• 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!

God as Energy and Matter

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
is the brahman, el, allah god a specific physical form of matter, or an energy?

isn't god infinite change and constant?
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
is the brahman, el, allah god a specific physical form of matter, or an energy?

isn't god infinite change and constant?

Yes, and yes.

The world is none other than Brahman, ie 'The Absolute', playing itself as 'the world', playing all the forms all at once, while forgetting that it is Brahman.

Brahman is The Changeless, appearing to be changing all the time
.

"The Universe is The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivekenanda

"Swami Vivekananda's statement that the Universe is the Absolute seen through the screen of time, space and causation allows us to get some interesting information, albeit in negative terms, about what he calls the Absolute.

Since it is not in time, it cannot be changing. Change takes place only in time.

And since it is not in space, it must be undivided, because division and separation occur only in space.

And since it is therefore one and undivided, it must also be infinite, since there is no "other" to limit it.

Now "changeless," "infinite," and "undivided" are negative statements, but they will suffice. We can trace the physics of our Universe from these three negative statements. If we don't see the Absolute as what it is, we'll see it as something else. If we don't see it as changeless, infinite, and undivided, we'll see it as changing, finite, and divided, since in this case there is no other else. There is no other way to mistake the changeless except as changing. So we see a Universe which is changing all the time, made of minuscule particles, and divided into atoms."

http://quanta-gaia.org/dobson/EquationsOfMaya.html

We call this 'changing, material' world 'maya'. Only Brahman is real.


 
Last edited:

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Brahman is formless, genderless. It is nirguna, without attributes or qualities. Brahman is pure consciousness and existence. Brahman isn’t matter or energy though it can and does manifest those. Then it becomes saguna Brahman, Brahman with attributes.

Btw, Brahman is not God as generally thought of... not Allah or Yahweh.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Brahman is formless, genderless. It is nirguna, without attributes or qualities. Brahman is pure consciousness and existence. Brahman isn’t matter or energy though it can and does manifest those. Then it becomes saguna Brahman, Brahman with attributes.

Btw, Brahman is not God as generally thought of... not Allah or Yahweh.
couple of problems here.

formless doesn't mean without energy or matter. it simply means without definition or contrast. in order to have form there must be something besides itself to define the form in contrast to something otherwise and define it. formless means indefinite. a singularity has no contrast in which a measure; such as, time, space can be determined in relation to some otherness. its like a point with no other points to compare, contrast, measure against.


forms have definition because of their plurality. an indefinite thing, an infinite thing, can exist without form. there is nothing to compare it to, or with. doesn't mean it doesn't have matter. means it doesn't have form.

being conscious is an attribute cause of itself. being conscious of oneself vs not conscious of oneself. conscious creates things of itself. case in point thoughts become things. thoughts arise and fall from mind. mind itself doesn't have to arise and fall; when not creating/destroying forms. it creates things from itself. itself having no form but giving rise to forms.


so brahmin is compromised of three parts at a minimum:

1 consciousness - mind
2. matter that is formless
3. energy or movement. it cannot make something of itself without movement


fyi - yahweh and allah are not the same thing
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Yes, and yes.

The world is none other than Brahman, ie 'The Absolute', playing itself as 'the world', playing all the forms all at once, while forgetting that it is Brahman.

Brahman is The Changeless, appearing to be changing all the time
.

"The Universe is The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"
Vivekenanda

"Swami Vivekananda's statement that the Universe is the Absolute seen through the screen of time, space and causation allows us to get some interesting information, albeit in negative terms, about what he calls the Absolute.

Since it is not in time, it cannot be changing. Change takes place only in time.

And since it is not in space, it must be undivided, because division and separation occur only in space.

And since it is therefore one and undivided, it must also be infinite, since there is no "other" to limit it.

Now "changeless," "infinite," and "undivided" are negative statements, but they will suffice. We can trace the physics of our Universe from these three negative statements. If we don't see the Absolute as what it is, we'll see it as something else. If we don't see it as changeless, infinite, and undivided, we'll see it as changing, finite, and divided, since in this case there is no other else. There is no other way to mistake the changeless except as changing. So we see a Universe which is changing all the time, made of minuscule particles, and divided into atoms."

http://quanta-gaia.org/dobson/EquationsOfMaya.html

We call this 'changing, material' world 'maya'. Only Brahman is real.



problem with this. being changless doesn't mean it doesn't have movement within itself. it can literally mean it doesn't stop moving.

ever changing means its a constant movement. its a paradox of sorts. to rest is a movement away from destroying or creating but it's always transforming from the formed to the formless. that which changes is measurable. that which is measurable isn't infinite, or ever changing. its either involution or evolution.

its either brahma, shiva, or vishnu. take your pick

"Nothing rests; everything moves; everything
vibrates."--The Kybalion.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
It [the OP] is also close to what Einstein believed.
buddhism and hermeticism are generally in agreement.

it is what is called the mind, body, spirit complex. the complex being singular and the singularity being composed of three primary things in itself.

movement cannot arise from non-moving things. that is not reasonable. if it creates things, destroys things, transforms things and it is omnipresent in all things, then itself is moving. the only option then is that it is constant change; like yin/yang and the dao.


it is changeless in its eternal/infinite changing

it is lila
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Brahman is formless, genderless. It is nirguna, without attributes or qualities. Brahman is pure consciousness and existence. Brahman isn’t matter or energy though it can and does manifest those. Then it becomes saguna Brahman, Brahman with attributes.

Btw, Brahman is not God as generally thought of... not Allah or Yahweh.

Since Brahman is not energy (Im thinking of energy that sustains life body, mind, hence spirit) and not a deity, of course, what is consciousness?

I compared non-attacment from a buddha dharma point of view that if you have gook that surrounded space that look like a string holding it together (gook being our attacments), some of us are in delusions that because we see the shape and the gook outlines it, it must exist. Through meditation etc we get rid of the gook (seeing it without attachment) we no longer belief there is string. When we understand this and have no gook left we are liberated. No more attacments. No more person.

That "space" is called many names and many cultures interpret it diferently from being egoless to having a heightened sense of awareness as a eureka moment.

If consicousness isnt tangible is it like that space without the culture making it unique to hindus practices?
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
problem with this. being changless doesn't mean it doesn't have movement within itself. it can literally mean it doesn't stop moving.

ever changing means its a constant movement. its a paradox of sorts. to rest is a movement away from destroying or creating but it's always transforming from the formed to the formless. that which changes is measurable. that which is measurable isn't infinite, or ever changing. its either involution or evolution.

its either brahma, shiva, or vishnu. take your pick

"Nothing rests; everything moves; everything
vibrates."--The Kybalion.

But in reality, there is no movement since the material world is an illusion, ie 'maya'. It only appears to be something real that is moving; it only appears to be real via the five senses. That is why the mystic must transcend the five senses ie perceptual reality, in order to realize Ultimate Reality. The nature of Brahman is not a material one. The world is a result of both lila and maya., ie 'divine play'.

The movement you are experiencing in a dream is not actual movement. When you 'awaken' to the next level of consciousness, you think you are awake partly because you sense movement and materiality, neither of which are real. You are in a dream of a higher nature, but still in the dream. Only when you awaken to an even higher level is the illusory nature of ordinary existence understood to be a dream.

Observer 1: 'The flag is moving'
Observer 2: 'No, the wind is moving'
Observer 3: 'Both wrong! Flag and wind are both moving'
Passerby: 'All wrong! Your minds are moving!'
 
Last edited:

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
what is consciousness?

Awareness I suppose, the true nature of reality. Without that consciousness or awareness it can't manifest into anything. It's kind of a brain-bender to try to envision something without form, no boundaries, yet it is the only thing and all that exists.

If consicousness isnt tangible is it like that space without the culture making it unique to hindus practices?

There are comparisons of Brahman to the Tao being indescribable and unfathomable, yet the basis for everything:

The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth
The named is the mother of myriad things
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
But in reality, there is no movement since the material world is an illusion, ie 'maya'. It only appears to be something real that is moving; it only appears to be real via the five senses. That is why the mystic must transcend the five senses ie perceptual reality, in order to realize Ultimate Reality. The nature of Brahman is not a material one. The world is a result of both lila and maya., ie 'divine play'.

The movement you are experiencing in a dream is not actual movement. When you 'awaken' to the next level of consciousness, you think you are awake partly because you sense movement and materiality, neither of which are real. You are in a dream of a higher nature, but still in the dream. Only when you awaken to an even higher level is the illusory nature of ordinary existence understood to be a dream.

Observer 1: 'The flag is moving'
Observer 2: 'No, the wind is moving'
Observer 3: 'Both wrong! Flag and wind are both moving'
Passerby: 'All wrong! Your minds are moving!'

the formed world is an illusion. forms are illusory, temporal, forms are definite because of their contrast of a thing to another thing. a form, illusion can be measured in contrast to the otherness that defines it.

maya is the ability to create forms. illusions are based on appearances and not actions. maya is the actors and lila is the action. so again maya itself is movement of forms, illusions.

alan watts even relates it as a flower that grew to fast wouldn't be discernible because it would rise/fall faster than the human could see it.


brahman is lila
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
the formed world is an illusion. forms are illusory, temporal, forms are definite because of their contrast of a thing to another thing. a form, illusion can be measured in contrast to the otherness that defines it.

maya is the ability to create forms. illusions are based on appearances and not actions. maya is the actors and lila is the action. so again maya itself is movement of forms, illusions.

alan watts even relates it as a flower that grew to fast wouldn't be discernible because it would rise/fall faster than the human could see it.


brahman is lila

If maya is 'movement of forms, illusions' then there can be no real 'movement', or change. Any such 'movement', or change is illusory as well.

Brahman is Pure Consciousness. Lila is divine play. Maya is the resulting illusion.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Awareness I suppose, the true nature of reality. Without that consciousness or awareness it can't manifest into anything. It's kind of a brain-bender to try to envision something without form, no boundaries, yet it is the only thing and all that exists.



There are comparisons of Brahman to the Tao being indescribable and unfathomable, yet the basis for everything:

The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth
The named is the mother of myriad things

For some reason, or Im just simple minded, it sounds very simple but all of you are honestly making it more confusing and complex than what it is. The language throws me off.

I hear it referred to a Zen. Some say its Buddha nature, people with the potiential to have full awareness or consciousness or the their term emptiness. I experienced it when I went to the Hindu temple and that same energy (lack of better words/lbw) is in the Catholic Church and probably other houses of worship. You can experience it in (lbw) objects or just in prayer. I wouldnt call it god. That sounds more of a cultural term that varies by religion. I wouldnt say the same source. Just what "is".

I think its simple given we all have the same human senses. I just think we make it much more than what it is. Im not really religious; so, expression of awareness is through simple prayer and thank yous.

But how do you relate the tao to being god? Is it because it is part of your worship?
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I'm thinking God is beyond matter and energy.
if you're speaking in relationship to the abrahmic god; then you're of the persuasion that god is panentheistic and genesis 1:2 is incorrect? god created spirit and water?

or god is greater than the formed universe?
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
If maya is 'movement of forms, illusions' then there can be no real 'movement', or change. Any such 'movement', or change is illusory as well.

Brahman is Pure Consciousness. Lila is divine play. Maya is the resulting illusion.
movement isn't illusory. it doesn't have to do with exclusive visual perception. movement causes the illusion to arise/fall from change. itself is unchanging, or constant change, the cause of "all" changes. you cannot use the term all because then there would be a contrast, separation, between brahmin and that which is within itself.

lila is movement, action. maya is the forms that arise/fall from lila

maya is like thought that arises/falls from movement of mind, of consciousness. maya is the result of formless lila being formed in contrast to some other form. lila is god pretending she's something else.

or as alan watts said:

That would be within the infinite multiplicity of choices you would have. Of playing that you weren't god, because the whole nature of the godhead, according to this idea, is to play that he is not. So in this idea then, everybody is fundamentally the ultimate reality, not god in a politically kingly sense, but god in the sense of being the self, the deep-down basic whatever there is. And you are all that, only you are pretending you are not.
 
