Tag Archives: veda in english

Vedas For Beginners : Is the God the Creator?

K:  Sister!  Give reply to yesterday’s question


V:  Your yesterday’s question was how God could protect the world when he was devoid of body for the reason that there could be no activity without body being present. But  I say that  your understanding of the matter is wrong. Conscious being can do functions any where it resides. It can give momentum. Where it is not there, then only the requirement of body is needed. For ex, now I have lifted this book. From which?

K: By hands of course.


V: If hands were not to be there would it be possible to lift the books?


K: Not possible.


V: Good!  The hands have lifted the book.  Now tell me which lifted the hands?


K: You have lifted the Books with your strength.


V: Look! I am shaking my entire body. From which the body is being shaken?


K: From your strength. It is obvious.


V: You were just telling that no activity was possible without Body. Now how the body got its activity without a Body?  The answer to this question is wherever the conscious entity and its strength is present there remains no necessity for the agency like the body. The Soul that resides inside the body gives mobility for the entire body, and for those things that reside outside the mobility is given thru the body. This is because He [Soul] is not found outside. God resides both inside and outside and he is omnipresent. Hence He does not require a body. Since he is present in the entire universe he gives momentum for the entire universe.


K:  I see, Pot makers, Cooks etc, who are having a Form, alone could create objects having Form. Then how formless God could create this world having a Form?


V: Creators who have a visible Form could create things that are external to their bodies. They cannot create things within their bodies. For the creation of things that are external to their bodies the help of limbs like hands and legs are necessary. However these are not necessary for creation of things that are inside. There are no materials which are external to god. He pervades all.  He is omnipresent. Hence no body is necessary for Him to create. A cook prepares food that is outside his body. Supposing if he prepares the food inside his body then who would eat the food? In such case why hands and legs are needed? The blood, bone, and marrow are formed inside the body without the help of hands and legs. Now think over. Sense organs create and watch external things. In case they were to watch what goes inside the body the life becomes miserable. How things will be if one were to smell inside body things, were to watch the flesh, blood, stools etc present inside the body? It is awful experience indeed! It is god’s grace that we see things that are external to the body.


K: Does the Creator pervade the created? Clock maker makes the clock. Clock is different from that of clock maker. The sweet maker makes the sweet. The sweet and sweet maker is different from each other. It is a universal principle that the maker is different from what is made. How it is possible that the God creates all and pervades all? Secondly it is not understood how things are created without the aid of hands and legs.


V:  The clock makers, sweet maker, are all creative men with finite abilities further bound by the limitation of space and time. They are together with the object created to the extent of action involved for creation.  If they were not to be there the corresponding action would not have taken place. When we say that clock-maker made the watch it would mean that he assembled the machine parts. A clock-maker makes the watch but does not create it. The machine parts maker is with the clock when the machine parts are being assembled. If he was not present, the machine parts would not have joined together to become a clock. Similarly the machine maker is present with machine parts with action. If that was not the case the machine parts would not have been made. Similarly, the people who made steel [out of iron ore] used to make machine parts were with the steel and this would not have come off had they not been with steel. This goes to prove that behind making a clock many hands of creation are involved. The Creator is present with the every corresponding action. Similar is the case of Goldsmith, and others. They are the creators of their action. Many hands are involved before making a final product.


So it is clear that while making an object, apart from the maker, the help of many people are involved. Then only an object could be created. Why this is so?  This is so because man has limited knowledge and limited abilities and he could create things with the coordinated efforts of others. Those Creators are with the created by their action. When they could associate with gross objects as such,why god is not present in the subtlest of the subtle, grossest of the gross Creation? Think for yourself. Creation does not mean just Sun, Moon, Stars, Mountains, Tress, Rivers, Human beings, Animals, Birds etc, There are many things which are endless subtle and beyond imagination. The Creation includes or a combination of all these things.


          Creation is made by an intelligent combination of atoms. Five gross elements, five principles of subtle entities called Panchatanmatras [speech, touch, vision, taste, and smell] five great elements called Panch-Mahabhootas [ether, air, water, fire and earth] are all created out of these atoms. The creation is made of out of these things. If the assembler of atoms is not with them how they can take shapes? There is no machinery in the world which can hold atoms together and bring out things out of them. The elements which are indivisible are called Atoms. God is immanent in all the atoms. Hence is able to form the grossest and subtlest things in the world. The atoms are the subtlest things in insensate [Jada] matters and God is more subtle than them. Hence he could pervade them. If this was not the case, he had to seek the help of outside agency similar to man taking the help of others for creating things. Hence it is clear that everyone is present to the extent of action involved for creation. Now the question how could things be created without hands and legs? Granting that these parts are necessary, a question that arises here as to who could have created these limbs? Here it should be understood, Hands and legs are the product of creation. When hands and legs could be created without the help of the latter is it not then possible for other parts of Creation to be had without the assistance of hands and legs?  Are the hands and legs of a child in mother’s view being formed with any hands or legs? Seeds grow into plants and trees. And are they so made with hands and legs? It should be made clear here, that hands and legs could manufacture things that are related it.  Is it possible to create mosquitoes and other minute creatures out of legs and hands? The circumference of the Earth where human beings reside is about 25000miles. There are planets like Mars, Uranus and stars like Sun in the Universe which are million times bigger than the Earth. Is it possible to create these objects with hands and legs? Only the omnipresent and omnipotent God has created these bodies in a purposeful manner.


K:  Sister!  Some how you initiate new subjects for discussion.  Where is the Rule being observed here? Are the things created as per Rule? Where is the method here?  We see tall mountains, deep valleys, on the one side! And on the other side there exist dense forests, deserts, bushes, shrubs etc. Where is the method/order here? Like wise the world is formed haphazardly. Normally a system is followed. When a man builds a house, he provides for a living room, well, lavatory etc so as to make it hospitable. An agriculturist builds an agricultural farm, provides for a farm house, canals, varieties of plants and trees etc in a methodical manner. A shopkeeper arranges goods in order in the shop. So a Rule or method is followed by man, whereas I find Creation to be reckless and bizarre. As per my assessment no Rule or method is found to be in Creation.


V: It is utter foolish to say that no Rule or method is found in Creation. Why Sun should rise in East and set in west? Why not the other way round? Is there no Rule here? Even the best made human watch shows slight variation in being either fast or slow. But do you find a variation by a second in the movement of Sun and the Moon? How perfect are their movements? Based on the movements of Sun and Moon the eclipses occurring at a distant future could be predicted accurately. Similar is the state of things in respect of other cosmic bodies also. Now tell me why mango seed is obtained from Mango tree only. Why we cannot get oranges from Mango tree? Why man is born a baby, grows into adult and gets old. Why not he gets old first, youth later and baby there afterwards?  Why see with eyes only and not heard from them? Why nose smells only but cannot taste?  Are these not indicative of the presence of Rule here?


Mountains are found to be somewhere and so the rivers. Oceans, bushes, Forests are found to be at some other place. And to say that there is no Rule in creation because of this diversity is reflective of your ignorance. With what petty yardstick you are measuring the Creation? Normally people find fault in things they do not understand. This is universal phenomenon. This sort of reasoning could be likened to an ant which started climbing the body of man and telling that the head is like a forest, eyebrows as thorny fences, nose as a hillock with nostrils as tunnels, moustaches to bushy forests, etc and felt that man indeed  should be awful creature. The ant bound by its limited intelligence assumes that body has been formed haphazardly.


Supposing, for the convenience of ant, if the eyes, face, nose and other parts are removed and body is made flat then the ant might feel that the body had been constructed in orderly fashion. Now my point is body shaped to the requirement of an ant could satisfy the whims and fancies of an ant and it might even say that the human body was in order. But the body shaped to the ant’s requirement could ever remain human?  Will the aesthetic intelligent transaction between the organs of perception and action occur there?  Not at all. Take another example. An Engineer constructs a machine having hundreds of parts inside it. The shape and size of each part might be round, curved, square, big or small. The parts are made to the requirement of the machine. An ignorant person not aware of the importance of machine might think that the parts are too big or curved and he may even say that the parts have been assembled haphazardly.  It is natural for an ignorant to think this way. But the machine maker knows well and he has assembled the parts as ought to have been done for the machine to work satisfactorily. If the machinery parts had been made either round or straight only the Machine would not have worked at all.


Similar is the position of Creation effected by God. The machinery called Creation has many parts. It has mountains, rivers, ocean, valleys, forests etc, etc. The Creation has a purpose and an object, i.e. welfare of human beings. For the ignorant, the parts of Creation appear as uncouth, useless and lacking in order, the reason being they are unaware of purpose of Creation. The usefulness of parts of Creation i.e., oceans, rivers, mountains etc is not understood. The examples of shopkeeper, agriculturist, etc that were given are too small and could be understood easily, whereas the laws of Creation are too subtle and complex to be understood. Just think over of the Brain thru which man makes laws. Even this brain is made by god who has formulated innumerable laws of Creation. If no laws were to be there who would have believed God? The existence of immutable laws provides the proof of existence of God.


K: O.K. God has made the Creation. Who has created the God?


