Mathematical Nature of Reality

Yesterday I was dealing with the transitions between levels.

In today’s entry I am concentrating specifically on that important transition as between Band 5 and Band 6 or more precisely Band 5 (Level 3) and Band 6 (Level 1).

From a spiritual perspective, this is typically viewed as representing the culmination of spiritual emptiness. In other words though phenomena of form - both of a direct and indirect conscious nature - still arise, experience is now so dynamic that they can gain no lasting permanency, being eroded immediately.

Put another way one has approached that point where realisation of the purely relative nature of all form has reached its greatest expression.

So the absolute nature of spirit (as emptiness) coincides with the purely relative nature of matter (as form).

Expressed in yet another equivalent manner, both transcendence (as spirit beyond form) and immanence (as spirit already inherent in form) reach their closest point in the same undivided experience at the centre of one’s being (which equally is the centre of the entire universe).

I have also referred to the transcendent aspect in the past as an en-tomb-ment which culminates in the death (of the old ego self) and the immanent aspect as a corresponding en-womb-ment. Here one, as it were, is in the foetal stage in preparation for a new “born again” experience, through the emergence of a full radial existence (entailing the mature interpenetration of both the differentiated and integrated aspects of development).

In a very real sense, the death of the old ego coincides with the development of a new cosmic self.

Therefore the transition here relates to the important conception of this new spiritual identity (which is both personal and universal).

However there is a vital aspect to this important transition that I believe has been greatly overlooked in the traditional esoteric accounts. And this goes to the heart of what I believe is most truly original regarding my own approach.

Throughout all of my recent blogs I have been addressing the enormous importance of Mathematics when understood - as it should - in a truly comprehensive fashion.

Put simply, when appreciated in the appropriate manner, the all important interface, as it were, between the (visible) world of form and the (invisible) world of spirit is inherently of a mathematical nature.

Again, when understood correctly, mathematical relationships, though not directly identifiable with either (phenomenal) form or (spiritual) emptiness, yet partake of both domains.

So once again mathematical relationships provide the essential interface as between the spiritual world (of ineffable emptiness) and the material world (of phenomenal form).

Now it is already well appreciated that the structure of material reality is encoded in a mathematical manner, which thereby serves as the essential tool for scientific understanding (of an analytic kind).

However what is not at all yet appreciated is that the structure of psycho-spiritual reality is likewise encoded in a mathematical manner thereby serving as an equally essential tool for scientific understanding (of a holistic kind).

And from the appropriate perspective, both the analytic and holistic mathematical aspects themselves only find true coherence when understood in a radial manner i.e. as dynamically related to each other.   

It might be helpful at this point to reflect on the fundamental nature of key mathematical symbols.

As we have seen, information technology is based on the analytic interpretation of the binary digits 1 and 0. So 1 and 0 represent - what I refer to as - the original and most important numbers.

However what is not yet appreciated is that all transformation processes are fundamentally based on the corresponding holistic interpretation of the same two digits. Such processes always reflect the relationship between differentiated (independent) and integrated (interdependent) aspects, which can then be interpreted as dynamic configurations through linear (1) and circular (0) logic respectively.

Now the analytic notion of 1 is implicit in the recognition of any phenomenon, which thereby represents one unit. However though this notion is necessarily inherent in the recognition of a phenomenon, it cannot be directly identified as that phenomenon.

For example right now I am sitting on a chair. So implicit in the phenomenal identification of this chair is the notion of 1 (as representing an independent unit).

This numerical notion is necessary for the identification of the chair. However it cannot be identified directly as the chair. Therefore though the representation of a unit is indirectly given a phenomenal identity (as 1), the strict notion of one i.e. as an independent unit remains somewhat ineffable.

Likewise the notion of 0 is implicit in the recognition of the absence of a phenomenon.  So if I say that a box is empty, the notion of 0 (as nothing) is implicit in the absence of any identifiable phenomenon.

However the notion that something is absent (i.e. not present) can only have experiential meaning in relationship to what is present.

In this sense 1 and 0 have a merely relative meaning.

Therefore 1 as implicit in an identifiable phenomenon relates to a relative - rather than absolute - notion of identity.

Yet in conventional mathematics the number unit is treated in a misleading analytic fashion as absolutely independent.

So in the simple relationship 1 + 1 = 2, the units here are treated in an absolutely independent manner.

However the notions of 1 and 0 equally have an important holistic meaning.

Here 1 represents the notion of oneness (as a shared identity).

So if for example two people in a romantic relationship feel as one, this now implies the notion of interdependence (rather than independence).

Indeed the most complete experience of a shared state of interdependence is often referred to as a spiritual union (which again represent the holistic notion of 1).

