Defining God --A Vedic Interpretation

Philosophy Compass, 2017

There is a variety of concepts of the divine in the eastern and western theological and philosophical traditions. There is, however, not enough reflection on the logic behind concepts of God and their justification. I clarify some necessary and sufficient conditions any attempt to explicate a concept of God has to take into account. I argue that each concept of God is a cypher for a particular worldview and distinguishes three types of justification frequently used to bestow content on particular concepts of God: philosophical, theological, and scientific. I turn to four fundamental models of the God-world relation and argue that the most promising concept of God is panentheistic, on which the universe is essentially divine but is not exhaustive of the divine being.

International Philosophical Quarterly, 1990

I. INTRODUCTION• T HE COMMON VIEW i5 that Hindu philosophy is committed to one of the cc;mccptions of the Trans~endent: whether understood as Brahman (the Ah-sol1.1te) of Vedanta met;iphysics; or as fl,•ara, in one of his triune: rorms of Siva., Vhnu. or. Brahma or the sect:uian traditions; or as Saktt an exclusively feminine divinity, such as the tenifting Goddess KiJi of the Ulntric sei;ts; or perhaps as •the divinely sacred offspring, .such as the elephanl-hea.dcd Oanda and his brother Kintikeya. And there are; of course, colorful variations to this wondrous theme, with a profusion of images in tile vast pantheon of Hindu gods, goddesses, avataras, partia1 divine embodiments. and so on. Understandably, rhen, scholars have attempted to encompass the bulk of Hindu be.liefs variously under one of these categories: polytheism. organized polytheism, pantheism. panenthc::ism, hcnotheism:1 monotheism. monism, non-dualism, OI', ~ved more puzzling. :all of the$e somehow wrapped into one (hence the ubiquitous '"Onc.nr::~s:•). By and large, it is a~$umc.d lha.t Hinduism pr-ogre.sscd from a primitive polytheism (in its pre-Aryan, ea.tthy roots) through henotbeism (In R..& and Atharva Vedas) atJd monistic: idealism (of the Upani5a.ds), towards a form of monot~ch;tn, which lhc vast majority of Hindus arc apparently seen to espouse.I Not so well known, pnrtly because of its-,neglect by OricntaJisls, is a contrary posjtion thal moves away from all such conceptions, and which could also be said to reject .. Oodtalk'' alto~ethcr: indeed, here we come: rather c:Jose to atheism (even •'a-1hcologieu) in the Hindu tradition. This is not merely a whimsical sentimeJlt which could be pcffuhctorily dismissed as an aberration within the tradition. There seems robe an argument for this contni.ry position, or at least a.rgumcnts ag:ilinst those whose theological discourse m.igllt pers~e them otherwise_ Jn general terms, let us say lhat lhcre is scope wilhin Hindu philosophy f'or an articulated •1 wtn1ld like: 10 c.-prcss my 1hanks ltt Dr. J~lyn. Dunph)' for 10\ng 1htoup ;\draft or 1his. p<lilll!r and m:ikir.1: a n~nnber or \1$~fllf wqei;:tiMs. 1 5' 1' 11!, f~r e~pl~. A. L. Basham. "KllSl':ilA.'" Rt:lirliiu$ Trodiliom • tOct .. 19'1~). 1-B. More ins11"1.1Clive in 1his conlr::ii.\ i!I Bashitm's erudite !iurv~ Qf "Hindtdsm•• if' R. C. Zachl!CI", ed., 'I~ Concts~ .Encyc/opa~di4 of Lilting FaiJJu (Londori.IBo.<:ton; 8£&con Presa. 196'). ZachoCl'':s works g[I Hilldiri:;m, Ctipec:ia.11}' hi& lmm;l:arion of •be Bh"8"~tta-8ild C01ford; The CluCJ1dan Press. 1974). and ~ M'y.nlcism, Sact~d 11.nd Profo~ (O:llfon:I: The CW'endu111 Pren, 1968}, be:1ray a distinctive monolheis1ic tt:ading ot cloissical Hind1.1ism. Cf. Mu l'dOUer-, ~ Sir s,~t~m:s of lndEan rmtosoplt)I {London: l.Angs.man, Ori::t:n, 1928); and Do11ald and J1:.an Jc;iJm!i.on, GfHl and God~ i11 Hindiiism (New Delhi~ Amald-Hcini;m21Ul, 1972). "* This reprinced anide ~s d-:dicalcd to th~ memol')' of Dr. Wilhelm Halbfass. dep.:irted May 2000.

