God – A question or an answer


For my thoughts on God visit :

http://lifereligiongod.blogspot.com/2013/05/god-question-or-answer.html

Advertisements

111 thoughts on “God – A question or an answer

  1. Sanjay this is for you. A rather bad joke but I felt it was though provoking.
    God vs Dev Anand
    Its not that I am an atheist but After veteran actor Dev Anand expired. His fans including me went into a gloom. Some time later saw a cartoon a rather untimely but seemingly appropriate joke. Dev Anand enters heaven. God angrily asks him you had stopped making good films a long time ago. Towards the end of your life all the films you were making were crap eg swami dada sachche ka bol bala awwal number. Kabhi aapke man mein khayal nahee aaya ki mujhse achchi films nahee ban rahee now I should stop making them and if you had done that you would have been remembered as a by and large successful producer of good films. Dev Anands answer. Prabhu you also had stopped making good human beings a long time back. Kya aapke man mein khayal nahee aaya ki mujhse achche insaan nahee ban rahe now I should top making crap humans. You would have been also remembered as a by and large successful producer of good humans and protector of goodness and humanity.

    Like

    1. Dear Niraj,

      There was a time I also had the same valid and genuine question for God. He replied but over a period of time…..His ways are very complex for intelligent minds but very simple for humbly submissive minds. A father cannot have all children alike hence their respective treatments. He can provide equal opportunities, comforts, resources and amenities but their utilisation is entirely upon his children.
      Being good is a relative term. It means you need to have bad to call something Good. If all is Good then there is actually NO GOOD because there is NOTHING BAD. Well this is just logic but what is God’s way of working I will try to explain –

      God (DAYAL) created his creation and handed it over to A MANAGER called KAAL. This manager found that it was a creation of non-living things. He requested God to ensure its inhabitation. God obliged and gave away some (countless though) drops (souls) from his ocean of supreme consciousness i.e. Atma got separated from Paramatma. These souls came under direct management of KAAL. The manager now activated Maya (illusion), five vices, senses, good/bad, right/wrong, 25 prakritis (natures), 3 gunas, various lower creations and consciousness levels till physical creation etc…It also gave birth to Trinity – Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh viz. Creator, preserver and destroyer of this creation. Brahma then created numerous bodies such as vegetation, insects & reptiles, Birds, quadruples and humans for souls to be active in physical world. With this came the supreme law – Law of Karma. For its survival in physical world of duality all bodies were compelled to ACT mentally, verbally and by actions. These actions by default were either good or bad thanks to duality. The quantum of these actions became so large that it could not be paid back in the same life hence introduction of CYCLE OF BIRTHS & DEATHS. This gave rise to three kinds of Karma – In action or kriyaman karma (which are done as per free will in one’s active life), Accumulated or Sanchit karma (which are in our balance, yet to be paid back and are stored for next births) and destined or Pralabadh karma (which have been decided to be part of our present life and cannot be changed). Along with this came the most shrewd and deadly agent of KAAL – our man (mind). Our senses keep engaging our mind in worldly pursuits and never let us know that we are actually not bodies but souls.

      Thus all souls got entangled in this complexity of Karmas and forgot their main origin i.e. God. The manager pays us back for our karmas through heavens and hells, prosperity and poverty, happiness and sadness, power and helplessness, respects and insults etc…but never allows us to realise our true identity. For average humans this manager is God. So when we look around us we see a mix of good and bad. In such duality we tend to raise the same question as put by you.
      ————————————————————

      Now some more info on the same for better understanding –

      In the beginning the load of karma was almost negligible hence pure soul (consciousness). People were more close to God. The GOOD things were in abundance. Age, physical capabilities, level of consciousness, way of life etc… all were of highest degree. Since the lifespan was also the highest, opportunity to do number of karmas were also more. This was Satyug. As we kept increasing the load of karmas during numerous birth cycles our virtues and lifestyles also kept changing during Treta and Dwapar. In kaliyug it is at the lowest thus we see more negativity. One thing to note is that the same souls are passing through these cycles which keep getting more complex thanks to KAAL’s management style and laws.

      This is spiritual aspect of explaining the yuga system as well….

      Like

    1. Thanks, Yuvasamrat.
      Read few chapters at random. This appears to be philosophy of some kind. Could you please summarise the essence if you have read all?

      Like

      1. I am still reading it. This philosophy is from Sri Datta Swami, Andhra Pradesh. I recommend that you read it all because it will be difficult to summarise it without missing some important points.

        Like

  2. The greatest miracle that proves the exisistence beyond any doubt is the creation itself. Every minute part of this infinite universe speaks about God’s infinite greatness, infinite kindness and infinite talent.

    Just as a scholar and a layman reading the same book get different impressions about the same subject, a devotee(one who has firm love on Supreme Lord) sees the whole world to be a testimony for the infinite glory of god while a non devotee sees the world just as a scientific process.

    Like

    1. Dear Yuvasamrat,

      There are six stages in human’s realisation of God-

      1. Ignorance of God
      2. Rejection of God
      3. Research for God
      4. Acceptance of God
      5. Seeking God
      6. Realising God

      Every soul goes through all these stages during various birth cycles. One’s belief is the outcome of which stage he is in. So everyone with respective belief is right whether he is devotee or not. God does not discriminate but humans do and that is why most of us belong to first five stages with the highest number being in the first stage. The succeeding stages have reducing numbers.

      Like

      1. What is the reason for ignorance of god? There are a few differences in opinion about the eternality of soul. Some say that soul is as eternal as God while some say that soul is eternal when compared to the non eternal nature of world(although strictly speaking the world is also eternal, it just undergoes transformation from manifestation to unmanifestation and vice versa. The first process is called annihilation and the second one is creation. ) But in comparision to the absolute eternality of God, both the soul and the world are non eternal. So, we have to accept that every soul was created at a particulat point of time. Soul is the best part of creation in the sense that of all created beings, soul resembles God the most like a water drop resembles an ocean. Before creating the soul, God created this beautiful world with all amenties to make the soul most comfortable. God has also given wonderful knowledge in the form of Vedas which clearly instruct about all dos and donts. The soul is given freewill to chose between God and maya. Based on the desires developed by the soul, God grants it a body that is best suited for the fulfilment of those desires. So, God’s mercy and love is visible at every stage. In my view, ignorance, negligence and rejection and hatred of God is misuse of freewill.

        Like

        1. Ignorance of God is the result of one’s Karmic account. As far as eternity is concerned you can measure that by understanding the analogy of drop and its ocean. Drop is the part of ocean so they have same properties. Misuse of freewill is also there but it is the heavy load of karmas accumulated during numerous births that is the main culprit and forms the major share of reasoning. for example if somebody desires to be a rich person engrossed in merry-making thorughout his life, obviously he will get a birth and body which will not remind him of God but of other pleasures of life.

          Like

            1. A water drop only has a partial resemblence and not complete resemblence with the ocean. An ocean can drown the whole world but a drop hardly makes any affect.

              Like

              1. Yes, drop becomes complete once it is with ocean or else it becomes dirty and stagnant. Similarly, soul becomes one with God once it realises God and becomes complete. Otherwise it remains the part of dirt and filth which is this creation where it is made to believe in its alienation and lives in superiority complex. In this creation soul’s is further traumatised by our mind which keeps it away from God.

                Like

                1. Dear Sanjay, I beg to differ a little here. First, the soul can never ever become one with God. Second, creation itself is not dirt and filth. If a water drop merges into ocean, it loses its individual existence. A soul can become one with God in the sense that it no longer has any individual interest. Interest of God is it’s interest and pleasing God is it’s ultimate aim. Dirt and filth is constituted in forgetfulness or negligence of the Supreme.

                  Like

                  1. Soul (atma) was with God (supreme soul-pramatma) and got separated during first creation (countless years ago) and realisation of God is the return of soul to God’s abode which is full of eternal bliss, peace and happiness. Such a state of eternal satisfaction happens when soul is merged with supreme soul. Once drop merges in ocean (which is the ultimate end and completeness), it becomes ocean and not vice versa. Once this happens no desire is left with soul and it enjoys the eternity with supreme soul. That state of bliss and eternal happiness is beyond our imagination, un-measurable and cannot be expressed in words. In comparison to that bliss this creation is nothing and that is why I used the word dirt and filth. Also God’s abode is beyond pralaya and mahapralaya i.e. it never ends/changes unlike this creation which is not permanent.

                    Like

            2. Load is the combinatio of good as well as bad karmas. He could be rich because of his good karmas also and do not think of God at all because of bad karmas also.

              Like

              1. Dear YS,

                this unedning karmic account keeps us entangled in the cycle of births and deaths. If we can overcome this cycle and move out of this chakra then it is called MUKTI. People usually equate MUKTI with dying and escaping all miseries of life!

                Like

  3. Dhruv! My friend,
    As promised, the basic fundamentals of Deism with my views:-
    – “Reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of God, accompanied with the rejection of revelation and authority as a source of religious knowledge”
    My views – Reason and observation of the natural world is okay to an extent but not sufficient because we are unaware of the vastness of our natural world. As we keep exploring new aspects of natural world our reasons and observations will keep changing and that will lead to more questions and reasons. Such a state of advanced reasoning may either keep us entangled in arguments or discussions at intellectual level or take us in the right direction to determine existence of God. We actually do not know the outcome. But this does not mean that we should stop reasoning and observing. This can help us to ensure that we follow the correct path in our quest for existence of God. As far as revelations are concerned, it depends from case to case and we cannot reject them. This has got more to do with individual experience. Revelations have their own significance depending on how the receiver accepts them. This means for somebody revelations may trigger reasoning and for some it is reasoning and observations which may reveal God. One thing more revelations are not at our commands.

    -“Finds fault with organized religion and did not believe in supernatural events such as miracles, the inerrancy of scriptures, or the Trinity”
    My views – We need to further understand how “Deism” defines “organised religion” then only we can comment if the faults are there or not. For me a miracle is something which I do not expect to happen to my advantage either in my thoughts or plans so any such happening will be a miracle for me. Theoretically this should be same for everyone. Again I do not reject the importance of scriptures but we should act on their teachings. For instance if we keep on reading books on cookery and do not try out the recipe, can we enjoy the food? Now the question arises about the quality of scriptures, adulteration of teachings in them, manipulations etc…which we cannot fathom on the face of it. The only way would be to read them with an open mind and develop your questions. I believe if our questions are answered in them itself then their teachings are worth following or else we need to take help of somebody who can guide us. It is like to know maths we need a mathematics teacher, to study hindi we need hindi teacher, to study French we need French teacher and so on. Similarly, to understand God we need somebody who has realised God himself and is licensed to guide us. This is the reason why India has a rich tradition of having a “Spiritual Guru”. But again the question of Guru leads to another question i.e. the quality of Guru which is another topic of debate. Again “Trinity” needs to be specified to be commented upon.

    “Deism is a theological position concerning the relationship between “the Creator” and the natural world”
    My views – There is indeed a relationship between the creator and natural world. But we are compelled to look at the physical aspect of that creation. The whole creation has other aspects too.

    “Though deists rejected atheism Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature”
    My views – This thought is very complex to understand. The government of a country has specific ministries to take care of various functions and they work in order to execute their responsibilities. But they all report to Head of the government. So in a way we can say that Head of government is detached from day to day working. Similarly, God has bestowed upon various responsibilities to various deities, forces, energies and laws to ensure that this world runs its daily affairs with utmost perfection. But this does not mean that God has left the world to its fate. God’s government ensures that there is a fair deal in all its execution.

