Essential Definitions of Technical Words Used In This Work

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Preface

The following are words that play an important role in this work. Most are existing words, and their definitions are placed here for your convenience. The others, and the most important for this work, are the protologisms that I have created in order to break free of the confining structuring of our thoughts by the extent paradigm of physical causality. It has been my understanding, for many decades, that we cannot free ourselves from the structuring of our thoughts, if we continue to use the same words and conceptual ideas that have come into use in support of our old paradigm. As Benjamin Lee Whorf, whose work first came to my attention during my teenage years, summed up his research findings: 

“The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscope flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds – and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and describe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way – an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, BUT ITS TERMS ARE ABSOLUTELY OBLIGATORY; we cannot talk at all except by subscribing to the organization and classification of data which the agreement decrees. (“Language, Thought & Reality,” by Benjamin Lee Whorf, edited by John B Carroll, 1956, pages 213-214).

There are sixteen protologisms that were created specifically for this work, because there are no words that adequately describe the necessary meaning in English, and therefore, would be misleading. They are indicated by the label “protologism” next to their word class at the top of the entry for that word. 

For your reference, here are direct links to the protologisms: Affective Response, Biphasic Perception, Canosis, Cognitive Frame, Coherent Continuity, False Halt, Imperience, Inner Spontaneous Sound, Inseparable Coherence, Mental Clarity, Metanoic, Omninclusive, Omnintrinsic, Pronoumenal, Propriogestæ, Sciomorphogenesis .

There are also thirty-four words that are marked with the label “Special Use.”  Some of these are existing words whose original meaning is no longer in use, but that particular meaning is needed to best express an idea used in this book in a succinct manner. Some of these words have a plethora of meanings so as to be nearly useless to the reader’s understanding, so I have specifically noted the meaning that I am expressing with that word. As well, some are existing words whose current meaning is almost what I need for this work, and so I have indicated the exact meaning that I am expressing with it. 

For your reference, here are direct links to the special use definitions (bold entries are central to this work): Animadversion, Apophasis, Apperception, Cause, Cognisance, Epiphany, Feeling, Form, Inform, Intellect, Introsusception, Know, Metacognition, Mind, Naturing, Nonrational, One, Paradigm, Plenum, Potentiate, Precariat, Real, Real versus Being versus Exist, Recognition, Resonance, Responsiveness and Compassion, Sæculum, Secular, Substratum, Understanding, Veridical, Vignette, Wholeness .

The special use and protologism entries are cross-referenced and hyperlinked so that the way in which they participate with each other and contribute to the system that I have developed and am elucidating in this work, is abundantly clear. If you click on a linked word in any of these definitions, you will be taken to that selected definition here in this glossary. Clicking on the back arrow in your browser will return you to your original word's entry.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Affective Response:

IPA: /əˈfɛktɪv + /ɹɪˈspɑns/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Affective Response

An affective response is a feeling that arises integrally with the impersonal recognition of an action, called a propriogestæ, which is informed by a sæculum.

It is our affective responses to what is — positive, negative, or neutral — which opens up, and closes off, the possibilities of what may come next. But exactly what comes next is constrained to be coherent with what is already present in every context — yet not determinately so, for there is a creative spontaneity, sometimes more, sometimes less, in what comes next. 

It is these affective responses that refine which course of coherent possibilities may become activated. But those possibilities which are activated are only advanced by our attention to them — they are not caused by our attention. What is finally selected, is the result of the spontaneously creative responsive naturing of all that manifests in our lives. 

These responses, being localized as a perspective upon what is, are not definitive in and of themselves, but are additive, like a superposition of colors, or subtractive, like an attenuation of color saturation, and thus the possibilities are never determined, but are the creatively spontaneous paths opened by the combined affective approval, disapproval, and neutrality of all entangled contextual perspectives — some more possible than others, and some so assured as to be of the character of a ‘cause’. And these affective responses are not contained within form, for then they would be the result of, and not the impetus for, the information of the world. 

In all of this, it is our attention alone, and our steering of our attention via our affective responses, that is always the enabler — always the instigator — of what comes, and so our ‘lived presence’ is just this: the attention we pay to the unfolding procession of events. If we do not pay attention, the procession of events is driven by other perspectives — what we might call “chance,” though the only difference from the description already given is our inattention — and so we can find our lives ‘out of control’.  

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA:  /ˌænɪmædˈvɝːʒən /

Special Use: While this word has a modern meaning in legal jurisprudence, in this work its meaning is recast back to its original etymological sense of the moving of attentional focus in a concentrated manner upon some particular imperience, which then elicits a coherent response.

ORIGIN: Late Middle English (in the sense ‘pay attention to’): from Latin animadvertere, from animus ‘mind’ + advertere (from ad- ‘towards’ + vertere ‘to turn’).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA:  /æpəˈdɪktɪk/

Expressing, or of the nature of, necessary truth or absolute certainty.

ORIGIN: Latin apodicticus, from Greek apodeiktikos, from apodeiknynai to demonstrate, from apo- + deiknynai to show.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /əˈpɑloʊ/
adjective (also used as descriptive name)

Not many, nondual  — for this Pythagorean etymology see Plutarch “Isis and Osiris” 381F.

ORIGIN: From Greek “a pollõn” : “not many,” “-ius” from Old Latin “-ios,” suffix -ius is added to a noun to form an adjective indicating “made of” or “belonging to” that noun.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /əˈpɑf.ə.sɪs/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Apophasis

Special Use: Unsaying is a mode of discourse that begins with aporia — the unresolvable dilemma of transcendence of the understanding of name and number, being and becoming, qualities and aspects. Transcendence must be beyond names, number, being, becoming, qualities, and aspects. The difficulty is that language is completely overwhelmed by the structure that one is attempting to transcend, thus, the transcendent is beyond names — yet I just had to name ‘it’ as “the transcendent.” And so, I must unsay that naming and that hypostatization of ‘it’, as there is no entity that can be named, and any name with an intended meaning misses the mark completely.

This regression of meaning is the guiding semantic force of this kind of language, which was given the name “Apophasis” by the early Greeks. Apophasis is frequently taken to mean ‘negation’ but its etymology suggests the meaning more accurately translated as unsaying or speaking-away.

Apophasis is a performative way of speaking. Unfortunately, it is often characterized — by those imprisoned by the structuring of conceptual language, who are unable to grasp the need for a performative language — as “Negative Theology,” which is not what apophasis is.

The classical Western apophasis shares three key features: (1) the metaphor of overflowing or “emanation” which is often in creative tension with the language of intentional, demiurgic creation; (2) dis-ontological discursive effort to avoid reifying the transcendent as an “entity” or “being” or “thing”; (3) a distinctive dialectic of transcendence and immanence in which the utterly transcendent is revealed as the utterly immanent.

(See: “Mystical Languages of Unsaying,” by Michael A. Sells, The University of Chicago Press, 1994)

ORIGIN: Late Latin, repudiation, from Greek, denial, negation, from apophanai to deny, from apo- + phanai to say.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /əˈpɔɹiə/

A state of complete befuddlement.

ORIGIN: New Latin, from Late Latin, doubt, perplexity, from Greek, difficulty, perplexity, from aporos impassable, difficult (from a- 2a- + poros passage, path) + -ia

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌæpɚˈsɛpʃən/

Special Use: The mental process by which a person makes conceptual sense of a pronoumenal imperience by coherently assimilating it to the body of understandings they already possess.

ORIGIN: Mid 18th century: from French aperception or modern Latin aperceptio(n-), from Latin ad- ‘to’ + percipere‘perceive’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɔːˈtɒd͡ʒɪnəs/

Spontaneously arising from within or from a thing itself.

ORIGIN: From Greek autós “self, meaning ‘of or by oneself, independently, or spontaneously,’ + -Latin -genous (-genus + -OUS) “birth, race, stock, kin.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌʌvəloʊkɪˈteɹʃvərə/
noun (Sanskrit, descriptive name)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Avalokitasvara

The contemporary spelling of Mahasattva “Avalokiteśvara” name has been changed back to the original spelling that appeared in early Sanskrit texts, “Avalokitasvara,” throughout this text. The reinterpretation in the current spelling presents him as an iśvara showing a strong influence of Hinduism, as the term iśvara was usually connected to the Hindu notion of Vishnu (in Vaishnavism) or Shiva (in Shaivism) as the Supreme Lord, Creator and Ruler of the world. This change meant that the original meaning of the name as “He who hears the cries of the world,” directly related to Avalokitasvara’s omninclusive responsiveness, was lost.

“The Sanskrit text clearly reflects a time when the original name of the bodhisattva had been supplanted by the later Avalokiteśvara form. As a result, the explanation of the bodhisattva’s name in terms of “sounds” loses its force, because -svara, the Sanskrit word for “sound” and the original ending of the name, has been replaced by the -īśvara ending, meaning “lord.”

For more on the original Avalokitasvara name, and its modification over time, please refer to the chapter: “The Name Avalokitasvara” in Volume 3, The Way of Tradition.

