From my upcoming book:
We are living in the middle of the age of materialistic Science. Most of the Science that is taught in high schools and universities around the world is only taught within the Materialistic Paradigm. This means there is a superficial skepticism of any theory that involves subjectivity, consciousness, the non-physical realms of reality, enlightenment, miracles, superhuman capabilities, or the existence of the Absolute. The paradigm that Science is currently under is deeply dualistic; that there is an observer who can objectively observe an object without manipulating that object in any way. This leaves no room at all for the nonduality between first-person consciousness and the outside world.
One of the key characteristics that will be highlighted in this essay is the ability to be aware of the nonduality between the inner world of the human mind and the environment outside of the self. Humans who perceive this nonduality perceive an absolute wholeness in reality; a beautiful stream of beingness that is filled with inextricably interconnected parts. One of the key parts to this whole is the self, the subjective awareness. At a higher level of awareness, one becomes aware that one’s self is one with the wholeness of being, thereby dissolving the barrier between the inner and the outer world.
A scientist may ask; “well, how does one prove this theory?” There is some short-sightedness embedded in this question. Let me explain here:
- Firstly, this endeavor is not meant to be a theory. This is a level of awareness that one can achieve through spiritual practice, which may require years of meditation. The word ‘theory’ implies that this level of awareness is simply an idea. However, I would argue that one could explore self-evident subjective phenomena in a scientific way. I believe that scientific data could be verified by a meditation practitioner from their subjective experience similar to the way that psychologists and social scientists study happiness, stress, or other subjective human sentiments or experiences. In general, these are real, self-evident subjective phenomena, not mere theory.
- The way that proof is seen in current science requires 3 elements; “person A proves thing X to person B.” This works well for phenomena that happen in biology or chemistry, but not in spiritual practice. In meditation, one needs to verify for themselves whether something is true or not. I cannot prove to someone else without a doubt that I feel peace. There must be some experiences that can be only verified as a self-evident truth. An example could be; “you are awareness itself.” The only way to prove this to somebody is for them to dive into their own awareness and for them to see, “oh yeah! I have never not been awareness itself.”
- This question is being asked from the viewpoint of logic and rationality only, which is conceptualization and languaging. Most experiences and stages on the spiritual path cannot be fully explained within the paradigm of mere rationality. Oftentimes, an answer or a truth in spirituality has a paradoxical response that is intuitively true, but would be considered inavalid logically. In Formal Logic, it is impossible that ‘A’ can be both ‘A’ and not-’A.’ therefore, it would be considered invalid to say that one both is a human and is not a human. However, this is EXPERIENTIALLY or intuitively true when one quiets the mind and feels into their deeper beingness. We may hear some of the wisest spiritual teachers frequently saying “yes, and…”
- To go even more in-depth, here is the paradoxical nature at the core of Jainism; the principle of Anekantavada. Which paradoxically states, “A is true, A is not true, A is neither true nor false, AND A is both true and false.” This paradoxical nature of reality goes even further in depth if one is interested to learn more about Anekantavada. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Anekantavada
- Most scientists do not have much meditation experience. This is either because they are skeptical of it, do not have the time, do not have the interest, or do not see the connection between meditation and the scientific implications it possesses. An analogy could be; I could explain to you in great detail how a mango tastes, however you must actually eat a mango to truly (subjectively) experience how a mango tastes. Most scientists have never actually tasted the mango due to their lack of meditation experience. There seems to be a bit of a hubris in the scientific community (probably due to the materialism embedded in the Scientific community) that subjective phenomena found in meditative states are not valuable. Or even more pessimistic, how much funding would research like this receive when compared to the amount of funding at the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland or NASA in the USA?
This point about scientific proof of the oneness of the inner and outer world is just one example of a characteristic that is being highlighted in this essay that goes beyond the current paradigm of scientific exploration. My hope for the future is that an essay like this would be considered within the realm of science. However, for the time being, this essay will most likely be considered outside of the jurisdiction of modern Science.