|
1. Incompleteness
in the arisen-as-series happens
2. Because of
discretely discontinuous, hence random quantum interaction of its substrate.
3. Incompletion
ends
4. With
quantization/ending of a series.
|
Realness (i.e.
sat) does not exist as such, as the ancient Indians believed. It
happens as momentary quantum collision effect.
That means
that whatever arises, namely any form-over-time (i.e. an analogue), does so
on the base of discretely discontinuous quantum collision effects. Realness
is created from instant to instant. Hence what ever is derived from, or
emerges upon the ground of these momentary affects is fundamentally momentary,
hence not lasting, hence cannot be owned.
Consequently,
no thing, i.e. as real-form-over-time (read: real identity) can ever be
complete for more than an instant (i.e. in the ‘NOW’). Hence, relative to
the everyday (i.e. analogue) world, real-forms-over-time are fundamentally
incomplete, and responded to with distress.
Moreover,
quantum collision can only happen in a relativity vacuum, that is to say, ‘only
random quanta can collide’ (i.e. ‘only random, events carry instruction’) to
produce a moment of realness.
That means
that for an everyday form, emerging as the whole, identifiable affect (i.e.
a self) of a discretely discontinuous stream of quantum affects, to
continue (i.e. to become, arise, be reborn), it must randomise (i.e.
change) itself, i.e. its quantum base from contact/moment to contact/moment.
In other words, since only ‘difference makes a difference’, what remains
the same cannot actually happen (i.e. ‘be’) at all.
It follows
that distress, as signal about failure to complete a logic function,
happens because difference (i.e. change, and which is fundamentally
non-logical) is not happening. And that understanding is the complete
opposite of the Sakya Buddha’s samma-sambodhi, unless samma-sam is read not
as ‘perfect’ or ‘complete’ but as same-same-same; for it is generating sameness,
i.e. non-difference, that prevents rebirth.
At the
everyday, village wisdom level, the Sakya Buddha got it partly right. At
the medium level he got it most wrong. At the fundamental level he got it
completely wrong.
|