Avalokitasvara is known as Chenrezig in Tibet, Guanyin in China, and Kannon in Japan.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Biphasic Perception:

IPA: /baɪ-ˈfeɪzɪk + pɚˈsɛpʃ(ə)n/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Biphasic Perception

Biphasic Perception encompasses the immediate recognition of the coherent continuity of each response that is informed by a sæculum — which is the first phase of all perception, followed by the apperception of what is immediately recognized into and through one’s understanding, which entails the process of making conceptual inferences about the contents, meaning, identities, qualities, classifications, names, and historical relations of the immediate recognition —  which is the second phase of all perceptions.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈkæn osis/
noun (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Canosis

One’s own developed condition, capacity, or faculty of being able to do, make, or accomplish something thoroughly without directed attention or thought. Canosis is specifically the result of practice or repetition with directed attention until mastery. Before we can attain canosis in some task, we have to learn by doing it repeatedly, and this requires observing ourself doing it, correcting what we do in a subpar or inaccurate way, until we can do it without directed attention. Any such practice or repetition can be referred to as canic (using the noun suffix for ‘one that produces’) in that it has the goal of canosis.

In the context of Responsive Naturing, canosis is the character of the omnintrinsic informing that is the ontogenesis of all life, because naturing is an activity that develops from repetition. 

In our lives, it refers to such kinds of accomplished performances as dancing, weaving, carving, painting, shucking peas, playing a musical instrument, fast chanting mantras or prayers, meditating, and doing yoga sequences, etc. In short, any condition, capacity, or faculty that requires practice to do well, rather than simple memorization of facts or procedures, following verbal instructions for how to do something, or based solely in direct experience without practice.

ORIGIN: Middle English (can), from Old English; akin to Old High German kan:  know, am able, Old English cnāwan: to know + Middle English osis , from Latin, from Greek -ōsis, from -ō- (medial vowel characteristic of derivatives of certain verbs) + -sis (from Latin, from Greek, feminine suffix of action).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /kɔz/

Special Use: A ‘cause’ is just a condition with 100% probability of coming to fulfillment or attainment.

ORIGIN: Middle English: from Old French, from Latin causa (noun)

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Cognitive Frame:

IPA: /ˈkɑɡ.nɪ.tɪv/ /fʁɛi̯m/
noun (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Cognitive Frame

A rigid axiomatic understanding which restricts what is acceptable for thinking, and excludes what is not, based upon commonly-held ‘obvious’ truths that we are enculturated into, inculcated with, and to which we add our own self-derived – and limited by our perspective – understandings of our world. Because of this, our understanding necessarily remains incomplete, inflexible, and ultimately contrived.

ORIGIN: Cognitive: from cognition + -ive, Frame: from 14th Century Middle English framien, framen, to benefit, comfort, construct, from Old English framian, fromian to avail, benefit, make progress.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈkɒɡnɪzəns/

Special Use: To notice or give attention to (something), conscious recognition, particular perspectival knowing — to be aware.

ORIGIN: Middle English conisance, from Old French conoisance, based on Latin cognoscere ‘get to know’. The spelling with g, influenced by Latin, arose in the 15th century and gradually affected the pronunciation.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Coherent Continuity:

IPA: /koʊˈhɛɹ.ənt +  ˌkɑːn.tɪˈn(j)uː.ə.ti/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Coherent Continuity

Coherent continuity is the impersonal recognition of the activity of responsive naturing — of its propriogestæ. This means it is not separate from that naturing. It is not some other thing, some observer of the activity, nor is it an entity. This is why it is characterized as ‘impersonal’.

The common word ‘awareness’ and even ‘consciousness’ are abstractions of this felt coherent continuity. To simplify this point, to rest in the coherent continuity that is recognized means being focused on the pronoumenal imperience of that which is informed, rather than experiencing our conceptual understanding of what has appeared.

This coherent continuity is not a conceptual idea that we have while it is recognized. It is a very visceral and present continuity of the coherently informing activity of this sæculum — i.e., the constructed being. This is the felt duration of our life, as well as the fluid information of our being. 

This is the source of our idea of time.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /kənˈtɪnjuəm/

A continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct.

ORIGIN: Mid 17th century: from Latin, neuter of continuus.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /daɪˈnæm ɪ.zəm/

  1. The quality of being characterized by vigorous activity and progress;
  2. In Philosophy, the theory that phenomena of matter or mind are due to the action of forces rather than to motion or matter.

ORIGIN: Mid 19th century: from Greek dunamis ‘power’ + -ism.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


In Buddhism, “Emaho” is most often used as an exclamation of wonder, surprise or amazement. It is also sometimes translated as “compassion for all livings beings.”

In ancient yogic traditions it is considered to represent — in an onomatopoeic fashion — the inner spontaneous sound (Naad Brahm) of energy flows through the subtle energy body of channels and chakras, in particular the rise of Kundalini Shakti (i.e. the rise of one’s own dormant divinity) from the base of spine till the top of head.

Here in this book, in the practice of Great Responsiveness Meditation, “Ema•Hō” is used in the original sense of its two underlying Sanskrit words: “Ema,” which means “a course, way, or path,” and “Hō,” a particle added, emphatically and impressively after a calling of attention to something, as well as an affirmation of all that has been said. So “Ema•Hō” means: “This is the way!” It’s like being lost on your way somewhere you want to go, and suddenly finding the road that will take you directly there: Surprise! Good fortune! Happy to be on your way! The destination is now achievable!

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪmˈpɪɹɪkəl/

Based on, verifiable by, or disprovable by: observation or experience; rather than, or without regard to, theoretical necessity or pure logic. 

ORIGIN: Middle English emperic, borrowed from early Medieval Latin empīricus, borrowed from Greek empeirikós, "based on observation (of medical treatment), experienced") + -AL

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɛnˈæntɪəʊ mɔː(ɹ)f ɪ.zəm/

A form which is related to another as an object is related to its mirror image.

ORIGIN: From Greek enantios “opposite” + -morph “form” + -ism.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɛn.tɪ.ti/

Some distinct thing with its own enduring intrinsic nature and being — thus, having an independent self-existence.

ORIGIN: Late 15th century (denoting a thing’s existence): from French entité or medieval Latin entitas, from late Latin ensent — ‘being’ (from esse ‘be’).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪˈpɪfəni/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Epiphany

Special Use: Closely tied in this work to the concept of Naturing, epiphany (and its adjectival form: epiphanic) has the meaning of appearing, or a ‘coming into view’, and especially as the informing of that which appears, which encompasses the immediate recognition of the coherent continuity of the event. This recognition is the first phase of Biphasic Perception and therefore is prior to any apperceived understanding of the appearance’s content or meaning, such as identities, qualities, classifications, names, or histories. It is like when we meet someone that we know, but cannot immediately recall their name, or how we know them. It is that immediate state of viscerally feeling that we know them that is the meaning of recognition as I use it here. This recognition is to be aware of the coherent continuity of the meeting of someone that you surely know and with whom you have interacted in the past. It is like this for our perceptions of all things, as well as our thoughts. There is an initiatory phase of visceral recognition, followed by the apperception of the meaning of what has happened. Thus, rather than an epiphany being a rare occurrence in our lives, our perception and our thinking is entirely epiphanic in nature.

ORIGIN: Middle English epiphanie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin epiphania, from Late Greek epiphania, plural, probably alteration of Greek epiphaneia appearance, manifestation, from epiphainein to manifest, from epi- to + phainein show.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Event Horizon:

IPA: /əˈvɛnt həˈɹaɪ.zən/
noun phrase

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Event Horizon

Special Use: In the paradigm of Responsive Naturing, the event horizon is a boundary between the intelligible natured events and their directly unknowable genesis — the boundary between the real and the existent beings.    

ORIGIN: neologism coined in the 1950s in conjunction with the study of black holes.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪkˈspɪɹ.i.əns/

Experience has two main senses: an original 14th Century sense of having taken something away from direct observation or participation in events over the course of time, such as a skill, a lesson learned, feelings of enjoyment, gratitude, discomfort, horror, shame, etc., and a later transition to the abstract process of observation or participation in events.

ORIGIN: late 14th century , "observation as the source of knowledge; actual observation; an event which has affected one," from Old French esperience "experiment, proof, experience" (13th century), from Latin experientia "a trial, proof, experiment; knowledge gained by repeated trials," from experientem (nominative experiens) "experienced, enterprising, active, industrious," present participle of experiri "to try, test," from ex- "out of" (see ex-) + peritus "experienced, tested," from PIE *per-yo-, suffixed form of root *per- "to try, risk." Meaning "state of having done something and gotten handy at it" is from late 15th century. (Etymology retrieved 19-Feb-2018 from:

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

False Halt:

IPA: /fɔls + hɔlt/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary False Halt

A false halt occurs whenever we attempt to transcend our experiences in order to find a new understanding, but find our progress along that path obstructed by the shear weight of our existing conceptual ideas (cognitive frame) and our need to rely on the shared vocabulary of words that is itself always rooted in the current paradigmatic way of seeing the world. Thus, we are faced with the problem of halting our ‘transcendence’ within some aspect of our phenomenal and conceptual existence. Such a false halt results in a state that cannot be considered truly transcendent, but merely transcendentally-inclined, yet still captive within our pre-existing ideas and understanding — the lens through which we view our lives, and structure our knowledge.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈfilɪŋ/

Special Use: the impersonal and undifferentiated background of the deeply felt presence of a sensation, perception, or thought, having an affective quality that ranges along a positive-neutral-negative continuum.

