Much of the seeking after truth fails because we seek it as a human beings seeking to find something. Truth is not something to be found or known in any human sense of the word. A man who seeks to find the truth is like a man who is searching his dream trying to find the room in which he is asleep having the dream.
No amount of self reflection can help us find the “I” in us; it is never there. The “I” is never found by seeking because it is the very thing doing the seeking. When we cannot find something we are looking for it doesn’t necessary mean that it is not there; it could also be that what we are looking for is either ourselves or something already in our possession. But if it were never there to begin with, neither with us nor elsewhere, then how on earth did we come to think or talk about it, let alone seeking it?!
If the consciousness of the atheist cannot find God anywhere it could be because God is the one providing the light of his consciousness!
Knowledge of truth is not a human possibility; our humanity is itself the very thing that keeps us from knowing the truth.
One may even say that to know the truth is to know that there is nothing to know, hence nothing to seek, and hence nothing to lose.
NOEMAYA 
The seeker is the sought.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It appears to me that if knowledge of the truth were known by all, the world would not exist. My focus at the moment is on the experience of the world and the world being one with God. The “one needs the other like a child needs a mother,” was a line on one of my songs. Since there is basically nothing in existence but one ultimate reality and that reality becomes the many, then the one needs the world as much as the world needs the one. If not, we would not even be talking.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Precisely. This is the cornerstone of my own thinking as well. Both physically and metaphysically it is necessary that the One must contain the many within it, even though as pure potentialities. It is like the I-world polarity. Wherever and whenever the “I” is there a world too must be there. world and I, like the one and the many, have a Yin-Yang kinda relationship.
LikeLike
Are you familiar with Aflred North Whiteheads work after his Principla Mathermatica? Especially PROCESS AND REALITY?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I have not read Whitehead’s own works except the Principia with Russel. But remotely I read about whitehead’s process philosophy. It is similar to Bergson’s work with which I am more familiar. I am myself a process kind of person. Our natural human understanding is based on things, what I call the point metaphysics. But I prefer a process metaphysics. Interestingly, this shift is at the heart of quantum physics. In classical physics particles were points but in QM they are vectors.
LikeLike
You are forcing me to become educated. How do QM vectors differ from Newtonian?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. In Newtonian Mechanics vectors were mathematical constructs representing the motion of particle. But in QM the particle itself, regardless of motion, is represented by a vector. The main different is that Newtonian vectors were 3-D vectors in physical space but quantum vectors are infinite dimensional vectors in what is called the Hilbert space. Actually you may know the wave function of a quantum particle. Wave function is the vector of the qm system. Like a vector that has components, the wave function of qm particle is one of the many components of the qm vector.
LikeLike
And whereas in Newtonian physics vectors were used as means of expression, in qm they are fundamental to the system. One can even say that the particle is not a thing but rather a tendency (similar to a process) in the structure of spacetime. Vectors are like IDs for qm particles.
LikeLike
In classical physics, mathematics is only a tool, for instance calculus, or they use imaginary numbers for solving wave equations. But in QM mathematics is fundamental. The underlying reality is mathematical and not physical. Imaginary numbers too are at the foundations of QM; without them we would not have colorful soap bubbles. This is the main part that makes grasping it difficult. That is why Heisenberg said modern physics is Platonism back on stage.
LikeLike
I think I like Whitehead more than Russel. Russel though I loved him at some point but is very rigid and dogmatic.
LikeLike
dear, there is a Indian story on Lord Dakshinamurthy and Sanakathi Muni (4 members). it talks of world and supreme.
LikeLike