• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

God Exists

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Mr.Nara,
Pl, look at this angle.During pralayam All Chiths,Achiths are embodied with Paramathma as Moolaprgruthi.During Shrushti Paramathma by His Sangalpa Makes Moolapragruthi separated from Him.This is like a Peacock spreads its 'Thogai' out of its body.Eventhough thogai is part of the peacock it is seen as a separate entity at the time of Peacock spreading its Thogai.Similarly Chitth,achiths are separated by Paramathma at the time of Shrusti.This is what Imeant as creation.Hope I have cleared my stand.Pl, point out if I am wrong.
with regards,
t.alwan
 
oam.

my first post here :) ...

afaik, what we call science is a description of how things happen and what contributes to the same.
in short, reasoning and explanation to what happens around us.

All that we humans have been able to do ( with or without science ) - is to change one form of matter into another. eg. when we "build" a house, we actually convert mud , sand , water , metal , etc ... in their raw form into a single structure as we require.
All that happens in the world on its own - is again a change from one form to another. eg. the cycle of water through water cycle or the cycle of plant chemicals through food cycle.

Some thing that has not happened so far - and hence something which science has no idea about - is the real "creation" or "destruction" of matter. Like Newton realized, "Matter can neither be created nor be destroyed" - he just forgot to add a "by humans" in the end ;) ...

a few interesting questions arise now - now if there is no possibility of creating something out of nothing, where did all this matter around us come from to start with ? or where does the space end ? rather, can it end at all ( as there will always be something on the other side of the end line ) ? and so on ...

these are questions which basically cant be answered - forming more of the unanswerable rather than the proclaimed unknown - leading , at the least to an entity which has more powers than what we humans are understood to possess. and irrespective of the questions about such an entity, the entity in itself is what people see in the super power we call as god :).

-n.
 
oam.

my first post here :) ...

afaik, what we call science is a description of how things happen and what contributes to the same.
in short, reasoning and explanation to what happens around us.

All that we humans have been able to do ( with or without science ) - is to change one form of matter into another. eg. when we "build" a house, we actually convert mud , sand , water , metal , etc ... in their raw form into a single structure as we require.
All that happens in the world on its own - is again a change from one form to another. eg. the cycle of water through water cycle or the cycle of plant chemicals through food cycle.

Some thing that has not happened so far - and hence something which science has no idea about - is the real "creation" or "destruction" of matter. Like Newton realized, "Matter can neither be created nor be destroyed" - he just forgot to add a "by humans" in the end ;) ...

a few interesting questions arise now - now if there is no possibility of creating something out of nothing, where did all this matter around us come from to start with ? or where does the space end ? rather, can it end at all ( as there will always be something on the other side of the end line ) ? and so on ...

these are questions which basically cant be answered - forming more of the unanswerable rather than the proclaimed unknown - leading , at the least to an entity which has more powers than what we humans are understood to possess. and irrespective of the questions about such an entity, the entity in itself is what people see in the super power we call as god :).

-n.

"....these are questions which basically cant be answered - forming more of the unanswerable rather than the proclaimed unknown - leading , at the least to an entity which has more powers than what we humans are understood to possess. and irrespective of the questions about such an entity, the entity in itself is what people see in the super power we call as god :)."

Dear N:

Welcome. Nice seeing you here.

As a Naturalist I don't have any problem with that Super Power... but do you think that Super Power expects from people all the prayers, rituals and adoration which is the essence of all the Organized Religions of Abraham and Vedas/Puranas?

Let the Super Power stays there where it is... let's live our lives according to our clean conscience without picking up a fierce fight with anyone who disagrees with us or going after "Eye for an Eye" according to the dictates of Holy BG or some other Holy Books!

Cheers.
 
...Let the Super Power stays there where it is... according to the dictates of Holy BG or some other Holy Books!
Y, super power is explainable, but supernatural power is not.

The Holy BG has been misused so much that it has been cited even to give a digit.

Cheers!
 
