clear

Subscribe

Recent Posts

clear

Categories

clear
Friday, 31 October 2014
God after the Death of God
Share
clear

by Richard L. Rubenstein (November 2014)


(This essay is a revised version of chapter 16 of the second edition of Richard L. Rubenstein's, After Auschwitz: History, Theology and Contemporary Judaism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.)

When I reflect on the question of God after the death of God, I recall a crucial conversation with the late Swami Muktananda of Ganeshpuri that took place at a major turning point in my spiritual life. One of my academic colleagues, Dr. Gulshan Khaki, a disciple of the Guru, invited Dr. Betty Rubenstein and me to spend a weekend at his American Ashram when he was in attendance. more>>>

clear
Posted on 10/31/2014 7:17 AM by NER
Comments
14 Jan 2016
Send an emailJohn
In your essay at http://www.newenglishreview.org/Richard_L._Rubenstein/God_after_the_Death_of_God/ you have the word "transcendant" which I believe is misspelled. The correct spelling is "transcendent".

31 Oct 2014
Send an emailjeff fixler

Once the thinking human being get past the concept of a personal God who monitors the events of a life so they will move closer to a more transcendent understanding of reality that does not rely on "belief".  The physical reality we are currently living in began approximately 13.5  billion years ago with the event known as "big bang". Prior to this event, the physical universe simply did not exist. Yet something non-physical pressed that run button, so to speak, and initiated the "physical" program , the virtual reality we live in. And indeed it is virtual, as all the particles --the stuff--that make up this reality can be shown to have no independent existence beyond what can be recorded as information by a conscious being. This is the inescapable, and ultimate understanding of the the double-slit experiment that is the key to understanding quantum mechanics. Consciousness is fundamental; not the "stuff".  Scientists also have their "beliefs". Stephen Hawking , among others, regularly asserts that the big bang could have come out of nothing.  That physical reality is all that exists, and we are just part of the "stuff".  He does this because to concede that something existed before the big bang, and initiated the event would be to admit that there is something beyond physical reality , and more fundamental.  Yet, claims that the universe self-initiated are just "beliefs" that have more to do with reinforcing one's philisophical outlook than anything to do with logic and science. If one were to approach a scientist and tell him a series of events occurred without any cause whatsoever, that scientist would think that individual foolish would they not?

     The good news is we can learn a great deal about the universe by studying consciousness and how it evolved, and is evolving on this planet. Biological evolution is but one evolving system. Technology evolves, social systems evolve, economies evolve, AND consciousness evolves. 

    The bad news is there is a limitation on what we can know. We are a subset of consciousness that is part of a greater superset. All the information in the superset is obviously not contained in the subset. That is just elementary logic.  Even if a human with an IQ of 500 were to come along, they could not gain an understanding of the greater consciousness system. It is beyond their sensoriam, and ours.