- Jul 20, 2012
- 1,393
- 1,921
A conscious creator in Sikhi?
I have noticed on here in recent times that some people claim to be Sikh and yet do not believe in a conscious creator, but instead personally interpret Gurbani to be instruction on how to live in harmony with nature / creation and compare Sikhi to Athiesm. But they do not believe in a conscious creator / deity. Others, personify Waheguru as being conscious of creation. I thought this was a good debate… Personally I believe in a conscious creator, not just because of the obvious intelligent design that to me could not just happen by chance, but also from quotes in Gurbani that seem to support ONE supreme conscious creator, from which everything exists in a state of duality from that ONE.
So let’s look at how the creator is described in Gurbani, starting with the Mool Mantra, where it clearly states qualities such as Ik Onkar - ONE God/Creator (Non Duality). Some people chose to translate Onkar as ‘ultimate truth’ and take any persona out of it, however the follow on statements seem to point to a persona: Without Fear, Without Hate for example, while stating the absence of something ‘could’ mean reference to something inanimate, but then why state them at all? You could continue on forever with statements of things that an inanimate universe does not possess. (without jealousy, without anger, without passion, etc ---- without CONSCIOUSNESS) So why use specifics such as ‘hate’ and ‘fear’ if the creator is unconscious?? It doesn’t make sense to me. The only way it makes sense is to say ‘without fear’ … as to specify fearlessness… ‘without hate’ … as to specify loving / compassionate --- these are qualities of a conscious persona, not an unconscious creation / reality that just ‘happened’ without conscious design. Of course there is MUCH deeper meaning in the Mool Mantra and you can read more here: MOOL MANTRA
So basically the Mool Mantra describes the creator… some also say creation… and yes you can go as far to say they are one in the same (as I will explain below) But to say that creation just came about without conscious design doesn’t make sense. And to say that something as abstract as the personal internal world of our consciousness came about as merely an emergent property of an unconscious creation without any intelligent design, just does not make sense! Throw a bunch of golf ***** into a pile and you will only ever have a pile of golf *****... no matter how many you throw there!
In SGGS you will find many references to this reality being a dream.
The use of the term ‘dream’ is interesting because a dream, which requires consciousness to occur, infers a DREAMER. If this reality is a dream and we are within the dream as suggested by the above, then WHO is the dreamer? Certainly not an unconscious creation that just happened on its own! And if we, conscious within the dream, and are able to question our existence… then the dreamer must certainly be conscious as well! Just like when you dream at night, you interact as one character, but in reality ALL the characters are really you. And outside of that dream, you exist as a CONSCIOUS dreamer, maybe not aware that you are dreaming when you are within the dream, but once you awaken, you are very conscious of the dream that took place.
That brings me to another quote:
The above describes the world as a play... similar to a dream. A play must be created, it can not exist without a writer. In the above, the actor is also the writer of the play, and also playing all of the characters within it. This certainly describes a conscious creation to me. Then it goes on to say that once the costumes are removed, there is only ONE. But for the above to occur there had to be a consciousness that staged the play. To me the use of this reference is very supportive of a conscious creator in Sikhi because, a play which was a good comparison in a time before television etc, by its nature is artistic, and requires a mind, an intelligence to create.
So to summarize, my belief is that reality is ONE consciousness, and that ONE is all that really exists. It is formless... pure frequency (as vibration is the basis of everything also supported in science), and is creative and conscious. This reality, this Universe is as a dream - the dream of the creator. As a formless, pure point of consciousness, the only tools you would possess to create would be thought - dreams - creativity. Everything within this creation, being a dream of the ONE universal consciousness, by extension is part of the ONE - everything within the creation IS the ONE. That means there exists fragmented parts of the ONE consciousness within everything and everyone, which is in agreement with Gurbani. To summarize my belief I would say that this reality is the expression of the ONE universal conscious creator, to subjectively experience itself, which it is doing through its own creation. Some people say we are as drops from the ocean that is Waheguru and we need to get back there through discovering the divine within us. In reality, I don't believe we ever left the ocean... we just forget where we were.
So what do you guys believe???