"....these are questions which basically cant be answered - forming more of the unanswerable rather than the proclaimed unknown - leading , at the least to an entity which has more powers than what we humans are understood to possess. and irrespective of the questions about such an entity, the entity in itself is what people see in the super power we call as god."

Dear N:
Welcome. Nice seeing you here.
As a Naturalist I don't have any problem with that Super Power...

Yamaka, i was speaking about whether the Super Power exists or not. Irrespective of whether we have problems with it or not, it still exists :).


but do you think that Super Power expects from people all the prayers, rituals and adoration

I am with you here, Nope - the very reason for the acceptance of its existence is our inability to comprehend it - so i do not think that the God is the Grocery Person that we ve made him/her out to be.

which is the essence of all the Organized Religions of Abraham and Vedas/Puranas?

I disagree. If all that we can see in our culture and rituals is just a "blind, repetition of some un known mantras and an expectation that all our needs will get fulfilled on reciting those" , then the mistake is in the way we see it.

The moment you start feeling that "rituals and adoration is the essence of all Vedas and Puranas", you start looking at "a senseless exercise to convince God" as your elders might have taught you.

Just the other day i was watching the Karate Kid and there is one good dialogue in that - "There are No Bad Students; There are only Bad Teachers" :).

Let me put it this way, the rituals and adoration are ways of expressing the intimacy one feels with his/her own God. Performing the Rituals and Adoration does not lead to the care / intimacy ; But the care and intimacy leads to rituals and adoration. A major difference.

Let the Super Power stays there where it is... let's live our lives according to our clean conscience without picking up a fierce fight with anyone who disagrees with us or going after "Eye for an Eye" according to the dictates of Holy BG or some other Holy Books!
Cheers.

:) - I am just expressing my views - and hoping that that is not "picking up a fierce fight".
If i may add, i think you hate the "stupidity of the people who ve misunderstood the Bible / Quran / Gita". And that hate of yours over flows to the Holy Books themselves.
This is like a young kid "hating Maths / Science" because he does not understand it but has to suffer the trouble of living with it.

As i said, "there are no Bad Students; only Bad Teachers". If a person looks at things in a wrong manner, the issue is with the way he/she looks at it - not with the thing itself.

----------

btw, thanks for the welcome Yamaka, it felt good :).

and, i am just expressing my views here ; surely not fighting - i seriously hope you dont misunderstand.
 
Is it not possible that the concept of "GOD" and all the diverse definitions, qualifications, attributes imagined of GOD, the dictum that once you "realize" GOD (or understand Iswara), bhakti, prayer, etc., etc., are all fertile imaginations of the human mind and that the "GOD" is nothing but what actuates the "LIFE" in each of the living entities - from the microscopic to the Man?

Is it not possible that this is why some of the saints emphasized the idea of "KADAVUL" (கடவுள்-உள்ளே கடந்து இருப்பவன் ; one who is within you) and that you need not follow any of these intellectual or religious formalities to understand the power which actuates your body, mind and intellect and leaves it at the moment of death?

Is that why, after all of those learned bhaashyas and arguments, Sankara advocates "nididhyaasana" (profound and repeated meditation) as the method to realize the Brahman?

Just some random thoughts, pl.
 
Kadavul was always Kal

Raghy,
The belated response may be surprising to you. Still, God is nothing but faith. The whole Universe must have been created by some super power out of nothing. Otherwise, the word superpower is a fallacy. Like faith in God faith in non existance of God is another faith. This is also a part of Hindu philosophy. Unless somebody questions, answers are not provided. The person remains an atheist so long as he is ignorant. Suppose, let us assume that the universe is not created but existed. The changes take place everymoment in the universe. These changes are called natural by those who believe that there exists no God. What is nature? Why changes should take place in it? Is there answers available to these questions? Even the non believers in God in my opinion could answer these questions. The changes are brought by time. What is time? who created it? The answers to this question would obviously be no idea by the non believers. That being the case, the answer can be provided by believers in God as his creation and by believing in existance of God and having faith in him will remove one's worries from his mind. Sometimes maximum efforts are putforth by human beings still no results could be get. Is there any explanation from non believers? The believers could jus forget believing that either the God thinks that achieving his wish would not be good to him in the long run. Of course, like conservation of energy, the efforts put forth give results in another sphere of life or in another birth insofaras believers in God are concerned. Devotees who love God need not fear him or any one for that matter. The conclusion is atheism and believing in God are two sides of the same coin i.e. community welfare and there is no harm in existance of both faiths in the same person may be at diffferent points of time. Atheists change their faith upon maturity and believers in God become atheists temporarily depending upon the struggle they encounter and the strength to struggle. After a period of time, the struggle brings in maturity and he starts believing in God. Therefore, it is only a question of time that the atheist changes his faith to believing in God. rajaji48



