Life force -some questions

Some of the revelations in our temple tell us that when there is something identified it becomes separate, duality requires opposition for identity to become existence.
Life is defined and this requires death or no-life. The life force in the world is growing, it is expanding.

This opens some questions
1.What is creating it?
2.Does life create itself?
3.If life is expanding then does duality mean it will at some point reduce?
4.What does life come from how does a non-life become life?
5.Is life real and independent?
6.Since life has definition and life is separate is life a substance? If not then what?

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira This opens some questions 1.What is creating it? 2.Does life create itself? 3.If life is expanding then does duality mean it will at some point reduce? 4.What does life come from how does a non-life become life? 5.Is life real and independent? 6.Since life has definition and life is separate is life a substance? If not then what?	”

It is said that life manifests from the Tao, thus-fore that which is life has always been and will always be, in whatever state it incorporates at any time.
If life is expanding, will it reduce? No, it will merely change its state from one form to another, for it to reduce would be to imply that the Tao is not all, and that is not the Tao.
Is life real and independent? Life is partially real, it is up to us to break through the barrier of illusion, that we believe is reality, to see what real life is truly about and then and only then, experience real life. It is only partially independent, one cannot survive without the Tao, if one can than that one is not natural, real, or whole.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Some of the revelations in our temple tell us that when there is something identified it becomes separate,	”

From what?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira duality requires opposition for identity to become existence.	”

So two things have to oppose each other in order to exist?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Life is defined and this requires death or no-life.	”

So in order for life to 'exist', there has to be an opposing force, i.e. death. Is that right?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira The life force in the world is growing, it is expanding.	”

Because the population is increasing?

“	Originally Posted By: aqira This opens some questions 1.What is creating it?	”

Life force? I would say God is.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 2.Does life create itself?	”

No it requires an architect, an author. God.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 3.If life is expanding then does duality mean it will at some point reduce?	”

I don't see how it would follow that it would, excepting that each new life is also subject to death.
It is a very interesting idea. If we are growing in number, each new person requires a soul...If those are old souls reborn, is the population growth indicating that more sould are in this plane of existance right now than ever before? What does that mean? What are the implications for this time? If they are new souls, well, that's even more interesting!

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 4.What does life come from how does a non-life become life?	”

I believe that life in constant, the way it is expressed changes. I believe we see very limited dimensionally. If we could understand a fourth of fith dimension (as cutting edge science believes) we would know so much more about what and who we are and where we are heading.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 5.Is life real and independent?	”

I think all we can do...Or all I can do is attempt to better understand my reality. If I was aware of something more real, I would have something to measure the reality of my existance against. But as I don't, or I am unaware if I do, all I can base my understanding on is what I have.
Is life independant? No I think it is interdependant, very much so. This is illustrated in simple bilogical models, food chains and food webs, but on a more complex level, I feel comfortable with the analogy of life like a river flowing to the sea. We fall as rain over the hills and join the river, flowing to the sea where we will all become one once more.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 6.Since life has definition and life is separate is life a substance? If not then what?	”

I have to say I don't really understand what you are asking here. It's like you are saying life is seperate and therefore it is a substance, but I see life as we live it now, as a form of experiencing the physical world we live in. Like our spirits crave physicality and over time we have controlled the spirit in favour of the physical senses. This could be why so many religions stress concern for things of the soul and not of the senses, ie that true enlightenment can only be obtained through abstinance.

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat I believe that life in constant, the way it is expressed changes. I believe we see very limited dimensionally. If we could understand a fourth of fith dimension (as cutting edge science believes) we would know so much more about what and who we are and where we are heading.	”

Just want to point out one thing, we already know the fourth dimension, it's TIME, and we're already on the way to understanding the fifth. Who knows, perhaps within the next few years we'll understand the 10 dimensions proposed by String-Theory.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua Just want to point out one thing, we already know the fourth dimension, it's TIME, and we're already on the way to understanding the fifth. Who knows, perhaps within the next few years we'll understand the 10 dimensions proposed by String-Theory.	”

I would say conjecture. I listened to a lecture on this last week and one of the main concepts discussed were the ability to comprehend another dimension. Actual comprehension itself would lead us to long leaps in our understanding. Time is a man made concept. It is difficult (though not impossible) to step outside the rigors the concept of 'time' sets upon us and imagine a constant universe...One where all things happen simultaneously...

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

sometimes before new discoveries can occur new ways to discover have to be found

Time---one of the primary tools of separation and definition, in non-life objects its application is precise -in the mind the application is adjustable when applied for reference use.
There maybe something going on here, if truth is constant and time were true the variations of time in the mind if still true would mean that either mind was false or mind can alter the universal law.