    “Human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature”
    My views – Although I have shared my views earlier on this, I would like to touch upon another angle through this statement. It is only humans who have the capacity to reason because of the mind. This makes humans superior to all living beings. Going by this fact, we can conclude that only humans can know God via reason and observation. This is why humans are the Top of Creation (Bible) / Nar Narayani deh (body) (Vedas) / Ashraf-al-makhlukaat (Persian)……

    “Deism does not ascribe any specific qualities to a deity beyond non-intervention”
    My views – In Geeta updesh, Krishna defines the identity, presence and penetration of God by saying that God is heat in the fire, strength in the strong people, chillness of ice, hunger of a hungry person, thirst of a thirsty person, sweetness of fruits, efforts in a hard-worker and so on. This means that God is in everything inspite of being non-interventional but is very difficult to define because of so many qualities. Deism might have struggled in either understanding all these qualities or defining all these qualities or in finding a name for all these qualities and probably did not try to explore further.

    “Deism is related to naturalism because it credits the formation of life and the universe to a higher power, using only natural processes.”
    My views – Deism is the route not from the creator to creation but from creation to the creator which is okay as long as it justifies that existence of God.

    “Deism may also include a spiritual element, involving experiences of God and nature.”
    My views – I have been insisting on this since beginning. Deism also acknowledges this. But I differ to an extent that experience is the truest reason to confirm existence of God whether you have a reason and observation for God or not.

    “Deist maintained that God endowed the world at creation with self-sustaining and self-acting powers and then abandoned it to the operation of these powers acting as second causes”
    My views – This is correct but “abandoned” is not so dignified word to define his non-interference attitude. His attitude is such because he has supplied us with every possible resource for us to take care of ourselves but we are still in his creation disciplined by his intent.

    “Critical elements of deist thought included:
    • Rejection of all religions based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God.
    • Rejection of all religious dogma and demagogy.
    • Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious “mysteries”.
    Constructive elements of deist thought included:
    • God exists and created the universe.
    • God gave humans the ability to reason”
    My views – Deism is the school of thought which says that existence of God can be known / explained by reasons and observations like any scientific project. At the heart of it lies the fact that God does exist. However, it lacks on various other questions on God – Where is God based? How can we meet him? Why should we meet him? Should we meet him or not? What does he expect of us? What should we expect of him? All these questions are answered by spiritualism.
    Will get back with my views on Pantheism also….

    Like

  4. Dear Niraj,

    At present I cannot understand your problem. It seems you do not like the system of God. According to you, whenever a person is about to commit a sin, God has to withdraw his free will. But by this, will the attitude change? A thief wants to steal something. Everytime he wants to steal something, God says, no you cannot do it. The stealing tendency in him remains as it is. He will only live an unfulfilled life. God has to permanently withdraw his free will. Now we accuse God for being cruel. Then we accuse God for not allowing us to have free will.

    Let me tell you that cripple, cancer, humiliation etc come under the category of mild hurting. We take detailed note of our sufferings but take our happy moments for granted. I am a little busy, will continue later

    Like

    1. Dear Yuvasamrat
      Yes you have hit the nail on the head. I do not like the system of God.
      You ask the question God has to withdraw his free will. But by this will attitude change.
      My answer. Shri Yuvasamrat. It’s the opposite. If a thief keeps committing crime successfully or a bullying person achieves a 100% accuracy and humiliating his victims (on a theory 100 births late he will be punished ) Its THEN his attitude will not change.
      If he/she sees a 100% accuracy in being foiled and before he tries is villainous behavior its then he/she ( I believe woman also can be equally evil minded ) will have to change attitude as he/she has realized the futility of adharma. In my child hood days I blame my father for not allowing me to have my free will. I wanted to join merchant navy. But now seeing my poor health and the tough life there I realise he was correct in his preventive measure as I could not have cope up with that tough life.

      Like

      1. Niraj, please reverse your situation. If your father would have desired you to join Merchant navy against your free-will of not joining it, what would have been your situation today? Then you might have been complaining against your father that he did not allow your free-will which was better for you. Right? This is our situation in front of God. First of all we do not understand what he is asking us to do. When we try to understand with our materialistic limited faculties we interprate HIS WISHES according to our convenience and ultimately these interpretations become our demands to him. If they are met we believe in him or else he is either non-existent or not GOOD father…..We may call him Father but would not listen to him or his wish rather we talk according to our wants, desires and wishlist. If the same father does not heed to our demands we are eveready with charges against him:) So the begining point should be to understand his wishlist before commenting on his non-competence or ineffectiveness. Anyway – “Baap phir bhi Baap hota, beta us se sirf binti kar sakta hai use character certificate nahin de sakta”

        Like

        1. God is not asking us to do anything. Things which does not exist don’t ask. A concept is created to control primitives minds and its still working, that is power of ideas. People will keep fighting over there imaginary friend and keep killing others. Its a deep rooted disease which can co-exist even in highly intellectual people due to childhood in-doctrine.

          Like

          1. Religion or concept of God is nothing but mind control. Religion is just trying to control your mind, control your thoughts, so they’re gonna tell you some things you shouldn’t say because they’re…sins. And besides telling you things you shouldn’t say, religion is gonna suggest some things that you ought to be saying; “Here’s something you ought to say first thing when you wake up in the morning; here’s something you ought to say just before you go to sleep at night; here’s something we always say on the third Wednesday in April after the first full moon in spring at 4 o’clock when the bells ring.” Religion is always suggesting things you ought to be saying.

            Like

            1. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time… But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. – Carlin

              Like

              1. Pray for anything you want. Pray for anything, but what about the Divine Plan?
                Remember that? The Divine Plan. Long time ago, God made a Divine Plan. Gave it a lot of thought, decided it was a good plan, put it into practice. And for billions and billions of years, the Divine Plan has been doing just fine. Now, you come along, and pray for something. Well suppose the thing you want isn’t in God’s Divine Plan? What do you want Him to do? Change His plan? Just for you? Doesn’t it seem a little arrogant? It’s a Divine Plan. What’s the use of being God if every run-down shmuck with a two-dollar prayerbook can come along and change Your Plan?
                And here’s something else, another problem you might have: Suppose your prayers aren’t answered. What do you say? “Well, it’s God’s will.” “Thy Will Be Done.” Fine, but if it’s God’s will, and He’s going to do what He wants to anyway, why bother praying in the first place? Seems like a big waste of time to me! Couldn’t you just skip the praying part and go right to His Will? It’s all very confusing. – Carlin

                Like

              2. Another myth about God that he is INVISIBLE MAN LIVING IN THE SKY. If God needs to observe us the best place would be inside us where he can track each move of ours through our thoughts, words and actions and not from sky (don’t you think it is going to trouble him to keep such eyesight intact for endless time?)
                Carlin’s statement – “And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time… But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more.”My response – He is not dictating you like kids with do’s and don’ts but he gave you heart, mind, body and soul to decide good for yourself. Now how each one of us decides our priorities is our problem and not his. If somebody says that he is intimidating you with fires of hell he is also rewarding you with temptations of heavens for good deeds. HE does not need money. Why does he need money for shopping ? for going out? for booz? who developed the concept of money? God r humans? It is humans who want money in his name

                Like

                1. The religion which is asking money is the “organised religion”with branding which we see across spectrum of world cultures. If you follow them you are on God’s path or else you conduct blasphemy. These ORs assure you that the higher amount of donations or charities you give to these holy organisations God will treat you better and would provide special privleges. As if they do not have God but personal Valet service. And interestingly each one of these ORs have been asked by the God to do these things differently!

                  Like

                2. Concept of God is created only by God, its came into existence because of our intelligence, our quest to understand reasons behind natural phenomena like death/birth/natural distastes/sun and so on. So finding answers to these question was not an easy task and as we always things that if something is there then someone must have created it so slowly concept of God came into existence. Property like omnipresent/omniscience and so on evolved. When someone asked who created God it leaded us to another property of God which is Ajanma or unborn, eternal and so on. As humans created money for convenience we are the one who created God

                  don’t you think it is going to trouble him to keep such eyesight intact for endless time? Are you doubting power of your God?

                  As I already said concept of God is evolving one. People will keep it changing as per there convenience. Someone will point something and concept will change. So everyone have different views on God. And why God want to track us if he is omnipresent/omniscience he already knows past/present and future. He is all powerful all knowing. May be you have changed definition of God to suit your needs. But it will not make it true.

                  Its humans who created God so I know they are the only one who want money from delusional people. There are the only one who tells you that you need to pray, you need to fast on these days and so on.

                  Good deeds need to be done because thats humanity not for the sake of heaven.

                  Like

                  1. Dhruv, you are confusing me now. What do yo mean by “Concept of God is created only by God?”Are you accepting the existence of God? Please clarify.
                    You said – “Are you doubting power of your God?”It was a PJ on my part though I was trying to tell you in purely physical terms that it is better to be close than being in the sky to know what we are doing.
                    Your statement – “And why God want to track us if he is omnipresent/omniscience he already knows past/present and future. He is all powerful all knowing.”My submission – It was a response to your use of words “invisible man in the sky.”
                    Your statement-“May be you have changed definition of God to suit your needs. But it will not make it true. “My surprised response – When did I define God forget about my likes and dislikes? I am no one to define him.
                    Your statement-“Its humans who created God so I know they are the only one who want money from delusional people. There are the only one who tells you that you need to pray, you need to fast on these days and so on.”My response- you are repeating my expression of OR.
                    Your statement- “”Good deeds need to be done because thats humanity not for the sake of heaven”My suggestion- why don’t you leave good deeds to chances because that is how the world came into creation according to you? Let the chances decide how humanity has to be measured? Till then you are most welcome to forget heaven and hell.

                    Like

            2. Your statement – “Religion or concept of God is nothing but mind control”. My response – First of all let us not use the word “concept” for God as concepts are created and devloped by humans. Secondly, please refer one of my earlier posts where I mentioned that religion is the way of life and not God or its doctrines. For God and its discussion, the correct word would be “spirituality”or science of spirituality. So whatever religion is asking you to do is part of lifestyle one is leading under given circumstances.
              Your statement – “Religion is just trying to control your mind, control your thoughts, so they’re gonna tell you some things you shouldn’t say because they’re…sins. And besides telling you things you shouldn’t say, religion is gonna suggest some things that you ought to be saying; “Here’s something you ought to say first thing when you wake up in the morning; here’s something you ought to say just before you go to sleep at night; here’s something we always say on the third Wednesday in April after the first full moon in spring at 4 o’clock when the bells ring.” Religion is always suggesting things you ought to be saying.” My response – “In the era of modern science we have better techniques to CONTROL MINDS so this modern world cannot be fool enough to stick to God for getting controlled. Even if this is not the case why is that minds are still out of control and we see so much chaos and anarchy in our day-to-day life. Another problem whenever we talk of God simultaneously we start talking about dualities and relatives like good and bad, truth and lies, virtues and sins….I insist God is beyond duality. If he becomes part of duality he cannot be in the seat of judgement.

              Like

              1. God is created/developed by humans that why its just a concept. This modern world still have enough number of people who are totally in control by religion and even they are ready to kill for there imaginary God.

                Like

                1. I agree with you – if you are being controlled by RELIGION then you will always be creating/developing “concept of God”so that you can forward your agendas in the name of God. But if you believe in God then you do not need RELIGION. If some people are killing in the name of God, then they surely do not know their God. They seem to be mistaking their desires and minds as God.

                  Like

          2. If we do not hear something for any reason is that the guarantee that nothing is being said to us? May be our ears are incapable, may be we are focusing on something else, may be we do not want to hear it because it does not suit our requirement etc…..Just by saying things does not exist things will not go out of existense. I have never been to Canada that means if I start claiming that it does not exist would somebody who has been to Canada going to support me?

