The Causal Proof part2
Tue, 01/22/2008 - 16:49 — admin
TEACHER: You are correct in asserting that Aquinas doesn't convince us by his argument that the cause of the universe is only one. But I don't believe that he attempts to do so. He deals not with the cause of the universe, but with the ultimate origin of all causes. There can only be one original cause. The word “original” means primary or first. An original thing means that from which similar things arise or are copied. The very nature of the concept or meaning of “original” denies the possibility of there being more than one. Original is a category of one. There is one and only one first mover; one and only one original cause.
Therefore, we don't argue with Hume's criticism that a single cause of the universe cannot be ascertained through the principle of cause and effect. Even if we are to admit ten or even ten thousand causes for the universe, however, that should not disturb us in our endeavor to prove that God exists. God is certainly more than a mere creator or designer of universes.
Hume declares that a house or ship or city may have many persons behind it, and then goes on to declare that this is evidence that there may be many 'Deities' and not just one.19 This is not really a valid argument. Either there is one supreme, all-powerful Deity or there is not. There is no question of more than one Supreme Deity.
“Supreme” means that which nothing can be greater than or equal to. “Supreme” means above all else. Also, the very concept of God means He who has no superior or equal. The Number One Entity-that is God. There can only be one Number One. So the argument that there might be many Supreme Beings has no entrance into the search to know if the Supreme Being exists, since the position of God or Supreme Being is a category of one.
MICHAEL: It seems that, in a sense, you are putting forward a form of Anselm's ontological argument.
This second mantra of the yogic scripture Sri Ishopanishad refers to karma yoga, or devotional service: A person may desire to live for hundreds of years if he works according to this truth because that sort of work will not bind him to the law of karma. And there is no alternative to this way for man.MICHAEL: It seems that Aquinas's argument fails to prove that there is a singular cause. Could there not be several causes? For example, a machine may be designed and brought into existence by a great number of persons working in unison, so is it not possible that the universe has more than one designer-more than one cause?
~Sri Ishopanishad, Mantra Two
Science of Identity Foundation – Siddhaswarupananda
TEACHER: You are correct in asserting that Aquinas doesn't convince us by his argument that the cause of the universe is only one. But I don't believe that he attempts to do so. He deals not with the cause of the universe, but with the ultimate origin of all causes. There can only be one original cause. The word “original” means primary or first. An original thing means that from which similar things arise or are copied. The very nature of the concept or meaning of “original” denies the possibility of there being more than one. Original is a category of one. There is one and only one first mover; one and only one original cause.
Therefore, we don't argue with Hume's criticism that a single cause of the universe cannot be ascertained through the principle of cause and effect. Even if we are to admit ten or even ten thousand causes for the universe, however, that should not disturb us in our endeavor to prove that God exists. God is certainly more than a mere creator or designer of universes.
Hume declares that a house or ship or city may have many persons behind it, and then goes on to declare that this is evidence that there may be many 'Deities' and not just one.19 This is not really a valid argument. Either there is one supreme, all-powerful Deity or there is not. There is no question of more than one Supreme Deity.
“Supreme” means that which nothing can be greater than or equal to. “Supreme” means above all else. Also, the very concept of God means He who has no superior or equal. The Number One Entity-that is God. There can only be one Number One. So the argument that there might be many Supreme Beings has no entrance into the search to know if the Supreme Being exists, since the position of God or Supreme Being is a category of one.
MICHAEL: It seems that, in a sense, you are putting forward a form of Anselm's ontological argument.