Bhalchandra Gaikwad asked by message ::
Namaskar..
now a days every one is talking about hindi movie "O my God" some people saying.. at the end of the film hero says "If there is fear then person start praying to god.. if there is no fear then no need of God"
I trust this is wrong statement.
..but how to convince people don't pray for god only for fear. there is lot of things....
can you please guide me how to tell them we hindus pray to god not because of fear but for extreme happiness.
Source :: https://www.facebook.com/
Brother Bhalchandra Gaikwad !!
Most people who are atheists are arguing against a specific concept of God. They are pretty much all arguing straw men. Here are some examples:
--> They are arguing against religion, like Christopher Hitchens. "The Catholics exterminated the Cathars. Muslims forcibly converted their conquered enemies."
-->Or against stupid traditions that have been part of religion. "Religions have always been misogynistic."
--> They are arguing against specific beliefs. "If God is good, then why is there evil in the world?"
--> They are arguing against a particular concept of God. "If God is all pervading, why do you think of him in human terms?"
--> They are responding to poorly constructed defenses of theism. "Why should there be a cause of all causes, when infinite regression makes as much sense?"
--> And, of course, a real favorite: The concept of faith itself. Belief in revelation, etc.
Basically, they are all missing the basic point of Vedanta: Existence itself is proof of God. Not so much because God created it, but because there is no reason for there to be existence rather than non-existence. This is not a complicated idea. Existence exists. Existence itself is God. That is the minimum universal definition of God as sat.
This in turn leads to the idea of truth as God. Falsehood or Maya is the "not-God." These people should therefore be congratulated inasmuch as they present themselves as seekers of the Truth. But they are overenthusiastic and tend to miss the forest for the trees. The existence of falseness does not negate existence itself. The existence of darkness does not negate light, but the momentary presence of even the feeblest spark negates an infinite and eternal darkness.
But existence without consciousness is barely worth the name of existence. We stand distinct as conscious beings from the creation and can therefore reflect on it. We should reflect on reflection a little. The ability to reflect in itself poses a huge question. The atheist does not want to face this question above all--why? Why is there existence at all? And why am I able to reflect on it? Why am I even able to ask the question, "Why?" Ultimately, "Why?" is a more important question than "How?" But as long as I stand in relation to existence as a conscious being, the question imposes itself. It is the great elephant in the room of life, the one we try to sweep under the rug with an infinite number of rationales, all tottering on the shifting sands of agnosticism and doubt.
Cit, or consciousness, is the seat of the various versions of the ontological argument for the existence of God. Philosophers call this the most sophist of arguments, and yet it is the very consequence of being conscious itself. Consciousness means I as a subjectivity am distinct from an ultimately unapproachable and unknowable objective universe. The mystics therefore say, "Know yourself." And by knowing yourself in all your profundity, you will know that which appears to be not-self, not in terms of infinitely changing phenomena, but as One without a second.
And again, even a fragmentary, momentary spark of consciousness in infinity and all eternity, negates all unconsciousness for all time, in all places। What has been always is. And this is not in the slightest denied by the possibility that scientists may "one day" produce consciousness in a test tube or a super computer.
And then, there is joy. Love. But existence (the Other) and consciousness (the One) are barely worth the name without joyful response and interchange. It is the culmination of both the recognition of Oneness and the existence of Otherness. The synthesis of Unity and Distinction is the essence of love and joy.
And yet, atheists seem at their most confident when they debunk love and joy, seeing it as Evolution's invisible hand that exists only to promote the continued existence of the species, to confirm actions that are favorable to reproduction, etc.
Alright, but why is there an urge to seek pleasure in the first place? Some higher force (Nature) that is pushing us to reproduce or seek survival-friendly outcomes? And then we have to explain self-destructive actions in these terms also--Thanatos.
Love is the essence of joy. And in the awakened being, love is the gateway to God. "God is Love." If we are armed with this awareness, we will never be bewildered by arguments that point out the aberrations of religion (where there is a failure of Love) or those that rail against false concepts of God ("the angry, jealous or vengeful God") that are projections of the worst in Humankind. God is, in one sense, a projection, but a projection of the best in us; an instinctive ideal that becomes clearer with our evolution as individuals and as a species. It is the ideal that makes us grow as individuals and as a species as much as a lighthouse guides us to the harbor.