            Again Dhruv, you are right. The concepts might be created to control primitive minds but who decides which mind or thought is primitive. Let me assure you that the only thing which is not primitive in the world is God because it is eternal and never changes with time. Also a disease is a disease it does not discriminate based on one’s intellectuality. The most dreaded disease humanity has witnessed since eternity is the EGO of one’s intellect (Mein sabse jyada samajhdar baaki sab murakh / yeh bewakoof meri baat samjhta hi nahin / Ise khuchch pata nahin bas bole jaa raha hai / mein sab janta hoon).

            Like

            1. So indirectly want to say that you met God inperson? May be indirectly I said something which makes you say thing about EGO. And ego is not a disease. Check 1st what ego means. Ego represents self, it does not say that you are the best or you are the only perfect being. It seems you change definition of words/concept according to your need. And conflicts of views never means they one of the two is more intellect. Faith in God can co-exist with intelligence. And there are 10-20% of scientist in world also believes in God and that does not make the foolish or non-intellect people.

              Canda’s existence is not in doubt and also its existence is not faith based. May be you can start telling this to people and hopefully you will get a good positive response from them. On the other hand existence of God’s is always in doubt and there is no evidence of its existence, whatever is in people’s mind. People who call conflicting thoughts of themselves God’s voice or inner-voice or whatever.

              Like

              1. Please read my post once again and try to get the jest of it and not only the words. You seem to got different message. Let me assure you that you never said anything to rake up the case of EGO. According to you it is “self”but I was talking of “SELF ONLY”which is always superlative in nature. If your intellect is not letting you understand or grasp the other’s point of view then it is a disease. Again I insist that it does not mean that every intellectual is suffering from this disease. I hope that it clarifies what you wanted to understand.
                As far as my example of Canada is concerend, I again request you to read it once again to get the message and not the words alone. Those who believe in the existence of Canada will believe it whether they have been there or not. And if I ask them proof of their belief then I will have to cut sorry figure because my question will be very immature for them. However, for the time being if I keep aside my query about Canada’s existence and instead try to learn from them about what made them have that belief, I may progress on the subject and get their point of view. This will neither affect my intelligence nor it will discard their belief outrightly. Further, inspite of getting to know their point of view I start coming back to my same question about the existence then this might become my disease (EGO) which as intelligent person I should avoid.

                Like

                1. But they will be able to provide you enough evidence for Canada but same dont follow for God. You can understand other’s point of view there opinion but it does not mean you have to agree with it. So you comparison of God & Canada is immature one in my point of view but it make sense to you and I respect your rights to have these kinds of views but that does not mean I need to respect that point of view. I whole heartly respect your right to have different views.

                  Like

                2. If there was any evidence of there was some logical argument provided by you on God I would have understand and even could have changed my point of view. Yes its my intellect which is stopping me to be in agreement with your views. And its not disease its just a conflict of views. Conflicts in views is necessary and thats the key which is reason we progressed so much. It is the spice in our knowledge.

                  Canada is not a belief system its a place. Where belief in God is a faith based belief system. Like children believes in Santa/tooth fairy and many other imaginary beings. But there true believes does not make them real. And yes your question about Canada is very immature one and it will be always immature to compare a place with a faith based belief system.

                  I dont belief in God and also I cant provide proof of its non-existence but existence of God is not required for me to understand this world and also how it came into existence not it is required for doing good. Similarly I also cant provide non-existence of Pink Unicorn living in my basement.

                  Like

                  1. Your statement – “If there was any evidence of there was some logical argument provided by you on God I would have understand and even could have changed my point of view”reminds me of a story. A child complained to his father why is he being sent to school? His father tried to reason with him that by going school he will become knowledgable, responsible and self-sufficient to lead his life when he grows up as many people have been. The child said, “I do not believe you. Show me the evidence!” And you can replace father with anybody you may approve to be suitable in this case. I hope you get the jest only this time. In fact I had already asked you to specify your idea of evidence to which you replied “concrete”. Now I do not understand what is concrete to you? I see the whole creation as evidence which I do not consider as a case of chance as you say. I see everything connected to him whether somebody is accepting it or not.
                    Your statement – “Conflicts in views is necessary and thats the key which is reason we progressed so much.”My point of view is that we made progress because we understood each other rather than kept asking for proofs and naming it “conflict of views”. The conflict needs to have convergence or at least acceptance of thoughts at some point for progress to be made because fixation to one view point will always lead to conflict. Another incident to put across the point – A man saw a donkey and announced it to be tiger. Somebody reminded the difference between the two and reminded him that it was donkey. Even after listening to the view point, the person still insisted “No, it is donkey”. Obviously nothing more could be done. Again I hope you get the jest only. To make progress in this case the person first needs to understand and accpet the difference between donkey and tiger or else this case does not qualify for a discussion anymore..
                    Your statement-“Canada is not a belief system its a place. Where belief in God is a faith based belief system. Like children believes in Santa/tooth fairy and many other imaginary beings. But there true believes does not make them real. And yes your question about Canada is very immature one and it will be always immature to compare a place with a faith based belief system. ” I was compelled to give such an example because you are not understanding the faith but understand the physical aspect of everything. If you are clear with the message I request you to kindly suggest me better example which I could have given. As far as I know you can never measure or give evidence for any “faith” in this world. That is only possible if you have experience on your side but the world will never accept your experience as evidence. This is where our mutual discussion is facing “conflict of views”.
                    One more thing Dhruv, I hope you are moderating this discussion on God and not taking a side on the subject. So far my assessment is that you have formed an opinion and are not looking beyond like any other Blogger. Is that the case?

                    Like

                    1. Yes its what you see but its an evidence for you only.

                      To conclude anything you need to answer all related questions like
                      How god came into existence?
                      Whats the purpose of his existence?
                      Why he created universe?
                      Why he need prayers?
                      What are his attributes?
                      How he affects life on earth?
                      What will happens after death?
                      Are there heaven and hell?
                      And thousands more

                      For you its very easy to start believing in God and you can keep it changing its definition as time passes as people raise questions and so on. It will keep changing, its just a God of gaps. What we dont know you can simply attribute it as act of God but that isn’t evidence of God as sooner or later that question will be answered and then gap will be filled.

                      I know whatever happen we will never able to answer ultimate cause of everything, whether there is a God or not.

                      May be you should check Deism on wikipedia which is more logical then theism. Atleast it makes a bit of sense.

                      And I have my opinions and till now you haven’t said anything which can make me change them.

                      Like

                    2. Dhruv,
                      If you have decided to overlook the logics, analogies, explanations in favour of God then no evidence is either sufficient or required at all. I will request you to come out of your fixations or delusions ( though I am awaiting your reply on this word) as you call it, of outrightly rejecting God and your perception of God as some physical entity.

                      Let me try it the other way round by asking you three questions –
                      1. What is your EVIDENCE that God does not exist?
                      2. Have you ever tried to look / search for God or not?
                      3. Your non-acceptance of God is after the search or before the search of God?

                      Will await your answers…….

                      Like

                    3. Ok so you skipped my questions and in response raised few other questions.

                      I hadn’t overlooked any logic as there wasn’t any. Analogies were also pretty bad i.e. Donkey and God. Neither you have shared any experience of yours which can enlighten me on God nor you have shared others experience for the same. And I humbly reject your request as I am not the one living in delusions. After pondering over this question and giving it a fair amount of time and raising all related questions and answers provided by spiritual text and also looking for those answers from science I concluded that science have given us right and more logical answers. On the other hand spiritual text had lots of flaws in it. But people still believe in those texts and try to find God using that also call them work of God but they also forgot that some text even dont have any clue about our own Earth. If God is not a physical entity then god most probably is an imaginary entity an act of human brain. You believe in it cause it give you hope in bad times or a higher entity to whom you can look upon in bad times. And few things works because of placebo effects.

                      Evidence of does not exists cant be provided for anything. Same you can try for Pink Unicorn or giant teacup wandering in this universe.
                      Yes I have tried and given a good amount of time in quest of God.

                      Hope you have looked about Deism on wikipedia. Also look for pantheism. You 1st need to understand what you believe.

                      Dont fall into God of gaps theory. This simply makes your believes shallow. Like people believed that God created Adam/Eve but evolution theory given us a better and more logical answer. And people changed there definition of God according to that. Bigbang caused people to say who caused Bigbang and so on.

                      But never any good explanation of our universe and ourselves in given by spiritual text.

                      Like

                    4. Your expected reply to my post has actually established the relevance of my analogy where a person was insisting on calling donkey a tiger inspite of the difference being told to him. Again as usual you understood it differently that I was talking of God and donkey!!!!!! My friend Dhruv, I WAS TALKING OF THE PERSON WHO IS HELL BENT ON A CERTAIN THING AND IS NOT GETTING THE RELEVANCE OF INFORMATION HE IS GETTING ON TIGER WHICH IS NOWHERE PHYSICALLY………The intent was to showcase the mindset of the person.
                      Your statement –“Ok so you skipped my questions and in response raised few other questions.” My response – I did not skip your questions but DID NOT ANSWER THEM INTENTIONALLY seeing your perception of my posts. I felt that it is too early for you to grasp these answers. Again it is your awareness level on God that I am talking of and nothing personal.
                      Your statement – “Neither you have shared any experience of yours which can enlighten me on God nor you have shared others experience for the same.”My response – Why do you want to know about my experiences if you do not understand the simple statement that Experience is the key to God? Even if I share any of these personal experiences, what is guarantee that you will understand them, forget about accepting them. When I mentioned about the saints of recent times like Guru Nanak, Kabir, Budha, Jesus etc. that they experienced God, your take was that it was hallucination!!! Their entire life is the evidence of God’s experience and you are not ready to acknowledge it for reasons or logics best known to you. So, I do not know what more to share with you.
                      I am also awaiting your reply on “Delusions” (not what dictionary says but what you mean). I put forward three simple questions to you to again give it a try to get into your mind on the subject.
                      Your statement – “After pondering over this question and giving it a fair amount of time and raising all related questions and answers provided by spiritual text and also looking for those answers from science I concluded that science have given us right and more logical answers. On the other hand spiritual text had lots of flaws in it.”My response -I do not know what have you read in spiritual texts and which spiritual texts you are referring to and what you wanted to read in them which had disappointed you on God? How you decided that they are full of flaws? And flaws in relation to what? Again in your style of logics – there are numerous spiritual texts and I am sure you have not read all of them so your quest on God is actually “Quest of gaps”
                      Your statement – “If God is not a physical entity then god most probably is an imaginary entity an act of human brain. “My response – You are alive with life in you. The life is not physical in nature. Does that mean it is IMAGINARY? If you breathe to live and cannot hold your breath in your hands to prove its physicality, does that mean that it is IMAGINARY? There are lot of scientific conclusions which we come to know through scientific books or texts but we may not have seen them ourselves, does that mean that they do not exist? So anything not being physical may not necessarily be IMAGINARY…..
                      Your statement – “Evidence of does not exists cann’t be provided for anything. Same you can try for Pink Unicorn or giant teacup wandering in this universe.”My response – I made this statement to talk in your language in which you keep asking for evidence for all of my statements. Dhruv, please understand the fact that MY EXPERINCE on God will be evident to me and not to others like you. And that is why it exists for me but NOT FOR YOU. The situation will remain same till you start accepting certain things beyond physical attributes. Let me make it more simple for you – As per science, travel in time is possible but only when you go beyond the realms of three dimensions. Now even if you believe in fourth dimension, what evidence can you give for it till you travel in fourth dimension? Inspite of that it is only YOU who will be privy to that experience and then Sanjay might say “Give me the evidence. I do not believe in your imagination of fourth dimension” To know more about your claims I need to start hearing you out on fourth dimension and then come up with subsequent queries for my satisfaction.
                      Your suggestion – “Hope you have looked about Deism on wikipedia. Also look for pantheism. You 1st need to understand what you believe. “My response – Thanks for info. Although I am very clear on the subject and would not like to be influenced by your suggested source, I will still try to go through them. But it is better that I refrain from discussing these because I do not want to get into arguments based on some philosophy (The names appear to me as some schools of philosophy) which is again not the way you should see God.
                      Your statement – “Don’t fall into God of gaps theory. This simply makes your believes shallow.”My response – I will reciprocate with same suggestion for you. God of gaps is for you because you are missing many links due to your limited approach on understanding God. There is NO God of gaps for me because I look at the wholeness of God and not parts like you are stuck on physical aspect. Please do not do that and expand your horizons beyond it. I know it is difficult but not impossible.
                      Your statement – “Like people believed that God created Adam/Eve but evolution theory given us a better and more logical answer.”My response – May be you are right, may be you are not. How can you say that Adam/Eve were never there? May be much before development of evolution theory, the traces or footprints of Adam/eve’s existence were wiped out (I am exploring the logical possibilities). Primarily, our science relies on physical proofs, what if they were wiped out and our science missed some crucial links. Won’t, in that case, our science be a “Science of Gaps?“
                      Your statement – “But never any good explanation of our universe and ourselves in given by spiritual text”My response – I do not know which one you read. Even if it is not there, what is the problem? I mean did you want to read geography or physics or astronomy in spiritual texts or spirituality? Just look at yourself how we are trying to expect things from spiritual texts as per our requirements. The best way should have been – I should read spiritual texts to know what is spirituality, what is God, how can I see him, meet him or realise him? Where do I stand in relation to God, how am I related to him etc….Our approach on God has always been very skewed and that is why the result is always scattered because of different intentions of the seekers.
                      I think this is the longest post I have submitted so far and sincerely hope that it serves its purpose or else I will regret wasting everybody’s valuable time.

