The Human Folly of Naming
"A name is imposed on what is thought to be a thing or a state and this divides it from other things and other states. But when you pursue what lies behind the name, you find a greater and greater subtlety that has no divisions. Atoms of dust are not really atoms of dust but are merely called that. In the same way, a world is not a world but is merely called that."
--Visuddhi Magga
--Visuddhi Magga
posted by The Toneman at 9:51 AM
2 Comments:
But if you don't give things names then how can you communicate? Dividing things from other things and other states is needed for communication and communication is needed on several levels and is what caused a major evolutionary jump to our species.
The atoms of dust are broken down into specific names. In fact atoms of dust is just a vague name and isn't fully descriptive of the whole picture. Atomic scientists would break it into much more specific parts. Perhaps this is another one that I don't understand and am looking at it wrong but I don't see the logic of saying "a world is not a world but is merely called that."
I suppose if this is meant to help engrain the concept that everything is the same thing then it works but to me that's getting down to a cellular or unexplicable level and only adds confusion.
As soon as something works it is automatically related to everything else that works.
It goes to the illusory nature of what the senses and the brain make into "reality." A scientist may be specific, but on a certain level the points at which things are divided and made separate and labled are pathological, bound up in our human nature, and artificial and arbitrary.
Take the convention of "Mon, Tues,. Weds..." It is one of these collective illusions that, granted, allowed for greater communication and ulltimately, on some level our success on an evolutionary scale. But they are still random.
To say otherwise is in some way to put humanity and anthropomorphism at the center of the universe.
Post a Comment
<< Home