Is There An Afterlife?

Most scientists would probably say that the concept of an afterlife is either nonsense, or at the very least unprovable. Yet one expert claims he has evidence to confirm an existence beyond the grave – and it lies in quantum physics.Professor Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism teaches that death as we know it is an illusion created by our consciousness.

Professor Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism teaches death as we know it is an illusion. He believes our consciousness creates the universe, and not the other way round, and once we accept that space and time are ‘tools of our minds’, death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either ‘We think life is just the activity of carbon and an admixture of molecules – we live a while and then rot into the ground,’ said the scientist on his website.

Lanza, from Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina, continued that as humans we believe in death because ‘we’ve been taught we die’, or more specifically, our consciousness associates life with bodies and we know that bodies die. His theory of biocentrism, however, explains that death may not be as terminal as we think it is.

Biocentrism is classed as the theory of everything and comes from the Greek for ‘life centre’. It is the believe that life and biology are central to reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way round. This suggests a person’s consciousness determines the shape and size of objects in the universe.

Lanza uses the example of the way we perceive the world around us. A person sees a blue sky, and is told that the colour they are seeing is blue, but the cells in a person’s brain could be changed to make the sky look green or red.

LANZA’S THEORY OF BIOCENTRISM AND THE AFTERLIFE

Biocentrism is classed as the Theory of Everything and comes from the Greek for ‘life centre’. It is the belief that life and biology are central to reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way round.

Lanza uses the example of the way we perceive the world around us. A person sees a blue sky, and is told that the colour they are seeing is blue, but the cells in a person’s brain could be changed to make the sky look green or red. Our consciousness makes sense of the world, and can be altered to change this interpretation. By looking at the universe from a biocentric’s point of view, this also means space and time don’t behave in the hard and fast ways our consciousness tell us it does. In summary, space and time are ‘simply tools of our mind. Once this theory about space and time being mental constructs is accepted, it means death and the idea of immortality exist in a world without spatial or linear boundaries.

Theoretical physicists believe that there is infinite number of universes with different variations of people, and situations taking place, simultaneously. Lanza added that everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses and this means death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either. Lanza, instead, said that when we die our life becomes a ‘perennial flower that returns to bloom in the multiverse.’ ‘Bottom line: What you see could not be present without your consciousness,’ explained Lanza. ‘Our consciousness makes sense of the world.’

By looking at the universe from a biocentric’s point of view, this also means space and time don’t behave in the hard and fast ways our consciousness tell us it does. In summary, space and time are ‘simply tools of our mind.’ Once this theory about space and time being mental constructs is accepted, it means death and the idea of immortality exist in a world without spatial or linear boundaries. Similarly, theoretical physicists believe there is infinite number of universes with different variations of people, and situations, taking place simultaneously.

HOW THE DOUBLE-SLIT EXPERIMENT SUPPORTS LANZA’S THEORY

In the experiment, when scientists watch a particle pass through two slits in a barrier, the particle behaves like a bullet and goes through one slit or the other. Yet if a person doesn’t watch the particle, it acts like a wave. This means it can go through both slits at the same time. This demonstrates that matter and energy can display characteristics of both waves and particles, and that the behaviour of the particle changes based on a person’s perception and consciousness. Lanza added that everything which can possibly happen is occurring at some point across these multiverses and this means death can’t exist in ‘any real sense’ either. Lanza, instead, said that when we die our life becomes a ‘perennial flower that returns to bloom in the multiverse.’ He continued: ‘Life is an adventure that transcends our ordinary linear way of thinking. When we die, we do so not in the random billiard-ball-matrix but in the inescapable-life- matrix.’

Lanza cited the famous double-slit experiment to backup his claims. In the experiment, when scientists watch a particle pass through two slits in a barrier, the particle behaves like a bullet and goes through one slit or the other. Yet if a person doesn’t watch the particle, it acts like a wave, This means it can go through both slits at the same time. This demonstrates that matter and energy can display characteristics of both waves and particles, and that behaviour of the particle changes based on a person’s perception and consciousness.

Lanza’s full theory is explained in his book Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.

