How can the Creator be part of His creation?

[Ramakrishna]

I was talking about theology with my friend today who is Catholic, and he asked me "What do you think about the argument that it is impossible for the Creator to be contained within His creation? Wouldn't that discredit all of the avatars in Hinduism?" I told him how I don't believe that, and God is not only contained within the avatars, but all of us. He wanted to know how can the Creator be part of His creation. I told him that I don't see God making so many creations and being completely separate from them. He said that God is not far away though, and every time we pray we are in the presence of God. I told him not to take it in a literal sense, like we are all God, because Hindus do not believe in that. I said that I agree with him that we are connected with God, who is within us, through prayer. I said again that it's not in a literal sense like God is living within my small intestine or something, but rather God is very close to us and reached through prayer and other methods. I told him this is what I think Christ meant when he too said "The Kingdom of God is within you." He then said that he thinks he agrees with me then, but he doesn't believe that God is present in everything physically though. Obviously this is one of the main differences between Christianity and Hinduism, but at least I think he believes that God is present within humans.

At the end, I told him that the concept of atman covers this. Is the concept basically that the atman is part of Brahman, but is separated from Brahman and ultimately must reunite with Brahman? Since the atman is emanated from Brahman, that makes God within us all? Why aren't we all divine and worshipped then? Is the answer because we are not complete manifestations of Brahman (like Shiva, Vishnu, and all the avatars) and therefore not fit for worship?

I think I have the whole concept down, but I want to make sure for when I explain it to people. I know that if I say something like "God is within us all", most Christians would be shocked and begin asking a million questions. Perhaps I should just point them to their Bible verse, "The Kingdom of God is within you."

[devotee]

Namaste Ramkrishna,

The Hindu philosophy has many layers. The highest philosophy, the ultimate Truth, propounded by Hindus and also realised/experienced by them is :

a) That there was never a creation
b) That Creator and the Creation are not different
c) Everything is One alone, apparently seen as many, is a highly intelligent system which is neither being nor not-being & it has four states of existence. This whole universe is just one face of the Reality ... it is one of the states & is called Waking state.

However, your friend many not digest this very high level of Truth. So, for him this philosophy is not advocated but I said it here & you may also tell him just to give an idea that Hinduism is not as simplistic as it seems from outside.

000000000000000000

Christianity says that this world was created by God. Genesis tells us that there was God alone to begin with. In fact, if God is really the creator of everything then there cannot exist anything except God unless the same is created by Him. If that is true then how did God create .... what material did he use to create ... where from did he get that material .... where did he get the dirt for the creation ... ? There is only one possibility that He Himself became the creation otherwise there will be creation of something out of nothing which is ridiculous. God cannot have even space around to start his creation activities as space too must have to be created by him.

So, the material to be used by Him must come only from God as there was nothing else available in the beginning. The space where this creation took place by using God as raw-material for creation must also be within God as there can't be any concept of "outside God" before creation. So, logically there is only one possibility that the creation is thoroughly within God and created by using raw material which was essentially God.

If we assume that God is just like a Human being in size and expanse as Christians believe, then can such a being create something as huge as this universe .... which is so huge that even one galaxy is not more than a point in the whole system ? These are very childish depictions of God. God existed even when there was no human being. The human being came on this earth too late ... billion of years after the Sun was born. Even the Earth came too late. Was there no God before ? Does it prove that God created this world including human beings as fast it is stated in the Christian Bible ? How does it explain the Charles Darwin's theory of evolution ? How does the Bible explain the existence of Dinosaurs when there was no man ? Why doesn't God talk about those in the Bible, if the Bible is the final word of God ? If the whole of this creation is destroyed by any fateful event, will the God survive ?

This creation theory is there in Hinduism too and is in other religions too. But these simplistic theories are for less intelligent people ... to give them a simple & easily understandable theory which can guide them to the right path. Bible also does the same thing. It is like limiting the teaching to "Light travels in a straight line" & "Light is a form of energy" to a student of elementary class without telling him the Truth that light is actually a form of electromagnetic wave which doesn't always move in straight line and that it has a nature of a wave and also of particles. Or like telling primary level students that mass always remains constant ... not disclosing to them that the mass can be converted into energy ... etc. etc. This is important ... very important that the Truth must not be told to each and everyone without assessing his/her capability to digest the Truth otherwise there would be more harm than good. That is why Hinduism has many philosophies within it suiting different types of people. The other religions don't have some much to offer ... there is just one size of clothing for everyone ... take it or leave it.

