Thursday, June 27, 2013


inthesaltmine suggest the term 'envolution' in the involutionary given thread. Continuing my previous posts on my comments in that thread I've added this:

Going back to the Lingam's excerpt G we see from the figure 7 on p. 21, and related text, that the subtle and causal bodies co-arise with material complexification of the brain in evolution. He does want it both ways though. In the section "involution and evolution" beginning on p. 29 he again tells his so-called myth about how evolution is just playing out involution in reverse. He even uses the two truths doctrine to support this, but it too is quite metaphysical as discussed in the Batchelor thread and elsewhere. I'll give him consistency though.

So using envolution as a notion of how the terms involution and evolution are mutually entailing and delimiting, I again take up Edwards' notion of involution as the downward move of integration of that which has 'transcended' upward in evolution. And all in this here corporeal universe without need of a prior givens. And as I've laid out elsewhere, this makes sense that per figure 7 the causal would appear in evolution with a pretty complex brain and not before, if I'm right about the causal being a fuller integration of our very early neurophysiology via meditative discipline. This goes all the way into the nondual, which co-arises with a brain that has achieved at least some more (obviously not anywhere near all) conscious access, integration and development of basic image schema via downward (involutionary) causation. This way image schema themselves are changed, transformed, not the same as when they were laid down much earlier in evolution. And in the process we have envolved.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.