K: Sister! Please give reply to yesterday’s question
V: Your question was what was wrong in assuming God had a form? Okay. There are many faults that are involved in treating God as having a form. Firstly, God is known as Sachitananda. This has three words.viz, “Sat” “Chit” and “Anand”. The term “Sat” means being present uniformly at all times, present, past and future. In the other words, that which does not undergo change is called as “Sat”. That which is Knowledge is known as “Chit” The term “Anand” indicates free from sorrow at all times which is known as Bliss. God is called Satchitananda because He is changeless, His knowledge is never destroyed, and who never experiences any sorrow.
It is in this context we should see how the objects in the world fare. All the things that have a form in the world are all subject to change and therefore they are not “Sat”. Only formless God and soul could be called under “Chit” Whoever is having a form or body cannot be away from sorrows. He does not enjoy happiness at all the times. He is afflicted with the feeling of hot and cold, hunger and thirst, fear and sorrow, sickness-ageing-death. God is distinct from these two.
The first fault in assuming God as having a Form, is with a form, he ceases to be Satchitananda and changeless. This is because all bodies have inbuilt qualities of birth- growth-decay and death. God is above these characteristics.
The second fault is God with a body becomes finite; Whereas God is infinite in nature. He is omnipresent.
The third fault with god having a form is He begins to cease “Beginning less and endless” This is because every thing with a form has an origin and therefore it has a beginning. It cannot be called as beginning less and endless. The thing which has an origin must have an end. That which is created is destroyed in the end.
The fourth fault is God with a body cannot be “All-Knowing” for the reason a body is limited by space and time and therefore it cannot have knowledge of all things. Because of this God cannot become “Antaryami” He cannot understand the mind of everybody.
The fifth fault is God ceases to be eternal. That which remains and has no reason for being remainant is called “Nitya” He being Nitya is not a combination of things. Whereas the things that have a form is the combination of certain elements.
The sixth fault is God instead of being supporter of all He himself becomes dependent on others. The entire world is dependent on God and He is supporter of all. He has assumed the entire world. Whereas if God is treated as having a body He is required to be dependent on some other material. Precisely, for this reason, the traditionalists have set apart places treating God with a body. Some have placed God in seventh heaven, others at Kailas, golok, etc. It is funny that God who is a supporter of the entire world have made himself dependent. If God were to remain dependent on world then how the world could support itself? Similarly there are so many faults in treating the god with a form or body.
K: God is no doubt formless. However, Scholars are of the opinion that God takes shape and reincarnates from time to time. For ex, vapor is formless but when required by time it takes a gross form. We can multiply such examples. When physical things could be formless and yet could assume shape why not God who is formless, could not take a form?
V: The example of water vapor and fire pointed out does not appear to be correct. Water and fire are not basic elements. Many atoms make for water vapor and this take gross shape in the form of cloud and again become water. If water vapor were to be made of one atom then it would not have taken gross form. So is the case of Fire. Many atoms make a fire ball and assume a gross form. To say that fire is all pervading and formless is totally wrong notion. Fire is subtler than earth and water elements. Hence it could be said that fire is pervading in Earth and water. But it is not pervading in air and ether. But it is true that both water and air is pervading in fire for the reason these are more subtle than fire. The subtle pervades the gross. In all things where fire is pervading they have shape and form. All the things in the world which have a form are caused because of all pervading fire. Because the quality of fire is form. Physical things become gross from subtle by the association of many atoms. God is omnipresent, and all alone. He cannot therefore assume shape and take a form. Now, about the god descending from time to time. This is only assumption and nothing else. The term Avatar means to descend and ascend. Only a finite bodies can do this and not applicable to infinite entity like God. The act of ascending, descending, Avatar, coming and going is unthinkable about an entity which is omnipresent. Wherefrom He can come and go when He is found to be everywhere?
K: Does not God take Avatar to vanquish Ravan, Kans, Hiranyakashipu etc? I have heard that God takes Avatar whenever Dharma is threatened?