To help understand duality as it affects the concept of life increase/decrease...... think of two triangles that the base of each faces each other the points of each pointing away from each other.

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira There maybe something going on here, if truth is constant and time were true the variations of time in the mind if still true would mean that either mind was false or mind can alter the universal law.	”

Both true, the mind of a person who is unenlightened, who has not put great effort into clearing the mind of its thieves, demons, and false illusions, who has not relearned that the world that most see is in itself, not real, but a delusion of the mind to comprehend what we see but do not understand. This would include the illusion of time as the mind perceives it to be, which in itself is not "real" time, but the delusion of the mind to explain the things and forces we cannot readily explain in our current state.

Who of us, unless he/she be an enlightened individual, can truly say that the mind cannot alter universal law? We view this law as constant and unalterable, when in fact that is merely another word/fact derived from human explanations, humans that were susceptible to fallacy. It is up to us to break free from these chains and truly open our minds to what really exists in the universe, to really see things as they are, to step outside the laws of physics and into the Way, to take our place with those of us who have been honored to become Real People.
Look at Einstein, he was one of the few to prove the fact that the mind can alter universal law, and the laws of man, with his discovery of General Relativity and Special Relativity. And through these new discoveries arose greater discoveries, new ways of thinking, and new fields of physics such as quantum, theoretical and others that took the last stages of Einsteins work and seek to finish it, to combine the theories of General/Special Relativity together. So he was but one to prove that the mind is truly a power beyond recognition, it is up to us to discover how to finish the journey that he started, and to discover how to use the full potential of the mind.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

why are we programed to Live ? Is it evoloution ? Years of it ? How is it that all life has this same programing ? even fungi, wich clings on to life in boiling hot desserts. Collective conscience ? I think if we truly understood lifes purpose, or the reason why everything lives, we'd be that much closer.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira 1.What is creating it? 2.Does life create itself? 3.If life is expanding then does duality mean it will at some point reduce? 4.What does life come from how does a non-life become life? 5.Is life real and independent? 6.Since life has definition and life is separate is life a substance? If not then what?.	”

1: Nothing, life occurs, as part of a whole web of phenomena.

2: There is no author. If life came after creation, was the creator dead?

“	Originally Posted By: Fighting Fat No it requires an architect, an author. God.	”

Why?
(I've often thought that if God was the creator of the universe, and all that exists within, then it would be such an alien and vast entity that we wouldn't comprehend each other. Any interface an entity of this nature could establish with us would be masking the horrifying nature (to us) of what it was.)

3: Probably. Change is the nature of things. Nothing is permanent. Nothing is permanent.

4:Life comes from nothing, this is the big mystery. Nothingness is the base element of existence. If matter is made from atoms, which are "made from" energy, then what is "energy" made from (being as it can't be created or destroyed?)? Nothing. Non life becomes life by separating itself from nothing.

5: No, a "living being" would not be able to exist without an environment to depend on. In terms of reality, it is dependent on it's separateness for definition, and this requires a "thing" to be separate from. So it can't derive from an independent reality.

__________________
Cling to nothing, except your Lego...

“	Originally Posted By: openmind why are we programed to Live ? Is it evoloution ? Years of it ? How is it that all life has this same programing ? even fungi, wich clings on to life in boiling hot desserts. Collective conscience ? I think if we truly understood lifes purpose, or the reason why everything lives, we'd be that much closer.	”

Good post. That's a good question, and in another context/view, is life really anything more than a fungi/virus/organism? A collective conscience/un-conscience that consumes, propagates, and spreads to new "hosts" to continue this fundamental continuation of species?

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: SunWuKung Why? (I've often thought that if God was the creator of the universe, and all that exists within, then it would be such an alien and vast entity that we wouldn't comprehend each other. Any interface an entity of this nature could establish with us would be masking the horrifying nature (to us) of what it was.)	”

The alternative is that we are a chance happening, yet we know that everything has a cause.

Every single physical object or living being comes from something else, nothing creates or makes itself, therefore, we can say nothing is the cause of it's own existence. This is true even of social or emotional realities.

An alien and vast entity? It is a complicated subject no doubt, yet something deep inside each of us reaches out to the eternal, the constant spiritual essence of our being, and identifies with it.

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat The alternative is that we are a chance happening, yet we know that everything has a cause. Every single physical object or living being comes from something else, nothing creates or makes itself	”

This is very much in keeping with the idea of dependent origination, one of the basic principles of buddhism. This poses a more problematic question regarding the nature of God as creator. If everything has a cause, what caused God? (if He exists, of course).