If he has difficulty in accepting "avataars" within Hinduism, how can he accept that Jesus was God ? How can he believe that God has a son like we humans have ... did He (God) have sex with a woman to produce this child ?? .... if not, and He created Jesus like he created the entire universe then why not we all are God's children ??? ...... (Sorry, God is not just like a king in blood and flesh) ! Does his logical brain work only when he analyses Hindu philosophies and stops working as soon as reaches the Church ??

OM

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


I think I have the whole concept down, but I want to make sure for when I explain it to people. I know that if I say something like "God is within us all", most Christians would be shocked and begin asking a million questions. Perhaps I should just point them to their Bible verse, "The Kingdom of God is within you."

One thing you might want to do is get well grounded in the knowledge. Where does one start? IMHO the upaniṣads are there for in-depth understanding. Some may not enjoy or 'get' the wisdom , so you have to see how you gravitate to this knowledge.

But which ones? This post may interest you:http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4617

And this post talks puruṣa entering creation:
of http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=40451&postcount=7 It is a common theme in the upaniṣads and offered from different points of view.


Last I have found having a comfortable conversation with another person that is open minded about talking of creation, its origin, Being, consciousness is delightful. Yet if one's intent is to change another's point of view, then a different relationship unfolds, many times not to ones liking.

praṇām

[sambya]

I was talking about theology with my friend today who is Catholic, and he asked me "What do you think about the argument that it is impossible for the Creator to be contained within His creation? Wouldn't that discredit all of the avatars in Hinduism?" I told him how I don't believe that, and God is not only contained within the avatars, but all of us. He wanted to know how can the Creator be part of His creation.......... He said that God is not far away though, and every time we pray we are in the presence of God. I told him not to take it in a literal sense, like we are all God, because Hindus do not believe in that. I said that I agree with him that we are connected with God, who is within us, through prayer. I said again that it's not in a literal sense like God is living within my small intestine or something, but rather God is very close to us and reached through prayer and other methods. I told him this is what I think Christ meant when he too said "The Kingdom of God is within you." He then said that he thinks he agrees with me then, but he doesn't believe that God is present in everything physically though. Obviously this is one of the main differences between Christianity and Hinduism, but at least I think he believes that God is present within humans.


well , your christian friend is having trouble in understanding what you are saying to him because he is stuck up with the christian concept of god as a formless anthropomorphic entity --one who has human feelings and emotions and yet lacks the human form .who 'creates' a universe and 'rules' over it . much in the same way as a earthly monarch , only in a larger scale .

hinduism on the other hand is all about philosophies . be it advaita , dvaita or vishistadvaita systems . god does not 'create' as we humans 'create' . when we say "god's creation" we are speaking of a phenomenon for which the nearest possible similarity is 'creation' as we humans know it . so we asssign the term 'creation' to that phenomenon .

now what is that phenonmenon like ? from the standpoint of advaita this phenomenon is a perception resulting out of ignorance or maya . the creation that we see around is illusory and actually nonexistent . the only thing that exists is brahman and brahman alone . perfect monism .
vishistadvaita believes that the creation does exist but is temporal . and this process of creation and subsequent destruction is a process of evolution and involution , of expansion and contraction . when brahman 'expands' it 'creates' and when it contracts it 'destroys ' . in reality nothing gets created and nothing gets destroyed .


creation in hindu sense is totally different from that of christian sense .

the rest of the points have been nicely described by devotee already .



At the end, I told him that the concept of atman covers this. Is the concept basically that the atman is part of Brahman, but is separated from Brahman and ultimately must reunite with Brahman? Since the atman is emanated from Brahman, that makes God within us all? Why aren't we all divine and worshipped then? Is the answer because we are not complete manifestations of Brahman (like Shiva, Vishnu, and all the avatars) and therefore not fit for worship?

actually atman is never seperated from brahman . the sum total of all atman is brahman . we are covered by a layer of maya which gives us this feeling of seperation . to remove the maya is the same thing as reuniting .

pranaams....

