I feel, after this book has largely been written, I should present my character and what makes me special in this world. While some of my more important facets really shouldn’t be all too unique, it may be helpful for the reader to understand me in a clearer light.
I was born in 1987 on a military base. I was told a story by my father about my first word. My father was a devout Muslim at the time that I was born, of the most devout that one could know, and he was keen to mistakes fueled by hearsay and not thinking independently, as he believed God would enjoy that one should understand God in a personal and aware way. He was an academic and an officer in the military, and was fond of education and learning, as well as business and language. The religion and business side of him did affect me significantly growing up, as well as the love of the understanding of the many questions regarding science and general intellectualism.
My first word, as I was told, was quite unique. It wasn’t just that it was a unique word, but there was something extremely different about how I, at I believe around one year old, approached the statement of the word, and the demeanor I had chosen regarding this word. I was told that one day, while my father was entertaining me and himself with our mutual company, I looked him straight in the eyes, and without any sound of the common babble of an infantile kid, I said to him, with the clearest of pronunciation and the clearest of intention, “Allah.”
During my upbringing, I was like many children, always asking questions. My questions concerned how everything in the world worked, and my father had the practice of always answering every single question. I learned a lot, and I remember one of the questions, “how do bouncy balls bounce,” that I asked when I was maybe three, and I still remember that he gave me a clear and true answer, regarding the displacement of volume and the elastic nature of the ball to return to its original form, which propelled the ball back into the air. It was never-ending questions like these that my father always answered. I was gifted with a great intuition regarding science and the laws of nature.
During my entire life, I had always wanted to know the answers to two main questions. These questions were, “what is reality,” and “what or who is ‘God’?” There was never a time where I thought that perhaps I should pick up this topic — it was a desire that had no beginning — a desire that I had since, perhaps, I was born, or perhaps a desire that transcended my birth. That is where the desire to write this book came from. Additionally, this book was written out of the desire to have a book to answer all of my questions regarding this topic, which I later learned was also called, “enlightenment,” so, if I were reborn, I would still be in primary school, or perhaps early in my secondary education when I found this book. This way, I would not feel this extremely difficult task of figuring out these hard questions of psychology, spirituality, intelligence, and reality, as there would be a book already written, if I were to be reborn, that already answered all of my questions.
I had also wanted to be an entrepreneur at a young age, as well, and I have always exhibited a form of independent spirit. The spirit of John Nash, a man, through a keen awareness, understood, coined, and revolutionized the difficult topic of game theory, reminds me a little of myself. (While it is perhaps a gossip, I am aware that it is possible that most of John Nash’s works went unpublished after John Nash realized he was writing a manual on how to commit conspiracy, as conspiracy and game theory are complementary.)
At a young age, I was very social, certainly. Children are often quite social, before choosing collectivism or choosing to be afraid of its violent and deceptive tendencies. One very important facet about me is that I swore to myself, completely and unequivocally, that I would never believe a lie. In my mind, I always analyzed every form of advice and organized it into a paradigm of reality that I had been developing. I could understand some advice had probabilistic characteristics to it, but I would never believe anything that I was not certain was true. I did this to a particularly agonizing extent, but looking at myself today, I can sense lying extremely easily. I have developed, over a few decades, an uncanny ability to speak words of joy and truth and to quickly and easily notice flawed thinking. I have thus become an expert logician. It surprises me to see a world where this is not a common mentality. To believe something that is not true is what I know to be the crime and sin of adultery. I believe that to “commit adultery” is literally to take a falsehood as truth, and I believe there were likely a few changes made to the Bible, as I see hardly a reason this simple and literal understanding should not be more evident. (It almost seems as if, through the millennia, people wanted to avoid mentioning that they were holding a falsehood as a supposedly true ordinance — that they were concealing a guilt and never seeking to admit, to themselves, that they had become manifest liars — agents of deceit and concealed terrorism.)
To answer the topic of enlightenment in a satisfactory way — that is to answer the question of enlightenment in a modern and rationalist way, from which the reader can gain wisdom and understanding such that the reader can then produce new primary knowledge on one’s own, was something that no one thought was even possible. It was indeed considered, to a scientist, one of the outstanding hard problems of intelligence and psychology, and to a layman, some kind of impossible rocketman-like task.
