How did the Universe begin? How did life begin? How did sentience begin?
I wrestle with many spiritual questions. Often, I encounter mystery, paradox and uncertainty, rather than “solid” answers. Sometimes, I change my mind. Changing our minds can be helpful, even necessary, as we gain more life experience and encounter different perspectives.
Three Big (Loaded) Questions
I used to think that the big questions were things like, “Is there a God?” or “What is the meaning of life?” or “What happens when we die?” But these questions seem to presuppose a theistic universe, and the universe might NOT be theistic.
Generally, these questions arise from our conditioning, NOT our experience. What in our experience suggests that there is a personal God? What suggests that there is an externally-determined meaning or a place to go after we die or a vehicle like a soul that transports us? Really, did we ask these questions on our own, or did the people who conditioned us ask them?
I found Zen after I had just about “called off the search,” tired of chasing my tail and running into mystery, paradox, and uncertainty. Buddhism generally does not confirm or deny specific beliefs. Rather, it does NOT address them because they are speculative.
It is an admission, NOT a dismissal, to call something “speculative.” We can NOT wrestle with these big questions without speculating.
I wrote about Zen here. Ask a Zen master questions like these: “Is there a God? What is the meaning of life? What happens when we die?” And he or she might answer: “Who knows? Do you realize that you are connected to everyone and everything? Are you here now?”
I wrote about curiosity here. Scientists are awed and inspired, too, but they often attribute awesomeness and inspiration to the natural world, NOT to a supernatural source. It seems to me that science involves a balance between imagination and wonder on one hand, and discipline and skepticism on the other. One of my friends wisely suggested that spirituality involves the same balance. I completely agree.
THE Three Big (Neutral) Questions
In The Way, I discussed three big questions that do NOT presuppose either a theistic or a non-theistic universe. These are THE big questions that keep philosophers and scientists up at night: “How did the Universe begin? How did life begin? How did sentience begin?”
In trying to draw the “bright line” between what we know and what we believe, I searched for natural explanations for these occurrences. That is NOT because I reject supernatural answers. Rather, if there were NOT any natural answers, then it might be helpful and necessary to embrace supernatural answers. In that case, I might have written a very different book.
Instead, I reported that scientists had plausible explanations, but NOT final answers, to these questions. Of course, we might NOT ever know the answers. We can NOT create a Universe in a lab. Likewise, we can NOT explore sentience objectively, from the outside looking in. Because we are on the inside looking in, part of the experiment that we are conducting.
My friend Jim Palmer says that supernaturalism is a construct, and he wonders where to draw the line between the natural and supernatural. He writes, “When the supernatural is no longer required as a category, the shift is practical, not abstract. It changes how experience is interpreted, how decisions are made, how meaning is formed, and how responsibility is taken. Nothing is lost. The field is reorganized.”
If the beginning of the Universe, the beginning of life, and the beginning of sentience all occurred naturally—rather than supernaturally (through the action or design of a Creator), would the complexity and diversity and interconnectivity of the Universe be any less astounding? Would we be any less grateful for an amazing world of natural, rather than supernatural, origin?
Still More Big Questions
In my writing, I attempt to address the big questions from a neutral place, without assumptions or presuppositions.
Does Ultimate Reality, a personal God or an impersonal Universe, have intention? I wrote about intention here. Most theists presuppose that a personal God has intention. Interestingly, many non-theists also presuppose that an impersonal Universe has intention. And if we assert that we are here to learn lessons and that we progress or regress depending on whether we have learned them, then we presuppose intention.
Do we have souls? I wrote about souls here. Without souls, it would be difficult to get to heaven or hell, even if they exist. Also, it would be difficult to reincarnate, even if it is otherwise possible. And if we assert that we maintain our individuality or we go somewhere when we die, then we presuppose that we have souls to maintain our individuality and to transport us elsewhere.
Do we have free will? I wrote about free will here. Without free will, it would NOT be just or merciful to punish or reward us for our actions or our thoughts. And if we assert that we will be punished or rewarded, then we presuppose that we have free will.
How Would We Live Our Lives Any Differently?
If the Universe is NOT intentional, if we do NOT have souls or if we do NOT have free will, would we live our lives any differently? To me, that is the crux of the matter. If we would NOT live our lives any differently, then these questions are simply interesting speculations. However, if we were to live our lives differently, then how would we live differently? What would that life look like?
How did the Universe begin? How did life begin? How did sentience begin?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In