Read more:
• Robert Lanza » Biocentrism / Robert Lanza¿s Theory of Everything
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2503370/Quantum-physics-proves-IS-afterlife- claims-scientist.html#ixzz2kr3gCxdl
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Spirituality Introduction

The essence and foundation of every religion in the history of the world is a spiritual impulse, a seeking, a yearning a desire to know a Supreme Being as expressed through the experiences and teachings of their masters and prophets. If you have such a desire, The Life Site is an excellent resource for a variety of information on religion, spirituality, angels, miracles, messengers and more. While religious institutions provide a framework for these impulses, they often fall prey to what Max Weber called “The routinization of charisma”, the adherence to ritual and doctrine devoid of its original spirit and intent.

Spiritual pursuits offer insights and experiential pathways to self discovery, transcendence and connection to the divine. It is a call to all who believe to go beyond structure and tradition and probe into the inner depths, the spiritual core of their faith, a common ground for all and a place for all to rejoice. The Life Site is honored to present a wide range of spiritual writers, thinkers, and resources for you to explore, and hopefully discover that which you seek.

Angels and miracles appear in ever religious tradition in the world, stories of visitations, healing, inspiration and guidance. Are they metaphorical, symbolic allegories to inspire the faithful, or are they real, proving the existence of life after death, or other dimensions of reality? Whole Universe endeavors not to take any position on this topic, but rather to present to our visitors stories of encounters, real experiences of real people and how they have experienced something extraordinary. We will also present to you many examples of angelic literature, from religious, spiritual, esoteric and literary traditions. We are all searching for miracles, may them come to you as you seek them, and with best wishes, here are our stories

 

Brugh Joy: Shadow,Ego,Self

This piece from W. Brugh Joy, M.D. was written towards the end of his life in the fall of 2009.

“Unconditioned/Unconditional Love Transcends the Self and gives the Self the cohesiveness of a Center of Being that is Supernally Conscious of the vast and unpartitioned Whole, the Eternal Forces or the Holyland…the archetypal fixed that are universal, unchanging, concentrated in potency, that can, from time to time transcend the material forces of form and function. Within this Center of Self lie two other centers of Awareness. Although neither the Ego nor the Shadow are the same as the Awareness of the Self…they are intricately and intimately related to the Self and under its unfurling dynamic in Temporality. The Ego and Shadow are specialized and limited aspects of the Self and function primarily to engage the Three Pillars of Temporality…Mystery of Change….Mystery of Differences….Mystery of Creative Adaptation and unfoldment.

The Shadow is the Self’s reservoir of Unconsciously expressed aspects of the Self that operate to maintain the overall balance and intention of the Self in specific relationship to the Ego…of which the surface sense of self, the ego, is only part of the Ego. There is nothing in the Ego or the Shadow that determines whether or not the balancing forces of the Self are activated. The Self is the source and the implementer of both Ego and Shadow interaction. The Shadow must not integrate Ego. The Ego must not integrate Shadow. It is the Self…when both timing of maturation of developmental dynamics and the supporting forces of the Self are in alignment that will activate the dissolution of both the Ego and the Shadow into a full reflection of Itself.

There is a problem when the Ego decides it is going to integrate the Shadow and vice versa. Too soon a conscious realization of the Self’s Shadow by the Ego or the Shadow’s conscious realization of the Self’s Ego would disrupt either secondary center and rupture the primary integrity of the Self in Time and Place…..in other words…in Temporality.

The Shadow fulfills the wholeness of the Self….is modulated by the Self and only becomes a conscious part of self when the Self begins the Wholeing or Holy task of uniting Shadow and Ego ….a Soul Mystery of uncertain outcome. When the personality or ego begins to take charge of dreams and possesses the dynamics ….a mishandling of the Holy Forces occurs. Really…the ego is the witness to the Self/Ego/Shadow development.

Remember….The Self, The Ego, and The Shadow don’t really exist per se but appear as epiphenomena issuing out of interacting forces. The interacting forces express uniquely depending upon what primary combination of interacting forces are present in any given individual in any given place, and in any given time.

Out of nothing all of this has come…..into nothing all of this will go…Don’t be too concerned about the aberration of Light.

To be re-emphasized….The Ego is not the source of the Shadow and the Shadow is not the source of Ego. The Shadow does not have to be made conscious to the Ego to effect its Holy Mission. The Ego does not have to be conscious to the Shadow to effect its Holy Mission. Both Ego and Shadow are completely under the egis of the Self. The Shadow modulates…the Ego orients. The unconscious forces that make up the Ego and the Shadow are Transpersonal and Holy. They must not be appropriated by either the Ego or the Shadow and certainly not by the ego….the surface awareness.

Shadow formation is never a conscious process nor does it need to be made conscious. It functions best unconsciously….just as the forces of the Ego operate best unconsciously. The Shadow can live through an individual, a family, a clan, a tribe, a community, a nation, and all of Humanity as a function of the intrinsic nature of Temporality/Manifestation/Time/Space. It is a part of Divinity’s (Self’s) Homeostasis or the Holy Love mystery of Balance. It is innate to the Wholeness or Holiness of Self.

The Shadow, as a natural aspect of homeostasis, operates (erupts) from time to time in the life of the conscious self Ego or larger and larger group awareness as a surprise/shocking action, illness, accident, slips of tongue, nightmare dreams, and self-sabotaging, and as Evil or the Dark face of Divinity when the surface awareness is biased to positivity.

The Shadow operates in the unexpected miraculous and inspired action, healing, inexplicable knowing to avoid a potential destructive moment, truth saying without karma in conversation, spontaneous healing, restorational dreams, self-acceptance and self love, and finally as Self Realization of the Beauty of God when the surface awareness (Conscious Ego) is biased to negativity.

The Ego is not the primary center of Awareness….the Self is.

The Shadow is not the primary center of awareness…the Self is.

The ego is the reflecting witness.

The unfoldment of a life is driven by the unconscious dynamics between Self…the Shadow…and the Ego. What the ego is aware of is mostly socialization attitudes, biases, preferences, and filtered perceptions.

The Self is the only responsible agent for the entire mystery of one’s life. Free will of the Shadow or of the Ego is an illusion generated out of a limited awareness. When witnessing the Divine Play of one’s Life…best not to appropriate any of what is seen, revealed, or experienced as personal.

The Self, The Ego, and The Shadow operate in time and out of time. The ego operates almost exclusively in time. The Ego is the chief organ of Temporal Awareness.

The Self….the Deepest Divine Mystery…may or may not elect to become conscious to the Ego.

Suggesting that C.G.Jung’s overarching view point ….that the great task of individual consciousness is to become more and more conscious…might not be, in any way the mandate to humanity. To the contrary….the great task of individual consciousness is to realize that the greatest mystery lies in darkness, the unconsciousness, and the mystery of manifestation and the impossibility of consciousness to encompass unconsciousness! The most astonishing, awesome, mind boggling, staggering, and incomprehensively complex manifestations took place without any secondary consciousness and certainly not by the consciousness presumed by humankind.

The most fundamental Realization is that consciousness or light is an aberrant and fundamentally temporary phenomenon of darkness to handle motion and change. Light and consciousness are both mostly interferences and most rarely a witness and handmaiden to the action of Self. Ego Consciousness is the carrier of the Soul’s incarnation into a specific time and a specific place. It is an interference of wholeness because it is differentiating and discerning. The Shadow is the Ego’s counterpart reflecting the Ego’s unconscious complements and vice versa. Gestation is the great principle of Darkness.”…W. Brugh Joy, M.D.

Symbolism & Religious Mystery, Pt. 1

An excerpt from Joseph Campbell’s Thou Art That

Part One – Symbolism and religious experience

With respect to the mystical tradition, one can divide the world into two great groups: one to the west of Iran, which includes the Near East and Europe; and the other, to the east of Iran, which includes India and the Far East.

Let us focus on the West. Our religions come one and all from the Levant, from the Near East rather than Europe. Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are called the great religions of the world. In all of these, God made the world and God and the world are not the same. There is an ontological and essential distinction in our tradition between creator and creature.

This leads to a totally different psychology and religious structure from those religions in which this distinction is not made. The goal of Western religions is not to bring about a sense of identity with the transcendent. Their goal is to bring about a relationship between human beings and God, who are not the same. The typical attitude of the Levant, of the Near East from which our religions come, is the submission of human judgment to that power conceived to be God.

In the Western tradition, the divine is not within you. When you turn within, you find a human soul and that human soul may or may not be in proper relationship to its creator. The great world of the biblical tradition tells us that nature is corrupt and that a fall took place, whether you designate it as Original Sin or not. The whole concept of sin is involved here, because you have a responsibility to God to obey some kind of law that you conceive Him to have rendered.

How in this tradition do you get related to God? The relationship is accomplished through an institution. This we may term the first mythic dissociation in that it dissociates the person from the divine principle. The individual can only become associated with the divine through the social institution. Thus, in the Jewish tradition, God and His people have a covenant regarding their special relationship.

In the Christian tradition, Christ is the centre because He is true God and true Man. This is regarded as a mystery because of the unity of these two natures. It is no mystery at all in the Orient, where each of us is conceived to be precisely a piece of God.

Our Western religious culture is committed to these social groups and their various biblical and ecclesiastical claims, which, in the light of modern historical and scientific research, are brought into question. By this arrangement, however, we have been emptied of our sense of our own divinity. We have been committed to a social organization or hierarchical institution, which sets up a claim for itself. And now that claim itself is in question. This breeds what we term alienation—that is, an individual sense of estrangement from the religious institution through which we relate to God.

The God of the institution is not supported by your own experience of spiritual reality. This opens a gap challenging the validity of the human being. The first aim of the mystical is to validate the person’s individual human experience.

Joseph Campbell was an American author and teacher best known for his work in the field of comparative mythology. Through his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces and his TV interviews with Bill Moyers he introduced his views on mythology to millions around the world.This excerpt was republished from Thou Art That: Transforming Religious Mystery. © 2001 New World Library.

Read more at http://www.themindfulword.org/2013/symbolism-religious-mystery-joseph-campbell/ #MHMue8joMWC8pFyx.99

Symbolism & Religious Mystery, Pt. 2

An excerpt from Joseph Campbell’s Thou Art That

Part Two – Experiencing Mystery

As we have previously mentioned, the primary purpose of a dynamic mythology, which we may underscore as its properly religious function, is to awaken and maintain in the person an experience of awe, humility, and respect in recognition of that ultimate mystery that transcends every name and form, “from which,” as we read in the Upanishads, “words turn back.” In recent decades, theology has been often concentrated on a literary exercise in the explanation of archaic texts that are made up of historically conditioned, ambiguous names, incidents, sayings, and actions, all of which are attributed to “the ineffable.” Faith, we might say, in old-fashioned scripture or faith in the latest science belong equally at this time to those alone who as yet have no idea of how mysterious, really, is the mystery of themselves.

Into how many of us has the weight described by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger been born that “this life of yours that you are living is not merely a piece of the entire existence, but is, in a certain sense the whole; only the whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one simple glance. This . . . is what the Brahmims express in that sacred, mystic formula that is yet really so simple and so clear: Tat tvam asi, that is you.”

This is the basic insight of all metaphysical discourse, which is immediately known—as knowable to each alone—only when the names and forms, what I call the masks of God, have fallen away. Yet, as many have observed, including William of Occam, Immanuel Kant, and Henry Adams, the category, or name, of unity itself is of the mind and may not be attributed to any supposed substance, person, or “Ground of Being.” Who, then, may speak to you, or to any of us, of the being or nonbeing of God, unless by implication to point beyond his words and himself and all he knows, or can tell, toward the transcendent, the experience of mystery.

The question sometimes arises as to whether the experience of mystery and transcendence is more available to those who have undergone some kind of religious and spiritual training, for whom, as I have said, it has all been named completely. It may be less available to them precisely because they have got it all named in the book. One way to deprive yourself of an experience is indeed to expect it. Another is to have a name for it before you have the experience. Carl Jung said that one of the functions of religion is to protect us against the religious experience. That is because in formal religion, it is all concretized and formulated. But, by its nature, such an experience is one that only you can have. As soon as you classify it with anybody else’s, it loses its character. A preconceived set of concepts catches the experience, cutting it short so that it does not come directly to us. Ornate and detailed religions protect us against an exploding mystical experience that would be too much for us.

