Unimaginable limits of space are God

dattaswami · Post by **dattaswami** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:13 am

Unimaginable limits of space are God

Let Me even say that the unimaginable limits of space are God.  The scientist agrees the existence of these unimaginable limits of space and therefore the scientists is agreeing to the existence of God. Even the common man is experiencing the existence of these unimaginable limits of space by seeing the space with his naked eyes.  The scientists see the space through the telescope and arrive at the same conclusion. The human intelligence cannot cross the four-dimensional space-time model at any cost on any day.   The beginning and the end of the space (limits of boundary) are always untouchable and unimaginable for the intelligence of even top most scientists.

If he crosses the limits of this space, certainly he can touch (Know) God who is beyond the space or exists in the limits of space. The unlimited space stands forever reminding the scientist regarding this eternal truth.  Thus, the Universe is visible to all human beings in all times exhibiting the unimaginable item through its unimaginable limits.  This Universe is a practical proof and the clear miracle of God available to all to declare this basic concept for every human being on this earth.  Nobody needs the demonstration of any miracle other than this to indicate the unimaginable God. The miracles are not available to all in all times.  Even if some miracle is demonstrated, people may conclude it as illusion or coincidence of events.  But in this demonstrated example of unimaginable limits of space, there is no such controversy.  Moreover, in this miracle there is no hope to disprove the unimaginable limits of space in future even according to the opinion of scientists.

There cannot be two or more than two unimaginable items.  Hence, the unimaginable limits of the Universe are showing only one unimaginable God directly to every human being.  Since, you do not perceive the limits of the Universe, you have not perceived God.  The existence of unperceivable limits establishes the unimaginable limits. The Universe is exhibiting its unperceivable and unimaginable limits. This means that you have not seen these limits.  Hence, you have not seen the unimaginable limits, which are God.

But the existence of unimaginable and unperceivable limits is exhibited.  This means that the unperceivable and unimaginable God exists and His existence is clearly exhibited. This Universe itself exhibits the existence of such God.  From this, the conclusion is that you have understood  only the existence of unperceivable and unimaginable God but this does not mean that you have seen or imagined God.  Veda says “Asteetyeva Upalabdhavyah” which means that you can know only the existence of the unknowable God. Veda says that God is unperceivable and unimaginable (Na Chakshusha…, Yasyaamatam…..).  Gita also confirms that God is unimaginable (Mamtuveda Nakaschana…).

At the Lotus Feet of His Holiness Sri Dattaswami

Anil Antony

Prof. Akers · Post by **Prof. Akers** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:40 pm

Why is there this constant battle between science and religion. Sience is science and operates under strict empirical rules of proof.
If I have a theory then I set up an experiment to prove or disprove my theory.
If I prove my theory, then any other scientist will be able to re-run my experiment and get the same results - every time!
Religion is about faith, anyone can believe whatever they want to believe and that's fine by me (some of my beliefs are seriously off the wall) but please don't try to imply that they are scientic truths.
Any piece with the word god in it is about faith (this also includes most of the topics on MB).
Leave science to the scientists, god to the believers and let the rest of us search diligently for our truths.

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:31 pm

Prof. Akers · Post by **Prof. Akers** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Would you care to talk a language that makes sense Danny what is the 'undefinable'

Rhutobello · Post by **Rhutobello** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:46 pm

Danny wrote:a)
b) we are the result of the will of THAT which was never born (had no beginning)

Yes...I can agree on that....but aren't that just how we define?

When I say God.....then I never think on a person who have been born.

When I say God.....Then I never think on one particular religion

When I say we are all created in God.....Then I never think that a person...or a being has made us by his own hand....but only that we all a part of his creation, none of us has precedence over other...but since we humans have got a more developed brain we act that way....we want to become God.

Mlady Raka · Post by **Mlady Raka** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:47 pm

Dear Prof,

I think what Danny is trying to say is that the Creation can never "define" that which created it.

It's much like a computer attempting to define it's programmer...

If we could "prove" that the Creator existed beyond any reasonable doubt, we wouldn't need faith.

Now the following is for EVERYONE who posted before me on this topic.  It is not meant to point a finger at anyone, nor to critisize any viewpoint which was already stated on this topic.

I just find that it demonstrates well what has been said....(and I hope Prof enjoys it, since it is a University setting in which it "apparently" happened...lol)

Here is a little incident which apparently happened to a first year student in a University....

The author is unknown, but the message quite clear....

I hope you will all enjoy it...

"KEEP THE FAITH"

"Let me explain the problem science has with Jesus Christ."
The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"

"Yes sir," the student says.

"So you believe in God?"

"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"

"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?"

"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"

"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...!"

"I wouldn't say that."

