English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-10-18 22:21:12 · 15 answers · asked by los 7 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

15 answers

Its simple never. Absence can not be incarnated, the absence of anything can not take form as it then becomes something and hence is existent. Its a logical paradox. The non-existent is not the same as the existent "absence".

2006-10-19 11:17:51 · answer #1 · answered by Bobby B 4 · 0 0

Non-existent or non-being question does not arise because it comes under the purview of consciousness. If it is maintained as non-existent, then it will create a position of void and one enters into that void - a stage in consciousness of deep sleep where everything becomes latent. This is one aspect of the experience of in the journey or adventure of consciousness but it is not the ultimate reality since even then something remains which is watchful of that state of non-existent.

Consciousness is the nature of the entire universe consisting of both existent objects including jar, etc. or non-existent such as imagined objects like sky flowers, etc.

Every appearance owes its existence to the light of consciousness. Nothing can ever have its own being without the light of consciousness. Being experienced, it is of the nature of consciousness itself, because of its being identical with that light.

"Consciousness is the whole of reality because all existents derive their existence from it, and because in the process of knowing, the known gets identified with It.

Hence, whether in the world or object or mental apprehension of it, there is no state which is not Consciousness or the Self. It is only the experient who always and everywhere exists in the form of the experienced."

Since consciousness is the nature of the universe, therefore in the order to prove it, the means of right knowledge are inadequate, for these means of right knowledge are themselves dependent for their proof on the Self-luminous consciousness and consciousness being ever luminous, it is impossible for anything whatever to veil it, as it is ever luminously present.

Thus, Consciousness is the Reality. The knower, knowledge, and known are all varius forms of consciousness.

The Ultimate Reality is imbued with Universal I-Consciousness which is the source of all manifestation and cannot be proved by any logical means, for all means of proof owe their existence to it, and so cannot prove their own source.

It has been rightly stated in the Atharvaveda X.8.37-38:

"He who knows the string which is spread out and in which are strung all these created beings, as also knows the string of the string, he may know the mighty Brahman.

I know the string which is spread out and is which are strung all these created beings, as also I know the string of the string which in itself is the mighty Brahman."

All this is sufficient to bear out the point that string, as the ultimate constituent of the world on the physical side along with its knower, i.e. the consciousness co-extensive with it, was envisioned by the Vedic Seer Atharvan. The Upanishad exposition of it, on the other hand, has shown the presence of consciousness in matter even up to its smallest constituent, as the string supposedly is. Indeed, it is due to that presence of it there, that the scientist is able to conceive of the string at all through the penetration of his own consciousness into that deepest layer of matter.

In Ucchushmabhairava, Siva says:

"O Dear One, so long as there are no knowers, how can there be anything known. The knower and the known are really the same principle. ..."

Thus, the question of non-existent incarnation incorrect, Consciousness is always present everywhere all the time. That from which everything arises because it is already existing in it and arising, still exists in it, can never be veiled by anything, there is no check to it anywhere.

Epistemology can work only in coordination with ontology.

2006-10-19 16:49:16 · answer #2 · answered by Virgo 2 · 0 0

The postulation of the being of non-being is the reference to an absence. Absence can be incarnated as the non-existence of something.

2006-10-18 22:40:32 · answer #3 · answered by karlrogers2001 3 · 0 0

Well, it can't! How can something that is non-existent incarnate? If it's non -existent it doesn't exist, anywhere. so, what's the question?

2006-10-18 22:30:20 · answer #4 · answered by Sweetie Poo 3 · 0 0

It may happen soon! Obviously you are familiar with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. (The quantum of action is h/2pi). Using a high energy particle/antiparticle collider, exotic states of matter, particles which may have existed at the time of the 'Big Bang' can be created, albeit for an exceedingly short time.Who knows?- with sufficient energy, all sorts of virtual entities may leap out of our infernal machine-angels, demons, dragons, Elvis!

2006-10-19 13:03:17 · answer #5 · answered by troothskr 4 · 0 0

Just because you cannot see it, does not mean that it is non existent. How do you prove that something is non existent in the first place?

2006-10-18 22:24:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

How can the non-existent explode in a Big Bang?

2006-10-22 00:37:37 · answer #7 · answered by jayelthefirst 3 · 0 0

The spirit is a energy form which interfaces with the human body which i call the vehicle of expression.

2006-10-18 22:25:26 · answer #8 · answered by oakesy1971 3 · 0 0

when what you are is no longer perfered, and is put to a stop, as in no longer going in that direction. then it no longer exist, because for something to live it must grow. if it is a dead way, then it no longer exist. the only things that exist are the things that are are growing. putting one way to death, and reincarnating into another way........from evil to love....to die to evil and to rise to a new life of love...........the jesus seed

2006-10-18 23:12:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A word does not exist until you say it, and it ceases to exist when its last echo dies.

But its effects could outlast generations.

Unless they don't speak your language.

2006-10-18 22:26:28 · answer #10 · answered by fiat_knox 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers