The statement "There cannot be a state of affairs where only dependent things exist" is False & I'll tell you why. Firstly let me define part of what you said. You said state of affairs & I am translating that to the word circumstance. Now with that said I'll explain why I say it's a false statement. This will take some explaining :) Imagine 1 piece of knowledge that is dependent on the existence of 2 or more other peaces of knowledge for it to exist. (Important note)-Knowledge in and of it's self has no physical form and yet exists, and as such it exists in it's own dimension of reality and because of this it is therefor existing in a place or should I say state of being where only it can exist. Follow along closely please :). The knowledge of the strawberry consists of the knowledge of all of it's constituent parts combined together. If the knowledge of even one of it's constituent parts did not exist, then the knowledge of the strawberry it's self as a whole would not exist and therefor in this respect the knowledge of the strawberry is dependent on the knowledge of all of it's constituent parts. Important facts to help you understand: Fact 1: Knowledge inherently has no physical form & yet exists. What we see is the physical representation of knowledge. Fact 2: Since knowledge inherently has no physical form it inevitably exists in it's own dimension. If the knowledge of something did not exist then we would never see the physical representation of it. Example: If the knowledge of the strawberry did not exist then we would never see a strawberry in our perceived reality. Explanation: Since the knowledge of the strawberry is different then the knowledge of a blueberry they are separate and because of this they have to exist in their own dimension. Summarized Info: The knowledge of the strawberry as a whole is dependent on the knowledge of all of it's constituent parts to exist. Summarized Info: Knowledge can only exist in it's own dimension because it inherently has no physical form and is different from other knowledge. Because of these things I explained, the statement "There cannot be a state of affairs (Circumstance) where only dependent things exist” is proven FALSE:face-blue-smiling:
1 year ago (edited) | 0
:face-blue-smiling:Food for thought to anyone that's interested. To understand God one should first understand the nature of knowledge. Knowledge inherently has no physical form. That which we see is the physical representation of knowledge. For instance, imagine all light bulbs on earth are destroyed, even then the knowledge of the light bulb still exists. Since knowledge inherently has no physical form, it is eternal (no beginning & no end) Now with that said one needs to understand the different types of knowledge. 1st of course is the knowledge of awareness. We know that it exists because it is what we truly are. We are the knowledge of awareness & since we know that knowledge inherently has no physical form, we know that what we truly are is eternal in nature. (no beginning & no end). Our bodies are the physical representation of the knowledge of all it's corresponding parts. If the knowledge of a thing didn't exist then we would never see the physical representation of it. Now if we know that we are eternal in nature, then we know that some other being did not create us, or even create the knowledge of the light bulb, since it too is inherently eternal (no beginning & no end). However, that is not to say there isn't an intelligence of awareness that has been awakened unto the knowledge of all things. (Effectively making them GOD). One could argue that there is truly only this One knowledge of awareness (GOD) in existence and it is focusing it's awareness in every variation of perceived reality simultaneously. Which effectively makes us all apart of a single whole. For instance imagine you where seeing reality through 2 different bodies at the same time, the first body being of a male design and the second body being that of a female design. Now it would still be you perceiving reality through both bodies but individually they would be perceptually separate. On the other hand one could argue that since one piece of knowledge is eternally separate from any other piece of knowledge, like the knowledge of the light bulb is eternally separate from the knowledge of a strawberry. One could argue there is a single unique piece of knowledge (That is you) combined with the knowledge of awareness effectively setting you apart from all others. Eternal none the less.:face-blue-smiling:
1 year ago | 0
sFDawah
JAZAKUM ALLAHU KAYRAN FOR REACHING 100,000 SUBSCRIBES!!!
1 year ago | [YT] | 320