Meaning of life (Part One)

It can be paraphrased by two questions: “why do we exist” and “how should we exist”. Call them the strong and weak anthropic questions, if you will.

First, the strong anthropic question: Why do we exist?

Science may have set out to find the answer, but the scientific method is never designed to reveal the motivation behind any physical phenomenon. While most cosmologists are confident in describing the universe a few seconds after the Big Bang and thereafter, no Friedmann models try to answer why there was even a Big Bang. When we successfully establish the unified theory of physics in the near future, it probably won’t tell us what “breathes fire” into those equations, as commented by the impressive Stephen Hawking. Science is designed to answer “how we exist” but not “why we exist”.

Wherever science fails to respond, religion thrives. Explaining the purpose of life has always been the first and last frontier of any religion.

The Abrahamic God is said to be perfect. Yet humans were created in order to serve Elohim or Yahweh, to love the Lord, and to worship Allah. The fact that human actions are required upon Him means that He needs something and is not complete. The definition of “perfect” is “lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind”. If we take the Scriptures literally, the motivation for Creation is confusing at best.

The Vedic and Puranic cosmology of Hinduism is probably the most scientifically comparable in all ancient civilizations. While the Hebrew universe lasts 6000 years, and the Chinese cosmos, a few tens of thousands more, the Hindu scriptures revealed a stunning scale of 4 billion years. Its creation-destruction cycle of Yuga corresponds to the theory of Big Bang, Expansion-Contraction and Big Crunch. The ultimate goal in a Hindu’s life is to achieve moksha from samsāra so that the ātmā, could unite itself with Brahman. Some Hindus believe that ātmā and Brahman are indistinguishable, and the detachment is caused by māyā. The existence of humans and its purpose is nothing more than a cosmic game of the divine. The forward path to overcome māyā and samsāra resembles that of a pawn in chess to reach the end zone so that it can be promoted.

Inheriting the tradition of kárma and samsāra, the dharmic protégé Buddha didn’t offer anything new to explain the meaning of life. In fact, Buddha refused to answer the question to the origin of the universe and life, because he thought it was irrelevant to a Buddhist’s quest: nirvana, a slight different form of moksha.

In Taoism, Tao, like Om, neither being nor non-being, gives birth to everything. Its indescribable mysticism in creation eludes its purpose. Although it stands out from the rest childish creation stories in ancient China, it offers no real insight as why there was even one.

So far, no single theory can satisfy the strong anthropic question. Therefore, I seek comfort in three working theories about the purpose of our existence:

1) There is no purpose. Life on this remote corner of the universe is a pure accident explainable by the Uncertainty Principle. God does play dices after all.

2) Humans were created to fulfill some unrevealed purpose, but the watchmaker walked away. Gott ist tot. The physical laws may still function, but the absolute morality no longer applies.

3) “God is a mean kid over an anthill with a magnifying glass”. The concept of cosmic game could potentially explain everything. Yet it renders the meaning of life meaningless. We are nothing but puppets to satisfy some sadistic perversion.