Wow! Existence has always existed

[Lauriso]

I found this article https://www.snsociety.org/wow-existence ... s-existed/ pretty mind-blowing. It describes facing the very limit of what human brains can conceive of when pondering existence itself.

Here are some quotes:

At some point, though, the chain of why reaches an end. Why the Big Bang? Why God? Why, why, why.

We can come up with possible explanations until… we can’t. Then we’re into mind-blowing territory. Terra firma not only turns into terra incognita, seemingly the very possibility of cognizing an answer vanishes.

For me it’s more like looking into a bottomless pit. I feel like I’ve reached the end of my knowing. And not only that: anyone’s knowing.

Do you agree with the conclusions of the author? I feel I do, but I find this incomprehensibility of existence at the deepest level disconcerting.

[Eugene I]

Why Is There Something, Rather Than Nothing?

[Martin_]

> I find this incomprehensibility of existence at the deepest level disconcerting.
* denial.
* anger.
* bargaining.
* depression.
* acceptance.

[Martin_]

In my opinion, the guy with < 200 views gave a better answer that the one with + 6 million views.
Jim Holt does make interesting points, but essetially he dodged the question.

[Brad Walker]

Why are you improbably existing now amongst an eternity of unconsciousness? Why are you experiencing this moment and not any other?

That God always exists is the most promising resolution to "why something". What's mysterious to me is how there was a first Universe.

[David_Sundaram]

There is only 'Being'. Non-Being is a purely imaginary 'state'. More food for thought:

"That which is not, shall never be; that which is, shall never cease to be. To the wise, these truths are self-evident." (The Bhagavad Gita, Ch2)

And from Seth Speaks, channeled by Jane Roberts:

"Each of you are now involved in a much larger production, in which you all agree on
certain basic assumptions that serve as a framework within which the play can occur.
The assumptions are that time is a series of moments one after another; that an
objective world exists quite independently of your own creation and perception of it;
that you are bound within the physical bodies that you have donned; and that you are
limited by time and space.

Other assumptions accepted for the same reason include the idea that all
perception comes through your physical senses; in other words, that all information
comes from without, and that no information can come from within. You therefore are
forced to focus intensely upon the actions of the play. Now these various plays, these
creative period pieces represent what you would call reincarnational lives.

They all exist basically at one time. Those who are still involved in these highly complicated
passion-play seminars called reincarnational existences, find it difficult to see beyond them.
Some, resting between productions, as it were, try to communicate with those who are still
taking part; but they themselves are merely in the wings, so to speak, and can only see so far.

The plays seem to be taking place one before the other, and so these
communications seem to intensify the false idea that time is a series of moments,
passing in a single line from some inconceivable beginning to some equally
inconceivable end."

[David_Sundaram]

There is only 'Being'. Non-Being is a purely imaginary 'state'.

Of course, 'imagination' is a power-ful; aspect/faculty of THAT which gives 'rise' to the expeerience and expression of any and all Being.

It's complicated - like 'The Devil'. If you imagine it/he/she is 'real', it becomes 'real' for you - for as long as you keep imagining it is, that is!
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_argument :

"He who dreams of drinking wine may weep when morning comes; he who dreams of weeping may in the morning go off to hunt. While he is dreaming he does not know it is a dream, and in his dream he may even try to interpret a dream. Only after he wakes does he know it was a dream. And someday there will be a great awakening when we know that this is all a great dream. Yet the stupid believe they are awake, busily and brightly assuming they understand things, calling this man ruler, that one herdsman—how dense! Confucius and you are both dreaming! And when I say you are dreaming, I am dreaming, too. Words like these will be labeled the Supreme Swindle. Yet, after ten thousand generations, a great sage may appear who will know their meaning, and it will still be as though he appeared with astonishing speed."


Here's the 'dream' I (for one!) continue to actively dream: "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. " (John Ch.14)

From my treatise:

"it has ... struck me that developments in the field of modern computer systems may provide us with a ... model for the universally creative, feedback-loop based interfusion of The Essence [i.e. 'the Father'] of Creativity and the Life of every individual and amalgamated aspect of Its expression. To explore this proposition, imagine if you will that the main aim or goal of said Essence’s ‘program’– the primary motive (i.e. desire) ensconced in its ‘source code’ – is to maximally express and thereby experience Love and Joy, to Joyfully express and experience Love and Lovingly express and experience Joy to the greatest possible degree in every possible way, or something like that.*

[Footnote*: Not that this is the only available supposition, mind you. Many, for example, think and feel that the expression and experience of Power and Success is Life’s prime imperative and so believe that maximal actualization and experience of these (i.e., of Power and Success) must be The Cat’s Meow (idiomatically speaking). However, since I myself most keenly enjoy recalling and vicariously reliving the loving and joyful times I had as a child, and as I continue to spontaneously resonate with the ‘Spirit’ exuberantly displayed in the antics of the (unadulterated by conditioning) young of many species including ours, also having deeply appreciated ‘returning’ to expressing and experiencing Love and Joy after sometimes lengthy dry-spell detours and digressions therefrom, and having gradually become more and more thoughtfully impressed by Jesus’ saying things like: “Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 18:3); “Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure [i.e.,  that keeps on being loving] unto the end, the same shall be saved.” (Matthew 24:12‑13); and “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” (Matthew 25:34), the proposition pertaining to the expression and experience of Love and Joy which I put forward in the preceding paragraph is the one I believe to be and so suggest is both the most pertinent and the most propitious in the long term.]

To 'picture' the activity of the Living Entity of our Creation (i.e., of ‘the Son’), imagine a universe-sized network made up of an infinite array of banks upon banks of computers matrixially web-strung together by way of both parallel and series connections, all simultaneously, individually and together, multi-processing the above referenced Love and Joy ‘program’, with each processor and every amalgamation thereof functionally outputting the ‘solution’ it ‘calculates’ will most probably yield the greatest possible Love and Joy ‘result’ in its case (as far as it can prognostically project, that is), which ‘solution’ then operationally functions as input in relation to any and all associated processors to whatever extent they ‘calculate’ it to be relevant to their own Love and Joy process, such that said output-n-input data-packet sequences co-actively ripple and reverberate around the network, sparking Love and Joy focused perceptions and decisions (i.e.,  expeeriences and expressions) which conjointly determine what takes place here, there and everywhere in ‘the body’ of said Entity over the course of time."


Choose your dreams and dream them 'well', Friend!

[Peter Jones]

I found this article https://www.snsociety.org/wow-existence ... s-existed/ pretty mind-blowing. It describes facing the very limit of what human brains can conceive of when pondering existence itself.

Here are some quotes:

At some point, though, the chain of why reaches an end. Why the Big Bang? Why God? Why, why, why.

We can come up with possible explanations until… we can’t. Then we’re into mind-blowing territory. Terra firma not only turns into terra incognita, seemingly the very possibility of cognizing an answer vanishes.

For me it’s more like looking into a bottomless pit. I feel like I’ve reached the end of my knowing. And not only that: anyone’s knowing.

Do you agree with the conclusions of the author? I feel I do, but I find this incomprehensibility of existence at the deepest level disconcerting.

It is simply a fact that any fundamental explanation must end with an inconceivable phenomenon. Kant makes this clear. Reality lies beyond the categories of thought.

It should not be disconcerting. All this is explained in the Upanishads. This 'bottomless pit' mentioned here is the chasm into which Indiana Jones must step into in his search for the Grail. Or consider the Buddhist teachings on Emptiness. The Tao that is eternal cannot be spoken or thought.

[Lauriso]

It is simply a fact that any fundamental explanation must end with an inconceivable phenomenon. Kant makes this clear. Reality lies beyond the categories of thought.

It should not be disconcerting. All this is explained in the Upanishads. This 'bottomless pit' mentioned here is the chasm into which Indiana Jones must step into in his search for the Grail. Or consider the Buddhist teachings on Emptiness. The Tao that is eternal cannot be spoken or thought.

Thanks for the reply, yes, I seem forced to agree with that conclusion, but for some reason it produces anxiety in me - I don't feel safe in a world so incomprehensible. It is said that the psychotic drowns in the waters the mystic swims in... rings true to me.

I tried reading Kant but found it very difficult. Is there any specific place in the Upanishads, where this is discussed, you could point me to?

And, if it cannot be thought, what CAN be done with it?

[Eugene I]

And, if it cannot be thought, what CAN be done with it?

Accept it as is, relax, live, enjoy, create, love, explore the infinite space of beautiful forms
You should not feel unsafe in this ineffable world, because in your essence you are indestructible, you are the reality itself and you can't not exist.
But imagine if you find the answer. This is it, there is no mystery anymore. Would not it be boring?
Yet we can keep approaching the Mystery, peeling more and more layers and going deeper and deeper, but this journey will never end, and this is a guarantee that we will never be bored and stagnant at the final destination.

The Cuckoo's Song of Total Presence
(Dzogchen school of Buddhism)

The nature of the variety of phenomena is non-dual,
Yet each phenomena is beyond the limits of the mind.

The authentic condition as it is does not become a concept,
Yet it manifests totally in form, always good.

All being already perfect, overcome the sickness of effort
And remain naturally in self-perfection: this is contemplation.