                      Like

                    5. Your expected reply to my post has actually established the relevance of my analogy where a person was insisting on calling donkey a tiger inspite of the difference being told to him. Again as usual you understood it differently that I was talking of God and donkey!!!!!! My friend Dhruv, I WAS TALKING OF THE PERSON WHO IS HELL BENT ON A CERTAIN THING AND IS NOT GETTING THE RELEVANCE OF INFORMATION HE IS GETTING ON TIGER WHICH IS NOWHERE PHYSICALLY………The intent was to showcase the mindset of the person.

                    6. Capslock here dont make your point or analogy valid or stronger. I know you were talking about how if someone start saying that this is a Tiger which is in reality is Donkey. But this is not a valid analogy.
                    7. Your statement –“Ok so you skipped my questions and in response raised few other questions.” My response – I did not skip your questions but DID NOT ANSWER THEM INTENTIONALLY seeing your perception of my posts. I felt that it is too early for you to grasp these answers. Again it is your awareness level on God that I am talking of and nothing personal.

                    8. My awareness level is more then you, I am open and will always consider a logical explanation of God and any other related idea but you are stubborn and even dont want to look for certain definition on wikipedia as it can influence you or I can say that it can open you for a different view towards things from which you are running.
                    9. Your statement – “Neither you have shared any experience of yours which can enlighten me on God nor you have shared others experience for the same.”My response – Why do you want to know about my experiences if you do not understand the simple statement that Experience is the key to God? Even if I share any of these personal experiences, what is guarantee that you will understand them, forget about accepting them. When I mentioned about the saints of recent times like Guru Nanak, Kabir, Budha, Jesus etc. that they experienced God, your take was that it was hallucination!!! Their entire life is the evidence of God’s experience and you are not ready to acknowledge it for reasons or logics best known to you. So, I do not know what more to share with you.
                      I am also awaiting your reply on “Delusions” (not what dictionary says but what you mean). I put forward three simple questions to you to again give it a try to get into your mind on the subject.

                    10. I will understand them but my understanding of them could be different then yours. And you never mentioned any saints that statement I said for people who say they have seen God or what not.
                    11. Your statement – “After pondering over this question and giving it a fair amount of time and raising all related questions and answers provided by spiritual text and also looking for those answers from science I concluded that science have given us right and more logical answers. On the other hand spiritual text had lots of flaws in it.”My response -I do not know what have you read in spiritual texts and which spiritual texts you are referring to and what you wanted to read in them which had disappointed you on God? How you decided that they are full of flaws? And flaws in relation to what? Again in your style of logics – there are numerous spiritual texts and I am sure you have not read all of them so your quest on God is actually “Quest of gaps”

                    12. Yes I havent red all of them but there are very long list of known flaws with almost all spiritual texts. And I can also assume that you also havent red all of spiritual text and whatever you have you just selected pieces whichever you like.
                    13. Your statement – “If God is not a physical entity then god most probably is an imaginary entity an act of human brain. “My response – You are alive with life in you. The life is not physical in nature. Does that mean it is IMAGINARY? If you breathe to live and cannot hold your breath in your hands to prove its physicality, does that mean that it is IMAGINARY? There are lot of scientific conclusions which we come to know through scientific books or texts but we may not have seen them ourselves, does that mean that they do not exist? So anything not being physical may not necessarily be IMAGINARY…..

                    14. Scientific conclusions are based on logic and also there is a way to prove/see it and even if you can disapprove it and people will applaud you. And in science there are lots of hypothesis which are just a theory based on logic and other correlated evidences. But everyone is free to provide better solutions of things in science.
                    15. Your statement – “Evidence of does not exists cann’t be provided for anything. Same you can try for Pink Unicorn or giant teacup wandering in this universe.”My response – I made this statement to talk in your language in which you keep asking for evidence for all of my statements. Dhruv, please understand the fact that MY EXPERINCE on God will be evident to me and not to others like you. And that is why it exists for me but NOT FOR YOU. The situation will remain same till you start accepting certain things beyond physical attributes. Let me make it more simple for you – As per science, travel in time is possible but only when you go beyond the realms of three dimensions. Now even if you believe in fourth dimension, what evidence can you give for it till you travel in fourth dimension? Inspite of that it is only YOU who will be privy to that experience and then Sanjay might say “Give me the evidence. I do not believe in your imagination of fourth dimension” To know more about your claims I need to start hearing you out on fourth dimension and then come up with subsequent queries for my satisfaction.

                    16. For thoese scientific theories you can search on wikipedia you will understand them. And those theories have some logical base on which they are based and still they are hypothesis. Those are still open and no one concluded that this is like that only. If you experiences are only evident for you then please atleast dont try to say to others that God exists because I experienced. Lots of people have experienced UFOs/Ghosts/God and so on and that dont make all of them real.
                    17. Your suggestion – “Hope you have looked about Deism on wikipedia. Also look for pantheism. You 1st need to understand what you believe. “My response – Thanks for info. Although I am very clear on the subject and would not like to be influenced by your suggested source, I will still try to go through them. But it is better that I refrain from discussing these because I do not want to get into arguments based on some philosophy (The names appear to me as some schools of philosophy) which is again not the way you should see God.

                    18. Yes you are free to read according to your likes. But if you really want to understand things better you need to look at things from all direction.
                    19. Your statement – “Don’t fall into God of gaps theory. This simply makes your believes shallow.”My response – I will reciprocate with same suggestion for you. God of gaps is for you because you are missing many links due to your limited approach on understanding God. There is NO God of gaps for me because I look at the wholeness of God and not parts like you are stuck on physical aspect. Please do not do that and expand your horizons beyond it. I know it is difficult but not impossible.

                    20. Yes you are free to look at this world according to you.
                    21. Your statement – “Like people believed that God created Adam/Eve but evolution theory given us a better and more logical answer.”My response – May be you are right, may be you are not. How can you say that Adam/Eve were never there? May be much before development of evolution theory, the traces or footprints of Adam/eve’s existence were wiped out (I am exploring the logical possibilities). Primarily, our science relies on physical proofs, what if they were wiped out and our science missed some crucial links. Won’t, in that case, our science be a “Science of Gaps?“

                    22. We are able to trackback to creation of Earth. It just you are trying to save your God with these arguments. And most of the people do that so thats fine.
                    23. Your statement – “But never any good explanation of our universe and ourselves in given by spiritual text”My response – I do not know which one you read. Even if it is not there, what is the problem? I mean did you want to read geography or physics or astronomy in spiritual texts or spirituality? Just look at yourself how we are trying to expect things from spiritual texts as per our requirements. The best way should have been – I should read spiritual texts to know what is spirituality, what is God, how can I see him, meet him or realise him? Where do I stand in relation to God, how am I related to him etc….Our approach on God has always been very skewed and that is why the result is always scattered because of different intentions of the seekers.
                      I think this is the longest post I have submitted so far and sincerely hope that it serves its purpose or else I will regret wasting everybody’s valuable time.

                    24. If in same text they are talking about those things and they wrong then how to believe those same texts for more complex question and its answer. Its not me who written those things in same book. Its not my expectation its what they have written.
                    25. ============
                      You are free to believe in anything you want. But hope you will also try to look at things with different view rather than God’s will or God’s act. Because that different view is the reason of our progress. May be you are right. But I dont have any godly experiences like you, also I dont see any reason for God’s existence. This world make sense to me without any super power. I could be wrong but I am satisfied with my answers.

