What/Who Is God?

SalixIncendium said:
I've been involved in many conversations that make reference to God...God's intent...what God does...etc. But in many of those conversations, participants struggle to even agree on what or who God is and find themselves simply talking past each other.

Being new here, I thought it would help me to learn a bit more of members' personal view of God to facilitate interaction and to avoid misunderstanding.

... if you're not comfortable answering the question, you're under no obligation to do so.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Perhaps it may help the rest of us better understand where you are coming from as well if you would be so kind as to answer your own question? No obligation...call now! But wait, there's more!

My view of G!d is found often enough around here, and after more than 20 years I'm still sorting out the details.

We now return to your regularly scheduled program... :)

</smart aleck>
 
  • Like
Reactions: wil
juantoo3 said:
Perhaps it may help the rest of us better understand where you are coming from as well if you would be so kind as to answer your own question?
Click to expand...

Certainly.

Truth be told, I avoid use of the term "God" when referencing my own view of divinity because of the reasons I mention in the post you quoted. It's a common error when I use the term to default to the God of Abraham, even by those people that know I'm dharmic. This happens with most non-dharmic paradigms, with theists and atheists alike.

For me, in the simplest terms, the highest divine principle, "God," if you will, is Brahman, specifically Nirguna Brahman (Brahman without qualities or attributes), as opposed to Saguna Brahman, which are typically the more anthropomorphic representations of the divine, i.e. Shiva, Vishnu, Ganesha, Parvati, etc., worshipped by those on the path of Bhakti Yoga. Nirguna Brahman is often described as satcitananda, which is Sanskrit for existence/conscious/bliss. It is immutable and without form.
 
SalixIncendium said:
For me, in the simplest terms, the highest divine principle, "God," if you will, is Brahman, specifically Nirguna Brahman (Brahman without qualities or attributes), as opposed to Saguna Brahman, which are typically the more anthropomorphic representations of the divine, i.e. Shiva, Vishnu, Ganesha, Parvati, etc., worshipped by those on the path of Bhakti Yoga. Nirguna Brahman is often described as satcitananda, which is Sanskrit for existence/conscious/bliss. It is immutable and without form.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

It would appear our views are similar, though I use different terms. I tend to use the term G!d as a matter of respect to my Jewish friends (and the foundation of my preferred paradigm), but I have long not seen "Him" as an old grey beard reclining on a cloud hurling thunderbolts. It can be a difficult concept to convey, particularly to those that hold a stereotypical view (even moreso those who use that view to set up strawman arguments).
 
I find it interesting that a couple of you use the spelling "G!d." Most Jewish people I've seen write out the term as "G-d." This is the first forum I've ever seen use the exclamation point in place of the "o."
 
SalixIncendium said:
I find it interesting that a couple of you use the spelling "G!d." Most Jewish people I've seen write out the term as "G-d." This is the first forum I've ever seen use the exclamation point in place of the "o."
Click to expand...
I came to use the ! for the. - reason but with some oomph of something special and G?d seemed insincere.
 
wil said:
Still confused...what is G!d?
Click to expand...
Natural. You are trying to understand the Flying Spaghetty Monster. How can you understand what does not exist and is fictional? Come out and abandon doubts and dualities. Krishna said:

"yadā bhūta-pṛathag-bhāvam, eka-stham anupaśyati;
tat eva ca vistāraṁ, brahma sampadyate tadā."
https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/31/

When one sees through different identities and sees them as one, and also its expansion, then one attains the Brahman conception.
 
Last edited:
the forums come and go, but equal lunch and liberty are always in your heart. There forums with presidents ( Trump one's A mean ), forums with dogs and cats, but the most important ones the ones God are the best ;D.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Aupmanyav said:
Natural. You are trying to understand the Flying Spaghetty Monster. How can you understand what does not exist and is fictional? Come out and abandon doubts and dualities. Krishna said:

"yadā bhūta-pṛathag-bhāvam, eka-stham anupaśyati;
tat eva ca vistāraṁ, brahma sampadyate tadā."
https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/31/

When one sees through different identities and sees them as one, and also its expansion, then one attains the Brahman conception.
Click to expand...

Yes, Aup. Only see all as one, loving one and all, and you hold and contain the expansion in the palm of your hand. When and if it should stop, you still hold the essence. In holding the essence, you hold to the one and all. Once again, love is the guide which organizes the all into it's proper place. Nothing escapes divine organization. Nothing can resist it's influence, which at times is almost imperceptible, but always relentless. Sometimes fast, sometimes slow, sometimes heavy, sometimes light, but always pushing toward the eternal and final goal of true union. This is a great mystery.
 
Just to add a little more depth: Scholarship is good, but if the heart is not somehow placed above the head, no amount of flowery words can make up the difference. Until the scholar learns how this is to be done (it involves death in a measure), even if the words were enough to fill several volumes, they are but a sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal.
 
stranger said:
Just to add a little more depth: Scholarship is good, but if the heart is not somehow placed above the head, no amount of flowery words can make up the difference..
Click to expand...

Yes .. the "heart" is the most important thing. Our sincerity and intentions.
 
stranger said:
Once again, love is the guide which organizes the all into it's proper place.
Click to expand...
I wont go that strong on love. Love Osma bin Laden or Caliph Ibrahim, they will still remain Osama bin Laden and Caliph Ibrahim. The perceived world and what truly it is are two completely different things. We term those as "Paramarthika Satya" (Absolute truth) and "Vyavaharika Satya" (Truth of the perceived world). Both are truths in their own way, and have to be handled at their own levels. Just love would not suffice.
 
Aupmanyav said:
I wont go that strong on love. Love Osma bin Laden or Caliph Ibrahim, they will still remain Osama bin Laden and Caliph Ibrahim. The perceived world and what truly it is are two completely different things. We term those as "Paramarthika Satya" (Absolute truth) and "Vyavaharika Satya" (Truth of the perceived world). Both are truths in their own way, and have to be handled at their own levels. Just love would not suffice.
Click to expand...
(misspelling of "Yin" notwithstanding...)
iu


iu


Reality requires two sides. We exist suspended in the tension between the two sides.
 
Last edited:
juantoo3 said:
iu


iu


Reality requires two sides. We exist suspended in the tension between the two sides.
Click to expand...
But in the I Ching the Spitual world vertical true Yin/Yang polarity shifts to the horizontal axis as it interacts into the natural dimension, where it is expressed as the 'opposites' of fire and water.

Darkness is not the opposite of light, but the lack of light. There is no light at the bottom of a mine -- it is totality of darkness -- but a single candle lights the darkness, and the brilliance of 10 million suns is still not that totality of light -- there is no upper end to light.

The Yin/Yang polarity must never be mistaken as an explanation for good and evil in nature. Imo

To me, the natural dimension is Plato's cave. Light is the shadow of God ...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top