[Mr. Nobody]

Thanks I suppose, but I don't know Upanishad.
My philosophy is shaped by the meaning of quantum mechanics and strict adherence to measurement and a correct interpretation of the afore.
Anton Zeilinger has put it bluntly:
"A world, a reality existing independently of what can be said about it, is void of any meaning. It is obvious that any property or feature of reality "out there" can only be based on information we receive. There can not be any statement whatsoever about the world or about reality that is not based on such information. It therefore follows that the concept of a reality without at least the ability in principle to make statements about it, to obtain information about its features is devoid of any possibility of confirmation or proof. This implies that the distinction between information, that is knowledge, and reality is devoid of any meaning. In other words, it is impossible to distinguish operationally in any way reality from information. Therefore, following Occam's razor, the notion of the two being distinct should be abandoned, as the assumption of the existence of such a difference does not add anything that could not also be obtained without it"

Extend this with an understanding for the true nature of measurement and how to interpret indeterminism and follow that to wherever it leads you