{"id":1648,"date":"2014-01-01T09:10:03","date_gmt":"2014-01-01T09:10:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/vedkabhed.com\/index.php\/2014\/01\/01\/concept-of-god-in-arya-samaj-protestant-hinduism-part-2\/"},"modified":"2026-03-28T06:42:47","modified_gmt":"2026-03-28T06:42:47","slug":"concept-of-god-in-arya-samaj-protestant-hinduism-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vedkabhed.com\/index.php\/2014\/01\/01\/concept-of-god-in-arya-samaj-protestant-hinduism-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Concept of God in Arya Samaj (Protestant Hinduism) Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Written by Abd Al Muhsin Al Hindy
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

The proponents (blind-follower’s)<\/em> of protestant Hinduism stress that their cult (and Vedic Hinduism)<\/em> is strictly monotheistic and has nothing to do with dualism, polytheism, pantheism, monistic or any other conception of God but monotheism. Whereas the orthodox Hindus maintain the opposite, that Vedic Dharma (Vedic Religion)<\/em> is not monotheistic and the cult (Protestant Hinduism, so-called Arya Sam\u0101j)<\/em> is unorthodox and deviated. In order to solve this ‘mystery’<\/em>, we’ll be showing few more proofs<\/span>, which will prove that protestant Hinduism is purely non-monotheistic, wearing garb of monotheism in order to delude and lead people astray, especially those who try to seek truth. This sub-section aims at exposing the polytheist (i.e. protestant Hindus) <\/em>posing as monotheists<\/span>. In the previous sub-section (i.e. ‘A) Is Protestant Hinduism Monotheistic?’<\/strong>) ,<\/em>we’ve already provided many proofs, to prove the non-monotheistic nature of protestant Hinduism, still we want to block any mice holes through which any such false claim could be made or even be thought of.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

b.1) Ishwar is Dependent not Independent \u2013 <\/strong><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

We’ve seen the ‘proposed definition’<\/strong> for Omnipotence by the protestant Hindus, now its time to put this proposed definition to scrutiny and see whether it can rightly depict the true picture of Protestant Hindu god Ishwar. Again in a precise manner we’ll be stating the ‘proposed definition’ as given by protestant Hindus \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Agniveer <\/strong><\/span>the new Isl\u0101mophobe (once was a “wannabee” but now is full-fledged Isl\u0101mophobe)<\/em>, hate-monger wrote \u2013<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

“Omnipotence means that Ishwar does not need help of any other entity<\/span> to conduct His duties<\/strong> \u2013 creation, management, destruction of universe. He is self-sufficient to conduct His duties”<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Moolshankar Tiw\u0101ri (Day\u0101nanda Saraswati)<\/em> wrote \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

“It really means that God does not require the least assistance<\/strong> from any person in all His works such as Creation, Sustenance and Dissolution of the Universe, and administration<\/span> of Divine Justice. In other words, He does all His works with His own infinite power.” \u2013 \u00a0[SP, Ch 7, pg. 208, Tr.Chiranjiva] [See Sub-section a.2 for the complete source]<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Moolshankar (Day\u0101nanda Saraswati)<\/em> wrote \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

“\u2026God stands in need of nobody’s least help<\/strong><\/span> in doing His work of creation, preservation, and destruction, and in doing equitable justice to souls according to their merits and demerits. In other words, He accomplishes all His works out of His own infinite power<\/strong>.”\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u2013 [Satyarth Prakash Ch 7, pg.211 Tr. Durga Prasad]<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

In the earlier sub-section we had hinted at the dependent nature of Ishwar, and Insh\u0101’All\u0101h we’ll expound on it more in this sub-section, as we read above, that the proposed definition of “Omnipotence”<\/strong> is “[Ishwar]<\/strong>
\ndoes not need help of any other entity<\/span>” <\/strong>as stated by the Isl\u0101mophobe Agniveer. But does Ishwar stands true to this ‘proposed definition’? <\/strong>We learn that according to Mooshankar, his god Ishwar needs nobody’s help? Well that’s quite contradictory to the apparent facts, which we’ve seen and other are mentioned below.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

We’ve have sufficiently shown the distorted nature of the ‘proposed definition’<\/strong> of Omnipotence<\/strong> by Moolshankar, and shown his deception, now we seek to elaborate something which readers may have noticed in our early points but may not have fathomed it completely. Above we saw the definition of “Omnipotence” <\/em>by Protestant Hindus where they claim that Omnipotence means “God does not require the least assistance from any person<\/span>” or “Ishwar does not need help of any other entity” or “God stands in need of nobody’s least help<\/span>.”<\/strong><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

