[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Help Please!
GOPAL Ganapathiraju Sree Ramana (gopal@ecf.toronto.edu) wrote:
: In article <ghenDqs92E.4yt@netcom.com>,
: Pradip Gangopadhyay <pradip@lism.usc.edu> wrote:
: > The knowledge of God is beyond the realm of logic. Nobody has ever
: >been able to prove or disprove the existence of God using logic. If you can
: >do that then God will come under the purview of science. Thus God can only be
: >"known" in a supersensuous experience (Aporakhsanubhuti). God is beyond our
: >senses. Thus the knowledge obtained in meditation is supersensuous knowledge.
:
:
: most difficult part of the post, to me, seems to be the excerpt above.
: "the knowledge of god is beyond logic" is a hypothesis, or a statement of
: fact, or proven theory? does the statement also imply "the knowledge
: of God is essentially *illogical*"?
:
The knowledge of God is second hand till you see Him. Anything
you read from books, the second hand info., may or may
not be logical. Even if they are logical to you, it may
not be logical to another person. Logic is a way of reasoning
out to your intellect based on your faiths/knowledge at that time.
To be logical in relative to God is meaningless, because
you work with a hypothesis till you realise Him, and when
you realise Him, only you are the witness to that. So,
when you are realised, it becomes logical
for you to say God exists, but it may not be for the rest.
If you start with the assumption that God does not exist,
and try to explain the behaviour of nature, and using
the technique of proving by contradiction, you may be
able to logically arrive at the point that God exists.
>From this point of view, Advaita is more meaningful to
start with, but difficult to practice.
Regards,
Santhosh
