REFUTATION OF ARGUMENTS THAT THE WORLD IS ETERNAL

1

2

3

of 28

WORLD AND ITS ORIGIN

The belief that the World is Eternal is held by Peripatetic Minded Philosophers. However they believed that the World with its Materials all are Possible Beings and Eternal Ad Aliis. That is they all are Eternal Effects. In General the disbelieved in Jazz La Yatazazza: [Indivisible Point Masses].

A number of other Philosophers believed that the World is Eternal Per Se like Deity, but Deity is the Prime Mover. The Untouched Mover and Ultimate of Beings in Movements.It appears that Eternally the World was as rest yet Deity made the first Motion in the World , but a large number of Philosophers believe that The Deity is the Eternal Mover and the World is Perpetuum Mobile.The movement is Eternal and Perpetual.

But when the Eternity of the World is once accepted portals to Atheism are opened once for All.

Semitic Religions agree that Deity Not only Created the World but also the the Materials which constitute the World. There general view is not that Deity first Created the Materials required to Create the World and then Created the World, but that Deity Created the world With All Materials in the World. The technical term for this is ‘AlJa”l ‘Al Muraccab. The term for the Former is ‘Al Ja”l ‘Al Basi:t.

Unfortunately Philosophers like Ibn Sina, Ibn Ar Rushd also advocated this view. It is very good to see that Saint Thomas refuted Ibn Ar Rushd in his Philosophical Views , and took Refutation Of Ibn ‘Ar Rushd as his Prime Task. Saint Thomas indirectly defended Judaism and Islam on the issues where Judaism , Christianity and Islam agree against Ibn ‘Ar Rushd. His perscrutation must be held in great respect and regard. In Indian Philosophy there are different views and believes about the Genesis of the Cosmos.

Simple Hymn Of Genesis in Vig Veda is interpreted differently by different Indian Religious System.

Pandit Dianand Sarsuti was a founder of a new Hindu Sect , yet he chose that Interpretation which is based on the Eternity of at least six types of Eternal Beings.He believed that Deity Constituted the World from them. If any one of them did not Exist Eternally, Deity Would be Unable to Manufacture the World. Although the followers of Respected Dianand Sarsuti use the word CREATION but it is not used in the Semitic sense but in the sense of Manufacturing and Construction from given Materials. So they are believed to Pre-Exist the World. In is strange to see that even he has mentioned the temporality of the Materials which he generally expostulated to be Eternal.

He believed that only an illiterate person can believe that any thing Distinct from Deity is Non Eternal instead of a disputed claim among intellectual scholars. His rigid views were not liked even by Vedic Scholars of other Hindu sects.

DISCUSSION ON THE BELIEF OF PANDIDT DIANAND SARSUTI IN REGARD TO GENESIS OF THE WORLD.

PANDIT DIANAND SARSUTI believed that there are things which are Eternal.

Page 2 of 28

4

567

89

101112

13

14151617

1819202122

23

24252627282930

313233

34

35

36

of 28

1] God [Param Atma , Barmh]

2] Prakti or Sat [Mother Nature, Cause Of Universe]

3] Parmanu [ Spherical Point Masses ]

4]Spirits [ Jeo Atma]

5] Sky [Acash or Asat]

6] Vedas [ Words Of God]

According to his system God is not a Creator but a Manufacturer who Manufactured the World from

Permanu, Practi and Spirits. So if any one of them did not existed God Could Not Have the Power to Make the World.

For Spirits [Souls] Diyanand says:

“Both God and the soul are eternal, they are alike in consciousness and such other attributes.

They are associated together”

,and souls \spirits are mutual companions.

Initially Dianand believed that Only God and Omnipotence are Eternal. He wrote:=

Prior to the Beginning of the World Shonia Acash or Asat did not Exist.

At that time Sat or Parcti [the Unsenseable Cause] did not Exist as well; and at that time

Parmanu [Point spherical Masses] also did not existed. However at that time Existed ONLY

uncaused Omnipotence [SAMRATH] Of God [Barmh], [ which is beyond the World]. [BHOMKA :

SWAMI DIANAND].

This does shew that Vedas simply treach and preach that Any thing which is Other Than God is

created whether it be Spirits, Parmanus, Asat [Acash] or Sat [Paracti]. Pandit Dianand was

compelled to write this truth.

This means that initially he believed that Only God and His Omnipotence are Eternal but he latter

either changed his views or due to some his own reason began to preach other wise but still in

heart believed in it. That is the reason he wrote what contradicts Arya Samaj belief of six

Eternals. His followers usually neglect this view and preach otherwise. This is a proof that simple

Page 3 of 28

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

4445

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

of 28

Teachings of Vedas were distorted by means of Dianandi Philosophy. Vedas only and simply

preach that God

And His Attributes like Breathing[Spiration,spiratio,] or Vita and Omnipotence are Eternal. Even

Will Of God is not Eternal.

But the question is why they denied that God is A Creator, i.e One That Hath Power to make things out of nothingness.

The answer is that he had very wrong interpretation of Vedas. Had he believed that Vedas believe that God Can Create things from nothingness ,he would have believed in it like some other Hindus.

How ever according to his interpretation he thought that Vedas deny the Divine Attribute of reativity , he attempted to prove it on rational grounds.

So our discussion is based on two things.

1]Vedic Proofs.

2]Rational Proofs.

Vedic Proofs.

1] “The Great God – the King – revealed all kinds of knowledge to the human soul – His eternal

subjects – through the Veda.” YAJUR

VEDA, 50, 8.

It may be pointed out that the Vedic Hymn Of Creation does prove that In the Beginning Ther

Was Neither Non Existence [Asat] nor Existence [Sat].

This is a proof that Veda believes that Nothing Other Than Deity Existed In Eternity.

This proves that the word Eternal in the Veda:50,8 means a Relative Eternity i.e Beginning .

Beginning Is Not Eternity. The Veda 50,8 means in Context Of HYMN Stated Above :=

1] “The Great God – the King – revealed all kinds of knowledge to the human soul – His

Beginning subjects – through the Veda.” YAJUR

VEDA, 50, 8.