ORIGIN: Middle English feling, from felen to feel + -inge, -ing -ing (alteration of -inde, -ende). First Known Use: 12th century (as noun) 14th century (as adjective).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /foɹm/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Form

Special Use: in the context of this book, a “form” is the particular way in which something actual exists. It refers to the visible shape or relational configuration of something as it autogenously changes coherently over its processual informing. It is the abstract ideal of the possible ontogenesis of an organism; the particular way in which some natural thing endures or appears for a spell; the essential nature of a species, or kind of natural thing.

ORIGIN: Middle English: from Old French forme (noun), fo(u)rmer (verb, from Latin formare ‘to form’), both based on Latin forma ‘a mold or form’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɡoʊ.ləm/

Found in Jewish legend, a golem is a clay figure brought to life by magic. Today, a golem is someone resembling the legendary kind, such as an automaton, or a blockhead. To wit, a golem is the product of the conceptual imagination of a shallow thinker.

ORIGIN: late 19th century: from Yiddish goylem, from Hebrew gōlem ‘shapeless mass’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Great Responsiveness Meditation:

Great Responsiveness Meditation is the practice of Avalokitasvara as described in the Surangama Sutra, as well as similar practices also using Inner Spontaneous Sound, which are the subject of this book, Tranquillity’s Secret (the relevant sections of the Surangama Sutra are included in Volume 3, The Way of Tradition).

You can read some general information about the meditation practice itself in Tranquillity's Secret in the Overview of the Practices article found in Volume 4, The Way of Meditation. For a detailed description of Avalokitasvara's meditation practice, please read the Great Responsiveness Meditation article which is also in The Way of Meditation

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /hɛkˈsiː.ə.tiː/
noun (medieval scholastic philosophy)

Refers to the quality that is inferred when we point at something and say “this.” It is, Duns Scotus explained, a quality, or “mode of being” through which a thing is or becomes an individual. Haecceity is a person’s or object’s thisness. 

ORIGIN: From Latin haecceitas, “thisness.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /haɪˈpɒstətaɪz/

Hypostatize means that you are treating or representing something abstract (not real) as a concrete reality. We do this, for example, when we distinguish the duration of knowing a direct lived event from the contents of the event “itself,” assert that this abstracted aspect of the experience is a real thing, and then call it “consciousness.”

ORIGIN: From Greek hypostatos substantially existing, from hyphistasthai + English -ize or -ise

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɪmənənt/

Existing or operating within; intrinsic.

ORIGIN: Mid 16th century: from late Latin immanent- ‘remaining within’, from in- ‘in’ + manere ‘remain’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /im ˈspɪə.ɹɪəns/
noun (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Imperience

The directly lived event which has affected us — it is the deeply felt presence of that which we perceive, think, emote, embody, remember and intuit, arising as the informing of phenomena. This is an immediate cognizance (recognition and direct knowing) without the mediation of our conceptual understanding. Note that ‘presence’ is different than meaning, or character, or even identification. Normally, these imperiences are swiftly apperceived into our conceptual understanding as our experience. For further information see Biphasic Perception.

ORIGIN: From Latin from in- “in” or “within,” + -peritus, “experienced” or “tested.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪnˈfɔɹm/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Inform

Special Use: While this word has a modern meaning of ‘giving facts or information’, in this work its meaning is recast back to its original etymological sense in the 14th Century of giving material form to something, or to make known in an actual sense, rather than a conceptual oneInformation is the proper name of the process of informing.

ORIGIN: 14th Century Middle English, from Anglo-French enformer, from Latin informare, from in- + forma“form.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Inner Spontaneous Sound:

IPA: /ˈɪnɚ + spɑnˈteɪ.ni.əs + saʊnd/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Inner Spontaneous Sound

“Inner Spontaneous Sound” describes a type of meditation support that has been used in meditation practices within many wisdom traditions. Specifically, this category of autogenous sound presents spontaneously and continuously within the mind with neither a condition of external stimulus, nor any other physical cause. They become apparent when thoughts are stilled, or in the silence between thoughts. These autogenous sounds differ from perceived sounds, which are conditioned or physically caused by external events.

Because all sound arises solely within the mind — which is the catch-all term for all that is informed by responsive naturing it is important to clarify one’s understanding of sound, in order to comprehend the particular character of this meditation support.

Instead of understanding sound as an external physical phenomenon that we directly perceive, we must instead see it as being a mental response that arises in one of two ways: The first occurs whenever a physical vibratory condition that we can sense exists inside of our body (proprioception), or outside of our body (perception). These are what we normally conceive of as sound. The second, and more interesting way for meditation, is a mental resonance of the naturing of our body and its ongoing life processes, such as that of our sense organs’ processing (‘sensing’) the external or internal conditions mentioned above, as well as our thoughts and emotions — all of which have associated processes in the brain, so that these mental resonances are arising autogenously and ‘alongside of’ the on-going naturing of the body.

The resonances of the naturing of these physical processes — which include even those processes down at the quantum level — can be imagined, without ascribing too much interpretation that may conflict with any of the spiritual doctrines about these sounds within the various wisdom traditions, as the circular ripples of water that appear as a fish breaks the surface of the water to leap out of it, and then also as the ripples that are caused when the fish once more falls back into the water, to disappear into its depths. Both sets of ripples continuing and overlapping for some time after the fish has gone.

The following is a list of synonyms for Inner Spontaneous Sound from various wisdom traditions and source (in alphabetical order):

  • “Abstract Sound” (see below: sawt-e-sarmad) — In “The Mysticism of Sound and Music,” by Hazrat Inayat Khan
  • “Astral Sound”
  • “Anāhata Nāda” (unstruck/uncaused sound) — in “The Practice of Nada Yoga,” by Baird Hersey
  • “Dharma Sound of the Diamond Samadhi” — in “The Surangama Sutra” (The Buddhist Bible,” Edited by Dwight Goddard, pg 258)
  • “Chönyid kyi rangdra” (natural/spontaneous sound of Dharmata) — in Tibetan Bardo teachings
  • "Dharmata Swayambhu Nada" (Self-arising Sound of the Dharmata) — in A Gift From The Lady in the Brilliant Expanse
  • “Divine Tremoring” — in Sant Mat tradition
  • “Eternal Sound” — in “The Practice of Nada Yoga,” by Baird Hersey
  • “Holy Stream of Sound” — In Essenes tradition (found in “The Teachings of the Elect”)
  • “Inner sacred sound”
  • “Inner Sound”
  • “Music of the Spheres” — In Pythagorean tradition (ancient Greek)
  • “Nada-Brahman”
  • “Omkara Dhvarni” — According to the shastras, Omkara dhvani was the first primordial sound that permeated the universe.
  • “Primordial Sound”
  • “Resonance of Emptiness” — His Holiness the Dalai Lama, New York City, NY September 2005, from: The Yoga Method of Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion
  • “Sawt-e-sarmad” — in “The Mysticism of Sound,” Hazrat Inayat Khan, Shambhala Dragon Editions, 1996
  • “Sacred Sound”
  • “Shabda” and “Shabda Brahman”
  • “Sound of Creation”
  • “Sound of Silence” — in “Inner Listening — Meditation on the Sound of Silence,” by Ajahn Amaro
  • “Soundless Sound”
  • “Thunder of Silence”
  • “Transcendental Sound”
  • “Unborn Sound”
  • “Unstruck Sound”
  • “Vajra Sound” — Erik Pema Kunsang teaching on Avalokitasvara’s practice. First used by Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche
  • “Word of God” — “Meditation can be a helpful tool in spiritual overcoming and growth. It involves concentrating one’s thoughts on the Word of God” (Psalms 119:99).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Inseparable Coherence:

IPA: /in.ˈsɛ.p(ə).ɹə.bl + /koʊˈhɪɚ ɑ̃s/
noun phrase (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Inseparable Coherence

Not separate, incapable of being separated, disjoined, or quantified, not even as not-many, nor One. Systematic or methodical essential consistency.

ORIGIN: Inseparable — 14th century Middle English, from Latin inseparabilis, from in- not + separabilis separable + Coherence systematic or logical consistency—  from Middle French cohérence, from Latin cohaerentia, from cohaerent-, cohaerens (present participle of cohaerēre) + -ia.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɪntəlɛkt/

Special Use: Intellect is the canosis of knowing, in a conceptual way, using keen insight, investigation, contemplation, and logical inference.  

