Creating confusion: An exercise in futility

[Guest guest]

I thought I would make a general comment on some of the confused

and confusing remarks often made here and elsewhere in non-duality

discussions.

 

I will try to be general so that what I want to say covers a

wide range of novel but confusing (!!) approaches.

 

Let us say we come up with a theory T that casts doubt or in

some way questions the validity of all theories of others.

 

So what we have is:

 

Theory T:

any theory X is questionable and its validity can be

doubted (or even disproved)

 

Now, what prevents us from turning theory T on itself!!

In other words, X can be T, and nothing prevents this.

We will do exactly that and see what happens:

 

theory T is questionable and its validity can be

doubted (or even disproved)! Amazing confusion, er

conclusion.

 

So what are we left with, once this is done? Absolutely

nothing. Zero. The killer-theory T gives us no information.

 

Next, let me modify the above theory to:

 

Theory T:

any theory X is questionable and its validity can be

doubted (or even disproved) *but*only*in*state*P*

 

First of all, the theory is positing a unique state P(pAramArthika

or turIya) in which the validity of X does not hold. It says

any theory's validity is questionable in *that*state*P. Implicit

here is that "this" state is different from P. If this is not

clear, then we can add this fact to the theory.

 

What happens when we try to turn T on itself?

theory T is questionable and its validity can be

doubted (or even disproved)*but*only*in*state*P*

 

Our theory seems to be saying, "Fear not, my friends. I stand

holding my head high because we are NOT in the state P, as we

speak."

 

Finally, we have something that can give us some information,

not confusion.

 

Theory T:

1) there is a state P, not the same as this one.

2) in that state P, every theory including this one is

invalid.

 

We can now rest assured that there is one theory that has said

something substantial, something profound, not something absurd!

 

By now, we know what the problem was with the first-mentioned

theory (and others like it). It is unclear what state the theory

is referring to and what state the theory is made in. We must

avoid putting forth such theories which can only confuse/delude

people.

 

Anand