Albert Einstein and Spirituality: From the Man of Atom Bomb

I must confess. While pondering these questions I had to, not only confirm my conceptions with research of others, but think back to my childhood and try to figure out where my parents and grand-parents fell askew with their conceptions. It was a good experience looking into these issues, but nothing has really changed my mind as I wasn't all that wrong (in my opinion) but feel free to point something out as being inconsistent with sikhi if you see it as such. :P

1. Please describe Ik Ong Kaar from the Sikhi view point. I am sure as having been born into a Sikh family you would be able to do that quite easily.

My being in a Sikh family didn't help me in figuring out exactly what the Sikh god is. I have to admit that my disbelief in God is one that is so general that I felt confident it would rule out the Sikh god in some way. And essentially my conception of the Sikh god was fairly simplistic. It is as follows

The Sikh god is immaterial, there is only one, impersonal, the creator and compassionate. Furthermore, there is no concept of free-will in sikhi so everything that happens is ordained beforehand by god ie predetermined. (this is something I've based on an earlier thread I posted on this site concerning the free will paradox and sikhi).

The first four qualities do infact align very well with the idea of Spinoza's god. It is the second last (and to a lesser extent, the last one as well) attribute that I disagree with the most (from my atheistic perspective). The second last attribute, the attribute of compassion, does not sit well with spinoza's conception of god. Spinoza's god was indifferent, neither malevolent, compassionate or apathetic. Simply indifferent.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/interfaith-dialogues/34540-albert-einstein-spirituality-man-atom-bomb.html

I cannot agree with god being the "creator" of the universe but I am willing to concede that point to you guys as a kind of nomological dangler so to say. It is conceiveble that a god like figure could exist, and create the world, but if he is to be impersonal he cannot be compassionate at the same time.

So I guess my concept of the sikh god depends on if I want to give him the attribute of compassion. What does the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji say? Im pretty sure sikhs believe in a compassionate god. If this is the case, then I cant believe in that kind of a god. If not, then it is essentially Spinoza's god

2. Please describe God from an Atheist viewpoint?

Any god in general. Whether it is Theist (like Christianity), Pantheist or Deist. I take a pretty hardline approach to what I consider to be a "God." I completely reject the notion of theist gods like Allah because they have to entirely destroy the systems of logic inorder to exist. And I disagree with more liberal notions of god (such as spinoza's god) due to the inherent pointlessness of these god. Although I would be the first to admit that you can set up a logical argument in favour of spinoza's god. But in such a universe where spinoza's god was the true god, it would make no difference whether u were an atheist or a sikh. That is something I can welcome as well.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=34540

3. Please give in details the difference between the first two as there are many.

Ah... not really for me. My concept of god is general enough to include the sikh concept of god. I concede there are different kinds of gods and the sikh god is not like allah. But i still cant believe in it and but one of those reasons is listed above

4. Is there any difference between Ik Ong Kaar and God in other religions? If the answer is yes or not then please give your reasons in details.

Omg yes. But i dont think I have to list those out here? I think we all agree the sikh god is more similar to spinoza then to allah but not similar enough to warrent comparison to einsteins conception of god :P

(im rushing to go to a midterm. i might expand on this tonite. but feel free to reply)

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

__________________
There is no Hindu, There is no Muslim—There is no Sikh

Caspian ji,

Guru fateh.

Thanks for the response.

I will wait for your elaboration. I have a couple of points to add. It seems that your way of expressing what god is and not is directed more towards your end- which is belief in no god- rather than the means.You are working it backwards to prove your atheism in an adamant way.

A couple of more questions for you to ponder on and please do not worry, no one is trying to convince you not to be an Atheist or convert you but I would like you to be nitid about your belief on whatever it may be. What I have felt in your posts is a bit of bitterness towards Sikhi for some reason without really giving it a much thought what Sikhi is all about outside your own home and bundling it with other religions. One wonders why! You want to be accepted as an Atheist but it seems that it is difficult for you to accept others the way they are. Isn't acceptance part of AtheISM?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=34540
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=34540

In Sikhi it is the foundation of its way of life.

1. Is Ik Ong Kaar a he, she or it?

2. Is Ik Ong Kaar a deity like other gods that you have bundled Ik Ong kaar with in your previous posts?

Thanks & regards & more hearing from you.

Tejwant Singh

PS: Good luck in your midterms.

Okay, first the easy questions.