Why Should There Be A GOD, When You Have Free Will and No Fear?

Many of you may know me: I have gone to the top of my house and yelled this question many times!

I have said that Man (some men) created all this Organized Religions and their Gods who just don't exist!

I have said that poojas and prayers are never heard by this (Non-existent) Gods! It's a form of Bribery!!

I have said that there is no Modus Operandi for any God to do anything to the devotees! Because He does not exist.

When Kavinger Kannadasan asked "Kadavul Yaen Kallaanaan?" I answered "He has been a Kall from the Beginning, Kavingarae!"

Gods exist because the Believers are in FEAR and/or are Superstitious, IMO.

Enjoy your Gods!
 
poor people enjoy life betterthan rich people

Yamaka,
Since rich people are exploiting others and desire to live in a lavish style, others are poor. The poor do not have time, energy, intelligence and analytical ability like those who are having all comforts can easily say people are poor because they do not put in the required efforts, are afraid of rich people, etc. But they are happier than the rich people. They go out of their way to help others inspite of themselves having many problems i.e. they are least selfish. In the absence of such people, rich people can not have any comforts. Rich always feel insecure about their status i.e. democleus sword is hanging over their head. Poor have no such inhibitions. Sometimes, poor are unhappy. They, however are not unhappy always. They do live in the present and do enjoy life. Rich people are always worried about tomorrow and furthering in fulfilment of desires. Rich people are mentally weak i.e. they can not even imagine for a moment to lead the life of a poor man even for a day. Rich people have comforts still they feel insecure. Could this be explained by
non believers in the God. If God were created by man, rich people should not feel insecure because they need not be afraid of anybody who is poorer than him. Of course, there are exceptions as every rule has the exception. The exception of tje rule is due to realisation of the truth that whole world is changing and change can not be prevented by any effort but has only to be endured. Normally, such exceptional people are believers in God and would have surrendered to him completely with full faith. rajaji48
"One might say "man invented the concept God". Another might say "man recognized the possibility of God"."

That's fine... but the same man who recognized the possibility of God should not be living in abject poverty, because of the belief that his God "did not give him a good life".

About 70% of the world population lives in abject poverty solely because of this belief in their Gods, and the neglect of their Free Will, smart planning and hard work.

That's a sad reality...
 
"One might say "man invented the concept God". Another might say "man recognized the possibility of God"

- well , let us just say that the Super Power created us Humans but we humans named that Power, as Bhagavan ( or God ) :) ?
 
Hello Rajaji:

My response in bold letters below:

Yamaka,
Since rich people are exploiting others and desire to live in a lavish style, others are poor.

This statement NEED not be correct... It could be true in a few cases, and not ALL cases. Very many rich became rich because of higher skills, better planning and harder work and some luck...IMO.

The poor do not have time, energy, intelligence and analytical ability like those who are having all comforts can easily say people are poor because they do not put in the required efforts, are afraid of rich people, etc.

Maybe... but poor are not afraid of rich people, IMO... many times they hate rich people because of jealousy, perhaps!

But they are happier than the rich people. They go out of their way to help others inspite of themselves having many problems i.e. they are least selfish. In the absence of such people, rich people can not have any comforts. Rich always feel insecure about their status i.e. democleus sword is hanging over their head. Poor have no such inhibitions. Sometimes, poor are unhappy.

