Existence Of Abrahamic God

[Ishna]

This recent thread got me thinking. http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/34683-does-sikhism-confirm-existence-hindu-gods.html

1. Are YHVH (Jewish God), the Trinity (Christian God) and Allah (Muslim God-no prizes for guessing!) the same God? I've always thought so since they all share common history, mythology and trace their roots to Abraham.

2. If you subscribe to the idea that gods and goddesses like Shiva and Durga are (or have been) part of creation, do you think the Abrahamic God is on the same level as all other gods and goddesses? Or do you think there is something special about this particular god?

Thanks
Ish

 

[BhagatSingh]

With Waheguru's Grace, the Almighty, The One and Many...

Ishna ji realize that all Forms come from the Formless. In this sense, all these Gods can be called demi-Gods. They are not the complete story. Shiva, Rama, Hari, Krishna, Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, Allah. All these Gods that we conjure up, even Waheguru, are demi-gods (don't hit me yet). Because none of them are that One God. They point towards God. And because they do so, they are the One God, Waheguru. So in a sense, none of the Gods that any of us imagines is the real deal... and yet it is the real deal. Through those forms the One God is realized. This realization is infinite, never-ending realization. However, at any point if we stop and claim we have found God then realize that we only have a "demi-God" in our hands... (meditate on this)

There is an analogy with handicapped people and an elephant. We are all handicapped in a sense so this analogy works. So the handicapped people are all in a room with this elephant.

The deaf one listens to the elephant and says he is quiet. The blind one sees the elephant and says there is nothing there. The mute one talks to the elephant and says there is no response... wait...

That's not the analogy. I had it backwards.

Ok *takes a big breath* handicapped and the elephant in the room.

They are all just blind now.

One feels the elephant's tail and says I have got a tail. Another feels the elephant's trunk and says I feel a trunk. Another feels the elephant's underside and says "I know it wasn't raining but if it rains, I am good to go guys." Another finds himself on top of the elephant and says what a bigas* m*********er! wait...

wait!

No no no

That doesn't seem right.

Ishna ji, you and I can see! So what is the need for analogies with handicapped people?

We can both see. That's how we made it to the forum. So now we know that we can see.

Right? Yes of course.

Ok I grab the trunk and say it's a trunk. You grab the tail and say that you have his tail...

Hold on... that can't be right either.

How did this elephant get through the door?

Ok forget the elephant, there was a snake in the room...


and everyone left the room.

ਟੋਡੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਭਗਤਾਂ ਕੀ
टोडी बाणी भगतां की
Todī baṇī bẖagṯāʼn kī
Todee, The Word Of The Devotees:
ੴ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥
ੴ सतिगुर प्रसादि ॥
Ik▫oaʼnkār saṯgur parsāḏ.
One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The True Guru:
ਕੋਈ ਬੋਲੈ ਨਿਰਵਾ ਕੋਈ ਬੋਲੈ ਦੂਰਿ ॥
कोई बोलै निरवा कोई बोलै दूरि ॥
Ko▫ī bolai nirvā ko▫ī bolai ḏūr.
Some say that He is near, and others say that He is far away.
ਜਲ ਕੀ ਮਾਛੁਲੀ ਚਰੈ ਖਜੂਰਿ ॥੧॥
जल की माछुली चरै खजूरि ॥१॥
Jal kī mācẖẖulī cẖarai kẖajūr. ||1||
We might just as well say that the fish climbs out of the water and up the tree. ||1||
ਕਾਂਇ ਰੇ ਬਕਬਾਦੁ ਲਾਇਓ ॥
कांइ रे बकबादु लाइओ ॥
Kāʼn▫e re bakbāḏ lā▫i▫o.
Why do you speak such nonsense?
ਜਿਨਿ ਹਰਿ ਪਾਇਓ ਤਿਨਹਿ ਛਪਾਇਓ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
जिनि हरि पाइओ तिनहि छपाइओ ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
Jin har pā▫i▫o ṯinėh cẖẖapā▫i▫o. ||1|| rahā▫o.
One who has found the Lord, keeps quiet about it. ||1||Pause||
ਪੰਡਿਤੁ ਹੋਇ ਕੈ ਬੇਦੁ ਬਖਾਨੈ ॥
पंडितु होइ कै बेदु बखानै ॥
Pandiṯ ho▫e kai beḏ bakẖānai.
Those who become Pandits, religious scholars, recite the Vedas,
ਮੂਰਖੁ ਨਾਮਦੇਉ ਰਾਮਹਿ ਜਾਨੈ ॥੨॥੧॥
मूरखु नामदेउ रामहि जानै ॥२॥१॥
Mūrakẖ nāmḏe▫o rāmėh jānai. ||2||1||
but foolish Naam Dayv knows only the Lord. ||2||1||

(Ok now hit me. Go on, just beat me up for not listening to Bhagat Namdev ji.)

