# Why Did God Create Universe?



## sandeep17oct (Oct 5, 2012)

I was wondering why God created the universe and then sent us here. My assumption here is that once we were all with God. We were a part of Him. And somehow we are here now. So my question is why did God send us here. Bible says because we sinned. Gita says that He is the supreme enjoyer and this way He chose to enjoy Himself. And as far as I know the Guru Granth Sahib agrees that in play He created the universe and in play it will all be destroyed. It is His nature who like a child who visits the beach, builds a palace of sand and then without hesitation goes on to destroy his own creation likewise is God.
So what I am asking is why are we here.Is it just play.


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 5, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Granth_Sahib_on_the_Universe

I agree with some of this -


----------



## KulbirSinghCanada (Oct 5, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

There is no you! It's all God and his own illusion. No one came but him - it's just his game.


----------



## Luckysingh (Oct 5, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

God is without form or typical physical characteristics.
He created us and the universe in a ''form'' so that he could have an image.
We were created in the image of God.

With this image, also comes the play and illusion that we are in.


Go deep within yourself to help you understand this.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 6, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



sandeep17oct said:


> I was wondering why God created the universe and then sent us here.



He didn't. Man created God as an explanation for everything we couldn't understand or explain.


----------



## kawalpreet176 (Oct 6, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

Sab Jot Teri Jag Jiwana , Toon Ape Data Ape Bhugta Hou Tudh Bin Awar Naa Jana ! .. Do we need further explanation ?
http://www.gurmatsagar.in


----------



## findingmyway (Oct 7, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

God isn't a person sitting up above and pulling strings like a puppet master. Read Mul Mantar-God is without form, birth, death. The Universe is a small part of creation. God is the laws of the universe. God is the laws governing, nature, maths, physics everything. There is no he in God and to believe the universe was created for the benefit of humans is a very arrogant stance to take!!


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

God is the laws governing the universe...so when there was no universe there was no god since the phrase laws of universe makes sense only  when there is a universe....when there is no universe --- no god(btw contracdicting ur own arg without birth death and so on)....why are we fools theists.......


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

laws of physics right...normally laws of science do not permit that a person can live once his head is separated from his torso and normally that is the case....logically( this is ur domain so correct me if i am wrong) there will be so much of blood loss that the person will die in seconds moreover he wont be able to move because the brain sends the impulses in response to which our hands and feet move....Now consider BABA DEEP SINGH JI...head was severed held his head on his palm and the sword in the other combating enemies...so in this case if god is laws then god bent himself\itself whatever....
Science is something which God who created it can bend....so saying that god is science....well i dont know if it is right...


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

findingmy...ji
are you familiar with the law of karma....no ure a scienthist....if i am human today i can be god tomorrow or i can be dog tomorrow according to my actions so what are u talking about when u say benefit of humans..


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



sandeep17oct said:


> laws of physics right...normally laws of science do not permit that a person can live once his head is separated from his torso and normally that is the case....logically( this is ur domain so correct me if i am wrong) there will be so much of blood loss that the person will die in seconds moreover he wont be able to move because the brain sends the impulses in response to which our hands and feet move....Now consider BABA DEEP SINGH JI...head was severed held his head on his palm and the sword in the other combating enemies...so in this case if god is laws then god bent himself\itself whatever....
> Science is something which God who created it can bend....so saying that god is science....well i dont know if it is right...



@Sandeep Ji
Wow! Are you for real or are you just being sarcastic?
You do realize that the story about Baba Deep Singh Ji has lots of fiction added on to it. That's what happens to religious folklores.  He did NOT continue to swing his sword after his head was severed. To swing a sword, the muscles in his arm would have continuously needed signals from his brain. Since his head was severed, this was not possible. If god bent the laws to make this happen, then why didn't he help Baba Randeep Singh Ji before his head was severed? That would have been less of a hassle.
I have met many people who have blind faith in their respective  religions or in  other words they are blinded by their faiths. But you  are definitely in your own league!!


@Everyone else,
I understand these religious tales might have some true components and rest of the stuff is just added up to make them even more inspirational. But Sandeep is an excellent example of what these fairy tale like stories  do to certain people who are more gullible than others. Such people assume these tales to be  literal and can be easily misguided by people who are willing to take advantage of such people's blind faith.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

I think we can accept that he continued to fight after a deep laceration to the neck, however, even if his head was severed, even 20 secs of fighting, whilst holding his head, would have seemed like a lifetime to an observer. 

