• 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.

Is God Really a Witness Or Is God "Manipulative" Or Is God "Guilty"?

Status
Not open for further replies.

renuka

Well-known member
Is God Really a Witness Or Is God "Manipulative" Or Is God "Guilty"?

Sravna's post on God being perfectly equal triggered a thought in me.

Is God really a witness or is God "manipulative" or is God "Guilty"?

The reason being is one can only be a witness if one had no role in the occurrence of any event.

If one is somehow related to any event one can NOT be a witness at any cost.

Now Brahman is supposed to be both the efficient cause(nimittakarana) and the material cause (upadanakarana) of the Universe.

Above that Brahman also functions with Maya to conceal and delude His creation.

On technical grounds God (Brahman) can NOT be a witness becos He has been involved from Day Zero of everything.

I am using the word Day Zero becos everything is supposed to be Unborn!

Maya is a manipulative tactic to delude the entire mankind.

It seems like an insincere tactic and yet humans are supposed to glorify God.

Imagine if we humans too have such a "mindset" and are manipulative and deluding and then call ourselves a witness..wont that seem like a Master Con job?

But how come such "behavior" is tolerated when it comes to God?


So what is it now?


Is God Really a Witness Or Is God "Manipulative" Or Is God "Guilty"?
 
Last edited:
I think we have taken the word 'God' for granted. We simply use the word 'God' without explaining what God means. If someone asks me whether I believe in God, my first question would be what does s/he mean by God.

Let us complicate this further.

Recently I met a gentleman who introduced himself to me by saying he is well versed in various slokas, mantras and that he meditates regularly and that he balances the chakras regularly. When I humbly asked him whether he has reached Sahasra chakra, he said he is almost there(??) I thought him to be a spiritually knowledgeable person. So I asked him whether he can say who created this world. He immediately answered God. So my next question was where was God situated when he created the world. I could not get a proper response from him as he evaded this question by trying to explain some thing else about creation.

I would be interested in a lucid discussion on this topic.
 
Above that Brahman also functions with Maya to conceal and delude His creation.

According to Vishishtadvaita, the above statement is incorrect. It is not the Brahman that works with Maya to conceal and delude anything, rather it is the individual soul that has the propensity towards any of the 3 gunas that chooses maya to attach with and thus gets deluded accordingly. I have thought deeply and according to me, this is how samsara, though known as 'bottomless' somehow begins. God, who is the 'parabrahman', stays unattached and does not interfere with how and what kind of maya individual soul attaches itself with, but inspite of it, gives a means for reaching himself by providing us all with a religion, he/she being merciful.
 
Sravna's post on God being perfectly equal triggered a thought in me.

Is God really a witness or is God "manipulative" or is God "Guilty"?

The reason being is one can only be a witness if one had no role in the occurrence of any event.

If one is somehow related to any event one can NOT be a witness at any cost.

Now Brahman is supposed to be both the efficient cause(nimittakarana) and the material cause (upadanakarana) of the Universe.

Above that Brahman also functions with Maya to conceal and delude His creation.

On technical grounds God (Brahman) can NOT be a witness becos He has been involved from Day Zero of everything.

I am using the word Day Zero becos everything is supposed to be Unborn!

Maya is a manipulative tactic to delude the entire mankind.

It seems like an insincere tactic and yet humans are supposed to glorify God.

Imagine if we humans too have such a "mindset" and are manipulative and deluding and then call ourselves a witness..wont that seem like a Master Con job?

But how come such "behavior" is tolerated when it comes to God?


So what is it now?


Is God Really a Witness Or Is God "Manipulative" Or Is God "Guilty"?