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

WOW...Ishna and myslef just thanked Bhagat ji simultaneously !! Gods work ha ha

 

[Ishna]

Lol !! Great post Bhagat bhaji, thanks for taking the time! It wasn't entirely what I wanted to hear (the part about Waheguru, just me looking for the easy way out) but you hit the nail on the head. This is the second time you've managed to point out what I know from Gurbani but haven't applied to my everyday mind. Like when I've read thr gurbani I understand but it doesn't stay in my mind, and when someone (ie you) point it out it's like du'h, I already knew that! *facepalm*

 

[Annie]

Ishna ji,

I don't know much about Islam so I can't comment on that, other than the fact that Muslims sometimes call Jews and Christians "people of the Book" which makes me think they identify with them in some way.

As for Christianity and Judaism, the main holy book of the Jews (the Torah) is the same as the first five chapters of the Christian holy book (the Bible). Yes, the two deities are one and the same. Both religions understand it in similar but not completely identical ways.

Christians and Jews believe that their deity is the creator of everything, not just a part of nature. They do not believe in the existence of demi-gods.

My personal opinion, if all these religions worship the one creator of the universe, then by definition that can only be one entity - the creator of the universe is the creator of the universe, no matter what name you wish to call it.

Adding to Bhagat Singh's analogy, God is like a vast stained glass window, so big that a person can only see one little part of it at a time. One group might say the window is blue. Another group might say it is red or yellow or green... but it is all part of the same window.

 

[Harry Haller]

Ishnabhenji,


when I read the bible many many years ago, I was struck by how angry god is. The abrahamic god seems to be at odds with the creator that we call god. I personally have never believed that all religions end up at the same place. And even if they did, I would want to learn through understanding and love, not fear. My father used to say to me, he never understood the term god-fearing, as he wanted to love god, not fear him.

A lot of religions place emphasis on doing things without question, with the consequences of not doing, being retribution, and to be in fear of that, as a way of life.

I cannot agree with anything other than a relationship with the creator based on love, respect and gratitude. The creator I know is a patient father, happy to give advice, but equally happy for his children to find their own way, he never gets angry, and he never burns bridges.

The creator I believe in, has risen above a lot of the personality traits that the abrahamic god seems to have, I find the abrahamic god quite 'human' in terms of feelings and actions, but thats just me , and I am always happy to be corrected swordfight

 

[prakash.s.bagga]

If we can understand the CREATOR as envisaged in Gurbani then we can have better
views for God and Goddesses.
We should carefully give a deep thinking to the aspect of CREATOR in Gurbani. We can find that the CREATOR in Gurbani is not FORMLESS as we take it. The CREATOR in Gurbani has a FORM which is invisible and specific.
The above fact of Gurbani is one of the reasons to understand that There is no concept of GOD in Gurbani.{There are other reasons too}
Thus from Gurbani we understand that the whole Universe is Creation from a CREATOR of definite FORM.
We can discuss this as we proceed ahead.

Prakash.S.Bagga

 

[BhagatSingh]

Harry ji,
Meditate on your words of wisdom for some time, there is much more there that you are missing out on. Do this now before continuing. Just go off into another room and contemplate your own words.

When you come back. Wait you have not left. GO NOW

Some say he is loving. Some say he gets angry.
Some say he is a creator. Some say he is a destroyer.
Some say he is. Some say he is not.
Some say he is Formless. Some say he is a Form but invisible and specific.

Happy meditating.:sippingcoffeemunda:

...

Keep meditating...

The creator I know is a patient father, happy to give advice, but equally happy for his children to find their own way, he never gets angry, and he never burns bridges.

You are absolutely right. The Abrahamic God sounds too human to be true. On the other hand, what you say does not sound like a human at all. Father? what is a father?

