We all have had a go on this one some time or the other. And each time the exercise probably ended with a strange disgusting feeling. At the outset though, an attempt to know god itself defeats the idea of god. It is like raping him so as to satisfy the vacuum in the crude faculty of reason. Knowing god is neither possible nor essential. Nor is he so boring to be answerable to reason. God is too smart to surrender his USP and rob us of this thrill at the same time. My discussion therefore, as anyone, will be yet another attempt to consolidate and share my views upon the following spheres.
1. The metaphysical perspective
2. The ‘why’ of existence
3. Ethics and god
4. The world as maya?
5. Liberation through direct perception
6. Role of religion
7. Krishna – the taintless
The metaphysical perspective
It is generally observed that things most common and ordinary are the ones that are liable to be ignored. For instance, we hardly take note of as vital a process as breathing. Similarly, the immanence of god is the reason behind his elusiveness. Imagine a number line. Infinity is on both ends of it. If we take any two numbers, there is nothing but infinity between them too. Infinity in finity? Sounds absurd. But it is true that there are infinite numbers between any two numbers notwithstanding how small the distance between them. In this seamless immanence, there are points that we call numbers which are nothing but concretizations (perhaps the world as we know it) of that changeless principle. This shows that (albeit loosely) not only does god reside in everything but in fact he himself is everything.
The ‘why’ of existence
Why does the universe exist? Why would anyone create space, time, and matter with commotion as a free gift? Couldn’t god just relax in his pristine impersonal inert state? The answer is that when the universal principle operates, it operates with all its glory. Every imaginable combination of events ought to be happening. Simply, there is nothing which can be left out. God concretizes himself into parts. The one becomes the many and each part acquires a distinct identity to engage in this brilliant spectacle which is the sport of god. Each part has to forget its universal identity in order to seriously enact its role in this dream drama. The part cannot complain why it has been allotted a particular role. There are two reasons for it. Firstly, the part has no independent existence. All its attributes are due to the sheer grace of the changeless principle, a sort of free gift. Secondly, since the part in its essential state is itself the whole, there is no role it is not enacting, no place it is not present and no limitation to have any cause for complain. The engaging of the parts in their respective karma is their supreme yoga. Seen this way, the entire universe in its forgotten state offers an ode to itself.
Ethics and god
There are certain things that seem to occur naturally such as the laws of physics, the impulse to evolve or a tendency to behave in a particular manner. The questions here are – (a) why are certain things are the way they are? (b) Does ethics finds a place in the universal principle? The answer to the former is that in the universe of infinite possibilities and experiences, there is no dream that is not being dreamt. All conceivable sets of circumstances in infinite matrices are playing out themselves instantaneously. Coming to the latter, ethics should be distinguished from dharma as mentioned in the scriptures. Truth, as is generally conceived is a dependent truth which would lose its meaning if it’s opposite i.e. falsehood ceased to exist. Just as there would not be any intelligent people if there weren’t any stupid ones to compare them with. Quite surely, such dependent ethics is not something that is conceived as ‘dharma’ in the scriptures. Or may be it is. Perhaps, the sustenance of the direction in which our particular universe appears to be moving is the challenge or the prescribed mode of conduct which we call ethics.
So far our discussion tends to suggest that the universe is on auto-pilot, the same logjam between free will and destiny which I confess is difficult to crack. Excluding any one would constitute a limitation on the limitless principle. Nevertheless, we can consider one explanation. If we accept there is free will, a person can always have the defence – why was it that I exercised my free-will in any particular manner only and not otherwise? But this defence at the same time defeats the very meaning of free-will. The question here is whether any action of an entity is solely attributable to it or it is the result of the totality of the influences it is subject to? Accepting free will casts serious doubts upon the justice mechanism of the universe in what may be termed as issues relating to original karma with the villain asking - why is he the one to be the villain? Accepting destiny evokes a horrible sense of predictability into everything. From each entity’s point of view, its actions are the result of the influences of all other entities and so it considers itself as ‘determined’ and not ‘determining’. So is the case of all other entities and therefore each entity is the hero in its own way and the universe appears to worship it and in the process imparting it wholeness and completeness akin to the ode offered to god thus confirming god’s immanence and that the part is nothing but the whole.