This statement NEED not be correct... maybe some poor are happier than the "rich".

They, however are not unhappy always. They do live in the present and do enjoy life. Rich people are always worried about tomorrow and furthering in fulfilment of desires. Rich people are mentally weak i.e. they can not even imagine for a moment to lead the life of a poor man even for a day. Rich people have comforts still they feel insecure.

This statement NEED not be true... perhaps it's all your POV on rich and the poor... a ploy to keep the poor poorer! Lol

Could this be explained by
non believers in the God. If God were created by man, rich people should not feel insecure because they need not be afraid of anybody who is poorer than him. Of course, there are exceptions as every rule has the exception. The exception of tje rule is due to realisation of the truth that whole world is changing and change can not be prevented by any effort but has only to be endured. Normally, such exceptional people are believers in God and would have surrendered to him completely with full faith. rajaji48

My view is the idea of God and the concept of Religions are all FICTION manufactured by some smart people to control, to regulate, and/or to exploit the unsuspecting innocent people.

I don't know whether this view will change till I die... I don't believe in "Poorva Janma Karma" another HOAX played upon the innocent people to exploit them by some smart MEN.

Not all Athiests are rich people... but they have reached their Moksha - the Freedom in this life itself.

Atheism is NOT in the same coin.... Theism is a mental construct of people for the sake of pure TRADITION and/or of FEAR and/or of SUPERSTITION... nothing more.

Atheists simply point out this FACT or the TRUTH or "the DHARMA" and get into trouble with the bloated EGO of the Theists, IMO.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Atheism is NOT in the same coin.... Theism is a mental construct of people for the sake of pure TRADITION and/or of FEAR and/or of SUPERSTITION... nothing more.

Atheists simply point out this FACT or the TRUTH or "the DHARMA" and get into trouble with the bloated EGO of the Theists, IMO.
Cheers.

sorry but ... that looks very rude to me :( ... it might be just me but "bloated egos of theists" looks too personal , whichever way it is looked at.

i prefer not to reply back, now. <eotdwy>
 
...links pasted in skeptics rainbow thread as well
Why? I started this second thread with the hope of keeping it free of polemics. I can only request, the rest is up to the members.

One proof and one evidence why God exists:
Dear narayan, the slide presentations you have posted are quite weak. Except the universal constants, all other issues have been thoroughly discussed in this very thread again and again.

The first video, purporting to provide proof of god's existence, makes two points, (i) watchmaker argument and (ii) universal constants.

The watchmakers argument starts out with the erroneous assumption that evolution is completely random, not so. This watchmaker argument was thoroughly debunked by Richard Dawkins in his book, "The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design". I invite you to read this book.

The universal constants is a better argument, but that too is weak because of what cosmologists and philosophers call the anthropic principle. Given a universe has manifested with a certain set of constants, only life that can flourish and observe that universe can come to exist. There is no definitive evidence to posit a supernatural power, having the life on earth in mind and setting the universal constants dials.

The second video is filled with logical fallacies. Discussing them will have no effect on the theist camp. Also, I have suddenly run into some time constraints. If anybody thinks these videos give definitive proof based on irrefutable evidence, that is fine with me, I wish you well.

Cheers!
 
Why? I started this second thread with the hope of keeping it free of polemics. I can only request, the rest is up to the members.

Dear narayan,

the slide presentations you have posted are quite weak.

The universal constants is a better argument, but that too is weak because of what cosmologists and philosophers call the anthropic principle.

