- Hindu vs God's Unity
- Moshe Ben-Chaim
- Reader: The response of the Hindu's position on the
topic of multiple gods from our discussion yesterday. His definitions
for his gods are different than what we had previously been defining
God as: Their is no one all-powerful all-knowing divine being,
but rather, many gods who all have different powers and capabilities,
(god of wisdom, beauty, etc.) All are limited in some sense.
All are more powerful than humans, but never complete. Their
natures are the same in the sense that all are gods, like all
natures of humans are human, but their capabilities and powers
are unique, like the different talents and abilities of different
humans. So the essence of their beings are similar, but they
possess accidental features like humans, thereby making them
unique, unlike God, who possess no accidental features whatsoever.
This was the response to my questions of his belief.
- He also had a question: Why can't two metaphysical beings
exist at the same time? (He wanted to prep the question by arguing
that two completely different metaphysical beings do exist at
the same time in a sense with the human soul existing after death.
After death, the soul (a metaphysical being, the essence of a
human) and the Divine metaphysical being both co-exist in a metaphysical
- Mesora: I address myself
to your Hindu friend.
- Drawing incorrect notions and parallels, that man's soul
exists "with" God after death, is not a proof that
there are multiple gods. You make two errors; 1)That there can
be "number" in the non-physical (metaphysical) world,
2)That any parallel may be drawn between man and God,
- A man's soul existing after death "with God", does
not mean that there are multiple, metaphysical things. 'Number'
can only exist in the physical world, in connection with things
which are subject to parts. For example, the idea of gravity
cannot be 'cut in half' it has no weight, color, size, etc. Physical
attributes are not applicable to non-physical things. Therefore,
multiple gods is a false notion. Our concept of "God's Unity"
is based on this vital principle.
- Additional errors include the notion of multiple gods with
mutually exclusive powers. Even in your own framework, this implies
a limit on each god, as each maintains only "some"
powers. If a god is limited, then what imposed this limit upon
them? You are forced to say that something even greater exists
which determines each god's capabilities and scope of power.
You have contradicted the very point you wish to make, that a
god is superior. This notion of multiple gods is not substantiated
by reason, and is mere imagination. We do not live by any thought
that a man imagines. Man's fantasies are numerous, but the truth
is singular. We must determine what is true, then all other opinions
will be rendered false.
- Proof of Torah from Sinai teaches that there is one God.
No mention exists in the Torah of any being but the God of creation,
the God of Abraham. Once we have proof that God gave the Torah
at Sinai, and that He alone is the sole cause for the existence
of all things, and we know that He wrote the Torah, we arrived
at a conclusive proof and the only conclusion: there is only
one Cause for the universe.
- It is incorrect thinking to suggest multiple gods, when no
evidence of such a notion presents itself. The burden of proof
is on this Hindu. As he has no proof, and defies reason, and
as we do have proof, we do not subscribe to his view but we follow
the rational principles which lead us to true monotheism, defined
only by the Torah.
- The argument that God may give of His own powers to anything
besides Himself is also false. God's control of the universe
- His wisdom and abilities - are synonymous with Him, for the
reason already stated: there cannot be division in God. Separating
some of His powers from Him is the flaw of ascribing division
to God. Additionally, if it is God's wisdom that created the
universe, this means that this is His unique ability to do so.
One cannot be what God is, this is impossible. In such a case,
the very definition of a God who created the universe alone would
be flawed. But this suggestion is erroneous, as one assumes other
beings to possess abilities identical to God. There cannot be
two things which created the universe. This would mean that each
god alone could not, thereby implying a limit on each god, a
limit, which implies that another force imposed this limit on
them. Then, there would be three gods at least; the two who created
the world, and a third who imposes a limited scope of power on
the first two. But then one would be saying that the imposer
of these powers did not create the universe, yet can control
the two gods who did! As you can see, such notions are foolish.
- But think for a moment; if God is the One who created all
the laws and matter found in the universe, then He alone controls
all. He has no need for assistance, by witness of His very creation,
by Himself. He also has no needs. "Need" itself is
something which also resides only in physical things. Not only
does God have no needs, but how would another thing control what
God controls? This implies God's inability to prevent another
being from doing what they wish. So it leads to yet another contradiction,
that God controls things, and others also possess control. Well,
which one controls the world? This is against reason.
- A rational analysis will lead one to the conclusion that
,1)all matter and all laws cannot create themselves, 2)something
external to all matter and all laws must have created them, a
Creator, 3)this Creator itself has no need for a creator, 4)the
Creator gave existence to all things, is all powerful and all
- God has no needs and runs the universe independently.