__________________
Cling to nothing, except your Lego...

Well first of all you have to understand that Christian belief is that God is the ultimate, the greatest and the most perfect reality of all.

Also, you have to understand that it [Christianity] takes the view, first expressed by St. Anselm (1023-1109) in one part of what is known as the 'ontological argument', that to exist is superior to not existing. In other words, and to risk stating the obvious, if something exists, it is more real than something which does not exist. So, if God is perfect, then God must be real and also, there can never have been a time when God did not exist, because not existing would be less perfect than existing and if God is absolutely perfect, then there could never have been a moment when God did not exist.

So, you see, if something created God, that would mean there was something greater than God...You can see that if one follows this line of reasoning one could ask the same question ad infinitum! Quite simply, God is the first cause of everything and is not caused by anything else, the alpha and the omega, without beginning or end.

St. Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274) wrote a fantastic thesis (Summa Theologica) and part of the way he taught us to think about God are his 'Five Ways'-

First Way: The Argument From Motion
St. Thomas Aquinas, studying the works of the Greek philsopher Aristotle, concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion (e.g. the planets, a rolling stone) is put in motion by some other object or force. From this, Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an UNMOVED MOVER (GOD) who first put things in motion. Follow the agrument this way:
1) Nothing can move itself.
2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first object in motion needed a mover.
3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Way: Causation Of Existence
This Way deals with the issue of existence. Aquinas concluded that common sense observation tells us that no object creates itself. In other words, some previous object had to create it. Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things. Follow the agrument this way:
1) There exists things that are caused (created) by other things.
2) Nothing can be the cause of itself (nothing can create itself.)
3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist.
4) Therefore, ther must be an uncaused first cause called God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Third Way: Contingent and Neccessary Objects
This Way defines two types of objects in the universe: contingent beings and necessary beings. A contingent being is an object that can not exist without a necessary being causing its existence. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. This being, called a necessary being, is what we call God. Follow the argument this way:
1) Contingent beings are caused.
2) Not every being can be contingent.
3) There must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings.
4) This necessary being is God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fourth Way: The Agrument From Degrees And Perfection
St. Thomas formulated this Way from a very interesting observation about the qualities of things. For example one may say that of two marble scultures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next. This is referred to as degrees or gradation of a quality. From this fact Aquinas concluded that for any given quality (e.g. goodness, beauty, knowledge) there must be an perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fifth Way: The Agrument From Intelligent Design
The final Way that St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of has to do with the observable universe and the order of nature. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat Well first of all you have to understand that Christian belief is that God is the ultimate, the greatest and the most perfect reality of all. ...if God is perfect, then God must be real and also, there can never have been a time when God did not exist, because not existing would be less perfect than existing and if God is absolutely perfect, then there could never have been a moment when God did not exist...	”

Or, alternatively, God is imperfect. I think what you have posted is a definition of what God would have to be to occupy His post in the universal scheme, and how this could possibly fit into an otherwise contrary physical reality.
This led to a second line of reasoning for me. If God is perfect, omnipotent, then what is free will? If I truly have free will, then God doesn't control me and could be considered incomplete and imperfect.

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat So, you see, if something created God, that would mean there was something greater than God...You can see that if one follows this line of reasoning one could ask the same question ad infinitum! ...	”

perhaps this is a human limitation of perception. If we can't concieve of infinity, does it follow that it can't be real?

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat 2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first object in motion needed a mover. 3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God....	”

3)Why not?
4)How does 2 make 3 true?

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat 3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist. 4) Therefore, ther must be an uncaused first cause called God.	”

3)Why not?
4)How does 3 make 4 true?

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat 2) Not every being can be contingent. 3) There must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings. 4) This necessary being is God.	”

2)Why not?
3)Why?
4)What proof is there that even if 3 is true, that it is the christian God? Why not Siva?

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat ...of two marble scultures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next...there must be an perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.	”

this has more to do with dualist perception on the observer than any abstract perfect ideal. The fact that definitions of beauty are mutable show that they are not absolutes.

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat ...was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.	”

This is akin to Lamarckism, wherein the giraffe's neck grows longer because the giraffe wants to get to the higher leaves. Subsequently it's offspring "develops" these traits.
Darwin argues that the longer necked giraffe is more suitable to the task and therefore more likely to survive. On balance, the latter argument, while unsympathetic to the needs of the human heart, is more plausible. Especially in light of our knowledge of genetics and mutation.

IMHO, God might be a metaphor for a whole bunch of concepts we can't comprehend/effectively percieve as a coherent thought. If these concepts actually formed an entity, I don't think we could establish a relationship with it, no more than an ant could establish dialogue with a blue whale.

__________________
Cling to nothing, except your Lego...