Therefore whenever any entity is entrapped in ignorance (as part of the sport) forgetting its essential nature beyond redemption (adharma), god has to descend and reveal to him that he is nothing but the whole. In short, all ends well and there is ultimate protection and preservation. This also corresponds to the famous verse in the Bhagvad Gita ‘yada yada adharmasye, glanir bhavati bharata…’ which can also interpreted as ‘whenever you are too confused I will come in the form of sleep’ ..hehe.. You have probably heard the story about the dispute that emerged on the question of division of the cows among the three sons of a farmer on his death. It so happened that there were 17 cows which had to be divided as one half to the eldest, two-thirds of the eldest son’s share to the second son and one-third of the second son’s share to the youngest one. As division of 17 into half was not possible without cutting the cow, all were in a fix. A learned sage offered to settle the dispute by offering his cow to take the total to 18. He assured everyone that he was not putting himself at a loss by doing so. The cows came to be divided as 9, 6 and 2 according to the formula and one cow was still left which the sage took back for himself. God’s incarnation can be equated with this cow which comes, solves everything and is still preserved in the end.
The world as maya?
Mathematics again has to come to the rescue. Religions across the board (Hinduism in particular) proclaim the world as maya or illusion. We have seen how infinity is an ‘idea’ and not a number and how individual points on the number line are concretizations akin to the visible world. Now, no matter how large a number, it shall always tend to zero from infinity’s perspective. Another example would be – if we consider space and time as limitless expanses, a finite experience of matter and any interval of time would tend to zero thus rendering them as illusion. Despite this observation, I do not feel that the word maya should be taken as outright rejection of the material world.
Liberation through direct perception
Liberation perhaps is becoming one with the stunning glory and the axiomatic simplicity of god through direct extra-sensory, intutional perception i.e. becoming god ourselves or rather remembering that we are him (so-ham, Thou art I). It is the complete surrender of the individual identity and instantaneous experience of all that is conceivable. Sages claim to have attained such a state. The revelation to Arjun of his cosmic form is one such instance. One intriguing thing about that episode is that so awe-struck was Arjuna by that vision that he requested the Lord to assume his simple form. Why would anyone insist to come back to normalcy after liberation? Does this mean liberation is not perpetual but only a formatting of the soul and the undoing of psychic bondages? Perhaps yes. Liberation lies in facing the world and not running away from it through perfect non attachment and the shunning of temporary sense-based motivations which is true yoga or union thus intensifying life by imparting a sense of being in the safe hands of god. Just as one who rides a roller coaster or who sky jumps with a parachute is in a state of intense thrill and never in horror of death, the yogi sails through life with the power of undaunted faith and devotion. Scorching through maya he remains absorbed – untainted- in the eternal self.
Let us try to understand this beast – the self through a quick exercise. Ask yourself – who am I? The answers will be like these, I am Ramesh, I am an engineer, I am a human being, I am the body, I am my mind. Each of the answers suffers from a fundamental defect. They are not ‘you’ but your possessions. There are three things the seer, seeing and the seen – the subject, the process and the object. The seen cannot be the seer. Your name, designation, body, etc are all your possessions and are ‘seen’ and not the ‘seer’ i.e. you. Sages proclaim that upto this point we both can come but beyond this it is a matter of pure grace. This is a delicate subject and to deal with it through logic is best to be avoided. As one sage has famously said “If logic is taught to a stupid man, the logic becomes stupid.”
Role of religion
Religions are often blamed for being too prescriptive, orthodox and superstitious. They are seen as restricting individual freedom by enforcing a code of conduct. Terrorism is a new malaise to have sprung from it. It is interesting to study Hinduism in this context.
As most other religions, Hinduism too has love, devotion and individual surrender as basic ingredients. It also holds that reason and intellect are inadequate to attain completeness and even the proprietorship of the entire universe is not enough to wipe out the emptiness. Emotions of love, devotion, and faculties of intuitive spontaneity, equanimity and harmony are ranked higher on the evolutionary ladder. These values contribute enormously towards making a person agreeable and less obtrusive in a world that increasingly explores a larger identity transcending the individual. Renunciation of the ego, as is often spoken of in the scriptures can be seen as a tool towards making the individual less susceptible to petty concerns and preparing him to undergo higher experiences of a collective nature thus aligning oneself with the universal identity.
