View allAll Photos Tagged Principles

The moment I wake up

Before I put on my makeup…

#MacroMondays #ReadyfortheDay 2018-05-21

 

Step into the serene grounds of the D.T. Suzuki Museum in Kanazawa, Japan, a tranquil haven dedicated to the celebrated Buddhist philosopher Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. This image captures the museum's water reflection garden, a key element that embodies Suzuki's teachings on Zen and mindfulness. The mirror-like surface of the water perfectly reflects the surrounding trees and the textured stone wall, creating a harmonious blend of natural and man-made beauty.

 

The stone wall, with its light-colored, textured surface, features a small rectangular opening near its base, inviting curiosity and contemplation. The wall serves as both a visual anchor and a symbol of the boundaries and connections between the physical and spiritual worlds. The lush greenery surrounding the pond includes a mix of vibrant green and autumnal hues, adding a rich tapestry of colors to the scene.

 

This tranquil setting encourages visitors to pause, reflect, and connect with nature. The garden's design, characterized by simplicity and elegance, aligns with the principles of Zen, offering a peaceful retreat from the hustle and bustle of everyday life. The water reflection garden is not only a visual delight but also a place for meditative practices, drawing visitors into a deeper state of mindfulness.

 

Whether you are a devotee of Zen philosophy or simply seeking a quiet moment of reflection, the D.T. Suzuki Museum provides an enriching experience that celebrates the harmony between nature and human artistry. This serene garden invites you to explore the depths of Zen teachings and the beauty of mindful living.

Dualism in cosmology is the moral, or spiritual belief that two fundamental concepts exist, which often oppose each other. It is an umbrella term that covers a diversity of views from various religions, including both traditional religions and scriptural religions.

 

Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement of, or conflict between, the benevolent and the malevolent. It simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and independent of how these may be represented. Moral opposites might, for example, exist in a worldview which has one god, more than one god, or none. By contrast, duotheism, bitheism or ditheism implies (at least) two gods. While bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, or light and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system could be one in which one god is a creator, and the other a destroyer. In theology, dualism can also refer to the relationship between the deity and creation or the deity and the universe (see theistic dualism). This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[1] Alternatively, in ontological dualism, the world is divided into two overarching categories. The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism. It is also discussed in Confucianism.

 

Many myths and creation motifs with dualistic cosmologies have been described in ethnographic and anthropological literature. These motifs conceive the world as being created, organized, or influenced by two demiurges, culture heroes, or other mythological beings, who either compete with each other or have a complementary function in creating, arranging or influencing the world. There is a huge diversity of such cosmologies. In some cases, such as among the Chukchi, the beings collaborate rather than competing, and contribute to the creation in a coequal way. In many other instances the two beings are not of the same importance or power (sometimes, one of them is even characterized as gullible). Sometimes they can be contrasted as good versus evil.[2] They may be often believed to be twins or at least brothers.[3][4] Dualistic motifs in mythologies can be observed in all inhabited continents. Zolotaryov concludes that they cannot be explained by diffusion or borrowing, but are rather of convergent origin: they are related to a dualistic organization of society (moieties); in some cultures, this social organization may have ceased to exist, but mythology preserves the memory in more and more disguised ways.[5]

Moral dualism[edit]

 

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.

Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (October 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Moral dualism is the belief of the great complement or conflict between the benevolent and the malevolent. Like ditheism/bitheism (see below), moral dualism does not imply the absence of monist or monotheistic principles. Moral dualism simply implies that there are two moral opposites at work, independent of any interpretation of what might be "moral" and—unlike ditheism/bitheism—independent of how these may be represented.

 

For example, Mazdaism (Mazdean Zoroastrianism) is both dualistic and monotheistic (but not monist by definition) since in that philosophy God—the Creator—is purely good, and the antithesis—which is also uncreated–is an absolute one. Zurvanism (Zurvanite Zoroastrianism), Manichaeism, and Mandaeism are representative of dualistic and monist philosophies since each has a supreme and transcendental First Principle from which the two equal-but-opposite entities then emanate. This is also true for the lesser-known Christian gnostic religions, such as Bogomils, Catharism, and so on. More complex forms of monist dualism also exist, for instance in Hermeticism, where Nous "thought"—that is described to have created man—brings forth both good and evil, dependent on interpretation, whether it receives prompting from the God or from the Demon. Duality with pluralism is considered a logical fallacy.

 

History[edit]

Moral dualism began as a theological belief. Dualism was first seen implicitly in Egyptian religious beliefs by the contrast of the gods Set (disorder, death) and Osiris (order, life).[6] The first explicit conception of dualism came from the Ancient Persian religion of Zoroastrianism around the mid-fifth century BC. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion that believes that Ahura Mazda is the eternal creator of all good things. Any violations of Ahura Mazda's order arise from druj, which is everything uncreated. From this comes a significant choice for humans to make. Either they fully participate in human life for Ahura Mazda or they do not and give druj power. Personal dualism is even more distinct in the beliefs of later religions.

 

The religious dualism of Christianity between good and evil is not a perfect dualism as God (good) will inevitably destroy Satan (evil). Early Christian dualism is largely based on Platonic Dualism (See: Neoplatonism and Christianity). There is also a personal dualism in Christianity with a soul-body distinction based on the idea of an immaterial Christian soul.[7]

 

Duotheism, bitheism, ditheism[edit]

When used with regards to multiple gods, dualism may refer to duotheism, bitheism, or ditheism. Although ditheism/bitheism imply moral dualism, they are not equivalent: ditheism/bitheism implies (at least) two gods, while moral dualism does not necessarily imply theism (theos = god) at all.

 

Both bitheism and ditheism imply a belief in two equally powerful gods with complementary or antonymous properties; however, while bitheism implies harmony, ditheism implies rivalry and opposition, such as between good and evil, bright and dark, or summer and winter. For example, a ditheistic system would be one in which one god is creative, the other is destructive (cf. theodicy). In the original conception of Zoroastrianism, for example, Ahura Mazda was the spirit of ultimate good, while Ahriman (Angra Mainyu) was the spirit of ultimate evil.

 

In a bitheistic system, by contrast, where the two deities are not in conflict or opposition, one could be male and the other female (cf. duotheism[clarification needed]). One well-known example of a bitheistic or duotheistic theology based on gender polarity is found in the neopagan religion of Wicca. In Wicca, dualism is represented in the belief of a god and a goddess as a dual partnership in ruling the universe. This is centered on the worship of a divine couple, the Moon Goddess and the Horned God, who are regarded as lovers. However, there is also a ditheistic theme within traditional Wicca, as the Horned God has dual aspects of bright and dark - relating to day/night, summer/winter - expressed as the Oak King and the Holly King, who in Wiccan myth and ritual are said to engage in battle twice a year for the hand of the Goddess, resulting in the changing seasons. (Within Wicca, bright and dark do not correspond to notions of "good" and "evil" but are aspects of the natural world, much like yin and yang in Taoism.)

 

Radical and mitigated dualism[edit]

Radical Dualism – or absolute Dualism which posits two co-equal divine forces.[8] Manichaeism conceives of two previously coexistent realms of light and darkness which become embroiled in conflict, owing to the chaotic actions of the latter. Subsequently, certain elements of the light became entrapped within darkness; the purpose of material creation is to enact the slow process of extraction of these individual elements, at the end of which the kingdom of light will prevail over darkness. Manicheanism likely inherits this dualistic mythology from Zoroastrianism, in which the eternal spirit Ahura Mazda is opposed by his antithesis, Angra Mainyu; the two are engaged in a cosmic struggle, the conclusion of which will likewise see Ahura Mazda triumphant. 'The Hymn of the Pearl' included the belief that the material world corresponds to some sort of malevolent intoxication brought about by the powers of darkness to keep elements of the light trapped inside it in a state of drunken distraction.

Mitigated Dualism – is where one of the two principles is in some way inferior to the other. Such classical Gnostic movements as the Sethians conceived of the material world as being created by a lesser divinity than the true God that was the object of their devotion. The spiritual world is conceived of as being radically different from the material world, co-extensive with the true God, and the true home of certain enlightened members of humanity; thus, these systems were expressive of a feeling of acute alienation within the world, and their resultant aim was to allow the soul to escape the constraints presented by the physical realm.[8]

However, bitheistic and ditheistic principles are not always so easily contrastable, for instance in a system where one god is the representative of summer and drought and the other of winter and rain/fertility (cf. the mythology of Persephone). Marcionism, an early Christian sect, held that the Old and New Testaments were the work of two opposing gods: both were First Principles, but of different religions.[9]

 

Theistic dualism[edit]

In theology, dualism can refer to the relationship between God and creation or God and the universe. This form of dualism is a belief shared in certain traditions of Christianity and Hinduism.[10][1]

 

In Christianity[edit]

 

The Cathars being expelled from Carcassonne in 1209. The Cathars were denounced as heretics by the Roman Catholic Church for their dualist beliefs.

The dualism between God and Creation has existed as a central belief in multiple historical sects and traditions of Christianity, including Marcionism, Catharism, Paulicianism, and other forms of Gnostic Christianity. Christian dualism refers to the belief that God and creation are distinct, but interrelated through an indivisible bond.[1] However, Gnosticism is a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in a belief in a distinction between a supreme, transcendent God and a blind, evil demiurge responsible for creating the material universe, thereby trapping the divine spark within matter.[11]

 

In sects like the Cathars and the Paulicians, this is a dualism between the material world, created by an evil god, and a moral god. Historians divide Christian dualism into absolute dualism, which held that the good and evil gods were equally powerful, and mitigated dualism, which held that material evil was subordinate to the spiritual good.[12] The belief, by Christian theologians who adhere to a libertarian or compatibilist view of free will, that free will separates humankind from God has also been characterized as a form of dualism.[1] The theologian Leroy Stephens Rouner compares the dualism of Christianity with the dualism that exists in Zoroastrianism and the Samkhya tradition of Hinduism. The theological use of the word dualism dates back to 1700, in a book that describes the dualism between good and evil.[1]

 

The tolerance of dualism ranges widely among the different Christian traditions. As a monotheistic religion, the conflict between dualism and monism has existed in Christianity since its inception.[13] The 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia describes that, in the Catholic Church, "the dualistic hypothesis of an eternal world existing side by side with God was of course rejected" by the thirteenth century, but mind–body dualism was not.[14] The problem of evil is difficult to reconcile with absolute monism, and has prompted some Christian sects to veer towards dualism. Gnostic forms of Christianity were more dualistic, and some Gnostic traditions posited that the Devil was separate from God as an independent deity.[13] The Christian dualists of the Byzantine Empire, the Paulicians, were seen as Manichean heretics by Byzantine theologians. This tradition of Christian dualism, founded by Constantine-Silvanus, argued that the universe was created through evil and separate from a moral God.[15]

 

The Cathars, a Christian sect in southern France, believed that there was a dualism between two gods, one representing good and the other representing evil. Whether or not the Cathari possessed direct historical influence from ancient Gnosticism is a matter of dispute, as the basic conceptions of Gnostic cosmology are to be found in Cathar beliefs (most distinctly in their notion of a lesser creator god), though unlike the second century Gnostics, they did not apparently place any special relevance upon knowledge (gnosis) as an effective salvific force. In any case, the Roman Catholic Church denounced the Cathars as heretics, and sought to crush the movement in the 13th century. The Albigensian Crusade was initiated by Pope Innocent III in 1208 to remove the Cathars from Languedoc in France, where they were known as Albigesians. The Inquisition, which began in 1233 under Pope Gregory IX, also targeted the Cathars.[16]

 

In Hinduism[edit]

The Dvaita Vedanta school of Indian philosophy espouses a dualism between God and the universe by theorizing the existence of two separate realities. The first and the more important reality is that of Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu or Brahman. Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu is the supreme Self, God, the absolute truth of the universe, the independent reality. The second reality is that of dependent but equally real universe that exists with its own separate essence. Everything that is composed of the second reality, such as individual soul (Jiva), matter, etc. exist with their own separate reality. The distinguishing factor of this philosophy as opposed to Advaita Vedanta (monistic conclusion of Vedas) is that God takes on a personal role and is seen as a real eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.[17][better source needed] Because the existence of individuals is grounded in the divine, they are depicted as reflections, images or even shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical with the divine. Salvation therefore is described as the realization that all finite reality is essentially dependent on the Supreme.[18]

 

Ontological dualism[edit]

 

The yin and yang symbolizes the duality in nature and all things in the Taoist religion.

Alternatively, dualism can mean the tendency of humans to perceive and understand the world as being divided into two overarching categories. In this sense, it is dualistic when one perceives a tree as a thing separate from everything surrounding it. This form of ontological dualism exists in Taoism and Confucianism, beliefs that divide the universe into the complementary oppositions of yin and yang.[19] In traditions such as classical Hinduism (Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika and the later Vedanta schools, which accepted the theory of Gunas), Zen Buddhism or Islamic Sufism, a key to enlightenment is "transcending" this sort of dualistic thinking, without merely substituting dualism with monism or pluralism.

 

In Chinese philosophy[edit]

 

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.

Find sources: "Dualistic cosmology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The opposition and combination of the universe's two basic principles of yin and yang is a large part of Chinese philosophy, and is an important feature of Taoism, both as a philosophy and as a religion, although the concept developed much earlier. Some argue that yin and yang were originally an earth and sky god, respectively.[20] As one of the oldest principles in Chinese philosophy, yin and yang are also discussed in Confucianism, but to a lesser extent.

 

Some of the common associations with yang and yin, respectively, are: male and female, light and dark, active and passive, motion and stillness. Some scholars believe that the two ideas may have originally referred to two opposite sides of a mountain, facing towards and away from the sun.[20] The yin and yang symbol in actuality has very little to do with Western dualism; instead it represents the philosophy of balance, where two opposites co-exist in harmony and are able to transmute into each other. In the yin-yang symbol there is a dot of yin in yang and a dot of yang in yin. In Taoism, this symbolizes the inter-connectedness of the opposite forces as different aspects of Tao, the First Principle. Contrast is needed to create a distinguishable reality, without which we would experience nothingness. Therefore, the independent principles of yin and yang are actually dependent on one another for each other's distinguishable existence.

 

The complementary dualistic concept seen in yin and yang represent the reciprocal interaction throughout nature, related to a feedback loop, where opposing forces do not exchange in opposition but instead exchange reciprocally to promote stabilization similar to homeostasis. An underlying principle in Taoism states that within every independent entity lies a part of its opposite. Within sickness lies health and vice versa. This is because all opposites are manifestations of the single Tao, and are therefore not independent from one another, but rather a variation of the same unifying force throughout all of nature.

 

In traditional religions[edit]

Samoyed peoples[edit]

In a Nenets myth, Num and Nga collaborate and compete with each other, creating land,[21] there are also other myths about competing-collaborating demiurges.[22]

 

Comparative studies of Kets and neighboring peoples[edit]

Among others, also dualistic myths were investigated in researches which tried to compare the mythologies of Siberian peoples and settle the problem of their origins. Vyacheslav Ivanov and Vladimir Toporov compared the mythology of Ket people with those of speakers of Uralic languages, assuming in the studies, that there are modelling semiotic systems in the compared mythologies; and they have also made typological comparisons.[23][24] Among others, from possibly Uralic mythological analogies, those of Ob-Ugric peoples[25] and Samoyedic peoples[26] are mentioned. Some other discussed analogies (similar folklore motifs, and purely typological considerations, certain binary pairs in symbolics) may be related to dualistic organization of society—some of such dualistic features can be found at these compared peoples.[27] It must be admitted that, for Kets, neither dualistic organization of society[28] nor cosmological dualism[29] has been researched thoroughly: if such features existed at all, they have either weakened or remained largely undiscovered;[28] although there are some reports on division into two exogamous patrilinear moieties,[30] folklore on conflicts of mythological figures, and also on cooperation of two beings in creating the land:[29] the diving of the water fowl.[31] If we include dualistic cosmologies meant in broad sense, not restricted to certain concrete motifs, then we find that they are much more widespread, they exist not only among some Siberian peoples, but there are examples in each inhabited continent.[32]

 

Chukchi[edit]

A Chukchi myth and its variations report the creation of the world; in some variations, it is achieved by the collaboration of several beings (birds, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator and the raven, collaborating in a coequal way; or the creator alone, using the birds only as assistants).[33][34]

 

Fuegians[edit]

See also: Fuegians § Spiritual culture

All three Fuegian tribes had dualistic myths about culture heros.[35] The Yámana have dualistic myths about the two [joalox] brothers. They act as culture heroes, and sometimes stand in an antagonistic relation with each other, introducing opposite laws. Their figures can be compared to the Kwanyip-brothers of the Selk'nam.[36] In general, the presence of dualistic myths in two compared cultures does not imply relatedness or diffusion necessarily.[32]

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualistic_cosmology

 

In spirituality, nondualism, also called non-duality, means "not two" or "one undivided without a second".[1][2] Nondualism primarily refers to a mature state of consciousness, in which the dichotomy of I-other is "transcended", and awareness is described as "centerless" and "without dichotomies". Although this state of consciousness may seem to appear spontaneous,[note 1] it usually follows prolonged preparation through ascetic or meditative/contemplative practice, which may include ethical injunctions. While the term "nondualism" is derived from Advaita Vedanta, descriptions of nondual consciousness can be found within Hinduism (Turiya, sahaja), Buddhism (emptiness, pariniṣpanna, nature of mind, rigpa), Islam (Wahdat al Wujud, Fanaa, and Haqiqah) and western Christian and neo-Platonic traditions (henosis, mystical union).

 

The Asian ideas of nondualism developed in the Vedic and post-Vedic Upanishadic philosophies around 800 BCE,[3] as well as in the Buddhist traditions.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought are found in the earlier Hindu Upanishads such as Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, as well as other pre-Buddhist Upanishads such as the Chandogya Upanishad, which emphasizes the unity of individual soul called Atman and the Supreme called Brahman. In Hinduism, nondualism has more commonly become associated with the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara.[5]

 

In the Buddhist tradition non-duality is associated with the teachings of emptiness (śūnyatā) and the two truths doctrine, particularly the Madhyamaka teaching of the non-duality of absolute and relative truth,[6][7] and the Yogachara notion of "mind/thought only" (citta-matra) or "representation-only" (vijñaptimātra).[5] These teachings, coupled with the doctrine of Buddha-nature have been influential concepts in the subsequent development of Mahayana Buddhism, not only in India, but also in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism, most notably in Chán (Zen) and Vajrayana.

 

Western Neo-Platonism is an essential element of both Christian contemplation and mysticism, and of Western esotericism and modern spirituality, especially Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, Universalism and Perennialism.Etymology[edit]

When referring to nondualism, Hinduism generally uses the Sanskrit term Advaita, while Buddhism uses Advaya (Tibetan: gNis-med, Chinese: pu-erh, Japanese: fu-ni).[8]

 

"Advaita" (अद्वैत) is from Sanskrit roots a, not; dvaita, dual, and is usually translated as "nondualism", "nonduality" and "nondual". The term "nondualism" and the term "advaita" from which it originates are polyvalent terms. The English word's origin is the Latin duo meaning "two" prefixed with "non-" meaning "not".

 

"Advaya" (अद्वय) is also a Sanskrit word that means "identity, unique, not two, without a second," and typically refers to the two truths doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, especially Madhyamaka.

 

One of the earliest uses of the word Advaita is found in verse 4.3.32 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (~800 BCE), and in verses 7 and 12 of the Mandukya Upanishad (variously dated to have been composed between 500 BCE to 200 CE).[9] The term appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the section with a discourse of the oneness of Atman (individual soul) and Brahman (universal consciousness), as follows:[10]

 

An ocean is that one seer, without any duality [Advaita]; this is the Brahma-world, O King. Thus did Yajnavalkya teach him. This is his highest goal, this is his highest success, this is his highest world, this is his highest bliss. All other creatures live on a small portion of that bliss.

 

— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.32, [11][12][13]

The English term "nondual" was also informed by early translations of the Upanishads in Western languages other than English from 1775. These terms have entered the English language from literal English renderings of "advaita" subsequent to the first wave of English translations of the Upanishads. These translations commenced with the work of Müller (1823–1900), in the monumental Sacred Books of the East (1879).

 

Max Müller rendered "advaita" as "Monism", as have many recent scholars.[14][15][16] However, some scholars state that "advaita" is not really monism.[17]

 

Definitions[edit]

See also: Monism, Mind-body dualism, Dualistic cosmology, and Pluralism (philosophy)

Nondualism is a fuzzy concept, for which many definitions can be found.[note 2]

 

According to Espín and Nickoloff, "nondualism" is the thought in some Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist schools, which, generally speaking:

 

... teaches that the multiplicity of the universe is reducible to one essential reality."[18]

 

However, since there are similar ideas and terms in a wide variety of spiritualities and religions, ancient and modern, no single definition for the English word "nonduality" can suffice, and perhaps it is best to speak of various "nondualities" or theories of nonduality.[19]

 

David Loy, who sees non-duality between subject and object as a common thread in Taoism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Advaita Vedanta,[20][note 3] distinguishes "Five Flavors Of Nonduality":[web 1]

 

The negation of dualistic thinking in pairs of opposites. The Yin-Yang symbol of Taoism symbolises the transcendence of this dualistic way of thinking.[web 1]

Monism, the nonplurality of the world. Although the phenomenal world appears as a plurality of "things", in reality they are "of a single cloth".[web 1]

Advaita, the nondifference of subject and object, or nonduality between subject and object.[web 1]

Advaya, the identity of phenomena and the Absolute, the "nonduality of duality and nonduality",[web 1] c.q. the nonduality of relative and ultimate truth as found in Madhyamaka Buddhism and the two truths doctrine.