I think I should just leave the forum or I am going to have way too many people hitting me. lol

 

[aristotle]

The Abrahamic God, (though common to Muslim, Christians, Jews i.e. Abrahamic religions) is metaphysically different in descriptions in each of them.
-In Jewish faith, the God is like a mighty Lord sitting on the heavenly throne seven layers above the living space. The fundamental quality of the Jewish God (YHWH or Yahweh) is his(?) hostility towards the Gentiles(non jews) and the recognition of Jews as the chosen race(Even up to the extent when the Jews massacre the Gentiles, the YHWH doesn't seem to mind at all!), that's why every Prophet (even Jesus!) came from this race. The only way the Gentiles can be appealing to the Lord is by submission to the Jews.

-In Christianity the same God(YHWH) is expanded to form a Trinity. He too, considers Jews as his chosen race and they automatically enter the heaven on the judement day though the Gentiles too can enter the heaven after being baptised in the name of Jesus who forms a part of the Trinity and is said to have paid the ransom for our sins in advance. The God, in Christianity is much more calm and good tempered and punishes less often, even allows the Antichrist to kill Christians during the Tribulation (period before the judgment, is said to be yet to come) and keeps the punishment part suspended till the judgment day.

-In Islam, The concept of YHWH is totally rejected and replaced by Allah. A lofty and mighty, bad tempered God, who punishes the qaafirs(non Muslims, literally False men), at even the slightest provocation. He sends earthquakes and calamities on the Earth because he is angry with the residents of the Earth on not accepting Qur'an and Prophet Muhammad. Considers only Muslims as men and the rest as lower animals, not even worthy of praying before him.

 

[prakash.s.bagga]

Bhgat Singh Ji,
Some may say Creator is FORMless but we should understand what are the messages of GuRU from Gurbani regarding the form of Creator.

We can verify that the CREATOR in Gurbani is "GuR JOTi" refered as GuRU-GuR and to be known as EKANKAARu.

There are several quotes in Gurbani which tell about this FORM of CREATOR.In Gurbani the FORM of CREATOR is also being refered as SAT SAROOP.

So Dear Bhagat Singh singh ji Some may say so much but What our GuRU says that should be important for us.

Prakash.S.Bagga

 

[Randip Singh]

I subscribe to the concept of Onkaar, that does not mean God as the word God is in itself is an Abrahamic concept.

Onkaar meaning Constant. We say Ek Onkaar i.e. One constant , Sat Naam i.e. Truth is its name.

There is but one constant, truth is its name!!

 

[BhagatSingh]

Prakash Singh ji,

You are absolutely right.

Guru's message is very important for us. We should meditate on the words of Gurbani, on his words.

Words can only describe a form. As they themselves are a form.

You say the words sat saroop, ek ongkar, gur jot, gur are being used. Also the words ram, hari, vishnu, parbrahm, parm atma, allah, khuda, kareem, raheem ... in fact, every word in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is being used. (Meditate)

What are they all referring to? That can only be known through meditation, through dwelling on the words, reading Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, singing it, repeating it, memorizing it, analyzing it etc whatever else you can think of. Once that is known, that... some call it form and some formless. Some call it with the words above, and some with the words that will arrive below.

 

[prakash.s.bagga]

It would be very intersting to understand the reference meanings of the following two words in Gurbaani
1.......The word EKANKAARu

2.......The word OANKAARu

We can find both words have different meanings.
In Gurbani we do not find the word OANKAARu being refered as CREATOR but definitely you can see that it EKANKAARu{GuR JOti} being refered as CREATOR.
It is thus clear that the word OANKAARu is not the reference for GuR JOTi so it should not be taken as CREATOR.

You are right that all the words |Except the word Vishanu ....There is no word like Param atma in SGGS }refer to CREATOR only.So it is utmost important to understand the complete knowledge}FORM as well as its MOORATi from SGGS .

You will appreciate that the knowledge of CREATOR by GURU in SGGs is perfect and compete so we should first grasp this.

Prakash.S.Bagga

 

[Annie]

I find the abrahamic god quite 'human' in terms of feelings and actions, but thats just me , and I am always happy to be corrected swordfight

I agree with you, Harry ji. I'm actually in the middle of re-reading the Bible/Torah right now. I'm just shocked at how violent and petty the Abrahamic God seems to be. It really makes me wonder.

There are several layers of understanding to the Bible and Torah. On one end of the spectrum, rules and consequences are what is taught to the people who can't or don't want to learn more. I think the religious authority figures, especially the Christian ones, are quite guilty of using the holy books to control the ignorant masses.

On the other end of the spectrum of understanding is mysticism - called Kabballah in Judaism. It takes the holy books much less literally and looks for deeper or hidden meanings. In that school of thought, the Abrahamic God is both masculine and feminine, and has a more complex and benevolent personality. In fact, it is much less human. One really has to be careful with mysticism though because for every person who is on the right path, there are a hundred crazies and manipulators.

