Monday, March 8, 2010

If you are an atheist, please read following article with open mind as you might need to broaden your view to understand the following article completely. The following article makes an assumption that god exists and god can be personified.

Have you ever been in a situation where you just wanted to go to a temple for darshan and it turns out that the queue is really long? I guess many of us will say yes. Well, this is a very common scenario where not much big/famous temples in the big cities of India are so much crowded that people decide not to go to those temples from next time. Many, seeing gigantic queue, just give up and return. Yesterday, I was stuck in a similar situation (obviously not for the first time). But this made me thinking of an issue that most of today's semi-agnostic young generation faces, i.e. is it necessary for me to wait in this long queue? Isn't it enough to have in my heart love, respect (and whatever it maybe for that matter) towards god? Won't my god understand that it is worthless to waste half an hour (or may be more) of my long waited Sunday when, at the same time, I can actually enjoy doing something I really like?

All those things came to my mind as I was waiting in the queue and one of my friends dropped a bomb, “Why don't we leave this queue right now and go back home?” Actually I was ready with the answer for this question.

Whenever someone tells me that there is no need to wait in a long queue in front of the temple, I always remember a poem that I learned in my schools days. That poem explained the complex idea of god and god’s relation with humans in very simple words. Following is the literal meaning of the poem.

“God is creator of world, universe and everything. God created man. Being god’s most favorite creation, he decided to give the man, all the possible gifts he could. He gifted the man with precious gifts like intelligence, love, pride etc. When he almost done with gifting, he saw only one thing lying at the bottom of the gift box and that was satisfaction. Here, god waited and thought, if I give away satisfaction too, the man will never remember me. The man will never come back to me ever again. So he stopped there.”

The title of that poem is “The Pulley” and after above explanation the title becomes self-explanatory.

To convey my point of view about this, I will just tell you a couple of lines which I believe in, “By waiting in the queue in front of the temple you are actually loading your side of the pulley to weigh more. Hence afterwards, god will gift you some more to maintain the balance of the pulley”.

Actually, I didn’t explain all this to my friend at that time (Why not? come on people, we were in a temple, not in a philosophy graduates’ meeting) and we waited in the queue and completed with the proper darshan.

At this point, even if we don’t have complete answers of above questions (i.e. issues can be explored further), but we have some insight into the “other” side of the story.

Conclusions:

You know what god might be expecting from you.

Don’t try to be satisfied in life, humans are not gifted with satisfaction.

I forgot the name of poet so the reference remains un-credited. :P

Note: The phrase semi-agnostic is used for those people who believe in the concept of the god but don’t believe in customs that people tell to follow in the name of god.

-AmitHK

7 comments:

  1. good food for thought.... althuogh I don't really know if I believe in the 'Pully' part of it or not... :)
    but that's not the point! the blog is good ! :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. First of all if god exists he must be omnipotent and omnipresent. So where is the need to go to a temple for a darshan? You can take his/her(?)
    darshan from anywhere. I believe that religious places were made for the common people who cannot grasp this concept and need some symbolism
    (place,idol,picture etc) for imagining the existence of god.

    Secondly waiting in a long queue for darshan is everyone's personal choice, there is nothing wrong or right about it. It all depends on beliefs(it is same as
    you believe in the meaning of the poem and you are touched by it, someone else might not have the same feeling abt it).
    I personally believe that it is a waste of time and energy, instead it would be better to use the same time for some social cause or some kind of
    creative work. It would definitely create some value and might make the world a better place; not in a very big way. But every small +ve thing definitely
    adds to it.
    I would recomment a book: God's Debris(written by Douglas Adams, creator of the famous Dilbert cartoon).
    This is a small book and you would find a e-copy easily. It handles this question(existence of god) in a very novel way, through a question-answer
    session between 2 persons. You believe or don't believe in the contents but it is surely thought provoking... btw keep writing :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dhiraj, Its not about what you believe in, its about if you say that you believe, whats next ...

