Since my intention is not to attempt a treatise on Hinduism, I must clarify that I use it only as a singular example of a religion that is slightly different from the often stereotypical framework of religions, and my description thus far, has been to logically find out how it was possible for me to outwardly seem a Hindu, and yet stay detached from it - It is this dilution that enabled my "meaninglessness within a spiritual framework".
While for other religions, this meaninglessness is painted over, new layer over layer, by frequent reprisals of messiah sagas and the resultant brainwashed generations, my particular religion didn't bother to maintain an impressive and contemporary advertisement on the "Path to God" - making it easier for me to see what I haven't been doing to reach God. Besides, being in India has the advantage that the only brainwash education is even slightly capable of, is patriotism. More about that later.
I used to, and still do, in some ways, admire the often mature origins, and motives of religions other than my own. One stresses on "discipline", another on "compassion", a third on "inner peace" - states of the mind.
God knows what He wants us to do, but popular literature would seem to suggest that the above mentioned "states" of the human mind are generally spiritually desirable. The real answers? Well...like I said and like we often mutter to ourselves, God knows.
We have these approximations to work with for now. But every one of these get-rich schemes for spirituality, that we call religions, (including my own) seems to think that every human being is born with some amount of spiritual questioning.
Every religion seems to assume that all human beings are born seekers.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. I don't know what THAT truth is, but I've met a substantial subset of the human population that would exchange the glory of turbulent quest, for the peace that comes with practiced mindlessness. In other words, I’d rather stay put than leave the firm I’m ground I’m standing on.
The average human being (say, "A") isn't on a purposeful quest to find the Creator, and/or (His) reasons for (our) Creation. The incompletion and flaws in the product called "human being", however, lead A to seek completion and perfection - to seek love, satisfaction, and fame, and money, and given the right overdose of religious Inspirin ....salvation.
Our religions prescribe mental states to be attained, but they (and we) have no consensus on the definitions of these states, or of love, or of salvation. These are words we take with a pinch of blind faith, and their vague definitions are all that we need to write articles and sell festival cards and promote messiahs. The repetitive use of the word "religion" so far has prompted me to consider using the comfortable "faith" as an alternative, but the reason I don't, is because that's a corruption - of my definition of the mental state called "faith" - At least the faith of the non-blind kind.
As long as our beliefs are based on reaching such hazy destinations, the whole idea of spirituality looks like a waste of time. The long journey to Godliness doesn't seem to be, quite simply … worth it.
And this is why religion, for me, has always opposed God, or at least obstructed the path to God.
Whatever form of God you may have in mind – Task-Master, Father, Destiny-Editor, Shepherd, All-Merciful or "Guy in the Sky" (my personal favourite), we are going to take away some assumptions about Him that have crept into us - by way of Mythology/Glorification/Devotional movies, Misguided priests, Misinterpreted religious texts (the worst), and
plain convenience.
Its true - We often rework our take on God to suit something we're doing, to clarify to ourselves that we're not sinning, or that whatever we're doing is at least partially pardonable (Thats a contradiction in itself, right? ). And this "wisdom of convenience" has been the major factor responsible for the dilution and delusion of religions with time.
Personal experiences aside, let's see what consensus we have on what "God should be like".
1. Omnipotent. All-powerful. In other words, richer than Bill G, more influential than George W, more superpowers than "Superman" Kent, "Spider-man" Parker and the whole Marvel and DC ensemble of "men in spandex" combined - Higher than our Highest Known Superlative in power. *But no, with the Great Power , comes not Great Responsibility. Read faster to see why I feel that way… follow the ‘*’ ;) (Only about God though)
2. Omnipresent. Available at the nearest anything-around-you. God does not have to travel, even when He does, it’s faster than a speeding mind.
..and so on. Omni being the keyword. By definition, God has no superior in anything, He is unsurpassable. And we have a word for such a big number – infinity.
Due to the large number of qualities attributed to God, often overlapping, mostly confused, if instead of enumerating what He should be, we think of what He IS not, we would probably define Him better.
GOD is not human
Hence,
Ø He doesn’t work FOR anyone. God isn’t responsible for us, and it is a bit childish to ‘expect’ things from Him. I am unaware of the global opinion on the clique known as "government servants", but the general attitude I've known is that the government, and its (paid) employees are the people in charge, but not the people responsible - in other words, they are the ones supposed to be doing something, but they are not to fault if it is not done.
Assuming one thing, and just one - that GOD exists, I think we should be sure that He is not a government servant. *God is not responsible for us. He was not ‘appointed’ for our conveniences, nor is His existence defined around our needs. He is not answerable to anyone, because if there was someone higher up than God, THAT someone would be God, and in that case I’m talking about “Him” – Guy in The Sky :).
A little thought will reveal that anyone who cares for us is the same.
God's Love and Grace, like anyone and anything you know, should not be taken for granted.
This is one of the greatest flaws of religious interpretations on Him – Most religions teach that God is looking after us, watching over us from the heavens, that He personally chooses and guides our individual destinies.
I'm sure that's a comforting thought, but I find it hard to imagine a God who busies His days calculating the optimum life-meters for 6billion-plus humans and trillions of plants, animals and insects. I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m saying it’s hard for me to imagine – It is quite possible that human intellect is inadequate, to even try and fathom, the mind of God. But even if He could, the question turns to ‘Why would He?’ – The answer to that question will someday define “Love” for us.
Ø He cannot be bribed. Atonement is an integral part of the ‘retention program’ of most religions. If you sin, and God doesn’t approve or doesn’t have mercy, a true religion should throw you out. If God has mercy, and He is all forgiveness, for something you regret having done and repent each day, a true religion should embrace you without reservations.
But that’s not how it usually works. There is a ritual or an expense. Donate to the religious treasure chest and you’re a free bird. Get 5 new recruits and you’re pardoned.
God doesn’t care for how many believers approach Him, recommended by which religion – all He cares for is belief and faith, if at all - I'm sure He's free of such petty human expectations as gratitude. He has no use for money - a human invention for human needs and inadequacies, or the number of people affiliated to His name - a human method for measuring power. He has nothing to prove, and no one to show up or win against. Because all that exists is Him.
Ø He has no rivals. Using the yin-yang argument to substantiate the existence of the devil always struck me as pretty lame. Agreed, the devil is a rather colourful character, thanks to Christian mythology. Literature and pop culture are forever indebted to Mr. Satan and his set of eventful (though rather horrific) anecdotes, for spicing up our language with “the devil’s workshop”, “the devil in the details”, “the devil and the deep sea”, et al. But if God is GOD, there is no way a devil can exist, since rivalry is a not-so-aesthetic human emotion. The need for recognition, ego are all unknown to God, for He is infinite, not just BIG. This is why, as I mentioned before, He doesn’t care for a huge flocking of followers or a good donation to the religious institution(s) that advertises His name, albeit distorted.
Ø He is more than human. Saying God is not human, doesn’t (obviously) mean that He is any less than human – which, by definition of God, would be wrong – because if humanity were supposed to be better than Him in any way, humanity would be called God, and vice-versa. I mean, God is like a superset of the good in humankind – He has all our good, and none of our faults.
Which is why we look up to Him, and
Not because He would be angry with us otherwise.
Not because He sacrificed a son for us, because in us, he has seen his sons reborn many billion-fold.
Not because He gave us rules and we find ourselves failing to obey them.
He didn’t make a set of toy-soldiers to play with, nor does He have an advantage in collecting souls in playing treasure hunt versus a hypothetical "devil”.
These are games we play, and we should realise that we respect God for His being above human, not for Him reflecting our deep, dark desires and childish power-games on a superlative, enhanced level.
We are shackled by our minds and mindsets, our abilities and thoughts hampered by a thought-process that has a hard time breaking free of assumptions.
Believe me,I'm goin thru' Hell here.
We are limited by nothing but ourselves.
And though that is often more than enough,
Thus,
&
That is why,
God,
