The absence of good...

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

I am rather fond of this story , yet have not found a reliable source that says this unequivocally took place...still, a valuable point of view.

A professor of a university challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student answered bravely, "Yes, he did". The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil.

The student couldn't respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had "proved" that "belief in God" was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.

Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " . Of course" answered the professor.

The young student stood up and asked : "Professor does Cold exist?" The professor answered, "What kind of question is that? Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?"

The young student answered, "In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot."

"And, does Dark exist?", he continued. The professor answered "Of course". This time the student responded, "Again you're wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light.
Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's lack of light."

Finally, the student asked the professor,

"Sir, does evil exist?" The professor replied, "Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil."

The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man."
After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn't answer back.

As the story goes, the young man's name was Albert Einstein

praṇām

[Maya3]

That is great!

Thank you for sharing that.

One thing I'd like to say though is that it is not the absence of God in men's hearts, God is never absent, it's just that some people don't feel God and therefore doesn't choose the right path.
Einstein was a Hindu I have heard, not sure how true that is?

Maya

[saidevo]

namaste Yajvan.

This urban legend, which I came across many years ago, has more to it: actually, the professor is supposed to have said that since God can't be seen or felt, he does not exist. To that the student, after many examples of duality such as heat and cold, good and evil, quipped that no one in the class had seen or felt the professor's brain, so it would mean that the professor had no brain! The extended form of the story can be read here:
http://www.indianskeptic.com/chain-mail-god-vs-science/
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=6619154611&topic=16325&start=90&hash=d81d7d8f60a826e5b03beec4177574ea

As this link shows, the extended story could have been one that was cobbled up of many other imaginary episodes:
http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp

Nevertheless, the postulate that darkness is only the absence of light and coldness is the absence of heat could be a pointer to the nature of Dvaita--duality, of the world. Would this mean that avidyA--nescience, that is, all the worldly knowledge including science, is only a myth, a mirage, due to the absence of vidyA--real knowledge, of the Infinite Self?

If that is the case, then what other proof do we need for Shankara's statement, "brahma satyam jaganmithyA", which establishes the Advaita--non-dual, unity of everything, when ultimately resolved/dissolved into Brahman the Self?

[Adhvagat]

Saidevo, this Indian Skeptic text is very interesting and brought me to a few points:

- The universe is not made out of dualistic states, instead the interaction of elements trying to find equilibrium and our limited observational capacity generates the idea of duality (just like there's no day and night for someone outside of earth's atmosphere).

- When he talks about darkness being only the absence of visible light, I imagine that all acts are always the flow of the untouched original energy of God and changes to them happens only in the observer's end.

If we look at this whole text as a Christian attempt to undermine attacks to its faith and evolution (to defend the nonsense that the universe was created 6000 years ago), yeah, the Christian philosophical understanding is pretty flawed, dualistic in a very material way and doesn't add much to its own concept of God.

However, the understanding of Samkhya, Brahman and Tattvas according to several schools of thought of Sanatana Dharma add a whole lot to the discussion.

But I must say that both sides of this Christian vs. Skeptics don't please me. The skeptics engage in a frontal encounter and instead of considering topics that transcend science, they stick to them using only logic as support without ever considering logic is only one function of our mind.

Feel free to point scientific and philosophical misconceptions in what I just said.

And It would be nice if someone talked about the Dvaita point of view of evil and misery.

Om Tat Sat

[jasdir]

"Did God create everything that exists?"

We cannot use the word "DID" in this Question, because
"He"(god) is still creating.

Anyhow, Can anybody write the right "QUESTION" ?.

_/\_Jasdir.

[Adhvagat]

We cannot use the word "DID" in this Question, because
"He"(god) is still creating.

Thanks for the reminder! A point I missed...

So is creation an endless flow?

:)

[Maya3]

Pietro:
I LOVE the way you said this;

The universe is not made out of dualistic states, instead the interaction of elements trying to find equilibrium and our limited observational capacity generates the idea of duality (just like there's no day and night for someone outside of earth's atmosphere).


I remember speaking to Christians before I became Hindu, and often when I voiced skepticism about Hell they always said: "But if there is good there HAS to be evil!" in such a tone of voice as if it was the most obvious thing in the world.
I never agreed.

There is only karma created because we don't see the whole picture and we don't understand who we really are.