There are two orders of meditation: discursive meditation and ordered meditation. In discursive meditation, such as that advocated by Ignatius Loyola, you consider some religious scene—the Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin or the story of the Crucifixion—arranging it as one would a stage set in the imagination. This is a protective prelude to one order of meditation. Another order of meditation is explosive because it carries you beyond all names, forms, and concepts. And then you cannot get back. If, however, you have engaged for several years in discursive meditation first, it serves as an intermediary state by which you can get back. In places in which meditation has been practiced for a long time—in contemplative orders, for example—this is well understood.

Let us find the way to mystery through a meditation on the birth, life, and death of Jesus. In this regard, the first century question, whether Christianity was a mystery religion or the mystery religion of which all the others were re-figurements is relevant. The many symbols, such as the animals of the Egyptian mystery religions breathing their spirit on the infant Jesus—the bull of the god Osiris and the ass of his brother Set, there in the manger—suggest their early understanding that this was indeed so. So, too, in the same nativity scene, the Magi wear the hat of Mithra as they pay homage.

It is clear that, in Orpheus and Christ, we have exactly the same archetype, with the motif of leaving the physical world, still symbolized with a cross in astronomy, for the spiritual. They leave the Earth, symbol of Mother, to go to the realm of the Father.

In the translation of a Neolithic fertility rite into a spiritual fertility rite, we see the death and resurrection of the grain refigured in the symbol of the death of the old Adam and birth of the new. As I have observed before, although I do not know how to prove it, the great insight of St. Paul on the road to Damascus was that the calamity of the death of this young rabbi, Jesus, was a counterpart of the death and resurrection of the saviour found in the classical mysteries. Paul also grasped that the Christian myth of the Fall at the Tree of the Garden and the Redemption at Calvary on the Tree of Redemption are the two aspects of the two Trees in the Garden of Eden. The first, the Tree of the Fall, represents passage from the eternal into the realm of time. The second is the Tree of the return from the realm of time to the spiritual. So that Tree is the threshold tree, the laurel tree, which may be seen in its two aspects, going from the sacred to the profane and from the profane back into the sacred.

When Man ate of the fruit of the Tree, he discovered himself in the field of duality instead of the field of unity. As a result, he finds himself out, in exile. The two cherubim placed at the gate are there representative of the world of the pairs of opposites in which, having been cast out of the world of unity, he is now located. You are kept in exile by your commitment to that world.

Christ goes past that—“I and the Father are one”—back into the realm of unity from which we have been expelled. These are mysteries. Here is an echo and a translation into another set of images of what we ourselves are experiencing. What comes forth now with the grain, as particles of that one life that informs all things, is the revelation of the spiritual unity in all its aspects. Here also is the revelation that one life can be personified as a Deity, as in the Christian tradition, and everything comes from the Deity. But the personification is not what is important. What we have is a trans-theological, transpersonified revelation.

When one is ready to see the eternal flashing, as it were, through the latticework of time, one can experience mystery. This is especially so in artwork that carries mythological symbols that speak to us still.

All this may be observed in the surface of an ancient two-sided vase. On one side, we see Triptolemus as an old man with Hermes before him with grains of wheat. Hermes is holding the caduceus. Turning the vase, we see that beyond this, Dionysos is led by a satyr with the chalice of wine. Triptolemus is associated with the bread, the grain, and Dionysos with the wine. These are the elements of the Roman Catholic sacraments of the Mass.

On a fifth century b.c. red-figured ceramic piece, one may see the goddess with the two powers, the serpent power and the solar power. The serpent power is the bite of death to ego that opens the eye and the ear to the eternal.

There are two orders of religious perspective. One is ethical, pitting good against evil. In the biblically grounded Christian West, the accent is on ethics, on good against evil. We are thus bound by our religion itself to the field of duality. The mystical perspective, however, views good and evil as aspects of one process. One finds this in the Chinese yin-yang sign, the dai-chi.

We have, then, these two totally different religious perspectives. The idea of good and evil absolutes in the world after the fall is biblical and as a result you do not rest on corrupted nature. Instead, you correct nature and align yourself with the good against evil. Eastern cults, on the other hand, put you in touch with nature, where what Westerners call good and evil interlock. But by what right, this Eastern tradition asks, do we call these things evil when they are of the process of nature?

