Semantics and God
Semantic Overload did a brilliant job of confusing the heaven out of people and preachers. Now he follows it up with a great post that puts into words a lot of my own ideas
f I were god (as most of the organized religions define god), then I’d make the world as a perfect place simply because its easier to manage and wonderful place to be, for your kids (i.e. humans) to live and die. Unless, of course, I want to raise the bar, I want a challenge. Since I am god, the all-powerful, nothing could be challenging, so I wouldnt really gain anything by creating an imperfect world and then getting a high out of managing it. Which means that I actually created a perfect world, but imprefection crept into it, thanks to the devil (garden of eden and the serpent). If I am god, and I created eveything, then I must have created devil as well… so devil should be perfect as well, and completely controllable by god, but obviously the devil isnt.. so there is some disconnect there. Even if it wasnt the devil, imperfection still crept in, like entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. But god should be able to set all that right.. after all he is god! At this point logic fails.
This reminds me of a talk I had with a “born-again christian” colleague of mine. We were discussing a client and I don’t know when it happened, but we jumped tracks and started discussing god and the bible. I asked him the same question Semantic asks – That if God is all powerful, and has the power over happiness and joy, and is all compassionate, why doesn’t he deem that all his creation on earth be perpetually happy? And more on similar lines. All I got in reply was a few garbled words about testing faith and stuff.
My one question to friends, relatives and stray people who talk of god and creation is this – If you believe God created you, why would he allow for so much imperfection and defective goods? If he is really omni-potent and omni-scient, what prevents him from coming up with the perfect world and perfect people?
You have no problem suing a manufacturer who supplies you defective or damaged goods. Why don’t you sue god too, for wilful negligence and inferior products?
My experience with my own family members is not very different. My father and cousins and uncles and sundry relatives question me endlessly on my beliefs and egg me on to find god. And I have a real hard time speaking my mind about god.
Oh well, nobody listens to my rants anyway
RSS/XML
October 20th, 2005 at 4:40 pm
i’m listening. keep on ranting. me.
October 20th, 2005 at 5:14 pm
Good one. Religion doesn’t bother me. Religious fanatics do.
October 20th, 2005 at 6:36 pm
Read this little story.
Btw,I am wish to recall profound quotes from a great book and which makes sense to me…
=> “Why do you keep shouting, researching or counting mangoes standing on an orchard’s fence, when your job is just to eat and enjoy these… just climb the tree and eat… In the orchard are weeds, wicked men, animals etc., and if you are thinking of them, you dont have time to enjoy these mangoes.”
=> “Empty your cup first, and only then can anyone else pour good tea in it”
Btw, your questions tell me that you believe in God, but do not accept his creation… Fair enough! Forget about the world, seek him and get an answer from him itself… Why bother about our views?
October 20th, 2005 at 6:37 pm
Read this little story.
Btw,I wish to recall some profound quotes from a great book that make sense to me…
=> “Why do you keep shouting, researching or counting mangoes standing on an orchard’s fence, when your job is just to eat and enjoy these… just climb the tree and eat… In the orchard are weeds, wicked men, animals etc., and if you are thinking of them, you dont have time to enjoy these mangoes.”
=> “Empty your cup first, and only then can anyone else pour good tea in it”
Btw, your questions tell me that you believe in God, but do not accept his creation… Fair enough! Forget about the world, seek him and get an answer from him itself… Why bother about our views?
October 20th, 2005 at 8:03 pm
I don’t have any big belief in God. For arguments sake lets assume (s)he is there.
But your take on imperfection is on shaky grounds. Imperfection is very much part of creation & evolution.
For example, Friction is an imperfection. But without it, nothing could exist. Nothing.
Without friction, you may wish a car slightly pushed will move on forever. (Damn petrol ;-). But without friction the car’s nuts and bolts won’t hold together. One can’t hold the steering. One can’t walk. For that matter, one cannot even chew food.
“...If I am god, and I created everything, then I must have created devil as well…”
Well, we say god vs devil equivalent in meaning to good vs bad. Meaning, both of them are equally powerful beings. The concept of one omnipresent is in conflict here. So, at the least, the god and the devil (the good and the bad) should be characters of one being.
I am providing no solutions here, just some questions.
October 20th, 2005 at 8:42 pm
One theory could be that if he had made the world perfect then who would remember him as a majority of people turn to god and spirituality only in adversity. So Good took it easy and allowed hiself to be selfish. Adversity also teahces a lot so it could be short term pain long term gain. On a more serious note, if the theory of Karma is correct I always wonder why God does not let ppl see the karmas of the past life that ted to the present. If people dont know for what reasons they were punished they are likely to repeat their behavior.
