In our viewer mail:
Saw a link to your show on Facebook, and found it quite interesting.
Don’t know if you guys know much about Eastern thought. Here is what I posted about your show on Facebook:
An interesting discussion. The two hosts are quite reasonable and logical. However, they assume Western ways of looking at religion and epistemology. For instance, the lady basically says, “Well, if there is a God, what sort of thing is this God, what category does it belong to?” But in the Orient, God is not seen as a thing belonging in a category, but universal awareness, underlying your and my awareness, and prior to all categories. Awareness can not see itself and put itself in an observed category and analyze itself.
The fellow on the other hand says “What evidence do you have for the existence of God?” But he sees this evidence as consisting of abstract facts. An enlightened oriental would say “Your question of how I know I am enlightened is like asking me to doubt that my hand I hold in front of me is mine.My knowledge is direct, not abstract or logical.” He has directly and experientially transcended the idea that awareness is limited to a supposed separate self.
Thanks for your consideration.
After giving it my “consideration,” here is what I think:
Why should anyone believe any of the claims in this letter about god? All he’s done is provide a lengthy statement that restates, “I can’t demonstrate anything I’m saying is remotely correct, but I assert, without evidence or reason that it is, obviously, correct. And asking for evidence, itself, is ridiculous; the enlightened individual will simply see it’s true.”
I recall reading this same argument in “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”
I encourage you to consider it as well. What do you think of it?