Ashok

A paragraph from my thesis draft:

It's not possible perception of a situation is constructed from separated sensations. Behavioural actions are not first only motions between location-points in empty space. Yet it's assumed from the start in most philosophy & science (esp. cognition).

In the old model (still taken for granted), 'order' limits and determines what can happen. But no abstract set of possibilities *determines* what can happen. Occurring (what actually happens) doesn't fill out some abstract order. If that were truly the case, nothing could ever actually happen.

Space-time localisations are only comparisons made by a spectating observer. But what occurs is not the result of any comparison. Actual events do not derive from comparisons.

who is not presented in the space. It is rather someone who connects the space and time points. The connections come to the points only externally; they are added by anonymous people called “the idealized observer.”

— Gendlin

The usual conceptual model deprives *everything* of implying and meaning, not just living bodies. It constructs its objects in empty positional space and time, so that everything consists of information at space-time points. The space and the objects are presented before someone—

It seems mechanistic formulation cannot be separated from (is derived from) spatial metaphor.

Nature is capable of being carried forward by all those formulations—and so it cannot possibly be equivalent to any of them.

— Gendlin

To read our formulations back as predetermining nature pretends that nature has the sort of order that our formulations have. Actually it is quite obvious that nature has something like the sort of order that the progression of our formulations exhibits over the years... >

"Since we humans are here, we can be certain that we are not impossible. A conceptual model of “reality” that makes us seem impossible has to have something wrong with it."

— Gendlin

The lost music with which the world worlds Arthur Haswell invites us to pay attention to and, once again, like our ancestors once did, hear the rhyme and rhythm with which the world worlds. Reality, he maintains, unfolds according to a form of...

From now on I shall be borrowing the excellent term Hylomania, or "obsession with matter": www.essentiafoundation.org/the-lost-mus...
(Pace Aristotle, whose 'hyle' I take to be entirely different to the modern concept of matter).

Science does not tell us that we are nothing but biological machines. It’s a philosophy which wants to speak for science which makes that claim.

We call that philosophy “ The Blind Spot”

@evanthompson.bsky.social

Ween's irreverence may, to some ears, mask their musical brilliance.

👍

Oh, I just tried to find you on twitter, but you're no longer there? my email: ashok@thebeyondwithin.space

send me a DM on twitter: @_beyondwithin_

If you still need it I have a spare one

Where the (false) distinction between thinking & spirit dissolves & transformed cognition begins. I'm sure you'll see the clear the influence of Steiner.

This was early 90s Sydney. An exciting time for live music. Used to bring a change of clothes in my bag to school. After school, get changed, head into the city to Rock Against Work; late afternoon & early evening bills at the Hopetoun Hotel. Saw many oz indie acts of the day. Good times!

The year of my first love, first joint, amazing group friends, looking old enough to sneak into pubs after school to see gigs (was 14 going on 18).

RIDE - Nowhere.

Hah, yeah. It was a prerequisite!

This just landed on my doorstep. Can't wait to get stuck in.

Modern metta is a bit like a variation/repurposing of bhakti, but stripped of all its magic. Rediscovering bhakti, rediscovers metta.

Love is the (open) secret ingredient.

No context ājñā.

https://thebeyondwithin.substack.com/p/yogic-vision-devas-and-super-sensible

A snippet from my latest substack.

It has taken some time. But I have finally updated my Substack with a new post.

The term emotion, then, refers to when we are clearly in reaction & resistance. Feeling on the other hand flows through opening to what is. It's got much less to do with 'positive' or 'negative' & much more to do with illuminating what is true inside. Capacity for feeling grows in non-reaction.

Here's snippet from what I have written about the mind, which is constituted by saṃskāras (latent impressions of conditioning left by experiences, especially the kind from which we then carry unexpressed grief), & what lies beyond them. It's helpful to make a distinction between e-motions & feeling.

I'll just say it. Meditation is not only a psychological or somatic thing. Although it's most certainly those. It's also a super-sensible thing: though now something that is rarely discerned, stillness becomes radiance, becomes ontological antenna for the Higher Presence of beings & worlds.