V: God has not taken Avatar ever nor He will ever do so in future. From time to time great men are born who have vanquished the wicked, showed the right path and therefore people have called them with some honorific titles. Some people have named them as Nabi or son of God. Still some other has described such great men as Avatar or God personified. But the fact remains that great men remained as such. Why you don’t talk rationally? Can God not capable of destroying by remaining formless? Hundreds of living beings are born every second and does God goes on destroying them? With one earth quake lakhs of men are killed. Epidemics wipe out hundreds of living beings. Is it sensible to believe that God takes Avatar just to kill wretched beings? Do men like Ravan, Kans ever count? Is it not ludicrous and insulting to God to assume god taking avatar to kill the wicked when He is capable of Creating, Sustaining and destroying the world? It is also not free from blame to say that God takes Avatar when Dharma is threatened. Probably those people who believe in Avatars believe this to be true. But they stand condemned by their own statement. Look! The people having belief in Avatar agree on Ten Avatars and also four Yugas. These Yugas are viz, Satyayuga, Threthayuga, Dwaparyuga and Kaliyuga. In Satyayuga, Dharma stands on four steps. In Threthayuga it stands on three steps, in Dwapara Dharma and Adharma stands equally on two steps each. In other words in Dwapara the elements of Punya [Virtue] and Papa {Non-Virtue] share equal honors. In Kaliyug it is believed that Non-virtue {Papa} rests on three steps and Virtue [Punya] rests only on one step. Now think of the order of Avatars in all the yugas. It is said four Avatars took place in Satyayuga, three Avatars in Threthayuga and two in Dwaparayuga. And they believe one Avatar taking place at the end of Kaliyuga. Now what is to be pondered over here, why four Avatars took place in Satyayuga when Dharma was resting on all four steps and no Adharma was present. In Threthayuga when Dharma was resting on three steps why three Avatars? Why one less? When in Dwapar when both Dharma and Adharma was present in the proportion of 50:50 why only two Avatars? In Kaliyug when Dharma and Adharma is in the ratio of 25:75 why only one Avatar is outstanding and that too at the end of the Yug? Logically speaking, the number of Avatars should be more with the increase in the proportion of Non-virtue. Whereas the number of Avatars went of decreasing with the rise in the proportion of Non-Virtue. Now tell me what is the relationship between Avatars with the loss of Dharma?
K: The Avatar men have shown amazing things not capable of being done by ordinary men. For ex, lifting of Govardhan Mountain with little finger, etc. Because of this we are compelled to believe that they are all Avatars of God.
V: First of all it is wrong to say that someone lifted a mountain with a finger. Even if we accept this could be true, this does not demonstrate anyway the greatness of God or God’s avatar. You may ask why? Before God, who has upheld Sun, planets and countless stars the lifting of Govardhan Mountain appears to be too trifle. There are hundreds of Mountains big and small in the world you live. God has upheld the world and what greatness is involved in upholding a Govardhan Mountain? What heroism is there in upholding a Govardhan Mountain? This is like a student of M.A answering a paper set for 3 rd standard. Yes. If a 3rd standard boy were to answer a paper for M.A then it deserves full praise. This is because it is unbelievable. If God’s Avatar were to lift a mountain there is nothing great or amazing here.
K: If God were not to take Avatar then how to believe that God is All-Powerful? Where is his omniscientness of God if He could not take an Avatar? He is All-Powerful who could do anything.