V:  Created matter is the effect. It [created matter] requires a material cause [base material] and the Maker is called Efficient cause. God is not a created-matter. He is Eternal and has No origin. Hence, the question, as to who created God does not therefore arise. Who could be creator for who is self-created? If the Creator were to have a creator then he cannot be called a Creator. He becomes a Cause then. He is alone a Creator who is self-independent. The matter- created, cannot be termed as Creator. The human bodies deemed as Creators are not Creators in the real sense. They are instruments or agencies that bring about Creation. The Soul is the Creator. 


K: O.K.  Granting, that Creator has no Creator as such, then please tell me as to why should we accept the God? Why should we praise [stuthi] pray [prarthana] and communion [Upaasana] Him?  How is He related to our lives?



Note : This is the the translated version of the original  ” Do bahinonke bathe” written by  late Siddagopal “kaviratna”.

Translated by Vasudev Rao.

Vedas For Beginners : IS GOD IS THERE OR NOT?

K; Sister! You have been telling me to pray daily. I am asking you to whom we should pray? And where is that God?


V: God is everywhere. There is no place which is free from God.


K: You have told the wonderful. If god were to be everywhere then where are other things? All space  are occupied by God and if there is no place free from God then there is no place for other things. Were the other things  remaining  without a space ?


V: It is not that way sister! When it is said that there is no place free from God, it means that God is everywhere. This is my opinion and that is how it is told in a common language. God being there  is not dependent on space. It is the   physical  elements that occupy the space.

Earth, water, air, fire and their atoms, are those things that occupy space. But God pervades them all. Hence it is said that God is everywhere.


K: O.K. If God were to everywhere  why He is not seen? When  not seen, where is the proof of  his presence?


V: Are there are no objects present which are not seen? There are so many things in the world which are not seen. cold, hot,  happiness, sorrow, time, direction, hunger, thirst, itching, pain, etc are there which are not seen. There may be many reasons for a thing not to be seen.  Like far off places say, like  Europe, America etc, many things are not seen. Are we able to see the kite or a bird flying at  a far off distance? Because of closeness of proximity also, eye is not able to see a thing. There are hundred of subtle things like atoms. Some like  bacteria or virus could be seen only thru microscope. Water being covered with  algae is not seen because of algae  and like wise there are so many unseen because separated by cover.  Because of dirt, a mirror is not seen and because of presence of a wall the man sitting across the wall is also not seen. Milk and water are both liquids and because of this water in milk is not seen. If there were to be trouble in the eye many things are not seen. A man affected with jaundice cannot see white objects. Hence it is not correct to say that  things are not present  just  because they are un seen.


K:  For me, I don’t believe in anything without seeing.


V: This shows your obduracy. I have already said that there are many things which are not seen and yet   we have to believe them.  Good! Now,  are you listening to  what I am telling?


K: Yes listening.


V: By which?


K: By ears of course


V: Are you sure that what I am telling?


K: Yes. Why not?


V:Are you seeing my words thru your eyes? Okay. Look here, I am having a flower in my hands. Which is that flower?


K: It is Rose.


V: Does  the flower has a fragrance  or not?


K: Yes. It has a fragrance.


V: How did you come to  know about  this?


K:  Through my nose.


V:  Tell me one thing. Did sugar was there in the milk that  you drank overnight?


K:  Yes. It was there.


V:  How did you come to know about  it?


K: Thru My tongue.


V:  Now I point out, that the sound was perceived thru ears,  fragrance thru nose, and sugar thru tongue. Why this way? Why not did eyes perceive sound,  ears the fragrance and nose the sugar?  Even though the smell and fragrance was present why not the same was seen by eyes?


K;  The senses perceive its subjects only and grasp knowledge. God is not perceivable by any sense organs. How could we believe that He  is present at all?


V: God is not seen and therefore he is not present  was your initial argument. Now you have turned over.  You have agreed that there could be things not seen. It is separate  issue that the knowledge of such unseen things  could be had by  other sense  organs. Now, you are asking how the presence of   God could be accepted when he is not perceivable by any sense organ. If you believe that God could not  exist as He is not understood by senses, then how you understand these senses? If you believe that sense organs are understood by sense  organs only then it constitutes what is known as Atmashrya Dosha. This is because thru what is seen is not seen by itself. When their subjects are different by themselves how sense organs could understand the  sense  organs? The subject matter of eye is sight; ears sound;  nose smell; tongue taste; skin touch. Nose cannot understand the eyes nor the  tongue can understand the ears.




K:  How it cannot be  understood? When I hold mirror before me,  the eyes, ears, nose , tongue etc are forthcoming. The eyes are more forthcoming about knowledge of other organs.