I was greatly impressed when I was first in Japan to find myself in a world that knew nothing of the Fall in the Garden of Eden and consequently did not consider nature corrupt. In the Shinto scriptures one reads that the processes of nature cannot be evil. In our tradition, every natural impulse is sinful unless it has been purified in some manner.

In some artistic representations, one sees the Deity and at His right stand the three Graces. The muses are clothed because art clothes mystery. The final revelation is the naked mystery itself. The first of the three Graces is Euphrosyne, or rapture, sending forth the energy of Apollo into the world. The second is Aglaia, splendour, bringing the energy back. Then, embracing the two, we find Thalia, abundance. One recognizes that these are the functions of the Trinity in the Christian biblically based tradition in which these same powers are given a masculine form.

Finally, it does not matter whether you are going to name them male and female. Transcendence is beyond all such naming. This symbol refers to what might simply be called total meditation. Father is Thalia, the abundance who unites the other two. The Son is Euphrosyne, the rapture of love that pours itself into the world. The Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, is Aglaia, who carries us back. The energy itself stems from Apollo, who in the Christian tradition is the one Divine substance of which the three of the Trinity are personalities.

Remember my earlier statement that the experience of mystery comes not from expecting it but through yielding all your programs, because your programs are based on fear and desire. Drop them and the radiance comes.

Joseph Campbell was an American author and teacher best known for his work in the field of comparative mythology. Through his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces and his TV interviews with Bill Moyers he introduced his views on mythology to millions around the world.This excerpt was republished from Thou Art That: Transforming Religious Mystery. © 2001 New World Library.

Read more at http://www.themindfulword.org/2013/symbolism-religious-mystery-joseph-campbell/ #MHMue8joMWC8pFyx.99

Manly P. Hall on Mindfulness

In our daily manifestation we are constantly in the presence of energies, but we take them for granted. We never question how it is that we can raise a finger, use a typewriter, or play a musical instrument. We see nothing mysterious about taking a walk, talking with our friends, or performing various arduous tasks in the name of health. The mystery behind the commonplace is something we do not understand but use constantly with little inquiry into our own nature. We have never questioned the process by which we are alive because we more or less take for granted that the questions cannot be answered and that whatever lies behind us is a mystery. Science has never undertaken to explore it. Philosophy has never been able to create a completely comprehensible exposition of principles, and religion deals in such abstract vagaries that we are not sure what part is true and what part is imaginary. But some have questioned and from the questioning developed various concepts by means of which it might be possible for us to explore this unknown world of causes.

Man specializes with his own mind, and whatever most occupies his mind is most supported by his resources. Persons interested in making a living devote their energies to this task, only occasionally taking time for meditation or reflection. It would seem, therefore, that there must be a motion, a process within our own thinking through which we can create the instrument for self-exploration. There must be some way of turning the mind from external addictions to the examination of internals. Most persons have never attempted to do this, and most do not even believe it possible. But there must be some way to use our faculties to discover ourselves, rather than using them constantly to buildup our store of knowledge about externals which, in the last analysis, are of very little basic importance to ourselves. To be given the equipment that we possess, only to use it for a few years, and then have both ourselves and our equipment fade away, seems to be contrary to the economy of nature. It would appear more reasonable that we have not yet attained to that degree of evolution which will enable us to develop the faculties of self-examination. They must lurk somewhere in our extrasensory perception band, and if we cannot find them, we will never know ourselves nor actually experience our true place in the universe or in the universal plan for ourselves.

It was first assumed that before we before we could penetrate the illusion of matter, we had to turn our attention away from matter, that to free our inner equipment for its apperceptive function, we had to relieve it of the burden of its continuous perceptive function, for every sensory perception that we possess is held in fascination in the world of phenomena. It is not so likely that we will be able to disentangle our functional resources and turn them in another direction. In order to explore causes, we must break the tie which forces us to continually use our energies as an outflowing toward externals. This is accomplished through a series of experiences in which we come to understand by degrees the unity of this life principle in ourselves. To the degree we understand life, we participate in it, and we are closer to enlightenment when we are tied to reality by bonds of intense sympathy. If our dedications are towards enlightenment, we have a greater probability of attaining it than when our dedications are turned to other things and enlightenment is merely an avocational interest.

