#And you are also very fatalistic and under the impression that people just can't change

[everymadara]

Chapter 622

[sagebodisattva]

Free Will & Determinism - Causality and Dependent Origination

Alright. So in part 3 in this series on free will and determinism, we will look to tie up some of the related concepts of these proposed theorems together into something concise and comprehensive. So, to be clear: To even begin the investigative inquiry into these matters with the consideration of reality as a template of either free will or determinism, gets it wrong before even making it out of the gate; as it is an erroneous approach, as this type of stance bases a strategy on: assuming a faulty premise and then using it to address a false dichotomy. To get heavily invested into arguments staged in this way, is to fall prey to a form of sophism. This is a deceptive method employed that has you fooled on so many philosophical fronts; wasting time getting lost in duplicitous arguments whose only goal is to keep you distracted, diverted and submissive to the rules of a lie. This is why, in philosophy, a perennial maxim is to QUESTION EVERYTHING, including the framework, the fundamentals and the nature of that which formulates the query. One must question that which is doing the questioning, before moving on to question anything beyond. This is called philosophical integrity. And, of course, THEY are gonna scoff and be dismissive of this, and entreat you to take it for granted, and pressure you to only focus on the sensory data feed streaming in your field of perception; because this type of focus reinforces your delusion, of which, they are also in delusion, but this okay, for then everyone is equally in delusion. They have no idea of who or what they are, no more then you do, but will nevertheless encourage the practice of choosing to assume a lie, so as to not upset the conditions of falsehood, the lifeblood of delusion. As long as you play the game according to the rules of delusion, you are an inconsequential player. And this is no problem. A problem will only arise if and when you begin to reject the falsehoods; then you become a danger and a threat to the status quo of delusion, for if you ever discover the truth, you will be out of the influence of the oppressive inculcation that seeks to conform you into a submissive disposition. And if you ever manage to gain this independence, you will be able to begin building up real power of the mind, for the truth is raw and potent, and breaks all binds of mental slavery, and then you will be free. And then they will have no way to stop you. And this simply will not do. All of this can potentially unfold with the simple practice of introspective inquiry.

So always question everything, including that which you call your self. What is this "self", and what is this possessive "your" to which this "self" belongs? Question it all. Even if you are just maintaining the role of a doubting skeptic with no position, it's still far less egregious then maintaining a position of some stubborn investment in delusion. On the spiritual journey, I think you'll find that a skeptic is a far better travel companion then a value junky. Skeptics have their issues to be sure, but are still in a far better position to handle the truth then those that are so stuffed up with lies that they can't even palate the truth, much less digest it. And there's no rush in this, so take your time. Much of this will be a matter of mastering patience, of which dedication, and the trail and error, can be extensive. There's no need to hastily commit to a position. It's completely okay to just continue to tread water until you finally get your mind right. And it's very important to get the mind right; as evil only holds an amount of power equal to our ignorance that awareness is our true essence. One should really examine this obstinate conditioning of the mind that always seems to want to consciously and unconsciously insist that reality is independent of the mind. This is the heart of the externalization conditioning: the denial of awareness as the fundamental axiom, in favor of beliefs about unsubstantial transient impermanent phenomena of the senses. And this is foolish, as trying to refute or deny awareness disqualifies the very attempt; as to reject awareness is to reject the very framework of your rejection. Remember, if you don't have the truth as a premise, you are like a dog chasing it's own tail; or a hamster forever running around on the wheel of infinity. Constantly on the move, and going nowhere fast. The proud, stubborn, arrogant, histrionic ego, that apparently has so much knowledge about falsehood that there is no longer any room left for the truth. It's an unfortunate situation.

But, anyway, let's go ahead and deconstruct some of the ego's attachments to free will or determinism, and hopefully, finally put to rest this absurd notion of the existence of a reality template. In the last video we went over the fact that it can be scientifically proven that inspiration and impulse seem to originate in the subconscious, which basically destroys all chances of the ego consciousness having free will. The ego experiences the results of a free will, indeed may even have the illusion of a free will, but the facts point towards the function of this utility operating prior to conscious awareness of it. So, in this sense, at least from the perspective of the ego, it is, for all intents and purposes, automated, which, when taken into account with the full implications of it's meaning, indicate that, although automatic, which implies determination, automation itself composes the essence of a spontaneously occurring system, as it has no need of assistance from the thoughts or intentions of a conscious mind. Yet, while true that the conscious mind has no free will to initiate, it is, however, free to respond and react to the pre-determined impulses that come under it's charge from the subconscious. This type of setup still leaves room for the consciousness to change or alter the course of a chain of events, due to having the flexibility of an open ended reaction in an open ended time frame, which determinism fails to demonstrate consistent reliable control over, while still holding true to the law of cause and effect. And of course, this is the ego's number one argument used to support determinism: causality. Of which, will be dissected and deconstructed concurrently...

