Meditative Mindfulness of How to Be Free from Misery/Pain – Unworkable & Workable Variants

The mindfulnesses are usually given (in Bauddha literature) as :

1. difficulty of obtaining a human rebirth;

2. impermanence of life;

3. universality of suffring;

4. consequences of karma.

All these notions are, when so stated, grossly misleading and thus erroneous in character (but are useful as a basis for discussions and suggestions for improvements), and as such are in need of being modified thus :-

1. For a soul so constituted as to be having the nature of human praedilections, a human type of life is inevitable; the correspondingly opposite results are true of the various species of animal-souls, of plant-souls, etc. [Each being quite specific, animal-souls and plant-souls are by nature (i.e., by their internal inhaerent structure) defective (especially ethically/morally), and thus are incapable of undergoing a life having human-style responsibilities.]

2. More specific than simply “impermanence” of “life”, more practicably the source of after-death difficulties (and perceived in contemplating these difficulties) is in temporary incapacity (after becoming redincarnate) for functional activities (one's functional abilities having to be relearned in each life, if one be reborn as a baby in each such life) and for retention of memory (when memories are lost at the end of each life). But if one can be adequately connected to the set-up of immortals [such immortals being usually witnessed as “space-aliens” aboard flying saucers] who collectively retain functional capacities and memories on behalf of any membres, so as to be able to restore (from the collective-memory back-up) any such, then for one's self to die [after having become a membre of the “space-alien” group by being transported by them aboard a flying saucer to their planet] cannot have such deleterious effects; but, instead, in that circumstance dying hath no more drastic effect than falling to sleep, whence one can awake with all one's capacities and memories quite intact.

3. Suffring can exist (for intelligent beings) only when there be lack of sufficient connection into the network of immortals [“space-aliens”], which immortals can quite readily collectively forestall and and repell from each and any membre any possibility of discomfort and/or of unpleasantness.

4. Unfavorable consequences (especially in another life) are caused not so much by actions (karman), as by inaction (a-karman). In particular, it is the inaction of not assiduously linking one's self into the universal telepathic network of beings who are ipso facto effectively immortal (having thus-sustained indestructibility of their functional capacities and of their useful memories) and who rendre one's self so likewise.

All the Na-astika (metaphysics not acknowledging the existence of a discrete selfhood) systems rendre themselves incapable of eliminating misery/pain out of their membreship's lives, simply because (along with the dogma of non-existence of a self, and thereby necessarily producing as corollary a dogma of non-existence of any eliminating of suffring from one'self) they promote a dogma of the non-existence of any immortal beings who are associated telepathically into a pact which is capable of effectively maintaining (by potentially restoring from a collectively-maintained back-up system) all the functional capacities and useful memories of all membres regardless of whatsoever may befall whatever bodies they may be temporarily occupying. The Bauddha and Jaina dogmatists are so intransigent in their doctrinaire refusal to consider alternative possibilities that they quite squelch their own opportunities for attaining liberation from suffring; and in particular, such a rigid intransigence must exclude any possibility of their ever becoming able to perceive for themselves the existence of a universal telepathic network, inasmuch as those dogmatists' arrogant attitude is felt to be so offensively distasteful to all repraesentatives of the universal telepathic network that it (proceeding according to recommendations from such repraesentatives) will make no overtures for communication with the dogmatists. (On the other hand, the Astika philosophies, on account of their tolerant and open-minded attitude, regularly experience their proponents' being invited to connect into the universal telepathic network, and many function as expert telepathists.)

The self-serving narrow-mind arrogance of Na-astika negativist dogmatism is disclosed by the fact that their denial of the self/soul is in fact intended as a denial of the existence of the self/soul of all persons of other than themselves only. (This is because the solipsist principle praecludeth the possibility of one's denying one's own existence, so that the only feasible possible target for denial can be the existence of other persons.) Actually, howbeit, this method of superfluously persisting in unreasonable denial can be logically refuted rather adequately, simply by noting that the description of one's self which is used in the solipsist philosophy, must be taken entirely from other persons' viewpoints about one's self; so that thus it would be self-refuting to deny the validity of those viewpoints by denying the functional/effective existence of those other persons. (In order to perceive that any understanding that one may have of one's self must be taken from other persons, do simply consider one's looking at one's own body : the material body which one is looking at was engendred by one's parents – with the assistance of the deities praesiding over procreation --, without whom one would not have a body to look at. So likewise with any other aspect of one's self, such as one's memories of one's activities, etc., all of which activities were engaged in with the necessary assistance by other persons.)

Because their essential intent is to deny the existence (and thus, effectively, the worthiness) of all persons other than themselves, Na-astika negativist dogmatists are essentially anti-social, anti-communal, and thus tending to a promotion of hateful competitiveness and of rampant capitalistic greed-mongering. The similarity of modern capitalist-promoted (promoted largely through capitalist-funded universities) soulless atheism (praevalent since perhaps the 17th century in western Europe and in the United States), to the antient Na-astika (Bauddha, Jaina, and Lokayata) dogmatisms, is very much in evidence. (Such soulless atheism came officially into vogue in Catholic western Europe with the adoption of Aristotelianism by Thomas Aquinas. The Near East, in noteworthy contrast, retained Neo-Platonism at least in the Fat.imid-derived versions of Yarsani philosophy. The name, at least, of “Fat.mid” is promoted in western Europe via Fat.ima in Portugal, where a large-scale repeated flying-saucer-style event occurred.)

[written Jan 18 (Fri) 2013]