I have noticed on here in recent times that some people claim to be Sikh and yet do not believe in a conscious creator, but instead personally interpret Gurbani to be instruction on how to live in harmony with nature / creation and compare Sikhi to Athiesm. But they do not believe in a conscious creator / deity. Others, personify Waheguru as being conscious of creation. I thought this was a good debate… Personally I believe in a conscious creator, not just because of the obvious intelligent design that to me could not just happen by chance, but also from quotes in Gurbani that seem to support ONE supreme conscious creator, from which everything exists in a state of duality from that ONE.
So let’s look at how the creator is described in Gurbani, starting with the Mool Mantra, where it clearly states qualities such as Ik Onkar - ONE God/Creator (Non Duality). Some people chose to translate Onkar as ‘ultimate truth’ and take any persona out of it, however the follow on statements seem to point to a persona: Without Fear, Without Hate for example, while stating the absence of something ‘could’ mean reference to something inanimate, but then why state them at all? You could continue on forever with statements of things that an inanimate universe does not possess. (without jealousy, without anger, without passion, etc ---- without CONSCIOUSNESS) So why use specifics such as ‘hate’ and ‘fear’ if the creator is unconscious?? It doesn’t make sense to me. The only way it makes sense is to say ‘without fear’ … as to specify fearlessness… ‘without hate’ … as to specify loving / compassionate --- these are qualities of a conscious persona, not an unconscious creation / reality that just ‘happened’ without conscious design. Of course there is MUCH deeper meaning in the Mool Mantra and you can read more here: MOOL MANTRA
So basically the Mool Mantra describes the creator… some also say creation… and yes you can go as far to say they are one in the same (as I will explain below) But to say that creation just came about without conscious design doesn’t make sense. And to say that something as abstract as the personal internal world of our consciousness came about as merely an emergent property of an unconscious creation without any intelligent design, just does not make sense! Throw a bunch of golf ***** into a pile and you will only ever have a pile of golf *****... no matter how many you throw there!
In SGGS you will find many references to this reality being a dream.
The use of the term ‘dream’ is interesting because a dream, which requires consciousness to occur, infers a DREAMER. If this reality is a dream and we are within the dream as suggested by the above, then WHO is the dreamer? Certainly not an unconscious creation that just happened on its own! And if we, conscious within the dream, and are able to question our existence… then the dreamer must certainly be conscious as well! Just like when you dream at night, you interact as one character, but in reality ALL the characters are really you. And outside of that dream, you exist as a CONSCIOUS dreamer, maybe not aware that you are dreaming when you are within the dream, but once you awaken, you are very conscious of the dream that took place.
That brings me to another quote:
The above describes the world as a play... similar to a dream. A play must be created, it can not exist without a writer. In the above, the actor is also the writer of the play, and also playing all of the characters within it. This certainly describes a conscious creation to me. Then it goes on to say that once the costumes are removed, there is only ONE. But for the above to occur there had to be a consciousness that staged the play. To me the use of this reference is very supportive of a conscious creator in Sikhi because, a play which was a good comparison in a time before television etc, by its nature is artistic, and requires a mind, an intelligence to create.
So to summarize, my belief is that reality is ONE consciousness, and that ONE is all that really exists. It is formless... pure frequency (as vibration is the basis of everything also supported in science), and is creative and conscious. This reality, this Universe is as a dream - the dream of the creator. As a formless, pure point of consciousness, the only tools you would possess to create would be thought - dreams - creativity. Everything within this creation, being a dream of the ONE universal consciousness, by extension is part of the ONE - everything within the creation IS the ONE. That means there exists fragmented parts of the ONE consciousness within everything and everyone, which is in agreement with Gurbani. To summarize my belief I would say that this reality is the expression of the ONE universal conscious creator, to subjectively experience itself, which it is doing through its own creation. Some people say we are as drops from the ocean that is Waheguru and we need to get back there through discovering the divine within us. In reality, I don't believe we ever left the ocean... we just forget where we were.
So what do you guys believe???
) as a result of my own faux pass I cannot but be intrigued by your frequent reference to God as energy. 