[Ramakrishna]

well , your christian friend is having trouble in understanding what you are saying to him because he is stuck up with the christian concept of god as a formless anthropomorphic entity --one who has human feelings and emotions and yet lacks the human form .who 'creates' a universe and 'rules' over it . much in the same way as a earthly monarch , only in a larger scale .

hinduism on the other hand is all about philosophies . be it advaita , dvaita or vishistadvaita systems . god does not 'create' as we humans 'create' . when we say "god's creation" we are speaking of a phenomenon for which the nearest possible similarity is 'creation' as we humans know it . so we asssign the term 'creation' to that phenomenon .

now what is that phenonmenon like ? from the standpoint of advaita this phenomenon is a perception resulting out of ignorance or maya . the creation that we see around is illusory and actually nonexistent . the only thing that exists is brahman and brahman alone . perfect monism .
vishistadvaita believes that the creation does exist but is temporal . and this process of creation and subsequent destruction is a process of evolution and involution , of expansion and contraction . when brahman 'expands' it 'creates' and when it contracts it 'destroys ' . in reality nothing gets created and nothing gets destroyed .


creation in hindu sense is totally different from that of christian sense .

the rest of the points have been nicely described by devotee already .




actually atman is never seperated from brahman . the sum total of all atman is brahman . we are covered by a layer of maya which gives us this feeling of seperation . to remove the maya is the same thing as reuniting .

pranaams....

Yes, I agree that a large part of it is because the Christian concept of God is quite different from the Hindu concept.

So if atman is never separated from Brahman, then why are not all humans worshipped? Is it because of that layer of maya which conceals us? Brahman has no maya, and therefore is fit for worship, but we do and until we overcome that maya we are imperfect and not fit for worship?

[sambya]

first of all worshipp , upasana or puja comes on the plane of dualism . in dualistic philosophies like vishitadwaita(partially dualistic) atman is qualitatively same with brahman but quantitatively different . the common example given is about drops of seawater and a big ocean . atman=drops , brahman=ocean . both are simlutaneously same and different . a drop can never be a ocean , hence not worshippable .

on advaita marg there's nothing except brahman . evrthing is brahman . so pure adivaitins meditate on their own self( not egoistic self , full of false identifications , but the real self) through the process of analyzation and rejection( neti neti ) . this can be reffered to as worship of their own self , as procedural worship is non-existent in strict advaita sadhana .

practically it all depends on adhikaar or competency . god is everywhere , so why cant we worship a table instead of a deity ? the answer would be yes , u can , provided you have 100% beilef in its divinity . most of us , being kanishta adhikaaris cannot bow down to a table . having a deity before us helps our case . thats why its advisable to worship a deity rather than a irregular stone or wood .

[Nara]

Dear Ramakrishna,

All religions base their arguments on faith, faith in their preferred text. A Christian believes in the Bible, both Old and New Testament, and they do because they were born and brought up in a Christian family. Even though there are new entrants into a given belief system, in the most part, i.e. almost always, the belief system one subscribes to, is entirely determined by the accident of birth.

Christian sects differ quite significantly in many aspects, like for example what constitutes moksha upaya -- generally, the Catholics believe in good works, while the Protestants believe in grace. But they all agree, in the most part, on creation myth, trinity, divinity of Jesus, etc.

But, there is no such broad agreement among the Vedic religions. If you take the major three Vedic religions, they disagree even in the most basic level, including creation. It is not proper to claim a single "Hindu" view.

Some claim that vedas teach us that the whole creation is illusion, mithya. If you take this view then there is only Brahman, and nothing else. There is no real creation in the first place, so, a question like the one you pose is moot.

For some others, Vedas say there are three tatvas, namely, Cit, Acit, and Iswara. These three being tatvas means they were never created, existing without beginning. Among the three, Iswara is the supporter, commander, and master of Cit (Jivas) and Acit. This means Iswara is the substratum of the other two, they say. So, the other two cannot exist without the intimate presence of Iswara, supporting, commanding, and being a master of them.

During Pralaya, Cit and Acit lose their gross form and become subtle. During creation, Iswara creates shapes, forms and give names to these. This process is what is referred to as creation. Creation in Vedas is not the same as in Bible. Iswara creates shapes and forms out of acit that already exists, and gives bodies for cit made of acit so that the karma phala is enjoyed by the cit. In as much as cit and acit cannot exist without the support, command, and mastership of Iswara, the creator is never separated from the creation. This is a vague and overly simplified outline of Visitadvaitam.

In any case, creation in Vedic religion not the same as in Christianity.

Cheers!

[smaranam]

So, the material to be used by Him must come only from God as there was nothing else available in the beginning. The space where this creation took place by using God as raw-material for creation must also be within God as there can't be any concept of "outside God" before creation. So, logically there is only one possibility that the creation is thoroughly within God and created by using raw material which was essentially God.

If we assume that God is just like a Human being in size and expanse as Christians believe, then can such a being create something as huge as this universe .... which is so huge that even one galaxy is not more than a point in the whole system ?