V:  Sister! This is your wrong understanding. What you see from your eyes is only a form or sight not the subjects. Will you see the subjects of other sense organs in the mirror? The eyeballs can see places of  sense organs which have a form. The strength of these senses are present in that places.  Can eyes disclose  the entire knowledge about other sense organs? Eyes cannot see by itself. You are of the opinion that  eyes are seen in a mirror. Now, I put a question. Tell me  what is in my hand?


K:  Mirror.


V:  How did you see that there is a mirror in my hand?


K; Thru eyes of course.


V: When you said  that you saw mirror thru eyes , it means before seeing a mirror eyes  had a knowledge. In other words it means to say that without eyes mirror would not have seen. Now tell me, whether thru  eyes mirror is understood or vice versa?  If eyes are understood thru mirror, even when eyes are dried up, the mirror should have caused  the knowledge of the dried up eyes. When eyes are dried up , let alone causing the knowledge of eyes, mirror  cannot cause the knowledge of itself. If you think deeply, even eyes see the others with the help of other aids and not independently. It is however  true that sight cannot be seen without eyes  but the knowledge of  sight  cannot be made  by eyes themselves.


K; What other  aids are required for eyes? Eyes sees the Forms independently. The subject matter of eyes are sight. How do you say that eyes don’t see independently?


V: Yes.  Now I am seeing all objects. But  if there  is a thick darkness surrounding can I see things?


K:  No, It cannot be seen.


V: Hence it is clear that eyes are not just enough to see. It requires light. If there were to be no light  eyes are helpless. And even if both light and eyes were to remain present  and the object is not stationary then also we cannot see. If you place the book too close to your eyes you cannot read. Similarly also we cannot read letters in a book held at a distance. Therefore to read letters  book is to be held at a definite distance and place. Further, even the object at a place and light were to be there and  if eyes were removed from the mind, in that event also we cannot see. There are many occasions where mind is involved in some work, the objects are not seen by the eyes even though they  may pass thru our front. In such circumstances, if you were to ask a person whether he observed certain things he would say “ no, I did not watch”. Now you would have understood what are the aids that are required to see a particular object.


K:  What do you mean by all this?


V: Have you not understood as yet?  If you cannot perceive God thru sense organs, you cannot understand sense organs thru sense organs. But even then we have to accept the sense organs. Then why doubt about  the  acceptance of existence of God.


K: How we can understand the senses?


V: Sense organs are understood by the Soul thru experience. When he perceives sound, smell, Form,etc he understands  “ That there are aids within me and I am getting the benefit thru them”


K: And how we could understand the God?


V: God could be understood by experience.


K: How the experience is got?


V: God is felt thru Soul.


K: When  this feeling is felt?


V: When mind is got rid of three faults.


K: What are these faults?


V:  Mala,  Vikshepa, and Avarana


K: What are its characteristics?


V: The thinking of doing bad to others and  the effects of  Sins fallen on Soul [sanskars] is called Mala.  Constantly thinking over  the worldly objects[materialism] and lack of firmness in mind is referred to as Vikshepa. The impact formed on mind about the pride of temporary worldly things is referred to as Avarana.


K: How can we overcome the above three faults?


V:  There are three ways thru which we can overcome these three hurdles.


K: What are they?


V: Knowledge, [Jnana]  Action[Karma] and Communion [ Upaasana]


K: What you mean by Knowledge, Action and worship?


V:  Understanding the matter as it is,  i.e. to treat inert matter  as inert[Jada] Conscious entities [ Chetan] as Conscious[Chetan] and transitory things  as transitory  things marks the  Knowledge.  To work for the welfare of  Soul, Body and  Society and to try for the acquisition of ennobling things  is referred to as Action. To approach  a material  and  overcoming his shortcomings based on the strength of that  material   is referred to as Communion.  Consider for a while, that  a person is down with cold. If he approaches water for the removal of cold it betrays  his ignorance, not knowledge. If he is aware of fire and  tries to obtain fire thru Action and approaches fire for the removal of cold then  only he gets rid of cold. From Knowledge, the Mala is overcome, from Action, Vikshepa, is got rid of and finally thru Communion  the effect of Avarana is kept away. Then only God is felt.


K: Make this point more clear. How the faults of Mala, Vikshepa, and Avarana are removed respectively by Knowledge, Action, andCommunion respectively?