It seems that the Upanishads have given far better answers to these questions than the anti-religious, anti-God "Truth" seekers.
To say God is existence is really not different from saying existence comes from God. The multiplicity comes from One. And yet it is all One at the same time.
To say God is consciousness does not negate the fact that individual consciousness also exists. It is simply that we are capable of intuiting a universal basis of consciousness. Thus mystics from time immemorial have recognized that God exists primarily in the deepest subjectivity, which is found in meditation and self-reflection. If we disperse ourselves in externals, we become alienated from that deepest subjectivity, or what is called "knowledge of the Self."
But real joy comes from the synthesis of the the One and the Other. This goes far beyond mere survival and evolution. Yes, Love gives meaning to life, where mere survival and reproduction do not. But why should there be any meaning at all? Why should there be any satisfactions at all? Surely the satisfactions of the atheist are perceived as something more that mere tactics that Nature is using to reproduce the species?
And even if they were, what is this "Nature" or "Evolution" that is pushing the species to go on? And is there not an infinite regress of why's that are ultimately brushed under the rug of "we don't know and we will never know"?
And if that is the case, then why, oh why, do we neglect the obvious answer that the satisfactions--being, knowledge and love--are ends in themselves. Ends that ever-increasingly seek some form of infinity and eternity. Bhumaiva sukham. Svalpe sukham nāsti. "Happiness lies in the Great. There is no joy in the trivial."
So the search for God is the search to go beyond the trivial, to attain the Great. bṛṁhati bṛṁhayati ceti brahma. This is the true force of instinct, of Libido, and of evolution, and these cannot be separated from the search for God.
So you may concede that there is stupid religion, there are stupid concepts of God, but God and religion in themselves are not false concepts. These three, irreducible miracles are the unassailable attributes of God. They are the essence of spirituality. Religion is the social expression of Humankind's evolving attempt to approach this Truth.
The Bhāgavata thus says,
dharmaḥ projjhitaḥ kaitavo'tra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ satāṁ.
..but how to convince people don't pray for god only for fear. there is lot of things....
can you please guide me how to tell them we hindus pray to god not because of fear but for extreme happiness.
Source :: https://www.facebook.com/
Brother Bhalchandra Gaikwad !!
Most people who are atheists are arguing against a specific concept of God. They are pretty much all arguing straw men. Here are some examples:
--> They are arguing against religion, like Christopher Hitchens. "The Catholics exterminated the Cathars. Muslims forcibly converted their conquered enemies."
-->Or against stupid traditions that have been part of religion. "Religions have always been misogynistic."
--> They are arguing against specific beliefs. "If God is good, then why is there evil in the world?"
--> They are arguing against a particular concept of God. "If God is all pervading, why do you think of him in human terms?"
--> They are responding to poorly constructed defenses of theism. "Why should there be a cause of all causes, when infinite regression makes as much sense?"
--> And, of course, a real favorite: The concept of faith itself. Belief in revelation, etc.
Basically, they are all missing the basic point of Vedanta: Existence itself is proof of God. Not so much because God created it, but because there is no reason for there to be existence rather than non-existence. This is not a complicated idea. Existence exists. Existence itself is God. That is the minimum universal definition of God as sat.
This in turn leads to the idea of truth as God. Falsehood or Maya is the "not-God." These people should therefore be congratulated inasmuch as they present themselves as seekers of the Truth. But they are overenthusiastic and tend to miss the forest for the trees. The existence of falseness does not negate existence itself. The existence of darkness does not negate light, but the momentary presence of even the feeblest spark negates an infinite and eternal darkness.
But existence without consciousness is barely worth the name of existence. We stand distinct as conscious beings from the creation and can therefore reflect on it. We should reflect on reflection a little. The ability to reflect in itself poses a huge question. The atheist does not want to face this question above all--why? Why is there existence at all? And why am I able to reflect on it? Why am I even able to ask the question, "Why?" Ultimately, "Why?" is a more important question than "How?" But as long as I stand in relation to existence as a conscious being, the question imposes itself. It is the great elephant in the room of life, the one we try to sweep under the rug with an infinite number of rationales, all tottering on the shifting sands of agnosticism and doubt.
Cit, or consciousness, is the seat of the various versions of the ontological argument for the existence of God. Philosophers call this the most sophist of arguments, and yet it is the very consequence of being conscious itself. Consciousness means I as a subjectivity am distinct from an ultimately unapproachable and unknowable objective universe. The mystics therefore say, "Know yourself." And by knowing yourself in all your profundity, you will know that which appears to be not-self, not in terms of infinitely changing phenomena, but as One without a second.
And again, even a fragmentary, momentary spark of consciousness in infinity and all eternity, negates all unconsciousness for all time, in all places। What has been always is. And this is not in the slightest denied by the possibility that scientists may "one day" produce consciousness in a test tube or a super computer.
And then, there is joy. Love. But existence (the Other) and consciousness (the One) are barely worth the name without joyful response and interchange. It is the culmination of both the recognition of Oneness and the existence of Otherness. The synthesis of Unity and Distinction is the essence of love and joy.
And yet, atheists seem at their most confident when they debunk love and joy, seeing it as Evolution's invisible hand that exists only to promote the continued existence of the species, to confirm actions that are favorable to reproduction, etc.
Alright, but why is there an urge to seek pleasure in the first place? Some higher force (Nature) that is pushing us to reproduce or seek survival-friendly outcomes? And then we have to explain self-destructive actions in these terms also--Thanatos.
Love is the essence of joy. And in the awakened being, love is the gateway to God. "God is Love." If we are armed with this awareness, we will never be bewildered by arguments that point out the aberrations of religion (where there is a failure of Love) or those that rail against false concepts of God ("the angry, jealous or vengeful God") that are projections of the worst in Humankind. God is, in one sense, a projection, but a projection of the best in us; an instinctive ideal that becomes clearer with our evolution as individuals and as a species. It is the ideal that makes us grow as individuals and as a species as much as a lighthouse guides us to the harbor.
It seems that the Upanishads have given far better answers to these questions than the anti-religious, anti-God "Truth" seekers.
To say God is existence is really not different from saying existence comes from God. The multiplicity comes from One. And yet it is all One at the same time.
To say God is consciousness does not negate the fact that individual consciousness also exists. It is simply that we are capable of intuiting a universal basis of consciousness. Thus mystics from time immemorial have recognized that God exists primarily in the deepest subjectivity, which is found in meditation and self-reflection. If we disperse ourselves in externals, we become alienated from that deepest subjectivity, or what is called "knowledge of the Self."
But real joy comes from the synthesis of the the One and the Other. This goes far beyond mere survival and evolution. Yes, Love gives meaning to life, where mere survival and reproduction do not. But why should there be any meaning at all? Why should there be any satisfactions at all? Surely the satisfactions of the atheist are perceived as something more that mere tactics that Nature is using to reproduce the species?
And even if they were, what is this "Nature" or "Evolution" that is pushing the species to go on? And is there not an infinite regress of why's that are ultimately brushed under the rug of "we don't know and we will never know"?
And if that is the case, then why, oh why, do we neglect the obvious answer that the satisfactions--being, knowledge and love--are ends in themselves. Ends that ever-increasingly seek some form of infinity and eternity. Bhumaiva sukham. Svalpe sukham nāsti. "Happiness lies in the Great. There is no joy in the trivial."
So the search for God is the search to go beyond the trivial, to attain the Great. bṛṁhati bṛṁhayati ceti brahma. This is the true force of instinct, of Libido, and of evolution, and these cannot be separated from the search for God.
So you may concede that there is stupid religion, there are stupid concepts of God, but God and religion in themselves are not false concepts. These three, irreducible miracles are the unassailable attributes of God. They are the essence of spirituality. Religion is the social expression of Humankind's evolving attempt to approach this Truth.
The Bhāgavata thus says,
dharmaḥ projjhitaḥ kaitavo'tra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ satāṁ.
No comments:
Post a Comment