                      Like

                    26. Your statement – “Capslock here dont make your point or analogy valid or stronger. I know you were talking about how if someone start saying that this is a Tiger which is in reality is Donkey. But this is not a valid analogy.”
                      My response – It is status quo for you after claiming to know what I was talking of……Great!
                      Your statement – “My awareness level is more then you, I am open and will always consider a logical explanation of God and any other related idea but you are stubborn and even dont want to look for certain definition on wikipedia as it can influence you or I can say that it can open you for a different view towards things from which you are running.”
                      My response – I will be very glad if you become more aware on the subject because it is your right to know God like all human beings. Why should you have wrong perception of God when you can have the right one?
                      Please go through all of my posts once again and you will find that I had agreed with many of your statements and thoughts but you had agreed to none instead you always insisted on something we were not talking of. So I do not think it is me who is being closed and stubborn. Whatever stubbornness you observed at my end is actually inspired by you. Anyhow I have downloaded your source of information also and would be going through them for your satisfaction. Indirectly you want me to discuss the bigger issue based on these sources only. Okay I will do that also. However, Wikipedia is not considered the reliable source of information as per my professional experience but it may be the best when nothing is available.
                      Your statement – “I will understand them but my understanding of them could be different then yours. And you never mentioned any saints that statement I said for people who say they have seen God or what not.”
                      My response – “I will understand them (or at least try to)” is a far better approach than “I reject it out rightly”. You are most welcome if you form different views but after understanding the whole thing rather rejecting it even before touching the essence of it. I request you to go through my posts in response to your conclusion that seeing God is hallucination like seeing ghosts, UFOs etc. I, in fact questioned you, if you are covering saints of the world also under this conclusion? Since you did not react to my observation, I had to conclude that you are saying so. Moreover, during same discussion, Yuvasamrat also mentioned that God is not hallucination. YS can correct me if I am wrong.
                      Your statement – “I said for people who say they have seen God or what not” further suggests that if “Saints” see God then it is okay but if People see or experience God then it is hallucination. Is that so? If yes, may I know why you think so? And let me tell you that even saints are born as humans only like you and me but they graduate to saintly persona after knowing and realising God in completeness. They may also start with logical quest on God like you which is not incorrect at all. This also implies that each single human being has equal possibility, opportunity and capability to become Saint irrespective of caste, country, culture, colour, religion, faith or other diversified traits.
                      Your statement – “Yes I havent red all of them but there are very long list of known flaws with almost all spiritual texts. And I can also assume that you also havent red all of spiritual text and whatever you have you just selected pieces whichever you like.”
                      My response – I must compliment you on your honesty. Yes, even I agree that reading all texts in the world is not practically possible for anyone and it includes me as well. You are again right there must be some flaws because they are not in their original forms. Chances are that they might have been manipulated with some objectives. Till middle ages, Europe was living with belief that earth is stationery and sun revolves around it. The people who could use this theory to their advantage would have surely added this to some of the spiritual texts or other influential records of those times to get some benefits. Our problem is that today we cannot pin point how these flaws came into them and also we do not have the original blueprint for many of these texts. So the best way would be to grasp and ponder over the commonalities mentioned about God in all of them rather than getting restricted or getting swayed in our quest for God because of these flaws. As mentioned earlier, our objective of reading these texts should be the quest of God and if we find flaw in the shape of the earth, it should not bother us because that was never our objective. Let me also share with you I do not read spiritual texts in the real sense but whatever I get from them in the quest of God I compare it with my experience. For me that forms the real logic which can be substantiated with live experience of oneself and not the other way round.
                      Also why are you saying “whatever you have you just selected pieces whichever you like?” I think that is too conclusive and opinionated statement because you neither know whether I have read something or not nor have I quoted any of the texts in my posts so far. On second thoughts, I liked everything which strengthens my perception of God based on my experience. You may call that as my likings….
                      Your statement – “Scientific conclusions are based on logic and also there is a way to prove/see it and even if you can disapprove it and people will applaud you. And in science there are lots of hypothesis which are just a theory based on logic and other correlated evidences. But everyone is free to provide better solutions of things in science.”
                      My response – First of all, let me put on records that I am neither against science nor do I discard or reject its importance. But I do not treat science as the end of all reasoning. My view of science is that it is always evolving but fickle in nature. As we keep discovering new theories, researches, thesis, laws science keeps changing its inferences and keeps throwing new findings. In comparison Spiritualism is as it is since eternity and will remain so because it is the Reason for all reasoning whether we are able to comprehend it or not. To put it simply God is the Reason for all reasonings and Science is one of his most powerful and effective faculties in our creation which we are using to our advantage.
                      Your statement – “For thoese scientific theories you can search on wikipedia you will understand them. And those theories have some logical base on which they are based and still they are hypothesis. Those are still open and no one concluded that this is like that only. If you experiences are only evident for you then please atleast dont try to say to others that God exists because I experienced. Lots of people have experienced UFOs/Ghosts/God and so on and that dont make all of them real.”
                      My response – Why do think that only science does experiments or has logics? Spiritualism is the science of highest degree and if you are not exposed to its findings, it does not mean that it does not have its own logics and theories. The other people who have experienced this science apart from me will vouch for them. I can accept that you were not fortunate enough to meet any one of them so far but that no way proves that it is not there at all. Once you meet any such person he will also say what I am saying about God. What is UFO – Unidentified Flying Object…..If it is a hallucination why are so many scientists working day and night to put forth various theories on aliens, Extra-terrestrials which might be using UFOs as travel medium to our planet? Please do not tell me that these brains are out there to prove hallucination of UFOs……….Again I will reserve my comments on ghosts because then you will ask for proofs and proofs and proofs of a non-physical entity.
                      Your statement – “Yes you are free to read according to your likes. But if you really want to understand things better you need to look at things from all direction.”
                      My response – As shared with you I will do that.
                      Your statement – “Yes you are free to look at this world according to you.”
                      My response – Well, I did not ask for permission, my friend!
                      Your statement – “We are able to trackback to creation of Earth. It just you are trying to save your God with these arguments. And most of the people do that so thats fine.”
                      My response – I again repeat – you are able to track back with “whatever” physical proofs you got but I am talking about “wiped out” physical evidences which might have given your tracking different results. And this time I have not used caps lock…….
                      Your statement – “If in same text they are talking about those things and they wrong then how to believe those same texts for more complex question and its answer. Its not me who written those things in same book. Its not my expectation its what they have written.”
                      My response – If you read a chapter in a book and there is a flaw in spelling or grammar or some facts, would you discard the entire book without reading it? Again I insist that keep your objective clear in your mind before reading anything. I can understand that it will be difficult for anyone to trust such book but one needs to review the approach also especially if you read the book for some serious stuff. Otherwise there will be no use of a determined mind like yours if you get distracted with flaws. You are finding God as complex question because you are expecting logic everywhere and that too so soon. When your logics are not getting answered on physical plans you assume that it is not there and if it is there it is not simple so let us reject the idea itself. Let me confess I have also undergone this state of mind so nothing strange.
                      ============
                      Your statement –“You are free to believe in anything you want. But hope you will also try to look at things with different view rather than God’s will or God’s act. Because that different view is the reason of our progress. May be you are right. But I dont have any godly experiences like you, also I dont see any reason for God’s existence. This world make sense to me without any super power. I could be wrong but I am satisfied with my answers.”
                      My response – Dhruv, my stand is after going through all different views and that is why my stand does not reject anything. Every view has its significance and importance but has limitation. You see only progressive side of different views but I look at both sides of the coin at every glance. If different views have allowed us some progress it has opened many gates for destructions as well. The two world wars, ethnic clashes, riots, environment issues, global warming etc are few of them.
                      The day you experience God you will see all reasons for his existence till then you can absorb yourself within your satisfied answers and no one is going to bother you on that. Let HIM decide if you should live your life confined to your view points or enlighten you as he has done to so many people through the course of endless time.

                      Like

        1. Although it is upto Niraj to respond to this post but my personal opinion is that GURU is too sacred to be discussed on blogs. It is simply to avoid any ill-feelings during such discussions. Noffence intended, Smartboy!!

          Like

        2. I am 39 years old. My Guru is Paramhansa Yogananda. To some extent Swami Vivekananda.( He is instrumental in my admiration for Karna as I know that no word of Swami Vivekananda is ever wrong)

          Like

              1. Yes, it is for you. Long back, in some blog, I remember your statement in defence of Lakshmana’s act towards Surpanaka that cutting nose and ears is only a metaphor and need not be taken in the literary sense. There you refered to some Guru who I think is not Yogananda or Vivekananda.

                Like

                1. Its possible I may have mentioned Yukteswara the guru of yoganananda. he had said bible is metaphorical and I must have applied the same logic to surpnakha

                  Like

    2. There are zero evidence of existence of God so before going ahead what will god do and so on 1st we need to answer whether there is a god or not. If yes why? How?

      People call that this universe is very complex and designed but if this is designed by someone then that entity must be more complex then whole universe so who created that?

      Also if you really look into universe you can see its not an awesome design if there is a intelligent creator then I atleast expect him to do a better job in designing it.

      Like

      1. Dhruv,
        Your statement – “There are zero evidence of existence of God so before going ahead what will god do and so on 1st we need to answer whether there is a god or not.” My response- Please specify your idea of evidence and their qualification for relevant comments because there are so many but they should qualify your criteria otherwise giving them in this court of law (your blog) will be waste of everybody’s time.
        Your statement – “People call that this universe is very complex and designed but if this is designed by someone then that entity must be more complex then whole universe so who created that?” My response – You are again right this universe is very complex because it is very vast and seems endless. Moreover, we are trying to unravel its design through our limited achievements and our search is yet incomplete. And why do say that the creator of a complex thing is ought to be complex himself? The greatest inventions and discoveries in modern science were made by simple-minded people and assumptions.
        Your statement – “Also if you really look into universe you can see its not an awesome design if there is a intelligent creator then I atleast expect him to do a better job in designing it.
        Again plase specify what betterment Mr dhruv is expecting from the creator of our universe?

        Like

        1. Human mind is most complex thing on this earth, yet you call great scientist simple minded. Only cause of our brain we are rulers of Earth.

          It seems that vast resources of this universe are not utilized. Also human body is poorly designed. Also Sun the giver of light also cause cancer and so on. Its not a design. Its a mere chance we are here. And using our existence as evidence of God is illogical. We are here and universe is like that. God is a concept which is also shrinking. Few hundreds years back people used super-power related answer to most of the natural phenomena, who did it, god did it. But now we know how things are happening. You can check God of gaps on wikipedia to understand it better. Evidence means something which is concrete i.e. more then blind faith.

          Our limited achievements are increasing, the quest for fining answer is on and marvelous people are working on it and I am very greatful to all of these great minds who truly enlighten us and pulled us out of darkness. Its just a matter of time. And as our understanding is increasing God is shrinking. And it will soon be gone.

          There are lots of flaws in religious texts like many says Earth is flat, its only 6000 years old and so on. So if those books are work of God then I think he need to join science class in middle school. And also he can book a space flight to see earth from outer space.

          I can understand soothing feeling you got from concept of God and prayers but its all in your head. Your feelings and emotions are not a proof god. What you felt is also a phenomena of human mind.

          Like

  5. Dear Niraj,

    Here are my answres to your two questions.

    1. Prevention is better than cure but what does prevention mean? Forceful withdrawal of free will. But God wants a stage when you are given an option to commit a sin but you do not do it. If we behave with God in business mode, God has to behave as an accountant. There is another class of people called as liberated souls who are not affected by karma chakra which also i have mentioned. So, God’s affectionate nature goes to them. There, no clearance of accounts, no rules only pure love. There is open chance for all of us to switch to that class whenever we desire. But we cling to karmic class only and force God to behave like an accountant.

    Regarding who committed the first sin, your Swami Vivekananda says that there was no time when creation did not exist. It runs parallel to God without beginning or end. So, the first innocent person does not arise. Putting Swami Vivekananda aside, my logic is that the first innocent person who was betrayed was God Himself. In the satya Yuga, people were grateful towards God but gradually, their attitude changed. So, It is a particular generation which betrayed God by using His resources and not following His commands. So, to purify them, God created a system in which the deceivers of God would be deceived by other men. This is not for revenge but the only possible way to erase their sinful nature.

    2. This is an interesting question. Assume God did not create you. What benefit would you derive? You would just be a non entity. A small student does not like to go to school. But his parents have to provide him education. This is in his own interest. The greatest God certainly created us only to provide bliss. But bliss without purity cannot last long. Hence God first takes the job of purification and when souls attain 100% purity, He awards them with Moksha whereafter there is a continuous stream of bliss. For purifying, God has to behave like an accountant. When a student is preparing for some important esam, father has to provide disciplined environment. He has to put aside his father heart and take some stern decisions like no TV, no friends, etc. But once exam is over and success is achieved, father behaves like a father only with all his love.

    If you are offended by God for creating you, better to follow Buddhist teachings who have Nirvana(termination) as the ultimate goal. If you are hell bent on once again becoming a non entity, that provision also exists.

    Like

    1. All religion believe their God is omniscient and knows everything, including everything that has happened and will happen, as well as every thought your mind creates before you think it. If that’s the case, there is no “free will.”
      They also believe their God is omnipotent, and can do anything. Problem is, if their God can do anything but doesn’t lift a finger to stop all the disasters, massacres and wars that have happened, are happening now and will happen in the future, their God is also a psychopath who enjoys watching our misery.
      However, if the God is not omniscient or omnipotent… well, in that case their God is not a “god” and doesn’t exist.

      Some people choose religion to get over a bad experience in their life such as addiction, or a tragic death. While religion can have positive impacts on people’s lives and can help them in times of need, that does not mean that the ideas behind the religion are true.

