söndagen den 11:e oktober 2009

Cosmology and Zoroastrian logic

Dear Mehran

I agree with you!!!
The fact that there IS a Universe to begin with PROVES that there is something there rather than nothing. That is our starting point, this is what Zarathushtra finds so awesome in The Gathas when he begins to look at the world and put forward his amazing questions regarding existence.
My point is that as Zoroastrians we do not need to separate this THING that we call God from The Universe, rather they co-exist, outside of time and possibly outside of our usual three-dimensional space. Regardless of whether we call this Pantheism or Panentheism (perhaps it is somehting in between that Zarathushtra has in mind).
The very NEED to separate God from The Universe arose far later in history after Zarathushtra as a means of separating Lord from Slave in human society (the Babylonian separation as I call it). We have never had a need for such a separation. To us, The Universe is in itself the very expression of Ahura Mazda, not just a separate entity.
According to modern physics there can even be thousands or even millions of other universes existing parallel to ours, all expressions of the same BEING. And this is where we are all unified in the belief of this being as "Ahura" (that which exists), expressing itself through "Asha" (how things work), manifesting itself as a contempltaing mind ("Mazda") in us as human beings.
This is to me, the LOGIC of the author of The Gathas, Zarathushtra, and it's brilliant logic! Much more logical than the Abrahamic contradictory explanations, where The Law was always constructed first (the Ten Commandments) and the divinity then constructed afterwards to DEFEND the specific law. In Zoroastrianism, Existence is the beginning of all logic, and we make our logical deductions from that fact and not from anywhere else.

Ushta
Alexander

2009/10/11 MoobedyAr Mehran Gheibi



Dear Bahman and Dino
dorood
I understand and accept your these words. I do not want to explain such God and do not believe in such abrahamic God. I am trying to say there is some thing that we call it God, and the statement that there is not any God is completely wrong.
I observe somehow intelligence, wisdom, ability and .... but I do not know any more.
I just try to say there is something. I try to say that world/universe/universes/multiuniverses.... (everything) is/are made things and any made things need necessarily a wise maker....... If you want to know why, pleas ask me to explain once again about why any made thing needs a maker.



--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Special Kain wrote:


Dear Bahman,

Let me please answer even though your question is not addressed to me.
You are absolutely right!!! Analogy is but one inference, and there are three more types of inference, namely deduction, induction and abduction, with science being most concerned with deduction, induction and abduction, but not necessarily with analogy. I guess that Mehran is taking metaphors for granted (since "book" and "author" are only metaphors in this case).
But we should treat metaphors and inferences as compared to other types of inference as what they are.

Ushta, Dino

--- Bahman Noruziaan schrieb am Sa, 10.10.2009:


Mehran,

I am not sure if I can go all the way, comparing the whole of existence with a tiny portion of it which is us, the humans.
Generalizing and extrapolating our understanding of a piece creation and a creator (poem vs poet) to the whole and all of existence, is not that appealing. It may be a good start for young ones to explain the concept of creation, creator and the law governing the creation (i.e. Universe, God and laws of Universe if you like). But for the later development of one's understanding, perhaps, one may see things differently.
This view, in its extreme shape and form is observed in Abrahamic Religions, were God behaves totally like a person but with extreme power.
In the case of Asha as I know, the Gathas call it as the creations of Ahura Mazda, but in very mild and poetic way and not in a very harsh authorative form. Am I not right?

Bahman

Inga kommentarer: