God and circular arguments

Circular argument, also called "Begging the Question" is proof of existence of God and the Soul. Believers of logic will very often deny that circular argumentation is also a form of pure logic, because then it can be proved that all logic is subjective, and the existence of pure logic itself is debatable. While they might, inside their minds and hearts, accept that circular arguments sound true, they will never openly accept it, for fear of being called names, like hypocrites. What is the purpose of accepting that circular arguments are also logical?

Self-realization.

This is the essence of Immanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason", which took him, one of the greatest philosophers I have ever read, a decade of self-isolation to come up with. This led me to believe that Western Philosophy, which can be called a tree born from the seed of Greek Philosophy, is very primitive compared to most Eastern philosophical schools of thought.

Why is God in suffering?

There is dignity in suffering. There is self-respect in dignity. There is compassion in self-respect. There is God in compassion. Hence, by the rules of set theory, there is God in suffering too.

Also, if one has to find God through suffering, one has to suffer with dignity. Suffering is commonly equated with hell, and because God is in suffering, God is in hell too, not just in heaven or above.
Then what is the devil? Devil is just God's other side of existence. If God has to be good, he has to be bad also, due to the law of balance. Extreme goodness and universal compassion is construed as Godliness, and extreme badness and lack of care for all forms of life other than oneself is devilry.

What is the purpose of suffering?

A dad says to his young son, "Go tidy up your room", and the son responds, "What does it matter? It will get dirty again." The father can argue saying that if he keeps it tidy every minute, he never has to tidy up, and the son can argue saying that if he never tidies it up, he never has to tidy it up again. Even though both of them know the truth, they argue against each other, because the discussion is not about cleaning the boy's room, it's about winning the argument, and not having to suffer a failure in front of an over-bearing father.

I remember thinking in my childhood, when I knew nothing about biology and metabolism, that if we keep excreting everything we eat, why do we have to eat at all?

A snake regularly sheds its skin after it grows a new one inside the old one.

What do all these three arguments have in common? Change.

We have to suffer to change ourselves and become better people. By tidying up his room unwillingly, the boy realized that happiness lies neither in winning the argument with his father, nor in following orders, but in doing his work in peace. Even though the boy won't admit, he knows that he feels peaceful while he is immersed in the task of cleaning up his room. There lies the purpose of suffering. Inner peace.

Why does God need incarnation?

There are people who don't believe in God, and don't see a God in themselves. He has to prove them wrong. That is why he incarnates.

How does he do this?
Because people who don't believe in God will question his existence, he has to prove his existence, and takes up a life form.

Why does he take up a life form?
Some will always exist who will say, "What does God have to bother? He neither suffers or dies."
To prove them wrong and help them see Him, he will have to show them that he can also suffer and die.

How does he prove that he can die too?
If one has to die, one has to take birth, and that is how he will incarnate. If one has to suffer, he must be sometimes happy too. That this temporary happiness is misconstrued as selfish service, is only a misconception, and it has to be uprooted.

That is why God will incarnate to show himself to people who don't believe in him.

Then what is the difference between incarnation and re-incarnation?
Even though he incarnates once and dies, there will be people, again and again, who still don't believe in him, because they are not the same people to whom he once proved his existence. So, will have to incarnate again and again, which is why he re-incarnates.

This is logical proof of the theory of re-incarnation in Hinduism.

Meaning in a language

Who gives meaning to a language? Who invents words and new languages? Can one find the answers to these questions, ever?

Here's my answer: It's the writer-reader and the speaker-listener relationship that gives meaning to a new word and language. It's not an unknown entity like God that creates new words and languages. It's in the minds of the people.

Thoughts and actions

All thoughts are actions, but not all actions are thoughts. These actions that are not thoughts, are a result of all thoughts that are not just thoughts. They are the thoughts that are translated into actions, through will, and that's where the human body comes in. One should see Unity in thought and action, and question it only when lost, not for the sake of thoughts or actions themselves.

Who is a restaurant?

I was at a restaurant for lunch, and this question came to my mind. Who is the restaurant to the customers? Who runs it? Who represents it? The manager? The cashier? The owner? All these are superficial. The real person who the restaurant is, is the one person who gives you exactly what you go to the restaurant for. You go to the restaurant for food. Does the manager give you food? No, he manages people. He has nothing to do with food. He does the same job a manager of a company would do. He needs the exact set of skills for that job. Does the owner bring you food? No, he is the person that makes profit and claims legal rights to the restaurant. It has nothing to do with food. He does the same thing the owner of a store does. Make money. The cashier too, is no different from a bank teller.