1) If those three are my only options then I would have to say "It" but I am equally inclined to say all three or none of the above. I don't think the concept of god in Sikhism lends itself to easy characterization like that. "It" would be preferred in normal language use, just so we can talk about "It." :P

2) This point is contingent on whether or not the sikh god is impersonal or personal. I believe the sikh notion of god is impersonal (consequently, I don't believe in the compassion bit, but thats a different conversation although it is related to my answer). So if the sikh god is not personal, then it is not a deity in the same sense as other religions (like islam and christianity). However, the compassion bit which I mentioned above, personifies god in a personal manner (atleast to me It does—im open to any argument that can suggest that a god can be both impersonal and compassionate, kind or caring). If it happens to be the case that the sikh god IS personal (this is a position I believe the average sikh holds). Then to me, of course, that sikh god is a deity. And that kind of a god was the god I debated against in my earlier threads (like the 2+2=5 one) although I acknowledge that is probably not the right interpretation of the sikh god. I have to say the "impersonality" clashes heavily with the "compassionate" bit in my head.

I wouldn't say I have a bitterness towards sikhi that borders on spite (which is the notion I think most people on this site assume, that I am doing this out of spite either at my parents or my community). I have a slightly negative attitude towards most religions (although I assure you, i'm far more negative towards christianity and islam then I am sikhism, that might not mean much to you though). And this negativity isnt really any form of "hatred," its more of a "scorn" akin to how quantum scientists look at string theorists—they just don't get along . Quantum scientists dont think that String theorists are crazy... but rather, they think that what they believe in doesnt really amount to "good" science and it contains an element of "faith" that goes above and beyond what is acceptable for a science. Having said that, they acknowledge that in the end, string theory may come out being true. So likewise, I feel that there are somethings that are holding Sikhism back from being a truly universal religion as it was intended on being (the 5 K's, etc) some of which are of no fault of the religion, but rather the disciples (silly stories and inconsistant belief between one sikh and another). Even though I'm willing to acknowledge that in the end, sikhism may very well be right—I disagree with how it was put in place and how it is being practiced. So most of my objections are with the practical side of sikhi and not so much the theory.

Its not that i dont accept you for who you are. By all means, be a sikh, remain a sikh, etc. But the same way you think I have not critically examined sikhism is what I think of many sikhs. I mean, me and you probably agree on more aspects of sikhism then me and the average sikh. Even the whole "god is impersonal" thing. Ill agree with you about that. But I feel like asking a question like that one i asked before (how can god be bother impersonal and compassionate?) gets sikhs to critically reflect on their religion just as much as I am reflecting on it. Having said that, if at the end of the day u come to a different conclusion then I have, and ur happy with urs as much as im happy with mines, by all means :P stick with it. Im not forcing anyone to become an atheist. I will admit to raising concerns but that is because I think there isnt a pathway for sikhs in the community to similarily raise concerns without the threat of ex communication or just generally being looked down upon. I also think sikhs tend to give very lazy answers to fellow sikhs. But if an atheist raises an objects, that gets sikhs thinking. Im doing this for everybody :P. In one of my very first threads here, a sikh commented "if only we had more young sikhs like you asking questions like these" however the longer ive been here that has come to been replaced by "why are u raising objects? just leave us be" :P

Just as a side note. My parents are probably the best parents I could have asked for. If I was to be "reborn" into a family and I had my choice of an atheist family I did not know or the current Sikh family I am from. I would choose to be reborn into this sikh family and just be the black sheep all over again. They've been more then tolerant of me and my views. (Just wanna throw that out there cuz some people accuse my parents of having did something to me to turn me into what I am ).

Raising questions is good. However, for a while your tone become one of righteousness and you cannot possibly be right in your way of thinking rather than critical appraisal. All too often atheists have an attitude of moral superiority which is just as ugly in them as in religious people who have that attitude. In one thread the declaration was that you saw it as your personal mission to finish people's religious convictions which to me seems the same attitude as Christian missionaries. A couple of times you also completely disregarded some responses as they did not fit in well with what you think Sikhs believe. Genuine questions are very welcome. Recent posts from you have been more balanced and open minded, less judgemental and therefore more enjoyable for all and more welcome. We do have 1 major thing in common-we both think a lot of Sikhs have missed the point and we love to question!

Your concept of impersonal vs compassion is an interesting one. I guess my thinking about compassionate is 1) giving life and 2) the feeling of constancy and happiness that comes with achieving the state of union described in the Guru Granth Sahib ji. How life is used is then free will so that why it is not compassion in the human sense. All resources are available as seen in the array of life on the planet. Its humans that misuse them. I will admit that sometimes it is very difficult to see the compassion but taking the traditional meaning of compassion I think it is free will and compassion that is not compatible rather than Ik Oankar and compassion. I propose we have just put too narrow a definition on compassion so we can blame God for our actions. Hmmmmmmm

Your example about string theory etc just proves that those who follow science as a religion as just as much fools!! I also disagree with your assessment about spirituality. What you describe are short term effects induced by an external agent. Spirituality is long term and comes from inside. I don't claim to be an expert as have a long long way to go but the 2 things are fundamentally different. Maybe you should define what spirituality means to you?