Krishna – the taintless
Hinduism accepts Krishna as the supreme Lord. Indeed quite uncharacteristic for a puritanical religion to have as its supreme ideal a god who steals, is a playboy, deserts the battle field and who doesn’t hesitate to adopt dubious means against enemies. He is also aware of the annihilation of his own clan at the time of his death and does nothing about it. All this makes him one of the most complex characters in history. All his actions are deemed as ‘leela’ or divine play which has to be interpreted transcendentally. At the bottom of one of his idols in India, it is written, “Please don’t try to understand me, just love me!” Sages in India warn against emulating Krishna’s actions contending that only Lord Rama’s character (maryada purushottam) should be emulated and that of Krishna should only be admired.
Nevertheless, Krishna’s life reinforces the liberal doctrine and rejects the creepy “don’t do this and don’t do that” type of boring prescriptive set of guidelines. His life is the saga that when one surrenders the ego and operates from the universal intuitive plane, he ceases to be subject to dualities of good and bad, action and reaction, higher and lower etc. and life becomes as mysterious as god himself. The individual just revels in this state and all actions become liberating and not bondage-creating as there is no ego to register any debits and credits. There is no greater sacrifice in this universe than the sacrifice of the self. Krishna comes out as lovable and ever fresh precisely because he has given himself up to his devotees, which makes him the supreme yogi.
Conclusion
As you would have noted, the above was an attempt to reconcile all the perspectives of god-theory which I concede has loopholes. The strange disgusting feeling that I mentioned in the beginning is still there, a kind of hollowness. Let us ask ourselves deep inside if we really desire god to spill out his beans and end the mystery. We would find the answer is ‘no’, because if it was to happen, there would be no one to play with us, no aim no purpose, no perpetuity. We would lose a brilliant friend.
Writing about this is a great personal satisfaction for me as not being able to go beyond the ‘chicken and egg’ dispute used to evoke a horrific sense of dread in me. Most of the ideas presented here are based upon Indian spiritual perspectives spiced with a bit of math and my own insights. Referring to god as male is purely incidental and in no way suggestive of any gender bias
With this rather long and supposedly insipid post, I also make a ‘Shree Ganesh’ of the blog. In the next post, perhaps you would know more about me.
1. The metaphysical perspective
2. The ‘why’ of existence
3. Ethics and god
4. The world as maya?
5. Liberation through direct perception
6. Role of religion
7. Krishna – the taintless
The metaphysical perspective
It is generally observed that things most common and ordinary are the ones that are liable to be ignored. For instance, we hardly take note of as vital a process as breathing. Similarly, the immanence of god is the reason behind his elusiveness. Imagine a number line. Infinity is on both ends of it. If we take any two numbers, there is nothing but infinity between them too. Infinity in finity? Sounds absurd. But it is true that there are infinite numbers between any two numbers notwithstanding how small the distance between them. In this seamless immanence, there are points that we call numbers which are nothing but concretizations (perhaps the world as we know it) of that changeless principle. This shows that (albeit loosely) not only does god reside in everything but in fact he himself is everything.
The ‘why’ of existence
Why does the universe exist? Why would anyone create space, time, and matter with commotion as a free gift? Couldn’t god just relax in his pristine impersonal inert state? The answer is that when the universal principle operates, it operates with all its glory. Every imaginable combination of events ought to be happening. Simply, there is nothing which can be left out. God concretizes himself into parts. The one becomes the many and each part acquires a distinct identity to engage in this brilliant spectacle which is the sport of god. Each part has to forget its universal identity in order to seriously enact its role in this dream drama. The part cannot complain why it has been allotted a particular role. There are two reasons for it. Firstly, the part has no independent existence. All its attributes are due to the sheer grace of the changeless principle, a sort of free gift. Secondly, since the part in its essential state is itself the whole, there is no role it is not enacting, no place it is not present and no limitation to have any cause for complain. The engaging of the parts in their respective karma is their supreme yoga. Seen this way, the entire universe in its forgotten state offers an ode to itself.