Smt. Renuka,

As I have attempted to tell earlier also, I believe there is no God outside of yourself; and that God which is within yourself, is everywhere in this world, and probably in this whole jagat itself. Our scriptures contain 'flashes' about the knowledge of this one God, in ever so many places, but primitive human thinking posited external god or gods and it has not been intellectually possible for humanity to come out of this "god & man" dichotomy so far, except in the case of some very intelligent (and lucky) cases who could establish themselves as god-man or god-woman as the case may be. In respect of such cases, their devotees never questioned any of their actions or words, and, it is my opinion that such an unquestioning attitude is caused by the "bhakti" phenomenon which mandates such an attitude. The is also the reason why we don't have any upanishads of philosophical enquiry, after the bhakti phenomenon became the selling face of hinduism; we only have hagiographic upanishads, even an Allopanishad!

God, therefore, is neither the efficient cause, nor the material cause, god is neither manipulative, nor guilty. God is, to put it in simple words.

As I said some time ago, people who can think more in abstraction only will be able to analyze and understand this. For the rest, this world as well as their own selves are solidly real and so a similarly real god is also necessitated. They, naturally, find consolation in stories about a continuity of similar reality after death also.
 
Smt. Renuka,

As I have attempted to tell earlier also, I believe there is no God outside of yourself; and that God which is within yourself, is everywhere in this world, and probably in this whole jagat itself. Our scriptures contain 'flashes' about the knowledge of this one God, in ever so many places, but primitive human thinking posited external god or gods and it has not been intellectually possible for humanity to come out of this "god & man" dichotomy so far, except in the case of some very intelligent (and lucky) cases who could establish themselves as god-man or god-woman as the case may be. In respect of such cases, their devotees never questioned any of their actions or words, and, it is my opinion that such an unquestioning attitude is caused by the "bhakti" phenomenon which mandates such an attitude. The is also the reason why we don't have any upanishads of philosophical enquiry, after the bhakti phenomenon became the selling face of hinduism; we only have hagiographic upanishads, even an Allopanishad!

God, therefore, is neither the efficient cause, nor the material cause, god is neither manipulative, nor guilty. God is, to put it in simple words.

As I said some time ago, people who can think more in abstraction only will be able to analyze and understand this. For the rest, this world as well as their own selves are solidly real and so a similarly real god is also necessitated. They, naturally, find consolation in stories about a continuity of similar reality after death also.

dear Sangom ji,

I was reading the Svetasvatara Upanishad for the 2nd time today and with so much description about the possibilities of Brahman I started to think that some "missing link" is somewhere still not explained yet.

At one moment it seemed as if we spend a lot of time in some state of denial.

Why doesnt someone just say it that "hey guys..God does not really exists as how we have imagined it all these while"

The Upanishads are almost there in trying to make Brahman seem to be the One without a second but even then its still in riddles and not point blank.

I feel a point blank answer is what I am still looking for..I guess that answer has to come from myself??
 
Last edited:
According to Vishishtadvaita, the above statement is incorrect. It is not the Brahman that works with Maya to conceal and delude anything, rather it is the individual soul that has the propensity towards any of the 3 gunas that chooses maya to attach with and thus gets deluded accordingly. I have thought deeply and according to me, this is how samsara, though known as 'bottomless' somehow begins. God, who is the 'parabrahman', stays unattached and does not interfere with how and what kind of maya individual soul attaches itself with, but inspite of it, gives a means for reaching himself by providing us all with a religion, he/she being merciful.

Dear JR,

I might need to read some Vishistadvaita(VA) books..so far somehow VA cant seem to hold my attention becos to a great extent I feel VA sort of discourages analysis.

Most VA text sort of expects us to agree that God is verily Vishnu and it ends there.

Its not that I need evidence for anything..I do not need evidence but I love freedom of thought which I cant seem to find in VA text.

Correct me if you can ..may be you can help me out to understand VA better.
 