Page 4 of 28

64

65

66

67

68

6970

7172

7374

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

of 28

Rational Proofs.

The Rational Proofs given by them are as fallow.

1]Analogical Proof:

If some one want to make a pot he needs mud which is the material of the pot. It is unthinkable to make a pot with out mud. Similarly if some one want to make a chair he requires wood. A chair cannot be made with out its material, which is wood in this case.

But if it is supposed that a person makes a pod of some metal. He may use some metal like Copper or Silver or even Gold instead of mud.

But even then some material is required.

If some one want to make a chair of some metal say brass he may use brass instead of wood. But some Material is requires. Similarly if God made the world He Required some thing which must pre-exist the world.

Now if this required thing is not Eternal then it is made. Then the maker of this thing which is the material of the world is made then an other material is required. This add up to infinitum. This is impossible. So there must be some thing which is the Eternal Material of the world.

2]The Postulate Of Impossibility.

It is taken as a Postulate that Nothing Can Be Made With Out Pre Existing Material.

That is it is Impossible that any thing can be made by an Agent with out its Material which exist prior to it. It is generally taken as a Postulate and no convincing proof of this claim is ever given.

Some how ever have attempted to revert this Postulate into a theorem and have provided an attempted proof for it.

The have argued as follow:=

If God Created then there are Only Two Possible Options.

1]This Act Of Creation Occured When This Act Of Creation Did Not Exist .

2]The Act Of Creation Occured When This Act Of Creation Did Exist .

The former is IMPOSSIBLE since It is the Union Of Creation and Not Creation.

Page 5 of 28

91

92

93

94

95

969798

99100

101

102103104

105106107

108

109

110111

112113

114

115

116

117

118

of 28

The Latter is IMPOSSIBLE since Is the the Achieving Of the Achieved. It is Achieving the Very Self Of An Act Which Has Been Already Achieved.

As both of the Alternatives are Impossible , The Act Of Creation Was Impossible. If It Was Impossible It is Perpetually Impossible .

3]Argument of Ownership and Lordship .

God is the King of the universe. He is an Eternal Lord. If God is the Lord then there must be some thing of which God should be LORD Of. Other wise Deity Cease to be an Eternal Lord. In other words Deity is not a Lord in Eternity. God is the Owner of the Universe and the world is His Property [Property in the sense of Owned things , not in the sense of Quality]. God Cannot be Owner in Eternity If he the Material , Spirits etc do not exist in Eternity. Similarly God would be a King without Kingdom, an Emperor with out any Empire and with out any Empyreal Army.

4]Argument Of Love.

God Loves His Subjects. Quality Of Love is Eternal. If His Subjects are not Eternal then His Quality Of Love Ceases in Eternity. God Must Love some things Distinct from God. If God Loveth some one In God orGodhead or if God loveth His Godhead then it is not Love but a type of Self Centerness . So the Spirits , Matter etc are Eternally Loved by God.

5]Argument Of Justice.

God is Just. If God is Just then he must be doing Justice .If there is no Subjects which are Judged by God

Then God is not Just in Eternity.

6]Argument Of Worship

God means an Object Of Worship or One Who is worshipped. If Spirits are not Eternal then there is no one to worship God In Eternity and God ceases to be Object of worship. This means God ceases to be God. If God was not worshipped in Eternity Then God was not God in Eternity. This implies God Himself is not Eternal.

7]Argument Of Objectivity.

i]If God is Omnipotent then there must be some thing under the Divine Power in Eternity. Otherwise God is Powerless in Eternity.

ii]Similarly if God is Omniscience then there must be some thing which is in his knowledge. If there is nothing in Divine Knowledge then Knowledge ceases.

iii]If Willeth to make a thing from nothingness He must Will at some thing which Exists. Other wise if there is nothing can be willed.

Page 6 of 28

119120

121122

123

124125126127128129

130

131132133134

135

136

137

138

139140141142

143

144

145146

147148

149150

of 28

8] Argument of Nothing is some thing.

It is rarely argued that If God Made the world from NOTHING, then Nothing is Some Thing from which God Made the World. If there is some thing from which God made the world then this contradicts the claim that God made the world with out any thing.

Dianand believed that Deity is not even the cause of Spirits, Pramanu etc. He believed in total independence of them.

These are Uncaused as the Deity is Uncaused.

Now it may be seen that all these Eternal THINGS SHARE the following Attributes and Qualities.

1] Each one of them is Necessary Being.

2] Each of them is Self Existing.

3] Each one of them is Uncaused and Independent.

4] Each one of them is Eternal.

5]Their respective numbers are fixed and they can neither be increased or decreased.

6]Annihilation Of Each One Of Them Is Impossible.

Respected Diyanand did not claimed for the Eternity of the World but for the Eternity of Constituents and Ingredients Of the world.

A part from them Dianand believed in the Eternity of Divine Qualities,Doings,Words as well.But as Deity is Communicable with them they are out discussion.

The Problems Of This Concept.

If the Material say Parmanu etc are finite in number then this Imply that When all the Material are consumed in construction and fashioning of the world then Deity can not make a single thing howsoever small.

Suppose that there are α number of Spirits and β number of Parmanu sufficient enough to make bodies of α living beings such that in each body there rests only one Spirit.

Suppose that God Of Dianandi System constituted α living beings from the available constituents stated above. Now God in Dianandi System cannot make (α+1)th living being since there is no Spirit left to rest in any body. So if the body of any living being is made [by Dianandi God] then it would be exclusively empty from any Spirit.This is pure Limitation of Divine Power.

Where α,βЄ N, α < β.

Page 7 of 28

151

152153154

155156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165166

167168

169

170171172

173174

175176177178

179

of 28

[ Some Time it is said that the total number of Eternal Spirits is 4500000000,i.e α=45*10exp10].

It may be noted that each Parmanu is a point Sphere with a radius r, where r =0. So number of Parmanu is very very great then the number of Spirits. It must also be noted that the idea of Transmigration and reincarnation of Spirits is due to the belief of finite number of Eternal Spirits. [ RESPECTED DIANAND DID NOT EXPLAIN HOW DOES PERMANU CONSTITUTE A BODY AND HOW DO THEIR CONJUNCTION OCCURS.

