What is God?

If you're aware of objections to your definition, then feel free to also address those objections.
I'm not convinced either on God's existence but I'll offer how I'd define them.

God is a highly advanced being. He does not have to be perfect nor omnipotent. I would say that he has to be more advanced than us, at the least. The reason I don't accept all of the traditional attributes (omnipotence, omniscience, etc.), is because I don't know of any way that we could ever know something to that scale. The ancients attributing those qualities to God may've just been an exaggeration.

My view comes from the fact that I can conceive of beings that are more advanced than humans when you consider that even modern-day humans are more advanced than pre-historic man. But I personally wouldn't add any more attributes to God unless there is good logic and evidence for it.
Last edited:
God is fundamental reality. When you reduce people and things to their most fundamental level you will find God.
Hi Swami. Welcome to the forum!

That's an interesting description. It seems like another way of saying that God would have to be the uncaused cause or the source of everything. Christians tend to attach attributes to this source. I assume your God is also immaterial, omnipotent, etc?
In my philosophy, consciousness is fundamental. If you reduce all people and matter to their fundamental state, then what is left is consciousness. Therefore, God is pure consciousness.
If you're aware of objections to your definition, then feel free to also address those objections
There are those who want proof that what I say is correct. I find it best to remind them that my philosophy is no different than that of Western scientists. Scientists also seek the fundamental form of the Universe. In this way, they are seeking God. Their conclusion is that the subject exist independent of object but this is a big error. I have come to the realization that subject and object are one. Everything exists in consciousness.

"There is no division, no multiplicity, no separation. Everything—the astonishing variety of living beings; nature’s myriad shapes, textures, and forms; the sun, the stars, the clouds, and the wind in the trees—all of it is a manifestation of an indivisible field of Consciousness. The goal of human life, the sages tell us, is to meet that Consciousness within ourselves and to know ourselves as That.

The sages also tell us all of our problems, indeed all of the world’s problems, can be traced to a single source: we misunderstand the nature of reality. Hypnotized by outward appearances, we misread the world around us. We see multiplicity instead of unity, separation instead of wholeness. Because we don’t understand that all beings share one life force, one consciousness, we blunder about, damaging ourselves by damaging others. It all boils down to an epic misunderstanding—and leaves us looking for fulfillment in all the wrong places."

Excerpt taken from: https://yogainternational.com/article/view/a-glimpse-of-cosmic-consciousness
  • Like
Reactions: AgnosticBoy
Last edited:
I have read a little on Eastern philosophy, but here is a good talk comparing Eastern and Western worldviews on consciousness:
(start at the 4:30 minute mark).

Let me know if this sums up your view, Swami.
Last edited:
I don't understand your view completely. Is it your view that everything is conscious? Panpsychism?
I do not say that everything is conscious. Everything comes from consciousness and exists within consciousness. The world is like a dream.

Discovering the nature of consciousness has led me to the very nature of reality.

Re: Panpsychism

The consciousness of the brain is a very limited consciousness. If you come back in this life with some presence of consciousness, including self-consciousness, then consider yourself halfway enlightened. If you come back as a rock then consider yourself less enlightened. If you realize the nature of consciousness, then consider yourself fully enlightened.

One person's experience:
"I was home alone, walking through the living room, not thinking of anything in particular, when suddenly my consciousness erupted. It no longer ended at the surface of my body but expanded outward, filling the surrounding space. I experienced everything around me as inside me and absolutely identical to myself. I was no longer Linda Johnsen; I was everything. The bliss of that single moment was beyond description.

It wasn’t “as if” I was the universe. I really “was” the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed.

I suddenly understood that the entire universe is held within an all-pervading, blissful awareness."
- Linda Johnsen
Last edited:
In my philosophy, consciousness is fundamental.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, Swami. I have little knowledge of Eastern philosophy but your perspective shows why allowing people of different religious/theistic perspectives (instead of just Christianity) all in one place to address the topics in this forum section is a huge benefit. I figured that Christians can use all of the help that they can get when it comes to addressing the topics here (joking, of course). ;)
God is a highly advanced being.

I have serious doubt about that. God belief has arisen almost everywhere and as far back as we can peer, but is it necessarily the case that belief arose through interaction with an advanced being? Was that the cause? The attributes of this God remind us of its importance but in all cases the inner we are dressing the formless presence of the inner Other in outer world garb because that is that is the place from which all our language derives. Someone having a mystic or religious experience isn’t seeing an actual being but rather a psychic presentation of that felt inner Other. But whatever form it may take it isn’t literally that Other as-described but rather a conglomeration of worldly iconography which is felt to convey the feeling one has in regard to the inner Other. The imagery offers clues as to relationship one fees oneself to have with that Other, but I find it doubtful there is just one true appearance which it in fact does have in and of itself. The formless is truly just that, though it is a source of insight to much of what really matters about how to live and to what is going on socially.

I would say the apprehension of an inner, greater other which never actually manifests in our consensual outer world is what has given rise to God belief.
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Swami V. Ānanda