ORIGIN: 14th Century Middle English, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin intellectus, from intellegere to perceive, understand.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪnˈtɛləd͡ʒəbl̩/

Capable of being understood via intellect

ORIGIN: 14th Century Middle English, from Latin intelligibilis, from intellegere, to perceive, understand.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɛ̃.tʁo.ʁal/

Of or relating to sound reception and perception by each ear considered separately.

ORIGIN: From Latin inter- “between, among” + auris “ear” + -al.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪn.ˈtɹɪn.zɪk/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Intrinsic

Belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing.

NOTE: "Intrinsic" is defined as “belonging to the essential nature of a thing,” whereas "inherent" is defined as “involved in the constitution or essential character of something.” The difference is subtle, and these two words are frequently seen as synonymous. However, the Latin derivation of each makes it clear that there was a difference between them: inherent is to hang on something, adhere to something, stick to something, (Latin inhaerens); whereas, intrinsic means within, or remaining within, and thus immanent (Latin intrinsecus, "within").

ORIGIN: French intrinsèque internal, from Late Latin intrinsecus, from Latin, adverb, inwardly; akin to Latin intra within.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɪntro-səˈsɛp-tʃən/

Special Use: The act or process of receiving directly within.

ORIGIN: From Latin intro, “within, inside,” + suscipere, “to receive”.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


noun (Sanskrit)

Pure awareness that is free of conceptual encumbrances; a cognitive event which is recognized immediately — without the mediation of our conceptual understanding. Knowledge that is inseparable from the total experience of reality. In Tibetan Buddhism, it is contrasted with vijñāna which is a moment of divided knowing. See Biphasic Perception.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /noʊ/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Know

Special Use: To know is not a passive activity, but in all cases is a productive activity. Which is to say, to know is to do, or to make something. This is clear, for example, when someone asks you if you understand how to do something, like break dance, or to show how the probability that photons will reflect or pass through a glass surface is calculated in Quantum Electrodynamics theory. Usually, they won’t just accept your assertion that you know how to do it.  They will demand that you prove it, by doing it. To know is the performative ability (canosis) to do or to make something.  So a statement like: “our experience is known by us, and that implies something known” takes on a completely new meaning. 

For further explanation of this, see the article “Understanding Experience” in Book 1 of Tranquillity’s Secret: The Way of Unsaying.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈlɪmən(ə)l/

  1. Relating to a transitional or initial stage of a process;
  2. Occupying a position at, or on both sides of, a boundary or threshold.

ORIGIN: From Latin limen, limin- “threshold” + -al.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


| ˈmʌhʌ ˈkəru̇ˌnä |
noun (Pali/Sanskrit)

In Pali “great responsiveness” (or “great compassion”) is called “mahakaruna.” “Karuna” is the impulse, rather than desire,  to remove harm and suffering from others. However, this karuṇā is “maha,” or Great Karuna. It is the responsive compassion of all the Buddhas, who are without any self-centered concern, and which is embodied as the bodhisattva Avalokitasvara (“He who hears the cries of the world”). 

It can be characterized as omninclusive loving compassion. Compassion is said to become ‘great’ only when, through proper training of the mind, such an altruistic aspiration becomes spontaneous and no longer requires any conscious effort for its arising. The measure of having realized such a state is that one spontaneously feels a sense of intimacy and compassion towards all others, with the same degree of commitment and intensity that one feels towards one’s most beloved.

Contrast this with the more familiar Pali term: “metta,” used in the conjunction: “metta-bhavana,” which is the desire to bring about the well-being and happiness of others, often called “loving kindness.” 

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Mental Clarity:

IPA: /ˈmɛn.təl + ˈklæɹ.ɪ.ti/
noun phrase (protologism)

One’s unwavering attentional focus and attenuation of conceptual thought.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈmɛt.ə kɑɡˈnɪʃ.ən/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Metacognition

Special Use: Metacognition is not intelligence, it is a higher-order awareness and understanding of what we are doing — as we are doing it. This includes the ability to be aware of our thought-process in such a way that we become immediately aware that we are mentally constructing magical thoughts — whether they are magical in the sense of being conclusions unsupported by facts, or magical in the sense of creating relations of cause-and-effect that only seem to hold together because the meta-evident missing links in their causal chain have been pushed out of sight. It is the faculty of metacognition that allows us to see clearly when our thoughts, motivations, desires, ideas, and actions, are incoherent, even though we may think they are the most sublime creation ever borne of man.

ORIGIN: Middle English cognicioun “comprehension, ability to comprehend,” borrowed from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French cognicion “knowledge, jurisdiction,” borrowed from Latin cognitiōn-cognitiō “act of getting to know, comprehension, investigation,” from cogni-, variant stem of cognōscere “to get to know, acquire knowledge of, become acquainted with, investigate” (from co- CO- + gnōscere, nōscere “to get to know,” inchoative derivative from Indo-European *ǵneh3-, *ǵṇh3- “to know, recognize”) + -tiōn-, -tiō, suffix of action nouns + META.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈmɛt.ə nɔ.e ɪk/
Adjective (protologism)

Of, or relating to, a transformative change of heart/mind, especially a spiritual conversion.

ORIGIN: Greek, from metanoiein to change one’s mind, repent, from meta- + noein to think, from nous mind + -ic.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /maɪnd/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Mind

Special Use: Mind is the totality of all pronoumenal imperiences, which are recognized impersonally in the first phase of biphasic perception, as well as the inferentially developed experiences that are the result of the apperception of those imperiences, which is the second phase. What is not mind are the propriogestæ which are actually informed, and which serve as the basis of all of the above perceptions, bodily sensations, feelings, and thoughts, as are within the repertoire of the particular sæculum. 

The distinction being made is based upon that which can be cognized and that which cannot. To understand this, one must remember that there is no time and no entities in this paradigm — there is only the non-durational activity of responsive naturing and the impersonal recognition of the propriogestæ — which are the actual state of affairs. But these ‘affairs’ are completely ephemeral, and never anything enduring. The felt duration in each moment, which is the recognition of the coherent continuity in each reconfiguration, is a constructed being, in the same way that our perception of fluid motion in films are actually nothing more than flashing images that replace each other before the prior image is inferentially processed.

The sæculum is not conscious in the way that we normally conceive ‘consciousness’ to operate, but is only cognizant of the immediate act of having natured a particular formal configuration. Simply put, it is a verb, not a noun, and its only constraint is maintaining the coherent continuity of its formal activity. 

The rest, properly understood, is pure mystery, because these are not illusions, not enduring matter, and not ideas — there are no substances (in philosophical parlance). Even though there is nothing permanent in any sense — the sæculum being simply processual activity — still, the appearances show up and seem to abide for a spell. There is no enduring matter, still, falling under a moving bus will have the expected repercussions. And though there is no mind entity, still, mental events occur. All of that is constructed being by the omnintrinsic and cognizant naturing that is both source and destination — that is us. 

ORIGIN: Old English gemynd “memory, thought,” of Germanic origin, from an Indo-European root meaning “revolve in the mind, think,” shared by Sanskrit manas and Latin mens “mind.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈmiːsəʊ dɪˈmɒt.ɪk/

Hatred of the people.

ORIGIN: From mīso-, comb. form of mīseîn “hate,” mîsos “hatred” + demos, “the people or populace,” Gr. dêmos.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈneɪ.t͡ʃɚ ɪŋ/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Naturing

Special Use: The term “naturing” has a long and illustrious history within philosophy, where it is seen to be nothing other than “Nature” doing its thing. That is not my intent for this term. 

Rather, the use of the present participle term “naturing” is a reflection of the absolute absence of any entity to be found within, or ‘behind’, the actual appearances that manifest as this world, our bodies, and everything that happens. What is found to be veridically real is not an entity in any sense, but only activity.

Thus, the standard formulation of the expression “Nature naturing” often used in Philosophy does not apply. There is no “Nature” that natures. What, after all, would be the source of this Nature’s nature? 

There is only the spontaneous, continuous, and unending activity that “naturing” denotes. This activity is the omnintrinsic informing of all formal appearances, and this Totality is an inseparable coherence.

This naturing activity, which we can only know through the evidence of the formal appearances — because they are intelligible can be seen to have three indivisible aspects:

  (a) That there are no entities involved, because that which is real can only be said to be the active principle of the essential naturing of the formal appearances within this Totality, and that naturing cannot be some ‘one’ among the formal appearances.

(b) That this active principle is cognizant — because that is the essential nature of this activity: knowing through the genesis of form (sciomorphogenesis). Cognizance is neither awareness, nor consciousness, as typically understood. This cognizance is an impersonal recognition of what is done — denoted as propriogestæ (own accomplishments).

(c) That this naturing is responsive because there is no time for causal change to occur in — this naturing is non-durational reconfiguration of what is actual, which happens as an indeterminate spontaneous response to current facts, latent coherent ontogenetic potentials of actualized forms, the contextual extant possibilities of all entangled ontogenetic forms, as well as the affective intents (attention, intention, and desire, if any, depending upon the capacities made possible by each form). This excludes any causal mechanism or actor (beyond the combined affective intents), such as that found at the heart of Determinism, Materialism, Physicalism, Pantheism, and Intentional Design, and all of their derivatives.