Then who is the restaurant to me? The waiter is the restaurant to me. He is the person that brings me what I need the most at a restaurant. He is the only person to the customer, that's more important than owners and managers. He is the connection to the outside world, and the most important one. He is the representative. And yet, all the customers' prejudice and frustration with the restaurant is directed at him. He is not responsible for the restaurant, but he is powerful. He is powerful in the same way a citizen is powerful in a country. It's his fate that he has to be at the bottom of the ladder, and yet he is powerful in a way no one can imagine.

How often do you complain to the manager, in person? How often do you complain to the head chef or the sous chef, in person? It's the customer's responsibility to follow the customs: to respect the waiter. He deserves more respect than the owner of the restaurant. He is the one that demands no fruits of his labor. He is the one that gives away all such fruit, for minimum wage that is essential to maintain the health of his body.

Respect the waiter, as he is your friend.

Why DO?

A reporter was once interviewing Gandhi about one of his national fasts, and was very interested to know why he chose this way of life to cause change in the world.

R: People are interested to know what thoughts guide you, and how you keep going despite the fact that no one understands you.
Gandhi: Let me explain, using a metaphor, for the mind can only understand other people's thoughts by free association, a Freudian term in Psychology.

I am a stone, that God threw into the pond of the world. It's my fate, and the bottom of the pond is my destiny. I can not blame God for it, for I understand that he reserves his own judgment for his actions, and he must be trusted. Inevitably, I cause ripples on the surface of the pond. I can not control that either, for every person affects another in one way or another, if not through words, through actions and ideas. If the pond I fall into is small, the ripples will come back to me in no time, before I even sink below the surface, after they bounce off the edge of the pond. If I fall into a huge pond, the ripples will never come back to me, and I will have long before reached the bottom of the pond and died. The only choice God has given me is the size of the pond, and I chose the sum of all oceans, for I realize that the bottom is inevitably reached and I can not wait for every ripple of my own to come back. That would be selfishness. That is why I go on, without any desire for any ripple of my own generation. That is why I go on, without any desire to try to stay at the surface of the pond, for God will keep throwing stones, and I have to make way for more.

Love and Attachment

Consider a fishnet whose four corners are fixed, but the fishnet itself is free to move up and down, like a large piece of cloth. It can be interpreted as an unrooted tree in Graph Theory. Pick a vertex, and then pull it up using two fingers. The entire fishnet will rise, but not all the vertices rise at the same speed, or to the same height. The force you use to pull the fishnet up is your Motivation, and you give your own Direction to that single vertex you are holding. Using Newton's Third Law, you can say that the fishnet also pulls you down with the same force. But, what keeps you going is your Motivation.

This fishnet is your Life. The vertices nearest to your vertex are your friends and family, and it's your responsibility to keep going despite all drag, and you will actually begin to notice that it's not just you that's moving forward, it's also your entire network. The force that pulls them along with you is called Unselfish Love, and the force that pulls you back is called Attachment. If you want to prove the world wrong, your Love, coupled with Motivation, has to overcome the sum of your Selfish Love and all Attachments in Life.

How do I become great?

The question is being asked in a wrong manner.
Wrong: HOW do i become GREAT?

The right question one has to ask oneself is this:
how DO i become great?

The simple left-to-right writing shows you that Doing comes before Greatness, and the not doing on your part is not making you great.

Man and child

If a man is better than a child because he can speak, is he not being
hypocritical when he is at a loss for words, looking at his first child?

Poet

Are you a poet,
if you write a poem?

Are you a poet,
if you read a poem?

Are you a poet,
if you feel a poem?

I think you are a poet,
if you poetize a poem.

Live on

If you don't move on,
you will never live on.

Oh, boy, come on,
It's time to move on.

I

Born I was with Curiosity,
Killed I was due to Animosity.

Live I shall for Knowledge,
and I beg you not to Judge.

Reincarnation

A desire to forget,
a desire to remember.
these two desires beget,
a desire to reincarnate.

Space-time and God

1. The SI definition of a second is expressed as a function of a Caesium atom.
2. Space is also expressed as a function of atoms.
3. All atoms constitute all matter.

Inference - Space and Time are both manifestations of matter.

Space is stationary matter, and time is moving matter. This duality implies that spacetime is matter itself.

Why language has no True meaning

Did you ever repeat the same word to yourself multiple times, and then think/feel: "The word lost its entire meaning!"

Go through this slowly: Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word. Word

You are now thinking, "What the heck is Word?" You just proved to yourself that word and its meaning are entirely separate from each other, and it's you who is giving meaning to the word. Can you do that with every word, not just Word? Yes.

Since you can do that with every word you can think of and then repeat, it means it's you that is giving meaning to all words you hear and speak. Since all knowledge is based on language and words, knowledge itself has no true meaning, and that meaning is inside YOU.