but where did the laws come from, especially as they apply to objects which have no power to reproduce themselves or direct themselves? is it enough to say 'that is just the way it is, the laws govern them and the objects and animals do as they are designed to do because it works'? if one can suffice to say 'the laws simply are', then why cannot it be said, too, that a governing 'entity' simply 'is' ?

not all 'laws' seem to be designed only for the maintenance and 'evolution' to the betterment of species. by 'law', humans have curiosity. we see much harm has come of curiosity that seeks destruction and seems to have a greater accelleration of success than curiosity that seeks to repair/edify.

or are laws defined as observations of those patterns and behaviors which exist but are exclusive of concern on the individual/collective impact of the behaviors overall? perhaps that is where i am amiss...

• Re: The Mystic LAw............. - mahasattva - November 27, 2000 - 08:33 UTC