The purpose of creation

[Koldo]

I have been meaning to ask this for quite a while.

What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?
( I know there may not be an unified view on this. Everyone is welcome to answer this question. )

Also, as far as I know, belief in a cyclic universe is quite common across hinduism.
Isn't the cyclic universe a form of samsara?

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

I have been meaning to ask this for quite a while.

What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?
( I know there may not be an unified view on this. Everyone is welcome to answer this question. )

Also, as far as I know, belief in a cyclic universe is quite common across hinduism.
Isn't the cyclic universe a form of samsara?

To the best of my understanding, the purpose of the creating the physical universe is for Brahma or All-that-is, to experience itself. Because Brahma is without form but also with infinite form, this explains the variety of life and experiences we see in the universe.

And time is cyclical in Hinduism, that is true. The universe will continue to expand until it doesn't, then collapse on itself and re-expand. Similarly, Brahma will continue to create and recreate a multitude of life/experiences, until every possible experience has been had. Then it will all start again. Why? That's the big mystery.

:camp:

 

[Koldo]

To the best of my understanding, the purpose of the creating the physical universe is for Brahma or All-that-is, to experience itself. Because Brahma is without form but also with infinite form, this explains the variety of life and experiences we see in the universe.

What do you mean by 'experience itself'?
I am having a hard time comprehending that because I have no idea on what 'not experience itself' would mean either.

And time is cyclical in Hinduism, that is true. The universe will continue to expand until it doesn't, then collapse on itself and re-expand. Similarly, Brahma will continue to create and recreate a multitude of life/experiences, until every possible experience has been had. Then it will all start again. Why? That's the big mystery.

:camp:

Don't hinduists seek liberation from samsara?
If the universe is recreated ( or re-expanded ) then won't the samsara be back with it? So, don't you always end up back to where you started no matter how many times you escape from it?

 

[Sumit]

I have been meaning to ask this for quite a while.

What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?
( I know there may not be an unified view on this. Everyone is welcome to answer this question. )

Continuity, that's the nature of Brahman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?

Also, as far as I know, belief in a cyclic universe is quite common across hinduism. Isn't the cyclic universe a form of samsara?

Don't hinduists seek liberation from samsara?
If the universe is recreated (or re-expanded ) then won't the samsara be back with it? So, don't you always end up back to where you started no matter how many times you escape from it?

I am known for my heterodox views around here. Yes, generally Hindus believe in a cyclical universe. But my contention is that we should first consider whether there is a creation or not, since many Hindus consider 'samsara' to be an illusion only. And what is supposed to constitute the 'samsara', is considered to be unchangeable (Brahman).

In case, there is no creation, then the question of purpose does not arise. No creation, no purpose.

The second thing is that you need to decide what is 'liberation from samsara'? Is it that you are bound in a cycle of perpetual birth and death, and you get a relief from that? Then do you go to heaven or hell according to your deeds, or go to the world of your deity for eternity and sing his/her praises? Or perhaps your soul merges with the God-head? These are the various meanings that people take from liberation/deliverance/nirvana/moksha/enlightenment/Etc.

But there is an other kind of deliverance. And that is deliverance from doubts, deliverance from nagging questions in your mind, deliverance from ignorance, etc. For example, you wonder as to what is the purpose of life or universe? You may have other questions like this in your mind. These questions agitate your mind. You read the scriptures, you ask people who are considered to be wise. And you get many types of answers. Consider, how peaceful it would be if you did not have these questions. Therefore, I present that knowledge is deliverance. That is the only way you get nirvana (which literally is supposed to mean 'absence of forest of trees obstructing one's views'). That is the way Buddha got his nirvana, by knowing, by understanding.

 

[Kalidas]

I'm not sure there is a reason as much as "The universe was created because it was created". Basicly maybe there is no "reason", no grand purpose. Maybe as Fireside said it is so Brahman can experience itself. I'm not sure if we'll ever know.

 

[Koldo]

Continuity, that's the nature of Brahman.

Can you elaborate on that?
Wouldn't Brahman continue to exist regardless of whether there was a creation?

 

[Kalidas]

Can you elaborate on that?
Wouldn't Brahman continue to exist regardless of whether there was a creation?

That is a good question?! Yet how can one answer? If there is no creation to try and understand Brahman how can we say Brahman does or does not exist?

 

[Koldo]

I am known for my heterodox views around here.

Yes, I know. Don't worry.

Yes, generally Hindus believe in a cyclical universe. But my contention is that we should first consider whether there is a creation or not, since many Hindus considered 'samsara' to be an illusion only. And what is supposed to constitute the 'samsara', is considered to be unchangeable (Brahman).

In case, there is no creation, then the question of purpose does not arise. No creation, no purpose.

If creation never came about, how did we end up with this illusion of sorts? Was it always there ever since the start?

The second thing is that you need to decide what is 'liberation from samsara'? Is it that you are bound in a cycle of perpetual birth and death, and you get a relief from that? Then do you go to heaven or hell according to your deeds, or go to the world of your deity for eternity and sing his/her praises? Or perhaps your soul merges with the God-head? These are the various meanings that people take from liberation/deliverance/nirvana/moksha/enlightenment/Etc.

The version I most often hear about is when you merge with the God-head. Then you no longer get reborn.

Do the concepts of heavens and hell also exist within mainstream hinduism? I thought they were more commonplace on buddhism.
Since we are here already, an extra question: To what degree is there a syncretism between hinduism and buddhism on India and surrounding countries? On the current days, do they stand within their own clear boundaries, or do certain ideas tend to jump from one side to the other?

But there is an other kind of deliverance. And that is deliverance from doubts, deliverance from nagging questions in your mind, deliverance from ignorance, etc. For example, you wonder as to what is the purpose of life or universe? You may have other questions like this in your mind. These questions agitate your mind. You read the scriptures, you ask people who are considered to be wise. And you get many types of answers. Consider, how peaceful it would be if you did not have these questions. Therefore, I present that knowledge is deliverance. That is the only way you get nirvana (which literally is supposed to mean 'absence of trees obstructing one's views' in the forest). That is the way Buddha got his nirvana, by knowing, by understanding.

If i say 'liberation from samsara', what are the chances that an hindu would think of this kind of deliverance?

 

[Koldo]

That is a good question?! Yet how can one answer? If there is no creation to try and understand Brahman how can we say Brahman does or does not exist?

Can't Brahman understand itself?
Actually, I thought that liberation from samsara was a result of, to put simple, understanding ( not just on the rational mind ) oneself as Brahman.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

What do you mean by 'experience itself'?
I am having a hard time comprehending that because I have no idea on what 'not experience itself' would mean either.



Don't hinduists seek liberation from samsara?
If the universe is recreated ( or re-expanded ) then won't the samsara be back with it? So, don't you always end up back to where you started no matter how many times you escape from it?

To the first question: Say I read a book about what it's like to fly in a hot air balloon. Let's say I read about it in intense detail. Let's say, I become so knowledgeable on the subject, that I can even speak to others and educate them about it. I know all about flying in a hot air balloon.

But knowledge is different than experience. I have never experienced flying in a hot air balloon.

Every soul that has ever existed knows certain things on an intellectual level, but not everyone has experienced every experience. Brahma knows itself completly - But in order to experience itself it must create a world with boundaries, rules and sensations in which to operate - to have experience.

Now, you could say, "But would Brahma, being all and knowing all, already have experience of itself ?"

Sure. The mystery is why the cycle keeps recurring. Maybe like Kalidas said, there is no reason, or perhaps, it's done for fun.

Your second question is harder and perhaps aup answered it already with his discussion about illusion and Maya. It's a very good question and one that I have to think about more to be honest with you.

:camp:

 

[Vinayaka]

I have been meaning to ask this for quite a while.

What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?
( I know there may not be an unified view on this. Everyone is welcome to answer this question. )

Also, as far as I know, belief in a cyclic universe is quite common across hinduism.
Isn't the cyclic universe a form of samsara?

Generally speaking, 'creation' is an inaccurate term. It's there because western indologists, in the attempt to study us, had no better word.

A more accurate word is emanation, and an analogy is rain from clouds. Clouds do not create raindrops, raindrops just fall naturally from clouds.

So form (the universe) comes out of formlessness (Brahman). There is no prurpose other than God extending himself, as part of his play, or dance.

 

[Maya3]

Generally speaking, 'creation' is an inaccurate term. It's there because western indologists, in the attempt to study us, had no better word.

A more accurate word is emanation, and an analogy is rain from clouds. Clouds do not create raindrops, raindrops just fall naturally from clouds.

So form (the universe) comes out of formlessness (Brahman). There is no prurpose other than God extending himself, as part of his play, or dance.

Yup and sometimes someone says something like this, and I think, yup, this is why I'm Hindu.

Beautiful!

Maya

 

[Aupmanyav]

Generally speaking, 'creation' is an inaccurate term. It's there because western indologists, in the attempt to study us, had no better word.