I do not believe that Creator bends any of natures rules for anyone.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



> God isn't a person sitting up above and pulling strings like a puppet master


Way ji I believe he does pull strings reference string theory.


----------



## Luckysingh (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



findingmyway said:


> God isn't a person sitting up above and pulling strings like a puppet master.


 

No, that's what the Godfather does


----------



## Astroboy (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



sandeep17oct said:


> I was wondering why God created the universe and then sent us here. My assumption here is that once we were all with God. We were a part of Him. And somehow we are here now. So my question is why did God send us here. Bible says because we sinned. Gita says that He is the supreme enjoyer and this way He chose to enjoy Himself. And as far as I know the Guru Granth Sahib agrees that in play He created the universe and in play it will all be destroyed. It is His nature who like a child who visits the beach, builds a palace of sand and then without hesitation goes on to destroy his own creation likewise is God.
> So what I am asking is why are we here.Is it just play.


à¨®à¨‰à¨²à¨¾ à¨–à©‡à¨² à¨•à¨°à©‡ à¨¸à¨­à¨¿ à¨†à¨ªà©‡ à¥¥ - YouTube


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

Skeptic listen to me....we do not have the perfect set of laws of nature with us...we are yet to find them....and we are in the process....we cannot accurately make deductions with an inaccurate set of laws...maybe research will one be able to agree with these tales of religious superheros....
But this is a nice lesson for me...probably my insistence is not right....


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> @Sandeep Ji
> But you  are definitely in your own league!!



Thanks skeptic brother. I take that as a compliment.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



> I was wondering why God created the universe and then sent us here.


Sandeep ji,
Why were you wondering that?


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

Bhagat ji
I know that there was a time when there was only God and then He out of Himself created the Universe. The result being that we are here. But this birth death cycle all this is suffering. 
so initially when there was nothing but God we were with Him and consequently happy. Now we in the influence of Maya have forgotten Him and are sad.so i was wondering this as why were we 
put in this birth death cycle which is nothing but misery.
But as I understand now in accordance with gurbani. This is His play.


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

Skepticfreethinker , and what are you?  Your argument makes quite no sense, even if you beleive in Sience, it is most of a lie as well. Since can´t explain the Universe as well.. THESE ARE ALL THEORIES. There are no facts, about universe. And Logic can be vieweed in several ways.  Physics knows nothing about the Universe, and has many contradiction in it as well. And Biologically IT IS POSSIBLE, that the Body functions are uphold for several Seconds, due to Axion, neurotransmitters, sending irreleativ electric signals . And this is contradicition of Science as well, all things they can´t explain, they declare as impossible..!


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

Ok so I understand you were wondering but I must ask again why were you wondering? You haven't answered it. Give it some thought.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



TigerStyleZ said:


> Skepticfreethinker , and what are you?  Your argument makes quite no sense, even if you beleive in Sience, it is most of a lie as well. Since can´t explain the Universe as well.. THESE ARE ALL THEORIES. There are no facts, about universe. And Logic can be vieweed in several ways.  Physics knows nothing about the Universe, and has many contradiction in it as well. And Biologically IT IS POSSIBLE, that the Body functions are uphold for several Seconds, due to Axion, neurotransmitters, sending irreleativ electric signals . And this is contradicition of Science as well, all things they can´t explain, they declare as impossible..!



TigerStyleZ Ji,
I don't mean to offend you but it's really hard to understand the broken english in the above post! Can you please repost in normal english...you know with grammar and reduced level of spelling mistakes. Please also try to proofread before submitting.

Thank you!


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 8, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



harry haller said:


> I do not believe that Creator bends any of natures rules for anyone.



Well said!




harry haller said:


> I think we can accept that he continued to  fight after a deep laceration to the neck



I am glad we came down from a totally severed head being held in his hand to just a laceration to the neck. This is believable and he would still be considered an extremely brave man.



harry haller said:


> however, even if his head was  severed, even 20 secs of fighting, whilst holding his head, would have  seemed like a lifetime to an observer.



This part is completely made up. A simple swing of the arm is such a complex act for the muscles that it constantly needs to be controlled by the brain and can't be performed if you loose nerve connection to brain.


----------



## Archived_member14 (Oct 9, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

skeptic.freethinker,



> Quote: Originally Posted by harry haller
> I do not believe that Creator bends any of natures rules for anyone.
> 
> Well said!