V: With the help of  Knowledge, it should be understood that all worldly things, all living beings are not permanent. For this reason, not entertaining the  feeling of  snatching away  the rights of others is a step in the direction of removal of evil  of Mala. By  thinking that worldly things are the end all and be all  and appropriating them with that spirit  would cause infirmity of mind  or Vikshepa. It is true that materials in the world are means to an end. But they are not end by themselves nor they could be life ideals. According to this principle, the action of man should be dispassionate, like a lotus in a water pond. This is type of  Karma which drives away Vikshepa. Looking upon the God gifted things as something his own is the thing that makes a deep imprint on the mind of man and this prompts him to treat money, women, land as his own which   causes self-pride and this cast spell over his  mind. Further with the strength of these material possessions  he starts tormenting  the others. He thinks there are no superior to him. But instead, when  he does Action with full Knowledge then he withdraws all forces inside  and with concentration thinks that “ God is with me and I am with God” in his heart  then he gets away from the evil ofAvarana. Hence by constant efforts and resorting to Knowledge, Action and Communion he is able to drive away the three evils Mala, Vikshepa and Avarana. Then only he can the feel the presence of God.


K; Sister, you are very clever and good at logic. Now tell me why God is necessary to this world at all?


V: Why God is  necessary to the world? Very good question. If God were not to be there then how is the world is created?. Who can create Sun, Moon, mountains, rivers, Air, water, ether, stars, forests, Trees, fruits, Milk, honey animals, birds, water creatures, snakes, etc. Who else can create these things and species?


K: Why God is necessary for the creation of these things? They are self-formed and has been there always.


V: If  things in the world could form themselves without the help of creator, then food should  have there without a cook, pot without a potter, ornaments without a goldsmith, sweet without sweet maker, dress without a tailor etc.  Secondly any thing in the world does not remain permanently. Every thing in the world has a origin, growth, decay, and ultimately destruction. All big to very big things have been created and gets destroyed in the end..


K:  I don’t see that God creates things. It does not appear as such. All things are formed by themselves and this order is there from time immemorial. Earth, water, Air, Fire, and their atoms are in existence in the world. These elements keep on joining  themselves in the creation of new and newer things and getting destroyed separately. Where is the work of God involved  here?


V:  Your opinion does not stand  to facts. The Earth and the other elements  and their atoms are inert matters. They don’t join themselves without joining them and do not disintegrate without getting disintegrated. Joining and Unjoining  are mutually hostile qualities. These qualities do not stay together. There may any number of qualities in a matter but not mutually  hostile qualities. If the nature of a thing  is to associate they keep on associating. and on the other hand disintegrating is their quality they keep on disintegrating. They do not join with mutually hostile qualities. If you were to say that joining and disintegrating  are the nature of a matter,  those qualities which are  predominant will have a say over the other. For ex, if joining is the  predominant quality, it never allows the world to disintegrate. If disintegrating is the nature of a matter and remains predominant it never allows the world  to stay together. If both qualities are held to be  equal then no object can be formed in the world. But we are seeing where an object is formed, remains for a while and gets destroyed. You may imagine any number of qualities in physical matters, but without God, Creation, sustenance, and dissolution is not possible in the matter called Prakrithi. There is difference in Conscious[ Chetan] and Non-Conscious[ Jada}forces. The Non-Conscious cannot do anything on their own. It keeps working with the help of Conscious forces only. The Conscious being  is capable of doing, not doing or undoing anything. This is the natural qualities of  Conscious beings.


K: The person who creates a thing in the world is directly  visible. The goldsmith, potter, the sweet maker,  the bird which builds the nests are  all seen. If God were to be creator of this world he would have been visible.


V: Believe me. The maker in the world is not at all visible. It is totally false to say that the goldsmith, Sweet maker, potter are visible. You may ask how? Listen. People like Potter, Goldsmith etc are creators who are made of twin elements, Body and Soul, The body to a soul is an instrument to do a function. Only when soul uses the  instrument called body a material  is formed. Without the instrument called body a material cannot come off. The goldsmith, potter etc are  physical bodies which are visible and are made of five elements called earth, water, fire, air and sky. But the soul who makes use of this body is not at all visible. The body without the soul cannot create things. Likewise without body, a soul cannot do anything either. His strength is of limited character. Hence God grants him a body which is visible. But God is of  limitless potentialities, omnipresent and omniscient. He does things without a body. The soul is also a creator like God, albeit with a limited strength and abilities . God is a creator of all. Both God and Soul  are not visible.


K: If God  is without Body then how is that  He can create the world. No function is ever possible without an instrument called  body.


V: Now the time is over. Tomorrow morning answer to this question will be given.


K: Okay. Let it be on tomorrow.

Note : This is the the translated version of the original  ” Do bahinonke bathe” written by  late Siddagopal “kaviratna”.

Translated by Vasudev Rao.