Who created God?

[Aupmanyav]

Deleted.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yeah, it is very strong that everything that exists in the universe arose from the ionic plasma which existed at the time of Big Bang. So humans, animals, vegetation and non-living substances, all arise from the same, without any exception.
That is non-dual Hinduism, 'Advaita'. No need for a God or soul. We ourselves and the society is the judge. No life beyond death, just change in form for what constitutes us. It is a simple doctrine devoid of complexicities.

I have to interject here, because you are once again taking your own materialistic views and calling them "non-dual Hinduism, 'Advaita.'"

Advaita simply the realization that the individual Self (Atman) is identical to the supreme reality...the highest principle...pure consciousness (Brahman).

Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Applying materialistic views to the philosophy is your prerogative, but please don't misrepresent it by suggesting that your views are the sum of the philosophy to those who may not be familiar with it. I'm confident Adi Sankara would take exception to your doing so.

 

[SalixIncendium]

My motive is to tarpedo false beliefs of theists with which they fool people.

There are no "false beliefs." All rivers lead to the ocean. No need to assume that everyone is afloat on the same river you navigate.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The Christian Apophatic Tradition says broadly the same thing. Eckhart says the same thing.

Consciousness is associated with Brahman, although this order transcends the human categories of understanding.

Maya conceals, but Maya also reveals.

Brahman does not have a brain. Brhman is not conscious. Brahman is quite machinistic. Action and reaction.
Maya conceals, knowledge reveals.

Per Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is pure consciousness...satcitananda. This is not the Western concept of waking consciousness that's associated with the brain, but the substrate that underlies that waking consciousness (jagrat), dream consciousness (svapna), and deep sleep (susupti).

Maya is time/space/causation. "Action and reaction" is causation, and therefore inherent to maya. Action and reaction are part of the veil obscuring Brahman from the world.

 

[SalixIncendium]

..well, you do!

Does that mean that "Brahman" is separate from human beings?

Human beings are an appearance in/of Brahman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Applying materialistic views to the philosophy is your prerogative, but please don't misrepresent it by suggesting that your views are the sum of the philosophy to those who may not be familiar with it. I'm confident Adi Sankara would take exception to your doing so.

Agree, it is my personal so-called 'materialistic view'. But perhaps Sankara would not have disagreed, he said 'Ishwar' belongs to 'Vyavaharika Satya'. I forgot to check this with him.

There are no "false beliefs." All rivers lead to the ocean.

Don't think so. Some rivers empty in land-locked lakes or marshes.

Per Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is pure consciousness...satcitananda.
Maya is time/space/causation.

There is no pure consciousness. Where does it exist? In what brain? There is no consciousness without a brain.
Existence of Brahman itself creates 'maya'. The fundamental forces giving rise to waves/particles to all that happens in the universe.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Agree, it is my personal so-called 'materialistic view'. But perhaps Sankara would not have disagreed, he said 'Ishwar' belongs to 'Vyavaharika Satya'. I forgot to check this with him.

Somehow, I don't think Sankara had "ionic plasma" in mind when speaking of Ishwara.

Don't think so. Some rivers empty in land-locked lakes or marshes.

It's meant to be a metaphor. But if you want to be so literal, let's not forget the water cycle.

There is no pure consciousness. Where does it exist? In what brain?

'Where' is a location word. That is maya. Pure consciousness simply exists.

There is no consciousness without a brain.

I just made the distinction between the Western concept of consciousness and the Eastern concept of it. You chose to ignore it and make the bold, empty claim that it's dependent on a brain. There is no evidence of this.

Existence of Brahman itself creates 'maya'. The fundamental forces giving rise to waves/particles to all that happens in the universe.

Brahman does not create. It simply is.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Somehow, I don't think Sankara had "ionic plasma" in mind when speaking of Ishwara.
It's meant to be a metaphor. But if you want to be so literal, let's not forget the water cycle.
'Where' is a location word. That is maya. Pure consciousness simply exists.
I just made the distinction between the Western concept of consciousness and the Eastern concept of it. You chose to ignore it and make the bold, empty claim that it's dependent on a brain. There is no evidence of this.
Brahman does not create. It simply is.

Sankara did not know about 'ionic plasma', but he sure knew that Ishwara does not exist in 'Paramarthika Satya' (Absolute Truth).
Point taken.
What is the definition of 'Pure Consciousness'? The four fundamental forces? 'Spooky action at a distance'?
There is no evidence contrary to it.
That is what I said. Maya happens because there is Brahman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

In quantum field theory, a force carrier is a type of particle that gives rise to forces between other particles. They serve as the quanta of a particular kind of physical field.
Photons are the fastest force carriers. In case of gravity, gravitons are postulated.
Force carrier - Wikipedia, Action at a distance - Wikipedia

 

[SalixIncendium]

What is the definition of 'Pure Consciousness'? The four fundamental forces? 'Spooky action at a distance'?

The state of awareness without qualities or attributes...devoid of content such as thoughts, feelings, and senses. No forces...no action. Simply the purest state of being.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I do not see a being in the sky. Brahman, for me is not a being. It is space/energy, appearing and (perhaps) disappearing. A football expanding with the speed of light, which we currently measure some 93 billion light-years, till it makes an about-turn.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I do not see a being in the sky. Brahman, for me is not a being. It is space/energy, appearing and (perhaps) disappearing. A football expanding with the speed of light, which we currently measure some 93 billion light-years, till it makes an about-turn.

I did not say 'a' being. I said 'being,' present participle of the verb 'be.'

Space and energy are things. That is maya. Brahman is no thing.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I did not say 'a' being. I said 'being,' present participle of the verb 'be.'
Space and energy are things. That is maya. Brahman is no thing.

Of course, Brahman is there; space, energy, time, mass is there; and nothing else, till the other phase (non-existence) begins.
My guess. Perhaps by the time my younger grandson is 80, things will be clearer. He is a 14-year old at the moment.
Things may be understood by the time his grandson is 80.
You see, Salix, things take time. Our desire to know the secrets does not hurry things.