Note that the intelligibility of this naturing is only possible because our thoughts and reasoning are similarly natured, and it is the activity of responsive naturing and its cognizance of what is natured that is the repository of all forms, including those that we designate as a priori knowledge and intuitions of logical and mathematical truths. Thus, mentality is actualized within a brain by naturing the thoughts within it. This overcomes the paradoxical impossibility of our brain thinking our own thoughts because that would necessarily entail that we know what a thought will be before thinking it — thoughts are responses to our affective intents, as mentioned in the previous paragraph. This means that naturing is not Panpsychism, nor Idealism, as both experiences and thinking are at the level of an individual actualized being; but the underlying source of both is not a mind-entity, but rather, responsive naturing which is not an entity, as mind is usually formulated to be. See, however, my definition of what “mind” does denote.

Going a step further, the evident fact that the salient character of this activity is coherent order — and not chaos — shows that this activity of responsive naturing can be and should be seen, not as a result of a primordial coin-toss selecting which way it would go — order or chaos — but as an ever-present concern to nurture and care for all ontogenetic forms that appear throughout this manifested universe. This is not a soteriological activity, nor is it teleological — it is simply the axiomatic concern displayed by the activity of Responsive Naturing. After all, asserting that naturing could bring chaos would be oxymoronic, just as asserting that order arises from chaos is.

Finally, this naturing can be understood to be a divine creation — however, it is an evident, axiomatic fact without any need for recourse to a divine origin. The difference between these two understandings is a personal choice, without any prejudice.

ORIGIN: From Latin, naturāns, from present active participle of naturō. First used in 9th Century French in phrase nature naturante in Château d’Amour by Grossetête, in 866 CE, in phrase natura naturans by the translators of Averroes in the Twelve Century CE, and as used by Spinoza in his “Ethics, Demonstrated in Geometrical Order” in 1677 CE 

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /nəʊˈmɒləd͡ʒikəl/

Relating to or denoting certain principles, such as laws of nature, that are neither logically necessary nor theoretically explicable, but are simply taken as true.

ORIGIN: mid 19th century: from Greek nomos ‘law’ + -logical.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈnɑn ɹæʃ(ə)nəl/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Nonrational

Special Use: Nonrational is not the opposite of rational, it is otherwise than rational — but certainly not irrational, because that is different, bringing, as it does, a certain flavor of both the emotional and unreasonable, and a certain incoherency or obscurity of thought. So, of the three concepts, "nonrational" has no clear common semantic referent. This lack of referent is the result of the exclusion of phenomena by our cognitive frame of mechanical materialism, such that, they are not even considered to be phenomena, but merely various phantasms and distortions  of our perception or imagination. So there is nothing there to see, nothing that needs a rational account. It is only when we insist that these excluded occurrences are factual that they become nonrational. Our cognitive frame is rigid and refuses to allow an account to be given for any nonrational occurrence. Because we do not, for the most part, allow facts of our interior life — those events that are not susceptible to being reduced to interactions of matter or its modifications — they are simply ignored. This leaves us bewildered as to how to explain these rejected phenomena that we do experience in our lives — comprising most of our interior experiences.

ORIGIN: From Middle English non- not, and Middle English racional, from Anglo-French racionel, from Latin rationalis, from ration-, ratio.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɒmˈnɪ nˈkluːsɪv/
adjective (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Omninclusive

Omni-inclusive, or simply “omninclusive,” means considering all — the totality — of potentials, possibilities and any affective weighting of them, in the informing of each reconfiguration of the actual state of affairs of all entangled beings. This means equal concern for all, because no distinction is made between individuals, not even that of oneself.

ORIGIN: from Latin omnis‘all’ + Medieval Latin inclusivus, from Latin inclusus + -ivus -ive

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɒmˈnɪ n.ˈtɹɪn.zɪk/
adjective (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Omnintrinsic

Omni-intrinsic, or simply “omnintrinsic,” means that which is intrinsic to all universally, rather than that which is intrinsic to one. That is, that which is omnintrinsic is the unity from which multiplicity comes. It is not just a common trait of the multiplicity, but is, rather, the source of the evident multiplicity.

ORIGIN: omni: from Latin omnis ‘all’ + late 15th century (in the general sense ‘interior, inner’): from French intrinsèque, from late Latin intrinsecus, from the earlier adverb intrinsecus ‘inwardly, inwards’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈwʌn/
noun (mystical)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary One

Special Use: The use of the term “One’” or more frequently, “The One,” in Mystical writings, and writings about Mysticism, is an unfortunate necessity when reasoning within an understanding based upon concepts and inferences. The clearest explanation for exactly why this is problematic is, in my experience, that of Plotinus, the 3rd Century philosopher and founder of Neoplatonism. His is the best because, while it uses rational logic in his explanation, it is based in a direct insight, or contemplative intuition, into the difficulties that lead us to use that word or phrase. 

While I have created neologisms, such as the adjectives “omnintrinsic” and “omninclusive”, as well as the noun phrase “inseparable coherence,” I bring Plotinus’ plaintive ‘stream of conscious’ explanation to the attention of those, whose own understanding is not yet emptied of the structural limitations of conceptual thought — its kenosis. Even the idea of unity, leaves open the possible misunderstanding that it implies that unity comes from multiplicity, rather than the more veridical understanding that unity is that from which multiplicity comes:

“Since the substance which is generated [from the One] is form – one could not say that what is generated from that source is anything else – and not the form of some one thing but of everything, so that no other form is left outside it, the One must be without form. But if it is without form it is not a substance; for a substance must be some one particular thing, something, that is, defined and limited; but it is impossible to apprehend the One as a particular thing: for then it would not be the principle, but only that particular thing which you said it was. But if all things are in that which is generated [from the One], which of the things in it are you going to say that the One is? Since it is none of them, it can only be said to be beyond them. But these things are beings, and being: so it is ‘beyond being’. This phrase ‘beyond being’ does not mean that it is a particular thing – for it makes no positive statement about it – and it does not say its name, but all it implies is that it is ‘not this’. But if this is what the phrase does, it in no way comprehends the One: it would be absurd to seek to comprehend that boundless nature; for anyone who wants to do this has put himself out of the way of following at all, even the least distance, in its traces; but just as he who wishes to see the intelligible nature will contemplate what is beyond the perceptible if he has no mental image of the perceptible, so he who wishes to contemplate what is beyond the intelligible will contemplate it when he has let all the intelligible go; he will learn that it is by means of the intelligible, but what it is like by letting the intelligible go. But this “what it is like” must indicate that it is ‘not like’: for there is no ‘being like’ in what is not a ‘something’. But we in our aporia do not know what we ought to say, and are speaking of what cannot be spoken, and give it a name because we want to indicate it to ourselves as best we can. But perhaps this name ‘One’ contains [only] a denial of multiplicity. This is why the Pythagoreans symbolically indicated it to each other by the name Apollo, in the negation of the multiple. But if the One – name and reality expressed – was to be taken positively it would be less clear than if we did not give it a name at all…” (Plotinus “Enneads” V.5.6, Loeb, pp 173-174)

ORIGIN: Middle English oon, on, from Old English ān.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɔn.tɔ  d͡ʒɛ.nə.səs/

The development of an individual organism or anatomical or behavioral feature from the earliest stage to maturity.

ORIGIN: late 19th century: from Greek ōnont- ‘being’ + genesis ‘birth’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈpæɹ.ə.daɪm/ 

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Paradigm

Special Use: a paradigm is a clear archetype or framework for some pattern of activity, whether in some specific type or field of activity, or in one’s general understanding of ‘the world’. This is often synonymously called a ‘worldview.’ In practical life, it points to how each of us understands the world, ourselves, and our life, and thus, how we comport ourselves. In scientific studies, it takes a more formal meaning as a philosophical or theoretical framework which structures how and what is studied, and, as well, how the results are interpreted. At the time of this writing, the dominant paradigm is that of physical causality, thus only material things exist and whatever happens are caused by the fields and forces that Science has theorized acting upon the material things in determinant ways (except for quantum mechanics which operates differently). The novel paradigm that this work presents is responsive naturing, which operates in the same way at all ‘levels’ of activity. In this novel paradigm, neither time nor entities exist, and the dichotomy between mind and matter, spiritual and material, are seen as a limiting cognitive frame, limiting our ability to see clearly what is happening. 

ORIGIN: late 15th Century: from Late Latin paradigma, from Greek paradeigma, pattern, model, example, from paradeiknynai to show side by side, compare, exhibit, from para- + deiknynai to show.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /pɚˈsiv/

To become conscious of, to become aware of, to attain an understanding of. 

ORIGIN: 14th Century Middle English perceiven, from Old French perceivre, percevoir, from Latin percipere to take possession of, obtain, receive, perceive, from per- prefix denoting completion or perfection + -cipere (from capere to seize, take). 