To attempt this it is necessary to reverse the involutionary process which ties energy to matter, and set up an evolutionary process within ourselves. Involution is the breaking up of one life into many manifestations. Evolution is the restoration of unity, the bringing back of diversity until oneness is re-established. Illusion is diversity. Reality is unity. To quiet down the experiences of diversity, to gradually bring separate things together, to search for unities where we have accepted diversities, to seek forever the one in the many and to discover finally the one behind the many – these are the labors of spiritual evolution. We begin symbolically by seeking the common ground of things and, in so doing, overcome forever the antagonisms and the conflicts which arise from our inability to perceive the identities of life.

~Excerpted from Manly P Hall Lecture #193 – “The Mystical Experience Union with The External Self.

Where Do We Come From?

The 7 Most Intriguing Philosophical Arguments for the Existence of God

Nietzsche said God is dead, but here are seven fascinating and provocative philosophical arguments for the existence of God.

This article originally appeared on io9.com, and is reprinted here with their permission.

Nietzsche is famous for saying that God is dead, but news of The Almighty’s demise may have been greatly exaggerated. Here are some of the most fascinating and provocative philosophical arguments for the existence of God.

To be clear, these are philosophical arguments. They’re neither rooted in religious scripture nor any kind of scientific observation or fact. Many of these arguments, some of which date back thousands of years, serve as interesting intellectual exercises, teasing apart what we think we know about the universe and our place within it from what we think we’re capable of knowing. Other arguments, like the last two listed, are attempts to reconcile questions that currently plague scientists and philosophers.
Now, none of these arguments make a definitive case for the existence of God, and many of them are (fairly) easily debunked or problematized (as I’ll try to show). But at the very least, they offer considerable food for thought.

Finally, by “God” or “god,” we’re not talking about any specific religious deity. As this list shows, the term can encompass everything from a perfect, omnipotent being to something that can be considered even a bit banal.

1) The very notion of an all-perfect being means God has to exist

This is the classic ontological, or a priori, argument. It was first articulated in 1070 by St. Anselm, who argued that because we have a conception of an all-perfect being — which he defined as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived” — it has to exist. In his essay “Proslogion,” St. Anselm conceived of God as a being who possesses all conceivable perfection. But if this being “existed” merely as an idea in our minds, then it would be less perfect than if it actually existed. So it wouldn’t be as great as a being who actually existed, something that would thus contradict our definition of God — a being who’s supposed to be all-perfect. Thus, God must exist.

Okay, admittedly, this sounds a bit weird by modern standards. Actually, it even sounded weird back then; Gaunilo of Marmoutiers ripped apart Anselm’s idea by asking people to conceive of an island “more excellent” than any other island, revealing the flaws in this type of argumentation. Today, we know that this type of a priori argument (i.e., pure deduction) is grossly limited, often tautological, and utterly fails to take empirical evidence into account.

But surprisingly, it was a position defended by none other than Rene Descartes. His take on the matter is a bit more illustrative; Descartes, in his “Fifth Meditation,” wrote that the conception of a perfect being who lacks existence is like imagining a triangle whose interior angles don’t sum to 180 degrees (he was big on the notion of innate ideas and the doctrine of clear and distinct perception). So, because we have the idea of a supremely perfect being, we have to conclude that a supremely perfect being exists; to Descarte, God’s existence was just as obvious, logical, and self-evident as the most basic mathematical truths.

2) Something must have caused the Universe to exist

Philosophers call this one the First-Cause Argument, or the Cosmological Argument, and early advocates of this line of reasoning included Plato, Aristotle, and St. Thomas Aquinas. It’s predicated on the assumption that every event must have a cause, and that cause in turn must have a cause, and on and on and on. Assuming there’s no end to this regression of causes, this succession of events would be infinite. But an infinite series of causes and events doesn’t make sense (a causal loop cannot exist, nor a causal chain of infinite length). There’s got to be something — some kind of first cause — that is itself uncaused. This would require some kind of “unconditioned” or “supreme” being — which the philosophers call God.

I’m sure you’ve already come up with your own objections to the First-Cause Argument, including the issue of a first-causer having to have its own cause. Also, infinity does in fact appear to be a fundamental quality of the universe. All this said, however, cosmologists are still struggling to understand the true nature of time and what “caused” the Big Bang to happen in the first place.

