivable but conceives everything is sublation of the ancient notion of substance. The difficulty of this idea is the negative contradiction the dead end we reach that because god is inconceivable, all things conceived by it are secondary.
This produces the custom of worship which can be seen as a meditative practice but by diminishing the character of the conceived for the inconceivable principle. In Islam “Creation and ordering of the universe is seen as an act of prime mercy for which all creatures praise God’s attributes and bear witness to God’s unity”.
The positive aspect of the idea that god conceives but is inconceivable is an intellectual constructive reason of substance. The notion makes sense in the same way that substance being first an activity, a form, then the matter substratum which exhibits itself. Form or activity is inconceivable in the sense that it simply arises from its own power. In Christianity (add the trinity here)
In Islam we also have god as positive construction of substance.
“Kil ouallauwho ahad ” means that let the word of god be that god is the only one,
“Allaho sammad” god is concrete, unmoveable in the sense of indestructible mass.
“Lamlaken wallamudan wallaem cofon ahehed” there was no body like him, and he is not created, and there will be no one will him,
(Add Limit of the object or environment ends in thought
–(add to above god)
What the other one lacks in imaginative and descriptive power in one concept the other makes up for in the other concept.
(Add here original sin)
Hell is the prediction of future problems in the process towards actualizing “the city”.
In Christianity hell is metaphorical for the suffering characterizing mortal life and the predications of the sins of the future. Even what the Greeks take to be the highest form of existence, philosophizing, characterizes the first level of hell in “Dante inferno” known as “limbo”.
In one sense, philosophy in Christianity is said to be a part of hell because it can be confused with sophistry which diverges people away from divinity and onto sin, which is the definition of sin, to miss the mark (find sin here). Although there is this element against rationalization in Christianity it is a shallow view because in Christianity there is the power of reason characterizes god, for god thinks, or speaks the word, is instantaneous with the creation of the world. God is also logical tripartite divinity, god, Holy Spirit? Christ. More accurately philosophy in the Greek sense although constitutes the highest existence, it is still part of mortal and finite being which Christianity recognizes as limbo because the mortal being has some understanding of infinite aspects but is still limited by the circumstances of physical reality. (Add Aristotle vs Plato about Socrates thinks body is bad Aristotle says it is necessary)
limbo is a state of transition from uncertainty. Hell is the description of the vice of life. The vices are qualitatively structured by the severity of causing suffering and every individual is subject to these vices (add here vice and virtue as health vs unhealthy)
Add Aristotle only know a man after he is dead)
The word for hell in Islam is Nār meaning fire, which in the aspect of diseases refers to inflammation.
In Islam hell is more of warning to not do sin but as to its description it lacks details like heaven in Christianity lacks details.
not reducible to the shallow interpretation of paradise where people confuse it with gratification of human pleasures which are the sins of hell.
Add Mohammad in cave
The only mean is the right extreme.
Ideology filters genetics
The development in religion does not only contribute to the development of human understanding but there is also filtering of genetics. For example, Sikhism although is not part of Islam has had its influence from the Islamic conquest into north India in the Middle Ages. Islam arrived in North India in the 12th century via the Turkic invasions and has since become a part of India’s religious and cultural heritage, with the Delhi Sultanate.
Those who became sikhs comprising North India mainly have fair and lighter skin than the other part of the population that comprise the south which are darker in skin tone. The darker skin tone Indians were pushed to the south by the Islamic reign in Indian and the lighter skin Indians either converted to Islam or later developed into sikhs. Islam filtered the population of Indian into the lighter skin comprising the north and the darker in the south.
(Add to extinction is development)
Modern genetic analysis determine that modern Eurasians have 1-4 percent Neanderthal DNA in their genome. This empirical fact suggest that Neanderthals never went extinct, but after thousands of years of interbreeding their species became assimilated in the genetic structure of homosapain. In other words Neanderthal are a genetic archetype of the homosapain.