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /pʌɪˌiːzəʊ.ɪlɛkˈtrɪsɪti/

Electric polarization in a substance (especially certain crystals) resulting from the application of mechanical stress. Piezoelectric substances are able to convert mechanical signals (such as sound waves) into electrical signals, and vice versa. They are therefore widely used in microphones, phonograph pickups, and earphones, and also to generate a spark for igniting gas.

ORIGIN: late 19th century: from Greek piezein (press, squeeze)  + electricity.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈplɛnəm/

Special Use: In this work the plenum of responsive naturing is the totality of all formed sæcula that are actualized (natured) now.

ORIGIN: Late 17th century: from Latin, literally “full space,” neuter of plenus “full.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈpoʊt(ə)nteɪt/
verb [with object]

Special Use: Increase the likelihood of certain possibilities.

ORIGIN: Mid 17th century: from Latin potentia“potency” + -ate (verb forming suffix).

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /pʁə.ka.ʁja/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Precariat

Special Use: “Precariat” is a portmanteau created by the British economist Guy Standing merging “precarious” and “proletariat.” It was created to indicate people suffering from “precarity,” or the condition of existence without predictability or security. The intended meaning is economic insecurity, and thus, living with financial unpredictability, but we today are all faced with a new precarious existence without the possibility of returning to any previous kind of normal — at least not for the duration of our lifetimes, nor that of our children and grandchildren.

You can see this in the weather, as much as in our troubled economic system — and most clearly in the ruining of our democratic systems of government, which are now trivialized, increasingly impotent to serve our needs, and repeatedly hacked by powerful extremists creating a looming danger to our very lives. Note, that “proletariat” comes from the Latin proletarius, meaning “producing offspring,” and the modern use in Marxist theory to indicate the class of wage-earners was only slightly changed by Guy Standing in his portmanteau to indicate those today who specifically lack any kind of job security.

For our needs here, I wish to go back towards a less restrictive meaning, closer to the original Latin sense, that includes as a class all of us that produce, as opposed to consume, life — and in this case “life” refers to the very basis of our ability to exist, if not thrive in this world, rather than simply producing offspring as in the original Latin meaning. This specifically creates a distinction between those that destroy the means of life via ecocide, and those that nurture life through their way of being in the world.

ORIGIN: 1980s: portmanteau of ‘precarious’ and ‘proletariat’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /pɹoʊ nuːmənɒn əl/
adjective (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Pronoumenal

The original Greek word noomenon, which Kant used in his philosophy to denote a thing-in-itself — giving it its present form of noumenon — was defined by him as an object that is conceived by reason alone, so that it is thinkable, but is not known via the senses. Examples of such an object were God and the soul. The meaning of pronoumenal indicates that which comes before inferential reasoning in perception. So it points to that which is recognized nonconceptually in the first phase of biphasic perception, during the imperience of that which is immediately recognized

ORIGIN: pro- (prior to) from Middle English, from Old French, from Latin, from Greek pro + noumenon from Greek nooumenon (that which is conceived, thought), from neuter of present passive participle of noein. (see below).

NB: While the modern understanding of the Greek word noein tends to focus on one of the meanings of the word in Ancient Greece — to conceive or think — it had a much deeper meaning which is the focus of its use in this work: Peter Kingsley, a philologist of Ancient Greek who studied the writing of Parmenides, and its contemporary meaning, points out: "this one word referred as much to the act of perceiving as to the act of thinking: to direct, intuitive perception as well as perception through and with our senses. And, beyond even that, it described exactly what nowadays we would refer to as consciousness or awareness.” (“Reality,” Peter Kingsley, The Golden Sufi Center, 2003, pg 77 )

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌpɹoʊ.pɹi.oʊˈsɛp.ʃən/

Cognizance of, being aware of, receiving stimuli produced within the organism of, the position and movement of the body.

ORIGIN: 20th century: English neologism from Latin: proprio- (from proprius own, particular) + by receptive (from Middle English recepcion, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French reception, from Latin reception, receptio, from receptus, past participle of recipere, to take back, receive) + ion.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌpɹoʊ.pɹi.oʊˈɡəˈʃtɛ/
noun (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Propriogest

Literally, “own achievements,” but note that ‘own’ here refers to the perspectival nature of all imperiences which are limited to the responsive activity of an informed sæculum, and does not imply an ownership identification with that activity, as that is naturally absent from all imperiences. Instead, the ‘achievements’ are the recognized activity of imperiences before the inferential reasoning about the imperience’s contents during its apperception into our understanding.

Thus, propriogestae are the actions that are recognized as they are performed in each reconfiguration by responsive naturing.

For further information see the article: “The Axiom of Great Responsiveness” in Book 2, The Way of Contemplation.

ORIGIN: Latin: proprio- (from proprius own, particular) + gestae (achievements)

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈkwɑːleɪ/
noun (plural qualia) Philosophy

The internal and subjective component of sense perceptions, arising from stimulation of the senses by phenomena.

ORIGIN: Late 17th century: from Latin, neuter of qualis “of what kind.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ɹætiˌɑsiˈneɪʃn̩/
verb [no object] formal

Form judgments by a process of logic; reasoning without the support of intuition.

ORIGIN: Mid 17th century: from Latin, ratiocinat- “deliberated, calculated,” from the verb ratiocinari, from ratio.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɹiːəl/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Real

Special Use: To be real, something must be non-contingent, necessary, simple, and evidenced. For further clarification of the meaning of real, and its unique, rather than synonymous meaning in relation to the words ‘being’ and ‘exist’, read Real Versus Being Versus Exist.

ORIGIN: 14th Century Middle English, real, relating to things (in law), from Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin & Late Latin; Medieval Latin realis relating to things (in law), from Late Latin, real, from Latin res thing, fact; akin to Sanskrit rayi property.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Real vs Being vs Exist:

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Real vs Being vs Exist

Special Use:  In English, what is real is that which exists, and what exists is that which is real. For example, in the unabridged Merriam-Webster dictionary, in the closest definition to our needs here, “real” has the meaning: “actually existing, occurring, or present in fact; having an objective independent existence; relating to, based on, or concerned with individual objectively existent things in the physical world.” 

In the same dictionary “exist” has the meaning: “to have actual or real being, whether material or spiritual; have being in space and time; to continue to be; maintain being.” 

And again in the same dictionary, “being” has the meaning: “the quality or state of existing; material or immaterial existence; something that exists as an actuality or entity in time or space or in idea or matter; conscious or mortal existence.”

As is clear in these definitions, “real,” “exist” and “being” are synonymous and are used to define each other in a circular fashion so that they do not have an actual definition that does not include the word or its synonym, and thus we must rely on a contextual intuition for each use of these words, since circular definitions are meaningless. For example, the suggestion that something “spiritual” can exist in the definition of “exist” is completely undermined by the implicit assertion that it is some thing, which the word spiritual directly asserts it is not when it gives the word “spiritual” the meaning “of the nature of spirit rather than material.”

But there are clues that can help us find a useful and well-defined meaning for each of these words.

In the same dictionary, there are two alternate definitions for “real” that can help us: “that which is neither derivative nor dependent; necessarily existent; not contingent” and “that is fundamental, intrinsic, and ultimate.” They do not give these same meanings to “exist,” so we can use them to create an exact definition for both “real” and “exist” so that they are not synonymous. 

Why is this necessary? Because these definitions assume that the world is material only, and thus, what is actual exists and is real because there is nothing other than material existence. But what if that is not the case, as this work argues? 

I realized that “real” has to mean something completely different than “exist” but not as an opposite, rather, something other than exist. What I finally arrived at, after decades of contemplation, is that to be real, something must be non-contingent, necessary, simple, and evidenced:

Non-contingent, means that it cannot depend on anything else. So what is real cannot become, be caused, or be created, for example, and it certainly cannot depend on you experiencing it for its reality. 

Necessary means what it says. What is real must be necessary — like a motor in a car, or a charge in its battery — or nothing works. What is real cannot be an option that one can take or leave, something gaudy, like an old hood ornament, to set our car apart from those of others. 

Simple means it is not a collection of parts; it is not a union of aspects — it is not structured in any way. The reason for this is that if a thing is not simple, then it depends on something else to cause it, or make it, to be, and so it is contingent. Therefore, what is real is necessarily nondual. This does not mean it is one thing, nor any thing at all; and it is certainly not a bunch of things all put together, the way we build a house. Rather, it is that which intrinsically encompasses (i.e., is omninstrinsic to) all things, but which is not any of those particular things.

Evidenced means there must be actual evidence for the assertions that the real is non-contingent, necessary, and simple. “Actual” in the sense I am using it, is a synonym of “exist,” but note that in my case, I am not asserting a direct correlation between “real” and “exist.” I am instead asserting that what exists is necessarily dependent or contingent upon, and thus founded — in some way — upon that which is real, so that the evidence for the real is necessarily that which exists. If what is asserted to be real is not directly evidenced — if it is simply inferred, imagined, hypostatized, or hypothesized, then it is not real.

To exist, in this context, means that the pronoumenon of an imperience is actual. And that is all I am saying, having already seen that the contents of each imperience are ephemeral and certainly lack any intrinsic self-existence — that is, they are not entities.

So, what is real? The real is necessarily none of the existing things that are dependent, contingent, or inferred, imagined, hypostatized, hypothesized, etc., but is evidenced by all of that. The real, which is that about which nothing can be truly said, is the origin of all that exists.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌɹɛkəɡˈnɪʃən/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Recognition

Special Use: As used in this book, recognition comprises knowing or feeling that an occurrent event is informing as the coherent continuity of that which it is a response to. Since there is only Now (which is not a time) for beings to be, there is no before, so this recognition of coherent continuity must be an essential aspect of the naturing that is informing now. This is called sciomorphogenesis — knowing through the generation of form.

ORIGIN: Latin recognition-, recognitio, from recognitus (past participle of recognoscere to recognize, examine, investigate) + -ion-, -io-ion.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈɹɛzənəns/


Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Resonance

Special Use: Sympathetic vibrations within the substratum of responsive naturing of all entangled sæcula of an organism and its ongoing life processes, arising autogenously as mental phenomena of sound. 

Specifically, the attentional process is accompanied by a shrill metallic sound whose pitch and volume directly track attentional focus and concentration, and which is normally identified as ‘tinnitus’. Other life processes are accompanied by subtler ‘Element’ sounds, such as Earth (like infrasound), Water (like flowing water of various types), Fire (like energetic hums), and Air (like the sighing of the wind, especially in a cave). Other events are accompanied by varying characteristic sounds, such as a Kundalini Awakening, which is accompanied by a loud wooden flute-like blast as it occurs.

ORIGIN: Middle French, from Latin resonantia echo, from resonant, resonans, present participle of resonare to echo, resound.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

Responsiveness and Compassion:

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Responsiveness and Compassion

Special Use: Note that here in this text, responsiveness and compassion are distinguished, rather than being just synonymous words. 

Although frequently referred to as compassion, responsiveness is the origin of omninclusive activity, not a motivation for action, as compassion is normally taken to be. 

‘Omninclusive’ means that there are no ego-centric, or self-centered, concerns motivating actions; instead, there is an all-pervasive, and inclusive, responsiveness to the ontogenetic potential, contextual possibilities, and affective feelings, of all beings within the context of each action. This responsiveness has the essential qualities of, concern, empathy, and love. 

In the Pali language “great responsiveness” (which is often mistranslated as “great compassion”) is “mahakaruna.” “Karuna” is the impulse to remove harm and suffering from others. This karuna is “maha,” or Great Karuna. The word "great" refers to the lack of self-centered concern, and its character of being an unmediated impulse to act. 

Mahakaruna is the responsiveness of all the Buddhas, in Buddhism, and its avatar there is the bodhisattva Avalokitasvara (“The one who hears the cries of the world”). Contrast this with the other, more familiar, Pali term “metta,” used in the conjunction: “metta-bhavana,” which is the desire to bring about the well-being and happiness of others, often called “loving kindness.” 

Great Responsiveness is not a psychological character of a being, however. It is, instead, the omnintrinsic substratum within every being that is its life-force, i.e., its sæculum. It is not developed. It is always the unchangeable substratum in all life. The psychological character of a being is manifest in their affective feelings, and different species have different capacities for such feelings. Individuals, to the extent of their capacity, freely choose: what they pay attention to, what their intention is, and what they actually desire. Great Responsiveness responds to each. For more on this, see: Naturing.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈsae̯.ku.lum/
noun (plural sæcula)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Sculum

Special Use: As used in this book, a sæculum is the actual information of the ontogenetic potential of each natured being, arising autogenously. The sæculum is the substratum of the being.

This substratum, which is omnintrinsically within each being, is the formal canosis for each being’s ontogenetic development. Simply put, It is the ontogenetic potential of the being’s form. And the responsive naturing of that form, which is its sæculum, is both the being’s actual lifespan, and its life-force. 

The sæculum is not a self, as it is only the local action of the omnintrinsic responsive naturing of all beings, which is impersonal. 

The sæculum impersonally recognizes the ontogenetic potential and contextual conditions of the being, as weighted by the sæculum’s affective attentional focus, and the intention and desire that focus generates, and reconfigures the actualized being in context

This reconfiguration is the information of the sæculum — its ‘being’ — which is not an entity, but rather, an activity. The sæculum recognizes that information as propriogestæ, and repeats this process again in a processual informing

This process does not consist of state changes. It is an immediate reconfiguration that occurs in such a way that it is 'all at once' actual. It is not a process that occurs over time. 

The essential character of this processual information, which is intelligible, is that each momentary ‘state of affairs’ is all there actually is, and it is recognized as the coherent continuity of the sæculum’s being, in context with its own potential and possibilities, as well as any other sæcula it is entangled with, in sæcula saeculorum

It is, as a phenomenologist might describe it: always already the case. There is no change over some duration of time. 

This coherent continuity is the plexus of the relations of the interdependency of the recognized reconfigurations of each sæculum’s information. This recognition is the cognizance of this naturing. It is the felt duration of our lives, in fact, the felt duration of all our experiences. Simply put, it is what we are conscious of. 

Note: A self, on the other hand, is a mental construction, natured responsively as above, like all mental phenomena are. It arises naturally in response to certain cues. See the chapter  “Why We Continue To Be Confused About Consciousness” in Book 2, The Way of Contemplation.

ORIGIN: From Latin (breed, generation, age), akin to Welsh hoedl lifetime, Lithuanian sėkla seed, Latin serere to sow.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /seɪ.piˈɛnt͡ʃəl/
adjective literary

Relating to wisdom.

ORIGIN: Late 15th century: from Old French, or from ecclesiastical Latin sapientialis, from Latin sapientia “wisdom.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈʃi.o mɔɹfoʊ d͡ʒɛ.nə.səs/
noun (protologism)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Sciomorphogenesis

Knowing through the generation of form.

ORIGIN: Neologism from Latin scientia “knowledge, science,” from scire ‘know’ + from Greek morphē “form” + genesis, from the base of gignesthai“be born or produced.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈsɛkjələɹ/

Special Use: Of or relating to the worldly, as distinguished from the spiritual — focusing upon that which is impermanent and mundane.

ORIGIN: Middle English, alteration influenced by Late Latin saecularis of seculer, from Old French, from Late Latin, saecularis secular, worldly, pagan, from Latin, coming or observed once in an age, from saeculum + -aris -ar;

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /soʊˈlɪvəɡənt/

Wandering alone.

ORIGIN: Latin solivagus, from sōlus(“alone”) +‎ vagus (“wandering”) + English -ant “agent.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /stəˈkæstɪk/

Not strictly determined; random; having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically, but may not be predicted precisely. Frequently, such distributions are constrained such that ‘limit values’ can be set so that a certain percentage of occurrences will fall between those values. This is used, for example, in the design of integrated circuits whose components’ operation is not strictly determined.

ORIGIN: Mid 17th century: from Greek stokhastikos, from stokhazesthai “aim at, or guess,” from stokhos “aim.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈsʌb stɹɑː.təm/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Substratum

Normally, a permanent characterless support of properties of a thing or reality.

Special Use: The substratum of each natured being is a sæculum. The sæculum is within the actualized being as its potential ontogenetic structural pattern for its further information, or naturing, as a continuation of this actual being. 

‘Within’ does not mean ‘inside’ as one might expect. It means that the substratum is the intrinsic structural pattern of the being, and the sæculum, being the substratum, produces the coherent continuity of its form via epiphanic reconfigurations. The substratum remains entangled with its own ‘history’, which is present in each reconfiguration. For this reason, each actual configuration is called a vignette

The sæculum is not being natured, the sæculum is naturing the apparent development of its apparent being, and is inseparable from the being — but it is not a ‘soul’, and what is natured is neither ‘material’, nor an ‘idea’. 

A soul is said to exist in another ‘plane’ or ‘realm’ — only briefly ‘inhabiting’ an earthly body; material refers to collections of natured beings, like atoms and molecules of gases congregating together, as dust clouds, piles of dirt, rocks and mountains, etc.; and ideas are merely faint representations of the actual truth. 

What is actual inhabits a space in-between, liminally, that is encompassing the activity of the responsive naturing of this actual form of a particular sæculum — its substratum — and as the formal natured being. The activity of the first unknown and unknowable, until the informations are recognized. The latter is actual. Simply actual.

These sæcula are entangled in deeply-nested recursive organic structural patterns that inform by responsively naturing a coherent response to each prior action, based on the potential ontogenetic developments, the contextual possibilities, and the affective intents (attention, intention, and desire) of each sæculum, as an immediate reconfiguration of each being, being done — in sæcula sæculorum. 

See the entry for Sæculum for further detail.

