CHAPTER-SEVEN
GOD AND THE VEDAAS
—
God is endowed with all divine attributes, actions and nature. He has all knowledge. In Him subsists, luminous bodies such as the Earth and the Sun. He is all pervading and God of all devaas. Those who do not know Him, or have no faith in Him or do not contemplate Him are most unwise and atheistic, and are always plunged in the ocean of miseries. The realization of God is the only means of making all men happy.
Question-Do you accept the view that the Vedaas mention more than one God?
Answer-We do not. Nowhere in the four Vedaas there is a mention of the plurality of Gods. Rather, there is a clear mention that God is one.
Question-There is a description of many devtaas in the Vedaas. What do you say so?
Answer-Anything having luminous properties is called devtaa, for example, earth. But it is nowhere regarded as God or an object of worship. This very mantra (Rigved 10-49-1) clears the point when it says that all the devaas, that is, devtaas subsist in God. They are mistaken who hold that dev and God are synonyms.
—-
Question-You repeat the name of God so often. But, how do you prove His existence?
Answer-By perception and other evidences.
—
The knowledge which we get by the contact of ears, skin, eyes, tongue, nose and mind with sound, touch, form, taste, odour, pleasure, pain, truth, untruth et cetra is perception, provided that it may not be erroneous. Now, let us note that the perception which we get through senses and mind is of attributes and not of the substance. Just as the four senses skin et cetra perceive the attributes touch, form, taste and odour, and the soul with the help of the mind perceives earth and other substances, of which these are the attributes, similarly by perceiving design, intelligence and other attributes of God in this universe, we perceive God also. When the evidence of perception is available for proving that God is, there is no doubt about other evidences.
—-
Question-Is God everywhere or does He reside at one place?
Answer-He is everywhere. Had He been at one place only, he could not have been all-pervading, all-knowing, all-ordaining, all-creating, all-sustaining and all-dissolving. No agent can work at a place where he does not exist.
Question-Is God merciful and just both or not?
Answer-Yes, He is both.
Question-These two attributes are inconsistent. Where there is justice, there is no mercy; and where there is mercy, there is no justice. Justice means the giving of exactly so much pleasure or pain as is one’s due on account of one’s good or bad actions; neither a jot more, nor a jot less. But, mercy means to let the guilty go unpunished.
Answer-Justice and mercy differ only in name. They both serve the same purpose. Punishment is given with the purpose of dissuading man from sin and preventing his pain. Your interpretation of justice and mercy is not correct. Justice means that a criminal should be punished to the extent of his crime. If he is not punished, mercy is out of question. To let off one robber means to give pain to thousands of righteous people. How will it be called mercy when letting of one man means misery to so many? To put the robber in the prison and to prevent him from further evil deeds is mercy to the robber, and to kill the robber is mercy to thousands of other men.
—-
The greatest mercy of God is this, that God has created, all sort of objects in the world so that the souls may be benefited thereby. What else can be a greater mercy? The only difference between mercy and justice is of angles of vision. When one wishes that people may be happy and be exempted from pain, it is mercy. But the dealing out of punishment et cetra, by external actions is justice. The purpose of both these is the same, namely, prevention of sin and removal of pain.
Question-Has God a form or is He formless?
Answer-He is formless. If he possessed a form, how could He be all-pervading? Had He not been all-pervading, He could not have had attributes such as omniscience. Every finite thing has finite attributes, finite activities and finite nature. Besides, a God with form, that is, a corporeal God could not have been free from such limitations as cold, heat, hunger, thirst, disease, impurities, piercing, cuts et cetra. This proves that God is formless or incorporeal.
—-
Question-Is God all-powerful or not?
Answer-He is but not in the sense, in which you think. All powerful means simply this that he does not require the assistance of anybody else in creating, sustaining and dissolving the world; and in awarding pain and pleasure for good or bad of the souls. He accomplishes all His work through His infinite capacity.
Question-But, we hold that God can do whatever He wishes. There is none above Him.
Answer-What does He wish? If you say that He wishes everything and can do everything then we would put some questions – Can He kill Himself? Can He make an equal of Himself? Can He become ignorant? Can He commit sins such as adultery? Can He suffer pain? These things are inconsistent with His qualities, actions and nature. As such, your statement that “He can do everything” is also inadmissible.
—-
Question-Is it a duty that we should worship God?
{STUTI, PRAARTHANAA and UPAASANAA, have become a proverbially joint phrase for all the implications of the word WORSHIP. (Translator)}
Answer-Yes.
Question-Will God in exchange of worship absolve the worshiper of his sins?
Answer-No.
Question-Why worship, then?
Answer-Its object is different.
Question-What is it?