A more accurate word is emanation, and an analogy is rain from clouds. Clouds do not create raindrops, raindrops just fall naturally from clouds.

So form (the universe) comes out of formlessness (Brahman). There is no prurpose other than God extending himself, as part of his play, or dance.

Nice definition and nice analogy. Like that of 'Samkhya' (for benefit of Koldo, a Hindu philosophy), 'the result is inherent in the cause'. Where can 'the formless' (Brahman) extend? It already extends to the limits of the known universe and perhaps beyond. Itself, it sets the limits (if any).

The mystery is why the cycle keeps recurring.

Is there any cycle? Is it not just another illusion?

 

[Koldo]

To the first question: Say I read a book about what it's like to fly in a hot air balloon. Let's say I read about it in intense detail. Let's say, I become so knowledgeable on the subject, that I can even speak to others and educate them about it. I know all about flying in a hot air balloon.

But knowledge is different than experience. I have never experienced flying in a hot air balloon.

I comprehend your analogy, but to relate to hinduism we would have to make use of dualism, which is not applicable here.

If I understood it right, the proper analogy would be: Say I read a book about what a human being is like. Let's say I read about it in intense detail. Let's say I become so knowledgeable on the subject that I can even speak to others and educate them about it. I know all about human beings.

But knowledge is different from experience.
And since I and 'human being' are one and the same, then I have experienced 'human being'.

Perhaps what you mean is more akin to 'fully' experience oneself. For example, if I never move even a muscle of my body, I can still say ( skipping the issue that it is not possible to say something without moving a muscle ) that I have experienced myself. But I can not say that I have fully experienced myself, since I have not made use of all my capabilities.
Would that be a correct way to look at it?

Every soul that has ever existed knows certain things on an intellectual level, but not everyone has experienced every experience. Brahma knows itself completly - But in order to experience itself it must create a world with boundaries, rules and sensations in which to operate - to have experience.

Do souls retain some sort of individuality even after being united with Brahma? ( Or perhaps, the right question would be 'when they realize they and Brahma are one?' )

Now, you could say, "But would Brahma, being all and knowing all, already have experience of itself ?"

Sure. The mystery is why the cycle keeps recurring. Maybe like Kalidas said, there is no reason, or perhaps, it's done for fun.

Your second question is harder and perhaps aup answered it already with his discussion about illusion and Maya. It's a very good question and one that I have to think about more to be honest with you.

:camp:

Thank you for your answers so far.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Wouldn't Brahman continue to exist regardless of whether there was a creation?

Now these are very difficult questions, and we do not know the answers of these questions. We are not likely to know the answers of these questions in the near future. It would take some time for science to answer these questions. It does seem that Brahman continues to exist regardless of the so-called 'creation'. But then, what do you mean by 'existence'? Is 'existence' any different from 'non-existence'? Is Brahman bound by the ways humans try understand it? Just as creation and dissolution may be an illusion (maya), existence and non-existence could also be another illusion. That is why Buddha said 'do not contemplate on these questions. Contemplated, they bring vexation in mind and cause madness'.

 

[Koldo]

Generally speaking, 'creation' is an inaccurate term. It's there because western indologists, in the attempt to study us, had no better word.

A more accurate word is emanation, and an analogy is rain from clouds. Clouds do not create raindrops, raindrops just fall naturally from clouds.

So form (the universe) comes out of formlessness (Brahman). There is no prurpose other than God extending himself, as part of his play, or dance.

That only takes my question a step further. ( And you probably saw that coming. )
Why does God extend himself, as part of his play, or dance?

 

[Vinayaka]

That only takes my question a step further. ( And you probably saw that coming. )
Why does God extend himself, as part of his play, or dance?

It's his very nature, and one of the lovely mysteries of the universe.

 

[Koldo]

Now these are very difficult questions, and we do not know the answers of these questions. We are not likely to know the answers of these questions in the near future. It would take some time for science to answer these questions. It does seem that Brahman continues to exist regardless of the so-called 'creation'. But then, what do you mean by 'existence'? Is 'existence' any different from 'non-existence'? Is Brahman bound by the ways humans try understand it? Just as creation and dissolution may be an illusion (maya), existence and non-existence could also be another illusion. That is why Buddha said 'do not contemplate on these questions. Contemplated, they bring vexation in mind and cause madness'.

Too late, for a madman I already am.

 

[Koldo]

It's his very nature, and one of the lovely mysteries of the universe.

By doing so, does it extend itself because that is its will ( does it even have a will of sorts? ), or is it more akin to a natural process like the rain falling from the sky?