Mysticism, a mystical unity between God and man.[web 1]

The idea of nondualism is typically contrasted with dualism, with dualism defined as the view that the universe and the nature of existence consists of two realities, such as the God and the world, or as God and Devil, or as mind and matter, and so on.[23][24]

 

Ideas of nonduality are also taught in some western religions and philosophies, and it has gained attraction and popularity in modern western spirituality and New Age-thinking.[25]

 

Different theories and concepts which can be linked to nonduality are taught in a wide variety of religious traditions. These include:

 

Hinduism:

In the Upanishads, which teach a doctrine that has been interpreted in a nondualistic way, mainly tat tvam asi.[26]

The Advaita Vedanta of Shankara[27][26] which teaches that a single pure consciousness is the only reality, and that the world is unreal (Maya).

Non-dual forms of Hindu Tantra[28] including Kashmira Shaivism[29][28] and the goddess centered Shaktism. Their view is similar to Advaita, but they teach that the world is not unreal, but it is the real manifestation of consciousness.[30]

Forms of Hindu Modernism which mainly teach Advaita and modern Indian saints like Ramana Maharshi and Swami Vivekananda.

Buddhism:

"Shūnyavāda (emptiness view) or the Mādhyamaka school",[31][32] which holds that there is a non-dual relationship (that is, there is no true separation) between conventional truth and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.

"Vijnānavāda (consciousness view) or the Yogācāra school",[31][33] which holds that there is no ultimate perceptual and conceptual division between a subject and its objects, or a cognizer and that which is cognized. It also argues against mind-body dualism, holding that there is only consciousness.

Tathagatagarbha-thought,[33] which holds that all beings have the potential to become Buddhas.

Vajrayana-buddhism,[34] including Tibetan Buddhist traditions of Dzogchen[35] and Mahamudra.[36]

East Asian Buddhist traditions like Zen[37] and Huayan, particularly their concept of interpenetration.

Sikhism,[38] which usually teaches a duality between God and humans, but was given a nondual interpretation by Bhai Vir Singh.

Taoism,[39] which teaches the idea of a single subtle universal force or cosmic creative power called Tao (literally "way").

Subud[25]

Abrahamic traditions:

Christian mystics who promote a "nondual experience", such as Meister Eckhart and Julian of Norwich. The focus of this Christian nondualism is on bringing the worshiper closer to God and realizing a "oneness" with the Divine.[40]

Sufism[39]

Jewish Kabbalah

Western traditions:

Neo-platonism [41] which teaches there is a single source of all reality, The One.

Western philosophers like Hegel, Spinoza and Schopenhauer.[41] They defended different forms of philosophical monism or Idealism.

Transcendentalism, which was influenced by German Idealism and Indian religions.

Theosophy

New age

Hinduism[edit]

"Advaita" refers to nondualism, non-distinction between realities, the oneness of Atman (individual self) and Brahman (the single universal existence), as in Vedanta, Shaktism and Shaivism.[42] Although the term is best known from the Advaita Vedanta school of Adi Shankara, "advaita" is used in treatises by numerous medieval era Indian scholars, as well as modern schools and teachers.[note 4]

 

The Hindu concept of Advaita refers to the idea that all of the universe is one essential reality, and that all facets and aspects of the universe is ultimately an expression or appearance of that one reality.[42] According to Dasgupta and Mohanta, non-dualism developed in various strands of Indian thought, both Vedic and Buddhist, from the Upanishadic period onward.[4] The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought may be found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which pre-dates the earliest Buddhism. Pre-sectarian Buddhism may also have been responding to the teachings of the Chandogya Upanishad, rejecting some of its Atman-Brahman related metaphysics.[43][note 5]

 

Advaita appears in different shades in various schools of Hinduism such as in Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), Suddhadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), non-dual Shaivism and Shaktism.[42][46][47] In the Advaita Vedanta of Adi Shankara, advaita implies that all of reality is one with Brahman,[42] that the Atman (soul, self) and Brahman (ultimate unchanging reality) are one.[48][49] The advaita ideas of some Hindu traditions contrasts with the schools that defend dualism or Dvaita, such as that of Madhvacharya who stated that the experienced reality and God are two (dual) and distinct.[50][51]

 

Vedanta[edit]

Main article: Vedanta

Several schools of Vedanta teach a form of nondualism. The best-known is Advaita Vedanta, but other nondual Vedanta schools also have a significant influence and following, such as Vishishtadvaita Vedanta and Shuddhadvaita,[42] both of which are bhedabheda.

 

Advaita Vedanta[edit]

Main article: Advaita Vedanta

 

Swans are important figures in Advaita

The nonduality of the Advaita Vedanta is of the identity of Brahman and the Atman.[52] Advaita has become a broad current in Indian culture and religions, influencing subsequent traditions like Kashmir Shaivism.

 

The oldest surviving manuscript on Advaita Vedanta is by Gauḍapāda (6th century CE),[5] who has traditionally been regarded as the teacher of Govinda bhagavatpāda and the grandteacher of Adi Shankara. Advaita is best known from the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara (788-820 CE), who states that Brahman, the single unified eternal truth, is pure Being, Consciousness and Bliss (Sat-cit-ananda).[53]

 

Advaita, states Murti, is the knowledge of Brahman and self-consciousness (Vijnana) without differences.[54] The goal of Vedanta is to know the "truly real" and thus become one with it.[55] According to Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is the highest Reality,[56][57][58] The universe, according to Advaita philosophy, does not simply come from Brahman, it is Brahman. Brahman is the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.[57] Brahman is also that which is the cause of all changes.[57][59][60] Brahman is the "creative principle which lies realized in the whole world".[61]

 

The nondualism of Advaita, relies on the Hindu concept of Ātman which is a Sanskrit word that means "real self" of the individual,[62][63] "essence",[web 3] and soul.[62][64] Ātman is the first principle,[65] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. Atman is the Universal Principle, one eternal undifferentiated self-luminous consciousness, asserts Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism.[66][67]

 

Advaita Vedanta philosophy considers Atman as self-existent awareness, limitless, non-dual and same as Brahman.[68] Advaita school asserts that there is "soul, self" within each living entity which is fully identical with Brahman.[69][70] This identity holds that there is One Soul that connects and exists in all living beings, regardless of their shapes or forms, there is no distinction, no superior, no inferior, no separate devotee soul (Atman), no separate God soul (Brahman).[69] The Oneness unifies all beings, there is the divine in every being, and all existence is a single Reality, state the Advaita Vedantins.[71] The nondualism concept of Advaita Vedanta asserts that each soul is non-different from the infinite Brahman.[72]

 

Advaita Vedanta – Three levels of reality[edit]

Advaita Vedanta adopts sublation as the criterion to postulate three levels of ontological reality:[73][74]

 

Pāramārthika (paramartha, absolute), the Reality that is metaphysically true and ontologically accurate. It is the state of experiencing that "which is absolutely real and into which both other reality levels can be resolved". This experience can't be sublated (exceeded) by any other experience.[73][74]

Vyāvahārika (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya,[75] consisting of the empirical or pragmatic reality. It is ever-changing over time, thus empirically true at a given time and context but not metaphysically true. It is "our world of experience, the phenomenal world that we handle every day when we are awake". It is the level in which both jiva (living creatures or individual souls) and Iswara are true; here, the material world is also true.[74]

Prāthibhāsika (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), "reality based on imagination alone". It is the level of experience in which the mind constructs its own reality. A well-known example is the perception of a rope in the dark as being a snake.[74]

Similarities and differences with Buddhism[edit]

Scholars state that Advaita Vedanta was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism, given the common terminology and methodology and some common doctrines.[76][77] Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state:

 

In any event a close relationship between the Mahayana schools and Vedanta did exist, with the latter borrowing some of the dialectical techniques, if not the specific doctrines, of the former.[78]

 

Advaita Vedanta is related to Buddhist philosophy, which promotes ideas like the two truths doctrine and the doctrine that there is only consciousness (vijñapti-mātra). It is possible that the Advaita philosopher Gaudapada was influenced by Buddhist ideas.[5] Shankara harmonised Gaudapada's ideas with the Upanishadic texts, and developed a very influential school of orthodox Hinduism.[79][80]

 

The Buddhist term vijñapti-mātra is often used interchangeably with the term citta-mātra, but they have different meanings. The standard translation of both terms is "consciousness-only" or "mind-only." Advaita Vedanta has been called "idealistic monism" by scholars, but some disagree with this label.[81][82] Another concept found in both Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is Ajativada ("ajāta"), which Gaudapada adopted from Nagarjuna's philosophy.[83][84][note 6] Gaudapada "wove [both doctrines] into a philosophy of the Mandukaya Upanisad, which was further developed by Shankara.[86][note 7]

 

Michael Comans states there is a fundamental difference between Buddhist thought and that of Gaudapada, in that Buddhism has as its philosophical basis the doctrine of Dependent Origination according to which "everything is without an essential nature (nissvabhava), and everything is empty of essential nature (svabhava-sunya)", while Gaudapada does not rely on this principle at all. Gaudapada's Ajativada is an outcome of reasoning applied to an unchanging nondual reality according to which "there exists a Reality (sat) that is unborn (aja)" that has essential nature (svabhava), and this is the "eternal, fearless, undecaying Self (Atman) and Brahman".[88] Thus, Gaudapada differs from Buddhist scholars such as Nagarjuna, states Comans, by accepting the premises and relying on the fundamental teaching of the Upanishads.[88] Among other things, Vedanta school of Hinduism holds the premise, "Atman exists, as self evident truth", a concept it uses in its theory of nondualism. Buddhism, in contrast, holds the premise, "Atman does not exist (or, An-atman) as self evident".[89][90][91]

 

Mahadevan suggests that Gaudapada adopted Buddhist terminology and adapted its doctrines to his Vedantic goals, much like early Buddhism adopted Upanishadic terminology and adapted its doctrines to Buddhist goals; both used pre-existing concepts and ideas to convey new meanings.[92] Dasgupta and Mohanta note that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta are not opposing systems, but "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara."[4]

 

Vishishtadvaita Vedanta[edit]

 

Ramanuja, founder of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, taught 'qualified nondualism' doctrine.

See also: Bhedabheda

Vishishtadvaita Vedanta is another main school of Vedanta and teaches the nonduality of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as "qualified monism," or "qualified non-dualism," or "attributive monism."

 

According to this school, the world is real, yet underlying all the differences is an all-embracing unity, of which all "things" are an "attribute." Ramanuja, the main proponent of Vishishtadvaita philosophy contends that the Prasthana Traya ("The three courses") – namely the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Brahma Sutras – are to be interpreted in a way that shows this unity in diversity, for any other way would violate their consistency.

 

Vedanta Desika defines Vishishtadvaita using the statement: Asesha Chit-Achit Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam – "Brahman, as qualified by the sentient and insentient modes (or attributes), is the only reality."

 

Neo-Vedanta[edit]

Main articles: Neo-Vedanta, Swami Vivekananda, and Ramakrishna Mission

Neo-Vedanta, also called "neo-Hinduism"[93] is a modern interpretation of Hinduism which developed in response to western colonialism and orientalism, and aims to present Hinduism as a "homogenized ideal of Hinduism"[94] with Advaita Vedanta as its central doctrine.[95]

 

Neo-Vedanta, as represented by Vivekananda and Radhakrishnan, is indebted to Advaita vedanta, but also reflects Advaya-philosophy. A main influence on neo-Advaita was Ramakrishna, himself a bhakta and tantrika, and the guru of Vivekananda. According to Michael Taft, Ramakrishna reconciled the dualism of formlessness and form.[96] Ramakrishna regarded the Supreme Being to be both Personal and Impersonal, active and inactive:

 

When I think of the Supreme Being as inactive – neither creating nor preserving nor destroying – I call Him Brahman or Purusha, the Impersonal God. When I think of Him as active – creating, preserving and destroying – I call Him Sakti or Maya or Prakriti, the Personal God. But the distinction between them does not mean a difference. The Personal and Impersonal are the same thing, like milk and its whiteness, the diamond and its lustre, the snake and its wriggling motion. It is impossible to conceive of the one without the other. The Divine Mother and Brahman are one.[97]

 

Radhakrishnan acknowledged the reality and diversity of the world of experience, which he saw as grounded in and supported by the absolute or Brahman.[web 4][note 8] According to Anil Sooklal, Vivekananda's neo-Advaita "reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism":[99]

 

The Neo-Vedanta is also Advaitic inasmuch as it holds that Brahman, the Ultimate Reality, is one without a second, ekamevadvitiyam. But as distinguished from the traditional Advaita of Sankara, it is a synthetic Vedanta which reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism and also other theories of reality. In this sense it may also be called concrete monism in so far as it holds that Brahman is both qualified, saguna, and qualityless, nirguna.[99]

 

Radhakrishnan also reinterpreted Shankara's notion of maya. According to Radhakrishnan, maya is not a strict absolute idealism, but "a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real."[web 4] According to Sarma, standing in the tradition of Nisargadatta Maharaj, Advaitavāda means "spiritual non-dualism or absolutism",[100] in which opposites are manifestations of the Absolute, which itself is immanent and transcendent:[101]

 

All opposites like being and non-being, life and death, good and evil, light and darkness, gods and men, soul and nature are viewed as manifestations of the Absolute which is immanent in the universe and yet transcends it.[102]

 

Kashmir Shaivism[edit]

Main articles: Shaivism and Kashmir Shaivism

Part of a series on

Shaivism

SaivismFlag.svg

Deities[show]

Scriptures and texts[show]

Philosophy[show]

Practices[show]

Schools[show]

Scholars[show]

Related[show]

vte

Advaita is also a central concept in various schools of Shaivism, such as Kashmir Shaivism[42] and Shiva Advaita.

 

Kashmir Shaivism is a school of Śaivism, described by Abhinavagupta[note 9] as "paradvaita", meaning "the supreme and absolute non-dualism".[web 5] It is categorized by various scholars as monistic[103] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism,[104] realistic idealism,[105] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism[105]).

 

Kashmir Saivism is based on a strong monistic interpretation of the Bhairava Tantras and its subcategory the Kaula Tantras, which were tantras written by the Kapalikas.[106] There was additionally a revelation of the Siva Sutras to Vasugupta.[106] Kashmir Saivism claimed to supersede the dualistic Shaiva Siddhanta.[107] Somananda, the first theologian of monistic Saivism, was the teacher of Utpaladeva, who was the grand-teacher of Abhinavagupta, who in turn was the teacher of Ksemaraja.[106][108]

 

The philosophy of Kashmir Shaivism can be seen in contrast to Shankara's Advaita.[109] Advaita Vedanta holds that Brahman is inactive (niṣkriya) and the phenomenal world is an illusion (māyā). In Kashmir Shavisim, all things are a manifestation of the Universal Consciousness, Chit or Brahman.[110][111] Kashmir Shavisim sees the phenomenal world (Śakti) as real: it exists, and has its being in Consciousness (Chit).[112]

 

Kashmir Shaivism was influenced by, and took over doctrines from, several orthodox and heterodox Indian religious and philosophical traditions.[113] These include Vedanta, Samkhya, Patanjali Yoga and Nyayas, and various Buddhist schools, including Yogacara and Madhyamika,[113] but also Tantra and the Nath-tradition.[114]

 

Contemporary vernacular Advaita[edit]

Advaita is also part of other Indian traditions, which are less strongly, or not all, organised in monastic and institutional organisations. Although often called "Advaita Vedanta," these traditions have their origins in vernacular movements and "householder" traditions, and have close ties to the Nath, Nayanars and Sant Mat traditions.

 

Ramana Maharshi[edit]

 

Ramana Maharshi (1879–1950) explained his insight using Shaiva Siddhanta, Advaita Vedanta and Yoga teachings.

Main article: Ramana Maharshi

Ramana Maharshi (30 December 1879 – 14 April 1950) is widely acknowledged as one of the outstanding Indian gurus of modern times.[115] Ramana's teachings are often interpreted as Advaita Vedanta, though Ramana Maharshi never "received diksha (initiation) from any recognised authority".[web 6] Ramana himself did not call his insights advaita:

 

D. Does Sri Bhagavan advocate advaita?

M. Dvaita and advaita are relative terms. They are based on the sense of duality. The Self is as it is. There is neither dvaita nor advaita. "I Am that I Am."[note 10] Simple Being is the Self.[117]

 

Neo-Advaita[edit]

Main article: Neo-Advaita

Neo-Advaita is a New Religious Movement based on a modern, western interpretation of Advaita Vedanta, especially the teachings of Ramana Maharshi.[118] According to Arthur Versluis, neo-Advaita is part of a larger religious current which he calls immediatism,[119][web 9] "the assertion of immediate spiritual illumination without much if any preparatory practice within a particular religious tradition."[web 9] Neo-Advaita is criticized for this immediatism and its lack of preparatory practices.[120][note 11][122][note 12] Notable neo-advaita teachers are H. W. L. Poonja[123][118] and his students Gangaji,[124] Andrew Cohen,[note 13], and Eckhart Tolle.[118]

 

According to a modern western spiritual teacher of nonduality, Jeff Foster, nonduality is:

 

the essential oneness (wholeness, completeness, unity) of life, a wholeness which exists here and now, prior to any apparent separation [...] despite the compelling appearance of separation and diversity there is only one universal essence, one reality. Oneness is all there is – and we are included.[126]

 

Natha Sampradaya and Inchegeri Sampradaya[edit]

Main articles: Nath, Sahaja, and Inchegeri Sampradaya

The Natha Sampradaya, with Nath yogis such as Gorakhnath, introduced Sahaja, the concept of a spontaneous spirituality. Sahaja means "spontaneous, natural, simple, or easy".[web 13] According to Ken Wilber, this state reflects nonduality.[127]

 

Buddhism[edit]

There are different Buddhist views which resonate with the concepts and experiences of non-duality or "not two" (advaya). The Buddha does not use the term advaya in the earliest Buddhist texts, but it does appear in some of the Mahayana sutras, such as the Vimalakīrti.[128] While the Buddha taught unified states of mental focus (samadhi) and meditative absorption (dhyana) which were commonly taught in Upanishadic thought, he also rejected the metaphysical doctrines of the Upanishads, particularly ideas which are often associated with Hindu nonduality, such as the doctrine that "this cosmos is the self" and "everything is a Oneness" (cf. SN 12.48 and MN 22).[129][130] Because of this, Buddhist views of nonduality are particularly different than Hindu conceptions, which tend towards idealistic monism.

 

In Indian Buddhism[edit]

 

The layman Vimalakīrti Debates Manjusri, Dunhuang Mogao Caves

According to Kameshwar Nath Mishra, one connotation of advaya in Indic Sanskrit Buddhist texts is that it refers to the middle way between two opposite extremes (such as eternalism and annihilationism), and thus it is "not two".[131]

 

One of these Sanskrit Mahayana sutras, the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra contains a chapter on the "Dharma gate of non-duality" (advaya dharma dvara pravesa) which is said to be entered once one understands how numerous pairs of opposite extremes are to be rejected as forms of grasping. These extremes which must be avoided in order to understand ultimate reality are described by various characters in the text, and include: Birth and extinction, 'I' and 'Mine', Perception and non-perception, defilement and purity, good and not-good, created and uncreated, worldly and unworldly, samsara and nirvana, enlightenment and ignorance, form and emptiness and so on.[132] The final character to attempt to describe ultimate reality is the bodhisattva Manjushri, who states:

 

It is in all beings wordless, speechless, shows no signs, is not possible of cognizance, and is above all questioning and answering.[133]

 

Vimalakīrti responds to this statement by maintaining completely silent, therefore expressing that the nature of ultimate reality is ineffable (anabhilāpyatva) and inconceivable (acintyatā), beyond verbal designation (prapañca) or thought constructs (vikalpa).[133] The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, a text associated with Yogācāra Buddhism, also uses the term "advaya" extensively.[134]

 

In the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of Madhyamaka, the two truths or ways of understanding reality, are said to be advaya (not two). As explained by the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna, there is a non-dual relationship, that is, there is no absolute separation, between conventional and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.[135][136] The concept of nonduality is also important in the other major Indian Mahayana tradition, the Yogacara school, where it is seen as the absence of duality between the perceiving subject (or "grasper") and the object (or "grasped"). It is also seen as an explanation of emptiness and as an explanation of the content of the awakened mind which sees through the illusion of subject-object duality. However, it is important to note that in this conception of non-dualism, there are still a multiplicity of individual mind streams (citta santana) and thus Yogacara does not teach an idealistic monism.[137]

 

These basic ideas have continued to influence Mahayana Buddhist doctrinal interpretations of Buddhist traditions such as Dzogchen, Mahamudra, Zen, Huayan and Tiantai as well as concepts such as Buddha-nature, luminous mind, Indra's net, rigpa and shentong.

 

Madhyamaka[edit]

Main articles: Madhyamika, Shunyata, and Two truths doctrine

 

Nagarjuna (right), Aryadeva (middle) and the Tenth Karmapa (left).

Madhyamaka, also known as Śūnyavāda (the emptiness teaching), refers primarily to a Mahāyāna Buddhist school of philosophy [138] founded by Nāgārjuna. In Madhyamaka, Advaya refers to the fact that the two truths are not separate or different.,[139] as well as the non-dual relationship of saṃsāra (the round of rebirth and suffering) and nirvāṇa (cessation of suffering, liberation).[42] According to Murti, in Madhyamaka, "Advaya" is an epistemological theory, unlike the metaphysical view of Hindu Advaita.[54] Madhyamaka advaya is closely related to the classical Buddhist understanding that all things are impermanent (anicca) and devoid of "self" (anatta) or "essenceless" (niḥsvabhāvavā),[140][141][142] and that this emptiness does not constitute an "absolute" reality in itself.[note 14].

