Zarathustra,
Yours is an interesting argument, but I can't quite follow it. I admit I have pondered about the primacy of existence, and how it might relate to consciousness. There are a couple of possible flaws. One, consciousness itself might be that primarily existing thing. Two, you say consciousness and existence cannot both be primary, but it might be that there is something elusive that is existence itself, and which gives rise to consciousness. It would then appear that consciousness is primary, but it really isn't. And three, why does any of this negate theism?
You say theists believe that a conscious being 'creates existence' but that doesn't quite make sense. Creating universes perhaps, but existence is already a reality before universes are made out of it. I could say that God has created this universe, but I don't believe God has created existence because God IS existence.
Whorly,
I like your line of argument, but
Once we understand reality, the task should then be to decide how to participate in it, not to try to fully evade it and live in some mystical unity with God,
I think the best way to participate in it is to live in mystical unity with God, why not? It's not like that precludes sex or children or even good wine.
You are right to find suspect a dogma that negates life. That is how we can know that what is being taught here is wicked.
It is a problem, however, that our lives are set up by those running society to have the majority of mankind working too hard and beset by endless problems. Therefore, since raising a family requires more resources than remaining single, and since problem do bring the consciousness down into the nether regions, that the spiritually weak can get very distracted by the vicissitudes of life. Or, rather, all but the very, very strong will be. But it is a valid path and one I have followed all my life.
Isn't it interesting that women are indeed something of a burden to men and that women are simply not equipped as well as men to survive in this world?
Isn't it funny that these 'real men' snarl at the fact that women gain more from marriage than men (actually, that is arguable, but materially it is true)? It is no different than if women were to suddenly say that having children benefits the children more than it benefits women, and therefore make disparaging remarks about the essential worth of children.
Again, this shows that these men do not value life, for woman is life. Life takes effort, and when life is very difficult, one naturally cuts back on getting married, on reproducing. So it must mean that these men here feel that life is too intimidating and it is better not to reproduce.
Is it possible though that a woman could provide a sexual outlet and a partner in the mundane tasks of everyday life that would actually aid in one's quest for wisdom and truth?
I think that I have done so in that I encourage my husband spiritually and I think that marriage has aided my spiritual development as well, perhaps due to my female nature - I feel much more secure and therefore more relaxed, and therefore less anxious, and therefore my spiritual focus has increased.
Truth is a pathless land.
