• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pantheists

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
I wasn't implying that the universe has anthropomorphic ego or emotion, which is why I said 'consciousness' is a heavy word in my OP. I have trouble explaining what I mean, I guess "has an intention for its own existence and the shapes it takes". Then again 'wanting' things is human as well, isn't it... A universe with an artistic choice to experience life through all of these emotional shapes we call beings? The way I often fantasize it is God being lonely or bored in the beginning (which are both human things, I understand) and deciding to separate itself into multiple identities. Or perhaps God's mind is just so complex that it couldn't help but perceive itself through multiple minds?

"Am I just paranoid or am I just stoned"
I wasn't critiquing your POV, just summarizing my own.
 

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
Is God personal or impersonal?

is God unconscious or conscious (I understand those are meaty words, any suggestions for better words I’d love to hear it)


I would tend to say that, in my experience, reality is impersonal. I expect reality to treat me no differently than it does rocks or sand. If someone expects the universe (or reality) to behave like a person, I'd say they have a lot of work ahead of them to justify that position. But many theists believe exactly that.
 

soulsurvivor

Active Member
Premium Member
Is God personal or impersonal?

is God unconscious or conscious (I understand those are meaty words, any suggestions for better words I’d love to hear it)
The One Universal God is impersonal but conscious. It is best not to call it a he or a she because it is neither. It permeates all of existence and is yet beyond it - this means if the Universe is totally destroyed, this 'God' will still remain.

There are many, many personal Gods (as the Hindus have said 330 million or some number like that) but worship of any personal God ultimately reaches the impersonal, universal One. When the Universe ends or is totally destroyed, these personal Gods will disappear with it.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
The One Universal God is impersonal but conscious. It is best not to call it a he or a she because it is neither. It permeates all of existence and is yet beyond it - this means if the Universe is totally destroyed, this 'God' will still remain.

There are many, many personal Gods (as the Hindus have said 330 million or some number like that) but worship of any personal God ultimately reaches the impersonal, universal One. When the Universe ends or is totally destroyed, these personal Gods will disappear with it.
I like that view, I’ve been testing the waters with personal gods lately, I’m still exploring but Krishna is interesting to me for some reason. Probably because he is my first experience with Hinduism.

Before all that I was praying to the universe directly and the results seemed to be a hit or miss
 

soulsurvivor

Active Member
Premium Member
I like that view, I’ve been testing the waters with personal gods lately, I’m still exploring but Krishna is interesting to me for some reason. Probably because he is my first experience with Hinduism.

Before all that I was praying to the universe directly and the results seemed to be a hit or miss
You may be interested in reading about the various Hindu Gods/Goddesses here: Hindu Gods and Goddesses
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I imagine that it would be more of a force than it would a person. That it would be an anthropomorphic being with humanesque ego and emotion doesn't make sense to me.
How a force? How do you define "force?"
Doesn't a force change things? Isn't it a thing apart from the thing changed?

Brahman is unchanging, it's beyond time, and it's non-dual. There is nothing for a force to work on; nothing exists that is not the entirety of Brahman.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What are your thoughts on it, though? The idea that the universe has a sort of self-created 'meaning' to existing? That there's a reason to everything that happens?
Ultimately, nothing "happens." That's all an illusion, a hallucination.
Time and change are illusions.

Everything that ever existed or happened,
Everything that does exist and is happening,
Everything that will exist or will happen, and
Everything that can exist or could happen, Exists and is happening NOW. Past and future are as real as the now.

All Reality is a timeless, changeless Now, a Brahman.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Ultimately, nothing "happens." That's all an illusion, a hallucination.
Time and change are illusions.

Everything that ever existed or happened,
Everything that does exist and is happening,
Everything that will exist or will happen, and
Everything that can exist or could happen, Exists and is happening NOW. Past and future are as real as the now.

All Reality is a timeless, changeless Now, a Brahman.
Okay, I can understand that. There is no change or process, time is an illusion, and there is just Brahman, and Brahman simply is? So that means that all things at all instances of time and space, as one, is the form of Brahman, correct?

But why is Brahman? Why is there not Brahman?
 
Last edited:

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
How a force? How do you define "force?"
Doesn't a force change things? Isn't it a thing apart from the thing changed?

Brahman is unchanging, it's beyond time, and it's non-dual. There is nothing for a force to work on; nothing exists that is not the entirety of Brahman.
:shrug:
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Okay, I can understand that. There is no change or process, time is an illusion, and there is just Brahman, and Brahman simply is? So that means that all things at all instances of time and space, as one, is the form of Brahman, correct?
Is Brahman. Correct.

But why is Brahman? Why is there not Brahman?[/QUOTE]
No idea.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I imagine that it would be more of a force than it would a person. That it would be an anthropomorphic being with humanesque ego and emotion doesn't make sense to me.
Yes. IMHO, it is a force, 'physical energy'. It is not an anthropomorphic being. Yeah, personal Gods (or Goddesses) do not make sense to me.
I wasn't implying that the universe has anthropomorphic ego or emotion, which is why I said 'consciousness' is a heavy word in my OP. I have trouble explaining what I mean, I guess "has an intention for its own existence and the shapes it takes". Then again 'wanting' things is human as well, isn't it... A universe with an artistic choice to experience life through all of these emotional shapes we call beings? The way I often fantasize it is God being lonely or bored in the beginning (which are both human things, I understand) and deciding to separate itself into multiple identities. Or perhaps God's mind is just so complex that it couldn't help but perceive itself through multiple minds?
IMHO, It has no intention, does not need any experience. It fluctuates according to its rules every Planck's interval. That gives us the impression that it is reacting to something.
But, of course, people will see that in their own way.
The idea that the universe has a sort of self-created 'meaning' to existing? That there's a reason to everything that happens?
Do you see a meaning? As for the reason why universe came to exist, we have not found it yet. My best guess is that if has got something to do with existence and non-existence. Perhaps non-existence is a phase of existence. Of course, just like relativity and quantum mechanics when they were first postulated, we cannot visualize it yet.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
You may be interested in reading about the various Hindu Gods/Goddesses here: Hindu Gods and Goddesses
The link explains the writer's views on Hinduism, but his understanding of Hinduism is deficient and so also his presentation. But I appreciate the effort. Hopefully, the site will improve with time. I find the following disturbing and an unnecessary exension:

"Essentially there are three main Hindu Gods (similar to the Christian Trinity*):
*Father, Son and Holy Spirit respectively."

Not all Hindus will agree that Gods (and Goddesses) are forms of some Supreme Spirit. Generalizing does not work with Hinduism. There is no need to add Theosophy to Hinduism.

We know there are 118 elements. The first 98 elements listed in the periodic table occur naturally while the rest can only be found in nuclear accelerators and laboratories. Five element theory is what was believed in olden days, world has moved ahead. How Many Elements Are There?

Everything is a 'cosmic incarnation', even a stone in River Tames. So, why list five and other mortals? Instead it could be said that these are important people in modern Hinduism. They are not incarnations of any God or Goddess. The heading gives an incorrect impression.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
How a force? How do you define "force?"
Doesn't a force change things? Isn't it a thing apart from the thing changed?

Brahman is unchanging, it's beyond time, and it's non-dual. There is nothing for a force to work on; nothing exists that is not the entirety of Brahman.
Brahman is the thing. Brahman is the force. These are not two. All things are made of 'physical energy'. Brahman is unchanging really means Brahman does not change what it does, fluctuating according to its ways. That creates the impression of changing things, which Hindus term as 'maya', illusion.
So that means that all things at all instances of time and space, as one, is the form of Brahman, correct?

But why is Brahman? Why is there not Brahman?
Correct. Who knows if 'Brahman' is 'not Brahman too'? Who knows if 'existence' is 'non-existence' too? We do not understand that at present. It is a question for future generations, just like relativity was not known in my great grandpa's time.
 
Last edited:

Zwing

Active Member
In Pantheism, God is the universe, so there are no personal gods that answer prayer and love you.
In the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, there is an absolute, objective reality, called within Hinduism Brahman, which underlies all illusory subjective reality. Within Advaita, some Advaitins are theistic, which means that they consider said Brahman to be “God”, while others are atheistic Advaitins, who do not. I think that, in like manner, pantheists might be theists or atheists. Furthermore, theistic pantheists might conceive of the God as impersonal, in which case they would be somewhat like Deists, or personal, which would undoubtedly require more ideological gymnastics to imagine, but is surely possible.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, there is an absolute, objective reality, called within Hinduism Brahman, which underlies all illusory subjective reality. Within Advaita, some Advaitins are theistic, which means that they consider said Brahman to be “God”, while others are atheistic Advaitins, who do not. I think that, in like manner, pantheists might be theists or atheists. Furthermore, theistic pantheists might conceive of the God as impersonal, in which case they would be somewhat like Deists, or personal, which would undoubtedly require more ideological gymnastics to imagine, but is surely possible.
Reality is different in different levels of consciousness. An advaitist could be both theistic and atheistic.
There's a hierarchy or stratigraphy of realities, each a product of our own consciousness. There's no reason we can't create a motorcycle, our own bodies, a god, or a spacecraft full of little green men in some of the realities. We imagine/dream what we will.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Hi, @Aupmanyav; long time no see! How you been?
I ran into some computer problem, internet not available. It happens with me frequently because I am an OS-hopper and a computer newbie for the last 40 years. That is a deadly combination and makes life interesting. Something or the other will always go wrong. :)
 
Last edited:
Top