Isn't this assuming that *you* know the workings of nature? Is your knowledge not based on what you heard from science which through your own reasoning have come to agree with?




> Quote: Originally Posted by harry haller
> I think we can accept that he continued to fight after a deep laceration to the neck
> 
> I am glad we came down from a totally severed head being held in his hand to just a laceration to the neck. This is believable and he would still be considered an extremely brave man.



There is absolutely no bravery in wielding a sword with the intent to strike another living being. Rather it is anger or fear which motivates such actions.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 9, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*



Confused said:


> There is absolutely no bravery in wielding a sword with the intent to  strike another living being. Rather it is anger or fear which motivates  such actions.



Confused Ji,
Longtime! If I remember correctly, you were one of the first people I interacted with when I first joined the forum two years back. You were and you still seem to be one of the few people on this forum who actually think things through.

Regarding the above comment, I wasn't really thinking in terms of the justification of the actions. I was just thinking in terms of the feasibility of the actions themselves. But you bring up a great point.



Confused said:


> skeptic.freethinker,
> Is your knowledge not based on what you heard from science which through your own reasoning have come to agree with?



Nope. People don't just 'hear' from science, think about it and come to agree with it. They don't have to...because science provides evidence.
This is one of the main difference between science and religion. Science provides proof, underlying assumptions and ways to disprove those assumptions. Science doesn't require blind faith. Religion does. 
Science does not have all the answers yet, but we are making progress and learning something new everyday. Whereas religion and religious folks just assume that they have all the answers, mostly in forms of ancient texts. They can't be farther away from the truth. This is why religion requires blind faith which many religious people wear as a badge of honor.

And  once people have blind faith, these gullible folks will believe anything....even that someone without a head kept fighting forever. Or that a magical skydaddy created the universe.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 9, 2012)

> This part is completely made up. A simple swing of the arm is such a  complex act for the muscles that it constantly needs to be controlled by  the brain and can't be performed if you loose nerve connection to  brain.


I don't think it is umpossible that if his head was cut off, that his body would not carry on as it was prior, maybe even for a second, maybe two seconds, who knows, but I do not think one can completely dismiss the possibility that a headless man had a limb with a sword in it, and that limb carried on flaying, sure he may not have won any competitions for accuracy, but it probably made a huge impact on his enemy.

Also I know of several chickens that would disagree with you lol


----------



## itsmaneet (Oct 9, 2012)

Simple As That - 

God Created Universes Coz He Wished To Do So !!


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 9, 2012)

Thanks for the PM Sandeep ji. 

The thing is if one cannot answer easier questions like "Why does one have particular thoughts?" how can they even begin to answer or even grasp questions of  much greater difficulty like "Why did God create anything?"

The difficulty of  answering this question is unknown to you and many here.

The answer you gave that it is all his play is what it is, not WHY it is. Why is it a play? Because so and so. Why is it so and so? Because so and so. Why? The real question is why are things the way they are and not some other way? Do you realize how difficult it is to answer it? But that belief that all of this is God's play is exhilarating is it not? Because if it is a play then it is happening right now, under our noses, and we are at the leading edge of that play!

To answer the question why did God create the universe, thus requires us to know what exactly he created. If it is his play, we ought to inquire into that play. What is it that I am calling play? Who am I? What allows me to even begin to call it by a name? What is the play like? What is God?

etc

For this we cannot rely on mere readings of a book, no matter how sacred. We must inquire into it ourselves with all our intent. And you'll find the answer is much more awe-inspiring, much more grand and more fulfilling than any answer someone gives you.

But you can never share this answer with anyone else once you get it. Not that you won't try... you just can't.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Oct 10, 2012)

itsmaneet said:


> *Simple As That* -
> 
> God Created Universes Coz He Wished To Do So !!



Actually, it's not that simple. Some people might be happy in not knowing the answer but ignorance is never the answer.

When  Newton saw the apple fall from the tree, he didn't conclude that the  apple fell because God wanted it to fall. Nope. He decided to study the  behavior further. We owe our space program to that guy because he didn't  choose ignorance as the answer.

Edward Jenner, who invented vaccine didn't go with the religious approach either to pick the answer that people fall ill because God wishes them to. If he would have decided to stay ignorant, we will still be suffering from diseases like cowpox which have been eradicated long time back.

Religion causes people to not seek answers and stay satisfied in their ignorance.



itsmaneet said:


> *Simple As That* -
> 
> God Created Universes Coz *He Wished To Do So *!!




If it's so simple, we should send out a memo to all scientific organizations and scientists who are spending billions of dollars in researching the cosmos to find it's origin. We owe it to them to let them know that they are wasting their time and money.
We should also inform the scientists who are  trying to find cure for diseases that they are just wasting their time and that  the diseases will get cured when God will wish to do so.

These scientists are the ones who make our lives better because they just don't assume that things happen because God wishes them to. They seek answers.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 10, 2012)

> Actually, it's not that simple. Some people might be happy in not knowing the answer but ignorance is never the answer



Sikhism does not condone ignorance, Sikhism stands shoulder to shoulder with science



> When  Newton saw the apple fall from the tree, he didn't conclude that  the  apple fell because God wanted it to fall. Nope. He decided to study  the  behavior further. We owe our space program to that guy because he  didn't  choose ignorance as the answer.



Life is a puzzle that needs to be worked out, God merely sets the rules, I am sure it pleases God no end to see the development and inspiration of Creation. 



> Edward Jenner, who invented vaccine didn't go with the religious  approach either to pick the answer that people fall ill because God  wishes them to. If he would have decided to stay ignorant, we will still  be suffering from diseases like cowpox which have been eradicated long  time back.



Sikhism has never advocated the 'leave it to God' approach, this is extremely Abrahamic, Sikhism wishes that all of Creation do the utmost to solve lifes riddles. Is not Sikhism about fighting against all odds? When Sikh warriors of old were confronted with unbeatable odds, did they run away, or just accept defeat? No, they did not, they fought to the end, optimistic. By your argument, one would think they would have acceptance. peacesign



> Religion causes people to not seek answers and stay satisfied in their ignorance.



Religion has a lot to answer for, and I agree with you, however, the facts that Science has validated appear in the SGGS years before. I myself despise 'religious' people, the very word suggests a fascination with 'an order' rather than the truth. Religious people point to manuscripts and quote passages to support their own brand of wierd theories. Sikhism is not about this, about being able to quote like a parrot, Sikhism is about living within the divine order that set the controls for  the world, on a basic level, it is a respect for gravity by not jumping off a Cliff. That one is obvious, there are many more that are not. 



> If it's so simple, we should send out a memo to all scientific  organizations and scientists who are spending billions of dollars in  researching the cosmos to find it's origin. We owe it to them to let  them know that they are wasting their time and money.
> We should also inform the scientists who are  trying to find cure for  diseases that they are just wasting their time and that  the diseases  will get cured when God will wish to do so.
> 
> These scientists are the ones who make our lives better because they  just don't assume that things happen because God wishes them to. They  seek answers.



It is not so simple, all those scientists are doing the work of Creator, working out solutions, making our lives better, all is Seva, all is good work, every such scientist is a Sikh!


----------



## sandeep17oct (Oct 10, 2012)

Bhagat ji 
I think when we say play.It includes both why and what. What is it -play why coz god wants to play ...done and over i think you do not need deep philosophical resolution of every question.... on the contrary i believe that complication is only caused by our misapprehension...
But ur words make me realize that it is useless to get into these things...its better to do your job and forget the rest....dont run your mind too much...it is doomed to end in misery...so how do i delete this thread...


----------



## Ambarsaria (Oct 10, 2012)

sandeep17oct ji what makes you think "Universe has been created"?  Is it possible that we call our illusions or illusive thinking a reality?  Perhaps there is nothing to create and creation/destruction are continuous while we experience only one at a given point based on what the limits of abilities to perceive are.  If we are limited, all our pursuits at best are less than half azzed and only an exercise in self adulation. 

Imagine a neutron star happens to pass by and all of the earth will be reduced to a size of a sphere less than 500 meters in diameter with the removal of all non matter space.   Earth will be baby food for such a star.

Neutron stars have overall densities of 3.7×10<sup>17</sup> to 5.9×10<sup>17</sup> kg/m<sup>3</sup> .  

Here a NASA picture of "Hand of God" far far away.







