In attempting to fruitfully decipher our place in the outer and inner cosmos, a view of how things actually are is of considerable value. A worldview that is contingent upon repeated reflection and not merely upon the senses is likely more aligned with truth. How much our reflections are determined by our sensorium is debatable. What might safely be said is that a worldview coemergent from our senses as well as our mind is probably closer to truth and actual reality than one derived solely from the senses. In manipulating the external world we make do with a framework of tangible, concrete and apparently rational elements. They are deemed rational because our machinations yield sensorially measurable, modifiable and predictable results. However, it would be prudent to remember that what we observe and predict is dependant upon the means of measurement. In the end, results and resolution are a reflection of the mind behind the measurement.
If the mind were to declare that the polemics of gain and loss, form and formlessness, even existence and nonexistence were inconsequential, we would still feel and act, but with a significantly altered emphasis. The ‘denial of duality’, as it were, would relegate the act of sensorial measurement and manipulation to mere sustainence, to meeting physiological needs and no more. On a collective level, even just this would likely lead to strife and perturbation and a cascade of effects that would lead to a world as we know it. However, on an individual level, things might indeed be different. Looking past mere appearance, it might become evident that there is no object without the observer, and that ‘knowing’ doesn’t necessarily require agency. Given that the act of measurement virtually creates the object discerned, it is not very far fetched to envisage pure potential, as self cognizant with the realization of possibility, a fruition of this cognizance. Pure mind, as it were, for a lack of adequate vocabulary.
For adherents of such a worldview, it would be possible to give up the notions of observer and observed, apprehender or apprehended, even existence and non existence. The inner and outer cosmos would be a field of possibility with observed phenomena being the movement or manifestations of the ground state of potential, a state of absence or emptiness. However, this all this would be a conceptualization, a creation, a belief. That would be so primarily owing to the intangibility of the primordial ground, a state beyond elaboration, explanation or description of any sort. Such a conceptualization or any measurement simply being a state frozen into temporary elaboration, literally an artefact!
Such a nontemporal, nonspatial worldview renders appearances, or any kind of phenomena as constructs that are not absolute. Hence any apparent reality is ours only, open to creation, and obviously subject to flux and decay. Thus to reify what is simply sensorially evident is an error and could be cause for much distress. Repeated contemplation of this worldview might tend to confirm the illusory nature of everything that we take for granted. Strangely however, noise is minimized and the contemplation of a primordial ground that is absolute and beyond attributes does lead to a state of unparalleled peace. This quiet often generates a remarkable degree of ‘space’. Room to maneuver, to navigate the viccisitudes of existence and if we are lucky it creates an unconditional compassion for all that unfolds from the field of primordial potential. Learning to embrace matter and sentience as creative expressions of something that is perhaps far beyond any system that we can envisage or measure leaves us open to awe, devotion and great compassion.