Interesting.


If we were to say that no understanding is ever complete or without error, then we would either be assuming or have adopted this as an understanding.

I do not subscribe to the belief that nothing can be known. Experiential self evidence seems to render this notion incorrect.
To my knowledge - and again only from my own journey and investigating, I certainly do not say this as complete fact - there are universal truths. The universe has structure and logic. It would be rather difficult to have a conversation here if my screen wobbled like jelly and the letters of the words kept changing places at random times.

From this discussion, there is perhaps two areas that may be looked at. One is the concept of objectivity and subjectivity. To my knowledge there is a form of objectivity which coincides with universal truth, but this is not for the most part the objectivity which science uses or understands. To cover what I interpret one of your points to be, yes the worldly illusion is just that. One need only contemplate things 10,000 years from now or how it will or might be after death to glimpse this. Which leads to the second area, much further beyond the paradigm of thought most common on this level presently - that is, basically speaking, that life serves to gather experiential knowledge for the higher self; much like the gifts being returned to the creator as you have already put forth.




I would suggest unifying "figuring things out" and "being" into one.


If it were, with what would you show it to be incorrect...?


My approval is not required for you to do as you choose.




No versus. It is another level of thought/being. Belief is redundant here. Logic is merely a tool.