Closest Neutron Star,

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <wunctuationKerning/>   <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>   <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>   <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>   <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>    <wontGrowAutofit/>    <w:UseFELayout/>   </w:Compatibility>   <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->  *PSR J0108-1431 Observation data*

  Constellation   Cetus

  Distance          424 light years


*Details*
  Temperature:    8.8 × 10<sup>4</sup> K

  Age:     166 million years
  <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">  </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable     {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";     mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;     mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;     mso-style-noshow:yes;     mso-style-parent:"";     mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;     mso-para-margin:0in;     mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:10.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-ansi-language:#0400;     mso-fareast-language:#0400;     mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->


> Einstein's general theory of relativity predicts that massive objects in short binary orbits should emit gravitational waves,  and thus that their orbit should decay with time. This was indeed  observed, precisely as general relativity predicts, and in 1993, Taylor  and Hulse were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for this discovery.


Is that part of the universe too!  Living in consonance locally perhaps is a more achievable goal or endeavor!  Sikhism definitely encourages focus on that.  Working synergistically with and making best use of all that is around us.

By the way I am not suggesting we don't ask questions or seek more answers.  Sometimes it is just awe that we also should recognize and I am sure most if not all do.

Sat Sri Akal.

*PS:*  Folks from Sikhism perspective we really need to pay attention to the infiniteness of creation espoused in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and not try to define and seek simple non-infinite answers to fit our imagination.  Many are trying to box this infinity including posts by some learned people who get trapped too in this at spn.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Oct 11, 2012)

Perhaps Pauri 21st in Japji Sahib helps us channel our inquiries,
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <wunctuationKerning/>   <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>   <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>   <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>   <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>    <wontGrowAutofit/>    <w:UseFELayout/>   </w:Compatibility>   <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->





> ਤੀਰਥੁ ਤਪੁ ਦਇਆ ਦਤੁ ਦਾਨੁ ॥ ਜੇ ਕੋ ਪਾਵੈ ਤਿਲ ਕਾ ਮਾਨੁ ॥
> Ŧirath ṯap ḏa▫i▫ā ḏaṯ ḏān. Je ko pāvai ṯil kā mān.
> _Pilgrimages and body regimens, compassion, alms given.  If so receives, but little respect._
> ਸੁਣਿਆ ਮੰਨਿਆ ਮਨਿ ਕੀਤਾ ਭਾਉ ॥ ਅੰਤਰਗਤਿ ਤੀਰਥਿ ਮਲਿ ਨਾਉ ॥
> ...


Above is my interpretation attempt and all errors are mine.  My work and understanding for Japji Sahib is at draft level at best but I posted to get some feedback as well if it triggers ideas.

All comments and suggestions welcome.

Sat Sri Akal.mundahug


----------



## Astroboy (Oct 12, 2012)

While contemplating upon the various views poured here, I'd like to add that a spiral galaxy is like a CD and we are just a byte in, replaying our part until this CD becomes useless and is discarded - destroyed. 

We are a very tiny part of a program. See Universal Soldier to understand this concept deeper.


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 12, 2012)

Yes, who are we to think we can reveal the universe? Maybe we invented some things that make life easier, maybe we revelaed some mysterious? But for what? For our Haummai, for our ego. For e.g. take Einstein he spend his life as well, to find and reveal the Universe, but in end he died.  And if you look clearly, his THEORY is still a theory, but many scientists ignore this facts and build up their develope from this theory.   There are still many  corruptions in his theory. Einstein said after his general relativity : That near high-mass objects , the light is deflected trough the room. But if we check the facts, that we  can scalre due to high technology his theory makes no sense. I can quote the measured graviation radius if you want. Then compare it to the measured  value, that he sclaed in 1919 during the famous solar eclipse. We just believe and don´t try to understand, if we hear big names like "Einstein", we just think , that everything is right, and that this person is brilliant, but we don´t think rational and crucial.

I can just quote what Carveer mead said..




> The last 70 years of the 20th Century being the dark ages of theoretical physics.
> 
> Carveer Mead


----------



## Archived_member14 (Oct 16, 2012)

*Re: why did God create universe*

skeptic.freethinker ji,

I couldn't write earlier, one reason being that my desktop computer main board broke down and the notebook hasn't come back from the repairs. 



> Quote: Originally Posted by Confused
> There is absolutely no bravery in wielding a sword with the intent to strike another living being. Rather it is anger or fear which motivates such actions.
> 
> Confused Ji,
> Longtime! If I remember correctly, you were one of the first people I interacted with when I first joined the forum two years back. You were and you still seem to be one of the few people on this forum who actually think things through.



Actually no, if I don't understand something immediately, I avoid thinking further about it. It is burdensome for me to work things out for long. Also I'm easily distracted and therefore my posts are usually not written in one sitting.