The second video is filled with logical fallacies. Discussing them will have no effect on the theist camp.

who ever did it, its not a good idea, especially in a forum, to post a link/video and expect others to counter it. it can be contained within youtube!

equally, its not again a good idea in a forum , that too after watching the clips, and end up with counter arguments like weak/fallacy etc. even if, one has put some effort and attempted to respond to a video clip/url, then he should also explain in detail why he view certain points as Weak/fallacy instead of out rightly rejecting other persons view. thats what is forum is all about, indeed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
watch maker analogy & richard dawkins.

i should admit, those who had read dawkins, would admire his excellent prose skills & his ability to put over a difficult subject with any reader, seeing it as common sense. to me his writing are a good entertainment, if we dont analyse his points,beyond the boundary of his explanation arena.

he says "if complex things must have been intelligently designed by something more complex than themselves, then anything posited as this complex designer (i.e. God) must also have been designed by something yet more complex"


at the first sight, it definitely appeals to any common reader. but he never further ventured in to explain it though taking the same path where the question had risen from, ie telelogical/cosmological argument (the analogy belongs to the same category) to prove his point, instead he stops his view within his area of knowledge subject.

this is similar to the 'first cause' argument, which any commoner would shoot up with jerk "who created god'. had dawkins ventured little more and discussed further about both the atheist/theist well know historical arguments done byvoltaire/aquinos/averoes/plato/kunt i would have appreciated. sadly, he didnt try that in detail in that book The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design.

again, in his next book, he attempted to answer the need of no-designer through genes/natural selection. i have answered this sometime before, anyways, once this is completed will try that part.
 
hi

God doesn't have a BlackBerry or an iPhone, but He is my favourite contact. He doesn't have Facebook, but He's my friend. He doesn't have Twitter, but I follow Him. He doesn't have Internet, but I am connected to Him. Copy and paste this as your status if you think ? GOD is GREAT


regards
tbs
 
Ok let me shoot the first few Q's to you Raghy,

1)Can we start by defining hardship?Don't you think hardship is subjective?

2) Why are we always measuring hardship with the Material Scale?Do we feel someone is better off to us merely becos he has more money and an easy lifestyle?

3)"Hardship" was your past..why dont you ask yourself why its "easy" for you now? If it was "Why me" for your hardship arent you asking "Why me" for your easier life now?
Have you ever thought that your "hardship" was your destiny to be a role model for others that success does come eventually?


Sowbagyavathy Renuka, Greetings.

I was not ignoring your questions.... But could not answer them soon enough.

1) Hardship is a subjective term. But, in my post #1173 I mentioned hardship with a sense of sarcasm when I was mentioning about 'Bad Karma'. I can't define 'hardship' since it is, as you rightly said, subjective. For example, a mainline drug addict would say, it is hardship if he/she could not support their expensive drug habit.

2). If you read my various posts, you may see, personally I am not measuring 'hardship' on a material scale. My post in #1173 only explained some of the injustices I had to go through. Money and happiness are not quite connected. Happiness is in the mind, not in the wallet. But, having said that, a fat wallet does help in many situations.

3). As I mentioned in #1, I was not quite talking about 'hardship' but about injustices. Fact is, I was enjoying life in all situations. I always found energy to bounce back. Taking everything in consideration, my life was enviable to many others in the same village. But I was not a 'role model' though; There are many others in my village who acheived much more, starting from much deprived situations.. at least, I had enough to eat all the time; there were many who didn't have that luxury, but still built a great life, building from nothing.

You have touched the point I was planning to express in your question #3. If one considered few obvious situations during my youth, may erroneously could say, such situations were due to 'poorva janma karma'... that same person, if he/she notes my life today might say , all this comforts I am having today is due 'my poorva janma punyam'... So, what is the truth? did I have 'poorva janma bad karmas' or 'poorva janma punyams'? in either case, such explanations are not meaningful, because, I can't be punished for some deed I do not even know about; also, i should not be enjoying any benefit for a deed I don't ever remeber performing.

By the way, Sri.Rajaji is not discussing anything after getting me back in this discussion. So, I conclude my discussion with this, please.

Cheers!
 
Chi.Ravi, Greetings.

I refer to your post #1177. Thanks for your expressions in support for me; but my post #1173 was a loaded post. My bad situations were only subjective; I bounced back soon enough. I don't much faith in poorva janma deeds controlling our present Janma. But, I respect your opinions. Thanks for your detailed opinions. (But, I don't really like to get in a discussion or debate).

Cheers!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top