Satori

Mereological nihilism is the philosophical position that there are no items that have parts. If there are no items with parts then the only items that exist are partless fundamental particles, such as the true atoms (also called philosophical atoms) theorized to exist by some ancient philosophers, some contemporary physicists , and some contemporary philosophers. With several novel arguments I show that mereological nihilism is the correct theory of reality. I will also discuss strong similarities that mereological nihilism has with empirical results in quantum physics. And I will discuss how mereological nihilism vindicates a few other theories, such as a very specific theory of philosophical atomism, which I will call quantum abstract atomism. I will show that mereological nihilism also is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that avoids the problems of other interpretations, such as the widely known, metaphysically generated, quantum paradoxes of quantum physics, which ironically are typically accepted as facts about reality. I will also show why it is very surprising that mereological nihilism is not a widely held theory, and not the premier theory in philosophy.

Once the positivistic/escapist interpretation that human consciousness is epiphenomenal, i.e., accidental, is dismissed there are two possible approaches to the scientific study of consciousness. Bottom-up consciousness, from the individual organism or being to the universe, and Consciousness from the top-down, from the universe to the individual. These two approaches mark the outer boundaries of the present scientific search for a theoretical model of consciousness, even though Consciousness goes beyond science and moves into the realm of metaphysics. In any case, everything in between these two approaches is seriously muddled and clouded with speculations and metatheories that cannot be possible, which is common to the period preceding a scientific revolution. Some of those speculations and metatheories sound rather esoteric and even spiritual, which allows them to appeal to many people, but they would normally be considered non-scientific by definition if they were expressed for anything other than consciousness, which in itself presents a total mystery to science and the scientists who are willing to attempt to explain consciousness. On the other hand, what little concrete information science has at its disposal about consciousness does seem to match ideas in eastern mystical thought and in some cases earlier western ideas in Natural Philosophy that have been rejected by science, which further muddles the scientific quest for understanding consciousness. These ideas and concepts fit the qualitative aspects of mind that science normally associates with consciousness even better as well as the direct characteristics of consciousness, at least to the extent that such characteristics are known. Science needs to find a balance between them so it can maximize the effect of the next scientific revolution as well as the corresponding evolutionary leap in consciousness that is coming, but physics must simultaneously develop a working unified field theory to better define the universe in which consciousness of any kind, shape or form can and has developed.

I approach the zen practices of satori and "simply sitting" from
the standpoint of pre-judicative hermeneutics, trying to argue for a "zen-less
satori" experience, or a "zen-less zen", meaning that the ultimate goal of zen
is to leave zen behind, experiencing the nonjudicative through silence and "simply
sitting" in zazen practice. The challenge is to reach the zen-less state of mind
(nonmind) through zen teachings, while maintaining the belief that we all
experience meditative silence as a nonjudicative experience in a similar manner.

Uncovering socio-religious amalgamations, it has been revealed that things such as meditation, ‘Zen art’ like the ensō, poems, and conveying certain moments of epiphany, were aesthetic additives to Zen developed though the Kamakura (1185–1333) to the Takugawa or Edo (1600–1868) periods. Most of these ideas were primarily introduced during the Heian era (794-1185) with the first Japanese imperial anthology, Konkishu. Such was left to permeate the religions of Japan and assimilate themes to the context of things such as Zen and satori. The Zen master then became a poetic figure and romanticized the idea of Jōshū’s ‘Ordinary Zen’. 
The Heian period precursors the time of Dōgen, and is usually described in such a way:

The last division of classical Japanese history. It is the period in Japanese history when Buddhism, Taoism and other Chinese influences were at their height. The Heian period is also considered the peak of the Japanese imperial court and is noted for its art, especially poetry and literature.

It is here we begin to see the descriptions of satori and their quality as ineffable. The Zen tradition has a philosophical corpus which in the modern context has mostly been expressed through various arts. Within these arts, there is an underlying connotation for emotive expression. Therefore to ‘see’ Zen, one would not seek scholarly approach but look to sumi-e prints (Japanese ink wash), haiku, karenasui (dry landscaping), ukiyo-e (floating world prints), nanga or bunjinga (literati painting), or kōan introspection, which usually depicts nature and life in raw form. Even then, unless the art is embodied by the observer it can only be looked upon as a disconnected visual representation. What it represents is by its very definition is self-defeating in so much as the ‘beauty’ consists in its being ephemeral. The practitioner is attempting to capture a moment where the moment is already gone. The perspective of recalling an experience such as satori changes it leaving the faintest trace. Yet, the common notion of Zen relishes in the paradox of this contradicting gesture and is labeled as yūgen.

There is no doubt that during the last several decades some significant progress has been made in the field of the inter-religious and inter-faith dialogue. It is also a well-known fact that wide scale changes have occurred in terms of global geopolitics and cultural interaction. What's more, in an era where even the idea of borderlines suffers a shape-shifting analogous to that one during the ancient Hellenistic times, we find ourselves facing unprecedented challenges and questions demanding viable answers. Now, more than ever, it is witnessed by all that politicians and economists have failed sourly in bringing peoples and cultures peacefully together. It is exactly where they have failed that religious leaders and religion experts are called upon to heal a severely wounded world. Should they succeed, the 21 st century would be one of religion and peace unforeseen in human history. Yet, even though around the same table, many a time religious leaders and spoke-persons find themselves entangled in the complexities of serious dogmatic issues, territorial (literal or not) power plays or the never-ending spiral paths of an all encompassing protocol or etiquette. Thus, though clear, progress is slow and meets not current pressing issues. Then, at the core of this brief presentation lies the belief that in the deepest recesses of religion, in their mystical dimension, one may find useful ideas and tools, perhaps able to help bridging a so far persisting gap of comprehension sometimes to be witnessed on all participant sides. Consequently, our task now would be to present at least some of those ideas that if approached with solemnity and a peaceful mind may widen our horizons and bring dialogue back to its ancient old nucleus: the human heart.