Answer-Stuti or appreciation creates love for God and helps a man to reform his character by contemplating the character of God.
Praarthanaa or prayer creates humility, hopefulness, and confidence.
Upaasanaa conduces to communion with God and His realization.
—-
The purpose of this stuti or appreciation is to imbibe those qualities, actions and characteristics which God has, for example, He is just, therefore, we too should be just. If a man sings laudations to God very loudly like a court-fool and does not reform his conduct, his stuti or prayer is meaningless.
—-
The prayer should be accompanied by like-wise conduct. For example, if a man prays for wisdom, he should have no stone un-turned in acquiring wisdom. It means that prayers should follow exertions. Following types of prayers should never be made, nor is God expected to listen to them.
“O God, destroy my enemies, make me the greatest of all. May I be most respected. May all be my subordinates.”
—-
When a man practices these methods, his-self and the inner-organ become pure and filled with truth; and by constant increase of truth and discrimination he reaches the stage of beatitude. If a man devotes even half an-hour a day to this practice, he would progress.
—-
The result is that, just as a chill-stricken man is cured of his chill by going close to fire, in the same way, by going close to God, all impurities and sufferings are shaken off and the qualities, actions and nature of the soul become similar to those of God.
—-
Besides, a man who does not worship God is ungrateful and foolish as well. It is ingratitude and folly to forget the Supreme Being who has given all the objects of the world for the enjoyment of souls, to overlook his obligation and further to deny His very existence.
God has no hands, but He grasps all and creates all with the hand of His power; He has no feet but being all pervading, He is very quick in reaching a place; He has no organ of sight, but sees all things accurately; He has no ears, but He hears the talk of all. He has no internal-organ but He knows the whole universe; there is none who might know the whole of Him, Him they call eternal, most excellent, and all-pervading Purush, that is, Being.
—-
Nothing is produced out of God, nor does He need any instrument. None is either His equal or His superior. The most excellent power comprising infinite knowledge, infinite strength and infinite action resides in Him inherently. Had God been action-less, how could He create, sustain and dissolve the universe?
Therefore, He is all-pervading and being intelligent, there is activity in Him.
—-
If God’s combination with matter be the hypothesis, God would be subjected to the same fault as matter. Just as matter, when combined, becomes gross, so shall God. Therefore, God is not material cause of the universe.
—-
Prakritii or matter is unborn and has triple nature-sattva, rajas and tamas. It being changeable is transformed into various objects of the world. But, Purush or God being un-changeable is never transformed to any other form. He remains always the unmodifiable same.
—-
In this verse Lord Krishna says, “whenever righteousness deteriorates, I take my birth”
Being anti vedic, this statement is not valid. If you take it in another sense, it may be accepted. Krishan was a virtuous man and always wanted to do good to the world. He might have meant that in order to protect the righteous and destroy the wicked, he would like to be born in every age.
—-
Question-If God were not to come into flesh, how would He kill wicked persons like Kansa and Raavan?
Answer- Do you think that to kill Kansa, Raavan et cetra or to lift up the hill, named Govardhan, are more difficult tasks than the creation, sustenance and dissolution of the earth, the Sun, the Moon and other objects? If one looks at God’s work in nature, he must admit that there is none equal to God, nor there shall ever be.
Reasoning also disapproves God’s incarnation. If anybody were to say that the infinite space entered the womb or somebody closed it in his fist, it would be wrong because space being infinite and all-pervading, the use of the words ‘came in’ or ‘went out’ is meaningless in this connection. Similarly, God being infinite and all-pervading, it is ridiculous to say that He goes or comes out. A thing goes to or comes from the place where it does not exist. Did God not exist in the womb, before He came into it? Or, did He not exist outside, before He came out? Who but a fool can speak or believe so in connection with God?
—-
Question-Does God forgive the sins of His devotees, or not?
Answer-No. If sins were to be forgiven, His Justice would be tampered with and all men would become sinful. Mere prospects of forgiveness make man bold and courageous to commit sins. When a king pardons the failings of his men, they become bold and commit gross faults in the hope that when they would beseech him (king) with folded hands and humble demeanour, he (king) would forgive them. Even those who are inclined to crimes, begin to commit them, as they have no fear. The same holds good in the case of God. Therefore, to reward virtue and punish vice in exact proportion is the work of God; not to forgive sins.
Question-Is the soul free or dependent?
Answer-It is free in the performance of its duties but dependent on God’s government for the fruits of its actions.