Smt. Renuka,

As I have attempted to tell earlier also, I believe there is no God outside of yourself; and that God which is within yourself, is everywhere in this world, and probably in this whole jagat itself. Our scriptures contain 'flashes' about the knowledge of this one God, in ever so many places, but primitive human thinking posited external god or gods and it has not been intellectually possible for humanity to come out of this "god & man" dichotomy so far, except in the case of some very intelligent (and lucky) cases who could establish themselves as god-man or god-woman as the case may be. In respect of such cases, their devotees never questioned any of their actions or words, and, it is my opinion that such an unquestioning attitude is caused by the "bhakti" phenomenon which mandates such an attitude. The is also the reason why we don't have any upanishads of philosophical enquiry, after the bhakti phenomenon became the selling face of hinduism; we only have hagiographic upanishads, even an Allopanishad!

God, therefore, is neither the efficient cause, nor the material cause, god is neither manipulative, nor guilty. God is, to put it in simple words.

As I said some time ago, people who can think more in abstraction only will be able to analyze and understand this. For the rest, this world as well as their own selves are solidly real and so a similarly real god is also necessitated. They, naturally, find consolation in stories about a continuity of similar reality after death also.

Sometime back I attempted to write an article on God. Basically it was about understanding God from a layman's point of view. I produce below a portion of it.

The concise Oxford English dictionary defines ‘God’ as superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature, human features etc. In religions ‘God’ is considered to be the creator, ruler of Universe and the Supreme Being. Let us accept the term ‘God’ in its present usage sense i.e. Supreme Being with supernatural powers, for our discussion in this article.

The idea of ‘God’ probably stems out of basic human instinct and the perceived awareness of ‘Self’, complemented by the nature around us. Initially, awed by the nature, man must have reasoned that some supernatural external forces are controlling him and the nature around him. These supernatural external forces formed the basis of ‘God’ theory. For primitive man the idea of ‘God’ was also primitive one. He worshipped the powerful and mighty. He worshipped nature, animals and also the dead. As human beings got more refined and civilised, the idea of ‘God’ also got more refined. Man perceived ‘God’ to be a person like himself but with supernatural powers, for He was thought to be controlling the universe. ‘God’ was thus personified and bestowed with powers. With the forming of a social structure, man started thinking on the lines of right and wrong. In the process, he also started wondering at the mystery of life and death. He was mystified by the way he dreamt while sleeping and, consequently, he evolved on the theory of Mind. Man’s quest to know more about life and death, and the idea of Mind probably took him on a journey towards ‘knowing’ himself. The search was not external but internal, within him, and this resulted in man encountering a force within him.

Let us see if we can make some sense about ‘God’ out of the following passages.

Life Force:

‘God’ is a state, psychic in nature, to be achieved. This universe, along with its contents, is activated and governed by a natural force which also has the potential to provide for ‘Life force’. Now, one also wonders how this universe was created. Modern science gives the theory of Big Bang, which traces the origin of Universe to an explosion of dense matter. The metaphysics gives the explanation of cosmic cycle which consists of three principles namely manifestation, abeyance and re-emergence. [“It is said that there is no absolute beginning, and nothing entirely new is produced. What existed once in a gross form, goes back to its fine causal condition, and again comes into the former gross condition. There is no creation out of nothing. There is an intervening period of inactivity between two gross manifestations. The universe in the process of time dissolves into the elements and finally into the subtle and unmanifested seminal condition”(from ‘Jnana Yoga’ by Swami Vivekananda)].

A layman would not understand both the above theories as a simple question will keep coming up as to ‘where’ all this (meaning big bang or cosmic cycle) takes place and how was this ‘where’ created. Thus, we are looking for answer to how the space where creation took place got created. However, these are only academic as the matter of fact is that ‘creation’ has indeed taken place and we are indeed part of it. I, therefore, feel that it is better to accept the universe and its manifestations as it is for the present and go further with our analysis.

The ‘Life Force’, as said above, is omni-present. All living beings carry this force within. There are many forms of living beings around us namely insects, reptiles, birds, animals (including aquatic vertebrates) and human beings. Of these, only human beings are considered to be of the highest intellectual order. It is now well known to us that while some living beings other than humans actually witness lives of other forms in the lower and higher order, human beings actually see lives only in the lower order. For e.g. a cow sees a dog in the lower order and also witnesses a lion which is of higher order. A cow can easily scare away a dog but, at the same time, is scared of a lion. It is quite possible that a cow must be wondering about the form of lion which is superior in power.