V: You are irrational. If God were to take Avatar he ceases to be All-Powerful and gets reduced to an entity with limited strength. You may wonder how? He who was doing things earlier without a body and limbs will now start doing the work with limbs. Earlier he was seeing things without eyes. Now he sees with his physical eyes. Earlier he was listening without ears. Now he listens with physical ears. The import of this is, earlier to taking Avatar he was doing everything without a body and now he is dependent on body. Where is His omniscient ness when he becomes dependent? Like the man with finite knowledge depending on Body God also becomes dependent on body. Now where is the difference between man and god? God also becomes subject to hunger and thirst, cold and hot that torment a man. Hate, Love, fever that man experience will also be felt by God. The extraordinary thing is God becomes subservient and not at all remain Independent. He requires food, water, clothes and shelter. How could you say that he is all powerful when he starts depending on his body for execution of jobs when earlier he was doing everything with no support from any side? A person with just a blink of an eye makes a person unconscious and yet another make him unconscious with the help of a drug. Who is powerful among these two? Definitely the person who renders unconscious with a blink of an eye for the reason he does not dependent on drugs for this job.
Now, you would have understood that God is powerful without taking Avatar. It is totally wrong notion to believe that being All- Powerful means that He is capable of doing everything. All-Powerful means that all powers are with him. He can join subtle things and could disintegrate them. He would award the human beings based on their Karma. He could create, sustain and dissolve the world and run it as per laws. He requires nobody’s help in the execution of his jobs. That is the meaning of being all-powerful or omniscient. Rendering impossible things as possible is not the meaning of being All-Powerful.
K: Does God not make impossible the possible? He is no God who cannot make impossible things possible.
V: Not making impossible things possible, not undoing the Rule [i.e. making or mending the rules] is God’s divinity. If you were to believe that God could turn impossible to possible then I would ask “can God kill himself? Or can God create another God? Please reply.
K: God may not kill himself. But since he is All-Powerful He could create another God as equal to himself.
V: No Sister! God cannot create another God of equal standing. You may ask why? Listen. Now imagine that God has created another God. Now is this created god could be equal to the creator? No. This is because one is old God and another is Created God. One is Visible God and another is invincible God and thus there are two Gods. One is ageless because he is eternal. The age of other God has just begun for he is created. The first God is all-pervading and other is pervaded. Both cannot become all-pervading. If you were of opinion that both are pervading 50:50 then none are omniscient and omnipresent. Hence all-Pervading does not mean that He could do everything and anything. God could do which could be done by him.
K: What is wrong in accepting that god could take Avatar? What is the risk here?
V: When God could not Avatar at all, the acceptance of God taking Avatar, would amount to twisting and killing the truth. This is the first danger. Secondly God himself gets entangled in decadence. Narayan becomes Nara. Nara becoming Narayan could be treated as growth, but the reverse is definitely a sign of downfall. If a poor becomes rich then it is his real improvement but if a rich becomes poor it is definitely a sign of retrograde progress. Thirdly, a fraudulent declares himself as an Avatar and misleads the followers. He makes money out of them and leads a sinful life. There are umpteen examples in Bharath where some fraudulent men have declared themselves as Avatars and totally cheated the people. Fourthly, people start tolerating the injustice and fraud. People begin watching loot, murder rape and destruction of property by hooligans and don’t protest against them. They feel it is not in their hands to prevent the injustice and of the opinion that only when God takes Avatar he would put down effectively all the cases of injustice. Then only that Dharma reins and evil is vanquished. This sort of wishful thinking is due to the belief in the concept of Avatar. Communities or group of people who don’t believe in the concept of God taking Avatar stand firm against assaults and resist firmly the cases of injustice and destruction bravely. They firmly believe that God has given those hands to protect themselves and never tolerate Adharma. They don’t look towards God for jobs that could be done by them. To be frank, the theory of Avatarvad has ruined the Aryan community and destroyed their self-confidence. This has caused untold hardships for Aryans and contributed to their prolonged slavery. Our history is a witness to this tragedy.
K: Your logic is fine, convincing and effective. Now tell me how to meditate on God who is said to be formless.
V: It is really God’s kindness that the effect of true principles have made impression on you. I will reply to your question tomorrow.
=====================================================================
This is the translated version of the original Hindi “Do bahinonke bathe” written by late Pt. Siddagopal”Kavirathna”
Translated by : Vasudev Rao.