thoughtvoke.

back from China

Firstly, I want to state this principle that is stated within the Dhammapada which I am rereading out of curiosity and interest. I recall having a great affinity with Buddha upon learning more about him in my eastern philosophy course. So now I'm pursuing the re-acquisition of my previous knowledge, and this particular book I recall being one of significant interest. It is indeed the case that it is quite thought provoking and interesting upon my reassessment of it.

I was just reading the Dhammapada when I was hit by the urge to organize and rationally articulate this thought in the way of my old blog posts. This particular thought has been one that has continually remained a tremendous interest of mine for quite a long time. I suspect since this is the case, it can then serve as an adequate explanation of this spontaneous urge or impulse to do this. So enough with my rambling introduction, now I want to state explicitly what provoked this impulse.

So this is a fairly clique type of statement but within the context of Buddhism I think it carries more weight. “Hatred never ceases through hatred, only through love.” Such is then labeled as an eternal law. So then I went into the task of questioning such law and dissecting it in a very scientific manner.

So to begin, the first piece I began to inspect was that of the concept of a perpetual motion machine. I then began to visualize the process, if for instance, hate attempted to disseminate itself through itself in an infinite loop. So such a machine requires fuel and in this instance the fuel of hatred would then rationally be that of more hatred. First I suppose I started with this as the fundamental axiom regarding my comprehension of illustrating such an example of the logic of how such a machine must then operate. If then such is the case, the only cessation to the functioning of such a machine would then to be to simply cut off its fuel source. Then I think it becomes rather simple to see where love plays its role. The process of producing love is that which is the complete inverse to that of hatred. So then, all the parts involved in allowing hatred to exist must then be exactly the opposite in order to produce love.

This then brings one to think more deeply upon the concept of “bringing an end to hatred,” in that bringing something to an end can be visualized as many different things. For instance, there is that of a permanent end such as death or permanent loss of state for some object with respect to time. There is also the idea of intermittently causing something to slow down or approach a point in which it halts its being in that it reaches a point of no longer being an “end,” yet it never is permanently erased from being a thing.

So the first thing I want to focus on is how that of the abolishment of hatred is not that which is erasing the machinery that allows for its very existence, yet it is simply an act of redirecting ones stream of consciousness. So back to the image of a perpetual motion machine. I had referred to it being fueled for instance by hatred, but at its essence what allows this machine to operate perpetually is consciousness. So hatred then becomes a mode of consciousness that may then be inhibited by consciousness. Logically writing and visualizing about such things can be a bit annoying at times because of the redundancy of the logical operation of the concept of consciousness. You may have noticed how with words I have begun looping around and about in that I am simulating the feeling of mind wandering.

So I slightly broke away into a bit of a tangent. Please forgive me. There are just so many things I want to articulate and such little time to adequately do so within. I have to break away again! Have you ever intuitively understood something yet never flushed it out into a very rational, organized, and written form? Such is the problem I often bump heads with in attempting to write these blogs. BUT, back to the form. So the concept of “bringing an end to hatred” is very ambiguous in that such a simple phrase requires that one organize such a concept like I have just done. This realization is imperative in that one does not get easily confused and discouraged when attempting to practice such “eternal law” or principle as I would rather denote the phrase.

So now I hope that adequately illustrates that the “bringing to an end” is not that of causing permanent end to the manifestation of anger, since anger is a mode of consciousness that is genetically hard wired into that of being a human being, it is then very understandable how one may then read such statements and toss them aside as nonsense. Just as how that of ones sexual organs are designed to play a permanent and vital role in the human species, Buddha started his life coming from Hinduism, where for many monks, ascetic and chastity practices were very normal. To then think of how it is that someone would intuitively structure their language in such a way that is contrary to the observable manner in which things simply are a matter of testable fact, it then become not too odd to see why it is that such language is shaped like so.

