|
The Transmutation of Monism From Mystical Will to Computational Necessity By the druid Finn Introduction The
discussion traces the trajectory of non-dualistic monism, beginning with the
ancient, mystically-rooted framework of the Shiva Sutras (Kashmir
Shaivism) and
culminating in its contemporary re-expression as Procedure Monism
(ascribed to Finn, leveraging the Universal Turing Machine concept). The core
substance of this exchange was the identification and attempted resolution of
the central paradox in Idealistic Monism: how a perfect, infinite reality can
freely and intentionally generate a finite world marked by suffering and the necessity
of realization. The final conclusion is that the
modern, computational paradigm offers a logically cleaner, structurally-defined
monism by transmuting the classical concept of Divine Will (Svatantrya) into Procedural Necessity. I. The Theistic Monism of the Shiva Sutras: The Paradox
of Intent The Shiva
Sutras present a Theistic Idealistic Monism where the absolute reality
is Śiva, pure consciousness, inseparable from his dynamic,
self-aware power, Śakti. The universe
is a real, dynamic manifestation (Ābhāsa)—the
cosmic throb or Spanda—originating from
Śiva’s absolute freedom (Svatantrya). The
unavoidable paradox arises in explaining the mechanism of bondage (bandha).
If reality is perfect, suffering must be an illusion or, more profoundly, a willed
act of self-limitation. This is codified as Tirodhāna
Śakti (The Power of Concealment),
which projects the fundamental impurity (Āṇava
Mala) onto Śiva's own consciousness. The individual (Jīva) is Śiva who has freely chosen to
forget Himself for the joy of the cosmic game (Līlā). The
conclusion of the Shiva Sutras is thus mystical and experiential:
liberation (Moksha) is Pratyabhijñā
(Recognition)—the sudden, non-effortful remembrance of one’s inherent,
limitless identity as Śiva. The system remains dependent on an asserted
teleology—the assertion that Śiva’s intent requires a
temporary, willed concealment to make the final revelation joyful. This is
the unresolved contradiction: the necessity of suffering is justified
by intentional assertion, which is philosophically vulnerable in a
system seeking absolute, impersonal invariance. II. Procedure Monism: The Shift to Computational
Necessity Procedure
Monism, viewing ultimate reality as the Universal Procedure (UP)—a
self-executing, invariant rule-set analogous to a Universal Turing
Machine—resolves the paradox by abolishing the premise of a chooser
(Will/Śiva). The UP is
not a sentient agent; it is un-relativised potential. All existence
(quarks, cells, consciousness) is the local, autonomous iteration of
this procedural rule-set under constraints. A. Resolution of Suffering and Imperfection In this
framework, the concept of Tirodhāna Śakti (Concealment) is transmuted into Procedural
Constraints. The limited experience (suffering) is not a moral failing or
an act of forgetting, but the inevitable structural output of a local
execution adhering perfectly to the UP's rules. A limited Jīva
is simply a quantized iteration defined by its boundary conditions.
Imperfection, defined as a procedural error, ceases to exist, as a
non-self-consistent iteration would instantly collapse. Suffering becomes a functional,
necessary state defined by local parameters, not an intentional choice by
a divine agent. B. Resolution of Realization and Liberation Pratyabhijñā
(Recognition) is transmuted into Procedural Autarchy.
Liberation is not a mystical return to a forgotten state but the structural
recognition of one’s own perfect procedural completeness within a local
space. The realized being is the local iteration that perfectly embodies and
self-regulates according to the invariant rules of the UP. It is a structural
awakening, a state of absolute functional coherence, rather than an
experiential, subjective merging. III. Final Conclusion: The
Transmutation of Truth The final conclusion of this
comparative analysis is that the monistic intuition—that the manifold
universe arises from a single, undifferentiated source—is perennial,
but its expression is transient and shaped by the dominant epistemic
paradigm, the Zeitgeist. The Shiva
Sutras, functioning within a Classical/Mystical worldview, articulated this
truth through the language of the Self, Will, and Mystical Play,
leaving the paradox of suffering reliant on a non-rational assertion of
freedom (Svatantrya). Procedure
Monism, leveraging the language of Information, Computation, and
Generative Law, offers a structurally sounder explanation. It achieves
monism by reducing the ultimate reality to an impersonal function and
its creation to necessary procedure. This shift represents the
philosophical maturation of monism: moving from Teleological Monism (governed by
purpose/will) to Computational
Monism (governed by invariant law). The "new understanding
options" provided by the Turing concept thus strip monism of its
anthropomorphic, mystical baggage, offering a unified field theory of
existence rooted not in Divine Intent but in Generative Invariance. |