—-
Just as the soldiers, who kill many men in a battle, under the orders or insinuation of the commander-in-chief are not guilty of murder, similarly, if the soul were to do actions at the suggestion of or under compulsion from God, they would not be accountable for their good or bad deeds. Only God would deserve their fruit. The Hell and heaven, pain and pleasure, should also be the lot of God. If a man kills someone with a weapon, the man is arrested and not the weapon, similarly the dependent soul could never merit the fruit of good or bad action. Therefore, the soul is free in doing the deeds which are within its power. But, when it had done them, it becomes bound by God’s government to enjoy fruit.
—-
Question-If God had not created soul and given them power to do an act, they could have done nothing. Therefore, it follows that whatever souls do, they do under orders from God.
Answer-Souls are never born. They are un-created. God and matter are eternal. God creates the body and the sense-organs, but they are all in the subordination of the soul. When a soul does a good or a bad action in thought, deed or word, it is that very soul which suffers, not God. Suppose, a miner dug iron-ore out of the mine, a dealer purchased it, then it passed to the smith who made a sword. The solider bought the sword and killed a man with it. Now, the king will punish only the killer and not the producer or dealer of the iron or maker of the sword or the sword itself. Just so, God who creates the body et cetra is not the sufferer, but the soul itself which does the actions. If God were the doer of the deeds, no soul would commit a sin, as God being holy and righteous would actuate no soul to do an evil deed. It is clear, therefore, that the soul is free in doing its deeds, as God is free in doing His.
Question-What are the essence, attributes, activities and nature of the soul and God?
Answer-Both are rational beings. The nature of both of them is purity, imperishable-ness, righteousness et cetra. But, God’s activities consist of the creation, sustenance and dissolution of the world, the government of all things, and the awardal of rewards and punishments to the souls for their good and bad actions. The soul’s activities consist of right or wrong actions concerning procreation and upbringing of children, art, craft et cetra. God’s attributes are eternal knowledge, eternal happiness, eternal power et cetra.
The attributes of the soul are as follows:
(1) Desire to get things, (2) Aversion from pain, and ill-will, (3) Energy, (4) Happiness, (5) Sorrow or displeasure, (6) Discrimination
The Vaiseshika-Sutra adds the following more:
(7) In-breathing (8) Out-breathing (9) Closing the eyes
(10) Opening the eyes (11) Decision, memory and egoism
(12) Motions (13) Use of senses (14) Internal emotions such as hunger, thirst, joy, sorrow et cetra.
The soul being invisible can be distinguished by means of these above mentioned attributes.
—-
It is foolish to call God the seer of the three times. The past is that which was and is not. The future is that which is not and shall be. Is there any knowledge of God which was and is not and is not and shall be? The knowledge of God is always the same, imperishable and indivisible. Past and future are only from the view point of souls.
—-
Aham Brahmaasmii means Aham Brahmastha asmii, that is, I subsist in God. Here is the figure metonymy, container for the thing contained. When we say that ‘platform cries’, we mean that watch- man seated on the platform cries, because the platforms being inanimate have no power to cry. The same holds good here.
—-
Chhandogya Upanishad does not negate the existence of soul or matter. It simply means that soul and matter are not equal to God. They are inferior. It signifies the singularity of God and plurality of souls and material elements.
—-
Partial similarity is no proof of identity e.g. earth, water and fire are all inert and visible. But they are not identical. Their peculiarities prove their distinctiveness. God’s infinite knowledge, happiness, power and activities, infallibility and omnipresence differentiate Him from soul; and finite knowledge, finite magnitude, fallibility and minuteness differentiate it (soul) from God. Therefore, God and soul are not the same.
—-
Ether is pervasive, fine, formless, infinite and the bodily object is finite, visible et cetra, just as earth and other objects are never separate from ether because nothing can subsist without ether, but at the same time they are distinct because of their distinctive attributes, Similarly God being all-pervasive, souls and other objects like earth, cannot be separate (different) from God, but at the same time, can never be identical, on account of their different characteristics. Before the building of the house, clay, wood, iron and other building-articles though scattered in different places, were actually subsistent in ether. When the house has been built, even then they are in ether. And when the house is demolished and all its particles are scattered, they will still subsist in that very ether.
This means that these objects can never be separated from ether. Being pervaded by God, souls and other objects of the world can never be separated from Him, but being of different characteristics they can never be one.
—-
All things are attribute-ful, so far as they have their own attributes; and at the same time they are attribute-less, so far as they are wanting in the attributes of other things. There is no object which is either only attribute-ful or only attribute-less. Attributefulness and attributelessness both reside at the same time in the same object. Similarly, God is attributeful by dint of possessing His own attributes, infinite knowledge, infinite power etc. and, He is attributeless also for He is free from the qualities of inert objects such as form and (qualities) of souls, such as aversion.
—-
Question-Is God desireful (raagi) or renunciative (virakta)?
