Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

“The Absolute can only create and recreate itself if it transforms into something “less absolute.” This “less” absolute Being manifested through many beings is not only the Absolute's creation or recreation but is also its only life. In absolute Oneness, there is no real life. Division is the source of life. The secret to life is plurality. Oneness without plurality loses meaning. Plurality in Oneness is the source of meaning and purpose.”

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

Work

ABSOLUTE

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Dejan Stojanovic
Dejan Stojanovic

Dejan Stojanovic, born on March 11, 1959, is a Serbian poet known for his profound emotions and unique style in his poetry, which has won the hearts of readers worldwide. more

You May Also Like

“Life is not perfect. Almost nothing is ideal in the strictest sense, and we humans are not perfect in the strictest sense. But what is perfection? Even if a human being, or anything else, could have been perfect, would that "perfection" be desirable from an absolute point of view? Regardless of our debates about the intelligent design of the Universe or accidental appearance or always present matter and the always present Universe, the question remains—what is perfection (or absolute goodness), and how much do we know about perfection (is perfection perfect)?”

LifeMatterUniversePerfectionCosmosAbsoluteAbsolute Goodnessm GodNergy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“It seems reasonable to believe that, regardless of the number of possibilities and universes, the Universe (Omniverse, Macro-Universe, Multiverse) would still be nothing more than a dead thing. What is it that powers the Universe? We see and recognize motion; we recognize the four main forces (gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear force) of the Universe, but we still do not know or fully understand these forces or the Universe itself. We recognize the Universe; we can feel it, touch it, think about it; we can describe it and its forces, but do we understand it? If we admit that we do not understand it fully, we must acknowledge that we do not fully understand perfection. Suppose we realize that we do not fully understand perfection; we must shift the subject of discussion to a higher level, which is not necessarily a higher level of understanding but a higher level regarding our approach.”

UniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindHigher Level Of Understanding
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We may win and still be wrong or partially wrong. We may win based on the merits of a superior thought at any given moment. But would we have won if there was a thought superior enough to challenge the winning thought at any particular moment? We would fail if there were a superior thought at any given time to challenge us. Would even the more superior idea be nobler or only superior in terms of the truth? Countless questions always arise and follow any serious inquiry.”

UniverseWinningCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteChallengeArguments
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“How do we know our thoughts are the best and, simultaneously, the noblest? How rigorous is the inspection of our thoughts and merits? Are we satisfied more with winning or knowing? Do we enjoy victories and fame more than the truth itself? Our motives are driven more by winning than by finding the truth. If when this is the case, the winning "truth" or personal "triumph" can be more devastating, not only to “progress” but also to knowledge and the truth, than if there were no such "truths" and such thoughts at a particular moment. Some ideas may temporarily open some doors but close others in the long run. (Features of this kind in human nature are most apparent in politics.)”

IdeasUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Considering all these elements, the context and frame from which we try to think or place ideas become more extensive and cannot be easily simplified to fit the purpose of a "winning" argument or idea. For example, the concept of intelligent design is, in a strict sense, a religious concept, but must it be strictly religious? To answer this, we must first ask what intelligent design is. And then, what may this design be from a metaphysical point of view, from the point of view of creation or recreation? How much do our particular human ideas about design enslave us, and can we even think about the design outside of our strictly human context and place it in an extraordinary context of the Absolute, God, existence, essence, matter, and Universe?”

GodUniverseExistenceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteHuman Context
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The visible universe contains only 5% of visible matter, whereas dark matter constitutes 27%, and 68% is dark energy. According to some scientists, dark matter may be in other dimensions. This idea is compatible with my idea of an Omniverse, although a Multiverse does not need to be in other dimensions. Nevertheless, such a Multiverse may contain material (perhaps unapproachable by human beings) beyond our imagination.”

UniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindDark MatterDark Energy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Since scientists have no answer to dark matter (except dark matter filament), the most logical explanation is that it is invisible. Some questions remain: 1. Can matter be invisible (or imperceptible by our senses and instruments)? 2. Even if matter could be theoretically invisible, is it possible that such a vast amount of matter, like dark matter, would escape all our knowledge and existing laws of physics and be unidentified until recently but wholly invisible and beyond our reach? 3. If dark matter is imperceptible, what makes it imperceptible? 4. Is it potentially perceptible but not perceptible to us as human beings? 5. Is there anything that would still avoid perception even if we possessed the absolute perceptive ability or technology with these abilities? 6. Or, is dark matter our way of explaining the unexplainable and offering a linguistic form to unknown phenomena? 7. Or, is it our inability to go beyond the spectrum, outside the existing frames, and try to decipher the unknown beyond the known frame of reality or what we see and understand as reality and the Universe? The answer to the first question is known; even atoms are invisible not only to the eyes but to microscopes. It is, therefore, theoretically possible that matter can be hidden and imperceptible. Still, it is hard to imagine that vast amounts of the mass of the Universe would stay unaccounted for within the realm of already advanced understanding of the laws of physics, instruments, and experiments. It would be possible to prove mathematically, based on what we already know about the Universe, the mass, the dispersion of energy and mass, and by these comparisons to conclude, without the CERN accelerator, that this is, most likely, impossible. This was a short answer to the second question. The third question is important because it would lead scientists in the right direction by avoiding the possible net of perplexed ideas. If we have already established that something exists, it would be better to define it as precisely as possible to avoid guessing only. In addition, how do we guess? We do not know anything about its nature, origin, or how it came into existence except that we came to this discovery almost accidentally by pure and relatively simple measurements and experiments. But what about us? How do we think? What methods do we use in experiments and the way we think? The answer to these questions could lead to better discoveries than only focusing on something we do not know and, even worse if we do not know where to look for it. Based on an accidental discovery, it is a good start to conclude that there is more mass in the Universe than can be detected. Still, it would be better and more productive to go beyond the Universe as we see it, beyond our existing knowledge and perception, not toward the stars we already know but toward another bottomless sky of darkness and the unknown. Although light is the source of life, darkness is also the source of light and life. Maybe the brightest “star” sleeps in the darkness and feeds the world from darkness. Is there only one Universe? If we start from the premise of the Big Bang theory, it would be logical to ask why there is only one Big Bang. It is easy to conclude that if there is a Big Bang at one point in “space” (nothingness), there can be another one at another “point,” past or future, although this may sound strange.”

UniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteDark MatterDark Energy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The source of 68% of the mass-energy density is dark energy. The Universe is one, even if we use the word Multiverse. If it is not one, then it is not a Universe. If what we understand as the Universe is not one, it does not mean that there are multiple universes but that our ideas about the Universe may need to be corrected or that they do not quite correctly represent reality. If this is the case, we should adapt the language to reality, not the reality to language.”

UniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteDark MatterDark Energy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“If we accept a Big Bang (although our view would be the same regardless of this premise), we must accept the possibility of multiple Big Bangs anywhere else. We can imagine many more (some even bigger) Big Bangs and “universes” (like our own) than there are galaxies in our Universe. Now, we will name this Universe, containing all others, Omniverse (Omni-Universe) or Macro Universe. Dark energy is the “unmeasurable” energy of the Omniverse (Macro Universe).”

UniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteDark MatterDark Energy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image