IF EACH PARMANU IS A POINT MASS AND A POINT SPHERE THEN THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY TWO PERMANU CAN TOUCH OR CONTACT EACH OTHER IS TO OVER LAP EACH OTHER. BUT THIS ONLY MEANS THAT THEY OCCUPY ONE AND SAME SPACE, IBN THIS WAY IN INDEFINITE NUMBER OF PARMANU HOWSOEVER LARGE CAN OVERLAP EACH OTHER WITH OUT OCCUPYING ANY REGION OF SPACE EXCEPT A POINT SPACE. ]

As the number of Spirits suggested by Respected Dianand is very small in compare to the generations of living beings on earth this means that transmigration is the only solution. But this also imply impossibility of life in other heavenly bodies i.e life in space. But the major objection is that Divine Power is very limited in world. God may be mighty then other beings yet not Almighty and Omnipotent. The only possible way left for Dianandi God is to break a thing into its Eternal Constituents and then to craft an other thing from it.

This is another limitation of Dianandi God.

Last but not the least God in this system has no power to perform Miracles.

So this type of God is very weak.

If spirits are eternal then there is no need of a God.It may be the case the case that Different Spirits have different Powers to make different parts of the world. The collectively made the world. If so then there is no need of a Dianandi God.It may be suggested that some of the Eternal Spirits loves to Incarnate while some do not.Those who do not regulate and run the world.

This system is Atheistic since the collection of Eternal brings is itself a world. So no need of a God to

Expain the World.

If it is supposed that Each Parmanu is a Rational Vital Being as rationality and vita as their eternal qualities then then it may be the case that bodies are made by parmanus themselves as a mutual

Coordination. It cannot be proved that Parmanu are neither intelligent and nor rational things.

An other objection is that if the materials required to fashion the world are Eternal and the world manufactured from them is not eternal then God was idle and inert in eternity as according to Dianandi system. An objection which he often made on others. If it is said that there is a world prior to every world thus a continuous series of distinct worlds constituted from same constituents , then as this series is claimed to be Eternal, there Must be an Eternal World in Eternity. This world would be unmade,

Page 8 of 28

180181

182183184185186

187188189190191

192193194195196197198

199

200

201

202203204205

206

207

208209

210

211212213214215

of 28

unmanufactured and un fashioned . Then there is no need of a God .What is the need of a God,who only destroyed an Eternal World. But the important thing is that if there is an Eternal World then such a world cannot be destroyed by a Dianandi God. It must be noted that Dianandi God cannot perform Miracles because He cannot break the laws of nature, then it is primarily true that the Eternal world cannot be destroyed , since it is nothing but the destruction of Eternal Nature and Eternal Laws of Eternal Nature.Thus if there is an Eternal Series of worlds such that prior to each world there was an other world of the same materials, then at least there is one world in eternity , other wise the series cannot be eternal. If not eternal then it must have a beginning. But as an eternal world if it existed in eternity cannot be made it was unmade. The belief in an unmade world is nothing but Atheism. In this situation Dianandi God did nothing but some how destroyed an eternal world and from its eternal matter crafted an other world for nothing,Then began to repeat the process till now. But this does shew God even in Dianandi system was inert and idle. He began to be active when he destroyed the eternal world and replaced it by a temporal world. This implies that the first act of God was the was Destruction.

It is impossible that eternal beauty can be replicated by temporal beauties. So is God had the power to destroy the eternal world then this was very unwise act to destroy the Eternal Beautiful world.

An Eternal World is inextinguishable and its Perpetual Continuation is inevitable.

ATTEMTED ARGUMENT AND SANSCRIT SCRIPTURES.

The Vedic proof for the infinite series is Given as follow:=

It is said in the Rigveda 8:8, 48. ‘The great Creator, made the sun and the moon just as He had made them before!

But it is a very wrong concept of Vedic Verse. This verse only suggests that there was a sun before this sun a moon before this moon. There are thousands of Stars in space each a Sun. Several Satellites revolving around planets , so there is no confusion in this verse.

It may be argued that if Vedas are Eternal then the verse is true for each Sun and each Moon, at all times. But if Vedas are Eternal this verse implies Pre –Eternity in this scheme of reasoning, which is impossible, so this scheme of reasoning of Vedas is incorrect and wrong and its wrongness is independent of the believes of Eternity or Temporality Of the Vedas.

Replying Rational Arguments:

1]Discussion On Analogical Argument.

As Deity is believed to be Omnipotent He Hath Power to Make things from Nothingness. The true meaning of Creation. Human beings are not OMNIPOTENT, that is why they cannot make any thing from nothingness and non-existence. But this does not imply that Deity cannot do it either.

Page 9 of 28

216217218219220221222223224225226227228

229230

231

232

233

234235

236237238

239240241242

243

244

245246247

of 28

Either Deity Hath Power to Create a thing [ From Nothingness] or not. In the former case the analogy is false or wrong or both. In the latter case Deity ceaseth to be Omnipotent. This simple analogy cannot be a proof that Deity lacketh this Kind Of Power.

This argument reduce the entire problem to the Question whether Deity is Omnipotent or Not.

And the Argument of Analogy as an alleged proof of the claim that Deity is not Omnipotent.

So it is tried to prove that Deity is not Omnipotent by Dianandi minded people.

ARGUMENTS OF DIANANDI MINDED PEOPLE AGAINST OMNIPOTENCE AND ABSOLUTE POWER OF DEITY.

At this place Dianandi Brothers argue in their attempt to disprove that Divine Power is Absolute Omnipotence as follow:=

1] God is not Omnpotent as He cannot become a Chair or a Table or a Robot or An Engine or a Machine or an Instument.

2] God is Not Omnipotent as He cannot become a Bird or a Reptile, or An Angelic Being or a Devilic Being or a Virus or even a Woman.

3] God cannot commit Suicide, or Punish Himself or Un God Himself or Dethrone Himself.

4] God cannot Commit adultery and other Sexual Activities.

5] God cannot move,run ,walk,crawl,climb etc.

6] God cannot rob, and steal.

7] God cannot Sleep or become faint OR Unconscious .

8] God Cannot make another God .