 

In Madhyamaka, the two "truths" (satya) refer to conventional (saṃvṛti) and ultimate (paramārtha) truth.[143] The ultimate truth is "emptiness", or non-existence of inherently existing "things",[144] and the "emptiness of emptiness": emptiness does not in itself constitute an absolute reality. Conventionally, "things" exist, but ultimately, they are "empty" of any existence on their own, as described in Nagarjuna's magnum opus, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK):

 

The Buddha's teaching of the Dharma is based on two truths: a truth of worldly convention and an ultimate truth. Those who do not understand the distinction drawn between these two truths do not understand the Buddha's profound truth. Without a foundation in the conventional truth the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught. Without understanding the significance of the ultimate, liberation is not achieved.[note 15]

 

As Jay Garfield notes, for Nagarjuna, to understand the two truths as totally different from each other is to reify and confuse the purpose of this doctrine, since it would either destroy conventional realities such as the Buddha's teachings and the empirical reality of the world (making Madhyamaka a form of nihilism) or deny the dependent origination of phenomena (by positing eternal essences). Thus the non-dual doctrine of the middle way lies beyond these two extremes.[146]

 

"Emptiness" is a consequence of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising),[147] the teaching that no dharma ("thing", "phenomena") has an existence of its own, but always comes into existence in dependence on other dharmas. According to Madhyamaka all phenomena are empty of "substance" or "essence" (Sanskrit: svabhāva) because they are dependently co-arisen. Likewise it is because they are dependently co-arisen that they have no intrinsic, independent reality of their own. Madhyamaka also rejects the existence of absolute realities or beings such as Brahman or Self.[148] In the highest sense, "ultimate reality" is not an ontological Absolute reality that lies beneath an unreal world, nor is it the non-duality of a personal self (atman) and an absolute Self (cf. Purusha). Instead, it is the knowledge which is based on a deconstruction of such reifications and Conceptual proliferations.[149] It also means that there is no "transcendental ground," and that "ultimate reality" has no existence of its own, but is the negation of such a transcendental reality, and the impossibility of any statement on such an ultimately existing transcendental reality: it is no more than a fabrication of the mind.[web 14][note 16] Susan Kahn further explains:

 

Ultimate truth does not point to a transcendent reality, but to the transcendence of deception. It is critical to emphasize that the ultimate truth of emptiness is a negational truth. In looking for inherently existent phenomena it is revealed that it cannot be found. This absence is not findable because it is not an entity, just as a room without an elephant in it does not contain an elephantless substance. Even conventionally, elephantlessness does not exist. Ultimate truth or emptiness does not point to an essence or nature, however subtle, that everything is made of.[web 15]

 

However, according to Nagarjuna, even the very schema of ultimate and conventional, samsara and nirvana, is not a final reality, and he thus famously deconstructs even these teachings as being empty and not different from each other in the MMK where he writes:[41]

 

The limit (koti) of nirvāṇa is that of saṃsāra

 

The subtlest difference is not found between the two.

 

According to Nancy McCagney, what this refers to is that the two truths depend on each other; without emptiness, conventional reality cannot work, and vice versa. It does not mean that samsara and nirvana are the same, or that they are one single thing, as in Advaita Vedanta, but rather that they are both empty, open, without limits, and merely exist for the conventional purpose of teaching the Buddha Dharma.[41] Referring to this verse, Jay Garfield writes that:

 

to distinguish between samsara and nirvana would be to suppose that each had a nature and that they were different natures. But each is empty, and so there can be no inherent difference. Moreover, since nirvana is by definition the cessation of delusion and of grasping and, hence, of the reification of self and other and of confusing imputed phenomena for inherently real phenomena, it is by definition the recognition of the ultimate nature of things. But if, as Nagarjuna argued in Chapter XXIV, this is simply to see conventional things as empty, not to see some separate emptiness behind them, then nirvana must be ontologically grounded in the conventional. To be in samsara is to see things as they appear to deluded consciousness and to interact with them accordingly. To be in nirvana, then, is to see those things as they are - as merely empty, dependent, impermanent, and nonsubstantial, not to be somewhere else, seeing something else.[150]

 

It is important to note however that the actual Sanskrit term "advaya" does not appear in the MMK, and only appears in one single work by Nagarjuna, the Bodhicittavivarana.[151]

 

The later Madhyamikas, states Yuichi Kajiyama, developed the Advaya definition as a means to Nirvikalpa-Samadhi by suggesting that "things arise neither from their own selves nor from other things, and that when subject and object are unreal, the mind, being not different, cannot be true either; thereby one must abandon attachment to cognition of nonduality as well, and understand the lack of intrinsic nature of everything". Thus, the Buddhist nondualism or Advaya concept became a means to realizing absolute emptiness.[152]

 

Yogācāra tradition[edit]

 

Asaṅga (fl. 4th century C.E.), a Mahayana scholar who wrote numerous works which discuss the Yogacara view and practice.

Main article: Yogacara

In the Mahayana tradition of Yogācāra (Skt; "yoga practice"), adyava (Tibetan: gnyis med) refers to overcoming the conceptual and perceptual dichotomies of cognizer and cognized, or subject and object.[42][153][154][155] The concept of adyava in Yogācāra is an epistemological stance on the nature of experience and knowledge, as well as a phenomenological exposition of yogic cognitive transformation. Early Buddhism schools such as Sarvastivada and Sautrāntika, that thrived through the early centuries of the common era, postulated a dualism (dvaya) between the mental activity of grasping (grāhaka, "cognition", "subjectivity") and that which is grasped (grāhya, "cognitum", intentional object).[156][152][156][157] Yogacara postulates that this dualistic relationship is a false illusion or superimposition (samaropa).[152]

 

Yogācāra also taught the doctrine which held that only mental cognitions really exist (vijñapti-mātra),[158][note 17] instead of the mind-body dualism of other Indian Buddhist schools.[152][156][158] This is another sense in which reality can be said to be non-dual, because it is "consciousness-only".[159] There are several interpretations of this main theory, which has been widely translated as representation-only, ideation-only, impressions-only and perception-only.[160][158][161][162] Some scholars see it as a kind of subjective or epistemic Idealism (similar to Kant's theory) while others argue that it is closer to a kind of phenomenology or representationalism. According to Mark Siderits the main idea of this doctrine is that we are only ever aware of mental images or impressions which manifest themselves as external objects, but "there is actually no such thing outside the mind."[163] For Alex Wayman, this doctrine means that "the mind has only a report or representation of what the sense organ had sensed."[161] Jay Garfield and Paul Williams both see the doctrine as a kind of Idealism in which only mentality exists.[164][165]

 

However, it is important to note that even the idealistic interpretation of Yogācāra is not an absolute monistic idealism like Advaita Vedanta or Hegelianism, since in Yogācāra, even consciousness "enjoys no transcendent status" and is just a conventional reality.[166] Indeed, according to Jonathan Gold, for Yogācāra, the ultimate truth is not consciousness, but an ineffable and inconceivable "thusness" or "thatness" (tathatā).[153] Also, Yogācāra affirms the existence of individual mindstreams, and thus Kochumuttom also calls it a realistic pluralism.[82]

 

The Yogācārins defined three basic modes by which we perceive our world. These are referred to in Yogācāra as the three natures (trisvabhāva) of experience. They are:[167][168]

 

Parikalpita (literally, "fully conceptualized"): "imaginary nature", wherein things are incorrectly comprehended based on conceptual and linguistic construction, attachment and the subject object duality. It is thus equivalent to samsara.

Paratantra (literally, "other dependent"): "dependent nature", by which the dependently originated nature of things, their causal relatedness or flow of conditionality. It is the basis which gets erroneously conceptualized,

Pariniṣpanna (literally, "fully accomplished"): "absolute nature", through which one comprehends things as they are in themselves, that is, empty of subject-object and thus is a type of non-dual cognition. This experience of "thatness" (tathatā) is uninfluenced by any conceptualization at all.

To move from the duality of the Parikalpita to the non-dual consciousness of the Pariniṣpanna, Yogācāra teaches that there must be a transformation of consciousness, which is called the "revolution of the basis" (āśraya-parāvṛtti). According to Dan Lusthaus, this transformation which characterizes awakening is a "radical psycho-cognitive change" and a removal of false "interpretive projections" on reality (such as ideas of a self, external objects, etc).[169]

 

The Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra, a Yogācāra text, also associates this transformation with the concept of non-abiding nirvana and the non-duality of samsara and nirvana. Regarding this state of Buddhahood, it states:

 

Its operation is nondual (advaya vrtti) because of its abiding neither in samsara nor in nirvana (samsaranirvana-apratisthitatvat), through its being both conditioned and unconditioned (samskrta-asamskrtatvena).[170]

 

This refers to the Yogācāra teaching that even though a Buddha has entered nirvana, they do no "abide" in some quiescent state separate from the world but continue to give rise to extensive activity on behalf of others.[170] This is also called the non-duality between the compounded (samskrta, referring to samsaric existence) and the uncompounded (asamskrta, referring to nirvana). It is also described as a "not turning back" from both samsara and nirvana.[171]

 

For the later thinker Dignaga, non-dual knowledge or advayajñāna is also a synonym for prajñaparamita (transcendent wisdom) which liberates one from samsara.[172]

 

Other Indian traditions[edit]

Buddha nature or tathagata-garbha (literally "Buddha womb") is that which allows sentient beings to become Buddhas.[173] Various Mahayana texts such as the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras focus on this idea and over time it became a very influential doctrine in Indian Buddhism, as well in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddha nature teachings may be regarded as a form of nondualism. According to Sally B King, all beings are said to be or possess tathagata-garbha, which is nondual Thusness or Dharmakaya. This reality, states King, transcends the "duality of self and not-self", the "duality of form and emptiness" and the "two poles of being and non being".[174]

 

There various interpretations and views on Buddha nature and the concept became very influential in India, China and Tibet, where it also became a source of much debate. In later Indian Yogācāra, a new sub-school developed which adopted the doctrine of tathagata-garbha into the Yogācāra system.[166] The influence of this hybrid school can be seen in texts like the Lankavatara Sutra and the Ratnagotravibhaga. This synthesis of Yogācāra tathagata-garbha became very influential in later Buddhist traditions, such as Indian Vajrayana, Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism.[175][166] Yet another development in late Indian Buddhism was the synthesis of Madhymaka and Yogacara philosophies into a single system, by figures such as Śāntarakṣita (8th century). Buddhist Tantra, also known as Vajrayana, Mantrayana or Esoteric Buddhism, drew upon all these previous Indian Buddhist ideas and nondual philosophies to develop innovative new traditions of Buddhist practice and new religious texts called the Buddhist tantras (from the 6th century onwards).[176] Tantric Buddhism was influential in China and is the main form of Buddhism in the Himalayan regions, especially Tibetan Buddhism.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism

   

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

The Atheist Bus Campaign, set out to convince you that a loving creator God does not exist, that you have no prospect of eternal life and that all you can look forward to is eternal oblivion.

 

Atheists have no evidence to back up that assertion. In fact logic, natural law and the basic principles of the scientific method rule out their naturalistic alternative to a creator as impossible.

 

They invent all sort of bizarre scenarios to replace a supernatural first cause (God), they even try to present their fantastical, naturalistic replacements for God as 'scientific'. Please don't be taken in by it.

Their naturalistic replacements for God are illogical, they all violate natural laws and the basic principles of science.

 

Atheism is rightly referred to as the no-hope philosophy.

Their ultimate goal and pinnacle of their short life is - eternal oblivion.

And, quite perversely, they want to convince you that is all you can look forward to.

Please don't be dragged down with them into that depressing pit of hopelessness.

The Good News is that they are entirely wrong, and furthermore, it is not just an opinion. It can be satisfactorily demonstrated by logic, natural law, and the basic principle of the scientific method ......

 

Read on .... and you will understand, why atheists can never replace God, however much they try.

 

Their Atheist Bus Campaign is deceitful because atheists have no logical or scientific grounds for claiming "There's Probably No God", in fact, the evidence of applied logic and natural law, is completely the contrary. The atheist claim that there's probably no God is just an unsubstantiated opinion based only on their own ideological beliefs.

You may wonder why they inserted the word 'probably'? Obviously, they knew that if they were challenged to present evidence for the truth of their advertisement and had to defend it in court, they would be unable to do so. Science and logic can be used to prove they have no alternative to a supernatural first cause, and they know it.

 

For atheists to propose that believing there is no God, is somehow a reason to stop worrying and the recipe for an enjoyable life, is perverse in the extreme.

For most sane people it would be the opposite - a road to depression, hopelessness, and a feeling that this short existence is worthless. It will all end in oblivion, and you might as well never have lived.

 

Thankfully, atheists are demonstrably wrong, there is every reason for hope - as we will show - a loving Creator definitely does exist. Your life is not a few short, stressful and worthless years leading to eternal oblivion. You are a unique, valuable, person, specially created out of supreme love, every human life is of infinite value right from the moment of conception. Humans really are special and not just intelligent apes, or a mere collection of atoms, as atheists would have you believe You can live forever in eternal bliss - that is the gift of life the loving Creator of the universe offers you, and it is all offered for free.

 

Please don't be fooled ... people who think for themselves (the REAL freethinkers), are able to see right through the atheist hype and propaganda. Ignore the relentless bombardment of atheist propaganda, such as the atheist bus campaign. Seek out and learn the real truth and the truth will set you free.

 

Please read on and you will understand ......

 

Because there is a law of cause and effect, the universe can't and won't create itself from nothing.

 

Consider this ....

A creator God (or supernatural first cause) has been made redundant and the final gap (pertaining to the so-called God of the gaps) has now been filled ... who says so?

Atheists, along with the secularist pundits in the popular media.

Why do they say that?

Because they believe that the greatest brain in atheism - Stephen Hawking, has finally discovered the secret of the origin of the universe and a naturalistic replacement for God.

 

The atheist replacement for God is summed up in a single sentence written by Hawking:

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

That is it .... problem solved - apparently!

 

The secularists in the popular media loved it, as far as they were concerned the problem certainly was solved. Hawking had finally dealt the fatal blow to all religion, especially Christianity. No need to question it, if a revered scientist of his calibre, is so sure of how the universe came into being, it must be correct.

The new atheists loved it, they wasted no time in proclaiming the ultimate triumph of 'science' over religious mythology and superstition.

 

So just how credible is the atheist claim that God has been made redundant?

And just how 'scientific' is Hawking's replacement for God?

 

Shall we analyse it?

"Because there is a law of gravity ....

 

So,

1) If the law of gravity existed, how is that nothing?

AND -

2) Where did the law of gravity come from?

AND -

3) How can a law of gravity exist before that which gravity relates to ... i.e. matter?

 

"the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

 

4) How can something create itself, without pre-existing its own creation?

(A) could possibly create (B), but how could (A) create (A)? Of course it can't.

 

5) What about the 'nothing' that is not really nothing, as most people understand 'nothing', but a bizarre 'nothing' in which a law of gravity exists. A nothing which is actually a 'something' where a law of gravity is presumably some sort of eternally, existent entity?

AND -

6) Is Hawking implying that the self-creation of the universe is made possible by the pre-existence of the law of gravity?

Of course, natural laws are not creative agents, they simply describe basic properties and operation of material things. They can't create anything, or cause the creation of anything. Something which is a property of something, cannot create that which it is a property of.

 

So, even if we ignore the law of cause and effect which definitively rules out a natural, first cause of the universe, the atheist notion of the universe arising of its own volition from nothing is still impossible, and can be regarded as illogical and unscientific nonsense. Hawking's naturalistic replacement for God, presented in his single sentence, and so loved by the new, atheist cabal, is obviously just contradictory and confused nonsense.

 

The truth, which atheists don't want to hear, is that atheism is intellectually and scientifically indefensible. That is why they always duck out of explaining how the concept of an uncaused, inadequate, natural first cause is possible.

The best they ever come up with, is something like "we don't really know what laws existed at the start of the universe".

However, the atheist claim that - we don't really know... is completely spurious.

We certainly do know that the Law of Cause and Effect is universal, there is no way round it.

The only reason atheists don't want to accept it, is ideological.

 

And ... isn't it strange, that the only laws atheists dispute are precisely those that interfere with their beliefs. For example, atheists seem pretty sure that one law existed .... the law of gravity (even prior to that which gravity is a property of … matter).

Why are they so sure that the law of gravity existed?

Because their naturalistic substitute for God, summed up in the sentence by Stephen Hawking, apparently requires that the law of gravity existed before anything else …..

 

Here it is again ...

‘Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing’ Stephen Hawking.

 

So atheists DO KNOW for sure that the law of gravity existed, but they don’t really know what other laws existed at the start of the universe. They especially doubt that the Law of Cause and Effect existed.

AMAZING!

 

Well, how about this for a refutation of Hawking’s replacement for God, also summed up in a single sentence?

 

Because there is a Law of Cause and Effect, the universe can’t and won’t create itself from nothing!

 

That is something Stephen Hawking conveniently forgot.

Apparently, he accepts that the law of gravity existed, because he thinks it suits his argument, but he ignores the existence of other laws that positively destroy his argument.

 

So now you know the truth about the best substitute for God that atheists have ever come up with.

IMPRESSED? I think not!

 

Why is it ATHEISTS that try to dispute the universality of natural laws?

 

According to their claims, atheists are supposed to be the champions of science. Yet we find in practice that it is actually theists who end up defending natural laws and the scientific method against those atheists who try to refute any laws and scientific principles that interfere with their naturalistic beliefs.

Whatever happened to the alleged conflict between science and religion?

That is revealed as purely, atheist propaganda. There is obviously much more conflict between atheism and science.

 

Why is the law of cause and effect so important?

Because it tells us that all natural entities, events and processes are contingent.

They are all subject to preceding causes. It tells us that natural entities and events are not autonomous, they cannot operate independently of causes.

That is such an important principle, it is actually the basis of the scientific method. Science is about looking for adequate causes of ALL natural events. According to science, a natural event without a cause, is a scientific impossibility.

Once you suggest such a notion, you are abandoning science and you violate the basic principle of the scientific method.

 

What about the first cause of the universe and everything?

How does that fit in?

 

Well, the first cause was obviously a unique thing, not only unique, but radically different to all NATURAL entities and occurrences. The first cause HAD to be an autonomous entity, it HAD to be eternally self-existent, self-reliant, NON-CONTINGENT ... i.e. it was completely independent of causes and the limitations that causes impose.

The first cause, by virtue of being the very first, could not have had any preceding cause, and obviously didn't require any cause for its existence. When we talk about the first cause, we mean the very first cause, i.e. FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.

The first cause also had to be capable of creating everything that followed it. It is responsible for every subsequent cause and effect that is, or has ever been. That means that nothing, nor the sum total of everything that followed the first cause, can ever be greater, in any respect, than the first cause.

So the idea that the first cause could be a natural entity or event is just ludicrous.

 

We know that the first cause is radically different to any natural entity, it is NOT contingent and that is why it is called a SUPERNATURAL entity, the Supernatural, First Cause (or Creator God). All natural events and entities ARE contingent without exception, so the first cause simply CANNOT be a natural thing.

That is the verdict of science, logic and reason. Atheists dispute the verdict of science and insist that the first cause was a 'natural' event which was somehow able to defy natural laws that govern all natural events.

Consequently, atheism can be regarded as anti-science. Which means .... the real enemy of atheism is science, not religion. And the real enemy of science is atheism, not religion.

 

An idea which seems to be popular with atheists at present, is a continuously, reciprocating universe, one which ends by running out of energy potential and then rewinds itself in an never ending cycle ..... this is an attempt to evade the fact that an uncaused, natural, first cause is impossible. They claim that, in this way a first cause, is not necessary. And that matter/energy is some sort of eternally existent entity.

So is it a valid solution?

 

Firstly .....

Matter/energy cannot be eternally existent in a cycle with no beginning).

Why?

Because all natural things are contingent, they have to comply with the law of cause and effect, so they cannot exist independently of causes. The nearest you could get to eternally existent matter/energy would be a very, long chain of causes and effects, but a long chain is not eternally existent, it has to have a beginning at some point. At the beginning there would still have to be a non-contingent first cause. So a long chain of causes and effects simply pushes the first cause further back in time, it can't eliminate it.

Secondly ....

It is pretty obvious that the idea of the universe simply rewinding itself in a never ending cycle, which had no beginning, is complete, unscientific nonsense. How such a proposal can be presented as serious science, beggars belief.

It seems atheists will try anything to justify their naturalist ideology. They apparently have no compunction about completely disregarding natural laws.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics rules out such atheist, pie-in-the-sky, origins mythology.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, the idea of a rewinding universe is tantamount to applying the discredited notion of perpetual motion - on a grand scale, to the universe.

Contingent things don't just rewind of their own accord.

The Second Law (not to mention common sense) rules it out.

Where does the renewed power or renewed energy potential come from?

If you wind up a clock, it doesn't rewind itself after it has stopped.

The universe had a beginning and it will have an end. That is what science tells us, it cannot rewind itself.

Such ridiculous, atheist musings are just a desperate attempt to wriggle out of the inevitable conclusion of logic, and the Law of Cause and Effect which are the real enemies of atheist ideology.

Once again atheism is hoisted on its own petard by natural law and science, not by religion.

 

A variation of the cyclical universe is the argument proposed by some that the universe just is?

Presumably they mean that the universe is some sort of eternally-existent entity with no beginning - and therefore not in need of a cause? Once again an eternally self-existent universe is not possible for the same reason outlined above.

In addition ....

The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us the universe certainly had a beginning and will have an end. The energy potential of the universe is decreasing from an original peak at the beginning of the universe. Even the most rabid atheists seem to accept that. Which is why most of them believe in a beginning event, such as a big bang explosion.

