1. Have an Interesting Snippet to Share : Click Here
    Dismiss Notice

What Part Of Speech Does God Represent?

Discussion in 'Snippets of Life (Non-Fiction)' started by jayasala42, May 21, 2021.

  1. jayasala42

    jayasala42 IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    5,020
    Likes Received:
    9,920
    Trophy Points:
    438
    Gender:
    Female
    Osho says that he denies the personality of God but there is tremendous GODLINESS.That is
    pure energy and to impose any form to it is ugly.
    The world consists of verbs and actions and not nouns.Nouns are human inventions.
    The flower is flowering, river is flowing.Baby becoming a boy, boy into a man,life turning to death.
    There is no full stop and there is continuous activity.
    When you say'God' as a noun, we are referring to something'static and not alive..God who is absolute,
    omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent cannot be a static noun but can only be an activity oriented verb only.
    The Universe itself is vibrating,pulsating and breathing Godliness.
    After reading this I got a sincere doubt whether to call rose as a flower or flowering and address Ganga not
    as a river but as 'flowing'

    So many books have been written representing God as verb, as an activity.

    The way Hindu temples perform Archanas, speaks of so many adjectives to show that God is a noun.In the Sahasranaamaas we have hundreds of adverbs to prove that God is a man of action.Sombody questioned whether God is a
    a collective noun representing group or bunch?Why not?
    Advaita has two fundamental tenets:
    1. The world is unreal
    2. Brahman at the base of the world is the only Reality.
    Earlier Science was stated to be irrelevant to Advaitha.
    Is modern science contradictory to Advaita Vedanta?

    Modern science is declared by many commentators on
    Advaita to be contradictory to the principles espoused by Advaita. Science is seen to consider the world around us as the only reality, and to confine its search for the truth to this material world.

    But Advaita declares the world to have only relative reality,
    and that the absolute truth lies beyond this world.

    So are we to believe that science and Advaita are contradictory, and that if we believe in Advaita we must abandon all scientific principles?

    But it is here that we see the great strength of Advaita logic, and to realize that not only does science not contradict Advaita but that it actually strengthens Advaita.

    Because modern science in fact has come round to the view that the world has only relative reality.
    Now there has been a radical change in the scientific world view.
    The theory of relativity in respect of time and space and
    quantum physics in respect of the root of matter have completely changed how we understand the world.
    Quantum physics has brought us even closer to the Advaitic
    viewpoint. The search for the roots of the world goes deeper
    and deeper into unreality. Physicists universally accept that
    there is no ontological absolute reality in quantum particles.

    A physicist of today would have no problems in accepting the
    tenets of Advaita that the world is not absolutely real.

    The path of science and Yoga are the same, but the goals are different. The goal of science is only to reach a correct intellectual conception of the world. This is what interests science and this is where the effort is concentrated. For the Advaitin though, this is only a milestone on the path and he or she does not worry much on this, going on further to the ultimate goal.


    Science can teach the Advaitin how to use logic and reason
    to understand the world. In return, Advaita can teach the
    scientist that after knowing the world with the mind,
    further progress is still possible and this is through the heart,
    to see the Absolute within and become one with it.

    Dr. Radhakrishnan’s idealism was such that it recognized
    the reality and diversity of the world of experience (prakṛti) while at the same time preserving the notion of a wholly transcendent Absolute (Brahman), an Absolute that is identical to the self (Atman).

    What is Advaitha?
    The Upanishads actually teach that the individual soul (called Atman) is not different from Ultimate Reality (called Brahman). Sankara also taught that there is only one essential principle called Brahman and everything else is a kind of expression of that one Brahman. Because of this theory of one being, his teachings became popular as the "Advaita"
    (a = not, dvaita = two, means no-two or non-dual). The way he said this to people was "Atman is Brahman."
    , "If a person's soul is really one with Ultimate all along, then what makes a person feel so separate from Ultimate?" His answer to this was that we are ignorant of our real self being Ultimate because we see through
    a kind of filter—like looking through a dirty piece of glass—
    and he called this filter we look through, maya, which means "illusion" in Sanskrit.
    It is just like ocean and waves.There is only one being that is unlimited.All human beings and all creatures are limited beings.They actually represent the unlimited under the appearance of Limitation.Actually Viswaroopam
    is nothing but love and affection shown to fellow human beings and other creatures.
    Shloka 30,Chap 6 of Gita reveals

    "yo maam pasyathi sarvatra, sarvam cha mayi pashyathi
    thasyaaham na pranasyaami sa cha me na pranasyathi "

    " One who who perceives that sarva vyapee Lord is inherent in all creations and that all creations are within the Supreme, I don't become invisible to him. Nor does he escape my vision. ( He is sure of getting my viswaroopa Darshan)
    What is the difference between the froth, wave and ocean? They are all part
    of the same.

    Collins, a genetic scientist,the head of the Genome Project says"God is
    more plausible than atheism.In my research I have identified several
    pointers to God which dragged me
    towards the MIND that created the universe,more remarkably,life.

    He further states"There are exact numerical value for certain constants which make the planets exist. If you interfere in any of the constants,the universe will not have a complexity needed for evolution.If the gravity had been weak,matter would fly apart & there will be no planets. If the gravity had been stronger ,BIG BANG would have been
    followed by a BIG CRUNCH and there would not have been evolution of intelligence in stages..So I believe there is a God who loves Maths,wants a universe ,keeps a balance of complexities in specific mathematical proportion which enables living beings to evolve into intelligence and more intelligence to understand His complexities better"

    Understand the gems of Vivekananda
    "Look upon every man, woman, and every one as God. You cannot help anyone, you can only serve: serve the children of the Lord, serve the Lord Himself, if you have the privilege If the Lord grants that you can help any one of his children, blessed you are; I should see God in the poor, and it is for my salvation that I go and worship them. The poor and the miserable are for our salvation, so that we may serve the Lord, coming in the shape of the diseased, coming in the shape of the lunatic, the leper, and the sinner!"
    Advaitha of Shankara, Gems of Vivekanada and Gandhiji's life -all point to to the same dogma---the world and creatures form a part of the Universal Absolute.

    It will be just fit even if you cast God as a multidimensional figure representing the entire world.Any part of speech-noun,pronoun,,predictae,adjective,adverb or
    collective noun or collective verb -it will just perfectly match.What do you think Friends?

    Jayasala42
     
    rgsrinivasan and Thyagarajan like this.
    Loading...

  2. Viswamitra

    Viswamitra IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    11,761
    Likes Received:
    20,883
    Trophy Points:
    538
    Gender:
    Male
    Dear Smt. Jayasala:

    What an analysis of Advaita philosophy with science! It is an extraordinary analysis from an extraordinary person. I agree with you that science is turning around and matching the tenets of the Advaita in their recent analysis. I agree that all constants on this planet should remain intact for life to exist. I read that in "Einstein's Enigma" a book written by Jos Rodrigues Dos Santos. I believe that the human effort is to learn that precious constant already exists and to do everything to keep them intact instead of destroying them.

    You have raised a question in your title, "What part of speech does God represent?" and my answer to this question is, "It doesn't matter". I have to quote the dialogue we use in day-to-day life. For the question, "What is in your mind?" the answer is, "It doesn't matter" and for the question "What is the matter?" the answer is, "Never mind". The Advaita philosophy states that mind and matter are manifestations of one reality. One has become many and all of them together is only one without a second. It defies the logic when we say that the Universal Absolute is smaller than the smallest and larger than the largest. Because human mind measures everything by the senses and the mass should be visible for the mind to accept existence.

    As you said rightly, it is possible to come up with a mathematical equation to define existence but to derive this human mind should reach the level of understanding that is way beyond the capabilities that the mind has. If the human mind operates within the limiting factors, it is difficult to understand the infinite. The general observation of humanity is determined not only by senses but also by the mind's analysis of historical data collected in its memory. Therefore, the observation itself is limited by those memories. Once this limit is exceeded, humanity will see much more than what it defines itself to observe.
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2021
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  3. jayasala42

    jayasala42 IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    5,020
    Likes Received:
    9,920
    Trophy Points:
    438
    Gender:
    Female
    Dear Viswa,
    Thank you Viswa.You have correctly got at the point I wanted to convey.Only after sending the article I felt that I should not have touched an abstract topic like this.Thank you very much for your authentic response.
    Jayasala42
     
    Thyagarajan and Viswamitra like this.
  4. Thyagarajan

    Thyagarajan IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    7,902
    Likes Received:
    8,333
    Trophy Points:
    490
    Gender:
    Male
    First light was considered travelling in straight lines as rays. After some time it was treated as wavelets and they spread in the form of waves. Then said wherever necessary it can bend - diffraction and also polarise.
    Physics step by step understood that light can behave in different ways. Then it was said light is mixture of colours. White is not a colour. Light now said that black holes in space can suck the light & swallow it.
    In the same way the cosmic Force called Almighty or God exists in multitude of forms. It can be bundle of energy. It can be in human beings.
    Bhagwan RAMAN Maharishi concluded that if “i” - the ego - is annihilated, one could realise God within himself or herself.
    So God can be all of grammar possibilities!
    Thanks and Regards.
     
  5. HariLakhera

    HariLakhera Platinum IL'ite

    Messages:
    1,637
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    Quite a serious subject. Given a choice, I would say God is an adjective, and abstract at that. It is like saying God is wisdom, God is Strength, God is supreme, -Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient.
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  6. nandinimithun

    nandinimithun IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    1,352
    Likes Received:
    4,755
    Trophy Points:
    335
    Gender:
    Female
    What part of speech does God represent? My answer would be everything, he is the question as well as the answer, he is the adhi and he is the anthya. He is in you and me, though we are same yet we are different.

    Thank you dear @jayasala42 ma'am for a wonderful post.
    Regards
    Nandini
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  7. jayasala42

    jayasala42 IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    5,020
    Likes Received:
    9,920
    Trophy Points:
    438
    Gender:
    Female
    Dear Shri Thyagarajan,I agree with you.The world of Science is bringing forth many interesting facts hitherto unknown and slowly enters into the world of spiritulity.At any time within 100 years it may totally endorse what Shankara said.
    Thank you for your kind response.
    Jayasala 42
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  8. jayasala42

    jayasala42 IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    5,020
    Likes Received:
    9,920
    Trophy Points:
    438
    Gender:
    Female
    Dear Shri Hari Lakhera,
    Thank you for your kind response.From the Archana format, every one is likely to come to that conclusion only.
    Jayasala 42
     
    Thyagarajan likes this.
  9. jayasala42

    jayasala42 IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    5,020
    Likes Received:
    9,920
    Trophy Points:
    438
    Gender:
    Female
    Thank you Nandini.In Tamil we used to say'Aadhiyum anthamum illaa arum perum jothi"( A bright jothi which has neither beginning nor end).It is a great topic .We can discuss many things but it is difficult to arrive at any conclusion.
    Thanks for the response.

    Jayasala 42
     
    Thyagarajan and nandinimithun like this.
  10. Thyagarajan

    Thyagarajan IL Hall of Fame

    Messages:
    7,902
    Likes Received:
    8,333
    Trophy Points:
    490
    Gender:
    Male
    One remembers in this context the quote
    “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

    So said Albert Einstein, and his famous aphorism has been the source of endless debate between believers and non-believers wanting to claim the greatest scientist of the 20th century as their own.
     

Share This Page