9] God Cannot Make Him Self Weak.

10] God cannot make a stone so heavy that he himself cannot lift it.

11] God cannot make an unbreakable rod which he himself cannot break.

12] God cannot Exile any One From His Universe/Kingdom.

13] God Cannot sit on chair or ride an animal whether it is as big as an elephant or as small as a mosquito.

14] Suppose that God made a Shield which cannot be broken by any sword. If God cannot make such a Shield God ceaseth to be Omnipotent.---------α

Page 10 of 28

248249250

251

252

253

254

255

256257

258259

260261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272273

274275

of 28

Suppose that God made a Sword which can break any shield. If God cannot make such a sword he ceaseth to be Omnipotent.---------β

Now Suppose that this sword hits against this Shield. Now either the shield breaks or not. The middle is logically excluded. If the shield breaks then line α implies God is not omnipotent.

If it doesnot breaks then the line β implies that God is not Omnipotent.

In either case God is not Omnipotent.

15] God cannot become pregnant [ like a woman]. God cannot Conceive . [ Conception is not begetting].

16] Cantor’s theorem also implies God cannot be Omnipotent.

17] Divine Power cannot be on Abstracts. Otherwise God must have the Power to make a world full of Supermen, faries, unicorns, hulks etc. This means God can make all types of fantasies of Marvel and DC comics as real , in real and actualize them. Similarly God cannot make a Nitrogen Breathing Man etc.

Or a Man which do not require Oxygen.

18]If God is Omnipotent then God must be able to Destroy His own Omipotence, A quality which can even destroy it self. Such a Quality is is a flaw and falliblty . But God is free from them. Similarly if God is Omnipotent then God Must Hve Power to Punish a Person with out any transgression or sin or crime what so ever.

From this the attempt to conclude that as Deity is not Omnipotent ,There fore He cannot make any thing from Nothingness. [ It is often argued that Deity Has Power to Make things from Nothingness and Non Existence Since the Holy Deity is Omnipotent and Divine Power is Omnipotence and Absolute.]

In their zeal to refute this argument the opt the only possible way to claim that Deity is Not Omnipotent and Divine Power is not Absolute. Since if Deity is Omnipotent then there can be no objection on Divine Power to Create thing from nothingness.

Analysis Of This Response.

This is a misconception . Divine Omnipotence or the Absolute Power is defined to be a Power On each and Every Possible Per Se. It by definition excludes Per Se Absurd.

Possibles.

The Set B which includeth All the Impossibilities or Absudities.

Divine Power Includeth each and every thing of Set A.

An Absudity may be of following types:=

1] One that is a Contradiction

Page 11 of 28

276277

278279

280

281

282

283

284285286

287

288289290291

292293294

295296297

298

299300

301

302

303

304

305

of 28

2]One that implieth a Contradiction.

3]One that Contradicteth Law Of Thoughts.

4] One that Contradicteth Divine Necessity

5] One That Contradicteth any Necessity.

6]Contradiction Of Possibility

7] Self Contrdiction.

8] Paradoxes. Eg. If A is B then A is Not B ANDIf A is Not B then A is B.

9] Defects, Flawsetc. Upon Divine Essence and Essential Essence.

10] Limitations Of Absolutes etc.

So the word Absurd or Impossible is used for these things in General. Creation is Not Indcluded in these things.

So if is accepted that what so ever is Absurd or Impossible , it is not in Divie Absolute Omnipotence.

But if a thing is included in Set B it cannot be a proof to exclude any thing from Set B.

So it cannot be argued that Creation is Absurd just because Deity Hath No Power to Commit Suicide.

Deity would have ceased to be Omnipotent If Possibles are Excluded FromDeity’s Omnipotence.

COUNTER ARGUMENT

In Diyanandi System Of Theology Deity Hath the Power to Make the World from Eternally available Eternal Things [ Eternal Constituents of the Non Eternal World].

Suppose that some One Argues that Deity Hath No Power to Make the World from these Eternal Materials available to Deity. In order

Page 12 of 28

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

of 28

to prove this view if some one argues that Deity Hath no Power to Make the World From The Eternally Available Things just as Deity Hath no Power to Kill Himself etc. this type of Argument shall be rejected even by followers of Diyanandi System. In the very similar way the argument against Creation is rejected.

Note:=(1) The word Creation is used in the meaning to Bring Some Possible thing from the Domain of Nothingness and Non Existence to the line Of Actuality. This is the actual meaning of the world in Semitic religions.

(2) The word thing in the most general meaning is used for:=

2,1) Necessaries. [Divine Essence, Divine Attributes, Intrinsic Implications, Trancedence Association Of Essential Attributes With the Essence, Eternal Realities].

2,2)Absurdities [Impossibilities/Incontingencies]

2,3) Possibilities [ Contingencies]

2,4) Existents and Non Existents.

2,5) Substances, Accidents, Attributes,Essences, Supposita, Entities ,Hypostases ,Existence whether they Exist or Not, Whether they are Actual or Imaginary, Whether they are Real or Vertual.

Cantor theorem and Omnipotence:=

Cantor’s theorem is used by Atheists not only against Divine Omnipotence but also against Divine Omniscience. So if their argument is true then Deity is not Only Not Omnipotent but also not Omniscient. If Deity is not Omniscient and Divine Knowledge is neither Absolute nor Omniscience then It is Finite , limited and Bounded.

Page 13 of 28

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

of 28

This is to second the author of Reconstruction Of Thoughts In Islam that Divine Knowledge is Finite and Limited. But the author is Heretic and Heterodox even on Orthodox Islamic Believes.

So if the believers of Diyanandi System believe that Cantor’s Theorem is Not Valid On Divine Omniscience they Have to admit that this theorem is Primarily not Valid On OMNIPOTENCE.

Also Cantor’s theorem is not provable in M.K.S system, and not Applicable to Classes and Grotheindick Universes. It is also not Valid on Divine Attributes. It is unacceptable in SematicTheological Systems.

One may refer to the work of Professor Gerry Mar in this regard.

See:Why Cantor’s Theorem on Omnipotence does not work.

SOME POSSIBLE THINGS INCORRECTLY CLAIMED TO BE IMPOSSIBLE.