      Like

      1. A father knows about his son and guides him. It is up to son whether he obeys his father or gets carried away by his free-will. In either of the case father knows more than his son and is also powerful enough to interfere but would prefer his son to learn from his experience. A powerful father cannot do much if son decides to go by his free-will only and gets himself hurt. He will be a fool if he blames his father for his hurt. Does this mean that father is not knowing, powerful or sadist?

        Like

        1. Mr. Sanjay. If God is compared to a father. Then when a father sees his son going in his childish ignorance towards a hot vessel of boiling hot water of his own free will. by your logic the powerful father guides him but still son goes towards it the powerful father should raise his arms and say I cannot do much if he decides to touch this boiling hot water and get badly burnt. I disclaim all responsibilty

          Like

          1. Assume that if father tries to bring the son away from boiling water, then the child cries and says that unless he is allowed to put his finger in hot water, he will not eat food, etc. What should the father do?

            Like

            1. the fathers behaviour would be better to exert force and impose his will here and making the child do what the father wants rather than giving out a disclaimer after the child suffers like our honourable prime minister Mr. Manmohan Singh which he so effectively does after every national disaster

              Like

              1. Dear Niraj,

                The father is not exerting his force as of now and letting the son learn from his mistakes and still we are complaining that he is indifferent and not merciful. What if he starts exerting HIS FORCE would we, his kids, be tolerant enough to bear with his will?

                Like

                1. Yes letting the son learn from his mistakes is one thing as long as he has overall protective to see that the son is not badly badly hurt in the learning process. Eg My father is teaching me swimming. I make a wrong splash. OK fine he will let me do some hampered waddling around and then come up with smooth swim. So yes he let me learn in the process. But if he sees me drowning even if my ego doesn’t allow me to take help he would care a hood of what I think and what my philosophy is. And will forcibly drag me out of the water. He wont let me drown and say learning process zindabad. So if God has this attutude and in the learning process allows certain suffering that’s OK. But the point is the suffering is immense and an affectionate father wont allow that for his son.

                  Like

                  1. Dear Niraj,

                    I remember in one of your earlier posts you had mentioned that God has helped you many times. May I have the liberty to call those moments of your life as your drowning situations? In my reply to your same post I had mentioned that some people acknowledge this help and some do not. Those who do not, are defying his instructions and if they suffer tomorrow, it cannot be God’s fault. Having said that I am not generalising the statement and saying that if you do not believe in God you will suffer. Rather I am trying to put across the point that we are in habit of commenting on momentery situations we see around us and are usually unaware of the backgrounds of such happenings.This is why we are always sympathising with the sufferer without knowing the status of his karmic accounts. Tell me one more thing – why do you consider the sufferer as the only son of God and not the one who is making him suffer? Would he be having some other father? If NO, then the same affectionate father cannot discriminate between his two sons in the first place and if he does so he cannot do it without any reason. So to understand God please understand his system and modus operandi also which you will find totally unbiased and truly just.

                    Like

    2. Dear Yuvasamrat
      Here are my answers to your answers. You say. Prevention is better than cure but what does prevention mean? – I believe I have given the swimming pool example to prove my point. An affectionate father will indulge in forceful withdrawal of free will to ensure his child is not badly hurt.
      Let me quote you “ God wants a stage “ This suggests dictatorship “its what God wants its clearly he is imposing his opinion on us. Shouldn’t he bother to find out what we want. Or what is good for us and our protection. Affectionate father may want something’s from children but not at the cost of exposing them to immeasurable pain and suffering if they fail the criteria of his “wants “
      “ If we behave with God in business mode, God has to behave as an accountant.” This answer is like a policeman theory. A person like ACP Pradyuman of crappy serial CID Ie god behavior is dependent on our behavior. If you do this I will do this to hit you bad. Instead of an accountant a affectionate father will prevent the child from doing evil foresee him and definitely force his will and also foresee that the child is not too badly hurt. Giving him a minor hurt while monitoring him rather than waiting for the event to take place like a police officer or a balance sheet accountant.
      Furthermore let me quote you “ my logic is that the first innocent person who was betrayed was God Himself. In the satya Yuga, people were grateful towards God but gradually, their attitude changed. So, It is a particular generation which betrayed God by using His resources and not following His commands.
      My answer – Yes if father see his sons ungrateful and not behaving properly definitely he indulges in some action but an affectionate father while administrating action has that lining protective mode that the child is not too badly hurt.
      “ You say so as to as to purify them, God created a system in which the deceivers of God would be deceived by other men. This is not for revenge but the only possible way to erase their sinful nature”
      My answer has sin been erased. It’s a classic case of khaya peeya kuch nahee glass toda baara aana. Instead of punishing after the event effective usage of power to prevent will be more effective in eradicating both sin and suffering.
      You say Assume God did not create you. What benefit would you derive? You would just be a non entity.
      My answer : Explanation in valid. If a person from Afghanistan is brought to USA against his will. The person cannot give counter argument that USA is better than Afghanistan assuming I would have not brought you what would you derive. Wrong is wrong. You say “ A small student does not like to go to school. But his parents have to provide him education. This is in his own interest. My answer Yes but the parent will send him for learning not punishment process. And if the parent knows that harshness is a certainty he/she will try to derive alternate means. You see that eye of protection is always there with the parent and child scenario.
      You quote
      “ The greatest God certainly created us only to provide bliss. But bliss without purity cannot last long. Hence God first takes the job of purification and when souls attain 100% purity, He awards them with Moksha whereafter there is a continuous stream of bliss. For purifying, God has to behave like an accountant. When a student is preparing for some important esam, father has to provide disciplined environment. He has to put aside his father heart and take some stern decisions like no TV, no friends, etc. But once exam is over and success is achieved, father behaves like a father only with all his love.”
      My answer: but at what cost. No tv no friends is alright. But cripplness cancer painful death humiliation, poverty – is this what an affectionate father will do ?
      And lastly to answer your question “If you are offended by God for creating you, better to follow Buddhist teachings who have Nirvana(termination) as the ultimate goal. If you are hell bent on once again becoming a non entity, that provision also exists.”
      My answer : I am not offended by being created. But if I am created without being consulted and brought in some place then it should be to my liking or at least not to my immense dislike

      Like

  6. @ Niraj,

    Dear Niraj,

    Thanks for your humorous posts. I could not explain clearly earlier. Please spare some time

    Shravana kumar was not a devotee of god. True, he was doing exceptional service to his parents but each action gives fruit seperately. He will be given long heaven for this service. Good deeds cannot cancel bad deeds. He was currently undergoing punishment for some previous sin.

    Karma theory is a bit complicated as it is multidimensional. Each of us have Karma account like a bank account and this has two seperate sub sections for good actions and bad actions. Assume these are punya account and papa account. Whenever we do a good work, our punya account is incremented by proportionate value. Whenever we enjoy the fruit of our good work, our punya account is decrimented by the proportionate value. Similarly our papa account is incremented when we do a bad work and decremented when we suffer the fruit of some bad work. Here the proportionate value is predetermined by God. Example, donating a cow gives x units of punya, saving a Brahmana/Guru gives x’ units of punya etc, killing some innocent animal gives y units of papa, betraying a friend gives y’ units of papa etc etc.

    Illustration :- Assume that a person has killed a cow. He has accumulated y units of papa. Now he will be reborn as a cow and will be killed by another person. He will suffer all the pain and agony etc. So, his papa account will be decremented by y units. His account is cleared for this act. Another person has saved a Brahmana(I mean a devotee) from fear by offering protection. His punya account is incremented by x units. Now when he is overwhelmed with fear and in need of protection, someone will protect him and allievate his fears. His punya account is decremented by y units. Again his account is cleared.

    In the first case, the killer of cow is reborn as a cow. Here there are two cases. First, there is a person who has intention to kill a cow. God will direct him to this cow and he will kill the cow. Now this killer will accumulate y units of papa. In the second case, there is no person who has the intention to kill the cow. Here God will pick up some person at random and direct him to kill the cow. This person kills the cow but he will not accumulate any papa as it was not his intention. In Shravan Kumar incident, God directed Dasaratha to kill Shravan Kumar but as Dasaratha had the intention to kill an elephant although he was not much skilled in it, he was affected by sin. When I say God directs us, it does not mean that God will appear and speak with us but we will feel a telling affect onour mind to do something and we will be compelled to do it.

    Another interesting feature is that the accumulated units will accrue interest also. The rate of interest is also predetermined by God. In the case of a person who has saved a Brahmana, he may not be in danger immediately. Until then, his punya account keeps gaining interest.

    While implementing Karma theory, God has reformation perspective also. The intention of God is that we should always be happy which is possible when we are glued to Dharma and do only good deeds. This is possible when our intelligence is refined. So, God gives results of our actions in such a way that they generate positive feelings in us. His act is one of compassion and not one of revenge.

    Coming to your example, your younger brother might have been bullied by you previously. Now God directs him to bully you. So, no sin on his part and no help to you by God as your account needs to be cleared. Assume that you never bullied him previously. Your brother wants to bully you out of his own desire and not directed by God. Now God sees your papa account. If you have previously bullied someone and not suffered its fruit, then God sanctions your brother’s intention and he now bullies you. Your account is cleared and he accumulates papa. Assume that you have never bullied anyone at any time or even if you have bullied someone, if you have already suffered your fruit, then God does not sanction your brother’s intention. Then, howsoever he may try, he will not be able to bully you. Here God has saved you.

    The special case is of the servant of God who has attained moksha. Example Prahlada. He has no accumulated punya or papa. He is already freed. His birth is directed by God only to give message to the society.

    The final conclusion is this. if you have not done any sin, there is no one in all the three worlds including Indra who can harm you. If you have sinned, God will decide a particular time and place for executing the punishment and this time and place is decided in view that punishment produces maximum positive change in you. At this time and place, again no one in the three worlds can protect you.

    Like

    1. Your quote God being the master of the Universe – if he does this the world would definately be a better place to live in

      God has already given the best place. there isn’t anything better.

      Like

    2. Shri Yuvasamrat. The summary of what you are saying comes down to the english proverb as you sow so shall you reap. Yes I am aware of it.
      Your answer let me quote. “ your younger brother might have been bullied by you previously. Now God directs him to bully you. So, no sin on his part and no help to you by God as your account needs to be cleared. Assume that you never bullied him previously. Your brother wants to bully you out of his own desire and not directed by God. Now God sees your papa account. If you have previously bullied someone and not suffered its fruit, then God sanctions your brother’s intention and he now bullies you. Your account is cleared and he accumulates papa. Assume that you have never bullied anyone at any time or even if you have bullied someone, if you have already suffered your fruit, then God does not sanction your brother’s intention. Then, howsoever he may try, he will not be able to bully you. Here God has saved you.” Here I see the words accounts needed to be cleared. So what is God ? He seems to be like an accountant. Such words are used by money lenders who are very particular about accounts. Like the character Sukhilala in the film Mother India. Don’t you think the almighty God should be more like an affectionate parental protective figure rather than an ACP Pradyuman like character ( from stupid serial CID which I recommend not to watch ) What was God doing when I was bullying someone ? Why wasn’t that person saved. Ok fine you may say that he himself had bullied some one before and had papa in his account. Then who was that some one ? was he innocent. He may further bullied someone then who was the first person bullied in this chain of events. And if he was the first person bullied ie no one else was bullied before him hence he was innocent ( since no one was bullied before him he could not have bullied any one ) Why wasn’t he protected and this chicken and egg situation would have been solved. Instead of implementing punishment after the crime has been committed like a police officer Why doesn’t God use the formula prevention is better than cure ?