> Regarding the above comment, I wasn't really thinking in terms of the justification of the actions. I was just thinking in terms of the feasibility of the actions themselves. But you bring up a great point.



And my comment was directed more at others than at you. ;-)

People confuse morally evil / unwholesome / disadvantageous states for being good / wholesome / advantageous. Attachment towards one’s religion is perceived as something positive and identification with it is encouraged. Pride, which otherwise is judged as undesirable, becomes a good thing when it is about one's own religion. While faith / confidence is based rightly on understanding the value of good states such as morality, kindness, generosity and so on, this becomes replaced by belief in a projected idea, where these good states are then referred to without any understanding. Indeed to refer to something outside of one's moment to moment experience as basis for right conduct is a case of wrong thinking motivated by ignorance, attachment, and in the case of God, wrong understanding about the way things are.

Regarding this particular matter, my intention was to draw the attention to the fact that fighting in battle with an intention to kill one’s enemy, rather than an act of bravery, is the product of strong attachment to self (and one's ideals). It is aversion in the form of fear and anger which drives a person to kill any living being. In battle, one may wield a sword or shoot an arrow, but aimed only at intimidating and never to hurt or kill. Knowing that if the enemy finds out about one's intention; one's own life is at risk, yet willing to face the consequence. *This* is bravery, which is result of understanding the value of and having confidence in, morally good action, while seeing the harm in and disadvantage of, immoral action. 

If one's values are distorted then the actions which follow can't be right. If one *believes in* wrong which is mistaken for right, much wrong must follow. One misperception leads to misperception in other areas. An Islamic terrorist for example, is one who mistakes what is evil for good and then allows his thoughts to proliferate like mad.



> Quote: Originally Posted by Confused
> skeptic.freethinker,
> Is your knowledge not based on what you heard from science which through your own reasoning have come to agree with?
> 
> Nope. People don't just 'hear' from science, think about it and come to agree with it. They don't have to...because science provides evidence.



Why do you think that I am not moved by what science tells me? It is because I know that science deals with concepts and not with reality. That you consider science as providing evidence is because you too fail to make the reality vs. concept distinction. 

While the scientist is going about his daily activities including when working with his theories and trying to prove them, he is ignorant of the mental and physical phenomena that make up his moment to moment experience. He does not understand any of what goes on as extremely fleeting and impersonal phenomena, but instead takes consciousness, feelings, perception and all actions through body, speech and mind as belonging to me, as mine and as I, lasting in time. Instead of understanding reality, he takes concepts for real.

I used to compare this situation with that of a child learning to draw geometrical objects perfectly and being able to use them creatively without a need to understand their mathematical properties. In the same way, a scientist is someone who has learnt to work with concepts, although he does not understand them for what they are. How he perceives the world is basically no different from how anyone else does. 

Now, I man not suggesting that concepts be dismissed. Thinking is part of who we are and concepts are means by which we function at all. The problem is taking concepts for reality and thinking that in studying them, one comes closer to the Truth. This is wrong understanding at work and encouraging in fact, of further ignorance and attachment. 



> This is one of the main difference between science and religion. Science provides proof, underlying assumptions and ways to disprove those assumptions.



I consider all religions except one, to be wrong when it comes to statement about the Truth. But neither does science touch upon the Truth! Both are dealing only with the conventional world, the objects of which are concepts. So yes, I would refer to science and not to religion when trying to understand and work with a particular aspect of the conventional world. 

The main objective of religion however, wrong though it is about conventional reality, is to guide a person towards a moral and therefore more fruitful life. And I consider this much more important than the ability to predict the weather, produce food, inventing a computer, using the Internet, radio, telephone, the air- conditioner or even electricity and penicillin. Without any of these things, but with understanding, life becomes more meaningful. With all these things but no inclination towards morality and wisdom, life is not worth living.



> Science doesn't require blind faith. Religion does.



No, it doesn't. But neither is it open to the possibility of being completely ignorant about reality / Truth. It believes its perceptions to be correct and that it is moving towards better understanding of reality. But this is not so. In fact science relies on agreed upon convention as basis for confidence in what it does, and this is no different from “belief”. And while a scientist goes about his daily task, including telling everyone else what he believes is reality, he'd do well to take some lessons from religion so that his life does not go too off track.



> Science does not have all the answers yet, but we are making progress and learning something new everyday.