However though again this holistic notion of 1 is necessarily implicit in the spiritual experience, it cannot be directly identified as that experience. So the indirect representation of oneness in phenomenal terms cannot be directly confused with a spiritual experience that is ineffable.

0 equally has a holistic meaning as nothingness (or emptiness). Again this only has meaning in relationship to what is absent (as oneness).

Thus the holistic notions of oneness (1) and nothingness (0) are themselves relative.

Therefore the qualitative notion of interdependence only has strict meaning in a relative - rather than absolute - manner.

And the analytic quantitative notions of 1 and 0 in turn only have meaning in the context of the corresponding  holistic qualitative notions, with both strictly having a merely relative identity.

Likewise the fundamental mathematical operations of addition and subtraction, which have a recognised quantitative interpretation, also have a corresponding holistic meaning.

In analytic terms addition implies the positing of a number. So 1 for example can be more fully written as + 1 (i.e. a number that is positive).

Then in corresponding holistic terms, addition implies the conscious act of recognition, by which a phenomenon is posited in experience.

Therefore in the conscious recognition of any phenomenon, the fundamental operation of addition is necessarily implicit.

Though this implicit act of positing (i.e. addition) is thereby necessary for the recognition of any phenomenal object, it cannot however be directly identified as that object.

In analytic terms subtraction implies negation with respect to a number, so that 1 in this context is written as – 1 (i.e. a number that is negative).

Then in corresponding holistic terms, subtraction implies the unconscious act of recognition, by which a conscious phenomenon is thereby negated.

This happens continually in experience without one consciously adverting to the fact.

For example at one moment I may be aware of an external object (which is thereby consciously posited); however the next moment the focus may have switched to internal awareness of the self (in relationship to the object).

Now to enable this switch to take place, the external object must to a degree be negated, which then enables the self to be consciously posited.

So in this interactive dialogue of meaning, the focus keeps switching from the external object to the internal self (and from the internal self in turn to the external object), which continually implies the alternate negation of each aspect (that has been consciously posited).

And this negation directly implies the intervention of the unconscious.

So once again though the holistic notion of negation cannot be directly identified as the unconscious aspect of personality, it necessarily is deeply implicit in its very operation.

So what I have been at pains to demonstrate here is that the  original numbers 1 and 0 and the fundamental operations of addition and subtraction have both analytic and holistic meanings, which are already most deeply inherent in the very manner in which communication with respect to reality takes place.

And this is not true just of human behaviour but of all phenomenal interactions.

So if we use the more general notion of holons in this wider context, implicit in the behaviour of every holon (for example at the physical level of a sub-atomic particle) are key mathematical notions (such as number and the operations of addition and subtraction).

Thus even at the most primitive level of physical existence, mathematical notions are already inherent in the very manner in which particle interactions take place.

And these notions can only be properly understood in a dynamic interactive context, where both quantitative (analytic) and qualitative (holistic) aspects are combined.  

Now in extremes as exemplified by accepted scientific interpretation, the quantitative (analytic) aspect tends to be identified in misleading absolute fashion with the phenomenal world of form (which is abstracted completely from spiritual emptiness); likewise as in the mystical esoteric traditions, the qualitative (holistic) aspect tends to be identified in a purely relative fashion with spiritual emptiness (now understood as inseparable from the phenomenal world of form).

However in an important sense, this misrepresents the nature of both domains.

In fact the remarkable truth is that what we identify as reality (through identifiable phenomenal forms) represent but appearances that express the interaction of the analytic and holistic aspects of fundamental mathematical notions.

Therefore though neither analytic nor holistic notions in isolation can be directly identified as - what we call - reality, the dynamic relationship of both these aspects in fact constitutes this very reality.

However the use of the conventional word “reality” in this context is somewhat unfortunate, for in truth it constitutes but a dynamic apparition with no ultimate material substance.

We are now familiar in this computer age with using various programmes that are designed to enhance our existence.

In this context a particular programme combines various software instructions in a coherent manner.

It is somewhat similar with the phenomenal world we live in, which arises from various mathematical instructions that are combined together in a coherent manner, enabling both quantitative (analytic) and qualitative (holistic) aspects of reality to emerge.

Then the phenomena that arise tend to mask the fundamental mathematical nature though which they have originated.

Therefore in a very important sense, the attempt to truly understand reality requires the unmasking as it were of all phenomena, so as to approach ever closer to their inherent mathematical nature.

In brief, the key importance of this transitional stage bridging Band 5 (Level 3) and Band 6 (level 1) is that one comes as close as possible to experiential realisation of the underlying mathematical nature of all reality.

So this transition therefore provides the finest bridge as between the spiritual world of emptiness and the phenomenal world of form. And in traversing this bridge one approaches direct knowledge of the mathematical interface which forever connects both domains.