Last edited:

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
I think its simple given we all have the same human senses. I just think we make it much more than what it is. Im not really religious; so, expression of awareness is through simple prayer and thank yous.

You are right. It's experiential, not intellectual. The only time I think about it is in discussions like these. I'm a "village Hindu"... I pray, I do puja, I go to temple, I read the stories (they're quite colorful), I try to be a good man (the kind of man my dogs think I am), and that's it.

But how do you relate the tao to being god? Is it because it is part of your worship?

I don't. Neither Brahman nor Tao are God. Brahman manifests as 'God'... Allah, Vishnu, Shiva, Yahweh, "the Romulan name is ... unpronounceable" (a little movie humor thrown in). But then, Brahman manifests as everything, because it is everything. Overwhelmingly Hindus don't worship or pray to Brahman. There are no temples or pujas (worship services) for Brahman. That would be like having a temple or puja for an amoeba, because amoebas are Brahman and Brahman is amoebas. What can an amoeba give me, except a really bad case of the runs? I certainly wouldn't thank an amoeba for that. But when Brahman manifests as God, now we're talking.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
You are right. It's experiential, not intellectual. The only time I think about it is in discussions like these. I'm a "village Hindu"... I pray, I do puja, I go to temple, I read the stories (they're quite colorful), I try to be a good man (the kind of man my dogs think I am), and that's it.



I don't. Neither Brahman nor Tao are God. Brahman manifests as 'God'... Allah, Vishnu, Shiva, Yahweh, "the Romulan name is ... unpronounceable" (a little movie humor thrown in). But then, Brahman manifests as everything, because it is everything. Overwhelmingly Hindus don't worship or pray to Brahman. There are no temples or pujas (worship services) for Brahman. That would be like having a temple or puja for an amoeba, because amoebas are Brahman and Brahman is amoebas. What can an amoeba give me, except a really bad case of the runs? I certainly wouldn't thank an amoeba for that. But when Brahman manifests as God, now we're talking.

so then a hindu is praying to an attribute of brahman? to a part in contrast to some other parts?

i'm using the word god in the same context as pantheism or panentheism; which is basically brahman


allow me to explain in a better way

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/thunder.html
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
so then a hindu is praying to an attribute of brahman? to a part in contrast to some other parts?

Mmmm... yeah, pretty much. I think that's as apt a description as any. The concept of māyā (literally "illusion" & "magic" like a magic show, "power") has a lot to do with it. Māyā is the veil, illusion, that causes us to see things as they are not. Our goal is to break through that veil and experience reality... Brahman.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
couple of problems here.

formless doesn't mean without energy or matter. it simply means without definition or contrast. in order to have form there must be something besides itself to define the form in contrast to something otherwise and define it. formless means indefinite. a singularity has no contrast in which a measure; such as, time, space can be determined in relation to some otherness. its like a point with no other points to compare, contrast, measure against.


forms have definition because of their plurality. an indefinite thing, an infinite thing, can exist without form. there is nothing to compare it to, or with. doesn't mean it doesn't have matter. means it doesn't have form.

being conscious is an attribute cause of itself. being conscious of oneself vs not conscious of oneself. conscious creates things of itself. case in point thoughts become things. thoughts arise and fall from mind. mind itself doesn't have to arise and fall; when not creating/destroying forms. it creates things from itself. itself having no form but giving rise to forms.


so brahmin is compromised of three parts at a minimum:

1 consciousness - mind
2. matter that is formless
3. energy or movement. it cannot make something of itself without movement


fyi - yahweh and allah are not the same thing
I think there is some terms that are interpreted differently and form. May be one..
 
Top