Nothing new is ever learnt! What happens is the creation of new concepts as a result of a particular kind of observation / study. It is akin to seeing what one likes to see. The only “new” are the realities which rise and fall away as part of one's moment to moment experience. The rest is just concepts based on other concepts experienced in the past, some of which happen to give the impression of something “new” happening. 

Indeed the very idea of “looking for answers” reflects a lack of appreciation with regard to the reality “now” as the only valid object of true knowledge.



> Whereas religion and religious folks just assume that they have all the answers, mostly in forms of ancient texts. They can't be farther away from the truth. This is why religion requires blind faith which many religious people wear as a badge of honor.



To rely on religion for knowledge about the conventional world is foolish. 
To rely on science for knowledge and understanding with regard to the Truth is also foolish.



> And once people have blind faith, these gullible folks will believe anything....even that someone without a head kept fighting forever. Or that a magical skydaddy created the universe.



Yes, when thinking in terms of concepts such as human physiology and the universe, science is what one should turn to for a more reliable knowledge. Religion should not attempt to say anything about such things.


----------



## itsmaneet (Oct 16, 2012)

skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Religion causes people to not seek answers and stay satisfied in their ignorance.
> 
> If it's so simple, we should send out a memo to all scientific organizations and scientists who are spending billions of dollars in researching the cosmos to find it's origin. We owe it to them to let them know that they are wasting their time and money.
> We should also inform the scientists who are  trying to find cure for diseases that they are just wasting their time and that  the diseases will get cured when God will wish to do so.
> ...


Dear Skeptic Ji

Nobody is stoping anybody to think on any question that comes in their mind. Scientists have also been searching since ages the time when the universe was created & it's well answered in Shri Japji Sahib Ji by Guru Nanak Dev Ji. There are certain questions that will remain unanswered till the time one merges with Almighty. If you want answers of these questions....it's too on the Almighty. One cannot even breathe out without his permission...

Gurfateh !!


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 17, 2012)

Dont generalise scpetic ji, Sikhi is not a religion, it is against dogmas , like Sience! Sikhi is going along with Sience, your "argument" makes no sense, because  Sikhi makes me even more seek answers!!! When I come to Sikhi I started to question everything, and learn how it works etc..!! What you are saying is just blind judgemental generalization! SIkhs can be Scientist doctors etc!! And we already have some examples ! We are here to develope the world, as well but trying to not do it for aur haumai!


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 18, 2012)

> Sikhi is not a religion, it is against dogmas


How so?

Dogmas are everywhere even in Scientism and Sikhism.


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 18, 2012)

BhagatSingh said:


> How so?
> 
> Dogmas are everywhere even in Scientism and Sikhism.




Please elaborate?


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 18, 2012)

Dogma is a set of beliefs given to us by some authority, which cannot be disputed, and are taken to be true.

The Sikh dogma is that there is one all-pervading Lord, without birth, self-existent, in-dweller, primal man, true in all ages, with form yet formless, timeless, deathless, protector of his devotees in all ages, slayer of evil, uplifter of obstacles, pure bliss, universal/ultimate consciousness, source to everything there is, all powerful, so on and so forth who can be known through a guru (one who already knows Him intimately and effortlessly).

If you are a Sikh you have to at least accept that as true IMO. SRM adds more things.

Scientism is a bit hard to talk about as I have haven't studied it as well as I have studied Sikhism.


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Oct 18, 2012)

Firstly I was talkign about the 'religious dogma' as Sceptic ji described. 
Secondly
like you describe everything is a dogma.

Thirdly if a Dogma is wrong or makes no sense, like take for example a ritual - we dont believe in .


----------



## BhagatSingh (Oct 18, 2012)

TigerStyleZ said:


> Firstly I was talkign about the 'religious dogma' as Sceptic ji described.


He is speaking nonsense. I have no better word to describe this: "Religion causes people to remain ignorant" 



> Secondly
> like you describe everything is a dogma.


No dogma is something given by authority and taken to be true and indisputable. Not everything fits into this category. But you are right that many things which we don't consider dogma, can be dogmatic in ways. Science is one of them.



> Thirdly if a Dogma is wrong or makes no sense, like take for example a ritual - we dont believe in .


No dogma is something you do believe in even if it doesn't fully make sense to you. The belief about God, the Sikh dogma, does it make any sense to you? For a Sikh Sikhism is dogma.


----------

