Thank you, dear SLAMH, you are kind.Thank you Onkara.
No Duality.
Maybe so. But presuming a God is if anything even more dangerous. It falls squarely into the other extreme, and may easily lead to the most gross forms of self-justification.
Incidentally, no one should "bow" to science. That is not its role.
I also wonder if there is even a dilemma in the lack of knowledge of how Existence came to be. It is legitimate to wonder about that, but it is just as legitimate to just accept that we don't know and it doesn't really matter for practical purposes. If it is a dilemma, it is a very minor one.
Exactly, why presume, why not investigate empirically, but not externally alone, but internally too? The limitation I am hoping to point out is that people cannot find a being outside of them so they conclude there is no "God". This is closer to "spiritual suicide" in my eyes.
By "bowing" I mean resigning oneself to science. It need not mean they deny their individuality or self-control, but that they give up, they commit spiritual suicide by negating that there could possibly be anything else.
I agree, cause and effect are minor by themselves as life goes on regardless. I think there is value in Buddhism drawing the line to help form a solid foundation for investigating oneself without too much debate. Drawing the line helps the investigator come to conclusions through investigation which may have already been reached without investigation. It is not necessary to try to find "god" but it is necessary to look further than science. In other words it is better to investigate than not to do so at all. And I fear science alone provides a false support if no "spiritual" investigation is ever considered.
Last edited: