"Is the universe eternal? Or not?
Or both? Or neither? Is the universe finite? Or not?
Or both? Or neither? Is the self identical with the body? Or is the self different from the body? Does the Tathagata (name Buddha used for
himself meaning the one who has thus come and the one who has thus gone) exist
after death? Or not? Or both?
Or neither?" ~The Fourteen
Unanswered Questions of Buddha.
The theories of
special relativity and general relativity, as theorized by Albert Einstein, in
part state that reality is four dimensional, made up of time, length, width and
depth. Also he states there are four
forms of fundamental force in the universe; weak nuclear force, strong nuclear
force, electromagnetism and gravity. A
fifth force is thought to exist and yet is undiscovered. Four is representative of completion in
numerous systems from our physical composition, to the laws of the four
dimensional universe and its four forces.
Without the balance of these four forces life as we know it would not be
possible. The matrix of four is
physically and naturally exemplified in our inner microcosm and the celestial
macrocosm and is spiritually and mentally recognized by many people's
throughout history, across cultures and subjects.
Our minds are
wired to question, only frequently we ask limited questions. Curiosity is a quality shared by all people,
only many people are trained not to be curious.
We are capable of questioning everything in the four dimensions. Some questions are of physics and nature
while others are about spiritual or mental applications. There are a few questions which all people
have all posed since time immemorial.
Some of the same questions have been asked, like those posed to and
unanswered by Buddha, for millennia.
They reveal our nature to question everything, even and perhaps
especially the unanswerable. Sometimes
answers are found. Einstein found many
answers to his questions about the universe.
Normally when questions are answered though, new questions arise. Some questions however are not worth asking
and not worth pursuing like the fourteen unanswered questions of Buddha, also
known as the imponderables. The Fourteen
questions are actually four questions, three with four aspects and one with
two. Despite Buddha's refusal to answer
the questions they were still posed in the most developed manner possible in
hopes of getting an answer, in four ways to form completion.
Buddha believed people existed in either two
states; in existence or nonexistence.
Many people visited him with questions and these were said to be the
only questions he did not answer. It is
believed he thought the imponderables could never truly be answered and that
they led to states of negativity and nonexistence, ultimately inconsequential
to our earthly predicament of eliminating suffering and attaining
enlightenment. Many questions are worth
deliberation and elaboration because they are pertinent to our earthly
predicament. But at least these four
questions, the imponderables, are inconsequential.
Questions are
posed completely in four ways, as illustrated in the formation of the
imponderables. The formation of the
questions are valuable on their own and indicative of the matrix of four and
the duality of polarity. Buddha is asked
these four questions in the philosophical formation of the duality of polarity,
with four important parts. Is it
so? Is it not so? Is it both?
Is it neither?
The very inquiry
into the origins of human thinking and being is posed through the duality of
polarity and yet it's most often considered a singular polarity. Why are we the way we are? Is it the result of nature or nurture? The debate of nature versus nurture is posed
in a single distinct polarization. Yet
the best answer supersedes the singular polarity and is traditionally
philosophically viewed as a trinity of options, it being the synthesis of one
and the other, of thesis and antithesis.
And yet this is actually the matrix of four and the duality of polarity
with the fourth part missing. It should
be asked in the same philosophical formation as the imponderables, which
despite Buddha's refusal to answer, were still posed in the most developed
manner possible, in hopes of an answer.
Is human thinking
and being the result of nature? Or
nurture? Or both? Or neither?
This idea may be explored in multiple ways and has roots among many
disciplines. Questioning our thinking
and being aim at providing evidence for an actual answer, however the pinnacle
purpose of such debate is to understand the possibilities, the in-betweens,
through the duality of polarity.
Whenever the either/or option is put forth it is limited for there are
always four possible present answers; one, the other, both and neither. In the case of nature versus nurture, the
most sensible answer is both nature and nurture makes us who we are, but
perhaps it is neither, perhaps other systems rather than biological or experiential
are at play, like astrological systems for instance.
Does art reflect
life or does life reflect art? This
similarly philosophical question is aimed at its own answers, but yet is
primarily based on understanding possibilities via the duality of
polarity. There are four basic forms of
answers to this question and those like it, and yet in typical form, only two
or three are normally explored. The
three comprised of one, the other or the combination of both, philosophically
known as thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.
There are the obvious two answers posed, one contrasting the other and a
mixture is the third choice. The
distinct fourth option, seemingly always left out, possibly because of its
ability to shake the status quo is the unlimited alternative, the
nullisis. In the philosophical set of
thesis, antithesis and synthesis the distinct possibility is missing, the
unlimited alternative, the neither option.
The nullisis answer is outside the box, or outside the cave,
thinking.
Nullisis can be
compared to and understood through the four human blood types. In every dialectical discussion there is
thesis, antithesis, synthesis and nullisis or A, B, AB, and O. Nullisis, neither, the unlimited alternative
is complicated for it opens every dialectic to any alternative. Consideration of alternatives is similarly
limited to one, the other and the combination, because the next option,
neither, opens up the door to anything else.
And entities seeking to control, during every time period, everywhere,
would automatically prefer to eliminate the fourth part for it represents the
unlimited alternative, while the either/or situation usually results in
controllable back and forth combinations.
The origin of the
celebrated triad of thesis, antithesis, synthesis, is often attributed to Georg
Wilhelm Hegel, however he criticized what is now often called Hegelian
Dialectic. Johann Gottlieb Fichte
actually formed the original presentation.
Hegel is known to have called the triad of thesis, antithesis and
synthesis "boring' and a "lifeless schema.'
Without nullisis, neither, the unlimited alternative, the commonly
referenced philosophical triad is a lifeless schema for if one combines a wrong
answer with the right answer a half correct solution might result.
Hegel did use and
note a similar extrapolation of three; immediate, mediated and concrete. Critics note this trinity to be limited by
way of assumptions and errors, soup in what is assumed to be concrete. Without nullisis or new information, one
could possibly begin with information which is then countered by disinformation
and ends up misinformation. Nullisis is
needed. Nullisis is the distinct and developed
fourth philosophical part which often goes unconsidered.
If mathematics can
be considered beautiful, nullisis is beautifully illustrated through the most
mysterious and elusive of all arithmetic equations, an imponderable of
sorts. It is represented in one of the
most mysterious equations of the most complicated of all numbers; zero. In fact there is no zero. Zero can never be physically represented and
in the entire universe there is not one.
Even in nothingness there is something.
And through its cancellation is its verification. There are in fact zero zeros. Zero represents uncertainty, uncertainty
similar to that of the unlimited alternative.
2
2
1
