Fabrizio Ulivieri - TrendSetter

  When we say that the invisible is stronger than the visible, and that the visible emerges from the invisible through proximity and coming together, we need an example. The best example is found in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 2.1: yathā sudīptāt pāvakād visphuliṅgāḥ sahasraśaḥ prabhavante sarūpāḥ | tathākṣarād vividhāḥ bhāvāḥ Just as thousands of sparks, all of exactly the same form, leap forth from a blazing fire, thus beings of various forms arise from the Imperishable [Logos = Excess = God]. And this is precisely how nature likes to express itself. ----------------- Telegram: De Unamuno Whatsapp: De Unamuno Facebook: De Unamuno Academia:   https://independent.academia.edu/fulivieri 

  When you evaluate something historically, you relativize it. At the very moment you place fundamental philosophical questions within a historical context, you deprive them of their philosophical value and relativize their significance. The same applies to truth: it cannot be relativized. Truth is one. Likewise, fundamental philosophical questions belong neither to a particular time nor to a particular place.[1] It is with such a principled question that the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad begins. कस्मिन्नु भगवो विज्ञाते सर्वमिदं विज्ञातं भवतीति kasmin nu bhagavo vijñāte sarvam idaṃ vijñātaṃ bhavatīti O Blessed One Sir, by knowing this [locally] does the [idam] All become known? In other words, if I know this (hic et nunc), I will know everything else. If this (hic et nunc) comes into being, everything else will come into being as well. In Antanas Maceina's thought, this fundamental structure of the question of knowledge was linked to suffering. Maceina discovered suffering as the primary drivi...