Janoah writes: Not only theists, no one can comprehend the ultimate truth.
Plato also said, “I know that I know nothing,” therefore everyone has to believe in something, atheists, for example, believe in atheism.
Dubious writes: A very questionable question: Do we even want to know what the ultimate truth is; are we not innately suspicious and even afraid of what it may reveal and all the beliefs which must surrender to it? It may be its consummate simplicity which neutralizes and reduces all beliefs into a state of falsehood, as nothing more than a psychological or political means of self-endorsement...a tool provided by our imagination to service a power complex.
The idea, or the possibility, or the probability, that Dubious expresses does have a correspondence to some traditions or spiritual schools, I am thinking of some out of India, that describe realization as the destruction of all conceptions and stories about God, the gods, divinity — everything.
All of that is described as melting away. Those traditions do not
deny the divine nor “divine realization” yet seem to indicate that the realization blows up, in a sense, the entire hallucinated pathway to it. And then consider that these traditions define the earth-plane as something to transcend. They actually visualize higher worlds beyond this world that one can attain — through renunciation here. Thus they involve a negation.
What is notable about the Judaic and Christian religions are the degree to which they define “world missions”. The Jewish project is as long as history, and it depends on memory and remembrance, not the negation of these. It is in fact a material project not a transcendent project. The notion of ascendence out of the earth-plane or to a transcendent realm — even a heaven — is unthinkable thought in Judaism.
Judaism is strictly about a defined historical mission on the Earth and because of this it poses problems for transcendental religiousness. One must understand that because of its focus on materialism, and because of its absolute certainty that it is
right and all other modes and traditions are idolatry which must be eliminated, it is associated with a unique power-principle. Something in fact Machiavellian. “Yahweh” takes acute aim at
all traditions that are different than it.
Christianity inherited, or extended, this sense of mission and imperative, though with a universalist coloring. The Christian product, the Christian person, this agent, this outcome, is a man of imperatives. Not a man who comes to a still point of quiescence.
The “heralds” of certain Ultimate Truths, for we moderns, seem to be expressed in a Matrix-like nightmare from which one can, under the right circumstances, wake up. But doing so one sees that one is trapped in that matrix. And that our human world is a trap. So an imperative shows up again: seeing under the surfaces. Which therefore involves one in
interpretive projects. And living in accord with another motivation set.