Ethics and god
There are certain things that seem to occur naturally such as the laws of physics, the impulse to evolve or a tendency to behave in a particular manner. The questions here are – (a) why are certain things are the way they are? (b) Does ethics finds a place in the universal principle? The answer to the former is that in the universe of infinite possibilities and experiences, there is no dream that is not being dreamt. All conceivable sets of circumstances in infinite matrices are playing out themselves instantaneously. Coming to the latter, ethics should be distinguished from dharma as mentioned in the scriptures. Truth, as is generally conceived is a dependent truth which would lose its meaning if it’s opposite i.e. falsehood ceased to exist. Just as there would not be any intelligent people if there weren’t any stupid ones to compare them with. Quite surely, such dependent ethics is not something that is conceived as ‘dharma’ in the scriptures. Or may be it is. Perhaps, the sustenance of the direction in which our particular universe appears to be moving is the challenge or the prescribed mode of conduct which we call ethics.
So far our discussion tends to suggest that the universe is on auto-pilot, the same logjam between free will and destiny which I confess is difficult to crack. Excluding any one would constitute a limitation on the limitless principle. Nevertheless, we can consider one explanation. If we accept there is free will, a person can always have the defence – why was it that I exercised my free-will in any particular manner only and not otherwise? But this defence at the same time defeats the very meaning of free-will. The question here is whether any action of an entity is solely attributable to it or it is the result of the totality of the influences it is subject to? Accepting free will casts serious doubts upon the justice mechanism of the universe in what may be termed as issues relating to original karma with the villain asking - why is he the one to be the villain? Accepting destiny evokes a horrible sense of predictability into everything. From each entity’s point of view, its actions are the result of the influences of all other entities and so it considers itself as ‘determined’ and not ‘determining’. So is the case of all other entities and therefore each entity is the hero in its own way and the universe appears to worship it and in the process imparting it wholeness and completeness akin to the ode offered to god thus confirming god’s immanence and that the part is nothing but the whole.
Therefore whenever any entity is entrapped in ignorance (as part of the sport) forgetting its essential nature beyond redemption (adharma), god has to descend and reveal to him that he is nothing but the whole. In short, all ends well and there is ultimate protection and preservation. This also corresponds to the famous verse in the Bhagvad Gita ‘yada yada adharmasye, glanir bhavati bharata…’ which can also interpreted as ‘whenever you are too confused I will come in the form of sleep’ ..hehe.. You have probably heard the story about the dispute that emerged on the question of division of the cows among the three sons of a farmer on his death. It so happened that there were 17 cows which had to be divided as one half to the eldest, two-thirds of the eldest son’s share to the second son and one-third of the second son’s share to the youngest one. As division of 17 into half was not possible without cutting the cow, all were in a fix. A learned sage offered to settle the dispute by offering his cow to take the total to 18. He assured everyone that he was not putting himself at a loss by doing so. The cows came to be divided as 9, 6 and 2 according to the formula and one cow was still left which the sage took back for himself. God’s incarnation can be equated with this cow which comes, solves everything and is still preserved in the end.
The world as maya?
Mathematics again has to come to the rescue. Religions across the board (Hinduism in particular) proclaim the world as maya or illusion. We have seen how infinity is an ‘idea’ and not a number and how individual points on the number line are concretizations akin to the visible world. Now, no matter how large a number, it shall always tend to zero from infinity’s perspective. Another example would be – if we consider space and time as limitless expanses, a finite experience of matter and any interval of time would tend to zero thus rendering them as illusion. Despite this observation, I do not feel that the word maya should be taken as outright rejection of the material world.
Liberation through direct perception
Liberation perhaps is becoming one with the stunning glory and the axiomatic simplicity of god through direct extra-sensory, intutional perception i.e. becoming god ourselves or rather remembering that we are him (so-ham, Thou art I). It is the complete surrender of the individual identity and instantaneous experience of all that is conceivable. Sages claim to have attained such a state. The revelation to Arjun of his cosmic form is one such instance. One intriguing thing about that episode is that so awe-struck was Arjuna by that vision that he requested the Lord to assume his simple form. Why would anyone insist to come back to normalcy after liberation? Does this mean liberation is not perpetual but only a formatting of the soul and the undoing of psychic bondages? Perhaps yes. Liberation lies in facing the world and not running away from it through perfect non attachment and the shunning of temporary sense-based motivations which is true yoga or union thus intensifying life by imparting a sense of being in the safe hands of god. Just as one who rides a roller coaster or who sky jumps with a parachute is in a state of intense thrill and never in horror of death, the yogi sails through life with the power of undaunted faith and devotion. Scorching through maya he remains absorbed – untainted- in the eternal self.