      Like

      1. Also we must realize that God has created us without our permission. Ie we have been brought into this world without being consulted. Let me explain. If am sleeping then I wake up in an aeroplane which is on its way to Afghanistan ( a place which I don’t want to go ) Its clear I am being brought to a place not to my liking against my will. Don’t you think the airline authorities are answerable to me. They may argue I have paid nothing and the most beautiful air hostesses were attending to me but the bottom line is that I have been brought into a place which is not to my liking against my will. From this point of view my individual character – whether I am a good person or a bad person is non contextual. I may indulge in some bad activities in the plane for which yes I can be punished but the fact of the matter is the I was brought into the plane without my consent. God has brought me in this world – not to my liking without my consent

        Like

        1. And one more thing, before God created you, you do not have any likings being a non entity. It is only after being created that you develop likings. So, no question of God consulting you. If you say you would be happy in some other world, then you can always go there. For every planet, Veda mentions a particular sacrifice. Today, yagnas are not possible but charity can help.

          Like

  7. @ Niraj,

    Although I agree entirely with sanjay in answer to your question, I’ll try to answer it in my own way.

    Those who are strong bully the weak. Assume that those who are weak are given strength. Will they refrain from bullying weaker ones? When Drupada was poor and in need of education, he was very humble in Baradwaja’s asram. After completing it, his pride shifted to his head.

    If a poor person who has his heart firmly engaged in God is tortured by a wicked person, he will certainly receive instant help. Example Prahlada, Ambarisha etc. These people were protected by the Lord.

    But for common people who do not make total surrender, karma theory does its job. A person never suffers unless he has done a crime. That crime may not be a crime in our eyes or perhaps it was performed in last birth and we conclude he is a good person.

    Like

    1. To take Karma theory little further – there are three kinds of Karmas.

      1.Sanchit (accumulated) karmas are like our bank balance account which were done by us and are stored. These are accumulated during all our lives while going through the numerous cycles of birth and deaths. Practically this account is on-going and is the main reason for our various life forms such as plants, insects, birds, animals and humans.

      2. Pralabdh (our luck / destiny) karmas are the repayments of past karmas in present life and are a part of Sanchit Karmas given to us in the form of our present life. They come to us as our happiness or sadness, successes or failures, our surroundings, relations and complete life we live from birth till death

      3. Kriyaman (Freewill) karmas are the ones which we are doing with our will and are not influenced by first two types. However, they become part of the first types after our death and again adds to our already huge karma balance.

      Like

    2. Yuvasamrat. Why didn’t Shravan Kumar get that same help like Prahalada Ambrisha. Was he a character like Drupada ? Ok fine let me give an eg. My father is the head of the family. He sees my younger brother who is stronger than me doing an advanced level misbehavior like beating me up. By your logic let me quote you “Those who are strong bully the weak. Assume that those who are weak are given strength. Will they refrain from bullying weaker ones?” I admit I too have a streak of aggression. But don’t you think my father who is the head of the family would be more impressive in his course of action if he reprimands my brother there and then rather than issuing me a character certificate and coming up with a conclusion that I too would have indulged in such behavior if I was stronger. He may be correct in his conclusion but instead of conclusions actions in preventing disaster is definitely better. God being the master of the Universe – if he does this the world would definately be a better place to live in

      Like

      1. There is a story according to which Dhritrashtra asks Krishan the reason for his lifetime blindness. He pleads that with the help of his spiritual knowledge he could go back to his previous 100 births and did not find any of his Karmas which made him blind in his present life. Krishna, being higher spiritual person, takes him to his 106th birth where one of his evil karma was highlighted. this became the reason for his blindness. So the moral of the story is that law of Karmas is so severe, strict and complex that it ensures the repayment. No matter whether soembody is aware of it or not, whether somebody likes it or not and whether we blame it on God or us.

        Like

  8. There is power who is controlling all the activities of this universe. This power is Ishwar/God. If there is no god, how then everything in this nature functioning in a systematic way according to a plan ? It can’t be mere a coincidence. We can feel this power around us but we can not see it as god is limitless. It is very difficult to know much about Ishwar and his plan through ordinary method. People out of ignorance sometimes give “godhood” and prophet-hood to ordinary humans they admire or who falsely claim that he is god or his prophet.

    Like

    1. As humans we feel that there is a power because for us its very hard to accept that our existence is because of chance and there isn’t any higher goal to achieve from this life like Moksha or heaven or next birth.

      What we have is what we have why and how these question will take thousands of years to get answers but this is not a proof of a higher power.

      This universe is eternal without it there is no space no time. So universe itself is beginning and itself is an end. As already added that adding God in this just move question of origin to one level up it dont serve any purpose.

      Like

  9. Dear Dhruv,

    The concept of God is not born out of human curiosity. We are accustomed to see only objects that are bound by natural laws and hence we see the concept of God also from the same angle. But God is not a part of creation, the creation is a part of Him and hence He is not bound by any rules.

    The entire creation that we see is within the framework of time and space. Can we imagine anything that is beyond time and space? That is the limitation of human brain. Our brain itself is within this framework and cannot rise above it by its very nature. So, God who is not only beyond the space and time but is the generator of them remains absolutely unimaginable.

    Science can at best prolong the life by a few years but can it bestow immortality? Even after a billion years?? No chance. The question is how many of us want to die? How many of us want to have misery, poverty, etc? How many of us want to part with our family, friends etc? But can we with all our latest innovations in science avoid any of them?

    I agree with you that experience of ghosts etc could be hallucinations but experience of God is certainly genuine. As Sanjay says, these experiences cannot be precisely described as the language itself falls short of vocabulary to describe them. They have only to be experienced personally.

    Just look at human body and its complex structure and perfect design which makes life possible. Can you call this also just another consequence of evolution?

    And regarding evolution, why does this happen? I mean there has to be some agent to initiate evolution. How is it that cell reactions happen that way only? And where did that first cell come from?

    It is not that physical laws are bent in black holes but due to black holes, we have been able to understand physical laws better, we understood another dimension of them.

    Like

    1. Today only science is reason of good life. Prayers didnt helped anyone but science did. And may be in future science will be make us leave forever but for me it dont make sense. Death itself gives meaning to life. So I don’t want this to happen. Things take time but they are achievable in few thousands years.

      I will suggest you below book for your design argument and all other doubts.

      I http://www.flipkart.com/god-delusion-1st-export/p/itmczzfbjxc2y8hq?pid=9780552774291&otracker=from-search&srno=t_1&q=God+of+delusion&ref=5ccd2c5b-67e2-4318-8415-65b3f7ddeb39

      ===
      And regarding evolution, why does this happen? I mean there has to be some agent to initiate evolution. How is it that cell reactions happen that way only? And where did that first cell come from?
      ====
      How god happened? Who initiated that? And how god came in that way only? Same can be said about God. 1st cell came into existence after a long complex chemical process which lasted millions of years. So calling that act of God will not justify effort put by nature in this.

      Physical laws are well understood and black holes just show power of one of great force of nature called gravitation. And those laws dont bent so sorry for my last comment. Laws remain intact just one force take over others.

      Like

      1. Dhruv,

        Your statement – “Today only science is reason of good ………thousand years.”
        My point of view – everybody has his own definition of good life so whether he is able to lead good life through science or something else is very individual assessment. We cannot generalise it. Even a drug addict is living good life according him but do we or science ever say that? No. Similarly, there are many poor or disabled people who may blame medical science of not giving them fair opportunity or tretament inspite of all its achievments. Does that make the science poorer or incompetent? Again NO. Same logic applies to God or prayers. There are people who benifitted from prayers and they do have their faith in God. I sincerly hope that your expectation of science to make us live (Leave in your statement) forever comes true but I know this will never happen because it is against teh law of your own trusted science that living things keep on evolving and changing since they are made of chemicals which are constantly undergoing one reaction or teh other and is bound to diminsh with time. Forget about humans even the chemical reactions in sun has a life because over a period of time, the chemicals in the solar reactions will get exhausted.

        Like

        1. Your next query – “And regarding evolution, why does this happen? I mean there has to be some agent to initiate evolution. How is it that cell reactions happen that way only? And where did that first cell come from?”
          My point of view – “So you have few curiosities whether that leads you to God or not will be seen later!!! The curiosity can lead you either to science or spirituality for answers. Either or both of them may have some concrete answers. Anything apart from these two faculties will always confuse or mislead you. But I believe that the later has all answers and the former has started its journey in the same quest. The basic difference between the two faculties is that the Science forms its conclusions after experimenting or you may say that its approach is sort of postmortem whereas believe in God or spirituality is the science which has its laws clearly laid out before experiments. For e.g. self-realisation before God realisation. Our problem starts here only when we see ourself as a material entity and not spiritual being.
          Regarding the evolution process, you are right that there has to be an agent to initiate. But I go a step further and claim that the agent not only initiates but remain within the process throughout to ensure that it happens according to the agent’s design.

          Like

          1. Or else, why is that the first cell took millions of years only and not one, two or few hundred of years to come into existence? This implies that it was somehow planned that way only. That means there was a planner even before first cell. Now you may call that planner as some chemical, or cell or whatever but the fact is that IT WAS ALREADY THERE. Now the role of scince in this would be to interprate the entire process and how it happened but not WHY it happened. For that WHY you will have to delve into spiritual science and not material science.

            Like

            1. Or else, why is that the first cell took millions of years only and not one, two or few hundred of years to come into existence? This implies that it was somehow planned that way only. :: Are you kidding or really want to say that? This is weird kind of logic. This is like this so its planned. There is no divine plan. It was result of a long random process.

              Actually I am shocked with your this comment. As there is no why needed for that. It was a random event occurred in this vast universe.

              And before concluding anything whose origin and purpose is unknown 1st you need to understand that same goes for God which is hypocrisy.

              Like

              1. No I am not kidding. Even if I go by your statement” It was result of a long random process”then also there was a process inspite of being random and you will agree that process is never without any objective whether planned or not.
                How can randomness have accuracy of producing human beings who start questioning everything and start even commenting on the creation which was not done by them???? I am not surprised by your shocks because that is very natural if you have alienated yourself from the creation and the creator. The problem with such thoughts is that it is the product of your mind and material experiences. The other problem is that it is assumed and taken for granted that God has originated from something else. Although it has been insisted time and again that God in itself is the origin of all creations. Anything which we have not seen or understand we tend to find it wierd or non-existence.

                Like

          2. There isn’t any design. And also there isn’t a point in discussing it any more.
            Universe is there who created it?
            God is there who created it?
            Both are same questions. Just adding God in this is not solving any purpose.

            Like

            1. Well if there is no point in discussing it then this blog becomes obsolete…….
              It is your thought which is insisting on creating the chain of creations and pushing you go beyond God as well. The creation and the creator are two different entities but there is always the existence of creator in its creation. For e.g. every creative artist has his signature style in his creation and the creation is never complete without his signature (I hope you get the right meaning of signature).We being part of the creation are trying to seek the origin of the creator who created us.

              Like

        2. Prayers do nothing. Most of the times things just happens. May be you prayed for it, may be not. It will not change the outcome. You need to put effort to achieve things. I am not expecting that science will work for prolonged life. 60-70 years of life is a good life to achieve and understand this world.

          And my English is a bit poor so sometimes it happened. And forever does not mean that science will make us live beyond time. Few hundreds years of live is going to be too much so why anyone on this earth will want to live forever?

          Hope with prayer you will help someone without limbs to help him get cured. Effect of prayers and God both are your delusions.

          Like

          1. Yes you are right that things happen whether you pray for them or not. Pilgrims who went to Kedarnath might have also prayed or not prayed but the catastrophe happened. I also accept your views that the outcome will not change. But my reason of accepting it is the law of Karmas which clearly expects you to put your best efforts and not become a non-doer.
            Even if you desire the life beyond 60-70, it will not change the outcome because it will be decided by The creator and not you or me.
            You have good command on your English. I mentioned “Leave”to ensure that I have understood it correctly or not. Apologies if you took it in different sense, I did mean it.
            One thing more I want to know the menaing of “delusions”.