October 21st, 2005 at 11:10 am
Why God doesn’t let people know about previous karmas? – Would a daughter-in-law wish to remember all her mother-in-laws of the past live
October 21st, 2005 at 11:16 am
Wrong argument Balaji,
The idea is that if you know what you are being punished for (karma and rebirth) you’ll make amends and try to live better (the entire judicial system is based on this).
But if you don’t know your mistake/crime, or don’t realise its a crime, you’ll continue to do it…
October 21st, 2005 at 12:00 pm
What really tickles me in such discussions is the fact that man automatically assumes that the entity called ‘God ’ is a super version of man himself. Therefore he would be man’s 100% perfect version. And he would be subject to logic and reasoning because that is what man does in his life. Man tries to reason out everything. What if reasoning was not the best approach to find a convincing answer?
October 21st, 2005 at 12:08 pm
:-)... Probably yes, probably not… I did post that for the sake of argument and didn’t want to prove/disprove anything there… I partiall agree with Lavanya too, that the reasoning that we are doing wont get us progressing any where. There is other kind of reasoning that the greats do, to which we are not anywhere close to in this discussion.
Btw, I have tried being self-critical after reading all those self-help books and after seriously analyzing every act of mine (probably even my sending of this email), I am concluding that man being pure in words, action is highly difficult, but possible. But at the same time, being pure at the thought level, in other words, controlling what your mind should think – seems super impossible to me at this state. After all every opinion (or even actions and words) of ours have their origin in thoughts, and hence if you control your mind you become pure! While you seriously start doing this, a person wanting purity really bangs his head against the wall for all the mistakes he did that he remembers. This seriously pulls-down one’s spirit in progressing toward purity, as you are still holding on some evil thought…
Now tell me, how hard the situation will be if I remember all the wrong-doings of crores of past lives… Can I even live peacefully? Even in my mind, I need to shake off the thought that I am a sinner (like what the Christian missionaries (not Jesus) call), and completely realize I am pure!
Again, my suggestion would be to push these questions aside to a corner of mind, but still walk toward the mango tree! The more you try to answer, the you will have questions preventing you from walking towards the tree. We gather these opinions from our own experience, and the books we read or the words we hear, which I think is very limited amount of knowledge. Now, if you a read a real God-man’s book (say Gospel of Ramakrishna) or heard it from the right people, then we have know something about both sides of the coin and can make a decision in a unbiased form. Else, it is like talking about Indian food after asking Bill Gates’ opinion or talking about God after watching a Kamal Hassan’s movie! Both these opinions are limited and highly biased…
Also, the law of association is equally valid – associate with the real Godly men (like mahaperiva or Ramanar), and you understand why all these…
associate with similar people like us, you are still stuck with no answers or wrong answers. It is just up to us to either talk to people who have seen London personally or just keep looking at the map or photos on the web and keep arguing…
Please do not take any of my comments seriously, although they may be against any of your existing views. But, keep moving forward…
My 2 cents…
October 21st, 2005 at 12:13 pm
Lavanya:
Well then, what do you think is God? if you don’t try reason and logic to find god, how else would you? And what would you discover and how will you understand whatever you found?
Ok, let’s assume you shun logic and somehow found god. How will you be able to understand that the thing you found is god if you didn’t apply some kind or reason/logic/theory to it? And if what you found doesn’t stand up to logic or reason, do you throw away reason or throw away what you found?
An analogy, using math – let’s say, you are trying to find a prime
number, say after 83 Now, you know that a prime number is a number that cannot be divided by anything other than itself and 1. Let’s say you shun logic and come to some arbit number which you believe is a prime number? Will you be able to ascertain if it conforms to the standards of a prime number without reason or logic? And if you apply the logic you know and discover that the number you found wasn’t a prime, will
you say your logic was flawed or would you throw out the result you got and try to find the next?
See, Logic is inherently required if you need to make sense of the question “Is there god” and my logic as far as I have applied says there isn’t
October 21st, 2005 at 12:35 pm
Following on lavanya’s comments, chandra tell me this…..a baby which we all think does not have any kind of logic or reasoning until it grows up, automatically goes to its mother wen it feels hungry or scared…so there is no cold logic behind its action…it was just intutive….the same kind of feeling is what is called ‘bhakti ‘.....an intutive belief that, there exists a supreme being who is responsible for all our actions…including such thoughts which doubts his presence…after all why would a great scientist like einstien went on to say ….’Religion begins, where science ends’....so there are things which are inexplicable by normal human brains.
October 21st, 2005 at 12:40 pm
Follow-up of my previous comment on Logic:
Vedanta is application of logic to find out God. But this logic is no where from what we are doing right now, as they give up their entire life doing this sadhana.
The followers of vedanta apply “trial and error” method to figure out what brahman (God and not a brahmin) is. They negate everything in the world first by saying “Neti! Neti! – Not this! Not this!”, and release him. But once the brahman is realized they see it everywhere, and remain silent, and cannot express what it is, but only can be experienced. An analogy is, while feeding people in marriage they intially talk a lot, but slowly when the food is fed thier sounds decrease, and after food everyone just sleeps and enjoys (the state of samadi)!
October 21st, 2005 at 12:49 pm
Arun,
Great point you raise here. of intuition and instinct and bhakti. My question – where did that intuition come from, if not logic and the baby’s brain?
A baby has what is called comfort zones. When in the womb, it learns and recognizes the smell of its mother. And it knows, in the womb that this smell means safety and food. later, when it’s born, and during the breast feeding stage, the child learns to associate a mother’s hand and breasts as safety and food. This the brain has sorted away as useful information. So, when the child feels threatened or hungry, it’s logic tells it to go towards the recognised source of safety or comfort.
October 21st, 2005 at 1:17 pm
Not really….I’m talking of anybody who brings up the baby right from the stage when it is born…not mother who gave birth to the baby and where the baby was developed….our very own krishna is one good example…
October 21st, 2005 at 2:29 pm
Chandroo:
>>What do you think is God?
My opinion has been evolving and will continue to do so. At the moment, I think that God is the highest potential energy state that can be reached. Every man has the inherent capacity to get to that state.
>>If you don’t try reason and logic to find god, how else would you?
I have been applying reason and logic all along and it has been frustrating to discover that I
just go around in circles with no convincing pointers forward. Therefore, I have been thinking that there must be other ways of understanding that do not necessarily stop with cold logic. Logic says if it is not black then it must be white; if it is not love then it must be hate. Where do we fit in entities like ‘gray’ and ‘indifference’ then? Logic is a useful tool, but
it cannot be the only instrument used to arrive at rock solid conclusions.
>>What would you discover and how will you understand whatever you found?
Ah. Now this is a tough one to answer. I have no clue what I would discover but I do know that when I question something, I must be open to finding answers that I may not really like.
>>The prime number example:
Logic works beautifully in a number of examples but does it mean that Logic can answer everything? A knife can be used to cut some things but in other cases a scissor is simply a better tool. In short, Logic is necessary but not sufficient.
October 21st, 2005 at 2:59 pm
lavanya:
>>>A knife can be used to cut some things but in other cases a scissor is simply a better tool. In short, Logic is necessary but not sufficient.>>>
See, that’s where logic comes in, knowing when to use a knife and when to use a scissor.
October 21st, 2005 at 3:08 pm
But Chandroo, the harder question is why cut at all?
October 21st, 2005 at 3:25 pm
Logic is a hopelessly flawed tool. Besides, what logic are we talking abt? Cartesian Logic assumes that if something is not flase, then it is true, and we all know that wont work is many situations, multi-valued logic is more flexible but still, all of them are constrained by the universe of mathematics that we operate under. And Godel’s theorem has proved that any mathematical universe that is advanced enough to enumerate the natural numbers will have self contradictions and inconsistencies in it.
Consider the sentence ‘This sentence is false.’ Is it true or false? Its a logical fallacy. If we attempt to decipher or understand with sucha flawed tool, we are sure to fail.
My 2 paise’s worth
October 21st, 2005 at 3:30 pm
God…. hmm.. that’s a really personal definition for each of us. Look out for a post abt it on my blog very soon
October 21st, 2005 at 3:38 pm
@ Chandroo: about “See, that’s where logic comes in, knowing when to use a knife and when to use a scissor.”
knowing doesnt have to involve logic… logic is merely a means, knowledge is the goal. Logic is one of the many means of attainaing it. We are prisoners of the ‘scientific paradigm’ because of which we are unable to think beyond logic.
October 21st, 2005 at 4:28 pm
When someone decides that god doesn’t exist, then any number of evidence can be argued away. Like, if I refuse to believe that humans actually walked in moon, then any amount of photographs, or interviews or press report is not going to satisfy me, as I have already concluded that we cannot go to moon. So it boils down to, even if god exists, do I want to know him?
God can be in any form, depending on person to person. None of us here have seen god face to face; if we had, this argument wouldn’t be there. Like Gandhi said, Truth may be god as only god knew the absolute truth.
I believe that god cannot be realized through our intellect. Intellect can lead us to a certain extent and no further. It is a matter of faith(bhakti) and experience derived from that faith.
Say if we are going to a different place, we try to enquire about the place with people who have been there. The same way, we will have to depend on our elder’s faith as they have lead a successful life…well I agree that is relative…but they did lead a peaceful life, which is what we are seeking at the end of the day…so god will always be unknowable to us mortals.
October 21st, 2005 at 5:35 pm
Logic – Flawed at best
Selective Amnesia’s post about god and religion (trackbacked to my previous post) has attracted a lot of debate. The one most interesting to me was about logic. It is amusing how engineering, scientists swear by logic like it was the holy grail of tr…
October 22nd, 2005 at 12:08 pm
This post reminds me of this hilarious passage from ‘The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’:
“ The Babelfish is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy not from its carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babelfish.
“Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
“The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,’ says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.’
`But,’ says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.’
`Oh dear,’ says God, `I hadn’t thought of that,’ and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.
October 22nd, 2005 at 8:06 pm
the missing connection I would say is because of the initial assumption we make – that the all-powerful creator (if there IS any) creator also thinks the way we do and since he is all powerful he would actually wish to have the perfect world, the definition of which lies in our observation rather than his.
October 23rd, 2005 at 8:23 am
I agree with Zero’s observation.
October 26th, 2005 at 9:18 am
Who says God didn’t create a perfect world? You have to remember that free will issue. God can give us a perfect world, and it’s up to us what we do with it! Relatively simple!
October 26th, 2005 at 10:03 pm
To elaborate on my Free Will statement. The concept of free will dictates that your choice be voluntary and completely unforced. I would never impose my views over yours for example. If you choose not to believe in a God, for example, that’s your choice and subject to no other judgement than yourself( And God, presuming the existence of God). I’m a bit of an existentialist in my beliefs, but you have to hang your faith on something, even if it’s your own ability to cope with life. I’ve been exposed to a wide range of religions and philosophies, and they mostly boil down to some basic concepts. )Do no harm to others, 2)Improve yourself to the best of your abilities, 3)Most actively encourage improvement of others lot, either through giving material assistance and/or educating others in HOW to improve their lot. No. 3 in particualr can be defined as “enlightened self interest” Because if you help your neighbor, they are FAR more likely to help you when you need it and FAR less likely to steal you blind when you are willing to help them out at need! There are exceptions to both of these statements, but that’s human nature again…...free will, remember?
August 17th, 2006 at 11:38 am
the god gave you everything…nature,humanity,IMPORTANTLY YOU...and what do you do??? when he created a river you put forth a dam and restrict its usage to you and what happens because of that to make one dam u have hundreds of problem…he created the skies and u partition it and create “this is my territory,you dont enter it r i will shoot you” as a matter of fact he should be the one sueing you(which he is partly begun right now) for destroying his property,not you sueing him
November 30th, 2006 at 12:36 am
Just got to sample your blog for the first time today. Great stuff, congratulations!
On the current topic, IMO these conclusions (or rather positions that are subject to change as we grow) are very subjective and intimate.
If it was possible to prove God logically I think it would have been done well before the 20th century. And He can no longer be described as in the Vedas: “From where words return without grasping, along with the mind and the like”.
I was reminded of Kanchi paramacharya’s response to a question posed to him by an earnest westerner. “If a person is ethical to the core but does not believe in God, is Mukti possible for such a person?”. I would like you to recollect the elaborate devotional rituals that these Seers perform everyday of their lives…... The Paramacharya closed his eyes awhile in deep reflection, and answered with a sure “yes”.
Another way to look at it; His Grace is not dependent on our acceptance; He is not vain. If ethics were ordained by Him, and if one of the main authorities for ethics is one’s conscience (as Manu smriti prescribes), then it appears that alone qualifies the adherent to Mukti. IMHO, blessed are those who can remain true to their conscience one hundred percent. I, for one, am NOT.
God bless you!
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:58 pm
[...] Ravages‘ post about god and religion (trackbacked to my previous post) has attracted a lot of debate. The one most interesting to me was about logic. It is amusing how engineering, scientists swear by logic like it was the holy grail of truth and knowledge. I used to be one of them, till I read the Robert Persig book ‘Zen and the art of motorcycle maintainence’. In that book Phaedrus questions and challenges rationality itself. That got me thinking about logic and its validity. How logical is logic itself? [...]