We human beings don’t see any form of life superior to us. Does this mean there is nothing superior to human beings? Absence of proof of existence of something does not necessarily mean it is nonexistent. If we can read the minds of animals, we may be able to know whether the animals are thinking of becoming like human beings. Human beings, with their intellectual ability and curiosity about life, must have sensed a superior life form in their quest and in the process must have perceived the ‘Life Force’ through intellect, intuitive and extrasensory faculties. Now the question hangs whether one may attain supernatural powers by realising this force within.

More thoughts will continue.
 
dear Sangom ji,

I was reading the Svetasvatara Upanishad for the 2nd time today and with so much description about the possibilities of Brahman I started to think that some "missing link" is somewhere still not explained yet.

At one moment it seemed as if we spend a lot of time in some state of denial.

Why doesnt someone just say it that "hey guys..God does not really exists as how we have imagined it all these while"

The Upanishads are almost there in trying to make Brahman seem to be the One without a second but even then its still in riddles and not point blank.

I feel a point blank answer is what I am still looking for..I guess that answer has to come from myself??


Madam Renuka,

Whatever little material I have read is written with the presupposition that God exists. No one has tried to explain how God came to happen. For e.g. we are travelling in a plane. Someone has to create the plane and in turn the creator has to be created. The automatic conclusion of the believers is God created. But no one created God. It, sorry, He simply exists. If God is personified and believed to have created this world (either through Brahma, Vishnu or Shiva) then I have a nagging query that why He has not propagated life through out the universe. If someone goes to Mars and prays to God can s/he survive there?
 
Dear Renuka,

To learn VA, Sri SMS Chari books are recommended by most.

In another site I used to be a very active member of, I have a short write-up on VA. I can PM that if needed.

I have to tell you that your threads are quite interesting. Although I do not see god as guilty or anything, I do find your original thoughts on this OP quite interesting. Even the other day when you posted on Darkness and Light, I enjoyed your OP very much.

Good work! :)

PS: I'm honest about my compliment, not expecting anything in return from you! :)

Also, I would be very interested to read a short OP from you in future, giving your own little narration of Advaita or VA. Since your writing style is good, and you have great amount of intellectual depth in your writing, you may be best suited to write a short little 'bhashyam' (if you will) on such philosophies. Just a thought, pl. ignore if you don't like it!
 
Last edited:
Dear Renuka,

To learn VA, Sri SMS Chari books are recommended by most.

In another site I used to be a very active member of, I have a short write-up on VA. I can PM that if needed.

I have to tell you that your threads are quite interesting. Although I do not see god as guilty or anything, I do find your original thoughts on this OP quite interesting. Even the other day when you posted on Darkness and Light, I enjoyed your OP very much.

Good work! :)

PS: I'm honest about my compliment, not expecting anything in return from you! :)

Also, I would be very interested to read a short OP from you in future, giving your own little narration of Advaita or VA. Since your writing style is good, and you have great amount of intellectual depth in your writing, you may be best suited to write a short little 'bhashyam' (if you will) on such philosophies. Just a thought, pl. ignore if you don't like it!


Dear JR,

Thank you for suggesting some books.

BTW coming to writing..I actually have been asked by my father to write cos my father does write books and is into his 3rd book.

But the strange thing is when ever I attempt to write anything by the time I reach Chapter 3,my understanding and opinion would have changed that I might even disagree with Chapter 1!LOL

Really I am not kidding...then I will abandon it and start a new "book" but again face that same problem.

Then again and again it happens and finally I feel I can never pen my thoughts down in a concrete fixed manner and prefer just random thoughts that shoot across my mind.

Also I feel if I write my thoughts in a fixed manner that amounts to influencing another's mind with my own opinion.

