Tag Archive: Maya


This is an interesting article by Deepak Chopra about the nature of reality.  He argues that reality is located in the quantum sphere beyond the 5 senses, and that science which fails to recognise this is deficient.  He talks about how consciousness is necessary for reality and meaning, pointing out that reality is changed at the quantum level by observation.  He talks about parallel universes, and Maya, which often translated as illusion actually means distraction.  The world of Maya is the world of the 5 senses alone.  He says that observation could not exist without consciousness and that consciousness is capable of self-knowledge, which is the world of the subjective mistakenly rejected by science.  Even the world of mathematics is seen as a limited system, being ultimately a system devised by the brain.

I am interested in this as yet another article which says that science as it is most widely practised is inadequate for reality and everything it entails.

Advertisements

Testing Listing

  • in the beginning
  • was the word
  • and the word
  • was with god
  • and the word
  • was god
  • all things were made by him
  • and without him
  • was not anything made
  • that was made

I remember this from my English literature class.  Not the listing, but the passage.  It was used by the lecturer to support the theory, or philosophical/religious assertion, that ‘nothing’ is a thing that was made.  Giving substance, even in the Bible, that everything is illusion.  It works better with ‘nothing’ than ‘not anything’.  ‘Nothing’ was made.  I like that.  If this is made the pivotal idea for understanding the Bible it makes for interesting reading and thinking.  Can we debunk the Bible?  Yes.  By understanding this thing that is said in this way and making it pivotal to out understanding of everything else it has to say.  It still presupposes God though, and that is OK with me.

Edit note 27.01.2012

I have been wondering if I have misunderstood this from my lecturer’s perspective.  He said (whether for himself or not I’m not sure, he definitely liked what he called gnostic – eg William Blake) that the material world, from the viewpoint of Gnosticism, was evil, and that before God created the material world there was nothing, and that it must have been a bad God who created the material world.  The context of this passage goes on to say that Jesus brought light into the world. Maybe because he talked about the world of spirit and its application to the material.  Also because he brought healing and deliverance.  I think my lecturer might say that I might have benefited from attending more of his classes!  I’m not sure if he said that ‘nothing’ was made, as I have said, but I think he did.

WAGblog: Dum Spiro Spero

"While I breathe, I hope"

Emerging From The Dark Night

Working through the Dark Night of the Soul to emerge as me.

The Elephant in the Room

Writing about my experiences with: depression, anxiety, OCD and Aspergers

The Sir Letters

A Tale of Love

The Seeker's Dungeon

Troubling the Surf with the Ocean

Seroquel Nation

Onward and upward...

We are all in this together

it's gonna be okay.

my last nerve

psychology | psychiatry | neuroscience | n stuff

A Philosopher's Blog

A Philosopher's View of the World...assuming it exists.