Does God exist?

[Jainarayan]

For that I can not wait to know more of the Sanskrit language, it seems to be imbued with culture its self. English is so darned ambiguous. I believe that this stems from the Latin root!

Sanskrit is a highly inflected language that allows for a clarity and nuance English has lost. Not because of Latin, but simply over time. English lost so many case markers that a sentence can be very ambiguous. "Her" can be dative, accusative, demonstrative, maybe even nominative (I'd have to think about that one). Sanskrit retains those cases, and even more.

As for this tower idea, I would agree that language comes from a Proto-Indo-European root.I would not have the audacity to base a philosophical doctrine on something so fluid and time dependant.

There's a clear relationship between Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Russian, (maa, mitera, mater, mat = mother; pitr, pateras, pater, utyets: OK, so that one developed some other way), et. al. that doesn't exist with Semitic languages (Hebrew, Arabic, ancient Egyptian, Phoenician, Aramaic, Canaanite). Or even with Sumerian and Babylonian. It's a nice mythology to explain that.

[sunyata07]

Interestingly enough, TBTL, in the Ancient Egyptian language the words for mother (mut) and father (it) aren't lightyears away from the Sanskrit matR and pitR. Probably an isolated example I've given though, seeing as a lot of languages around the world have similar sound for the words mother and father, if not practically the same.

Om namah Shivaya

[Jainarayan]

Interestingly enough, TBTL, in the Ancient Egyptian language the words for mother (mut) and father (it) aren't lightyears away from the Sanskrit matR and pitR. Probably an isolated example I've given though, seeing as a lot of languages around the world have similar sound for the words mother and father, if not practically the same.

Om namah Shivaya

I didn't know that about ancient Egyptian. Interesting considering that it is Semitic and totally unrelated to Sanskrit. Otoh...

A likely reason for the mother/father similarities around the world is that ma, ba, da are the easiest phonemes for a baby to say.

Loanwords are probably not even in the equation, but cognates probably are, within language families.

[issacnewton]

in mathematics , when we prove some object exists , somewhere in the text a definition of that object is already given. so given the assumptions of a theorem , we can find if the object as specified in the definition exists or not.

so when we ask a question "does god exist" , we have to first define what
is the definition of 'god' .only then we can decide it such a thing 'exists', probably we will also need to be careful about the meaning of the word 'existence' . now even in hindu/india related world , many different definitions
of 'god' are there. so does question have meaning as such ?

[sunyata07]

so when we ask a question "does god exist" , we have to first define what
is the definition of 'god' .only then we can decide it such a thing 'exists', probably we will also need to be careful about the meaning of the word 'existence' . now even in hindu/india related world , many different definitions
of 'god' are there. so does question have meaning as such ?

Namaste Isaacnewton,

Excellent point made! Yes, I agree with you totally. This is one of the reasons why I believe the argument rarely goes beyond any further than just asking for physical proof for the existence of God. There are many kind of theists (monotheists, polytheists, pantheists, panentheists, etc.) - and each group I'm sure has there own definition of what exactly constitutes God or gods. No wonder there's never been much progress about the God debate. Atheists have to decide from which point they have to begin arguing. For example, are they going to debate from a pantheist view? If they were to take the view that God is essentially the universe (God is materially the world, space and all the physical laws), this would be entirely different from the perspective of a monotheist (e.g. Christian) arguing for the existence of his concept of God.

Om namah Shivaya

[Spiritualseeker]

Eknath Easwaran in his work, "Following the Teachings of the Upanishads" said (paraphrasing slightly) that when someone tells him they are atheist he does not bat an eye. He said he only asks them if they have ever looked there (Within).

This is powerful, because I have had my bouts of doubts about God, but now it seems to be ever evident that Supreme Consciousness does exists. The more we go deeper in meditation the more that consciousness reveals itself.

Om Namah Shivaya