    Sachin,
    I want to clear a few points here,
    1. I already mentioned at the top of the article that I am assuming that god can be personified. So god might be expecting the people to come and wait in the long queues in front of temples. Also I want to be clear here, I am not saying that god DOES expect people to wait in the queue, but god MIGHT BE expecting that people should wait in the queue. So, my point is, there can be multiple ways in which you can pull down your side of the pulley.
    2. At the end of the article I said that this does not give us complete answer but gives some insight into "other" side of the story. This other side is where you believe in the concept of pulley to be true and question things based upon this. There are many sides to this story, I am exploring only one.
    3. I have nothing against people who want to spend their time in social activities but question here is does that pull your side of the pulley down, for sure (or goodness is just a make-believe thing?)?
    4. I will surely try to read the book you mentioned.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1) If you assume that 2+2=5, immediately you would come to a breakthrough result that 1=2. But this is insane. Unfortunately the same is the case with the post. You can conclude great thing after asumming something but it remains worthless till you show that what you assumed is correct.

    2)You believe that God didn't give satisfaction to humans. Why? Because if He would have given that man would never remember Him. Unfortunately this God is clearly a sadistic person. A mother gives everything to his child and expects nothing but this God want man to come to him thats why he didnot give him Satisfaction. It is unfortunate that such poems are taught in schools.

    ReplyDelete
  5. #3. I have nothing against people who want to spend their time in social activities but question here is does that pull your side of the pulley down, for sure (or goodness is just a make-believe thing?)?

    How do you know that standing in the queue would pull down your side of the pulley? It is all assumption, isn't it? Anyways, I did not say this thing(doing social work/creative work) in context of your pulley concept as I don't believe in it. My point was instead of wasting time in a queue use it in some productive way. This productive way could be anything and would vary from person to person.
    A famous quote from Abraham Lincoln about religion(it is not related to this discussion): When I do good I feel good and when I do bad I feel bad and that's my religion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. One thing I would like to mention is that The God does not want you to be coming to him and wait in the long queue. You have been entrusted with some duty from him (it might be social or taking care of your family or anything). If you are following your duty properly, God himself will come to you. You don't need to go anywhere else. In other words, you will get satisfaction if you are following your duty diligently. Finally thats the reason why people go to temple. I also remember one famous anecdote. Once Naradmuni asked Lord Vishnu, who is your greatest devotee? Vishnu said pointing, its "that" farmer. Narada puzzled and asked but he just takes your name thrice a day and I chant whole day. How come I am not the greatest one? In reply, Vishnu gave Narada one task. He gave him a lamp filled with oil and told him to take a revolution around the earth, but not to spill a single droplet from it and then come back to him. When Narada came back to Vishnu after completing his task, Vishnu asked only one question, "How many times did you utter my name?". Narada was speechless. Since he was busy concentrating on his task, he didn't utter Vishnu's name even once. What Vishnu must have explained to Narada later need not be written here. Its kind-of self explanatory, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Manoj,

    You have said,"You can conclude great thing after asumming something but it remains worthless till you show that what you assumed is correct."

    I would like to ask you a question. Here I am not arguing as my knowledge about this subject is really low.

    Science itself is based on some assumptions. Some of which are proved to be correct and some are still assumptions. My question "Do we have complete proof for Law of conservation of mass and energy?" If no, then how come a large number of scientists are assuming something, proving a lot of things based on that law, publish papers and you say it is not worthless." I don't know whether they have proved law of conservation of mass and energy but this is not my point here. My point here is According to your statement, all the research that is being carried out on assumptions is worthless.


    Also,

    Can you tell me the name a person who is/was completely satisfied. Probably the answer is no one. Why is that? The explanation inside the poem mentioned in my text does address this question in a way. I cannot argue with you on this point (probably not right now, probably not at all) but I would like to know better answer to the question "Why no one in this world is completely satisfied?" (Is the answer to this question is "existential nihilism"?)

    Finally,

    The tone of my article was to discuss on an issue, and not to argue on it. I know that, at the time of concluding I got aggressive and thats what probably lead to the argument. Also, we can see that Dhiraj, Sachin and you are focusing on your own perspective of the same story and I did the same thing. I wanted people (especially atheists and agnostics) to think from theist's perspective.

    ReplyDelete