Just pointing at causality, which is so often used as a staple mainstay of fatalistic philosophy, isn't evidence for the complete dominance of a deterministic paradigm. But Sage, are you saying that the universe isn't governed by cause and effect? You know, it's strange to constantly hear people refer to mental phenomena as a "universe", as if it's an actual place existing somewhere. Yes, there is something like cause and effect at play existentially, but what cause and effect actually is, is largely misunderstood. And this is due, once again, to addressing an existential quandary with a fallacious philosophical approach. There is no actual cause and effect actually existing in some literal location. That isn't what can be said about cause and effect. What CAN be said, is within illusion, there is an impression of cause and effect, but as far as identifying this for what it really is, let us not forget what gives cause and effect it's context. We WANT cause and effect to BE the context, or to, perhaps, at least be some type of structured spectrum wherein cause and effect acts as the apparent all encompassing law, but these wishful abstractions miss the mark completely, as they are still making the same old mistake of externalizing the truth again. A medium isn't the reality. A law of a medium isn't the reality. Reality is that which gives mediums and laws of mediums a contextualization. So, knowing this, it can be understood that cause and effect are the workings of a purely mental facility, not the governance of some external container. Hence, with this in mind, pun intended, let's explore how cause and effect actually work in illusion. It's not as rigidly clockwork, as many of us would like to believe, for, as just previously stated: cause and effect are not rules of an externally existing medium, but are simply a phenomena of the illusion of sensory perception. So, how does this cause and effect work? A cause will bring about an effect, and the effect can then be considered a contributor to a current condition, but where this condition goes from this point can be potentially limitless, as the essence of reality is limitless potentiality. In other words, once a cause is effectuated, the effectuation itself a spontaneous impulse of free will, the unfolding of the cause is determined, and the resulting condition will correspond accordingly, but after the condition has been modified as such, where the condition goes from here is open ended again. And there's not necessarily any rule that states that a condition has to develop any further. A condition can decay and disperse, if no further cause is implemented. So there's a gap between the apparent cycle of cause and effect; much like the notes played in an improvisational jazz solo. Determinism fails to take these gaps into account. I think the issue is that people conceptualize cause and effect as a constant chain that forever extends, but this is an abstraction trying to establish structure on an externalization.

In truth, as said earlier, this matter is a concern of a purely mental spectrum. Causes and effects and the conditions they foster are all states... states of mind, to be exact. The reason why the gap is imperceptible is due to the constant engagement of the attention with these states, with little to no quieting of the mind. I posit that the default nature of the mind is serene. Quiet. Motionless. Static superposition, if you will. Like the surface of still water. Smooth and undisturbed. A cause would be like a disturbance to this zero point condition. For example, you make a sound, a humming noise, the cause, the sound creates vibrations which cause the water to move, creating a ripple, the effect, and this rippling plays out completely deterministically, unless otherwise effected. The misconception of cause and effect as a constant chain comes from only having a frame of reference from within the ripple... but if the source of the sound ceases, and this ripple runs it's course, and comes to stillness again, anything further beyond this point is dependent on that which might make additional sounds; that which derives it's inspiration from a spontaneous origin; the mother of all causes; the source of dependent origination. And speaking of which, let's touch on dependent origination, the eastern philosophical principle that states that all dharmas ("things") arise in dependence upon other dharmas: "if this exists, that exists; if this ceases to exist, that also ceases to exist." That is: all physical and mental states depend on and arise from other pre-existing states, and in turn from them arise other dependent states while they cease. This is basically a description of the ripple. Everything within the ripple, that is, all that transpires between birth and death, are interconnected states that are dependent on one another. And when it can be appreciated that there really isn't a dichotomy here, that, in truth, there really isn't any physical states, but that, in fact, physicality is just another aspect of a mental state, then it can be understood that any possible so called states are mental states, and while all possible mental states are all dependent on one another to persist or desist, all states are equally dependent on one original source: the one mind. Pure potentiality. The empty nature of our true essence. That which produces all vibrations that create all the rippling waves of manifestation. If we direct our attention to the source of the attention, and meditate on this, and bring it to stillness, ceasing to create any new vibrations, there will also cease to be any causes or effects, and all that will be is peace and serenity.