            Like

  10. Sanjay,

    How can you say that medicinal science cannot defy death? There are lots of cases I say in millions where medicinal science defied death. Without that many would have died earlier.

    Like

    1. “Science has not given immortality to anyone till now” – this is what I meant. People die everyday and will keep dying everyday – this is the law of death which I was talking of. This law is unchanged so far and medicines cannot change this. Somebody may die early somebody late but everybody dies.

      Like

      1. Sanjay. I worship God and in my personal life have seen how he has got me out of impossible and difficult situations But there are questions which need answers.
        One Powerful country attacks and enslaves people of weak country
        Strong man bullies and ridicules weak man for sadistic pleasure
        USA drops atom bomb on Hiroshima
        Why doesn’t God intervene and say hello bhai main hoon upar

        Like

        1. Dear Niraj, everybody goes through the experience of god’s help sometime in life. Some realise and acknowledge this and some do not.
          Your questions are very valid, natural and universal. May be this is the human curiosity Dhruv has been talking about. The only answer I can give you is that it is all due to Karmic law which is very deep and complex. For average human it is very difficult to understand. But for every action of ours there is a result and repay (scientifically – for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction). This repay may be good or bad. This good or bad is our sukh or dukh. You can estimate the number of karmas in our lifetime we do by thinking, talking and doing. Multiply this by the number of births we undergo (if we believe in another birth after death theory), the balance account of our karmas is unlimited. And repaying them in single life may also not be feasible. So our account is always full with karmas and that is why we continue through the cycles of birth and death life after life.
          Our karmas are also not in isolation but are in relation to other people around us. So Karmically we are related to them. The effect of such relations erupt as not only variety, injustice and wrong-doings to many but also in unlimited happiness, pleasures and prosperity for others. Since we look at parts of creation only and that too for very little time (our lifespan) we get an impression that this is wrong.
          I like your last line ” Why doesn’t God intervene and say hello bhai main hoon upar”. But how many of us has teh time and ears to hear hime out even if he says so? We are so busy in this material creation that we are lost in hearing him out inspite of him saying so since eternity…..

          Like

          1. Its better you share your experience with god. As most of the experience are just delusions of mind which dont have any relation to God. So please share your experiences.

            Like

  11. Here I am talking about 1st singular cellular life in lab from chamical that is the crusc of it. All other life is evolution. What do you mean by common law? Even law of physicas are bent within black holes. Will add more soon.

    Like

  12. Dear Dhruv, I agree with YS that you cannot deny the existence of God. The spiritual texts – not only vedas but others as well, have been lost in their originality and purpose during the course of time flow. However, there is one interesting thing Yuva has mentioned that vedas were not created by man…..then who did it? how was it given to mankind? Who gave it? When? Why? so many questions !!!

    Like

    1. How we know that Vedas are not creted by man? And there are lots of flaws in Vedas which points out that it they are not from ultimate creator. Vedas are evolved knowledge which is passed from father to son in many generations and when means of writing were feasible someone like Ved Vyas penned them. So no one gave vedas to humans, they are by product of human knowledge, and answer of why is very simple as our human nature we always pass our knowledge to next generation.

      Like

      1. Dhruv, if you see a dream and wants the world to know about it, what would you do? Either you will tell people or you would write it down for people to know? But can you guarantee the real soul of what you saw? The only thing which is closest to the dream’s explaination is your experience. Right? But it is yours only or could be of somebody else only when he/she has the same dream (experience). Similarly vedas and other scriptures are nothing but the experiences of the people who were successful in experiencing these instructions from a source which never changes with time. Then only we can say that it is flawless. Today you might find flaws in scriptures because either they have been tampered with or you do not believe in them or may be one does not understand the experiences narrated in them.
        Now even if somebody reads your dream experience what you have written, he may offer counter arguements and queries. He may not have experienced it but he would argue as if he is the real experience holder. After a point you would stop make him understand your experience and would wait that he has that experience to understand you. You would keep mum on the subject. This is what god does through humans. The world keeps arguing with saints and other godly people about the proof, address, shape, colour of god because they look at God as some material object which is bound to be seen to be believed. Whereas God is an experience to be understood. Saints are the people who have experienced him and that is why they are in stoic state of mind and do not keep shouting about their experience to everyone except to those who are sincere to have that experience.

        Like

        1. It seems you are comparing dreams with God and dreams can be unrealistic, imaginary and weird so same goes for God so indeed a nice analogy. And before looking for evidence of something you should 1st apply common sense and see whether given concept/theory is feasible/logical or necessary. But concept of God came into existence because of human curiosity to understand the world. As humans we always want to know where we came from, where we are going, what is our purpose. Without God answer of these questions makes humans feel they are not center of things and there isn’t any divine plan for them which don’t give a soothing feel. So adding God gives some pleasant picture of this world which is not real but its like a dream come true.

          And saints who says they experienced God, could able to do so because of nature of human mind. They could be hallucinating due to longer fasting and over-thinking. Even people have experienced UFOs/Ghosts/Aliens and that don’t make there experience true.

          Like

          1. Dhruv, I do not think that you have the right to tell me how to apply my common sense. I found this comment little personal. Though I did not mean what you have understood and I do not know why, I will try to catch up with your uni-dimensional approach on the subject. Please replace the concept of dream with any of your emotions or feelings or thought. This was to highlight the importance of EXPERIENCE and not to compare god with dreams:( As you may agree that there is no better knowledge than experience.

            Your statement – ” And saints who says they experienced God, could able to do so because of nature of human mind.”. I think you are saying that all saints of the world like Guru Nanak, Kabir, Prophet Mohammad, Jesus….were the victims of hallucination?????? I hope my understanding is dot on point this time though I wish to be proved wrong!!!

            Dhruv, the concept of god is not understood with arguing on plain words or having closed mind. I will try to be more simple next time for you to get my point or else you will think China and I would be talking Japan:)

            Like

    2. Many spiritual texts even says that earth is flat so for them its game over. And also there are lots of flaws so all of them are human created with there knowledge what they had at that time.

      Like

      1. Here you are right, Dhruv. Anything created by man is prone to flaws and is destined to change. So the first thing about God is that IT never changes. And that is why you may adress HIM as TRUTH (Sach) because it never changes with time.

        Could you please give more details on the background to this statement – “Many spiritual texts even says that earth is flat so for them its game over?” I missed the context in it.

        Like

  13. Dear Dhruv,

    It is good that you want to be rational.

    As Swami Vivekananda says, God may forgive an atheist who having exercised the faculties given to him comes to the conclusion that God does not exist but God never forgives a person who totally neglects the faculties(reasoning) and blindly believes any theory.

    If we believe a theory blindly(without being convinced), sooner or later, we have to part with it. It is therefore important that our conscience is intellectually satisfied.

    I also agree with you that most of the religious theories are hallow but your conclusion that god does not exist is very dangerous as you miss an eternal infinite ever increasing ocean of love and bliss.

    As regards world religions, there are two types of religions(dharmas). One is Sanatana Dharma(eternal Vedic religion) and the other is apat Dharma(that which is introduced to meet the religious needs of a particular time/place/race/circumstances).

    Why Veda alone deserves to be called as eternal? The reason is that there is no date for Vedas. Though European scholars struggle to show the origin of Vedas at some 1500 to 20000 BC, Veda is the only scripture that can claim the title Apaurusheya(not the work of any man).

    Another reason is that the sciences mentioned in the Vedas represent culmination of knowledge.

    There are some inconsistencies in Vedas mainly due to three reasons

    1. There are different standards in spiritual education. Vedic statements intended for one class may differ or even oppose those intended for a different class.

    2. Vedas are composed in ancient-most Sanskrit language. So, over the course of time, the sense of some words changes. So, there are several interpretations for many verses.

    3. More than 90 % of Vedic texts are lost and hence we may not get the total picture that Vedas intended to present from just the available texts.

    Any way, coming to the topic, Veda is the only text that presents the science of God in the most rational and scientific terms.

    If you are not interested in Veda, try to answer the following questions.

    1. It is our common perception that nothing comes out of nothing. So, how can the universe come out of nothing? If we say that universe itself is eternal, even then, universe should only mean non living things. How can life come out of lifeless?

    2. We see that there are many laws that are obeyed in the universe indicating at a pre-planned creation. In the absence of creator, we should not be seeing any order in the creation. We see a food chain,water cycle,seasons, etc.All that we need like food, water, shade etc are all supplied by the nature. Even for a new born child, God arranged mother’s milk. So, these all are just impossible in a randomly existing universe.

    3. The most important hint is the karma theory. There are a number of cases in this world that prove rebirth. The soul leaving the body at the time of death also has been photographed by the scientists.

    If there is no past birth/rebirth, why is it that people are born differently? With different talents, different riches and different tendencies?

    4. Why is it that every one of us is constantly hankering after happiness with all our works directed towards attaining more and more of it? This is possible only if the natural end result of everyone is same, i.e an infinite reservoir of pleasure, the supreme Brahman.

    5. There is very little freedom for us. we do not want to die, yet we die. we do not want disease, yet we fall sick. We do not want misery,yet we get it. is this possible in a randomly existing universe? It is possible only if there is an all powerful controller.

    Like

    1. Yes it common perception that nothing comes of out of nothing but in chain of finding ultimate creator or ultimate source we will always be left out with one question who created that? i.e. who created Universe or who created God so adding God as answer of creator of Universe doesn’t serve its purpose as we are still left with one Who so adding God just add one more level nothing else. And life came from lifeless things due to chemical reactions and sooner or later we will be able to do so in labs.

      Laws of nature are not an evidence of God, these laws are like this. And life on earth is evolved as per environment, many time life ended due to nature. Life is more or less all about evolution. Milk of mother is also part of that. Nothing related to God. Dont mix emotions with logic.

      Soul living human body is not photographed by scientist but they tried to calculate difference between human body weight before and after death to calculate so call soul but as there are many other species whose total weight is lesser then 21grams. And rebirth/heaven/hell all are human concepts just to give a good feeling that life is not going to end after death. As humans we always want that some part of us should continue even after death. Termination of ourselves is not a good feeling but thats how life goes.

      We all are slaves of our mind, we follow what we think is good for us, will give happiness to us. And this is not same for everyone so with this you can that there isn’t anyone controlling our behavior or thinking. We all have freewill. So there isn’t any godly plan.

      And there is enough freedom for us. And a random universe is a very good answer to randomness of life/death/disease. And we fall sick but prayer never cured us but medicine did. No Prayer ever caused limbs to grow back but science helped them better.

      Like

      1. Your statement – “Yes it…….so in labs”is logical but misses the point that creation is complex. It has creations within creations (from atoms to galaxies), it has time within times (from nano seconds to billions of years), it has spaces withing spaces (from mm to light years) and every kind of lives. I do not know how many these things can be created in labs. Laws of nature may not be an evidence of god but they are an evidence of a common law which is governing all laws. This is again by scientific law of cause and effect which says nothing happens without reasoning and I call that reasoning as god in very simpler form.

        It is too early for me to comment on soul leaving body process but you are right that we are slaves of our minds which keeps us entangled in parts and not the wholeness of creation. That is why our opnions on god keeps ocsillating between overtly-rational or emotional agreements and disagreements and not on spiritual experience. You are further right that there is enough freedom for us but this “enough” is different for each one of us which modern science cannot explain. Medicinal science my cure people but cannot defy death when it is due.

        Like

Say it right

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s