OM

DevoteeJi praNAm

Thank You for a wonderful explanation of the Universe as viewed by Hinduism. I really liked it , just as your other comments elsewhere.

I am not sure all Christians believe God has a form, but they do believe He has a personality.

This part about how can a human-like God create the Universe as an amsha of Himself and pervade it :

Someone pointed out that we can be in awe of something grand and big ; However we cannot have a personal relationship with "everything" because (in Hinduism) "God is Everything that exists". That one does not have lunch with the Grand Canyon, they have lunch at the Grand Canyon.

I thought that was very funny, but then why do you perform Govardhan PujA or pray to the river YamunA or GangA - so that Their mercy will bring mercy from the Supreme Lord ? The Gopa boys didn't exactly carry Govardhan on their backs when He won a game. They carried Krshna. Govardhan never played with the GwAla bAls (cowherd boys) although He provided a hide-and-seek playground.

One answer can be because Yamuna is the Goddess , Deity that presides over and represents the Yamuna river and so on. [So Grand Canyon could be VishAlDariDhan Ji ]

-----------------------------------
So, RamaKrishnaji,

On the same lines, KRshNa/NArAyaNa is the Supreme Person that presides over and represents the Universe (SadAshiva or Divine Mother for some). OR one may say - Personification of Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. Why do they all look like humans ? They don't look like anything. They are not material humans. They are personifications of Tattvas (principles). It is the limitations of our 5 senses and intellect that we cannot perceive an abstract principle and commit or surrender to it, show our love and devotion, act or work for it, etc.

The Indian Subcontinent personifies BhArat MAta (Mother India) , and this itself brings a surge of patriotism.
They personify MAyaboli - Mother Tongue , the language learnt by infant from Mother's speech. MAyaboli is dressed head to toe in jewellery , elegant sAri, flowers.

I am not sure all people of other faiths like Christianity will appreciate this - some might.

SwAmi ChinmayAnanda describes KRshNa's form thus (in Glories of Krishna):

The yellow pitAmbar (robe) : AvidyA (ignorance) of jivas. Also silicon-dioxide representing earth. He takes this form for earthlings
Vayjayanti HAr (garland) : our vAsanA , desires (that He drives away - as Hari )
Peacock feather : MAyA (the creative power). Some say its the sahasra (crown) chakra or suprasensory energy
Tilak - sandalpaste mark of forehead : Yoga - our union with Him thru' Bhakti, Karma , Jn~Ana (dnyAna).
His blue complexion : Infinity (He is anAdi-ananta , beginingless, endless)
His Flute : JIva - living entity - 8 openings ( 5 senses (Jn~AnendrIya) , Manas-mind, buddhi-intellect , ego-ahamkAr ) He sings the tune thru' the 8th hole of ego, controlling the music notes on the 7 holes.

When we surrender to this Supreme Person, the music that flows thru' His flute is the Divine Melody due to touch of His perfection and glories.

Until then we are singing out of tune , our own tune.

Is it not amazing that This Divinity , NArAyaNa was here on earth in this form 5200 years ago, and the entire Braj (VrndAvan) did not notice why He wore the peacock feather or played the flute. You would not call it a coincidence, it is history by Divine Wish, not a myth as some may think. The historicity of KRshNa is well established.
Even if one says, the dress/form of Divine avatAr (even PUrNAvatAr) or any other Hindu form of God , can always be poetically interpreted, one has nothing to lose. By seeing every gesture and little thing of the AvatAr as an aspect of His Divinity will only do good to humanity, other creatures and the world.

Jai Sri KRSNa

[ScottMalaysia]

I was talking about theology with my friend today who is Catholic, and he asked me "What do you think about the argument that it is impossible for the Creator to be contained within His creation? Wouldn't that discredit all of the avatars in Hinduism?" I told him how I don't believe that, and God is not only contained within the avatars, but all of us. He wanted to know how can the Creator be part of His creation.

As a former Catholic, I have a good grasp of Catholic theology. Catholics believe that Jesus Christ is fully God, so the same problem applies to them (indeed, Muslims have used the very argument your friend used against Christianity). Catholics believe that Jesus Christ was also fully man (so that He could pay the price for mankind's sins). They don't believe that He was just God in human form (like Lord Rama), they believe that he was 100% God and at the same time 100% human. Being God by its very definition implies having no limitation (omnipotence) while being human means having limitations.