It is said that Deity Hath no Power on Abstract as in statement number 17.

But this is Possible and in Divine Omnipotence. There is nothing Impossible to Create a Super Man etc. Similarly Deity Hath Power to Change or suspend not only Laws of Physics ,He Hath the Power to Change or Suspend Laws Of Biology as well. Since such things whoever Comical are Possible and Not ABSURD.Also to Punish an innocent Person is not Absolutely Impossible but Relatively Impossible , so it is in Divine Omniascence.

2] Postulatic Argument.

The postulate is unaccepted and it can be only used by those who accept this Postulate as an unproved assertion in their theological System.

Page 14 of 28

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

of 28

Those who reject this postulate has only to say that this is incorrect rather its Negation is correct .

THE ATTEMPTED PROOF [ TAKING THIS CLAIM AS A THEOREM]

The Attempted proof is just a General Fallacy. As it is a General Fallacy it can be used against any Act What So Ever.

If a General Fallacy is used only in a particular case it is a Deliberate use of the General Fallacy.

This may be termed as the Fallacy of a particular use of a General Fallacy.

An example of this kind is given below:=

Suppose that a person believes that a body B can move in Free Space from Point A to Point C, but claims that the very same body B cannot move from point A to point D in the free space. As a proof he uses the arguments of Zeno against the Possibility Of Motion.

This is beyond any doubt that this is a fallacy since if the Arguments of Zeno are correct they prove impossibility and absurdity of motion in all directions , not just in one direction.

Even if Zeno’s arguments are not properly answered, they are still fallacies since the Existence of Motion in Nature is Certain beyond doubt. So it is a different case to point out the actual flaw in a fallacy and it is a different case to discard a fallacy. The former does not imply the latter. This is the reason Philosophers and theologians have attempted to answer the fallacies of Zeno but no convincing refutation is achieved so far. Yet it is agreed upon fact that Zeno’s arguments against Motion and Movement are just fallacies.

Page 15 of 28

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

of 28

Now we come to the preset case. The ARGUMENT presented is a General Fallacy, and use of this fallacy against a particular case is another fallacy as stated above.

It is necessary to shew that this type of argument can be used against almost every Act.

Example#1:=

Suppose a person wrote.

Suppose that some one argued that the person did not write any thing.

He argued as follow:

If the person Wrote then he either wrote when the act of writing did not exist or he wrote when the act of writing did exist. In the first case it is the Union Of Writing and Not Writing , which is impossible and absurd. In the second case it is achieving of the achieved and this is also impossible and absurd.

As Act Of Writing Does Exist with certainity , this argument is just a general fallacy if used for the act of writing since it canbe used against any act what so ever.

How ever to use it for a particular person is a special case of the this fallacy as stated above.

Example#2

The same formula type fallacy can be used against the act of Cutting.

It is certain that many things can be cut like wires, pages, fabrics, plastic sheetsetc by different instruments or tools.

Page 16 of 28

417

418

419

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

of 28

But if some one claim that nothing can be cut since the act of cutting is Impossible and Absurd.

Some one may argue that if :=

1] Some thing is cut , the act of cutting occurs when the very same act of cutting did not occure, or the act occurs when the very same act of cutting did occur.

In the former case it is the union of cutting and not cutting which is impossible and absurd.

In the latter case it is achieving of the achieved, an other impossibility and absurdity.

Some more examples .

1] Suppose that a living being [say a human being ] Died.

1,1] Either the Person died when he had not died or he died when he had died. In the former case it is the Union of Dead act of dying and not dying. In the latter case it is the Achievement of the Achieved.

1,2] The Act of Dying Occurred when it Had Not Occurred It Occurred when it had occurred. In the first case it is the Union Of Dying and Not Dying.

In the second case it is the Achievement of the Achieved.

1,3] Either the Act Of Dying occurs when the Person is not Dead or it Occurs when the Person is dead. In the former case It is the Union of Death dying and not dying , death and not death. [ Since if the act of dying occurs and the the person does not die, this is not the act of dying but failure attempt of act of dying which is out of the discussion].

In the latter case it is the achievement of the achieved.

Page 17 of 28

444

445

446

447

448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

471

of 28

2] Suppse a body β moves from point A to point B in space.

Suppose that initially it was at rest at point A.

Now either the act of Motion occurs from when the body β is not moving; or the act of motion occurs when the body β is moving. In the former case it is Union of Moving and not moving , and in the latter case it is the achievement of the achieved.

2,1] Suppose that a body say β began to move from POINT A to POINT B IN SPACE..

Now either the act of motion does Occur when the act of Motion does not occur or the act of motion does occur when it does occur.

In the first case it is Union Of Motion and Not Motion. In the Latter case it is the achievement of the achieved.

3] Suppose that any act doeth occur. It either occureth when it occureth NOT, OR It occureth when Occureth. As the middle is excluded between occurrence and not occurrence of any possible or contingent act, then either it is Union of Occurene and not occurrence of the act or it is achievement of achieved.

4] Least but not the last example.

At least one more example is given.

Suppose that Paracti [Sat], Acash [Asat] , Parmanus and Spirits all are Eternal.

4,1]Now let it be supposed that Deity Maketh the universe / world from the Eternal Materials of available to Deity.

Page 18 of 28

472

473

474

475

476

477

478

479

480

481

482

483

484

485

486

487

488

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

of 28

Now either He made the Universe / World when He was Not Making Or He Made the World When He Was Making.

In the first case it is the Union Of Making and Not Making.

In the second case it is the Achievement Of the Achieved.

4,2] Either the Universe was made when it was Not Made or it was Made when it was Made. In the first case It is Union Of Making and Not Making or the world from available materials.

In the second case it is the achievement of the achieved from the given materials.

This fallacy is a general fallacy and can be used against any act what so ever.

IT IS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT IT IS A GENERAL FALLACY AND TO USE A GENERAL FALLACY ONLY AGAINST A PARTICULAR CASE IS AN OTHER FALLACY.

IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO REFUTE THE FALLACY BY POINTING OUT THE FLAW IN THE FALLACY IF THE FALLACY IS GENERAL. IT IS SUFFICIENT TO POINT OUT THAT IT IS A GENERAL FALLACY.

