--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@...> wrote:
> Xeno, > > The reason why there is a Divine Being is because IMO if you died or I died > it is highly probable that the universe will continue to exist. If all > humans disappeared from this solar system, it is still hightly probable that > the universe will still exist. If you extend this rationale to the last > sentient being or knower, then you would reach the Knower, or the Creator of > the universe. Without this Knower, a Divine Being, the universe disappears > because there no one else left who can conceive of the the four dimensions, > or any other higher dimensions that exist in this universe. > > IMO, enlightenment is knowing the relationship between the individual self > and the Self, who is the Knower, and the other sentient beings in this > universe who are capable of perceiving the existence of the Knower, who is > the Divine Being or the Absolute. > > JR > John, We see people die all the time. The universe does not disappear for those still living. We infer hypothetically that the universe continues to exist. Your argument is the first cause argument, which has infinite regress. There can always be a KNOWER of the 'Knower, or the Creator of the universe'; arbitrarily stopping at the Knower does not result in a solution. The argument is faulty, as is its opposite (a supposed proof that no such Divine Being exists). Enlightenment is not knowing the relationship between the individual self and the Self. The Self (Being) is not really a 'self', it is just word to represent the most abstract value of existence. It is a carrot on a stick, a concept to draw us into seeking enlightenment. The 'self', small 's', is a fiction, it does not exist. This is what the enlightenment experience reveals. You cannot have a relationship between a non-existent entity and an existential abstraction. You can have an experience that is *called* Self, even though it is not really a 'self', but it has no secondary values, it is unitary and whole, and on that level, so to speak (because this is just a metaphor), that is all there is. And it does not matter that the body that has this experience is alive or dead, but if dead, the universe for that body comes to an end. The existential abstraction is not altered by this. We do not live to experience death. That is what death means. It is the extinction of life and becoming and any kind of consciousness that can know itself. It requires a body with some structure to create a self-referral loop that can know itself, it requires a separation from unity, just a teensy weensy bit. While not an argument to contradict what you are saying, why is it that those who believe in an afterlife that is so much better than the one here are so often terrified of death? You would think they would be eager to go, would leap at the chance. If you experience that existential abstraction, the question of life after death has no significance, because it is a flawed concept, because it rests upon the thought that 'you' are some kind of entity and also somehow in a relationship with something. And that thought is one of many that keep us in ignorance.