"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

The student remains silent.

"No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"

"Er... Yes," the student says.

"Is Satan good?"

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

"Then where does Satan come from?"

The student falters. "From... God..."

That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything correct?"

"Yes."

"So who created evil?"

Again, the student has no answer.

"Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness. All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?"

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"So who created them?"

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question, "Who created them? "

There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized.

"Tell me," he continues. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."

The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"

"No sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"

"No, sir. I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter."

"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"Yet you still believe in him?"

"Yes."

"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that son?"

"Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."

"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of his own.

"Professor, is there such thing as heat?"

"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"And is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes, son, there's cold too."

"No sir, there isn't."

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.

"You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than -458 degrees. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

"What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"

"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?"

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light... but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?"

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester.

"So what point are you making, young man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must also be flawed."

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you explain how?"

"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it. Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester indeed.

"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

"To continue the point you were making earlier, let me give you an example of what I mean?" The student looks around the room.

"Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?"

The class breaks out into laughter.

"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir."

So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. "I guess you'll have to take them on faith."

love and rainbows

Raka

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:49 pm

Rhutobello · Post by **Rhutobello** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:14 pm

Danny wrote:How can you define WHAT you don't nor will ever have the ability to completely perceive, see, comprehend. How can an infinitessimal part of SOMETHING see the WHOLE when it is impossible for it leave it.  It is always part of the WHOLE.  

Say we are part of a mountain, to take a picture of the mountain we would have to leave or detach from it a go at a distance.  The thing is here that there is only the MOUNTAIN nothing else, we can't leave it as nothing else exists but the MOUNTAIN.

I think you have been a bit stuck here

Of course you will never be able to see God....of course God have never been born...and since has never been born he can neither Die.

If we then take that into account....none will be able to define it up against any living soul...mountain..sea...forest...desert...whatever...because "he"(she)(it) is it all.

Most people call it God....some says Higher being...some greater force and you will now have the greater Will.

All of them is ok....if they define the same thing...which is impossible to define....but what is ultimate, none beside, none over.

So if you define your Will the same way I define my God..then we talk about the same thing...we just have 2 words for it

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:29 pm

Rhutobello · Post by **Rhutobello** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:52 pm

Well....then we still agree.....If you start to take the religious word of God....then the discussion become much broader and with danger of several wars

As stated before.

One of the reasons for freedom of belief is that none can prove that their belief is the only true one.

Since most Religions are created by man (males), they also have a tendency to look what benefit the Religion itself.
Most modern people know that the world was not created in 7 days....that Adam and Eva is more an image then a real historical event.
I can never understand that any force on earth are able to give absolution by receiving X dollar and say Ave Maria X times...without much more involvement from all implicated parts.
I have never understand the reason for why some who die in battles shall be surround by virgins in heaven
I never understand why the Male human is perfect, but womans, gays and so on are not...aren't we all a creation of God?

So in my opinion is the best thing with Religion that it give a lot of people ease in the soul...one must only not be blind from it

Prof. Akers · Post by **Prof. Akers** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:01 pm

Nice one Raka, I wish I'd had that student - chopped liver is very nice on toast ( but so is humble pie).
My point really is, the site is Mystic Board, I have no problem with tarot, vedic astrology, pagans or even other taoists but I do resent people coming on and banging on about god, go to god site if you want to talk about god.
You know I love zen sayings and I try to live my life taking some of them to heart - indeed you've joined in more than a few times.
More later I've got 1st place in the Grand National (horse race). Serious celbrations.

suzisco · Post by **suzisco** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:15 pm

lol congratulations proff.

yes i don't like the god arguments, they tend to be futile and pointless and go round in circles.  No one can prove there is a god but no one can disprove there is a god so you either have faith in your religion or you don't believe.  If you do believe then go and talk to the other people who do believe and if you don't then thats fine because you don't bang on about god and don't try and convert/hurt the bad devils/witches.

Personally i don't have an opinion, people should be free to chose their own ways in life....but they shouldn't go round saying their way is the best when its not proven...  Thats like saying persil soap powder is the best when we know fine well there is absolutely no difference in soap powders...all they do is clean clothes, its just the fancy packaging and the clever wording that attracts us to a product in the first place....

(sits back and waits for the furore caused by saying religion is like buying soap powder lol)

Prof. Akers · Post by **Prof. Akers** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:35 pm

I really wish i hadn't celebrated so much. Cheers Suz (hick, sways gently in the none existant breeze). going to watch a programme on the genetic faces of England - good wishes to all.
Stuart

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:14 pm

Danny · Post by **Danny** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:26 pm

Unimaginable limits of space are God

Unimaginable limits of space are God

Who is online