Religion I feel is a personal journey and whatever we read is never going to get us anywhere..therefore I feel the only thing I can write is NOTHING..my book has to be blank.

That is why I prefer just writing random thoughts in Forum and everyone shares their opinions..this way nothing is fixed and concrete and its forgotten after the thread has become in active.
 
dear Sangom ji,

I was reading the Svetasvatara Upanishad for the 2nd time today and with so much description about the possibilities of Brahman I started to think that some "missing link" is somewhere still not explained yet.

At one moment it seemed as if we spend a lot of time in some state of denial.

Why doesnt someone just say it that "hey guys..God does not really exists as how we have imagined it all these while"

The Upanishads are almost there in trying to make Brahman seem to be the One without a second but even then its still in riddles and not point blank.

I feel a point blank answer is what I am still looking for..I guess that answer has to come from myself??

Smt. Renuka,

Reading upanishads may not lead you any further in your quest; that is my sincere view. Each upanishad is the view
arrived at by some one or some group at sometime in the past. We are now here, today and the world is not the same. We may not think in the same way, or on the same lines, as those people in those past period thought, and so, the only way is for us to introspect. Brahman, I believe, is beyond any description and that is why (trying to describe a thing beyond description) we find such a lot of space devoted to that, especially in the Upanishads. And, whether one is ready enough to accept, wholeheartedly, the brahman as the only God, is yet another aspect. When the Chhaandogyopanishat described the "purusha" as tasya yathA kapyAsaM puNDareekaM evamakShiNee", I feel it was just another instance of some guru trying to describe the indescribable. But, as you know, this gave rise to VA itself!

Therefore, what I am saying is that it is better not to rely completely on our old scriptural texts to show the way, but to
chart out your own way. Even if you end up unable to deny the Reality of this experiencable world, and hence a Saguna
Brahman also, no problem. That is what your past karmas lead you to. So, you are right, the answer has to come from you, not the books!
 
Is God Really a Witness Or Is God "Manipulative" Or Is God "Guilty" ?

The earliest statement of the Nature of Reality occurs in the first book of the Rig-Veda: Ekam Sat-Viprah Bahudha Vadanti. "The ONE BEING, the wise diversely speak of."

The Kena Upanishad says that the Supreme Reality is beyond the perception of the senses and the mind because the senses and the mind can visualise and conceive only the objects, while Reality is the Supreme Subject, the very precondition of all sensation, thinking, understanding, etc. No one can behold God because He is the beholder of all things.

The Prasna Upanishad says that God is the Supreme Prajapati or Creator, in whom are blended both the matter and energy of the Universe. God is symbolised in Pranava, or Omkara.

The Svetasvatara Upanishad says, 'Thou art the Woman', 'Thou art the Man', 'Thou art Girl', 'Thou art Boy', 'Thou deceivest us as the old man tottering with the stick', 'Thou movest everywhere, in the form of everything, in all directions', 'Thou art the dark-blue Butterfly, and the Green Parrot with red eyes', 'Thou art the thunder cloud, the Seasons and the Oceans', 'Thou art without beginning and beyond all time and space', 'Thou art That from which all the Universes are born'. 'That alone is Fire. That is the Sun. That is Air, That is the Moon, That is also the starry firmament, That is the waters, That is Prajapati, That is Brahman.'


(Excerpts from an article by Swami Krishnananda on "The Concept of God in Hinduism")

From the above we can understand God is a concept, neither a witness , nor "manipulative" of our life. I feel God deals the cards to all in the game of Life at birth,and let us free to play the Game (of life) directed by our own Karma and face the consequences as per the "Laws of cause and effect". Thus God has "no role in the occurrence of any event"
in individual's life.

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.
 
Last edited:
If God is personified and believed to have created this world (either through Brahma, Vishnu or Shiva) then I have a nagging query that why He has not propagated life through out the universe. If someone goes to Mars and prays to God can s/he survive there?

Dear Nobleking Ji,

May be some aliens exists in galaxies we havent heard off yet.

