2. Defining "GOD" from Advaita perspective (Category:-Philosophical)

GOD is the one who is the Karta (Subject), Karma (Object), and Kriya (Task). He/She is the one who can do all the following three tasks alone viz. Srushti, Sthiti, and Laya. The same statement when i have to put in simple English, i would say the one who does the following things alone is a GOD!!

• Generation
• Organization
• Destruction

Believe me, the aforementioned 3 tasks can't be done in an 'Out of Sync' way! For that, a proper synchronization needs to be maintained.

Technically speaking, if you plot a Design Structure Matrix (DSM), and analyse the dependencies, the output would be a Deadlock! As per DSM rules, to resolve a deadlock area, only a single resource should work on those tasks otherwise it can't be resolved. Well, if you don't know what DSM is, it's a methodology (and tool) designed by 'MIT' which takes your work items as input and suggests the best possible execution flow. For more details on DSM visit the website. Let me come back to spiritual explanation rather than being algorithmic here.

The 3 tasks Srushti, Sthiti, Laya are mutually dependent on each other and hence there always exists a deadlock among them. So, as the common belief goes among the Hindu people that there are 3 deities viz. Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva to take care of these tasks is a Misconception!!

Hinduism mentions about 3 primary deities viz. Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva but essentially they are one and the same!! These 3 names are the 3 attributes of the GOD!

If a river splits into 3 channels and flows in 3 different regions and is called by 3 different names, what difference does it make to us? Essentially all 3 channels are the same 'Water' and originated at the same source! Same theory applies to the Hindu trinity as well. In order to execute the tasks of the universe the same Supreme being attributes himself 3 different names but is non-dual from each other. That is what Advaita also tells about the God.

Brahma primarily creates, but he also sustains by giving boons to the deserving and maintains harmony. So isn't he the sustainer? isn't he doing similar job of Vishnu? Now when he gives unusual boons to Demons, he also creates a trap door in some way or the other to put an end to the demon. Also, when demi-gods seeks his guidance for killing the demon, he reveals them the secret and indirectly helps the destruction of the demon. So is he not doing destruction indirectly? is he not doing the job of Shiva?

Vishnu's prime task is protection, sustenance. But had he not created Madhu and Kaitaba and has he not been protecting the world by killing the sinners/demons? So, is he also not doing the 3 tasks alone?

Shiva's so called primary task is destruction. But it would be an off topic here if i explain the difference between Rudra and Shiva. It's Rudra who destroys, Shiva does everything. So let me say Rudra in this context. So, Rudra's task is to dissolve. As Shiva had he not created Bhairava, Ganesha, Skanda kind of great gods? Has Shiva not been sustaining the universe by taking care of the devotees and protecting them? So is he not doing the 3 tasks alone?

So, now tell me what's the difference between the three deities? They are essentially one and the same as like as 3 different streams of water still remains water only!

So, let me come to a conclusion here that it's only one God who is called by the 3 different names!!

P.S:- People who follow Dwaita perspective (Dualism) they may have a different opinion, and may consider one form as superior to another. Even in that case, the 3 gods converge at a common God, for Vaishnavites he is Vishnu, for Shaivites he is Shiva, for Shaktas, it is mother goddess Shakti (Energy). Also there exists theories given in KMG Mahabharata kind of authentic texts supporting Shiva which tells that it's one god only (Shiva) who exists as/is called Vishnu in Vaikuntha, and Brahma in Satyaloka. A detailed topic is presented on another blog of mine here. In any case, it's only one God with different names/forms..!!!

17. Narayanamruta Advaitananda Lahari (Category:- Poetry)

I have moved my poetry to a separate blog altogether in order to give them a distinct place to flourish. This particular post has been moved to the following location.

http://stotramaalika.blogspot.com/2010/11/narayanamruta-advaitananda-lahari.html

Thanks for visiting!

19. Explaining Why GOD Cannot Have Duality and Form (Category:- Advaita)

Rigveda States, "There is only one Truth (God) whom seers call by various names". (Rigveda 1:164:46)
Svetaswatara Upanishad States, "“His eyes are everywhere, His faces everywhere, His arms everywhere, everywhere His feet. He it is who endows men with arms, birds with feet and wings and men likewise with feet. Having produced heaven and earth, He remains as their non—dual manifester”. ( 3:3 svetasvatara upanishad)"

But then we usually visualize Gods in various forms. Do multiple Gods exist? Do they have form? - Are few most common nagging questions in our minds. Let's analyze and try to find out answer though "Proof by Contradiction" method.

Assumption:

Let's assume the following things:

1. God has form
2. There are many Gods (Means Duality is true)

Axioms:

Let's consider the following beliefs/facts as axioms to build our analysis. Without someone satisfying these fundamental rules, one can't be called a God

1. God is infinite
2. God is Omnipotent (all powerful)
   
3. God is Omnipresent (all pervading)
   
4. God is Omniscient (All knowing)

Let's now proceed ahead and develop our analysis based on above four axioms.

Analysis:

Let's follow a case by case approach here.

