Message-ID: <alpine.NEB.2.00.1412121913490.29315@panix5.panix.com>
From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@panix.com>
To: Cyb <cybermind@listserv.wvu.edu>, Wryting-L <WRYTING-L@listserv.wvu.edu>
Subject: pramana, shameless
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 19:17:15 -0500 (EST)
pramana, shameless http://www.alansondheim.org/pramana2.jpg http://www.alansondheim.org/pramana.mp4 http://www.alansondheim.org/pramana1.jpg "VII The analogy of lamplight and pramanas adduced by the opponent is unfit, because the lamplight cannot illuminate darkness, since no connection is possible between them. It must be said: 7. The lamplight, either connected or not connected with darkness, does not illuminate. The lamplight, either illuminates with being connected with darkness, or illuminates without being connected (with it). (We have it that) the lamplight cannot illuminate being connected with darkness, since (that) connection is not (possible), because the lamplight and darkness do not get connected as they are opposed. Where the lamplight is, there darkness is not; consequently how the lamplight could either remove or illuminate darkness? Also (the lamplight cannot illuminate) not being connected (with darkness), as the sword that is not in contact (with something) does not cut (it)." From Nagarjuna's Refutation of Logic (Nyaya), Vaidalyaprakarana, edited and commentary, Fernando Tola, Carmen Dragonetti, pp. 60-61 Where one is, the other is not, or: One and the other both are, but of the darkness, a focus, and of the lamplight, a focus. Or an imposition or a superimposition, entangled, but neither one nor the other. Pramana - here, the means of valid knowledge, Prameya - here, the knowable (object) From IV: "Pramana and prameya as mutually dependent are neither existent nor non-existent nor existent and non-existent. Moreover 4. An existing (thing), a non-existing (thing), and a thing that were both are not dependent (on something other)." (p. 59, end of something other) Now then presuppose the darkness as monstrous, the lamplight as flickering, what then? It is present, it is past forgetting; they are present, they are past forgetting. They will be forgotten, they will be past forgetting. They forget. The darkness forgets the darkness, the lamplight forgets the lamplight. Substitute a Victor. The Victor forgets the darkness, the darkness forgets the Victor. The Victor forgets the lamplight, the lamplight forgets the Victor. But are they not for example vestiges of lux? Or of radiation or its lack, there you are, dark matter a vestige of darkness? Where might one find a photo? Virtual particle? Neutrino? It is luminous, this darkness within the red and darkened lamplight, it is sexual, yes, the means of valid knowledge.