In the end, we are all (at least the people who are serious about religion) just doing our best to understand the incomprehensible, and trying to do the right thing.

 

[Harry Haller]

Annieji,

Herman Hesse, the writer of the book steppenwolf, from which I took my name here, wrote that an artist is someone of enormous creativity that is able to use that gift to create something magical, music, paintings, etc.He describes a mystic as the same, but without the ability to translate that gift. I am not sure how that helps in understanding mysticism!

I would like to think, and I may be wrong, that incomprehensible, is fully comprehensible, provided we allow ourselves to be guided by the creator, as outlined in the SGGS.

I have been trying to do the right thing all my life, its amazing how many times you think you are doing the right thing, even by other people, and in fact you are doing the wrong thing, what appears to be the right thing from one perspective can look completely wrong in a different light. To that end, I hope to fine tune my ability to see the creators perspective, which will hopefully enable me to see where the light shines, and what is illuminated, and what is in darkness

who said doing the right thing was easy !

 

[BhagatSingh]

Annie ji, what a coincidence. I am also in the process of reading the Bible.

... maybe not a coincidence then. Since I'm also trying to read (at turtle's pace): the Quran, Bhagwad Gita, Tao Te Ching, Yoga Sutra of Patanjali along with the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, of course.

I'm just shocked at how violent and petty the Abrahamic God seems to be. It really makes me wonder.

Yes, and what stuck out to me was:
In Genesis, God creates everything then says "it is good".
God created man in his own [rather violent] image.

Clearly a contradiction. Man is both good and violent?


My enlightened friend Narayanjot Kaur ji (she's on this forum) once made a remark somewhat akin to "Life is about contradictions" I think she also said we should learn to accept and live with these contradictions. Ever since, this has been ringing in my ears. Anywhere I am, in any situation, in a thread, in a park, looking at nature, reading spiritual texts...

I find contradictions at the core of our world, and so all religions. The Tao Te Ching and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji makes especially good use of contradictions in many places. God-willing I will someday post stuff from Tao Te Ching. From Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, I presented a shabad by Bhagat Namdev ji in the beginning of the thread. After I read it and understood it, I fell in love with this shabad. The use of contradiction to highlight the Eternal Truth in his shabad is done very creatively. I had a good laugh after I read it and realized what was going on... then laughed some more.

Pretty deep stuff, all of it.

In the end, we are all (at least the people who are serious about religion) just doing our best to understand the incomprehensible, and trying to do the right thing.

Could not have said it better. I would add even those who aren't serious about religion are doing the same.

 

[prakash.s.bagga]

I feel we have different understanding about the meanings of the words
NIRANKAAR and the word NIRAAKAAR.

Correct understanding of the meaning of composite words can be derived by proper Disection of the word. This disection should be done as per rules of disection of the words.
Considering the rule of disection of some of the words we can get the clue for its correct meaning.For example

The WORD NIRANJAN....tobe disected as NIR plus ANJAN means free from ANJAN

THE word NIRANKAAR....to be disected as NIR plus OANKAAR Means free from OANKAAR

The word NIRAAKAAR,,,to be disected as NIR plus AAKAAR means free from AAKAAR

We can find in Gurbani that the word NIAKAAR is always reference for EKANKAAR
whereas the word NRAAKAAR is reference for OANKAAR.

This consideration should make us clear that
It is OANKAAR which is SAAKAAR or NRAAKAAR but EKANKAAR is always NIRANKAAR.

These are only personal views for considetration although the views are based on certain facts only.

Prakash.S.Bagga

 

[BhagatSingh]

Prakash ji and the relationship between Nirgun Niraakar and Nirankar is?

Also the relatioship between Oankar Saakar and Sargun is?


What is the relationship between those two sets? They appear to be opposite forces.

 

[prakash.s.bagga]

Bhagat Singh ji,
We can find that the words SARGUN and NIRGUN have been used for NIRANKAAR only.
I have yet to see the use of words SARGUN and NIRGUN being used for OANKAAR.
If you have any quote from Gurbani for this pl post this for me.

Prakash.S.Bagga

 

[BhagatSingh]

Prakash Singh ji,

My knowledge of Gurbani is not as great as yours. But what I do know is that Gurbani starts off from Ek Onkar then goes onto elaborate on Ek Onkar.

Everything in Gurbani is talking about Onkar: Every word, every sentence, every shabad, every bani, every author...