So the question is how did it (the universe) begin to exist, not whether it began to exist?

Which takes us back to the question of the nature of the very first cause.

It can only be one of two options,

an uncaused, natural first cause

OR

an uncaused, supernatural first cause.

An uncaused, NATURAL first cause is impossible.

Thus the only possible option is a supernatural first cause, i.e. God.

 

Atheists can’t refute the Law of Cause and Effect which is so devastating to their naturalist agenda, so they regularly invent bizarre scenarios which ignore natural laws, and hope people won’t notice. If anyone does they just brush it off with remarks like “we just don’t know ” what laws existed prior to the beginning of the universe.

Sorry, the atheist apologists may not know …. but all sensible people do know, we certainly know what is impossible ….

And we certainly know that you cannot blithely step outside the constraints of natural laws and scientific principles, as atheists do, and remain credible.

We know that natural laws describe the inherent properties of matter/energy. Which means wherever matter/energy exist, the inherent properties of matter/energy also exist - and so do the natural laws that describe those properties. if the universe began, as some propose, with a cosmic egg. or a previous universe, those things are still natural entities with natural properties, and as such would be subject to natural laws. So the idea that there were natural events leading up to the origin of the universe that were not subject to natural laws is ridiculous.

The atheist claim; that we just don't know, is not valid, and should be treated as the silliness it really is.

 

The existence of the law of cause and effect is essential to the scientific method, but fatal to the atheist ideology.

SO ....

Is the law of cause and effect really universal?

 

Causation is necessary for the existence of the universe, but ALSO for the existence of any natural entities or events that may have preceded the creation of the universe.

 

In other words, causation is necessary for all matter/energy and all natural entities and occurrences, whether within the universe or elsewhere.

ALL natural entities are contingent wherever they may be, whether in some sort of cosmic egg, a big bang, a previous universe or whatever.

Contingency is an inherent character of all natural entities, so it is impossible for any natural entity to be non-contingent.

 

Which means you simply CANNOT have a natural entity which is UNCAUSED, anywhere.

If, for example, matter/energy was not contingent at the start of the universe, or before the universe began, how and why would it be contingent now?

Why would nature have changed its basic character to an inferior one?

 

If matter/energy once had such awesome, autonomous power - if it was, at some time, self-sufficient, not reliant on causes for its operation and existence, and not restricted by the limitations causes impose, it would effectively mean it was once an infinite, necessary, self-existent entity, similar to God.

 

Now if matter once had the autonomous, non-contingent powers of a god, why would it change itself to a subordinate character and role, when it became part of the universe?

Why would it change to a role where it is limited by the strictures of natural laws. And where it cannot operate without a preceding, adequate cause?

 

To claim matter/energy was, at one time, not contingent, not subject to causes (which is what atheists have to claim) – is to actually imbue it with the autonomous power of a god.

That is why atheism is really just a revamped version of pagan naturalism.

By denying the basic, contingent character of matter/nature, atheism effectively deifies nature, and credits it with godlike powers, which science clearly tells us it doesn’t possess.

 

Thus, if anyone dismisses causality, they effectively deify matter/nature.

Which means they have chosen the first of the 2 following choices …

 

1. Atheism ... the unscientific, illogical belief in a natural, uncaused god (of matter or nature) which violates natural laws - which science recognises restrict its autonomy?

 

2. Theism ... the logical belief in an uncaused, supernatural God, which created matter and the laws that govern matter. And therefore does not violate any laws, is not contingent, and thus has completely unrestricted autonomy and infinite powers?

 

Which one would you choose?

 

Which one do scientists who respect natural laws and the scientific method choose?

The great, scientific luminaries and founders of modern science, such as Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Louis Pasteur etc., in fact, nearly all of the really great scientists and founders of modern science, had no doubts or problem understanding that choice, and they readily chose the second (theism), as the only logical option.

So, by choosing the second - a supernatural first cause – rather than meaning you are anti-science or anti-reason or some sort of uneducated, superstitious, religious nut (as atheists frequently claim) actually puts you in the greatest of scientific company.

 

To put it another way, who would you rather trust in science, such scientific giants as: Newton, Pasteur, Faraday, Von Braun, Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Mendel, Marconi, Kelvin, Babbage, Pascal, Herschel, Peacock etc. who believed in a supernatural first cause?

OR,

the likes of: Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking, Andrew Denton etc. who believe in an uncaused, natural first cause?

No contest!

 

We can see that atheists are anti-science, because they treat natural law and the whole principle of the scientific method with utter contempt, and all the while, they masquerade as the champions of science to the public.

 

The question of purpose ....

A further nail in the coffin of bogus, atheist science is the existence of order.

 

Atheists assume that the universe is purposeless, but they cannot explain the existence of order.

The development of order requires an organizational element.

To do useful work, or to counter the effects of entropy, energy needs to be directed or guided.

Raw energy alone actually tends to increase the effects of entropy, it doesn't increase order.

The organizational principle in living systems is provided by the informational element encoded in DNA.

Atheists have yet to explain how that first, genetic information arose of its own volition in the so-called Primordial Soup?

 

Natural laws pertinent to all natural entities, they guide the behaviour of energy and matter, but also serve to limit it, because natural laws are based only on the inherent properties of matter and energy.

So ... natural laws describe inherent properties of matter/energy, and natural processes operate only within the confines of natural laws which are based on their own properties. They can never exceed the parameters of those laws.

 

The much acclaimed, Dawkinsian principle that randomness can develop into order by means of a sieving process, such as shaken pebbles being sorted by falling through a hole of a particular size is erroneous, because it completely ignores the regulatory influence of natural laws on the outcome, which are not at all random.

If we can predict the outcome in advance, as we can with Dawkins' example, it cannot be called random. We CAN predict the outcome because we know that the pebbles will behave according to the regulatory influence of natural laws, such as the law of gravity. If there was no law of gravity, then Dawkins' pebbles, when shaken, would not fall through the hole, they would not be sorted, they would act completely unpredictably, possibly floating about in the air in all directions. In that case, the randomness would not result in any order. That is true randomness.

Dawkins' randomness, allegedly developing into order, is not random at all, the outcome is predictable and controlled by natural laws and the inherent properties of matter. He is starting with 2 organizational principles, natural laws and the inherent, ordered structure and properties of matter, and he calls that randomness!

Bogus science indeed!

This tells us that order is already there at the beginning of the universe, in the form of natural laws and the ordered composition and structure of matter .... it doesn't just develop from random events.

 

A major problem for atheists is to explain where natural laws came from?

In a purposeless universe there should be no regulatory principles at all.

Firstly, we would not expect anything to exist, we would expect eternal nothingness.

Secondly, even if we overlook that impossible hurdle, and assume by some amazing fluke and contrary to logic, something was able to create itself from nothing ….. we would expect the ‘something’ would have no ordered structure, and no laws based on that ordered structure. We would expect it to behave randomly and chaotically.

This is an absolutely fundamental question to which atheists have no answer. The basic properties of matter/energy, and the universe, scream …. ‘purpose’.

Atheists say the exact opposite.

Furthermore, if we consider the accepted, atheist belief; that matter is inherently predisposed to produce life and the genetic information for life, whenever environmental conditions are conducive (so-called abiogenesis), where does that predisposition for life come from? Once again, atheists are hoisted on their own petard, and the atheist idea of a random, purposeless, universe is left completely in tatters.

 

It is the atheist ideology that is anti-science, not necessarily individual scientists.

There may be sincere, atheist scientists who respect the scientific method and natural laws, but they are wedded to an ideology that - when push comes to shove, does not respect natural laws.

It is evident that whenever natural laws interfere with atheist naturalist beliefs, the beliefs take precedence over the rigorous, scientific method. It is then that natural laws are disregarded by atheists in favour of unscientific fantasies which are conducive to their ideology.

Of course, in much day-to-day practical science and technology, the question of violating laws doesn't even arise, and we cannot deny that in the course of such work, atheists will respect the scientific method of experiment and observation within the framework of the Law of Cause and Effect and other established laws of science.

Bizarrely, It is a different matter entirely, when it comes to hypotheses about origins. It then becomes an 'anything goes' situation. The main criteria then seems to be that it doesn’t matter whether your hypothesis violates natural laws (all sorts of excuses can be made as to why natural laws need not apply), all that matters is that it is entirely naturalistic, and can be made to sound plausible to the public.

However, the same atheist scientists would not entertain anything in general, day-to-day science, that is not completely in accordance with the scientific method, they make an exception ONLY with anything to do with origins, whether it be the origin of the universe, or the origin of life, or the origin of species.

 

Atheism is not simply passive non-belief, you can only be a ‘genuine’ atheist if you proactively believe in the following illogical and unscientific propositions:

 

1. A natural, first cause of the universe that was ‘uncaused’.

 

2. A natural, first cause of the universe that was patently not adequate for the effect, (a cause which was able to produce an effect far greater than itself and superior to its own abilities).

 

3. That the universe created ITSELF from nothing.

 

4. That natural laws simply arose of their own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.

 

5. That energy potential at the start of everything material was able to wind itself up from absolute zero, of its own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.

 

6. That the effect of entropy (Second Law of Thermodynamics) was somehow suspended or didn’t operate to permit the development of order in the universe.

 

7. That life spontaneously generated itself, of its own volition, from sterile matter, contrary to: the Law of Biogenesis, the laws of probability, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, Information Theory and common sense.

 

8. That the complete human genome was created by means of a long chain of copying mistakes of the original, genetic information in the first living cell, (mutations of mutations of mutations, etc. etc.).

 

9. That the complex DNA code was produced by chemical processes.

 

10. That the very first, genetic information, encoded in the DNA of the first living cell, created itself by some unknown means.

 

11. That matter is somehow inherently predisposed to develop into living cells, whenever conditions are conducive to life. But such a predisposition for life just arose of its own accord, with no purpose and with no apparent cause.

 

12. That an ordered structure of atoms, guiding laws of physics, order in the cosmos, order in the living cell and complex information, are what we would expect to occur naturally in a purposeless universe.

 

The claim of atheists to be the champions of science and reason is clearly bogus.

They think they can get away with it by pretending to have no beliefs.

However, when seriously challenged to justify their dogmatic rejection of a Supernatural First Cause, they indirectly espouse the unscientific beliefs outlined above, in their futile attempts to refute the evidence for a supernatural first cause.

Of course, whenever possible, they avoid declaring those beliefs explicitly, but you don’t need to be very astute to realize that relying on those beliefs is the unavoidable conclusion of their arguments.

 

That is why atheism is intellectually bankrupt and is doomed to the dustbin of history. And that is why we are seeing such a rise in militant, evangelizing, atheist zealots, such as Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens.

Their crusading, bravado masks their desperation that the public is so hard to convince. What Dawkins et al need to face is that they are in no position to attack what they consider are the bizarre beliefs of others, when their own beliefs (which they fail to publicly acknowledge) are much more bizarre.

 

What about Christianity and pagan gods?

 

Atheists frequently try to dismiss and ridicule the idea of a Creator by comparing it to the numerous, pagan gods that people have worshipped throughout history.

 

Do they have a good point?

 

Certainly not, this is just a red herring ….

Other gods, cannot be the first cause or Creator.

Idols of wood or stone, or the Sun, Moon, planets, Mother Nature, Mother Earth etc. are all material, contingent things, they cannot be the first cause.

They are rejected as false gods by the Bible and by logic and natural laws.

They are considered gods by people who worship things which are 'created' rather than the Creator, which the Bible condemns.

In fact, they are much more similar to the atheist belief in the powers of a naturalistic entity to create the universe, than they are to the one, Creator God of Christianity.

For example, the pagan belief in the creative powers of Ra (the Sun god) is similar to the atheist belief that raw energy from the Sun acting on sterile chemicals was able to create life.

 

So atheist mythology credits the Sun (Ra) with the godlike power of creating life on Earth. And thus, atheism is just a revamped version of paganism.

Just like paganism, atheism rejects worship of a Supernatural, First Cause, and rather chooses to worship created, natural entities, imbuing them with the same godlike powers, that theists attribute to the Creator.

There is nothing new under the Sun ... We can see that atheism is just the age old deception of ancient paganism, revisited.

 

The Creator is a Supernatural, First Cause, which is not a contingent entity, nothing like the pagan gods, but rather a self-existent, necessary entity. As the very first cause of everything in the universe, it cannot be contingent (it cannot rely on anything outside itself for its existence, i.e. it is self-existent) and therefore it cannot be a material entity.

The first cause is necessary because, not being contingent, it necessarily exists.

If anything exists that is not contingent, it has to have within itself everything necessary for its own existence. If it is also responsible for the existence of anything outside itself (which as the first cause of the universe, we know it is) it is also necessary for the existence of those things, and has to be entirely adequate for the purpose of bringing them into being and maintaining their continued existence. It is not subject to natural laws, which only apply to natural events and effects, because, as the first cause, it is the initiator and creator of everything material, including the laws which govern material events, and of time itself.

 

The atheist view of a natural first cause is not even rational, to propose that all the qualities I have mentioned above could apply to a material entity is clearly ridiculous. But apparently, atheism has no regard for natural laws or logic. Atheists get round it by simply dressing up their irrational beliefs to make them appear ‘scientific’.

This combined with rants and erroneous and derisory slogans about religious myths and superstition makes it all seem perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately, those with little knowledge, or who can’t be bothered to think for themselves are taken in by it.

 

Atheists repeatedly claim that they have refuted the law of cause and effect by asking : So what caused God then?

How true is that?

 

The ... what caused God? argument is a rather silly argument which atheists regularly trot out. All it demonstrates is that they don't understand basic logic.

 

The question to always ask them is; what part of FIRST don't you understand?

If something is the very FIRST, it means there is nothing that precedes it. First means first, not second or third.

That means that the first cause cannot be a contingent entity, because a contingent entity depends on something preceding it for its existence. In which case, if something precedes it, it couldn't be FIRST.

All natural entities, events and effects are contingent ... that is why the Law of Cause and Effect states that ... every NATURAL effect requires an adequate cause.

That means that the first cause cannot be a natural entity. An UNCAUSED, NATURAL event or entity is ruled out as not possible by the Law of Cause and Effect.

Therefore the very FIRST CAUSE of the universe, which we know cannot be caused, by virtue of it being FIRST (not second or third) CANNOT be a natural entity or event.

Thus we deduce that the first cause ... cannot be contingent, cannot be a natural entity, and cannot be subject to the Law of Cause and Effect.

So the first cause has to be non-material, i.e. supernatural.

The first cause also has to have the creative potential to create every other cause and effect that follows it.

In other words, the first cause cannot be inferior in any respect to the properties, powers or qualities of anything that exists...

The effect cannot be greater than the cause....

So we can thus deduce that the first cause is: UNCAUSED, SUPERNATURAL, self-existent, and capable of creating everything we see in the existing universe.

If there is life in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create life,

If there is intelligence in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create intelligence.

If there is information in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create information.

If there is consciousness in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create consciousness. And so on and on. If it exists, the first cause is responsible for it, and must have the ability to create it.

That is the Creator God … and His existence is supported by impeccable logic and adherence to the demands of natural law.

 

Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.

 

But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.

The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.

Why do atheists have such a problem with it?

 

Atheists also seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.

This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.

That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.

But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.

A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.

Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and the demands of their own pre-ordered composition and structure. Lighting blue touch paper would do absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it.

 

What about the idea proposed by some atheists that space must have always existed, and therefore the first cause was not the only eternally, uncaused self-existent power?

This implies that the first cause was limited by a self-existent rival (space,) which was also uncaused, and therefore the first cause could not be infinite and could not even be a proper first cause, because there was something it didn’t cause i.e. ‘space’.

There seems to be some confusion here about what ‘space’ actually is.

Space is part of the created universe, it is what lies between and around material objects in the cosmos, if there were no material objects in the cosmos, there would be no space. The confusion lies in the failure to distinguish between empty space and nothing. Nothing is the absence of everything, whereas space is a medium in which cosmic bodies exist. ‘Empty’ space is just the space between objects. So space is not an uncaused, eternally self-existent entity, it is dependent on material objects existing within it, for its own existence.

What about nothing? Is that an uncaused eternally self-existent thing? Firstly, it is not a thing, it is the absence of all things. So has nothing always existed? Well, yes it essentially would have always existed, but only if the first cause didn’t exist. If there is a first cause is that is eternally self-existent, then there is no such thing as absolute nothing, because nothing is the absence of everything. If a first cause exists (which it had to), then any proposed eternal ‘nothing’ has always contained something, and therefore can never have been ‘nothing’.

What about the idea that the first cause created everything material from nothing? Obviously, the ‘nothing’ that is meant here is … nothing material, i.e. the absence of any material entities.

The uncaused, first cause cannot be material, because all material things are contingent, so the first cause brought material things into being, when nothing material had previously existed. That is what is meant by creation from nothing.

So what existed outside of the eternally existent first cause? Obviously no other thing existed outside of the first cause, the first cause was the only thing that existed. So did the first cause exist in a sea of eternally existent nothingness?

No! the first cause was not nothing, it was ‘something’. So to ask what surrounded the something that is the first cause is not a valid question, because if something exists that is not ‘nothing’. This means that such a notion of ‘nothing’ didn’t exist, only something – i.e. the eternally existent first cause. If you have a box with something in it, you wouldn’t say there is both something and nothing in the box. You would say there is something in the box, regardless of whether there was some empty space around the thing in the box.

 

Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.

Such as the utterly, ludicrous notion of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating!

They are clutching at straws and anyone with any common sense understands that.

 

So to sum up .....

The atheist ideology is illogical, unscientific nonsense. Even worse, it has no compunction in treating natural laws and the basic principle of the scientific method with utter distain and contempt whenever they interfere with atheist beliefs.

Science is the real enemy of atheism, and atheism is the real enemy of science.

 

So please ignore the atheist bus slogans, they are not worth the ink the are printed with.

 

FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE

The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins

www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...

 

"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."

kgov.com/big-bang-predictions

Always fun to gift!

 

For more Burning Man images follow my decommodified feed at www.instagram.com/jamenpercy.burn

Japanese Garden Design.

Below are a few of the guiding principles of Japanese garden Design. Read these before we visit the Japanese Garden at Cowra.

1.Nature is all important. You must recreate nature, even if symbolically. You cannot have items not found in nature i.e. a fountain (but you can have a waterfall) or a square pond (but you can have an irregular, natural shaped pond) etc. A pond or even the sea is often represented by raked gravel.

2.Balance or sumi is important. You cannot have a large rock in a small space. Rocks can be used to symbolise mountains. But the scale must be correct for the size of the area. Pools can represent lakes etc.

3.Emptiness or ma is important. Japanese gardens often have empty spaces as space or emptiness defines the other elements around it.

4.Wabi or sabi is another basic principle. Sabi is about capturing the ideal image of an item and wabi is about capturing the spiritual essence of an item. So a perfectly plain round boulder in a garden has no wabi or sabi, but an irregular, lichen or moss covered boulder typifies a rock in nature.

5.Time is an important feature of Japanese gardens. The garden must have attractions for all four seasons of the year.

6.Enclosure as a feature of Japanese gardening. To be a retreat to nature, the garden must be fenced and gated to keep out interference. The garden is a separate world, and gates have spiritual meaning. Fences, hedges and screens are meant to also hide items which then suddenly become revealed. This is called miegakure.

7.Flatness is important. Flat areas are used for meditation, often in front of temples or shrines. These areas are Zen in style.

8.Formality is another principle. Although tea gardens are always informal and often have rustic huts and chalets in them. A focal point is always the tea pavilion.

9.Rocks are the backbone of a Japanese garden. Stones are usually, but not always set in groups of three. They can be vertical or horizontal in form. Stones set in the ground are used for stepping stones. A wide stone across a path tells us to stop there and admire the view. The pathway represents the pathway of life.

10.Water is an important feature of a Japanese garden. Waterfalls, ponds, and the bamboo deer scarer which fills the water basis for ritual washing are all important features. Water flows through Japanese gardens and bridges are important. The movement of water symbolises the passage through life from childhood to adulthood and maturity. Crossing a bridge takes you from one world to another world. Some bridges are purely ornamental, but most cross flowing water. Carp are obligatory in ponds as they are part of nature.

11.Plants play a secondary role to stone in Japanese gardens. Common plants for a Japanese garden include pines, bamboo, cherries, maples, camellias, azaleas, water plants, grasses etc. Some Japanese gardens are almost monochrome and entirely green. Evergreen trees like pines symbolise eternity.

12.Stone lanterns, stupas and basins are important elements for the garden.

13.Above all the garden must have atmosphere, simplicity and elegance and this is often obtained through the use of extensive pruning and the shaping of plants.

 

Jewish influence apparently - olives in vinegar due to the alcohol prohibitive principles

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

My tribute to Steve Jobs…

 

Apple co-founder and Chairman Steve Jobs died 10/5/11 at 56 of pancreatic cancer.

www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/business/steve-jobs-of-apple-d...

 

The 7 Success Principles of Steve Jobs

By Carmine Gallo

www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2011/01/04/the-7-succes...

Principle One: Do what you love. Steve Jobs once told a group of employees, “People with passion can change the world for the better.” Jobs has followed his heart his entire life and that passion, he says, has made all the difference. It’s very difficult to come up with new, creative, and novel ideas unless you are passionate about moving society forward.

 

Principle Two: Put a dent in the universe. Passion fuels the rocket, but vision directs the rocket to its ultimate destination. In 1976, when Jobs and Steve Wozniak co-founded Apple, Jobs’ vision was to put a computer in the hands of everyday people. In 1979, Jobs saw an early and crude graphical user interface being demonstrated at the Xerox research facility in Palo Alto, California. He knew immediately that the technology would make computers appealing to “everyday people.” That technology eventually became The Macintosh, which changed everything about the way we interact with computers. Xerox scientists didn’t realize its potential because their “vision” was limited to making new copiers. Two people can see the exactly the same thing, but perceive it differently based on their vision.

 

Principle Three: Kick start your brain. Steve Jobs once said “Creativity is connecting things.” Connecting things means seeking inspiration from other industries. At various times, Jobs has found inspiration in a phone book, Zen meditation, visiting India, a food processor at Macy’s, or The Four Seasons hotel chain. Jobs doesn’t “steal” ideas as much as he uses ideas from other industries to inspire his own creativity.

 

Principle Four: Sell dreams, not products. To Steve Jobs, people who buy Apple products are not “consumers.” They are people with hopes, dreams and ambitions. He builds products to help people achieve their dreams. He once said, “some people think you’ve got to be crazy to buy a Mac, but in that craziness we see genius.” How do you see your customers? Help them unleash their inner genius and you’ll win over their hearts and minds.

 

Principle Five: Say no to 1,000 things. Steve Jobs once said, “I’m as proud of what we don’t do as I am of what we do.” He is committed to building products with simple, uncluttered design. And that commitment extends beyond products. From the design of the iPod to the iPad, from the packaging of Apple’s products, to the functionality of the Web site, in Apple’s world, innovation means eliminating the unnecessary so that the necessary may speak.

 

Principle Six: Create insanely great experiences. The Apple store has become the world’s best retailer by introducing simple innovations any business can adopt to create deeper, more emotional connections with their customers. For example, there are no cashiers in an Apple store. There are experts, consultants, even geniuses, but no cashiers. Why? Because Apple is not in the business of moving boxes; they are in the business of enriching lives. Big difference.

 

Principle Seven: Master the message. Steve Jobs is the world’s greatest corporate storyteller, turning product launches into an art form. You can have the most innovative idea in the world, but if you can’t get people excited about it, it doesn’t matter.

Simply put, innovation is a new way of doing things that results in positive change. Innovation is attainable by anyone at any organization, regardless of title or position. Make innovation a part of your brands’ DNA by thinking differently about your business challenges.

 

The Innovation Secrets of Steve Jobs

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufAe0oOxIHM

McGrawHIllPro

  

St. Hilda’s By The Sea is a small Anglican church in Sechelt. Set among the verdant green trees of the temperate rainforest, it is an eclectic mix of old and new: retired British pensioners polish the altar crystal and set out flowers for Sunday services, presided over by a gay Chinese-Canadian priest. Tai chi mixes with Celtic mysticism in a melange that is somehow stronger than its parts. And isn’t that what community is all about?

 

From the official website:

 

Walking the labyrinth is an ancient spiritual act that is being rediscovered during our time.

 

Usually constructed from circular patterns, labyrinths are based on principles of sacred geometry. Sometimes called “divine imprints”, they are found around the world as sacred patterns that have been passed down through the ages for at least 4,000 years. When a pattern of a certain size is constructed or placed on the ground, it can be used for walking meditations and rituals.

 

Labyrinths and their geometric cousins (spirals and mandalas) can be found in almost every religious tradition. For example, the Kabbala, or Tree of Life, is found in the Jewish mystical tradition. The Hopi Medicine Wheel, and the Man in the Maze are two forms from the Native American labyrinth traditions. The Cretan labyrinth, the remains of which can be found on the island of Crete, has seven path rings and is the oldest known labyrinth (4,000 or 5.000 years old).

 

In Europe, the Celts and later the early Christian Celtic Church revered labyrinths and frequently built them in natural settings. Sacred dances would be performed in them to celebrate solar and religious festivals. During the Middle Ages, labyrinths were created in churches and cathedrals throughout France and Northern Italy. These characteristically flat church or pavement labyrinths were inlaid into the floor of the nave of the church.

 

The Chartres Labyrinth

 

The labyrinth constructed at St. Hilda’s is an 11-circuit labyrinth. It is a replica of the one embedded in the floor of Chartres Cathedral in France. The design of this labyrinth, and many of the other church labyrinths in Europe, is a reworking of the ancient labyrinth design in which an equal-armed cross is emphasized and surrounded by a web of concentric circles. As with many Christian symbols, this was an adaptation of a symbol; that is known to have predated the Christian faith. This medieval variation is considered a breakthrough in design because it is less linear than the preceding, more formal, Roman design that developed from quadrant to quadrant. The medieval design made one path as long as possible, starting at the outer circumference and leading to the centre. Fraught with twists and turns, the path’s meanderings were considered symbolic representations of the Christian pilgrim’s journey to the Holy City of Jerusalem and of one’s own journey through life. This classical design is sometimes referred to as “the Chartres Labyrinth” due to the location of its best known example. The labyrinth was built at Chartres in the early 13th century (~ 1215 A.D.). No one knows the source of this classical 11-circuit labyrinth design, and much of its spiritual meaning and use has been lost.

 

The Chartres Labyrinth is located in the west end of the nave, the central body of the cathedral. When you walk in the main doors and look towards the high altar, you see the center of the labyrinth on the floor about 50 feet in front of you. It is approximately 42 feet in diameter and the path is 16 inches wide. At Chartres, the center of the Rose Window mirrors the center of the labyrinth. The cathedral is perfectly proportioned, so that if we put the west wall of the cathedral on hinges and folded it down on the labyrinth, the Rose Window would fit almost perfectly over the labyrinth.

 

Labyrinth or Maze?

 

The difference between a labyrinth used for meditation and mazes can be confusing. Mazes often have many entrances, dead-ends and cul-de-sacs that frequently confound the human mind. In contrast, meditation labyrinths offer only one path. By following the one path to the center, the seeker can use the labyrinth to quiet his or her mind and find peace and illumination at the center of his or her being. “As soon as one enters the labyrinth, one realizes that the path of the labyrinth serves as a metaphor for one’s spiritual journey. The walk, and all that happens on it, can be grasped through the intuitive, pattern-discerning faculty of the person walking it. The genius of this tool is that it reflects back to the seeker whatever he or she needs to discover from the perspective of a new level of conscious awareness.”

 

The Labyrinth is a Universal Meditation Tool

 

Anyone from any tradition or spiritual path can walk into the labyrinth and, through reflecting in the present moment, can benefit from it. A meditation labyrinth is one of many tools that can be used for spiritual practice. Like any tool, it is best used with a proper, good, intention. A church or temple can be used simply as a refuge from a rainstorm, but it can be so much more with a different intention. The same is true of the labyrinth. The seeker is only asked to put one foot in front of the other. By stepping into the labyrinth, we are choosing once again to walk the contemplative spiritual path. We are agreeing to let ourselves be open to see, to be free to hear, and to becoming real enough to respond. The labyrinth is a prayer path, a crucible of change, a meditation tool, a blueprint where psyche meets soul.

 

The best way to learn about the labyrinth is to walk a well-constructed one a few times, with an open heart and an open mind. Then allow your experience to guide you as to whether this will be a useful spiritual tool for you.

 

The Chartres Labyrinth and the Pilgrim’s Journey

 

Pilgrims are persons in motion – passing through territories not their own – seeking something we might call completion, or perhaps the word clarity will do as well, a goal to which only the spirit’s compass points the way.

Richard R. Niebuhr in Pilgrims and Pioneers

 

“The tradition of pilgrimage is as old as religion itself. Worshippers on pilgrimage traveled to holy festivals whether to solstice celebrations, to Mecca to gather around the Ka’aba for the high holy days of Islam, or to Easter festivals in the Holy City of Jerusalem. Pilgrimages were a mixture of religious duty and holiday relaxation for the peasant, the commoner and rich land owner alike. The journey was often embarked on in groups with designated places to stay at night. The pilgrims were restless to explore the mystical holy places, and many were in search of physical or spiritual healing.

 

The Christian story, which emphasized the humanity of Christ, fascinated the pilgrims. In the Middle Ages, most people did not read. As a result, they were much more oriented to the senses than we are today. They learned the story by traveling to Jerusalem to walk where Jesus walked, to pray where he prayed, and to experience, in a solemn moment, where he died. Unlike today, Pilgrims encountered the truth of the Christian mystery through an ongoing intimacy with all their senses.

 

When a person committed his or her life to Christ in the early Middle Ages, they sometimes made a vow to make a pilgrimage to the Holy City of Jerusalem. However, by the 12th century when the Crusades swept across Europe and the ownership of Jerusalem was in tumultuous flux, travel became dangerous and expensive. In response to this situation, the Roman Church appointed seven pilgrimage cathedrals to become “Jerusalem” for pilgrims. Consequently, in the pilgrimage tradition, the path within the labyrinth was called the Chemin de Jerusalem and the center of the labyrinth was called “New Jerusalem”.

 

The walk into the labyrinth marked the end of the physical journey across the countryside and served as a symbolic entry-way into the spiritual realms of the Celestial City. The image of the Celestial City – taken straight out of the Book of Revelation to John – captivated the religious imagination of many during the Middle Ages. The wondrous Gothic cathedrals, with painted walls either in bright, even gaudy colours, or else white-washed, were designed to represent the Celestial City. The stained glass windows – when illuminated by the sun – created the sense of colourful, dancing jewels, allowing the pilgrim to experience the awesome mystery of the City of God.”

 

The Journey of Life

 

A fundamental approach to the labyrinth is to see it as a metaphor for life’s journey. The labyrinth reminds us that all of life, with its joys, sorrows, twists and turns, is a journey that comes from God (birth) and goes to God (death). It is a physical metaphor for the journey of healing, spiritual and emotional growth and transformation. Following the path is like any journey. Sometimes you feel you are at or nearing your destination, and at other times you may feel distant or even lost. Only by faithfully keeping to the path will you arrive at the physical center of the labyrinth, which signifies God, the center of our lives and souls.

 

Applying the Three Fold Mystical Tradition to the Labyrinth

 

In the Christian mystical tradition, the journey to God was articulated in the three stages. These stages have become recognized as being universal to meditation: to release and quiet; to open and receive; and to take what was gained back out into the world.

 

The Three Stages

 

The first part of the Three- Fold Mystical Path is Purgation. This archaic word is from the root word “to purge”, meaning to cleanse, to let go. Shedding is another way of describing the experience. The mystical word is empting or releasing. It is believed that monks journeyed the first part of the labyrinth Purgation on their knees as a penitential act. This was not done for reasons of punishment as we might think, but as a way to humble oneself before God.

 

The second stage of the Three-Fold Path, Illumination, is found in the center of the labyrinth. Usually it is a surprise to reach the center because the long winding path seems “illogical” and cannot be figured out by the linear mind. After quieting the mind in the first part of the walk, the center presents a new experience: a place of meditation and prayer. Often people at this stage in the walk find insight into their situation in life, or clarity about a certain problem, hence the label “illumination”. As one enters the

center, the instruction is simple: enter with an open heart and mind; receive what there is for you.

 

The third stage, Union, begins when you leave the center of the labyrinth and continues as you retrace the path that brought you in. In this stage the meditation takes on a grounded, energized feeling. Many people who have had an important experience in the center feel that this third stage of the labyrinth gives them a way of integrating the insights they received. Others feel that this stage stokes the creative fires within. It energizes insight. It empowers, invites, and even pushes us to be more authentic and confident and to take risks with our gifts in the world. Union means communing with God.

 

The Monastic Orders experienced a union with God through their community life by creating a fulfilling balance between the work that was assigned, sleep and the many hours of worship attended daily. Our times present a similar challenge: we struggle to find balance between work, sleep, family and friends, leisure and spiritual life. The lack of structured communities in which people share work responsibilities and the “every person for himself or herself” mentality (or every family for itself) prevalent in our highly individualistic society makes the task of finding balance even more difficult.

 

Monastic communities offered a mystical spirituality that spoke to highly intuitive and intensely introverted people and (paradoxically to some) at the same time provided an economic structure throughout Europe. Monasteries during the Middle Ages provided schools and hospitals managed by monks; yet, at the same time, cloistered life helped the monks stay inwardly directed. Today, without any reliable structure directing us, the way of union needs to be re-thought. Our times call for most of us to be outer-directed. We are called to action in every aspect of our society in order to meet the spiritual challenges that confront us in the 21st century. Gratefully, there are still people in religious orders holding the candle for deep contemplation, but the majority of people involved in the spiritual transformation are searching for a path that guides them to service in the world in an active, extroverted, compassionate way. The third stage of the labyrinth empowers the seeker to move back into the world replenished and directed – which makes the labyrinth a particularly powerful tool for transformation.

 

Walking the Labyrinth: The Process

 

The purpose of all spiritual disciplines – prayer, fasting, meditation – is to help create an open attentiveness that enables us to receive and renew our awareness of our grounding and wholeness in God.

 

The Experience of Walking Meditation

 

Many of us have trouble quieting our minds. The Buddhists call the distracted state of mind the “monkey mind”, which is an apt image of what the mind is frequently like: thoughts swinging like monkeys from branch to branch, chattering away without any rhyme or conscious reason. When the mind is quiet, we feel peaceful and open, aware of a silence that embraces the universe.

 

Complete quiet in the mind is not a realistic goal for most of us. Instead, the task is to dis-identify with the thoughts going through our minds. Don’t get hooked by the thoughts, let them go. Thomas Keating, a Cistercian monk who teaches Centering Prayer (meditation) in the Christian tradition, described the mind as a still lake. A thought is like a fish that swims through it. If you get involved with the fish (“Gee what an unusual fish, I wonder what it is called?”), then you are hooked. Many of us have discovered through learning meditation how difficult it is to quiet the mind; yet, the rewards are great.

 

In the labyrinth, the sheer act of walking a complicated, attention demanding path begins to focus the mind. Thoughts of daily tasks and experiences become less intrusive. A quiet mind does not happen automatically. You must gently guide the mind with the intention of letting go of extraneous thoughts. This is much easier to do when your whole body is moving – when you are walking. Movement takes away the excess charge of psychic energy that disturbs our efforts to quiet our thought processes.

 

Two Basic Approaches to the Walk

 

One way to walk the labyrinth is to choose to let all thought go and simply open yourself to your experience with gracious attention. Usually – though not always – quieting happens in the first stage of the walk. After the mind is quiet, you can choose to remain in the quiet. Or use the labyrinth as a prayer path. Simply begin to talk to God. This is an indication that you are ready to receive what is there for you, or you allow a sincere part of your being to find its voice.

 

A second approach to a labyrinth walk is to consider a question. Concentrate on the question as you walk in. Amplify your thoughts about it; let all else go but your question. When you walk into the center with an open heart and an open mind, you are opening yourself to receiving new information, new insights about yourself.

 

Guidelines for the Walk

 

Find your pace. In our chaotic world we are often pushed beyond a comfortable rhythm. In this state we lose the sense of our own needs. To make matters worse, we are often rushed and then forced to wait. Anyone who has hurried to the bank only to stand in line knows the feeling. Ironically, the same thing can happen with the labyrinth, but there is a difference. The labyrinth helps us find what our natural pace would be and draws our attention to it when we are not honouring it.

 

Along with finding your pace, support your movement through the labyrinth by becoming conscious of your breath. Let your breath flow smoothly in and out of your body. It can be coordinated with each step – as is done in the Buddhist walking meditation – if you choose. Let your experience be your guide.

 

Each experience in the labyrinth is different, even if you walk it often in a short period of time. The pace usually differs each time as well. It can change dramatically within the different stages of the walk. When the labyrinth has more than a comfortable number of seekers on it, you can “pass” people if you want to continue to honour the intuitive pace your inner process has set. If you are moving at a slower pace, you can allow people to pass you. At first people are uncomfortable with the idea of “passing” someone on the labyrinth. It looks competitive, especially since the walk is a spiritual exercise. Again, these kinds of thoughts and feelings, we hope, are greeted from a spacious place inside that smiles knowingly about the machinations of the human ego. On the spiritual path we meet every and all things. To find our pace, to allow spaciousness within, to be receptive to all experience, and to be aware of the habitual thoughts and issues that hamper our spiritual development is a road to self-knowledge.

 

Summary of How to Walk the Labyrinth

 

Pause at the entry way to allow yourself to be fully conscious of the act of stepping into the labyrinth. Allow about a minute, or several turns on the path, to create some space between yourself and the person in front of you. Some ritual act, such as a bow, may feel appropriate during the labyrinth walk. Do what comes naturally.

 

Follow your pace. Allow your body to determine the pace. If you allow a rapid pace and the person in front of you is moving slower, feel free to move around this person. This is easiest to do at the turns by turning earlier. If you are moving slowly, you can step onto the labyrs (wide spaces at the turns) to allow others to pass.

 

The narrow path is a two-way street. If you are going in and another person is going out, you will meet on the path. If you want to keep in an inward meditative state, simply do not make eye contact. If you meet someone you know, a touch of the hand or a hug may be an important acknowledgement of being on the path together.

 

Symbolism and Meanings Found in the Chartres Labyrinth

 

Circles and Spirals

 

The circle is the symbol of unity or union and it is the primary shape of all labyrinths. The circle in sacred geometry represents the incessant movement of the universe (uncomprehensible) as opposed to the square which represents comprehensible order. The labyrinth is a close cousin to the spiral and it, too, reflects the cyclical element of nature and is regarded as the symbol of eternal life.

 

The labyrinth functions like a spiral, creating a vortex in its center. Upon entering, the path winds in a clockwise pattern. Energy is being drawn out. Upon leaving the center the walker goes in a counter clockwise direction. The unwinding path integrates and empowers us on our walk back out. We are literally ushered back out into the world in a strengthened condition.

 

The Path

 

The path lies in 11 concentric circles with the 12th being the labyrinth center. The path meanders throughout the whole circle. There are 34 turns on the path going into the center. Six are semi-right turns and 28 are 180° turns. So the 12 rings that form the 11 pathways may symbolically represent, the 12 apostles, 12 tribes of Israel or 12 months of the year. Twelve is a mystical number in Christianity. In sacred geometry three represents heaven and four represents earth. Twelve is the product of 3 x 4 and, therefore, the path which flows through the whole is then representative of all creation.

 

The obvious metaphor for the path is the difficult path to salvation, with its many twists and turns. Since we cannot see a straight path to our destination, the labyrinth can be viewed as a metaphor for our lives. We learn to surrender to the path (Christ) and trust that he will lead us on our journey.

 

The path can also be viewed as grace or the Church guiding us through chaos.

 

The Cruciform and Labyrs

 

The labyrinth is divided equally into four quadrants that make an equal-armed cross or cruciform. The four arms represent in symbol what is thought to be the essential

 

structure of the universe for example, the four spatial directions, the four elements (earth, wind, water and fire), the four seasons and, most important, salvation through the cross. The four arms of the cross emerging from the center seem to give order to the would-be chaos of the meandering path around it.

 

The Chartres labyrinth cross or cruciform is delineated by the 10 labyrs (labyr means to turn and this is the root of the word labyrinth). The labyrs are double-ax shaped and visible at the turns and between turns. They are traditionally seen as a symbol of women’s power and creativity.

 

The Centre Rosette

 

In the Middle Ages, the rose was regarded as a symbol for the Virgin Mary. Because of its association with the myths of Percival and the Holy Grail at that time, it also was seen as a sign of beauty and love. The rose becomes symbolic of both human and divine love, of passionate love, but also love beyond passion. The single rose became a symbol of a simple acceptance of God’s love for the world.

 

Unlike a normal rose (which has five petals) the rosette has six petals and is steeped in mysticism. Although associated with the Rose of Sharon, which refers to Mary, it may also represent the Holy Spirit (wisdom and enlightenment). The six petals may have corresponded to the story of the six days of creation. In other mystical traditions, the petals can be viewed as the levels of evolution (mineral, plant, animal, humankind, angelic and divine).

 

The Lunations

 

The lunations are the outer ring of partial circles that complete the outside circle of the labyrinth. They are unique to the Chartres design.

 

Celtic Symbols on the St. Hilda’s Labyrinth

 

The Celtic peoples have given us seven enduring spiritual principles:

 

1. A deep respect of nature, regarding creation as the fifth Gospel.

 

2. Quiet care for all living things.

3. The love of learning.

4. A wonder-lust or migratory nature.

5. Love of silence and solitude.

6. Understanding of time as a sacred reality and an appreciation of ordinary life, worshipping God through everyday life, and with great joy.

7. The value of family and clan affiliation, and especially spiritual ties of soul friends.

To show our respect for such wisdom, two Celtic designs adorn the St. Hilda’s labyrinth.

 

To mark the entrance to the labyrinth is a Celtic zoomorphic design painted in red. Traditionally, Celtic monks used intricate knotwork and zoomorphic designs (odd animals intertwined in uncomfortable ways) as mere filler for their illuminated gospel texts. They had no discernible meaning.

 

However, because of their unique design components, zoomorphs are now associated with transformations.

 

Transformation, change, action, and passion are also associated with red, the colour of fire. Therefore, this entrance symbol may well be an appropriate sign for the journey ahead.

At the labyrinth’s centre is a Celtic triquetra. This interlocked knotwork design of three stylized fish (whales) is often interpreted as the Trinity knot. It is a perfect representation of the concept of "three in one" in Christian trinity beliefs. Having the design enclosed within the centre circle further emphasizes the unity theme.

 

The triquetra can also be considered to represent the triplicities of mind, body, and soul, as well as the three domains of earth- earth, sea, and sky.

 

Final Reflection: The Labyrinth as a “Thinning Place”

 

In Celtic Christianity, places where people felt most strongly connected with God’s presence were referred to as thin places. It was these places in nature (forest groves, hilltops and deep wells) that the seen and unseen worlds were most closely connected, and the inhabitants of both worlds could momentarily touch the other. Today our churches, temples and sacred sites are the new thin places to meet the Divine. Here, at St Hilda’s, we have opportunities to encounter many thinning places – whether it be during Eucharistic or Taize services, while singing or praying, or through the love of a welcoming inclusive community. The labyrinth is a welcome addition; and with the right intent can also become a new thinning place for the modern pilgrim/spiritual seeker.This outward journey is an archetype with which we can have a direct experience. We can walk it. It can serve to frame the inward journey – a journey of repentance, forgiveness and rebirth, a journey that seeks a deeper faith, and greater holiness, a journey in search of God.

 

This 360° High Dynamic Range panorama was stitched from 66 bracketed photographs images with PTGUI Pro, tone-mapped with Photomatix, processed with Color Efex, and touched up in Aperture.

 

Original size: 20000 × 10000 (200.0 MP; 1.04 GB).

 

Location: St. Hilda’s By The Sea Anglican Church, Sechelt, British Columbia, Canada

Hi everybody,

again another shot for my Principles of Levitation project...

 

More or less 2 months ago I posted my last Levitation shot and today I decided to get back to the project, so, I told my parents to help me with the shot :D

 

They were watching tv when I arrived from Crossfit and my mom prepared me a delicious dinner :D

 

So after eating we started the shooting and well here is the result, not 100% happy with the result but well, I didn't had time today like to do something better... I hope you like it!

 

Now, well you know :) time to go to bed!

 

Peace!

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

Click here to join my Facebook page!

 

GIMP

 

Hi everyone!

The first levitation shot in the 52 Weeks project!

 

Last Friday my photo Principles of Levitation pt. 2: Reading to improve the technique was featured as "Photo of the day" in the Berlin subway, yes, the whole day you could see my photo between news, the weather and some other ads.

 

Yes, I also took a ride in the subway just to see my photo :D, and yes, I am still happy about this little achievement.

 

In the background on the top you can see my photo displayed in the right screen with my name and description in the left one.

 

In other news, I am really hating this "new" Flickr layout, I really hate it!

 

Well, now time to go to the balcony and enjoy of a delicious watermelon water and the nice weather!

 

Have a great Sunday you all!

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

en.easternlightning.org/faith-and-life/studying-bible-mor...

 

3 Principles for How to Meditate on the Word of God

 

By Xiao Xiao, France

 

Contents

1. When reading the Bible, quieting your heart before God is a precondition for gaining the Holy Spirit’s enlightenment and guidance.

2. Don’t read aimlessly, but select corresponding passages according to your actual problems and difficulties.

3. Focus on pondering God’s words and understanding their inner meaning.

 

Let’s look at the following words from the Lord: “Truly I say to you, Except you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3). “But let your communication be, Yes, yes; No, no: for whatever is more than these comes of evil” (Matthew 5:37). We can see in God’s words that He loves honest people and is disgusted by liars and cheaters. Only honest people can enter the kingdom of heaven, while sinister and crafty people cannot pass its gates. Only by praying and pondering God’s words can we understand that God wants us to be honest people, as innocent and open as a child with no trickery or deception. Once we’ve thought about things to that point, we can continue to seek: Do we have dishonest parts? By reflecting on our thoughts and actions, we can see that we still display a lot of deceitfulness. Sometimes when we’re before God in prayer, we say all sorts of wonderful things and set our resolve many times, but in our real lives we hardly ever match up to that. Sometimes we do something wrong and want to acknowledge our mistake to someone else, but we’re afraid they’ll look down on us, so in order to preserve our own face and name, we tell a half truth and cover up the truth. Sometimes when we’re talking about our experiences, we’re willing and ready to talk about how we do put God’s words into practice, but very rarely speak of the ways we defy and resist God, and our manifestations of not practicing the truth. We often pretend to be something we’re not so that others will maintain a good image of us. Sometimes we see brothers and sisters doing things that are not in line with God’s will and want to share fellowship with them, but we’re concerned about injuring their pride, or afraid that they won’t accept our opinion and will judge us, so we go on with one eye open and one eye closed, pretending we don’t know anything. The list goes on. Through reflection, we can see how much deceitfulness we display—we are not at all honest people who are pleasing to God. So, how could people such as us enter the kingdom of heaven? After understanding these things, we must continue to mull over the path to becoming an honest person in God’s words. First, we cannot lie with our words, but must speak in accordance with the truth. One is one, and two is two. But primarily, we need to have honest hearts. We cannot have crookedness or deceitfulness within our hearts; anything we say or do is subject to God’s scrutiny. We cannot lie or cheat to protect our own status, reputation, or face, but when we encounter an issue we should be able to forsake our own incorrect motives, speak honestly, and speak out what’s in our hearts. If we can live up to this, we start to enter into the truth of being honest people. If we always earnestly ponder God’s words in this way, seeking to understand the essence of the truth through the literal meaning of God’s words, we will understand the finer points of the truth more and more, and then what we practice in our lives will be more correct. We will become closer to God’s will and requirements and we will feel more and more steady, at peace, and content in our souls.

  

Related Reading:

3 Practices to Develop a Powerful Prayer Life in 2020

 

Image Source: The Church of Almighty God

 

Terms of Use: en.easternlightning.org/disclaimer.html

 

"I saw the Storm and ice covered land

I saw the frozen trees so silent

I saw the blackness of their branches

under the unforgiving snow

Down down into the earth i went

Deeper and darker places surrounded me

Until the colors came

Until the swirling shapes danced around me

There the roots of life drew forth from a greater Life

This is the place of the Great Dream

Where the Garden ever pulsates

From this place the roots draw forth and sustain entire worlds

The seasons draw from on eternal Spring

changing the shapes of Infinity over and over again."

 

© Ganga Fondan, 2010

 

Unedited from a journal entry written after meditating on the "Four Eternal Principles". Focusing on the meaning of those journaled words came this artwork on digital canvas. It reminds me of how everything we touch, taste, smell, see, feel, hear....is connected to a greater Source beyond the senses and immerses us in a grander experience each time we are courageous enough to let go of all the small ways we know ourselves.

 

Blog

   

Step into the ethereal charm of the Garden of Six Qualities, a serene oasis blending traditional Japanese landscaping with timeless philosophical values. Nestled in a peaceful corner, this garden captures the essence of six aesthetic principles: simplicity, naturalness, subtlety, tranquility, asymmetry, and depth. It’s a living testament to the harmonious balance between nature and human artistry.

 

The scene unfolds with moss-covered earth, meticulously arranged stones, and a flowing stream that mirrors the vibrant greenery surrounding it. A delicately carved stone pagoda rises gracefully, symbolizing spiritual elevation amidst the natural world. The wooden bridge, worn smooth with time, invites you to meander through the garden, offering ever-changing perspectives of its carefully curated views. This juxtaposition of rugged natural elements and refined human craftsmanship embodies the wabi-sabi philosophy of finding beauty in imperfection.

 

The architectural integration is subtle yet profound. Bamboo railings blend seamlessly into the organic environment, providing structure without intruding upon the scenery. The interplay of light and shadow across the water’s surface shifts throughout the day, creating an ever-evolving canvas of reflection and serenity.

 

Originally designed as a meditative retreat, the garden is steeped in history, drawing on centuries-old landscaping traditions. Each element has been meticulously placed to encourage introspection and a deep connection with the natural world. Whether you’re an aficionado of Japanese culture or a casual visitor seeking tranquility, the Garden of Six Qualities offers a profound escape from the modern world. It’s a perfect spot to pause, reflect, and capture the delicate interplay of history, nature, and artistry.

The Journal asked writers and illustrators to contribute a series based on design icon Dieter Rams’ Ten Principles of Good Design manifesto. Each writer wrote on one of Rams’ principles; each illustrator reacted to a writer’s essay. This is the seventh illustration from the ten-part series.

 

Steven Heller wrote on Rams’ sixth principle, Good design is honest. Mr Heller is a notable author, writer for Print Magazine and co-chair of the MFA Designer as Author program at the School of Visual Arts in New York. Emory Allen created the above illustration based on Mr Heller’s essay. Mr Allen works under the studio name Ocular Invasion. He currently works for the motion graphics and animation studio Make.

The meaning of lucky bamboo plays an important role as a living example of the feng shui elements of water, wood and earth. When you place this plant in the correct pot, it can introduce fire and metal to complete a balance of the five elements. This plant is one of the most recognizable and popular feng shui cures. It's an easy care plant that can survive in any kind of light. Feng shui principles claim that bamboo attracts auspicious chi energy. Since the bamboo plant is strong, it can energize your home.

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

45EPIC Malibu Ballet! Beautiful High Res Fine Art Ballerina Dancing Classical Ballet in Pointe Shoes Goddess! Golden Ratio Photography Surf Goddesses! Athletic Action Portraits of Professional Ballerinas! Bikini Swimsuit Aphrodite! Athletic Fitness Models! 45SURF dx4/dt=ic

 

Sony A7 R RAW Photos of Pretty, Tall Blond Ballerina Model Goddess Dancing Ballet! Carl Zeiss Sony FE 55mm F1.8 ZA Sonnar T* Lens & Lightroom 5.3

 

My physics equation dx4/dt=ic graces the swimsuits and bikinis, while the golden gun is designed in proportion with the golden ratio, and the photos are oft cropped in divine proportions!

 

Beautiful Golden Ratio Composition Photography Surf Goddesses! dx4/dt=ic Athletic Action Portraits of Swimsuit Bikini Models! Athena, Artemis, Helen, and Aphrodite! Athletic Fitness Models!

 

My Epic Gear Guide for Landscapes & Portraits!

geni.us/hcTs

Everyone is always asking me for this! Here ya go! :)

 

My Epic Book: Photographing Women Models!

geni.us/m90Ms

Portrait, Swimsuit, Lingerie, Boudoir, Fine Art, & Fashion Photography Exalting the Venus Goddess Archetype: How to Shoot Epic ...

 

Epic! Beautiful Surf Fine Art Portrait Swimsuit Bikini Models!

 

Bitcoin: 1FMBZJeeHVMu35uegrYUfEkHfPj5pe9WNz

 

Follow me friends!

facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/45surf

 

Epic books, prints, & more!

geni.us/aEG4

 

Exalt your photography with Golden Ratio Compositions!

geni.us/eeA1

Golden Ratio Compositions & Secret Sacred Geometry for Photography, Fine Art, & Landscape Photographers: How to Exalt Art with Leonardo da Vinci's, Michelangelo's!

 

Epic Landscape Photography:

geni.us/TV4oEAz

A Simple Guide to the Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography: Master Composition, Lenses, Camera Settings, Aperture, ISO, ... Hero's Odyssey Mythology Photography)

 

Epic Art & Gear for your Epic Hero's Odyssey:

geni.us/9fnvAMw

 

Enjoy my physics books graces with my fine art photography! Light Time Dimension Theory: The Foundational Physics Unifying Einstein's Relativity and Quantum Mechanics: A Simple, Illustrated Introduction to the Physical

amzn.to/2A4IMfM

 

Beautiful Surf Goddesses! Athletic Action Portraits of Swimsuit Bikini Models! Athena, Artemis, Helen, and Aphrodite!

Pretty Redhead Venus Swimsuit Bikini Surfer Girl Malibu Beach Model! Pretty Red Hair Cowgirl Cowboy Hat! Surf Lifestyle Portrait Headshots Photoshoot! Gorgeous Ginger Tall, Thin, Fit Fitness Model Long Legs Abs! 45SURF 45EPIC dx4/dt=ic! Cloudy Day Light!

 

My Epic Gear Guide for Epic Landscapes & Portraits!

geni.us/hcTs

Everyone is always asking me for this! Here ya go! :)

 

Epic books, prints, & more!

geni.us/aEG4

 

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography:

geni.us/taophotography

 

Exalt your photography with Golden Ratio Compositions!

geni.us/eeA1

Golden Ratio Compositions & Secret Sacred Geometry for Photography, Fine Art, & Landscape Photographers: How to Exalt Art with Leonardo da Vinci's, Michelangelo's . . . !

 

Epic Landscape Photography:

geni.us/TV4oEAz

A Simple Guide to the Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography: Master Composition, Lenses, Camera Settings, Aperture, ISO, ... Hero's Odyssey Mythology Photography)

 

Epic Art & Gear for your Epic Hero's Odyssey:

geni.us/9fnvAMw

 

Follow me my good friends!

Facebook: geni.us/A0Na3

Instagram: geni.us/QD2J

Golden Ratio: geni.us/9EbGK

45SURF: geni.us/Mby4P

Fine Art Ballet: geni.us/C1Adc

 

Photographing Women Models! geni.us/m90Ms

Portrait, Swimsuit, Lingerie, Boudoir, Fine Art, & Fashion Photography Exalting the Venus Goddess Archetype: How to Shoot Epic...

 

Epic Poetry inspires all my photography: geni.us/9K0Ki Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art Nature Photography with the Poetic Wisdom of John Muir, Emerson, Thoreau, Homer's Iliad, Milton's Paradise Lost & Dante's Inferno Odyssey

 

Ralph Waldo Emerson. The happiest man is he who learns from nature the lesson of worship.

These Seven Principles of Human Learning taken from the National Academies Press free ebook Learning and Understanding (2002).

 

"During the last four decades, scientists have engaged in research that has increased our understanding of human cognition, providing greater insight into how knowledge is organized, how experience shapes understanding, how people monitor their own understanding, how learners differ from one another, and how people acquire expertise. From this emerging body of research, scientists and others have been able to synthesize a number of underlying principles of human learning. This growing understanding of how people learn has the potential to influence significantly the nature of education and its outcomes."

 

Image licensed under Creative Commons by happeningfish: www.flickr.com/photos/happeningfish/3007746661/

The University of Greenwich is a public university located in London and Kent, United Kingdom. Previous names include Woolwich Polytechnic and Thames Polytechnic.

 

The university's main campus is at the Old Royal Naval College, which along with its Avery Hill campus, is located in the Royal Borough of Greenwich. Greenwich also has a satellite campus in Medway, Kent, as part of a shared campus. The university's range of subjects includes architecture, business, computing, mathematics, education, engineering, humanities, maritime studies, natural sciences, pharmacy and social sciences. Greenwich's alumni include two Nobel laureates: Abiy Ahmed and Charles K. Kao. It received a Silver rating in the UK government's Teaching Excellence Framework.

 

The university dates back to 1891, when Woolwich Polytechnic, the second-oldest polytechnic in the United Kingdom, opened in Woolwich. It was founded by Frank Didden, supported by and following the principles of Quintin Hogg, and opened to students in October 1891. Like Hogg's pioneering venture in London's Regent Street, it initially combined education with social and religious functions.

 

In 1894 it focused on an educational role, concentrating on higher technical education appropriate to its location close to Woolwich Dockyard and the Royal Arsenal; William Anderson, director-general of the Ordnance Factories, was a trustee and later a member of the board of governors. Its premises were also used for day schools – the first Woolwich Polytechnic School was established in 1897.

 

In 1970, Woolwich Polytechnic merged with part of Hammersmith College of Art and Building to form Thames Polytechnic. In the following years, Dartford College (1976), Avery Hill College of Education (1985), Garnett College (1987) and parts of Goldsmiths College and the City of London College (1988) were incorporated.[9]

 

In 1992, Thames Polytechnic was granted university status by the Major government (together with various other polytechnics) and renamed the University of Greenwich in 1993. On 1 January 1993, the Thames College of Health Care Studies, itself a merger of three local nursing and midwifery training schools, officially merged with the newly designated University of Greenwich, becoming a full faculty of the university.

 

Formerly a UK government research agency, the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) was incorporated into the university in 1996.

 

In 2001, the university gave up its historic main campus in the Bathway Quarter in Woolwich, relocating to its current main campus in Greenwich.

 

Greenwich Campus is located mainly in the Old Royal Naval College, into which it moved in the 1990s when the premises were sold by the Royal Navy.

 

The campus is home to the Business School and the Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The campus also includes university's Greenwich Maritime Institute, a specialist maritime management, policy and history teaching and research institute. The Old Royal Naval College also hosts "The Painted Hall", which was painted in the 18th century by Sir James Thornhill, which covers over 40,000 square feet of surface in 200 painting of kings, queens and mythological creatures.

 

The campus has a large library at Stockwell Street which houses an extensive collection of books and journals, language labs and a 300-PC computing facility. Other facilities include specialist computer laboratories including one at Dreadnought centre, a TV studio and editing suites. The Stephen Lawrence Gallery at the Stockwell Street building, showcases the work of contemporary artists and is linked to the School of Design.

 

The Avery Hill Campus comprises two sites, Mansion and Southwood. Both are situated in the 86-acre Avery Hill Park in the Royal Borough of Greenwich, south-east London.

 

The campus is home to the Faculty of Education & Health. Facilities include computer laboratories, a library and a TV studio, as well as a sports and teaching centre with a sports hall and 220-seat lecture theatre. Southwood site also has clinical skills laboratories. These replicate NHS wards, enabling trainee health professionals to gain hands-on experience. The village complex provides student accommodation, a general shop and a launderette. The Dome, in the centre of the complex, houses a food outlet and gym. Rugby, football, indoor pitches, netball and tennis courts, and a dance studio are on Avery Hill campus.

 

The facility, which was built by Wimpey Construction under a PFI contract, was completed in 1996.

 

The Winter Garden, the centrepiece of the Mansion site, has fallen into neglect and is on Historic England's 'At Risk' Register. A campaign to restore the Winter Garden is putting pressure on the university and Greenwich Council to ensure its future.

 

The Medway Campus is located on a former Royal Navy shorebase (called HMS Pembroke) opened in 1903 at Chatham Maritime, Kent.

 

The Faculty of Engineering and Science is based here, as is the Natural Resources Institute, a centre for research, consultancy and education in natural and human resources. It is also the home of Medway School of Pharmacy, a joint school operated by the Universities of Greenwich and Kent. The Faculty of Education & Health offers a number of its programmes at Medway. Facilities include laboratories, workshops, a computer-aided design studio and a training dispensary.

 

The Drill Hall Library is a learning resource centre with a library, computers, study areas and teaching rooms. Social facilities include a sports hall, bar, gym and outdoor tennis courts. The university is a member of Universities at Medway, a partnership of educational establishments at Chatham Maritime that is developing the area as a major higher education centre in the Medway region.

 

Greenwich Campus is near 74-hectare Greenwich Park, home to the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. The Stockwell Street Building opened in 2014 and is now home to the campus library, film and TV studios, and state-of-the-art editing suites. In 2015, it was shortlisted for the Stirling Prize for excellence in architecture.

 

The Dreadnought Building is a central hub for the Greenwich Campus, with further teaching and social spaces.

 

The Student Village at Avery Hill Campus provides accommodation for around 1,000 students. On-site facilities include a café, canteen, shop, launderette, bicycle parking, and a gym.

 

Medway Campus has 350 rooms across five halls of residence dedicated to student accommodation.

 

Greenwich Students' Union is the university's students' union. In October 2019, the GSU Student Assembly voted to ask the university to declare a climate emergency and for the university and union sustainability strategies to consult with students in creating them. This call to action aimed to speed up the university's efforts at becoming carbon neutral.

 

At the Medway campus in Kent there is a partnership between the University of Greenwich Students' Union, Canterbury Christ Church and University of Kent Union on the Medway campus. Greenwich Students' Union has been leading the partnership since July 2021 and manages The Hub space, previously The Student Hub when it was looked after by GK Unions – the Greenwich & Kent Students' Unions Together (once the Universities at Medway Students Association, UMSA).

 

Greenwich Students' Union delivers at Avery Hill, Greenwich and Medway campus.

 

Greenwich research seeks to influence and enhance health, education, science, engineering, computing and social policy, and attracts international agencies, government departments and global corporations (for example, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, BAE Systems, Airbus, GE Aviation and Merck Consumer Health) from over 50 countries. Significant areas of research and consultancy include landscape architecture, employment relations, fire safety, natural resources, tourism and hospitality, social network analysis, education, training, educational leadership and public services.

 

Examples of research

The university's Natural Resources Institute has developed an artificial cow that attracts and kills the tsetse fly. This was recognised by a Universities UK survey in 2009 as one of the ten most important discoveries to be made in a UK university over the past 60 years.

The Fire Safety Engineering Group, part of the School of Computing & Mathematical Sciences, is a world leader in computational fire engineering, including expertise in aircraft, building, ship and rail evacuation and fire modelling. It has developed airEXODUS, a leading evacuation model in the aviation industry.

A University of Greenwich research team helped restore the Cutty Sark after it was badly damaged by fire.

Researchers working on 19 sustainable development and agriculture projects in India helped the university to win the 2010 Times Higher Education Award for Outstanding International Strategy.

Two University of Greenwich scientists have developed a technology which converts contaminated land and industrial waste into harmless pebbles, capturing large amounts of carbon dioxide at the same time.

The Greenwich Maritime Institute makes internationally recognised contributions to research in maritime history and economics, such as its exploration of the governance of the River Thames since the 1960s and the effects this has had on the economic development of adjacent communities.

The university has had many famous movie productions that were filmed on campus, one example of a movie is the classic 2013 Marvel movie Thor: Dark World

Rankings

Rankings

National rankings

Complete (2024)110

Guardian (2024)116

Times / Sunday Times (2024)105

Global rankings

ARWU (2023)601–700

QS (2024)671–680

THE (2024)501–600

The university was ranked 94 out of 121 UK institutions according to The Guardian University Guide 2022 league table. For 2023, the University of Greenwich was ranked 60 according to Times Higher education (THE). Moreover, University of Greenwich ranked first in London for Events, Tourism and Hospitality by the Guardian’s 2023 university rankings. Subjects taught at Greenwich have seen rises in the Guardian university league tables for 2022: Chemistry was at 10, up 10 places since 2021. Forensic Science (9), Criminology (10), Mechanical Engineering (12), and Education (48) also moved up significantly.

 

In Center for World University Rankings World University Rankings 2020–21 – University of Greenwich was ranked 76 in the UK. In 2022, University of Greenwich was ranked in the 750-800 range globally by QS World University Rankings.

 

In the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings 2020, Greenwich performed well in several categories:

 

Responsible Consumption and Production (24th)

Life on Land (66th)

Reduced Inequalities (68th)

Climate Action (75th)

Partnership for the Goals (77th)

 

Awards

In 2012, the university was rated as the greenest in the UK by People & Planet Green League Table. In 2019, it was ranked 14 in UK, and third in London. The University has gained many national awards, including four Queen's Anniversary Prizes, nine Times Higher Education Awards and two Guardian University Awards.

 

In 2019, the university's Natural Resources Institute was awarded a Queen's Anniversary Prize for its research in pest management and control to combat human and animal diseases in the UK and internationally; in 2015 it won a prize for work on the cassava crop in Africa.

 

In 2023, the university has been classified as Gold in Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) of Higher Education.

 

Cafeteria workers' dispute

In 2019, the university's main cafeteria was operated by BaxterStorey, which paid its workers £9.25 per hour without contractual sick pay. After a chef had collapsed on his way home from a shift during a typical 80-hour week, all workers joined UVW union. After four strike days in October 2019, and protests disrupting the annual graduation ceremony and a board meeting, Greenwich University announced in early January 2020 that all outsourced cafe workers, cleaners and security guards would receive the London living wage of £10.55, in addition to the same sick pay and annual leave as university staff.

 

Partnership with Charlton Athletic

In 2018, the University of Greenwich started a partnership with Charlton Athletic F.C.

 

Notable alumni

Abiy Ahmed is Prime Minister of Ethiopia and a Nobel Peace prize winner

Sir Charles Kao was one of the distinguished alumni at UOG

 

Demitu Hambisa Bonsa

Prominent alumni of the university and its predecessor organisations include Nobel Laureate Charles Kao, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2009 for his work on transmission of light in fibre optics, and Abiy Ahmed, who won the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize. In June 2021, representatives from multiple countries called for the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Abiy to be re-considered because of the war crimes committed in Tigray. Two British government ministers, Richard Marsh and Gareth Thomas, are also graduates. A more extensive list is given below.

 

Abiy Ahmed, Prime Minister of Ethiopia and Nobel Peace prize winner

Jamie 'JME' Adenuga, MC

Bola Agbaje, playwright

Helen Bailey, writer

Natasha Bedingfield, pop singer (did not graduate)

John Behr, theologian

Malorie Blackman, children's author

Demitu Hambisa Bonsa, Ethiopian government minister

John Boyega, actor, best known for Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Sheila Bromberg, musician

Liam Brown, author

Campbell Christie, chairman of Falkirk F.C.

Terry Christian, radio and television presenter

Mark Daly, Irish senator

Siobhan Dowd, writer (A Swift Pure Cry)

Sarah Eberle, garden designer

Jenni Fagan, author

Leo Fortune-West, professional footballer

Sarah Gillespie, singer-songwriter

Pippa Guard, actress

Andrey Guryev (born 1982), Russian entrepreneur

Gareth Hale, comedian

Patrick Harrington, politician in the National Front (1979–1989) and currently Third Way (UK) think tank; general secretary of Solidarity – The Union for British Workers

Rachael Heyhoe-Flint, cricketer

Roy Hodgson, England and Premier League football manager

Dermot Hudson, left-wing political activist

Brian Jacks, 1972 Summer Olympics bronze medallist in Judo

Mark Jackson, musician (VNV Nation)

Charles K. Kao, Nobel Prize winning scientist

Graham Kendrick, Christian worship leader

Sammy Lee, IVF specialist

Pablo Daniel Magee, writer, journalist and playwright

Richard Marsh, Baron Marsh, politician

Rui Moreira, Portuguese politician and businessman; mayor of Porto

Chinenye Ochuba, former Most Beautiful Girl in Nigeria

Sarah Ockwell-Smith, childcare author

Joy Onumajuru, model and philanthropist

Norman Pace, comedian

Ann Packer, 1964 Summer Olympics gold medallist

Lara Pulver, Olivier Award-nominated dancer and actress

Richard Pybus, cricket coach

George Rose, businessman

Dave Rowntree, musician (Blur)

Etienne Schneider, Deputy Prime Minister of Luxembourg

Peter Skinner, MEP

Aramazd Stepanian, playwright

William G. Stewart, TV presenter (Fifteen to One)

Nina Stibbe, author

Adelle Stripe, author

Gareth Thomas, politician

Ewen Whitaker, lunar astronomer (alumnus of Woolwich Polytechnic)

Joel Willans, author and copywriter of works in Finland.

Principles Of Lust: Sadeness / Find Love / Sadeness (Reprise)

 

Right-click link. Select "Open in New Window

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvQcX5yfTD8

  

Epic 45SURF Gear for your Epic Hero's Odyssey!

 

shop.spreadshirt.com/45surf/

 

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.amazon.com/Epic-Landscape-Photography-Principles-Comp...

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

The Epic Seascape! Malibu Sea Caves!

 

Landscape photography is not only about traveling through space, but it is also about traveling through time. One may return to the same beach time and again throughout the seasons to find a million different universes, changing in an infinitude of manners with each passing wave.

 

Not only do we voyage outwardly to get the shot, but we travel even further inwardly. While I spend my year trekking along the John Muir Trail, and on through Zion, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, Death Valley, and the Colorado Plateau, my heart always finds its home in these Malibu sea caves, where I have stood in awe during all hours of the day and night.

Included within are a few shots that only I have so far captured, including a miraculous winter solstice sunrise.

 

Best wishes throughout the coming year!

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

From the test-roll through the new Olympus OM-2.

© Don't use this image on websites, blogs or media without my explicit permission.

 

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

The Epic Seascape! Malibu Sea Caves!

 

Landscape photography is not only about traveling through space, but it is also about traveling through time. One may return to the same beach time and again throughout the seasons to find a million different universes, changing in an infinitude of manners with each passing wave.

 

Not only do we voyage outwardly to get the shot, but we travel even further inwardly. While I spend my year trekking along the John Muir Trail, and on through Zion, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, Death Valley, and the Colorado Plateau, my heart always finds its home in these Malibu sea caves, where I have stood in awe during all hours of the day and night.

Included within are a few shots that only I have so far captured, including a miraculous winter solstice sunrise.

 

Best wishes throughout the coming year!

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

Now selling epic 45SURF t-shirts & hoodies!

 

shop.spreadshirt.com/45surf/45surf+hero's+odyssey+mytholo...

 

Epic Malibu Sea Caves 2018 Caledar!

www.zazzle.com/elliotmcgucken

 

My book on Epic Landscape Photography!

www.amazon.com/Epic-Landscape-Photography-Principles-Comp...

 

Photographing the Venus Archetype!

www.amazon.com/Photographing-Women-Models-Photography-Arc...

 

Greetings mate! As many of you know, I love marrying art, science, and math in my fine art portrait and landscape photography!

 

The 45surf and gold 45 revolver swimsuits, shirts, logos, designs, and lingerie are designed in accordance with the golden ratio! More about the design and my philosophy of "no retouching" on the beautiful goddesses in my new book:

 

www.facebook.com/Photographing-Women-Models-Portrait-Swim...

 

"Photographing Women Models: Portrait, Swimsuit, Lingerie, Boudoir, Fine Art, & Fashion Photography Exalting the Venus Goddess Archetype"

 

If you would like a free review copy, message me!

 

Epic Landscape Photography! New Book!

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography

 

And here's more on the golden ratio which appears in many of my landscape and portrait photographs (while shaping the proportions of the golden gun)!

 

www.facebook.com/goldennumberratio/

'

The dx4/dt=ic above the gun on the lingerie derives from my new physics books devoted to Light, Time, Dimension Theory!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Thanks for being a fan! Would love to hears your thoughts on my philosophies and books! :)

 

facebook.com/mcgucken

http:/instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Beautiful swimsuit bikini model goddess!

 

Golden Ratio Lingerie Model Goddess LTD Theory Lingerie dx4/dt=ic! The Birth of Venus, Athena, and Artemis! Girls and Guns!

 

Would you like to see the whole set? Comment below and let me know!

 

Follow me!

instagram.com/45surf

facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

I am working on several books on "epic photography," and I recently finished a related one titled: The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography: An Artistic and Scientific Introduction to the Golden Mean . Message me on facebook for a free review copy!

 

www.facebook.com/goldennumberratio/

 

The Golden Ratio informs a lot of my art and photographic composition. The Golden Ratio also informs the design of the golden revolver on all the swimsuits and lingerie, as well as the 45surf logo! Not so long ago, I came up with the Golden Ratio Principle which describes why The Golden Ratio is so beautiful.

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Dr. E’s Golden Ratio Principle: The golden ratio exalts beauty because the number is a characteristic of the mathematically and physically most efficient manners of growth and distribution, on both evolutionary and purely physical levels. The golden ratio ensures that the proportions and structure of that which came before provide the proportions and structure of that which comes after. Robust, ordered growth is naturally associated with health and beauty, and thus we evolved to perceive the golden ratio harmonies as inherently beautiful, as we saw and felt their presence in all vital growth and life—in the salient features and proportions of humans and nature alike, from the distribution of our facial features and bones to the arrangements of petals, leaves, and sunflowers seeds. As ratios between Fibonacci Numbers offer the closest whole-number approximations to the golden ratio, and as seeds, cells, leaves, bones, and other physical entities appear in whole numbers, the Fibonacci Numbers oft appear in nature’s elements as “growth’s numbers.” From the dawn of time, humanity sought to salute their gods in art and temples exalting the same proportion by which all their vital sustenance and they themselves had been created—the golden ratio.

 

The Birth of Venus! Beautiful Golden Ratio Swimsuit Bikini Model Goddess! Helen of Troy! She was tall, thin, fit, and quite pretty!

  

Read all about how classical art such as The Birth of Venus inspires all my photography!

www.facebook.com/Photographing-Women-Models-Portrait-Swim...

 

"Photographing Women Models: Portrait, Swimsuit, Lingerie, Boudoir, Fine Art, & Fashion Photography Exalting the Venus Goddess Archetype"

   

Posters spotted off Liverpool's famous Mathew Street (home of the original "Cavern Cub"), which earlier this year awakened many magical memories of my personal (wild but wonderful) scouse-prime.

 

My own (very short lived) contribution to the legendary "Mersey Beat/Mersey Sound" consisted of me playing banging drums at countless practice/rehearsal sessions -- then, actually performing in public ... at just two (bloody jokes of) gigs.

 

I soon realised that I was a rubbishy drummer but, had already recognised the terrific and extremely special talent(s) of one of our three guitarists, Keith Dodd.

Keith went on to much better things with some great Liverpool groups, including "The Swinging Blue Jeans", "Ricky Gleason & the Topspots" and "The Principles". It wasn't just "The Cavern Club" he played, he also played at Hamburg's equally famous "Star Club", where he met his German wife, Marja. Incidentally, Keith only retired from performing a mere five years ago.

 

Although it's not officially mentioned/recorded ANYwhere (and rightly so), the first group Keith ever played with (approx 1961) was our own band, called "The Debonairs", which consisted of Keith, Doug, Vinny ; all guitarists - plus 'drum banging' yours truly.

 

One other great thing Keith did was to introduce me to (the amazing talents of) some greats of the day ; Django Reinhardt, Stéphane Grappelli, and Les Paul & Mary Ford.

Learn a little more about Keith (far right in pic) at the links below - and about other relevant/related stuff.

www.liverpoolbeat.com/rocknroll/wp-content/uploads/2013/0...

jkhmusic.co.uk/topspots/history.html

merseycats.com/Maja's-Memories-of-the-Star-Club.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cavern_Club

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Reinhardt

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%A9phane_Grappelli

www.gibson.com/News-Lifestyle/Features/en-us/les-paul-and...

   

Finally, a Principles edition! Doesn't seem like there are any others documented on flickr, apart from the advert our very own 'VAGDave' posted a while ago. According to HML there are only two on the road, and this is the only one on SORN.

 

The vehicle details for E786 KDL are:

Date of First Registration 04 07 1988

Year of Manufacture 1988

Cylinder Capacity (cc) 1275cc

CO₂ Emissions Not Available

Fuel Type PETROL

Export Marker N

Vehicle Status SORN in place

Vehicle Colour WHITE

 

Pride of Longbridge 2014.

New book! Epic Landscape Photography: The Principles of Fine Art Nature Photography!

 

www.facebook.com/epiclandscapephotography/

 

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

 

Working on a couple photography books! 45EPIC GODDESS PHOTOGRAPHY: A classic guide to exalting the archetypal woman. And 45EPIC Fine Art Landscape Photography!

 

More on my golden ratio musings: facebook.com/goldennumberratio

instagram.com/goldennumberratio

 

Greetings all! I have been busy finishing a few books on photography, while traveling all over--to Zion and the Sierras--shooting fall colors. Please see some here: facebook.com/mcgucken

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Let me know in the comments if you would like a free review copy of one of my photography books! :)

 

Titles include:

The Tao of Epic Landscape Photography: Exalt Fine Art with the Yin-Yang Wisdom of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching!

 

The Golden Number Ratio Principle: Why the Fibonacci Numbers Exalt Beauty and How to Create PHI Compositions in Art, Design, & Photography

facebook.com/goldennumberratio

 

And I am also working on a book on photographing the goddesses! :) More goddesses soon!

 

Best wishes on your epic hero's odyssey!:)

 

instagram.com/45surf

 

I love voyaging forth into nature to contemplate poetry, physics, the golden ratio, and the Tao te Ching! What's your favorite epic poetry reflecting epic landscapes? I recently finished a book titled Epic Poetry for Epic Landscape Photographers:

 

www.facebook.com/Epic-Poetry-for-Epic-Landscape-Photograp...

 

Did you know that John Muir, Thoreau, and Emerson all loved epic poetry and poets including Shakespeare, Milton, Homer, and Robert Burns?

 

I recently finished my fourth book on Light Time Dimension Theory, much of which was inspired by an autumn trip to Zion!

 

www.facebook.com/lightimedimensiontheory/

 

Via its simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension, LTD Theory provides a unifying, foundational *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and the second law of thermodynamics. The detailed diagrams demonstrate that the great mysteries of quantum mechanical nonlocality, entanglement, and probability naturally arise from the very same principle that fosters relativity alongside light's constant velocity, the equivalence of mass and energy, and time dilation.

 

Follow me on instagram!

instagram.com/elliotmcgucken

 

Join my new 45EPIC fine art landscapes page on facebook!

facebook.com/mcgucken

Contrary to what we are lead to believe by the popular media, science is not the enemy of Christianity.

Genuine science is completely compatible with the belief in the creator God of Christianity.

Most of the world's greatest scientists, who were the pioneers and founders of modern science recognised this.

It is only fairly recently with the rise of militant atheism that science has been portrayed, through propaganda, as being in conflict with Christianity.

 

So why were so many great scientists convinced that the principles of science were in perfect harmony with belief in the Christian God?

 

Consider this ....

A creator God (or supernatural first cause) has been made redundant and the final gap (pertaining to the so-called God of the gaps) has now been filled ... who says so?

Atheists, along with the secularist pundits in the popular media.

Why do they say that?

Because they believe that the greatest brain in atheism - Stephen Hawking, has finally discovered the secret of the origin of the universe and a naturalistic replacement for God.

 

The atheist replacement for God is summed up in a single sentence written by Hawking:

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

That is it .... problem solved - apparently!

 

The secularists in the popular media loved it, as far as they were concerned the problem certainly was solved. Hawking had finally dealt the fatal blow to all religion, especially Christianity. No need to question it, if a revered scientist of his calibre, is so sure of how the universe came into being, it must be correct.

The new atheists loved it, they wasted no time in proclaiming the ultimate triumph of 'science' over religious mythology and superstition.

 

So just how credible is the atheist claim that God has been made redundant?

And just how 'scientific' is Hawking's replacement for God?

 

Shall we analyse it?

"Because there is a law of gravity ....

 

So,

1) If the law of gravity existed, how is that nothing?

AND -

2) Where did the law of gravity come from?

AND -

3) How can a law of gravity exist before that which gravity relates to ... i.e. matter?

 

"the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

 

4) How can something create itself, without pre-existing its own creation?

(A) could possibly create (B), but how could (A) create (A)? Of course it can't.

 

5) What about the 'nothing' that is not really nothing, as most people understand 'nothing', but a bizarre 'nothing' in which a law of gravity exists. A nothing which is actually a 'something' where a law of gravity is presumably some sort of eternally, existent entity?

AND -

6) Is Hawking implying that the self-creation of the universe is made possible by the pre-existence of the law of gravity?

Of course, natural laws are not creative agents, they simply describe basic properties and operation of material things. They can't create anything, or cause the creation of anything. Something which is a property of something, cannot create that which it is a property of.

 

So, even if we ignore the law of cause and effect which definitively rules out a natural, first cause of the universe, the atheist notion of the universe arising of its own volition from nothing is still impossible, and can be regarded as illogical and unscientific nonsense. Hawking's naturalistic replacement for God, presented in his single sentence, and so loved by the new, atheist cabal, is obviously just contradictory and confused nonsense.

 

The truth, which atheists don't want to hear, is that atheism is intellectually and scientifically indefensible. That is why they always duck out of explaining how the concept of an uncaused, inadequate, natural first cause is possible.

The best they ever come up with, is something like "we don't really know what laws existed at the start of the universe".

However, the atheist claim that - we don't really know... is completely spurious.

We certainly do know that the Law of Cause and Effect is universal, there is no way round it.

The only reason atheists don't want to accept it, is ideological.

 

And ... isn't it strange, that the only laws atheists dispute are precisely those that interfere with their beliefs. For example, atheists seem pretty sure that one law existed .... the law of gravity (even prior to that which gravity is a property of … matter).

Why are they so sure that the law of gravity existed?

Because their naturalistic substitute for God, summed up in the sentence by Stephen Hawking, apparently requires that the law of gravity existed before anything else …..

 

Here it is again ...

‘Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing’ Stephen Hawking.

 

So atheists DO KNOW for sure that the law of gravity existed, but they don’t really know what other laws existed at the start of the universe. They especially doubt that the Law of Cause and Effect existed.

AMAZING!

 

Well, how about this for a refutation of Hawking’s replacement for God, also summed up in a single sentence?

 

Because there is a Law of Cause and Effect, the universe can’t and won’t create itself from nothing!

 

That is something Stephen Hawking conveniently forgot.

Apparently, he accepts that the law of gravity existed, because he thinks it suits his argument, but he ignores the existence of other laws that positively destroy his argument.

 

So now you know the truth about the best substitute for God that atheists have ever come up with.

IMPRESSED? I think not!

 

Why is it ATHEISTS that try to dispute the universality of natural laws?

 

According to their claims, atheists are supposed to be the champions of science. Yet we find in practice that it is actually theists who end up defending natural laws and the scientific method against those atheists who try to refute any laws and scientific principles that interfere with their naturalistic beliefs.

Whatever happened to the alleged conflict between science and religion?

That is revealed as purely, atheist propaganda. There is obviously much more conflict between atheism and science.

 

Why is the law of cause and effect so important?

Because it tells us that all natural entities, events and processes are contingent.

They are all subject to preceding causes. It tells us that natural entities and events are not autonomous, they cannot operate independently of causes.

That is such an important principle, it is actually the basis of the scientific method. Science is about looking for adequate causes of ALL natural events. According to science, a natural event without a cause, is a scientific impossibility.

Once you suggest such a notion, you are abandoning science and you violate the basic principle of the scientific method.

 

What about the first cause of the universe and everything?

How does that fit in?

 

Well, the first cause was obviously a unique thing, not only unique, but radically different to all NATURAL entities and occurrences. The first cause HAD to be an autonomous entity, it HAD to be eternally self-existent, self-reliant, NON-CONTINGENT ... i.e. it was completely independent of causes and the limitations that causes impose.

The first cause, by virtue of being the very first, could not have had any preceding cause, and obviously didn't require any cause for its existence. When we talk about the first cause, we mean the very first cause, i.e. FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.

The first cause also had to be capable of creating everything that followed it. It is responsible for every subsequent cause and effect that is, or has ever been. That means that nothing, nor the sum total of everything that followed the first cause, can ever be greater, in any respect, than the first cause.

So the idea that the first cause could be a natural entity or event is just ludicrous.

 

We know that the first cause is radically different to any natural entity, it is NOT contingent and that is why it is called a SUPERNATURAL entity, the Supernatural, First Cause (or Creator God). All natural events and entities ARE contingent without exception, so the first cause simply CANNOT be a natural thing.

That is the verdict of science, logic and reason. Atheists dispute the verdict of science and insist that the first cause was a 'natural' event which was somehow able to defy natural laws that govern all natural events.

Consequently, atheism can be regarded as anti-science. Which means .... the real enemy of atheism is science, not religion. And the real enemy of science is atheism, not religion.

 

An idea which seems to be popular with atheists at present, is a continuously, reciprocating universe, one which ends by running out of energy potential and then rewinds itself in an never ending cycle ..... this is an attempt to evade the fact that an uncaused, natural, first cause is impossible. They claim that, in this way a first cause, is not necessary. And that matter/energy is some sort of eternally existent entity.

So is it a valid solution?

 

Firstly .....

Matter/energy cannot be eternally existent in a cycle with no beginning).

Why?

Because all natural things are contingent, they have to comply with the law of cause and effect, so they cannot exist independently of causes. The nearest you could get to eternally existent matter/energy would be a very, long chain of causes and effects, but a long chain is not eternally existent, it has to have a beginning at some point. At the beginning there would still have to be a non-contingent first cause. So a long chain of causes and effects simply pushes the first cause further back in time, it can't eliminate it.

