A six-party conversation on Concept of God in Hinduism - 1 of 3

[Guest guest]

Namaste all.

 

The recent discussions on the list on the existence of God

motivated me to write this. The following is an imaginary

six-party conversation on the concept of ‘God’ in Hinduism.

The six persons who are parties to this conversation,

namely, RNB, DD, OT, PP, SV and PA are all Hindus who have

grown in an atmosphere full of the culture and tradition.

They are such thick friends of one another that each knows

the others inside out! But the six have different views on

Hindu beliefs, philosophy and practices and that makes the

conversation interesting.

 

1. RNB is a rationalist and a non-believer to the extent

that he has serious questions on the existence of God. The

one thing he appreciates is the necessity for the

purification of one’s mind. He has a soft corner for

karma-yoga, because the concept of unselfish service means

something to him but his ideas are only vague. His

attitudes to his friends’ perception of the ‘faith’ part

of religion are rather blurred.

 

2. DD is a simple and pious devotee, but he is a kind of a

‘doubting’ devotee, because every alternate day he

discovers that his prayers are not answered by God. He

jumps from one form of God to another (and Hinduism gives

him this flexibility) and is carried by naivity to believe

in any one who poses the frontal of a saffron colour. He

thinks he understands Lord Krishna and His leelas, but of

Krishna’s Gita and the philosophical undercurrent running

through it, he has only a confused perception, if at all.

An undercurrent of vacillation and doubt constantly bothers

him. In fact he represents a large number of ordinary

Hindus.

 

3. OT is the orthodox theologist. He knows all the puranic

stories. He corresponds to the traditional layman-Hindu,

very often superstitious. He does not have a clear

understanding of the basic philosophy of the religion and

he tends to develop dogmatic attitudes towards viewpoints

that do not coincide with his own perception of religion.

He thinks he understands both Krishna’s pranks as well as

his Gita, but his attitudes which have a colour of

dogmatism in them prevent him from a full understanding.

 

4. PP is one who professes Philosophy. Mostly his is an

arm-chair philosophy. He believes in the omnipresence of

Divinity. He knows that God is immanent in himself and he

has to only realise that Godly presence. He believes or

cares for nothing else. For him, neither karma yoga nor

bhakti nor surrender theory nor the concept of Avatar has

any meaning, much less, any fascination. But he is very

knowledgeable because he is well-read.

 

5. SV, the Scientist-Vedantin, on the other hand, has a

great fascination for the intellectual exercises embodied

in the philosophical schools of Hinduism, the consequent

corollary of a karma yoga and so on. He even probes into

treatises which deal with these teachings in their depth.

He needs ‘proof’ for everything on the lines of what his

scientific mind seems to be familiar with. The concept of

One God with myriads of names and forms is unpalatable to

him even as an academic hypothesis. He thinks he

understands the Gita, but certainly he cannot swallow the

pranks of Krishna.

 

6. AV is an advaita-vedantin. He claims to have read (and

understood!) all the advaitic treatises and has probably a

good perception of the Prasthana-traya.

--------------------

The conversation starts in an elementary casual way between

#s 1 and 2 on the existence of God. At some point #3 joins

in the debate. The conversation turns into a serious

debate. #4 also joins now. #s 5 and #6 join in the final

stages. Now let us go to the conversation from the

beginning. The paragraphs are numbered so as to facilitate

a further discussion, if necessary, by members. In fact

members are particularly requested to give a critical

scrutiny of the whole document.

 

1. RNB: Good morning DD, what temple did you visit today?

What was your latest prayer?

 

2. DD: Well, over the weekend I had been to the temple of

Guruvayoor. Do you know it draws the second largest crowd

of devotees among all Hindu temples, next only to Tirupati?

Guru-vayoor-appan is the greatest boon-giver according to

Narayaneeyam. Among the many prayers I carried to the Lord

was one which concerns you. I prayed that God should grant

you what you do not have.

 

3. RNB: I know what you mean. You have prayed to your God

that he should grant me faith in him. And you think he can

do that for you.

 

4. DD: Why not? God can get anything done if He wills it.

 

5. RNB: So do you think He can put that faith in me in

spite of my will otherwise?

 

6. DD: Certainly. Further I am not asking Him to give me

material benefits. I have asked Him, on your behalf, the

one and only thing you need and that is not a material

benefit.

 

7. RNB: That is your feeling about me. But I don’t feel I

am lacking anything. Why should I have faith in a

non-existent God?

 

8. DD: Come on, don’t repeat all that talk of yours. You

seem to take pleasure in denying God. Don’t you know that

even in the west they are talking about a super-designer

who must have designed this universe with all its fantastic

order and in-built regularity, which is unexplainable?

 

9. RNB: But you are begging the question. Who designed that

super-designer?

 

10. DD: That super-designer is God. Nobody designed Him.

 

11. RNB: That is exactly my point. You are only making a

hypothesis, aren’t you?

 

12. DD: So what? That is the declaration of all religions

of the world.

 

13. RNB: Religion is man-made. God is just a creation of

man’s intelligence. Man created God in his own image as an

anthropomorphic super-duplicate of himself. I don’t need

such a creation.

 

14. DD: Have you ever felt depressed when things don’t work

the way you wanted them to work for you?

 

15. RNB: I don’t feel depression at such times. I know I

am lucky most of the time and some times I am not lucky;

that is all.

 

16. DD: What is luck, if not God’s Grace?

 

17. RNB: Why do you bring in God into everything? Luck is

luck; there is no God there. What does your God gain by

giving me luck? I do my duty and I expect rewards. If I

don’t get those rewards it only means there is some fault

in the system and I have to work towards removal of that

fault. You believers rely on God to give you those rewards

or correct those faults in the system. Last year you were

visiting local temples one by one for redress of your

grievances and this year you have gone all the way to

Guruvayoor. But your grievances are still there!

 

18. DD: You may not agreee with this. But it is God that

gives all the rewards.

 

19. RNB: But if it is a God that rewards only those who

pamper him, then I am not willing to have anything to do

with him.

 

20. OT (entering): Hello friends, it appears you are

seriously discussing something. Can I join you?

 

21. RNB. Actually we were looking for you. DD has just

returned from a trip to Guruvayoor. He is trying to

convince me that Guruvayoorappan is the supreme God. Last

year he tried to convince me that the elephant-God Ganesha

in the corner of this street is the supreme God. This year

it is different!

 

22. OT. Nobody can convince you, because you don’t believe

in anything.

 

23. RNB. Why can’t you folks give me a logical argument for

the existence of God? Don’t bring in a bundle of primitive

concepts from your Puranas and all your superstitious

beliefs.

 

24. OT: Is it superstition to believe what hundreds of

great men like Shankara, Tirunavukkarasar, Ramanuja,

Madhva, Vedanta Deshika, Appayya Dikshidar, Kabirdas,

Meerabai, Chaitanya or a Vallalar have believed? Is it

superstition to believe a Ramakrishna of our own times who

saw the Goddess in person? Is it superstition to have

trust in a Raghavendra who lives still in his samadhi and

grants our wishes? Have you ever exposed yourself to the

sayings or the life story of any of these? That is exactly

your problem, the problem of Ignorance!

 

25. RNB: Wait for a minute! I thought you were going to

give a logical argument.

--------------------------(To

be Continued)

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

 

 

 

 

Prof. V. Krishnamurthy

 

Ongoing new series of pages on my website: 'Bhagavatam and Advaita Bhakti'

starting with

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/VK2/Bhagavatam_Introduction.html