 91. Knowledge (Big Bang of Creation) |
Essentially, then, your question, as stated, is total nonsense! It is conventional space-time-bound mind struggling to have a though in order to comprehend what is beyond itself. That effort is nonsense.
It cannot be done. The only True Answer to such questions is Divine Self-Realization Itself, not some collection of verbal descriptions.
You do not comprehend the "Big Bang." You are speaking about it abstractly, objectively, and also from a position in space-time, and based on concepts that are space-time-bound. Therefore, you are not, in Reality, talking about the "Big Bang" at all.
Reality Itself Is, Always Already.
Reality Itself is not limited or bound.
Reality Itself cannot itself be fractured.
Space-time is an apparent fracturing.
The "Big Bang" is a kind of metaphor, if you like, for the first cell division that was the basis for the appearance of your own body now. Before that cell division, what was there that has anything to do with you? Mother and father in bed sexing does not have anything to do with you yet, because that event is before the sperm and egg joined and started dividing cells.
Thus, in some sense, this notion of the "Big Bang" is like the notion of your own physical beginning, with the first call division in the womb. Questions about what came before the first call division have nothing to do with you (as a gross physical being). Such questions relate to what is prior to you. So it is, also, with questions that relate to what is prior to space-time.
It has even been "concluded" recently, by several groups of scientists, working independently, that there is not enough mass in the gross physical universe to cause it to "fall back in" on itself and collapse–such a collapse to be followed, thereafter, by another "Big Bang." These scientists (in contrast to other scientists, who "conclude" the exact opposite, based on their own theories and observations) suggest that everything will simply continue to expand for however many more billions of years. They hypothesize that there will be no "end-event" of the physical universe, but that, eventually, the physical universe will cease to be a living process (with new stars being formed, and so on), and that all matter will become virtually dead, standing in space without event.
Such hypothesizing is, again, a kind of extension of thinking about your own bodily condition. The "Big Bang" is like the first cell division that produced your body, and the eventual everything-merely-dead-moving- endlessly is like the notion of your own bodily death. Thus, the concepts about the nature of the physical universe which are current in scientific thinking at the present time are very much like the notions current about human physical existence. And, just as the notion that you are merely a gross physical body (beginning with a first cell division, and ending in death, or disintegration) does not account for the whole of you, is not the "end of the story," is not the totality understood–just so, to speak of the universe in terms of the "Big Bang" and eventual ever-expanding deadness is not the "answer," or the finality, or the total picture, either. Both of these are space-time-bound conceptions of reality–the one individual, personal, and bodily, and the other Cosmic. But these conceptions have very similar features as descriptions–one of the human reality and the other of Cosmic reality altogether.
Neither of these conceptions comprises (or leads to) a total comprehension of Reality Itself–not even a total comprehension of conditional existence altogether, in all of its planes. Only a fraction of conditional existence is taken into account by these (now commonly presumed-to-be-true) conceptions–namely, that fraction of conditional existence which is comprehended by the gross perceiver who located in space-time.
