A Degree of Understanding on the Nature of ‘Reality’ for an Observer
Ayad Gharbawi
January 12, 2010 – Damascus, Syria
Again and again, one of the deepest mysteries of life, is what exactly is ‘reality’?
We can agree that reality is that which surrounds us, including our bodies, General Abstract Vision (gav), plus that which is what I call the Mental Abstract Vision (mav), like the known senses, feelings, vision, dreams, emotions, thoughts and so on.
In truth, both categories, (gav) and (mav) are fundamentally alike in their basic constituents, since both are ultimately made up of an unlimited number of indefinable, indistinct and unrecognizable ‘number’ of mutually contrasting and similar images, and that is why, I classify them as being ‘abstract’.
I use the term ‘abstract’ to indicate that which the Mind cannot recognize or understand or relate to or see in any way.
I argue that these are the basic fundamental constituents of Reality.
An oddity, indeed.
For an infinite ‘number’ of abstract images that, in themselves have absolutely no relation, and far more importantly here – they have absolutely no ‘flavours’ (to use the quantum terminology for subatomic particles here) to the perceiver, and it is precisely these flavourless abstract images that do ultimately emerge, and then do create a recognizable and relatable image and environment and feelings that we ultimately call as that totality, which is every person’s own reality.
What is the difference between the constituents of the (gav) and (mav)?
The difference is in the degree and depth of abstraction.
Thus, a table in front of me (gav) is one that is less abstract than if I were to think and imagine a table in my mind (mav).
But we must never forget that the fundamental constituents of all reality are all abstract.
The question becomes – to what extent are they abstract?
The existence of abstract constituents for all attributes of reality can be seen, whenever we wish to look at any aspect of reality.
I have discussed, in many of my previous articles, the aspect of vision in relation to the mind, and what role abstraction plays in the beingness or in being the essence of vision.
And here I need to add that every aspect of reality is made up from an unlimited number of meaningless, unrelatable, indefinite number of abstract images.
Now, I need to be more precise. For in many instances, within the described or the studied time frame (TF) of the Observed Person (Op), the reality that he feels, or perceives can be a totality of these unlimited number of (gav) and (mav) that can and need to be compressed in order for the said Observer (Ob) to make any understanding and relatable meaning from these same attributes.
To understand the ‘Reality’, the first and most fundamentally important understanding that needs to be accepted, is that Reality is and can only be a ‘truth’ for an observing person. Therefore, Reality can only be relative to each individual and cannot be described as a phenomenon beyond the mind of each individual.
Reality, beyond an Observer, is therefore a meaningless concept.
Now, relative to the person we are studying, given a prescribed (TF), Time Frame, we can say that the Observer (Ob) is looking at a table in front of him, and so we call that situation as being General Abstract Vision (gav).
Now, if we say the (Ob) was only concentrating at looking on the chair, what else can we say from that specific situation?
Assuming, (Ob) was not thinking of anything else, and had no feelings, or memories and, in essence, during the specified time frame, (Ob) was thinking of nothing and looking at nothing else;
Then, we can say that the Mind and the Reality of (Ob) during (tf) 5 seconds were equal to the observed object, the chair.
The Mind and the entire Reality of the person in question becomes functionally equal and- or as one – with that which is being observed.
We can say:
In other words, within the 5 seconds, the Reality and the Mind and Consciousness and the sense of the ‘Self’ and ‘I’ for the (Observer x), became completely unified functionally with the object he was looking at.
In other words, the total entities and constituents and contents of the entire mind/the ‘Self’, the Consciousness of (Ob), during the 5 prescribed seconds, constitute and add to nothing more than the observing of the chair.
Thus, when we ask our question: what is the Reality for Observer (x), we answer thus: – during a certain time, Observer’s Reality was an observed chair in front of him. That means, that the totality of the Reality of the Observer (x) was nothing more and nothing less than that particular observed object.
And, we add, that equally so, the entire – Beingness, Consciousness, Mind, the ‘Self’, the ‘I’ of our Observer (x) – or the totality of what constitutes the Mind of our particular Observer, during the 5 second period, was itself the observed object, the chair.
In other words, Mind becomes, functionally speaking, exactly as one, unified as that which the Mind is concentrating on.
And, further, the Reality for our Observer (x) during the specified Time Frame is exactly as what the constituents of his mind are during the same time frame.
Ayad Gharbawi