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

[krish44]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

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?

If we are our selves , others would not like us as we accept ourself as we are.

People are jealous of those who think differently and are happy.

They would like others go thru the pain they are undergoing trying the follow the path of divinity by penance, performing rituals in temples and generally torturing

themselves in various ways to attain god like divine status.

They feel cheated when someone says they are wasting their time and such things are not required to be done to become divine.

The classification of something as evil is arbitrary . Some are defined as evil as they may be bad for health or socially unacceptable or unlawful or religion defines

them to be so.People perform actions to suit themselves . If they get hurt in the process and end result is difficult to digest then perhaps it belongs to evil category. No

need to label it as such.most People themselves will realise what is evil for themselves

 

[SANDHYAV]

I think GOD is a witness. He is that mountain, which will not suffer earthquake, but watch over.

For those who think GOD is within oneself, then GOD is guilty, for you are already manipulating your GOD into delusions of grandeur.

 

[nobleking]

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

I am humbled. I take your point of doing good for welfare of all. As the adage goes. to serve humanity is to serve the God. Think about aged people who are not in a position to help others but look forward receiving help from others. For them whoever helps them is a God.

As I said earlier, I think God should not be construed to be someone who controls the universe and its subjects though for all practical purposes people use with this connotation. I would say it is basically a force or say Life Force.

 

[renuka]

I would say it is basically a force or say Life Force.

May the Force be with you Skywalker.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

God is neither manipulative nor guilty of anything. He is just a witness as the scriptures say. Yes , you are right that maya deludes the humans but this is like trying to make a child understand something as you cannot use logic with someone who cannot see logic. In the case of humans when one does not or even refuses to see logic, manipulative tactics are required. But that is only to accomplish the larger goal of setting people on the right path. After all physical world is a just a projection. The ultimate reality is already out there and is timeless. So God is only a witness of what actually happens in the physical world. The manipulative tactics have to be seen in the above light i.e., as something that ensures setting people right and so as a reflection of harmony in the timeless reality.

Hope I answered your question

 

[Janaki Jambunathan]

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??

The point blank answer your seeking .... as you have guessed has to come from you "AHAM BRIMASME" Hence ask within yoursel!!

 

[Brahmanyan]

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

Dear Renuka,

God is neither manipulative nor guilty of anything. He is just a witness as the scriptures say. Yes , you are right that maya deludes the humans but this is like trying to make a child understand something as you cannot use logic with someone who cannot see logic. In the case of humans when one does not or even refuses to see logic, manipulative tactics are required. But that is only to accomplish the larger goal of setting people on the right path. After all physical world is a just a projection. The ultimate reality is already out there and is timeless. So God is only a witness of what actually happens in the physical world. The manipulative tactics have to be seen in the above light i.e., as something that ensures setting people right and so as a reflection of harmony in the timeless reality.

Hope I answered your question

Dear Sri "sravana",

It is interesting indeed that we are discussing a subject in which none of us have personal "experience or revelation". All our discussions are just verbal acrobatics due to inherent limitation.

I am reminded of the words of the famous physicist and cosmologist, Stephen W. Hawkins who said " “We find ourselves in a bewildering world. We want to make sense of what we see around us and to ask: What is the nature of the universe? What is our place in it and where did it and we come from? Why is it the way it is?” ― (Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time).

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[Naina_Marbus]

......such an unquestioning attitude is caused by the "bhakti" phenomenon which mandates such an attitude.

"Bhakti" does not "mandate" any thing. I would substitute "induces" or "inspires" instead of "mandates".

......
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....

A really enlightened and enlightening statement!

 

[biswa]

So far there have been many answers but nobody has yet said "I don't really know, because I have not really met God".

So let me be the first to say it.

 

[renuka]

So far there have been many answers but nobody has yet said "I don't really know, because I have not really met God".

So let me be the first to say it.

Wow!

This is the best answer cos the Upanishad saying goes "Those who know.. do not know and those who do not know..know"

Biswa Maharaj Ji Ki Jai!

 

[Raji Ram]

Dear Renu,

There is an adage in Tamil: கண்டவர் விண்டிலர், விண்டவர் கண்டிலர்.

Those who have seen (God) have not described and those who described (God) have not seen!

 

[Brahmanyan]

Wow!

This is the best answer cos the Upanishad saying goes "Those who know.. do not know and those who do not know..know"

Biswa Maharaj Ji Ki Jai!

Doctor,

I have mentioned about our limitation in the following words in my post 32
"It is interesting indeed that we are discussing a subject in which none of us have personal "experience or revelation". All our discussions are just verbal acrobatics due to inherent limitation."

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[sangom]

"Bhakti" does not "mandate" any thing. I would substitute "induces" or "inspires" instead of "mandates".

Sir,

The various schools of belief, particularly, Vaishnavam, lay down various rules to be followed by a bhakta or true devotee. Do you feel that these are not mandatory?

 

[Vaagmi]

Sir,

The various schools of belief, particularly, Vaishnavam, lay down various rules to be followed by a bhakta or true devotee. Do you feel that these are not mandatory?

What are these mandatory rules laid down in vaishnavam? Please enlighten the members here.

 

[sarang]

I presume various schools referred to include Islam, christianity, Marxism and a few more.
Even an eatery has rules to be respected and followed. Perhaps agnostics are free from rules of any kind.

Sir,

The various schools of belief, particularly, Vaishnavam, lay down various rules to be followed by a bhakta or true devotee. Do you feel that these are not mandatory?

 

[sangom]

What are these mandatory rules laid down in vaishnavam? Please enlighten the members here.

Please refer to an old post here. It says as follows:

"Bhagavat Ramanuja describes three stages, Bhakti, Para Bhakti, and Parama Bhakti. At the Bhakti stage one seeks only Sriman Narayana for anything, material or spiritual. When this Bhakti matures, it becomes Para Bhakti. In this stage the Bhakta sees Sriman Narayana everywhere and in everything. This matures into the third stage Parama Bhakti. In this stage the bhaktha is unable to stand the separation and craves for instant union. It is at this stage Sriman Narayana lifts him up into Vaikunta."

The mandate here is highlighted.

Also please see here. Are these not rules?

I presume various schools referred to include Islam, christianity, Marxism and a few more.
Even an eatery has rules to be respected and followed. Perhaps agnostics are free from rules of any kind.

I am glad that at last your have spoken the truth, or is it Sriman Narayana himself coming out because he is fed up with the hypocrisy? I am enlightened (as Sriman Narayana himself says, possibly) that you people equate your religion or cult to nothing more than an eatery of sorts!

P.S.

Shri Sarang Sir ji, your posts are very "maDi". because they give out the cow-dung stench, invariably!

 

[sarang]

A simple statement like all systems simple or complex have rules has pricked your innards to blow hot. Perhaps such letting of vapour is good for the system.

We have matams and sampradayams. Using a inappropriate word like cult shows nothing bur a disrespect for our systems and misplaced love for something else.

Well, most of the hindus, respect cows and cow dung and act accordingly. Of course this will be anathema to someone who is fond of and awed by camels and camel dung! And consume the camel after it serves its purpose. To each according to his disposition and destiny.

I am glad that at last your have spoken the truth, or is it Sriman Narayana himself coming out because he is fed up with the hypocrisy? I am enlightened (as Sriman Narayana himself says, possibly) that you people equate your religion or cult to nothing more than an eatery of sorts!

P.S.

Shri Sarang Sir ji, your posts are very "maDi". because they give out the cow-dung stench, invariably!