Before looking closer into what was told by the meditators - lets take a few 'sidesteps':


Just as we once discovered that the earth was not flat
- or -

when we had to acknowledge that the earth was not the center of our solar system


Perhaps we also should consider the possibility that our universe, even life itself,

might not been made for 'us' at all....



Throughout human history, we’ve grappled with profound inquiries about our existence: 'Where do we come from?' 'Where are we headed?', 'What is the purpose of life?' - these questions transcend cultural boundaries and have fascinated us for ages.


Our quest for answers extends beyond Earth. We scan the cosmos, hoping to discover extraterrestrial life. But even if we encounter intelligent beings elsewhere, the question remains: “Where did they originate from?”


Science introduces the concept of quantum fluctuation, suggesting that something can spontaneously arise from nothing. Yet, this leads us to another puzzle: Who or what established the very laws of nature that govern such fluctuations?


Religious and spiritual explanations often invoke gods or higher powers. But then we encounter a paradox: If gods exist, who or what created them?

Let’s see what would happen if we take one step back and ask the following question;

- What if the universe, even life itself, was not ‘made for us’ at all?


And by 'us', I dont mean just humans. I mean EVERYTHING living within the entire universe.

That includes all life on Earth and any extraterrestrial life or species we might encounter out there.

In this scenario, 'we' as living organisms - we're all in the same 'boat'




Lets face it, if everything was made for 'something else' - something that arrived from 'outside' our univers - that would also mean that our entire universe is just a scenery. A simple framework needed for this 'something' to achieve its real goal.


And; What could that be?

Well, wouldn’t it be logical if the answer lies in the very surroundings in which we find ourselves?


In other words, since we are living in a physical universe, the most logical answer would simply be that it needed;


Physical experience and knowledge


Look at it this way;
You can always read lots of books regarding 'how to drive a car'.

But you will never, ever truly understand what it's like to drive

unless you've been behind a physical wheel,

in a physical car, going down a physical road.


One might, of course, ask if this world is perfect; - war, hunger, injustice, disasters, poverty, personal problems, financial concerns, illness, losing someone close etc etc etc - don’t sound ‘perfect’ at all.

On the other hand; What if it is - what if everything is exactly the way it was meant to be.


It's just that our view regarding the concepts of 'good' and 'bad', is....wrong.


I'll use temperature as an example;

Guess a temperature between +10°C/+50°F and +30°C/+86°F feels reasonably comfortable for most of us - outside this range, and it's either to hot or to cold.


Absolute zero (-273°C / -459°F) would then be...right, damn cold.


But, what about -272°C/-457°F ...?

Most of us would agree that this is pretty cold too, but there is a significant difference.


At absolute zero, all atomic movement stops (maybe not quite true, but still) - while at any other temperatures, there is 'movement' (that is; something happens).

So then, is -272°C/-457°F something you would define as 'good or bad' - I mean, compared to absolute zero ?...remember, at one point everything is dead and at the next, there is 'movement'.


In other words, if we look at it from an 'existing point of view' (vs 'non-existing')

there is a big different between -273°C and -272°C (or between -459°F and -457°F) 

as

there is 'something happening' compare to 'nothing happens at all'

and hence

-272°C/-457°F might turn out to be something 'good' after all

(..no matter what we, as humans, may feel about such a temperature..)



One might even say that if our physical universe had been in perfect harmonious balance (to us)

- then it would be of absolutely no use for this ‘something’ -

because such a physical world would offer no chance of learning ALL aspects of a physical life. 


Remember, in this scenario the real 'Star of the Show' is not 'us', it is something coming from outside our universe.

The universe is just a landscape (for physical experience and knowledge) and life is just the tool to achieve this.


- just to take another sidestep -

Regarding the perception of 'space and time'; As far as I know - parts of science tend towards the idea that 'time and space' actually is a network of events, of happenings, of processes, of movements etc (ref: Carlo Rovelli: The Order of Time)


If this ‘something’ needs physical surroundings that consist of movement, action, events, processes, etc.

Which surroundings do you think would be best adapted to this...?


Our Physical Universe


***