Let us try to understand this beast – the self through a quick exercise. Ask yourself – who am I? The answers will be like these, I am Ramesh, I am an engineer, I am a human being, I am the body, I am my mind. Each of the answers suffers from a fundamental defect. They are not ‘you’ but your possessions. There are three things the seer, seeing and the seen – the subject, the process and the object. The seen cannot be the seer. Your name, designation, body, etc are all your possessions and are ‘seen’ and not the ‘seer’ i.e. you. Sages proclaim that upto this point we both can come but beyond this it is a matter of pure grace. This is a delicate subject and to deal with it through logic is best to be avoided. As one sage has famously said “If logic is taught to a stupid man, the logic becomes stupid.”
Role of religion
Religions are often blamed for being too prescriptive, orthodox and superstitious. They are seen as restricting individual freedom by enforcing a code of conduct. Terrorism is a new malaise to have sprung from it. It is interesting to study Hinduism in this context.
As most other religions, Hinduism too has love, devotion and individual surrender as basic ingredients. It also holds that reason and intellect are inadequate to attain completeness and even the proprietorship of the entire universe is not enough to wipe out the emptiness. Emotions of love, devotion, and faculties of intuitive spontaneity, equanimity and harmony are ranked higher on the evolutionary ladder. These values contribute enormously towards making a person agreeable and less obtrusive in a world that increasingly explores a larger identity transcending the individual. Renunciation of the ego, as is often spoken of in the scriptures can be seen as a tool towards making the individual less susceptible to petty concerns and preparing him to undergo higher experiences of a collective nature thus aligning oneself with the universal identity.
Krishna – the taintless
Hinduism accepts Krishna as the supreme Lord. Indeed quite uncharacteristic for a puritanical religion to have as its supreme ideal a god who steals, is a playboy, deserts the battle field and who doesn’t hesitate to adopt dubious means against enemies. He is also aware of the annihilation of his own clan at the time of his death and does nothing about it. All this makes him one of the most complex characters in history. All his actions are deemed as ‘leela’ or divine play which has to be interpreted transcendentally. At the bottom of one of his idols in India, it is written, “Please don’t try to understand me, just love me!” Sages in India warn against emulating Krishna’s actions contending that only Lord Rama’s character (maryada purushottam) should be emulated and that of Krishna should only be admired.
Nevertheless, Krishna’s life reinforces the liberal doctrine and rejects the creepy “don’t do this and don’t do that” type of boring prescriptive set of guidelines. His life is the saga that when one surrenders the ego and operates from the universal intuitive plane, he ceases to be subject to dualities of good and bad, action and reaction, higher and lower etc. and life becomes as mysterious as god himself. The individual just revels in this state and all actions become liberating and not bondage-creating as there is no ego to register any debits and credits. There is no greater sacrifice in this universe than the sacrifice of the self. Krishna comes out as lovable and ever fresh precisely because he has given himself up to his devotees, which makes him the supreme yogi.
Conclusion
As you would have noted, the above was an attempt to reconcile all the perspectives of god-theory which I concede has loopholes. The strange disgusting feeling that I mentioned in the beginning is still there, a kind of hollowness. Let us ask ourselves deep inside if we really desire god to spill out his beans and end the mystery. We would find the answer is ‘no’, because if it was to happen, there would be no one to play with us, no aim no purpose, no perpetuity. We would lose a brilliant friend.
Writing about this is a great personal satisfaction for me as not being able to go beyond the ‘chicken and egg’ dispute used to evoke a horrific sense of dread in me. Most of the ideas presented here are based upon Indian spiritual perspectives spiced with a bit of math and my own insights. Referring to god as male is purely incidental and in no way suggestive of any gender bias
With this rather long and supposedly insipid post, I also make a ‘Shree Ganesh’ of the blog. In the next post, perhaps you would know more about me.