WE MAY GIVE AN OTHER EXAMPLE SUPPOSE THAT:

There is a movement from Potentiality to Actuality of a Potential Thing.

Now if the movement occurs when it has not occurred then it is the Union Of Movement and Not Movement. If it has occurred when it has occurred then it is the Achievement Of The Achieved.

Page 19 of 28

499

500

501

502

503

504

505

506

507

508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

523

524

of 28

Thus not only Physical movements [motions] become impossible and absurd but also all Philosophical movements become impossible and absurd.

If all types of acts whether Divine or Not Divine are Impossible and Absurd then no thing is left to discuss any more. But in this case Even thew Diyanandi Deity [namely Barmh] Cannot make a single thing from the Eternal Things available to Him. So every thing is as it was in Eternity. If so then this destroys the entire Dianandi System Of Philosophy.

ARGUMENT OF OWNERSHIP ETC. There are two Fandamental types of Divine Attributes.

1] Absolute Attributes.

2] Relative Attributes.

Each One of the two are of two types. A] Incommunicable .B] Communicable

Each type of Divine Attributes have some subdivisions. Kingship ,Ownership etc. are Not Incommunicable Attributes of Deity. In Case Of Deity [Divine Case]

Kingship, Ownership, Lordship, Mastership are Relative Attributes Of Deity.How ever they are still different from Human Attributes Of Kingship etc. in some regards. In Eternity Deity the Divine Attributes of Kingship, Ownership etc. Are Potential.

But the Difference between the Divine Potentia Kingship etc. and Human Potential Kingship etc is as Follow:=

If there is a Single Subject Of Kingship Existeth then It is Per Se Impossible and Per Se Absurd That Deity is Not the King Of It.

Similarly the same is true for Divine Attributes Of Ownership,Mastership,Lordship etc,

Although Kingdom , Lordship are not Incommunicable Attributes Of Deity , But The Type Of Attributes Of Kingship, Ownership etc. Which are Attributes Of Deity Are Incommunicable. The same is true for the Attribute Of Worshipness or Worshiphood.

Deity is One Who Eternally Deserveth To Be Worshiped. But it is Not Necessary That Act Of Worhipping the Deity is Eternal.

Page 20 of 28

525

526

527

528

529

530

531

532

533

534

535

536

537

538

539

540541

542543544

545546

547548

549

550551552

553554

of 28

The same is some what true for Justice. How ever It is In Power Of Deity to Punish a Person with out any Sin or Transgression .But Deity never Exercise this Power. The same is true for speaking a False Sentence. They are Relatively Absurd.

DISCUSSION OF ARGUMENT OF LOVE There are two types of Divine Attribute Of Love.

One types is Only For Deity and is an Absolute Incommunicable Attribute Of Deity.

Deity [God] Loves His Divine Self ,His Divinity [Godhead]. Only a Perfect Individual Loveth His Self as an Attribute Of Perfection

DISCUSSION ON ARGUMENT OF [GRAMMATICAL] OBJECTS OF ATTRIBUTES

DIANANDI SYSTEM AND THE INCONSISTENCY OF ETERNITY OF SPIRITS ,PARACTI ETC.

In Sathyarath Paracash Respected Dianand said that:=

Qualities ,Activities and Effects Of Eternal are Eternal.

[S. P ,Ch#7:81]

This Claim Is divided into three Sub Claims:=

ALL QUALITIES [ATTRIBUTES] OF AN ETERNAL ARE ETERNAL.---------- C-1

ALL ACTS [ DOINGS] OF AN ETEWRNAL ARE ETERNAL.--------------------C-2

ALL EFFECTS OF AN ETERNAL ARE ETERNAL.--------------------------------C-3

Discussion on Sub Claim C-1

From this Statement it can be proved that :=

One That have at least one Non Eternal Attribute [ Quality]is Not Eternal.

Proof:=

LET := ALL QUALITIES [ATTRIBUTES] OF AN ETERNAL ARE ETERNAL.---------- C-1

IF All Qualities [Attributes] Of An Eternal Are Eternal Then Each and Every Attribute of The Eternal Is Eternal.[ A SIMPLE TAUTOLOGY]

If Each and Every Attribute of a Thing is Eternal, then It does not have any Not Eternal Attribute. [C-1]

Page 21 of 28

555556557

558

559

560

561562

563

564

565

566

567

568

569

570

571

572

573

574

575

576

577

578

579580

581

of 28

Since If It Has Any Non Eternal Attribute then Some Attribute Of the Eternal Are Non Eternal.

If some Attrbute Of An Eternal are Not Eternal then then the following Claim is False:=

All Attributes Of (an ) Eternal Are Eternal.

But this Claim is true even according to Pandit Dianand Sarsuti.

So If Some Attributes Of A Thing [ at least] are Non Eternal then the Thing is Non Eternal.

Q.E.D

SIMILARLY the following claims can be proved.

One That have at least one Non Eternal Act [Doing] is Not Eternal. [Using C------2]

One That have at least one Non Eternal Effect is Not Eternal. [Using C-----------3]

According to this rule the Impossibility of Eternity Of Spirits, Paramanu, Paracti etc. is followed.

Let it be discussed one by One:=

1]Spirits:=

1,a] If Spirits are Eternal then they cannot be depended upon Deity, Since Independence is among the Eternal Qualities of Eternal Spirits. If they are independent then their independence is Perpetual and Eternal and cannot be ceased i.e Unceaseable. But they depend Upon Deity in many regards as admitted in the System. So this imply Spirits are not Eternal.

The Act of transmigration is not Eternal and each Act is Temporal and this implies that Spirits are Not Eternal.

1,b] If Eternal Spirits depend upon Deity in some regard , and in those regard then they are Eternally dependent. This means they are not Per Se Eternal but Eternal Ab Aliis in those regard as stated above.

But if they are Eternally Dependent then they are Eternal Ad Aliis. But Dianandi system does not believe in Eternal Ad Aliis. So if Spirits are neither Per Se Eternal since Per Se Eternal cannot be dependent at all, nor Eternal Ad Aliis. Then they are Temporal. This proves inconsistency in the system.