Anything could be possible..may be long long ago earth could have been empty and humans existed in a different planet and that planet got destroyed and some DNA made its way to earth and humans evolved.

We never know.

BTW why does anyone have to go to Mars to pray to God to survive?

Even on Earth itself survival is uncertain so why go to Mars?
 
So, you are right, the answer has to come from you, not the books!

Dear Sangom ji,

At present I feel the God concept is not necessary for continuation of species and existence on earth.

As you said earlier God simply Is.

I guess that is the only "Is"m. Everything else is a "probable"ism"
 
Dear Nobleking Ji,

May be some aliens exists in galaxies we havent heard off yet.

Anything could be possible..may be long long ago earth could have been empty and humans existed in a different planet and that planet got destroyed and some DNA made its way to earth and humans evolved.

We never know.

BTW why does anyone have to go to Mars to pray to God to survive?

Even on Earth itself survival is uncertain so why go to Mars?

Dear Madam,

Mars was only an example. The moot point was if God is the creator and if he is omnipresent then there has to be life in other planets. Can a person by praying to God, meditate and follow the religious scriptures survive in a planet where there is no life? Our realising God or attaining moksha is directly linked with 'life'. I wonder if I will be wrong to say that without 'life' or without human being there is no God.
 
I wonder if I will be wrong to say that without 'life' or without human being there is no God.

You are 100% right!

When the phenomenal world is set aside and denied..the human being ceases to exist...then the concept of a personal God too ceases to exists becos there is no worshiper and no worshiped..then Maya the progenitor of all 3 too ceases to exist and everything goes back to its unmanifest form.
 
Last edited:
Dear Madam Renuka,

I may sound like contradicting my own statement but I feel the idea of God cannot be wished away. If we believe Sri Adi Sankara, Chandrashekarendra Saraswathi swamigal, Sri Ramanujar, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa, Swami Vivekananda, Ramana Mahirishi, Aurobindo, Baba Lahiri Mahasaya, Sri Yukteswar Giri, Yogananda Paramahansa and other innumerable saints who have lived in the past then God seems to be a possibility.

We human beings are bestowed with immense potential and possibilities. For example we found possibility in discovering electricity from water, air, sun and fuel. I have deliberately used the word ‘discovering’ instead of ‘inventing’ as I believe any invention is basically a discovery of process and possibility that are already in existence. If the possibility is not in existence then the invention will not take place. So scientists keep on discovering the process that are possibilities already existing and that can lead to inventions. With inventions like electronic gadgets, wireless communication devices, remote sensors, satellites, space ship, the list is ever growing. All these are byproducts of physical science and are corporeal in nature. But what about the discoveries in the spiritual realm? I think this is where the God (and Satan) comes in. As everything else, this power already exists within us and only needs to be discovered and tapped. May be convergence of mind with this power can lead a person to divine status. So, God could be a possibility but S/He is not someone sitting above and looking at us. It is rather we who are witness to our actions and suffer or enjoy the karma.
 
. May be convergence of mind with this power can lead a person to divine status. So, God could be a possibility but S/He is not someone sitting above and looking at us. It is rather we who are witness to our actions and suffer or enjoy the karma.

Dear Sir,

Even if we do away with the concept of God I feel humans will try to find someway of getting to a divine status.

There seems to be an innate desire to be 'divine' which I wonder why?

Why is it that we humans just simply can't be ourselves without the need to be divine or evil?
 
Dear Renu,

You know that humans like to brag. The ultimate stage is to say 'I am divine' so that there will be a huge bhakthAs group to follow!

If humans are themselves how will Gurujis exist?

The concept of God has been discussed umpteen times in our forum. And one was a hot thread for quite sometime. Humans have

named the 'Power' which controls the universe as God and given different forms and gender to that Power. People with very good

imagination created several stories which we are reading and discussing endlessly ! :blabla:

BTW, yesterday I read a new story, where the 'sight' of Sani severs Baby Ganesh's head and then replaced by an elephant's head.

