Ex nihilo nihil fit

[Johannes Patruus]

The title line is quoted by Dr Immanuel Schochet in his lecture on the
foundations of religion in general and of Judaism in particular -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwm-HxYXaQU

(Includes a reference to David Hume.)

Patruus

[Ed Cryer]

Ex nihilo nihil fit.
Deus est.
E quo fit Deus?
Deus A e Deo B factus est.
E quo factus est Deus B?
Certe e Deo C.
Et is Deus sane e Deo D?
Ita vero.
Et sic usque ad infinitum?
Sic videtur.
Et quem Deum oportet nos adorare?
Omnes Deos.
Forsan eum Deum qui maxime nostris moribus prodest?
Eum Dem qui nobis suas leges dedit.
Sed homines leges habent omnium generum; et saepe leges quae inter se
bellum gerunt. Sumusne qui sumus quia sic nos fecit Deus? Aut Deum
fecimus propter nostram imaginem?

Edus (Davidii Humi assectator libentissimus)

[jsqu...@gmail.com]

Thanks for this nice, easily understood,
bit of Latin and of ancient clear headedness.

I translate the Sanskrit of NAgArjuna,
the preeminent Indian philosopher,
as saying the same thing. My English
form of NAgAjuna's Skt. is


"There are no independent arisings"



He of course wrote in Sanskrit, but I am
fairly sure that I have, in this case,
got him about as right as translation allows.

The so-called "New Physics", rescued from
a horde of "New Agey" mush, says something
similar. Bell's Theorem, for example,
can be taken to agree with NAgArjuna
and many other of the better classical
thinkers.