1,c] If all Qualities of an Eternal are Eternal then they are either Ignorant in Eternity or does have an Eternal Knowledge.

If they are Ignorant in Eternity then it is impossible for any Spirit to know any thing since the Eternal Ignorance cannot be replaced by Non Eternal Knowledge.

If they have Eternal Knowledge then it cannot be Annihilated or Destroyed. So the result is that every person must know this Eternal Knowledge. Since Knowledge of Spirits cannot be annihilated and every

Page 22 of 28

582

583

584

585

586

587

588

589

590

591

592

593

594595596597

598599

600601

602603604

605606

607608

609610

of 28

Human being must know this Eternal Knowledge. But this is not the case .The knowledge of human beings are not Eternal.

Each human being must receive the Eternal Knowledge by means of a his/her Spirit,therefore it must be in mind and memory of every human being .But this is not the case. This does prove that Spirits are not Eternal.

1,d] If two things say ε and δ exists such that δ depends on ε in some regards [say in some Attributes\Qualities or Acts\Doings or both] and ε is independent of δ in all regards ( with out any Possible and Actual Exception) then if the Independent and Dependent connection between ε and δ is Supposed to be Ceased then this imply the Annihilation of δ in some regards. Since if a thing depends upon an other thing in some regard [say Attributes or Acts or both] and if the Independent Dependent Relation Ceases then these regards [Qualities or Acts or Both] are Annhilated, and ceased to exist Immidiately with out any actual or possible delay.But if the Annihilation of atleast One Attribute or Act is Possible the Attribute or the Act is Certainly Not Eternal. If some Acts or Qualities of a thing are not Eternal then this contradict the Axiom of Dianandi System Of Theology which is stated as follow:=

All the Qualities and Doings Of An Eternal Are Eternal.

Spirits do depend on the Deity in some regards stated above and hence by the Axiom they cannot be Eternal , in the Dianandi system of theology.

This proves that Spirits are not Eternal.

2]Parmanu:=

A Parmanu [Farmanu] is a tiny particle may be called Atom. But there are two concepts in Phlosophy

1] They are tiny spheres with a radius r>0 [Democritus’ Particles]

2] They are Point masses with radius r=0

According to Dianandi system it appears the latter.

In the latter case all the Parmanus in the world can over lap in the single point of space.

They cannot constitute a Body.

In the former case they are mentally divisible. Since if there radius r =γ , where γ>0 yet very very small even then one can suppose a number γ/2 <γ.In this case they may be assumed as Spheres of very small radii. In this case the cannot be Eternal Since they can touch each other without overlapping. Suppose that two such Particles touched one an other. So act of touching one an other [mutual toching] Must be Eternal. Since Every Act Of An Eternal Is Eternal In Dianandi System. But we see that in the system God Changes their Combinations. So they cannot be Eternal otherwise It is even out of the Power Of Dianandi God to do so. [It shal be discussed latter].

Page 23 of 28

611612

613614615

616617618619620621622623624625626

627

628629

630

631

632

633

634

635

636

637

638639640641642643644

of 28

Pandit Dianand Sarsoti in either case did not explained the nature of conjunction of these particles. It is not informed how do they constitute a body.

Any How there are several inconsistencies in regard to Parmanus:=

2,a] If they are Eternally moving in Chaos ,t hen the Chaotic motion is there Eternal Property/Quality. It cannot be ceased . If Deity manufactured and fashioned bodies from them their Eternal Motion did cease. This imply that some Qualities and Acts/ Doings Of Eternal are not Eternal.

This contradicts the Axiom:=

All the Qualities and Doings Of An Eternal Are Eternal.

So if there was an Eternal Chaotic motion in Parmanus, it must have to continue for ever.

If it is not so then they are not Eternal.

Similarly if their Eternal Motion a was not Chaotic then this motion MUST HAVE continued Perpetually. Deity cannot change their type of Motion.

If they were at rest in Eternity then rest is an Eternal Property [Quality] so as Zeno argued for MOTION MUST BE IMPOSSIBLE.

If it is claimed that Motion and Rest are relative then according to the above Axiom this relation would have been Perpetually Conserved for all Eternities. But it is not so. This implies Parmanu are not Eternal. Eternal Relations Must have been conserved since Eternity for Eternity .

2,b] Suppose that Deity constituted a Body from a number of Eternal Parmanus how so ever large or how so ever small. So if this Constitution is an Eternal Quality then the Body would have been Eternal. This contradicts the claim Deity Constituted the Body from Eternal Parmanus.

If the constitution is not an Eternal Property of Parmanus then to be independent of the Constitution is an Eternal Property of these Parmanus. In this case to constitute a body from these Parmanus is Impossible .

Pandit Diyand Sarsoti himself once believed that Parmanus are Not Eternal as he has written in the commentary of Fig Veda.

SCIENTIFIC ERROR IN DIYANANDI SYSTEM:=

According to Pandit Dianand :=

SIXLY ATOMS OF PARMANY MAKES ONE MOLICULE OF ANO.

TWO MOLECULES OF ANO MAKES ONE ANIK [ANIC]

Page 24 of 28

645646

647

648649650

651

652

653654

655

656657

658659

660661662663

664665666667

668669670

671672

673

674

675

676

of 28

TWO MOLECULES OF ANIK MAKE ONE MOLECULE OF AIR.

THREE MOLECULES OF ANIL MAKE ONE MOLECULE OF FIRE.

FOUR MOLECULES OF ANIK MAKE ONE MOLECULE OF WATER.

FIVE MOLECULES OF ANIK MAKE ONE MOLECULE OF MUD OR CLAY.

This is purely unscientific AND UNACCEPTABLE. But this shews that Parmanu combine in different numbers to make different MOLECULIC compounds. This Combination is temporal and any thing temporal is not Eternal. This proves that Parmanu Can Not Be Eternal in Diyanandi System.