So saying that Jesus Christ is fully man and fully God is like saying that someone is fully male and fully female. Or that a piece of cloth is fully wet and and the same time fully dry.

Challenge your friend with these.

[TatTvamAsi]

christians and logic are mutually exclusive however try this explanation and see if that numbskull gets it.

the abrahamic terrorist YAHOO, is said to be omnipresent; present everywhere.

If he is not in the creation, then he is not omnipresent; hence, YAHOO is no god but a dope.

End of story.

next.

[Explorer]

One thing I found of great use in these matters, was the following example:

If God is the Ocean, we are each drops of water. Of course none of us is 'God', but that's how we have something of him within us. For the same reason we are not worthy of worship, the ocean is however. And while not worthy of worship, we are still worthy of kindness and good treatment :)

This parallel to earthly reality gets even better if you consider humans like cells, and God like the complete organism. For instance we have fingers, from above we know their purpose and meaning, and how to keep them safe most of the time, but the smaller parts do not have full awareness of the system they're a part of.

By this model, what we can do to best fulfill our roles, is exactly what cells do, in order for the greater body to thrive: cells must be healthy, perform their function, and also work well with the other cells around them. Though we cannot see the complex relationships that make our lives have a purpose, we can certainly believe that the purpose is there, and our existence is not merely an accident in space, but also serves something much higher than us all.



well , your christian friend is having trouble in understanding what you are saying to him because he is stuck up with the christian concept of I for one will stop talking of immaterial things to Christians, I found that at least 90% of them try to first 'filter' my words through the very narrow text of the Bible, and only afterwards think about any meaning it may have. This makes useful conversation impossible.

IMHO, One simple thing that brings out the disconnects in Christian 'logic' is this:

http://www.evolutionordesign.com/images/barred%20spiral%20galaxy%20NGC%201300%20small.jpg

Some time ago, there was no Earth. Some time after today, there will be no Earth again. This we know to be true, planets come and go, and so do stars and star systems.

Throughout the whole universe, the laws of Karma, birth and rebirth, keep their balance and continue to function, for all beings. Where there is life, the laws of Karma do not defy common sense, there is a balance. And also my example above can hold true, as all beings are part of Creation, manifesting the divine in a small limited way, serving their purpose.

Now someone explain to me how Christianity is supposed to function on any place in that image, at a random point in time, some millions of years before or after today, where no Jews ever lived, no Jesus was crucified or sold for silver. Are the Insektoids on planet AKX-4827624523857346 wicked sinners as well ? Does a Jesus get born and killed for sins on all those worlds, so that they too can know the grace of God, like Christians do on Earth ? :p

[kallol]

You are asking the crux of the Advaita philosophy which takes long time to comperehend and appreciate.

However to summarise I can note down a few points. To get elaborate analysis of these and more, you should understand the Gita from Advaita point of view through a teacher. You can try out CDs from Swami Paramarthananda of Chennai as a begining.

1. God is the superset of physical entity (manifested and unmanifested) and the Consciousness both of which permeates the space.

Manifested physical entity is the creation (including our bodies) and unmanifested is the energy. This entity is changing, has attributes, has life (manifestation) and death (unmanifestation), finite and is also known as Lower nature.

Consciousness is always unmanifested, unperceivable, attributeless, timeless, infinite and also called the Higher nature.

2. Physical entity is dumb and lifeless like bulb, fan, computer, etc without energy. Consciousness is the life giver and is like the power. Without it our bodies are useless and dumb.

3. Whereas the Higher nature is independent the Lower nature is dependent. The creation, including us, is a combination of the Lower nature and Higher nature. This creation can be compared with different phases of water. Like liquid, solid and gas. It is the same water manifesting in different form. Similarly the Lower nature manifests in different forms which in conjuction with the higher nature evolves from gas to stars, to planets, to trees, to animals and human.

So it is that same combination in different forms - it is the manifestation of God (combination of Higher nature and Lower nature).

4. This consciousness is the "I" in us which is not the part of the body. Even in dreams or unconscious state when the body ceases to function that "I" is there. It continues through dream, unconscious state and death.

5. To have the feeling of "I" we need another entity which is also part of physical part but much subtle - MIND. This mind, in the ocean of consciousness, is the jibatma or the soul. The consciousness, being everywhere, is like light in which the mind moves and reflects that consciousness or "I". This mind moves from body to body between birth and death.

So the main aim should be to develop clarity of the body, mind, intellect and consciousness. This is difficult. Once you have this clarity and assimilate it then the theory becomes clear.

Love and best wishes