There is no mention about the fight between Lord Shiva and His son, in which the Son's head is severed by the Father! :)
 
Dear Sir,

Even if we do away with the concept of God I feel humans will try to find someway of getting to a divine status.

There seems to be an innate desire to be 'divine' which I wonder why?

Why is it that we humans just simply can't be ourselves without the need to be divine or evil?


George Mallory was an English mountaineer who took part in the first three expeditions to climb Mt. Everest. During the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] expedition he disappeared (on 8[SUP]th[/SUP] or 9[SUP]th[/SUP] 1924) and it remains a mystery whether he made it to the summit. His frozen body was found after 75 years. In one of his interviews he was asked “what is the use of climbing Mount Everest” and his famous quote was “So, if you cannot understand that there is something in man which responds to the challenge of this mountain and goes out to meet it, that the struggle is the struggle of life itself upward and forever upward, then you won’t see why we go. What we get from this adventure is just sheer joy. And joy is, after all, the end of life. We do not live to eat and make money. We eat and make money to be able to enjoy life. That is what life means and what life is for…….. I climb it because it is there”.

Life is a mystery. Death (life after death) is a mystery. It is not unnatural for human beings to crave to unravel the mystery of life. In this modern age, we are busy with internet, facebook, iPad, mobile phones, movies, TV serials, office, family and household chores. We find little time for introspection. We used to hear elders saying ‘Sivanaenu Iru’ when we indulge in hectic physical or mental activity. But what this implies is be like Siva. Siva is mostly found in meditating posture. So what is required is meditation. The whole process must have started from dreams. Human beings must have wondered how do we dream in our sleep, how are we able to see even when our eyes are closed? This and the mysteries of life and death must have triggered the journey of ‘seeking’ the ‘self’.

Religions, scriptures and Gods are value additions.

The concept of God is our making of something that is already existent. My humble view is even if we want it or not, even if we like it or not it is there. It is the governing law of universe (creation, operation, destruction). Anyone who goes against the law will face repercussions and anyone falls in line may be blessed. God is a generic name given to someone who wields power and authority. Different religions have different names for their Gods. I do not think this has happened overnight. This has evolved with human beings. We must have started worshipping nature because it is powerful and important to life. E.gs rain, sun, tree. As humans evolved his concept of God also evolved. Rich and powerful were revered, irrespective of their qualities. Even now we can see many personalities have attained godly status because of their power and ability. A film star is a God for his/her fans. A doctor is a God for his patient. A judge is a God for the accused. How many times we find ourselves say “he came like God and helped me when I was in distress”!

Yes, we can simply be ourselves but it is for the individuals to decide. We feel the need to take solace in something when life goes against our wishes. Some take to drinking, some to drug or other social menaces. Taking solace to God, I think, is not a bad option. I think the reason why many basically abhor God is because of the wrong ideas, dogmas and religious rigidity. We are so absorbed in doctrines that we literally forget the purpose. Simple philosophy is do not harm anyone. And what is harm? Do not do anything to others that you would not want to happen to you.
 
HE is all in all. To realize we should be lucky enough to be initiated and guided by a Sadguru. Once initiated there should not be wavering mindedness or astray from the path of goal. As for nobody could give proper answer I can quote Vivekananda's experience bestowed by Ramakrishna paramahamsa where he was in bliss till broght back by the same guru after three days-when he asked whether paramahamsa can show god. Rest is history. Furthee Avandry ore anuvum asayadhu. Last but not the least Kandavar vindadhillai-vindavar kandadhillai. Omthathsath.
 
noblekingji

I like the line ' We can simply be ourself. Your thinking that Solace in God is not a bad option for some is rational. Some who cannot relate to God would do well In

having a liking for all humanbeings and doing good for welfare of all. You are right that one should not do unto others what you would not want to happen to to you.

You are indeed a noble soul perhaps deserving the title king you have given yourself.lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top