ETERNAL STATES OF THE ETERNAL:=

If there are different types of thing existing [Other than Deity] in Eternity ,each with a pre existence, then their States Must be Eternal. If there states are Eternal then they cannot be changed, otherwise some states of Eternals are not Eternal. This contradicts Dianandi Axion stated above since each and every state is either an Act or an Attribute or an Effect. This implies that either all these Eternal things are in Eternal State since Eternity, with out any addition of non eternal state and without any substraction of any Eternal state.

If not so then all these things stated above are NOT ETERNAL.

3] PARACTI:-

If Paracti is Eternal then either it is Sat [Existence] or Cause or Nature.

If it is Eternal Nature then there can be no Non Eternal Thing in the Nature. Existence Of Non Eternal Things destroys the Eternal State Of Nature which is free from Not Eternals.

If Paracti is Existence then it is not Eternal.

If it is Eternal Cause then its Effect Must be Eternal other wise it ceases to be a Cause. This implies that the thing what so ever it was in Eternity was Neither A Cause Nor An Effect In Eternity, But some how this thing gained the Quality of Causality . Thus the Property/Quality Of Causality is Not Eternal. If Not Eternal then atleast One Of the Quality of Eternal is Not Eternal. If So then the Claim “ All Attributes Of An Eternal Are Etternal Is Contradicted.

But this is true even in Diyanandi System.

Page 25 of 28

677

678

679

680

681682683684685

686

687688689690691692693694

695

696

697

698699700

701

702703704705706707708

709

of 28

If this claim is true then any thing which has a Non Eternal Quality Of Causality is Not ETERNAL.

4] Space [ Acash ,Asat]:=

Either Space is Non Existence and Nothingness or It Is an Existing Thing. If it is nothing then the entire discussion ceases. If it is an Existent [ a being] then its states changes as a body changes its position in space.

This proves that space is not eternal as well.

WHAT IF SOME QUALITIES OF ETERNAL ARE NOT ETERNAL.

If it is supposed that the claim :=

“SOME QUALITIES OF ETERNAL ARE NOT ETERNAL”.

Then it is implied that some Qualities of God are Not Eternal.

Since God is One Of the Eternals.

If So then All the Dayanandi arguments in the Support of Eternity Of Four Vedas Fall down and become invalid.

Since they are based on the Claim:=

ALL THE QUALITIES / ATTRIBUTES OF AN ETERNAL ARE ETERNAL

CONUNDRUM Dianand Sarsoti believed that The Materials and Constituents Of the World are but the World is not .He believed that Deity Makes the World from the Eternal Materials then Demolishes Decomposes the World ,and into its Constituents and then Construct a new World From the Materials and Constituents which are Eternal.So no Wolrd is Eternal. But to each and every world there is a World Prior to it.

The series is infinite in the past. But in the Infinite Series of Worlds in the direction of Past Tense, there is no Eternal World , yet the Material from which each Non Eternal World is

composed and Constituted is Eternal. [Let this series be called Series A]

Mathematical Representation

A1,A2,A3,A4…………………,Ai,……………….………….∞ , iЄN

N IS SET OF NATURAL NUMBERS.

A1 is the present World.

WHERE NUMBERS INCRESES IN DIRECTION OF PAST. A2 IS PRIOR TO A1 ETC.

LET CALL EACH WORLD OF SERIES A AS Ai TERM [NON ETERNAL TERM]

Page 26 of 28

710711

712

713714715

716

717

718

719

720

721

722723

724

725

726

727728729730731

732733734

735

736

737

738

739

740

of 28

There is no need to comment on this view since the Eternity Of Materials Of the World is in correct as discussed above.

But if it is so then on same ground it can be said as follows:=

The Materials Of Each World is made From the Materials of a World Prior to It.

So there is an Infinite Series of Materials so that each and every Material is Non Eternal and is Made from a Previously Made Material. [Let this series be called Series B]

So the Series Of Non Eternal Materials is Infinite in the Past , but there is no Eternal Material.

MATHEMATICAL PRESENTATION

B1,B2,B3,B4…………………………,Bi,………………………∞ ,iє N,

N IS SET OF NATURAL NUMBERS

WHERE NUMBERS INCRESES IN DIRECTION OF PAST. B2 IS PRIOR TO B1 ETC.

B1 is the Materail of present World.

LET CALL EACH MATERIAL OF SERIES B AS Bi TERM [NON ETERNAL TERM] OF SERIES B

As Pandit Diyanand claimed that nothing can be made from nothingness, this series DOES NOT CONTRADICT this Controversial claim.

Yet it does not Imply the Eternity Of any Not Divine Being .

THERE ARE FIVE THINGS COMMON IN BOTH SERIES:=

1] NO SERIES HAS ANY ETERNAL TERM.

2] NO SERIES HAS ANY FIRST TERM IN THE DIRECTION OF PAST

3] TO EACH AND EVERY Ai , Ai+1 is PRIOR TO IT.

4] TO EACH AND EVERY Bi THERE IS Bi+1 PRIOR TO IT.

5] THERE CAN BE NO OBJECTION WHICH IS VALID ON SERIES B BUT INVALID ON SERIES A.

SO THE QUESTION IS WHY TO ACCEPT THE FIRST AND TO REJECT THE SECOND AND ON WHAT GROUNDS.

A QUESTION ABOUT VEDAS:-

EITHER EACH ONE OF THE VEDAS IS DEITY OR NO VEDA IS THE DEITY.

IF EACH ONE OF THE VEDAS IS DEITY THEN THERE ARE FOUR DISTINCT DEITIES SEINCE EACH ONE OF THE FOUR VEDAS IS DISCTINCT FROM OTHER VEDAS,

Page 27 of 28

741742

743

744

745746

747748

749

750

751

752

753

754755

756

757758

759

760

761

762

763

764

765

766767

768

769

770771

of 28

IF NO VEDA IS DEITY THAT WHAT IS THE MATERIAL OF VEDAS SINCE DIVINE OUSIA CANNOT BE THE MATERIAL OF ANY THING SINCE IT IS IMMETERIAL, AND NEITHER MATTER NOT MATERIAL.

=

Page 28 of 28

772773774

775

776

777

778

REFUTATION OF ARGUMENTS THAT THE WORLD IS ETERNAL

Documents

Transcript of REFUTATION OF ARGUMENTS THAT THE WORLD IS ETERNAL