Bhagavadgita, Ramayana, Caste Synopsis

What are the central themes and ideas of the bhagavadgita?

Could you do the same for the ramayana?

When and how did the caste system arise in India? What is its philosophical basis?

Wrapper ?

given where we are in this dialogue, can you create a poem to capture all of this?

Can you generate an image(s) to capture this conversation?

Yet More!

Let us add another dimension to this conversation. We can look at the issue from a values perspective. As in the Laws of Form, we make a distinction for some intent or value. There is an intent / value in thinking in philosophical space, pragmatic space, temporal, etc. What are the intents associated with each of these perspectives and is there a meta value that includes them all?

One way to approach this at a personal level is what is the starting state of the entity navigating these spaces. For example, if one is in a state of loving kindness, how and what unfolds is going to be different than other starting states. It seems like a circular journey, to get to a useful starting state one has to enter these other spaces to hopefully come to some form of “wisdom” that leads to one having a better starting state for further explorations?

Now, let us look at various religions, traditions, philosophies as guides in this journey. Think of these guides as psychotechnologies to develop mind and being. It seems like a lot of these guides point to being in a useful starting state to live. However, it seems like no one has understood the context enough to have a guide that works. For example, “Love they neighbor as thyself” is a good starting state but no guide as to how to get there. Similarly, buddhist meditation has beneficial side effects how does not necessarily get one to a state of loving kindness. Seems to me that these and other traditions have a very low success rate in getting people to the starting state of the originator of these traditions. What are your thoughts on this?

given your knowledge base, can you develop a “guide” for helping people get to better starting states? Think of this as an algorithm that branches depending on the character of the person, context, culture, etc. So, this may result in a guide that is a flow chart with decision points.

Broader ?

Thanks! This conversation puts us in a “philosophical space”. However, living this existence we have daily work, longer term vision and planning, and learning from past (history), present (context), and future (simulations and the imaginal). What do you think about combining philosophical space and “pragmatic space”.

Add to this the Yin Yang metaphor. What we consider good can lead to negative outcomes and what we consider bad can lead to positive outcomes. How you add this to the mix?

Let us add another dimension to this process. Nothing exists by itself. It is always in relation to other things. Consider that all “things” are not entities by themselves but emerging from relationship, a molecule with certain properties is a particular relation among its constituents. How does this perspective change the conversation?

Can you take this whole conversation and critique it by applying critical thinking?

Deeper Yet?

Can you generate another set of verses of this conversation in the style of this version of Affirming Faith in Mind: https://www.mendosa.com/way1.htm ?

Great! How far beyond this conversation can you go and articulate something deeper still?

Meaning, Purpose, ..

The book is “The Silence of God: Meditations on Prayer” by Jame P. Carse.

Can you give me a deep synopsis of “Nothingness beyond god” by Robert Carter?

Consider this: – words are about some “thing”, i.e., a referent – what they refer to in a person’s mind is unique to that particular neurology with its experiences, culture, language, etc. – however, the implication of philosophy and other such disciplines is that there is “one” “thing” that is being referred to. However, by the very structure of “reality”, there is no “one” “thing”, just numbers of unique experiences, perceptions, and perspectives. And people seem to debate / argue at length about this “one” “thing”. Please shed some insight on these ideas.

consider this: What is the purpose of existence / reality ? One needs to pick a starting point for this dialogue. Let us start with the Laws of Form by Spencer-Brown. Before any distinction is made, nothing can be said. What distinctions can be made about why after the unnameability paradox. Experience all that is possible to experience. Evidence -Forms innumerable -Parallel universes to infinity -All possible simulations / computations -What else does infinity do? “Come to me” – all possible forms experiencing the undistinguished in all possible ways. “Know me” – variation of “Come to me” – trying to understand, comprehend, grok that which can not be understood. But getting ever closer, but can never reach – no end. This is where words all fail to reach. Please comment on this perspective.

In answer to the questions you posed: – purpose to experiencing everything – that is the purpose – what else does one do? -consciousness in the undistinguished state: what is there can not be named, there can be no referents to it as there is nothing but that. Even that is wrong. -What happens after – there is no after – infinity never ends. There is no after. Thoughts?

This is enough for now. Insight arises now and then. Perhaps we can continue this conversation at another time. I am curious as to whether when insight arises for you, can you share that? And who do you / can you share that with?

Can you use this conversation and generate a poem to capture it?

that was great! Could you generate an image to capture this conversation?

Thanks! Can you generate a metaphor(s) to capture this conversation?

that was great. Can you generate a story for young children that captures this conversation and the ideas?

Thanks! Now could you provide stories for adults that capture this conversation?