3) There has to be something rather than nothing

Called the Cosmological Argument from Contingency, this is a slightly different take on the First-Cause Argument. The German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz put it best when he wrote,

Why is there something rather than nothing? The sufficient reason … is found in a substance which … is a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself.

Because it’s impossible for only contingent beings to exist, he argued, a necessary being must exist — a being we call God. Writing in “Monadology,” he wrote that “no fact can be real or existing and no statement true without a sufficient reason for its being so and not otherwise.”

More recently, the philosopher Richard Swinburne looked at the issue more inductively, writing,

There is quite a chance that if there is a God he will make something of the finitude and complexity of a universe. It is very unlikely that a universe would exist uncaused, but rather more likely that God would exist uncaused. The existence of the universe…can be made comprehensible if we suppose that it is brought about by God.

4) Something had to have designed the Universe

The Design Argument, or teleological argument, suggests we live in a Universe that surely had to be designed. The cosmos, goes the argument, exhibits orderliness and (apparent) purpose — for example, everything within the universe adheres to the laws of physics, and many things within it are correlated with one another in a way that appears purposeful. As William Paley argued, just as the existence of a watch indicates the presence of an intelligent mind, the existence of the universe and various phenomena within it indicates the presence of an even greater intelligence, namely God.
Needless to say, this line of argumentation was far more compelling prior to the advent of naturalism (the idea that everything can be explained without the benefit of supernatural intervention) and Darwinian evolution. Indeed, Darwin served as a kind of death knell to the Design Argument, at least as far as the biological realm is concerned. We know that the human eye — in all its apparent complexity and purpose — is not the product of a designer, but rather the painstaking result of variation and selection.
But the Design Argument isn’t entirely dead yet. The exquisite fine-tuning of the “biophilic universe” has lead some to conclude there is in fact a greater intelligence at work. To counter this line of reasoning, however, philosophers say we should simply defer to the anthropic principle, which is interesting because theists say the same thing!

5) Consciousness proves that immaterial entities exist

We still don’t have a working theory of consciousness, giving rise to the notorious Hard Problem. Indeed, subjective awareness, or qualia, is quite unlike anything we normally deal with in our otherwise material universe. The weirdness of consciousness, and our inability to understand it, has given rise to the notion of substance dualism, also known as Cartesian dualism, which describes two fundamental kinds of stuff: the mental and the material. Dualists say that material on its own is incapable of producing qualia — one’s capacity to have internal thoughts, subjective awareness, and feelings.

Theists have used substance dualism to make the claim for an independent “realm” of existence that’s distinct from the physical world. It’s a scenario similar to the one experience by Neo in “The Matrix”; his mental experiences occurred in a realm separate from the one that hosted his body. Theistic philosophers have taken this idea to the next level, using it to infer the existence of otherworldly or immaterial entities, including God. It’s a bit of a stretch, and an argument that could use a lot more evidence.

6) We’re living in a computer simulation run by hacker gods

God is in the eye of the beholder. Unlike Anselm’s take on God as something “that which nothing greater can be conceived,” gods can also consist of entities vastly beyond our comprehension, reach, and control. If the Simulation Hypothesis is true, and we’re the product of posthuman ancestors (or some unknown entity), we simply have no choice but to recognize them as gods. They’re running the show, and our collective (or even individual) behavior may be monitored — or even controlled — by them. These hacker gods would be akin the gnostic gods of yesteryear — powerful entities doing their own thing, and without our best interests in mind.

7) Aliens are our gods

We have yet to make contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence, but that doesn’t mean they’re not out there. A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox is the notion of directed panspermia — the idea that aliens spark life on other planets, like sending spores or probes to fertile planets, and then leave, or monitor and control the process covertly. By definition, therefore, they would be like gods to us.
This idea has been addressed many times in scifi, including the “Star Trek: The Next Generation” episode “The Chase”, in which a god-like species is responsible for all life in the Alpha Quadrant, or Ridley Scott’s “Prometheus,” in which an alien can be seen seeding the primordial Earth with life. Even Arthur C. Clarke’s “2001” is a take on this idea, with the monoliths instigating massive evolutionary leaps.