In this research paper we will discuss the concept of God in Hinduism and Islam, the two major world religions. The theme of this paper is to show that monotheism is at the core of both these great religions. Islam is strictly monotheistic but Hinduism has pantheistic and henotheistic tendencies as well. While monotheism means the oneness and transcendence of God pantheism means that the Supreme Being is immanent in His creation and is present everywhere and in everything. Henotheism is the belief in one Supreme Divinity with the belief in other lesser deities.

COMMUNIO-SPOKANE THEN WASHINGTON-, 2002

Sins for the Sake of God Affinming God as Creator Leonard Lmin I W m Y Kalmanofjkr APortrait ofhbecca: The Devolution of a Matriarch into a Patriarch MsffornbRotenbw~ -The I;ckh W a Model: A Rrflection on Sufkring Mbrcia find Inirodnction &y D a d Kraemer Thc Multiple Meanings of the Mourner's Kaddish RivmR?yJikw P LctterfiomNicc P Cbark Simon FROMTHEARCHIWS AMoment of Joy in Jewish Id%, 1899 hac1 F r i t W w Intmdrrcrion by Baika Round Shagel BOOKS IN REVIEW Bemard Ghaman ._-3 25 46 63 67 78 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

Scientific GOD Journal, 2016

In almost all religions, it is said that God is the supreme source of the universe. But it seems that God could not be sensed through any material sensations. Thus, we need to develop the logical understanding of God which would be only possible through the entities that are subtlest in nature and form the substrate of our awareness. This substrate is consciousness and, in turn, the source of consciousness is the divine, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient God.

The Concept of God in Different Religions.

Many of us, I venture to say, have heard, believed, or defended God but none of us has ever seen, felt, or detected this phenomena called as God. As a Science and Law student who values logic and facts above all, I can hardly entertain the idea of a nonempirical existence who is an All-powerful, All-knowing, All-merciful ultimate creator but I shall not venture in the journey of finding whether god exists or not. I would rather give my theist inner-self a benefit of doubt. I actually would be the first person to be filled with delight and joy if the existence of God is proven. We still do not know many things about the universe and the purpose of our existence in such a large world. As Socrates said "I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing and that is, and that I know nothing" 1. My goal is rather to venture into the domain of Idea, a foolish Idea

The process of the cosmic creation is a very important subject for the proper understanding of the origin of the universe and life. The ancient Sanskrit texts of India describe the creation of the material world in a very elaborate way. The Vedas described the creation, evolution and annihilation of the universe as a cyclic process: creation (sarga & visarga), maintenance (sthana), and dissolution (pralaya). In this paper, sustained with a Power Point presentation, it will be explain the universal creation from the theistic view point of the Vedantic Big Vision (VBV) model of the Universe, according to the Vedantic paradigm. The development of this thesis is also based on the fundamental concepts of the cyclic model of Vedic Cosmology and the great cycles of cosmic evolution in large scale divisions of time. My thesis also leans on in the ontological foundations of Sankhya Philosophy, some of whose aspects I already exposed in previous works and pioneer investigations research. This vedantic scientific approach agrees with the spiritual paradigm that has been established by the Bhaktivedanta Institute, harmonizing the complementary roles of science and spirituality. Under this scope-view it will be explain the theistic conception of the universal genesis, establishing a better understanding and nexus between Vedanta & Science and their projections in the creation phenomena. The Vedic Universe as a multi-dimensional system From the standpoint of the Vedanta-sutra and Bhagavatam Purana, the universe is a multi-dimensional system that includes different elements and phenomena. The vedantic theistic paradigm here presented is concerning with the understanding of the Cosmos and his meaning in relation with God and the service of the divine. Under this scope the creation of the Universe is carried out by the Supreme Being. In this cosmic scenario, the role of consciousness as an irreducible principle of life and its interactions with nature, up to the levels of high order, will play a fundamental significance. The manifestation of the world is not technically a process of evolution in every sense, because the cause of the world itself (Visnu) never undergoes transformation. The world manifests through successive emanations that result in the unfolding of matter, to the point that it is suitable for the expression of the latent desires of the jivas. As matter develops downward from subtle to gross forms, the jivas develop from gross to refined subtle expressions of themselves through 8,400,000 forms beginning with aquatic life and culminating in human life. At the time in this process that humanity makes its appearance on earth, everything is in order for the jiva souls to meet their maker. At this point the world consisting of the jivas and matter —the marginal and external saktis of Visnu—, becomes conscious of itself.

Journal For the Scientific Study of Religion, 1998

Concepts of gods, like any other concepts, are informed and constrained by cross-cultural regularities of the human mind-brain. Specifically, divine beings that are represented as intentional agents are subject to the cognitive intuitions that govern all intentional agents. These intuitions ...