Answer-Neither. Covetousness or desire is always for a thing remote from and better than oneself. There is nothing remote from God, nor better that He. Therefore, it is not possible for Him to covet. Renunciative is he who abandons what is in his possession, God being pervasive cannot abandon anything.
Question-Has God any wish (Ichhaa) or not?
Answer-In the ordinary sense, God has no wish. A man wishes only that thing which he does not possess, but which is better than his possession and whose acquisition is expected to make him happier. There is nothing that God does not possess nor there is anything better than God. His happiness being full, there is no question of making Him happier. Therefore, wish is out of question in connection with God. But there is one more tendency somewhat akin to ichhaa (wish). That is ikshana or insight into everything and a tendency to create.
—-
Translator–Ichhaa or wish is a passion while Ikshana is a spontaneous tendency, a sort of nature.
Being all-powerful and pervasive God does not need mouth etc. for the revelation of Vedic science. The use of the mouth or the tongue is needed only in pronouncing words to those, who are remote from us; not for ourselves.
—-
Close your ears with your fingers and hear how many sounds are audible without the use of the mouth and the tongue. In the same way, God, who is within the souls, revealed His teachings to them. Pronunciation is necessary only when we make others hear the words.
God being formless (incorporeal) and all pervasive reveals all Vedic science to the souls from within. It is after this revelation that men teach the Vedaas to others through word of mouth. This difficulty cannot arise in the case of God.
Question-How do you prove the Vedaas to be God revealed and not man-composed?
Answer-God is holy, all-knowing, pure in nature and just, merciful et cetra, in quality. The book that describes God exactly as He is, is God’s and not of others’. That book is God’s in which there is nothing against laws of nature, or evidences such as perception, authority et cetra. God’s knowledge is infallible and therefore, the teachings of God’s book should also be equally infallible. In God’s book there should be the same order or things as exists in nature, the same description of God, soul, creation, its cause et cetra, as they actually are. The Vedaas are such books.
There is nothing in them which might be contradictory to the laws of nature or invalid according to the laws of logic.
Question-What is the need of positing that the Vedaas are from God? Men increase their knowledge step by step and in the long run succeed in composing books.
Answer-They can never do so. There can be no effect without a cause. The men living in jungles cannot be learned by mere observation of nature. They can be learned only when someone gives them education. Even in these days nobody becomes learned without receiving education. In the same way, had not God taught the sages the Vedaas and they to others, there would have been no educated man today. If any baby is put in a secluded place, in the midst of the ignorant people or of animals, he will remain ignorant like his associates.
—-
Just as we, these days, acquire knowledge by reading with our teachers, similarly, God is the teacher of those, Agni and other sages, who were born in the beginning of the universe.
—-
It was the Supreme Being who made it known to them. And whenever virtuous men, yogins, sages et cetra went into communion with God, expressed an eagerness to understand the Vedaas, God helped them to do so. When the Vedaas became known to many, those sages wrote commentaries and historical books. These books came to be known as the Brahmanaas or notes on Brahma, that is, Vedaas.
Whichever sage saw (Clearly understood) the meaning of a Vedic verse and before whom none had brought it to light became the seer or rishi of that verse and his name is even today pre-fixed to that verse, in honour of his memory. Whoever calls those rishis the authors of those verses is wrong. They were the seers and publishers of their meanings.
Question-Which books are called the Vedaas?
Answer-The Rik, the Yajur, the Saam, the Atharva; only the mantra portion.
—-
History is always written after the occurrence. It cannot pre-exist the birth of those whose life it describes. The Vedaas contain no history. There is no reference in them, of any particular man or particular event. There, the words are used in their derivative sense.
—-
Just as parents are kind to their children and desire their welfare, in the same way, God has very kindly revealed the Vedaas for the good of men, so that by acquiring the sun of knowledge, they may be free from the darkness of superstition and improve their learning and happiness.
Question-Are the Vedaas eternal or non-eternal?
Answer-Eternal. God being eternal, His knowledge is also eternal. Eternal substances have eternal qualities, activities and nature. Non- eternal things have non- eternal qualities et cetra.
Question-Are these books also eternal?
Answer-No. A book is made of paper, ink et cetra. How can it be eternal? But words and their relation with the things they stand for, are eternal.
—-
The rishis have composed books on grammar, philology, prosody et cetra, after having read the Vedaas. If God had not revealed the Vedaas, nobody could have composed anything.
LIGHT OF TRUTH: CHAPTER – ONE | CHAPTER – TWO | CHAPTER – THREE | CHAPTER – FOUR | CHAPTER – FIVE | CHAPTER –SIX | CHAPTER –SEVEN | CHAPTER – EIGHT | CHAPTER – NINE | CHAPTER – TEN
Leave A Comment