Maya

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakakam Yajvan et al:

We read and read, and some concepts stay, whilst other ideas go in one ear and out the other. This thread is one that will stick in this soul's head for this lifetime, I think. It is quite widespread and can be used to explain a lot: " ______ is just the absence of ________. I've been filling in the blanks all night. Some concepts work better than others. Thank you.

I remember going off topic into ideas such as number without a unit having no meaning, directions being totally meaningless from a universal viewpoint, and location only being relative to another location. It makes one review how bound we are by false concepts, and yet at the same time how dysfunctional we would be on this plane without them.

Aum Namasivaya

[saidevo]

namaste PI and others.

You have made some wise and thought-provoking points.



The universe is not made out of dualistic states, instead the interaction of elements trying to find equilibrium and our limited observational capacity generates the idea of duality (just like there's no day and night for someone outside of earth's atmosphere).

I imagine that all acts are always the flow of the untouched original energy of God and changes to them happens only in the observer's end.


This is nothing but pure Advaita. The beauty of it is that it is the 'untouched original energy' of Brahman that has condensed itself into the atomic matter of the elements and catalyzes their interactive search for equilibrium. The pure energy of chaitanya--consciousness/intelligence, has also created simulated forms of consciousness known as jIvas, which are nothing but thinking robots that delusively conclude themselves to be the observers and everything else as observed, without understanding their true nature.



The skeptics engage in a frontal encounter and instead of considering topics that transcend science, they stick to them using only logic as support without ever considering logic is only one function of our mind.


The skeptics are afraid that their whole physical edifice will crumble if they admit that it is after all the human mind that is responsible for all the concepts of science. This is why they make repeated attempts to reduce the mind to physical concepts, organs and functions.

The whole universe is in the mind of Brahman, just his dream. The difference between his cosmic dream and our dreams is that we have no plan or control over our dreams. Saying 'our dreams' is duality, because our dreams are also part of the cosmic dream, which is why Brahman has introduced Time as the healer and dissolver of the chaos.

[sanjaya]

Einstein was a Hindu I have heard, not sure how true that is?

Einstein's religious views were notoriously difficult to pin down. He was a Jew (in the same sense that I am Indian, which I suppose says next to nothing about what he actually believed). In his various writings he says that he believes in God, that he believes religions to be childish, and that he regards God as the cause of order in the universe. If we have to label him, I suppose we could call him a deist.

That's what I get, anyway, from a book I read containing selected writings of his.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Sir Isaac Newton:
In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God's existence.

praṇām

[saidevo]

namaste Yajvan.



Sir Isaac Newton:
In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God's existence.


As in the statement "angushTa mAtraH purushaH" of the KaThopaniShad?

[jasdir]

Thanks for the reminder! A point I missed...

So is creation an endless flow?

:)
Yes! creation is an endless flow,
"He"(god) is "Creator" not the "creation",

Because "He" (god) or "Beyond-Time" is still creating,
The word "DID" can be used only "In-Time" or "For-Time"

So the word "DID" and "God" or "Who is beyond time" cannot stay together.

Can anybody write the right Q: ?

[devotee]

Namaste Yajvan ji,

It is an interesting thread ! :)



The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man."


May I offer a slightly different perspective ? The way I see it the above is the Abrahimic way of looking at things (I mean looking in a simplistic "White-Black", "Evil-Good" way). The Hindus would go beyond this :

a) The absence of good may not be evil. It can be neutral state ... neither good nor evil.

b) As Maya has pointed out, there is no heart where God is absent ... "Aham Atman Gudakesha Sarva BhUtaashaya Sthitah". So, how come evil is there is some of the hearts ? Certainly there are other factors into play even in the presence of God. What are those ?

Namaste Jasdir,


Yes! creation is an endless flow,
"He"(god) is "Creator" not the "creation",

Because "He" (god) or "Beyond-Time" is still creating,
The word "DID" can be used only "In-Time" or "For-Time"

So the word "DID" and "God" or "Who is beyond time" cannot stay together.

Can anybody write the right Q: ?

Are the creator and the creation really different from each other ?

OM

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam all

Very interesting thread, the way I see it, the one does not negate the other. The good may be opposite of bad but they are both independent off each other. It was inferred in the story that darkness do not exist, I fail to see that. Try telling that to a blind person, no amount off light would dispel the darkness. Just as the son covered by cloud does not make it disappear the darkness in a room seemingly covered by light soon as it is switched off the room is all dark again. Its not as if the darkness appeared and disappeared.




Are the creator and the creation really different from each other ?

OM

Pranam Devotee ji

In this matter I refer you to Bhagvat Gita see what you think
dvau bhuta-sargau loke 'smin
daiva asura eva ca
daivo vistarasah prokta
asuram partha me srnu

O son of Prtha, in this world there are two kinds of created beings. One is called the divine and the other demoniac. I have already explained to you at length the divine qualities. Now hear from Me of the demoniac. 16.06

Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

Here is what Sir Isaac Newton says about ( my favorite) tattva, ākāśa :

"No being exists or can exist which is not related to space in some way. God is everywhere, created minds are somewhere, and body is in the space that it occupies;
and whatever is neither everywhere nor anywhere does not exist. And hence it follows that space is an effect arising from the first existence of being, because when any being is postulated, space is postulated."


praṇām

[devotee]

Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,



In this matter I refer you to Bhagvat Gita see what you think
dvau bhuta-sargau loke 'smin
daiva asura eva ca
daivo vistarasah prokta
asuram partha me srnu

O son of Prtha, in this world there are two kinds of created beings. One is called the divine and the other demoniac. I have already explained to you at length the divine qualities. Now hear from Me of the demoniac. 16.06


I understand what you are referring to. I agree with your views. The only thing I wanted to point out that they are not "really" different from each other. The essence is the same. The cool water of a spring and the boiling water in a pot, the freezing ice and scalding super-heated steam are all same in essence & yet they are different in characteristics. The "ajanmaa" (birthless ... which is never born & which is uncreated) is the essence of everything which is created.

OM

[jasdir]

Are the creator and the creation really different from each other ?
For Example:

A battery has two ends Nagative & Posative to light a bulb,

Hence the currents are of two types nagative & positive, but we can also light a bulb using only one wire by placing the tip of bulb on the tip of battery and the other ends we can connect by wire.

So, we can also say that battery himself is posative and only nagative "current" is coming out to light a bulb,

And the nagative "Current" which is coming out needs "Time" (kaal) to come out,

Similarly Creator & Creation both are "Current", BUT, Creator himself is posative and only nagative (creation) is coming out,

And the nagative (creation) which is coming out needs "KAAL" (time) to come out,

SO, In spiritual language everything which flows in "Time" (kaal) is called IN-TIME(creation) and creator himself is BEYOND-TIME.

I hope you can smartly understand This.

_/\_Jasdir.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Devotee ji


Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,



I understand what you are referring to. I agree with your views. The only thing I wanted to point out that they are not "really" different from each other. The essence is the same. The cool water of a spring and the boiling water in a pot, the freezing ice and scalding super-heated steam are all same in essence & yet they are different in characteristics. The "ajanmaa" (birthless ... which is never born & which is uncreated) is the essence of everything which is created.
OM


I know where this is leading to, hope we can leave that discussion aside.

but relevent to professors query and let us stick to that, i quote Lord Krishna

Know that the three Gunas, Saattvika, Raajasika, and Taamasika, also emanate from Me. I am not in (or dependent on) the Gunas, but the Gunas are in (or dependent on) Me. (7.12)

This entire universe is pervaded by Me, the unmanifest Brahman. All beings depend on (or remain in) Me.I do not depend on them. (9.04)

And yet beings, in reality, do not remain in Me. Look at the power of My divine mystery. Though the sustainer and creator of all beings, I do not remain in them. (9.05)

this is to prove that the evil of Hitler or for that matter anyone is not the essence off God

Jai Shree Krishna

[NayaSurya]

Forgive, forgive, forgive... this very humble offering. As I am not a learned scholar, nor have spent my life emersed into the bliss of this sublime knowledge which I have seen eminate from you, wiser beings.

But being of this world and sunk from the lowest portions to rise just enough to see some respite from the confusion, I do have this common view of this topic.

When the car breaks down due to weather and other things, are we broken down? Likewise, the evil men of the world are not evil beings but heavily confused by their own set of circumstances and situations.

Abuse, neglect, mental illness, many times will cause such things. These things may seem like they are evil, but they are just broken vessels which play out a certain purpose here.

These vessels confuse, stupify and break. But this is does not change who we are. We may be shrouded in doubts, fears and much suffering...but always we on the inside are unmoved...unshaken.

The most evilest of men is the most clouded, consumed in their broken vessel so wholly that they react out in this "evil" fashion.

What is the difference of a man in a car driving along well and the man who has had the breakdown on the side of the road? Is there a difference between the inside person?

Surely their state of mind. One may be consumed with fear, the other...calm and proceeding along as he wishes. All part of the mind, and not of their true selves.

A man within a car within a human vessel. Three levels of being...the more you add, the more complicated and convoluted it gets.

Much "Evil" happens here, by these confused beings...so far removed from Beloved's influence, they are capable of attrocious behavior.



But, even this does not mean we should allow such beings to harm. We take them out, and pray that next time, they get it correct. If they don't...one of these higher beings will once again come along and remove them and they will try yet again.

From this life time, it may be hard to imagine one of us...long ago in this severely confused state. But, who knows what each of us have come from?

Such compassion I have in my heart for all beings here, this place is truly wretched. Is it any wonder why one would be so inclined to move beyond this realm and out of such misery.

I read a wonderful verse about this in the Brihadaranyaka Up and fortunately saved it.


IV 3,8

"That man, when he is born, or attains a body, is connected with evils (the body and organs); and when he dies, or leaves the body, he discards those evils."




Then, also there may be darker things which cause far greater evil....I have witnessed unhuman things which I can not comprehend from this limited state.

[maxpsycho]

namaste Yajvan.

This urban legend, which I came across many years ago, has more to it: actually, the professor is supposed to have said that since God can't be seen or felt, he does not exist. To that the student, after many examples of duality such as heat and cold, good and evil, quipped that no one in the class had seen or felt the professor's brain, so it would mean that the professor had no brain! The extended form of the story can be read here:
http://www.indianskeptic.com/chain-mail-god-vs-science/
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=6619154611&topic=16325&start=90&hash=d81d7d8f60a826e5b03beec4177574ea

As this link shows, the extended story could have been one that was cobbled up of many other imaginary episodes:
http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp

Nevertheless, the postulate that darkness is only the absence of light and coldness is the absence of heat could be a pointer to the nature of Dvaita--duality, of the world. Would this mean that avidyA--nescience, that is, all the worldly knowledge including science, is only a myth, a mirage, due to the absence of vidyA--real knowledge, of the Infinite Self?

If that is the case, then what other proof do we need for Shankara's statement, "brahma satyam jaganmithyA", which establishes the Advaita--non-dual, unity of everything, when ultimately resolved/dissolved into Brahman the Self?
To start off - the parable isn't actually true. It's an internet invention like countless others. Secondly, just a thought on the distinction between positive qualities and privations, it seems little more than a play with words. If you had a cookie jar, and I took all the cookies out of it so that you didn't have any, and then you blamed me for emptying the cookie jar, it would not be a defence for me to say, "Well I was the source of the emptiness in the cookie jar, but there's no positive quality of emptiness in the cookie jar. That's just a privation of cookies" That wouldn't be a defence, and you would probably punch me in the face if I said that. God, if he exists and is the source of everything, then he most certainly is the source of all evil, and I don't think there's any reason to exculpate him from that.

[devotee]

Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,



Know that the three Gunas, Saattvika, Raajasika, and Taamasika, also emanate from Me. I am not in (or dependent on) the Gunas, but the Gunas are in (or dependent on) Me. (7.12)

This entire universe is pervaded by Me, the unmanifest Brahman. All beings depend on (or remain in) Me.I do not depend on them. (9.04)

And yet beings, in reality, do not remain in Me. Look at the power of My divine mystery. Though the sustainer and creator of all beings, I do not remain in them. (9.05)



Thanks for good quotes from BG ! :)

On a little analysis of verses can we come to these conclusions ?

7.12 : Lord Krishna aka Brahman is actually Nirguna. However Brahman is the source of all the gunas i.e. Sattva, Rajas and also Tamas.

9.04 : As every smallest divisible point within this universe is pervaded by Him, the manifest universe is nothing but a "transformation" (if choice of this word is pardonable due to lack of better words) of Him.

Matsthaani sarvabhootaani na chaham teshu avasthitah --- > "All objects subsist in me but not I in them". This verse is tricky. This verse can be wrongly understood unless the verse, "Ahamaatmaa gudakeshah sarvabhootashaya sthitah" (O' Arjuna, I am the Self in the heart of all beings) is kept in mind and it is translated accordingly. The same is true for verse 9.05 too. I think your translation does the required justice.

So, yes, God is there in Hitler too but his evil is not of God within him. :)

OM