Listen to  the 14th Century mystic Meister Eckhart’s Sermon Fourteen(b): “Like A Solid Golden Vessel Adorned With Every Precious Stone,” about the difference between being ‘in’ something, and being ‘within’ a spiritual vessel, to get a better understanding of how a substratum is within the natured being of each sæculum: 

A master says, if all mediation were gone between me and this wall, I would be on the wall, but not in the wall. It is not thus in spiritual matters, for the one is always in the other: that which embraces is that which is embraced, for it embraces nothing but itself. This is subtle. He who understands it has been preached to enough.
Every vessel has two properties: it receives and it contains. Spiritual vessels are different from physical vessels. The wine is in the cask, the cask is not in the wine. And the wine is not in the cask as it is in the staves, for if it were in the cask as it is in the staves, we could not drink it. With a spiritual vessel it is different. Whatever is received in that is in the vessel and the vessel in it, and it is the vessel itself. Whatever the spiritual vessel receives, is its own nature.

(Taken from: The Complete Mystical Works of Meister Eckhart, translated and edited by Maurice O'C Walshe, The Crossword Publishing Company, 2009 reissue of 1979, pages 112 & 114 respectively.)

ORIGIN: Medieval Latin, first known use: 1631, from neuter of Latin substratus, past participle of substernere to spread under, strew under, from sub- + sternere to strew.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈtɪn.ɪ.təs/
noun (medical)

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Tinnitus

Tinnitus is a symptom, not a disease, that is theorized to result from a number of underlying causes, although in practice only physical injury is clearly linked. It is the hearing of sound when no external sound (source) is present.

While often described as a ringing, it may also sound like a clicking, hiss or roaring. Rarely, unclear voices or music are heard. The sound may be soft or loud, low pitched or high pitched and appear to be coming from one ear or both. It is the author’s contention that many of the described characters of tinnitus are conflated with the occurrence of inner spontaneous sound, and are not tinnitus symptoms at all.

ORIGIN: mid 19th century: from Latin, from tinnire ‘to ring, tinkle’, of imitative origin.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།

To Wit:

IPA: /tu wɪt/

To Wit literally means “to know” and that was its original meaning. This adverb is used today to mean “that is to say” or “namely” and is often used to enumerate and call attention to particular matters embraced in more general preceding language.

ORIGIN: Middle English to witen, literally, to know. First Known Use: 14th century

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈtrɑnsvɝbəat/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Transverberate

Religious ecstasy; it is a type of altered state of consciousness characterized by greatly reduced external awareness and expanded interior mental and spiritual awareness, frequently accompanied by visions and emotional (and sometimes physical) euphoria. Although the experience is usually brief in time, there are records of such experiences lasting several days or even more, and of recurring experiences of ecstasy during one’s lifetime. A person’s sense of time and space disappear during a religious ecstasy forsaking any senses or physical cognizance in its duration. In Sufism, the term is referred to as wajd and the experience is referred to as either jazbah or majzoobiyat.

ORIGIN: From Latin transverberatus, past participle of transverberare, “to strike or pierce through.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˌʌndɚˈstændɪŋ/
Verb, Adjective, and Noun

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Understanding

Verb: Special Use: To understand, or in its present participle form, understanding, is the process of apperceiving something, whether it be a sense perception, perception of a thought, a feeling, a bodily movement, or speech (a subtype of bodily movement) in a recognition of its similarity to an already natured, that is to say known, pattern of intelligible activity. This is the second phase of biphasic perception.

Adjective: Special Use: To be understanding is to be responsive to a context of being(s).

Noun: Special Use:  The understanding is a hierarchical nexus of patterns of intelligible activity that originate in the process of the recognition of the naturing of all being, which is not two processes — only one process that is inseparably coherent

These patterns are the origin of formal activity, and its result — that is, they are the ontogenetic form of each sæculum, which is the naturing of that particular form. So a sæculum is a unique perspectival process of being that is informing the ontogenetic potential of its form. 

The understanding is the entanglement of these actualized patterns. There is no such thing as a possible pattern. These actualized patterns develop via responsive naturing, which has a certain degree, more or less, of creativity. Thus, novelty comes from both slight creative variation in the repeated naturing of a formal pattern and its intrinsic potential, as well as contextual responses to actual extent conditions, as actualized forms are natured and become entangled within the hierarchical nexus of the understanding. This is the genesis of slight iterative evolution of particular forms, leading to the development of new formal patterns. 

The specific genesis of the creativity spoken of here, is a mystery, but one whose result is intelligibly present — and this genesis cannot be random, for that would undermine the ever-visible constraint of maintaining coherent continuity in all that is natured.

ORIGIN: 12th Century Middle English, from Old English, from understandan to understand + -ing

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /vɝbəaʃən/

The act or action of beating or striking, specifically the impulse or vibration of a body that causes sound.

ORIGIN: Late Latin verberation-verberatio, from Latin verberatus (past participle) + -ion-, -io -ion.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /vəˈɹɪdɪkəl/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Veridical

Special Use: Veridical means conforming, in some useful way, and to some degree , to the truth, and thus, not false, nor illusory. 

Veridical knowledge is intentionally not asserted to be true, since doing so creates a difficulty: if it can be falsified, then it is either the case that “true” is not the truth, or scientific knowledge is little more than dogma, based upon belief. 

Wisdom traditions specifically note that the truth is not conceptually knowable. But that assertion, that it is a truth about conceptual reasoning, should not be a denunciation of conceptual reasoning, for otherwise the statement is meaningless, as the assertion of the Wisdom traditions is presented conceptually. Instead, this statement should be about the intelligibility of the truth. Simply put, the truth is not intelligible in the way that empirical evidence is intelligible.

As well, for any scientific knowledge to be asserted to be true, it must already be true — that is, the scientific method seeks to verify that something is true, but it does not create the truth of the thing — it must already be true for it to be verified to be true. In general, that is not possible to do comprehensively. Thus, such ‘true knowledge’ can only ever be contingently true, as it is contingent on the fallibility of the science practitioners, thus statements that some scientific knowledge is true merely belief.

Finally, to say that some scientific knowledge is contingently true, and some is belief, leaves any assertion that scientific knowledge is true as meaningless.

Therefore, this word, veridical, does not go beyond conformance with the truth, in some useful way, and to some degree.

ORIGIN: Latin veridicus veracious (from verus true + -dicus, from dicere to say) + English -al

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /vɪnˈjɛt/

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Vignette

Special Use: “Vignette” is used in the sense of a brief incident or scene, as in a play or movie, which fades in with a backstory. In this usage, however, the backstory is the posterior and immediately prior actualized configurations and their contextual conditions that the actual configuration was a response to. Each vignette, or scene, corresponds to the actual configuration of a sæculum as this being, that is, as the sæculum's own achievements (propriogestæ). The sæculum is impersonally cognizant of its propriogestæ which are immediately recognized, and together with the backstory of its entangled history, is the felt duration of the vignette – its coherent continuity – of the being's formal ontogenetic informing.

ORIGIN: late Middle English: from French, diminutive of vigne ‘vine’.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /hoʊlnəs/
abstract noun

Tranquillitys Secret Glossary Wholeness

Special Use: Wholeness is an abstracted quality of something, especially of experience, in its use in this book. This quality of not lacking anything, or not being damaged, can refer to two origins: the first is a constructive origin as a unity derived from multiplicity (of parts, qualities, or aspects), or as a multiplicity derived from a simple, unitary, whole. Unity from multiplicity means that we understand certain differences between parts, qualities, or aspects, to be not relevant and so these differences can be overlooked and the unity that is otherwise obscured can be seen, like when we talk about Humans as if all humans were the same with no differences between them, or the human body is a whole that is otherwise obscured by the various physical characteristics, and inner arrangement of a particular ‘body’. Multiplicity from unity means that we can distinguish parts, qualities, or aspects of a simple unitary whole and reason about those parts, qualities, or aspects as if they were separate from the whole, even though we know that in reality they are not and cannot exist apart from the whole, like when we talk about our ten fingers. If we are merely distinguishing parts, qualities, or aspects of a simple unitary whole, we should never believe that the result of our reasoning about them can ever tell us the truth, either about the parts, qualities, or aspects, or about the whole.

ORIGIN: Middle English hoolnesse, from hool entire, whole + -nesse -ness.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /ˈwɪtɪŋli/

Being intentionally done, and in the sense of being fully cognizant of what is being done. This is a synonym for the modern term, “mindfully.”

ORIGIN: Old English witan (past tense wast, past participle witen) “to know, beware of or conscious of, understand, observe, ascertain, learn,” from Proto-Germanic *witanan “to have seen,” hence “to know.”

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།


IPA: /zəʊɪ'tɹəʊpɪk/

Of, or relating to, a device in which still images depicting sequential stages of coherent movement of a subject or scene are moved past a viewpoint with a speed sufficient (24 images per second) to give the impression of actual movement of the subject or within the scene.

ORIGIN: From Ancient Greek ζωή (zōḗ, “life”) +‎ -trope +‎ -ic.

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ། ཕན་ནོ་ཕན་ནོ་སྭཱཧཱ།