So I am going all over the place with this post. But ultimately I want to express the thing that instigated me writing this. As I was going over this thought and idea I realized why it is that people often never communicate after having had previously loving one another. With this thought in mind, now conversely reverse the principle I have been talking about this entire time. “Love never ceases through love, only through hatred.” Since it seems very easy to conceive of the initial statement, logically it should also be true conversely. BUT in philosophy you learn a great deal regarding converses and how they operate within language. I am no logician but I do think I have seen a few instances where the rule of equality is violated via comparing converses. I only blatantly jump through this hoop because of the tremendously negative aspect of this principle relative to being a loving human being.

But anyways, what I wanted to touch upon within my observation regarding why it is that people never communicate after splitting apart. Something else that I feel I need to mention before making this point is something else Buddha made a point of. This is another example of ancient insight based upon that which is spiritual or in other words is nonsense in some peoples eyes, yet this insight turned out to be scientifically proven physiologically as how our brains function. According to Buddha, a large part of our experience is simply the mechanical return of ones karma (weighted consequences associated with whatever basis of actions derived from someone/thing). Now that I established the parts, its small picture time. So a person has to deal with addressing their karmic consequences that often causes a emotional reaction of anger, frustration, and sometimes even hatred. The more one ruminates upon such emotional reaction the more their brain reinforces their neurological connection in their memory of such emotions pertaining to said phenomena. This is the modern explanation coupled with Buddha's explanation. I do this to make it more pleasurable to read and also due to my scientific biases.

So more upon the neurological pathway regarding neurons and their association with one another pertaining to memory. So in the process of solidifying ones love by this logic, a great lover then becomes one who can find the means for realizing this principle. Some discover this completely intuitively, and I honestly believe discovery of this principle in an empathetic way is completely prior to knowledge via language, and absolutely in the form of a feeling or emotion. This is my first time actually putting this knowledge into rational language that I can recall. I think for the majority of my existence it simply accompanied me strictly as an emotion or feeling in which I am beyond grateful for. I am getting a bit confusing here, because what instigated this thought was that of romantic love which is entirely different from the broad range in which the love I was just referring to. Back to the main topic I was talking about which was romantic love between two partners.

So why then it is most frequently the case that such communication comes to an ultimate permanent ending? Well to conclude this post I want to refer back to the juxtaposition of the converse of the love principle. Like I previously stated in becoming a fantastic lover, it is essential that one develops a powerful intuitive system to promote love and conversely negate hatred. So in the case that the “splitting up” happens between two lovers, what exactly is that which is the converse of being a great lover? The main point that I want to state that led me to previously mentioning that why simply analyzing the truth of something by that of comparison of its origin and converse isn't satisfactory in proving logically whether one has a exhaustive comprehension of the domain which represents everything provided by such a comparison operation. I know this first hand via experience. I find it a bit worrisome to public provide yet I also think in doing so it could potentially have great benefits.

I will just get this out of the way. I experienced delusional disorder in which I lost a great deal of my touch with reality. I do recall focusing a great deal on love during this period of time and I think I have some useful insights that I want to share. Back to my discussion upon Buddha's principle and its converse, the main reason I had such an insight at that point in which I noted that just comparing two logical truths and then coming to a rational conclusion was potentially faulty logic, I pondered what type of role could my love may have been playing regarding my minds instantiation of my delusional world? Then it suddenly hit me, how was it, that I, whom has always had a solid grasp on reality, could've slid into a state in which my imagination could dominate my conscious ego? What again is the most reasonable conclusion to disassembling love according to the logic of that principle? Wouldn't it have to use the tool of hatred? What if that tool is not fully available to ones consciousness? That then serves as an adequate explanation regarding my delusional disorder I have been wonderfully been led to by the Dhammapada. Life is so incredibly interesting. I have somehow collected the necessary materials to rationally explain the why regarding how it is that I have come to where I reside. Or does the spiritual plane have some mysterious unknowable influence? Mathematically it seems the probability just seems so near improbable that I have the particular materials I do to rationally express everything in a satisfactory manner as I have. Perhaps it is that we as human beings are just such amazing creatures at being efficient, resourcefulness never ceases to amaze us. Regardless I found this to be very interesting to write. I need to do this for my deteriorating memory, ha.

Cheers.

周培森