It was not an easy task. Even though this book presents inarguably sound logic in a way that is extremely easy to understand, learn, and read, the finding of these answers was literally the most difficult endeavor I could’ve ever imagined. It was like climbing a Mt. Everest thirty times the size of Mt. Everest, although I speak from a perspective of never having climbed Mt. Everest, and as thus, this metaphor is very much a metaphor, but hopefully this metaphor gives the reader an understanding of the difficulty I felt in trying to answer the then believed to be impossible question of enlightenment.
My mind raced every day, year after year. I felt I was always behind. Growing up, I was told, that if I really wanted to accomplish a particular task in life, then if I truly dedicated myself to the task, then I would be able to accomplish whatever task that may be. This question was one of the hardest questions that have ever existed. I wasn’t sure if I would ever figure out a completely coherent answer to the nature of God, reality, and the sociology and psychology required to bring the planet to a wonderful understanding that would finally cure the problematic mind of the problems that this mind faces and the problems this planetary mind creates, and then lead the world to the cessation of suffering, as the Buddha would recommend I do.
From the day I was born, for 33 years, I toiled relentlessly and endlessly. Shortly before, I had almost decided to simply write a book on the many topics I had considered and the many conversations I had, but it wasn’t a book that truly had the answer to the question I really wanted to answer. It would be a book that wasn’t quite what I truly wanted to write. I decided ultimately to not publish the other book. Soon after that phase of almost writing a book that would fall short of my true goal, I had finally found exactly the moment of coherence that I was searching for — everything I knew had matched up into a confident understanding. I decided to explore this very well-known understanding of coherence that I had been seeking for so many years by creating a stream-of-consciousness pseudo-podcast where the characters would talk about all sorts of mildly related topics, in a funny and light-hearted manner. I posted this on YouTube for a little, but I eventually changed my mind after having my podcast accidentally say something slightly mean, which made me feel awful. Instead of fixing it and moving on, I deleted the podcast, as it was simply an experiment and perhaps a way to hear my thoughts, and decided that the podcast was a great experience — it was helpful to see my whimsical stream-of-consciousness in this new light — but I then believed that I should write something more seriously, to answer the question.
I then created the website, enlightenmentexplained.com. I began writing on this website, as writing online gave me the feeling of an echo; it helped me feel as if my thoughts were being read and thought about, and it helped give me the little bit of self-conscience that I needed to really make a special book.
I created the first edition, which was quite elucidating, although, after taking some time away from it and returning, I found it to be assuming that the reader would know more about what I was thinking when I wrote many of the paragraphs than one should expect a reader to know. (Additionally, I had published it in Times New Roman — oops!) I carefully went through this edition, edited it, filling in the many thought-gaps that I then noticed were present, and clarifying many things quite greatly, while adding several new chapters, bringing the published copy of the book to over 430 pages — a significant work of logical literature. The second edition was marvelous, indeed, a work a greatness.
Now soon I will publish the third edition of this book. I assume this book will surpass 600 pages in length, but more importantly than number of pages (as I choose to be succinct and clear in my writing), is that I feel it will be almost exactly the book I wished I had in primary school. Additionally, I have certainly noticed what impact this book will play in the world of science and applied philosophy, and I see a bright future ahead for the world, due to the very new information that can now be found in this book. I feel it is almost completely perfect to what I needed to know in primary school, although I realize there are likely a few little topics that I will want to add later, so I do expect there to be a fourth edition. (I also hope this book to begin an entirely new field of science — Ideological Philosophy — and the observational data-driven science that falls in line with this remarkably helpful branch of philosophy.)
In addition to dedicating my life primarily to the writing of this book, and the subsequent lectures I will surely give once I decide to fully publish it (as right now it is self-published on Amazon, which makes it apparently very difficult to find), I am also an expert programmer, specializing in C++ and what that entails (systems design, elegant code, and a low-level understanding of computers), and I am also an expert musician, although I have yet to publish anything remarkably serious (aside from perhaps one album, but I feel it is too in line with the traditions of music). However, being an expert musician, and particularly, an expert music producer, as well as a software engineer who writes this type of music software, lends itself to becoming an engineer capable of performing many data-driven observational science experiments (particularly regarding radio, signal processing, and analysis) and going even further than this book, into seriously studying the mechanics of the world and of physics, by following the philosophy presented in this book as the source of testable hypotheses. Thus, while this book is nearing a satisfactory breadth of information, I do feel I have a long future of science and teaching ahead of me.
That sums up who I am quite well. I do hope you enjoy the product of my efforts. I know that if I am ever reborn, this will be my very favorite book — a book I will always keep by my side. I hope that perhaps you may find a similar joy from this work.