Secondly ....

It is pretty obvious that the idea of the universe simply rewinding itself in a never ending cycle, which had no beginning, is complete, unscientific nonsense. How such a proposal can be presented as serious science, beggars belief.

It seems atheists will try anything to justify their naturalist ideology. They apparently have no compunction about completely disregarding natural laws.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics rules out such atheist, pie-in-the-sky, origins mythology.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, the idea of a rewinding universe is tantamount to applying the discredited notion of perpetual motion - on a grand scale, to the universe.

Contingent things don't just rewind of their own accord.

The Second Law (not to mention common sense) rules it out.

Where does the renewed power or renewed energy potential come from?

If you wind up a clock, it doesn't rewind itself after it has stopped.

The universe had a beginning and it will have an end. That is what science tells us, it cannot rewind itself.

Such ridiculous, atheist musings are just a desperate attempt to wriggle out of the inevitable conclusion of logic, and the Law of Cause and Effect which are the real enemies of atheist ideology.

Once again atheism is hoisted on its own petard by natural law and science, not by religion.

 

A variation of the cyclical universe is the argument proposed by some that the universe just is?

Presumably they mean that the universe is some sort of eternally-existent entity with no beginning - and therefore not in need of a cause? Once again an eternally self-existent universe is not possible for the same reason outlined above.

In addition ....

The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us the universe certainly had a beginning and will have an end. The energy potential of the universe is decreasing from an original peak at the beginning of the universe. Even the most rabid atheists seem to accept that. Which is why most of them believe in a beginning event, such as a big bang explosion.

So the question is how did it (the universe) begin to exist, not whether it began to exist?

Which takes us back to the question of the nature of the very first cause.

It can only be one of two options,

an uncaused, natural first cause

OR

an uncaused, supernatural first cause.

An uncaused, NATURAL first cause is impossible.

Thus the only possible option is a supernatural first cause, i.e. God.

 

Atheists can’t refute the Law of Cause and Effect which is so devastating to their naturalist agenda, so they regularly invent bizarre scenarios which ignore natural laws, and hope people won’t notice. If anyone does they just brush it off with remarks like “we just don’t know ” what laws existed prior to the beginning of the universe.

Sorry, the atheist apologists may not know …. but all sensible people do know, we certainly know what is impossible ….

And we certainly know that you cannot blithely step outside the constraints of natural laws and scientific principles, as atheists do, and remain credible.

We know that natural laws describe the inherent properties of matter/energy. Which means wherever matter/energy exist, the inherent properties of matter/energy also exist - and so do the natural laws that describe those properties. if the universe began, as some propose, with a cosmic egg. or a previous universe, those things are still natural entities with natural properties, and as such would be subject to natural laws. So the idea that there were natural events leading up to the origin of the universe that were not subject to natural laws is ridiculous.

The atheist claim; that we just don't know, is not valid, and should be treated as the silliness it really is.

 

The existence of the law of cause and effect is essential to the scientific method, but fatal to the atheist ideology.

SO ....

Is the law of cause and effect really universal?

 

Causation is necessary for the existence of the universe, but ALSO for the existence of any natural entities or events that may have preceded the creation of the universe.

 

In other words, causation is necessary for all matter/energy and all natural entities and occurrences, whether within the universe or elsewhere.

ALL natural entities are contingent wherever they may be, whether in some sort of cosmic egg, a big bang, a previous universe or whatever.

Contingency is an inherent character of all natural entities, so it is impossible for any natural entity to be non-contingent.

 

Which means you simply CANNOT have a natural entity which is UNCAUSED, anywhere.

If, for example, matter/energy was not contingent at the start of the universe, or before the universe began, how and why would it be contingent now?

Why would nature have changed its basic character to an inferior one?

 

If matter/energy once had such awesome, autonomous power - if it was, at some time, self-sufficient, not reliant on causes for its operation and existence, and not restricted by the limitations causes impose, it would effectively mean it was once an infinite, necessary, self-existent entity, similar to God.

 

Now if matter once had the autonomous, non-contingent powers of a god, why would it change itself to a subordinate character and role, when it became part of the universe?

Why would it change to a role where it is limited by the strictures of natural laws. And where it cannot operate without a preceding, adequate cause?

 

To claim matter/energy was, at one time, not contingent, not subject to causes (which is what atheists have to claim) – is to actually imbue it with the autonomous power of a god.

That is why atheism is really just a revamped version of pagan naturalism.

By denying the basic, contingent character of matter/nature, atheism effectively deifies nature, and credits it with godlike powers, which science clearly tells us it doesn’t possess.

 

Thus, if anyone dismisses causality, they effectively deify matter/nature.

Which means they have chosen the first of the 2 following choices …

 

1. Atheism ... the unscientific, illogical belief in a natural, uncaused god (of matter or nature) which violates natural laws - which science recognises restrict its autonomy?

 

2. Theism ... the logical belief in an uncaused, supernatural God, which created matter and the laws that govern matter. And therefore does not violate any laws, is not contingent, and thus has completely unrestricted autonomy and infinite powers?

 

Which one would you choose?

 

Which one do scientists who respect natural laws and the scientific method choose?

The great, scientific luminaries and founders of modern science, such as Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Louis Pasteur etc., in fact, nearly all of the really great scientists and founders of modern science, had no doubts or problem understanding that choice, and they readily chose the second (theism), as the only logical option.

So, by choosing the second - a supernatural first cause – rather than meaning you are anti-science or anti-reason or some sort of uneducated, superstitious, religious nut (as atheists frequently claim) actually puts you in the greatest of scientific company.

 

To put it another way, who would you rather trust in science, such scientific giants as: Newton, Pasteur, Faraday, Von Braun, Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Mendel, Marconi, Kelvin, Babbage, Pascal, Herschel, Peacock etc. who believed in a supernatural first cause?

OR,

the likes of: Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking etc. who believe in an uncaused, natural first cause?

No contest!

We can see that atheists are anti-science, because they treat natural law and the whole principle of the scientific method with utter contempt, and all the while, they masquerade as the champions of science to the public.

 

The question of purpose ....

A further nail in the coffin of bogus, atheist science is the existence of order.

 

Atheists assume that the universe is purposeless, but they cannot explain the existence of order.

The development of order requires an organizational element.

To do useful work, or to counter the effects of entropy, energy needs to be directed or guided.

Raw energy alone actually tends to increase the effects of entropy, it doesn't increase order.

The organizational principle in living systems is provided by the informational element encoded in DNA.

Atheists have yet to explain how that first, genetic information arose of its own volition in the so-called Primordial Soup?

 

Natural laws pertinent to all natural entities, they guide the behaviour of energy and matter, but also serve to limit it, because natural laws are based only on the inherent properties of matter and energy.

So ... natural laws describe inherent properties of matter/energy, and natural processes operate only within the confines of natural laws which are based on their own properties. They can never exceed the parameters of those laws.

 

The much acclaimed, Dawkinsian principle that randomness can develop into order by means of a sieving process, such as shaken pebbles being sorted by falling through a hole of a particular size is erroneous, because it completely ignores the regulatory influence of natural laws on the outcome, which are not at all random.

If we can predict the outcome in advance, as we can with Dawkins' example, it cannot be called random. We CAN predict the outcome because we know that the pebbles will behave according to the regulatory influence of natural laws, such as the law of gravity. If there was no law of gravity, then Dawkins' pebbles, when shaken, would not fall through the hole, they would not be sorted, they would act completely unpredictably, possibly floating about in the air in all directions. In that case, the randomness would not result in any order. That is true randomness.

Dawkins' randomness, allegedly developing into order, is not random at all, the outcome is predictable and controlled by natural laws and the inherent properties of matter. He is starting with 2 organizational principles, natural laws and the inherent, ordered structure and properties of matter, and he calls that randomness!

Bogus science indeed!

This tells us that order is already there at the beginning of the universe, in the form of natural laws and the ordered composition and structure of matter .... it doesn't just develop from random events.

 

A major problem for atheists is to explain where natural laws came from?

In a purposeless universe there should be no regulatory principles at all.

Firstly, we would not expect anything to exist, we would expect eternal nothingness.

Secondly, even if we overlook that impossible hurdle, and assume by some amazing fluke and contrary to logic, something was able to create itself from nothing ….. we would expect the ‘something’ would have no ordered structure, and no laws based on that ordered structure. We would expect it to behave randomly and chaotically.

This is an absolutely fundamental question to which atheists have no answer. The basic properties of matter/energy, and the universe, scream …. ‘purpose’.

Atheists say the exact opposite.

Furthermore, if we consider the accepted, atheist belief; that matter is inherently predisposed to produce life and the genetic information for life, whenever environmental conditions are conducive (so-called abiogenesis), where does that predisposition for life come from? Once again, atheists are hoisted on their own petard, and the atheist idea of a random, purposeless, universe is left completely in tatters.

 

It is the atheist ideology that is anti-science, not necessarily individual scientists.

There may be sincere, atheist scientists who respect the scientific method and natural laws, but they are wedded to an ideology that - when push comes to shove, does not respect natural laws.

It is evident that whenever natural laws interfere with atheist naturalist beliefs, the beliefs take precedence over the rigorous, scientific method. It is then that natural laws are disregarded by atheists in favour of unscientific fantasies which are conducive to their ideology.

Of course, in much day-to-day practical science and technology, the question of violating laws doesn't even arise, and we cannot deny that in the course of such work, atheists will respect the scientific method of experiment and observation within the framework of the Law of Cause and Effect and other established laws of science.

Bizarrely, It is a different matter entirely, when it comes to hypotheses about origins. It then becomes an 'anything goes' situation. The main criteria then seems to be that it doesn’t matter whether your hypothesis violates natural laws (all sorts of excuses can be made as to why natural laws need not apply), all that matters is that it is entirely naturalistic, and can be made to sound plausible to the public.

However, the same atheist scientists would not entertain anything in general, day-to-day science, that is not completely in accordance with the scientific method, they make an exception ONLY with anything to do with origins, whether it be the origin of the universe, or the origin of life, or the origin of species.

 

Atheism is not simply passive non-belief, you can only be a ‘genuine’ atheist if you proactively believe in the following illogical and unscientific propositions:

 

1. A natural, first cause of the universe that was ‘uncaused’.

 

2. A natural, first cause of the universe that was patently not adequate for the effect, (a cause which was able to produce an effect far greater than itself and superior to its own abilities).

 

3. That the universe created ITSELF from nothing.

 

4. That natural laws simply arose of their own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.

 

5. That energy potential at the start of everything material was able to wind itself up from absolute zero, of its own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.

 

6. That the effect of entropy (Second Law of Thermodynamics) was somehow suspended or didn’t operate to permit the development of order in the universe.

 

7. That life spontaneously generated itself, of its own volition, from sterile matter, contrary to: the Law of Biogenesis, the laws of probability, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, Information Theory and common sense.

 

8. That the complete human genome was created by means of a long chain of copying mistakes of the original, genetic information in the first living cell, (mutations of mutations of mutations, etc. etc.).

 

9. That the complex DNA code was produced by chemical processes.

 

10. That the very first, genetic information, encoded in the DNA of the first living cell, created itself by some unknown means.

 

11. That matter is somehow inherently predisposed to develop into living cells, whenever conditions are conducive to life. But such a predisposition for life just arose of its own accord, with no purpose and with no apparent cause.

 

12. That an ordered structure of atoms, guiding laws of physics, order in the cosmos, order in the living cell and complex information, are what we would expect to occur naturally in a purposeless universe.

 

The claim of atheists to be the champions of science and reason is clearly bogus.

They think they can get away with it by pretending to have no beliefs.

However, when seriously challenged to justify their dogmatic rejection of a Supernatural First Cause, they indirectly espouse the unscientific beliefs outlined above, in their futile attempts to refute the evidence for a supernatural first cause.

Of course, whenever possible, they avoid declaring those beliefs explicitly, but you don’t need to be very astute to realize that relying on those beliefs is the unavoidable conclusion of their arguments.

 

That is why atheism is intellectually bankrupt and is doomed to the dustbin of history. And that is why we are seeing such a rise in militant, evangelizing, atheist zealots, such as Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens.

Their crusading, bravado masks their desperation that the public is so hard to convince. What Dawkins et al need to face is that they are in no position to attack what they consider are the bizarre beliefs of others, when their own beliefs (which they fail to publicly acknowledge) are much more bizarre.

 

What about Christianity and pagan gods?

 

Atheists frequently try to dismiss and ridicule the idea of a Creator by comparing it to the numerous, pagan gods that people have worshipped throughout history.

 

Do they have a good point?

 

Certainly not, this is just a red herring ….

Other gods, cannot be the first cause or Creator.

Idols of wood or stone, or the Sun, Moon, planets, Mother Nature, Mother Earth etc. are all material, contingent things, they cannot be the first cause.

They are rejected as false gods by the Bible and by logic and natural laws.

They are considered gods by people who worship things which are 'created' rather than the Creator, which the Bible condemns.

In fact, they are much more similar to the atheist belief in the powers of a naturalistic entity to create the universe, than they are to the one, Creator God of Christianity.

For example, the pagan belief in the creative powers of Ra (the Sun god) is similar to the atheist belief that raw energy from the Sun acting on sterile chemicals was able to create life.

 

So atheist mythology credits the Sun (Ra) with the godlike power of creating life on Earth. And thus, atheism is just a revamped version of paganism.

Just like paganism, atheism rejects worship of a Supernatural, First Cause, and rather chooses to worship created, natural entities, imbuing them with the same godlike powers, that theists attribute to the Creator.

There is nothing new under the Sun ... We can see that atheism is just the age old deception of ancient paganism, revisited.

 

The Creator is a Supernatural, First Cause, which is not a contingent entity, nothing like the pagan gods, but rather a self-existent, necessary entity. As the very first cause of everything in the universe, it cannot be contingent (it cannot rely on anything outside itself for its existence, i.e. it is self-existent) and therefore it cannot be a material entity.

The first cause is necessary because, not being contingent, it necessarily exists.

If anything exists that is not contingent, it has to have within itself everything necessary for its own existence. If it is also responsible for the existence of anything outside itself (which as the first cause of the universe, we know it is) it is also necessary for the existence of those things, and has to be entirely adequate for the purpose of bringing them into being and maintaining their continued existence. It is not subject to natural laws, which only apply to natural events and effects, because, as the first cause, it is the initiator and creator of everything material, including the laws which govern material events, and of time itself.

 

The atheist view of a natural first cause is not even rational, to propose that all the qualities I have mentioned above could apply to a material entity is clearly ridiculous. But apparently, atheism has no regard for natural laws or logic. Atheists get round it by simply dressing up their irrational beliefs to make them appear ‘scientific’.

This combined with rants and erroneous and derisory slogans about religious myths and superstition makes it all seem perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately, those with little knowledge, or who can’t be bothered to think for themselves are taken in by it.

 

Atheists repeatedly claim that they have refuted the law of cause and effect by asking : So what caused God then?

How true is that?

 

The ... what caused God? argument is a rather silly argument which atheists regularly trot out. All it demonstrates is that they don't understand basic logic.

 

The question to always ask them is; what part of FIRST don't you understand?

If something is the very FIRST, it means there is nothing that precedes it. First means first, not second or third.

That means that the first cause cannot be a contingent entity, because a contingent entity depends on something preceding it for its existence. In which case, if something precedes it, it couldn't be FIRST.

All natural entities, events and effects are contingent ... that is why the Law of Cause and Effect states that ... every NATURAL effect requires an adequate cause.

That means that the first cause cannot be a natural entity. An UNCAUSED, NATURAL event or entity is ruled out as not possible by the Law of Cause and Effect.

Therefore the very FIRST CAUSE of the universe, which we know cannot be caused, by virtue of it being FIRST (not second or third) CANNOT be a natural entity or event.

Thus we deduce that the first cause ... cannot be contingent, cannot be a natural entity, and cannot be subject to the Law of Cause and Effect.

So the first cause has to be non-material, i.e. supernatural.

The first cause also has to have the creative potential to create every other cause and effect that follows it.

In other words, the first cause cannot be inferior in any respect to the properties, powers or qualities of anything that exists...

The effect cannot be greater than the cause....

So we can thus deduce that the first cause is: UNCAUSED, SUPERNATURAL, self-existent, and capable of creating everything we see in the existing universe.

If there is life in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create life,

If there is intelligence in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create intelligence.

If there is information in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create information.

If there is consciousness in the universe, the first cause must have the ability to create consciousness. And so on and on. If it exists, the first cause is responsible for it, and must have the ability to create it.

That is the Creator God … and His existence is supported by impeccable logic and adherence to the demands of natural law.

 

Essential characteristics of the first cause.

 

Consider this short chain of causes and effects:

A causes B, - B causes C, - C causes D, - D causes E.

'A, B, C & D' are all causes and may all look similar, but they are not, there is an enormous and crucial difference between them.

Causes B, C & D are fundamentally different from cause A.

Why?

Because A is the very first cause and thus had no previous cause. It exists without a cause. It doesn’t rely on anything else for its existence, it is completely independent of causes - while B, C & D would not exist without A. They are entirely dependent on A.

Causes; B, C & D are also effects, whereas A is not an effect, only a cause.

So we can say that the first cause ‘A’ is both self-existent and necessary. It is necessary because the rest of the chain of causes and effects could not exist without it. We also have to say that the subsequent causes and effects B, C, D and E are all contingent. That is; they are not self-existent they all depend entirely on other causes to exist.

We can also say that A is eternally self-existent, i.e. it has always existed, it had no beginning. Why? Because if A came into being at some point, there must have been something other than itself that brought it into being … which would mean A was not the first cause (A could not create A) … the something that brought A into being would be the first cause. In which case, A would be contingent and no different from B, C, D & E.

We can also say that A is adequate to produce all the properties of B, C, D & E.

Why?

Well in the case of E we can see that it relies entirely on D for its existence, E can in no way be superior to D because D had to contain within it everything necessary to produce E. The same applies to D it cannot be superior to C, but furthermore neither E or D can be superior to C, because both rely on C for their existence, and C had to contain everything necessary to produce D & E.

Likewise with B, which is responsible for the existence of C, D & E.

As they all depend on A for their existence and all their properties, abilities and potentials, none can be superior to A whether singly or combined. A had to contain everything necessary to produce B, C, D & E including all their properties, abilities and potentials.

Thus we deduce that; nothing in the universe can be superior in any way to the very first cause of the universe, because the whole universe, and all material things that exist, depend entirely on the abilities and properties of the first cause to produce them.

 

So to sum up … a first cause must be uncaused, must have always existed and cannot be in any way inferior to all subsequent causes and effects. In other words, the first cause of the universe must be eternally, self-existent and omnipotent (greater than everything that exists). No natural entity can have those attributes, that is why a Supernatural, Creator God MUST exist

 

Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.

 

But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.

The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.

Why do atheists have such a problem with it?

 

Atheists also seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.

This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.

That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.

But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.

A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.

Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and the demands of their own pre-ordered composition and structure. Lighting blue touch paper would do absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it.

 

What about the idea proposed by some atheists that space must have always existed, and therefore the first cause was not the only eternally, uncaused self-existent power?

This implies that the first cause was limited by a self-existent rival (space,) which was also uncaused, and therefore the first cause could not be infinite and could not even be a proper first cause, because there was something it didn’t cause i.e. ‘space’.

There seems to be some confusion here about what ‘space’ actually is.

Space is part of the created universe, it is what lies between and around material objects in the cosmos, if there were no material objects in the cosmos, there would be no space. The confusion lies in the failure to distinguish between empty space and nothing. Nothing is the absence of everything, whereas space is a medium in which cosmic bodies exist. ‘Empty’ space is just the space between objects. So space is not an uncaused, eternally self-existent entity, it is dependent on material objects existing within it, for its own existence.

What about nothing? Is that an uncaused eternally self-existent thing? Firstly, it is not a thing, it is the absence of all things. So has nothing always existed? Well, yes it essentially would have always existed, but only if the first cause didn’t exist. If there is a first cause is that is eternally self-existent, then there is no such thing as absolute nothing, because nothing is the absence of everything. If a first cause exists (which it had to), then any proposed eternal ‘nothing’ has always contained something, and therefore can never have been ‘nothing’.

What about the idea that the first cause created everything material from nothing? Obviously, the ‘nothing’ that is meant here is … nothing material, i.e. the absence of any material entities.

The uncaused, first cause cannot be material, because all material things are contingent, so the first cause brought material things into being, when nothing material had previously existed. That is what is meant by creation from nothing.

So what existed outside of the eternally existent first cause? Obviously no other thing existed outside of the first cause, the first cause was the only thing that existed. So did the first cause exist in a sea of eternally existent nothingness?

No! the first cause was not nothing, it was ‘something’. So to ask what surrounded the something that is the first cause is not a valid question, because if something exists that is not ‘nothing’. This means that such a notion of ‘nothing’ didn’t exist, only something – i.e. the eternally existent first cause. If you have a box with something in it, you wouldn’t say there is both something and nothing in the box. You would say there is something in the box, regardless of whether there was some empty space around the thing in the box.

 

Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.

Such as the utterly, ludicrous notion of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating!

They are clutching at straws and anyone with any common sense understands that.

 

So to sum up .....

The atheist ideology is illogical, unscientific nonsense. Even worse, it has no compunction in treating natural laws and the basic principle of the scientific method with utter distain and contempt whenever they interfere with atheist beliefs.

Science, not religion, is the real enemy of atheism, and atheism, not religion, is the real enemy of science.

 

FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE

The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins

www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...

 

"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."

kgov.com/big-bang-predictions

1 2 4 6 7 ••• 79 80