Case -1: God has duality and has a specific form and all forms are equally powerful

Let's consider two Gods for analysis viz. God-A, and God-B, let's say they are circular in shape and exist in a space called as universal set "U". This can be seen in the below figure.


Now let's see if this arrangement of Dual Gods having a particular form meets the Axioms (Rules) stated above or not.
We see from the above figure that:

• God A and God B both are not omnipresent since they have their separate existence as well as however huge they may be, since they have a particular form, there is still some space available outside their form (space tagged with - U) -> This contradicts rules no. 1 and 3
• Since we assumed both Gods A, B as totally different from each other, there is no chance that either of them would know about each other. -> This makes the rule of Omniscience (Rule 4) false
• Now since the Case-1 considers God-A and God-B as equally potent, the God-A can't influence God-B and vice versa. So this contradicts the axiom of Omnipotence -> This makes the rule no.2 false
  

Since this case (setup) has contradicted 4 basic rules (axioms), this case cannot be true.

Case -2: God has duality and has a specific form and all forms are not equally powerful (One God contains another in his form/body)

Let's consider two Gods for analysis viz. God-A, and God-B, let's say they are circular in shape and exist in a space called as universal set "U". This can be seen in the below figure.

Now let's see if this arrangement of Dual Gods having a particular form and one God containing another in him meets the Axioms (Rules) stated above or not.
We see from the above figure that:

• God A and God B both are not omnipresent since however huge they may be, since they have a particular form, there is still some space available outside their form (space tagged with - U) -> This contradicts rules no. 1 and 3
• At a time one God can contain another in his form. Assuming God A as superior to God-B, we can assume God-B contained in God-A's form as shown in above figure. However this again contradicts the rule of Omnip[resence since God-A "contains" God-B, but God-B is not "Contained" in God-A". This is similar to Heisenberg's uncertainity principle. Here at a time one got can contain another and be superior. Both gods containing each other and being equally superior erases the Duality hence there are only two combinations as shown in the picture above in case-2. In any case, if God-A contains God-B, then God-A is not contained in God-B thereby nullifying the rule of "Omnipresence" (Rule-3)

Since this case (setup) has contradicted 2 basic rules (axioms), this case cannot be true. Let's proceed ahead.

Case -3: God has NO-Duality but has a specific form

Let's consider two Gods for analysis viz. God-A, and God-B, let's say they are circular in shape and exist in a space called as universal set "U". Since Both Gods are not different from each other, let's draw them as overlapping circles to show their nun-duality. This can be seen in the below figure.

Now let's see if this arrangement of Non-Dual Gods having a particular form meets the Axioms (Rules) stated above or not.
We see from the above figure that:

• God A and God B both are identical and there is zero difference in them. Hence they are just different in their names by which people recognize them (as God-A and God-B). So, this meets the Rigvedic axiom "There is one God whom people call by many names"
• Go-A and God-B are contained in each other equally and hence became one with each other. This makes them omniscient about each other, and omnipotent equally. So, Rules no. 2, 4 are satisfied
• Still then Rules no 1, 3 of being Infinite and Omnipresent are not satisfied since the God-A=God-B but they are circular and hence they leave a lot of space represented by "U" outside them

This case is very close to the Axioms and Vedic verses but still is not truly satisfying. Let's proceed with last case

Case -4: God has NO-Duality and is Formless

Let's assume the universal set- U itself as the God. Then it gives us a picture of non-Duality as well as Formlessness as shown below

Now let's see if this arrangement of Non-Dual God Formless God meets the Axioms (Rules) stated above or not.
We see from the above figure that:

• There is only one God-A whom people call by the names God-B, God-U. Therefore it meets the Rigvedic verse
• God-A (=B, U) is present everywhere without leaving any space unfilled -> Meets with the Rule of Omnipresence (Rule-3)
• God-A (+B) is equal to the infinite universal set-U. Hence God-A(+God-B, U) is "Infinite". Therefore it satisfies the rule of God being Infinity (Rule-1)
• Since there is only One God pervading everywhere, he is Omniscient and Omnipotent as well. Therefore rules no. 2,4 are also met
• This arrangment of God being formless, it also satisfies the statement of Svetaswatara Upanishad that God has eyes everywhere, faces everywhere, arms everywhere etc.

Hence our initial assumption that God is Dualistic and has a Form is contradicted with this Case-4 which satisfies correctly all the four fundamental axioms and also remains inline with the Ridvedic and Svetaswatara Upanishadic verses.

Conclusion:

With this proof of contradiction we could arrive at the conclusion that God is essentially One and is formless. However whatever forms we see all are due to Leela (divine sport) and are created under his Maya (Illusion).
Only through Gyana one can damage this fabric of Maya and visualize that Supreme Brahman in his true formless Jyoti called as Brahma-Jyoti. This Brahma-Jyoti is the only truth everything else is illusion. This Brahma-Jyoti is also called as 'Param Jyoti', 'Apo-Jyoti', 'Shiva-Jyoti' and 'Jyoti-Sthambha'