Are there any verbal answers to those?

[Existence]

Hey guys. I was contemplating and have come up with those questions.

1. If god is completely self contained and has no desire to do anything, then why it needs to experience reality from human perspective?(or other animal's perspective)
2. Why god has to shift shape, take a form or create differences between itself?
3. Yeah, if god doesn't do it then i wouldn't exist now. But my question is "why i have to exist?" 
4. Why this whole universe exist? What's wrong with not existing anything?
5. What is the point of ,god turning itself into a human, creating massive ego, suffering for years that way, and then working very hard to realize it's formlessness. If becoming formlessness is the ultimate goal why can't it be that way from the beginning.
6. Why god imagines reality, what's wrong with "absolutely no reality"?

Feel free to share your opinions.

Thank you.

Edited November 7, 2019 by Existence

[Nahm]

1. Creates, rather than needs.

2. Formless in actuality, appearing form.

3. Nonexistence is a thought, rather than an actuality.

4. Same.

5. It is, form is appearance.

6. No reality is no existence. 
 

[Forestluv]

@Existence You might be entering a deeper level of contemplation that is not limited by reason and conceptual constructs.

4 hours ago, Existence said:

If god is completely self contained and has no desire to do anything, then why it needs to experience reality from human perspective?

We can create conceptual constructs about god and what god experiences, yet there is also an "ISness" that cannot be captured through theoretical constructs trying to define what IS is.

For example, "If. . . . then. . . " constructs have an underlying assumption. In the question above, we are assuming that there is a thing called god that has no desire to do anything? Do we know that is true? How do we know that is true? . . . Quite often, we are not even aware of our assumptions. When we become aware of the underlying assumption, the rest of the question becomes mute. For example, what if god does have desire to do something? Then the question is recontextualized or dissolves.

4 hours ago, Existence said:

Why this whole universe exist? What's wrong with not existing anything?

Fundamental to these questions is a thing called "existence". What is existence? How can we distinguish between existence and non-existence? Who determines whether it counts as existence or non-existence. Could there be an in-between of "quasi-existence"? 

4 hours ago, Existence said:

Why god imagines reality, what's wrong with "absolutely no reality"?

What is the difference between "reality" and "no reality"? Is there one reality or countless realities? Does a human and a donkey share the same reality? Whose reality is more real? Is waking reality more real than a dream reality?

Is there a separate thing called "god" that is imagining this reality? If so, who/what imagines that god?

These types of questions are designed to pull the mind out of logical, reasonable thinking. Similar to zen koans. As well, there is a "trans-human" ISness that is not contracted within a human perspective.

It can be fun to create constructs to these questions. It can also be insightful to question the questions. 

[Existence]

8 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Existence

we are assuming that there is a thing called god that has no desire to do anything? Do we know that is true? How do we know that is true? . . . Quite often, we are not even aware of our assumptions. When we become aware of the underlying assumption, the rest of the question becomes mute. For example, what if god does have desire to do something? Then the question is recontextualized or dissolves.

 

 

Maybe I'm wrong, But, isn't "desire" an attribute? As we know, nothingness has no quality or attribute, why would it have desire?