The problem with their ‘proposed definition’ <\/strong>is that their god Ishwar does not stand true even upon this definition! Ishwar does require <\/span>the assistance (help)<\/em> of \u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em> and Prakriti (Primordial matter)<\/em> for the creation of this universe. <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

All of his duties (Ishwar’s)<\/em> are dependent on basically two things \u2013 \u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em> and Prakriti (Primordial matter)<\/em>, hence he is not self-sufficient nor is he independent of others and their help.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

For instance, what if \u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em> refuse to (or don’t)<\/em> inhabit the bodies created by Ishwar using Prakriti? As according to protestant Hinduism, \u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em> are ‘sat’ (eternal)<\/em> and have ‘chit’ (conscious)<\/em> , where as Ishwar is ‘sat’ (eternal)<\/em> has chit (conscious)<\/em> and has ‘\u0101nanda’ (bliss)[hence protestant god Ishwar is known as Satchidananda], and prakriti( primordial matter)<\/em> \u00a0is only ‘sat’(eternal)<\/em> and lacks the other 2 attributes.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

As these souls have conscious they are responsible whether or not to associate themselves with the bodies\u2026etc made using prakriti, by Ishwar. And this is what is stated by a Protestant Hindu Pandit in his book \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

“Souls tend to associate<\/span> themselves with matter <\/strong>but are free<\/span> to do so with God<\/strong>. In the former case they are subject to births and deaths, in the latter case they acquire bliss which is a divine attribute. In both cases it retains its individuality being uncreated and indestructible.<\/strong>“<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u2013 [The Handbook of \u0100rya Sam\u0101j, pg 41, Pandit Vishnu L\u0101l Sharm\u0101, \u0100rya Pratinidhi Sabh\u0101]<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

We question, what if all the \u0100tma (Human Souls)<\/em> refuse to associate themselves with Ishwar and matter (Ishwar made Bodies\u2026etc)<\/em>? The making<\/strong> of this universe cannot be completed, without their help and co-operation! Now you need not be ‘scholar’ or even a ‘graduate’ from MIT, Harvard or NASA to predict and guess the outcome of such situation! It’s evident that Ishwar is NOT Self-sufficient and requires assistance (needs prakriti)<\/em> from prakriti for making universe and co-operation from \u0100tm\u0101 to make the universe working. So who does Ishwar need and depend?<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Prakriti(Primordial matter)<\/em><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Ishwar depends and needs Prakriti (Primordial matter)<\/em> for creating this universe, hence he cannot be self-sufficient or independent.Moreover Ishwar also requires \u00a0\u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em>to make his universe “living”<\/strong> or “active”<\/strong> as mere bodies without souls are nothing but matter. Hence for a “working”<\/strong>, “active”<\/strong> universe Ishwar heavily depends upon his two other partners named above.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Now let’s assume for the sake of argumentation, that \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u0100tm\u0101 (Human Souls)<\/em> totally including everyone of the souls, agree to either associate with, matter (Ishwar’s making i.e. Universe, Human Bodies\u2026Etc)<\/em> or Ishwar, so will then Ishwar be Omnipotent according to the ‘proposed definition’<\/strong> of omnipotence by protestant Hindus?<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course not as, even then Ishwar will still be dependent on prakriti(Primordial Matter)<\/em>, for making universe, Human bodies, animal bodies\u2026etc as Ishwar cannot create primordial matter(prakriti)<\/em> nor destroy it, he is a mere ‘Fashioner’ or ‘Engineer’ of it ,in terms of Agniveer.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Hence in no way, either by the correct definition of ‘Omnipotence” or by the distorted definition (‘proposed definition’ <\/strong>by protestant Hindus)<\/em> is Ishwar OMNIPOTENT.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

This ultimately proves that God is purely in need of the other 2 co-eternal entities. Hence even the ‘proposed’ definition of Omnipotence (i.e. “God does not require the least assistance from any person<\/span>” or “Ishwar does not need help of any other entity”<\/span> or “He is self-sufficient to conduct His duties<\/span>.”)<\/strong><\/em> is too big for Ishwar. And that he (Ishwar) <\/em>does not stand up to this definition. This materialistic view of creation makes protestant Hinduism very close to materialism; it would be ridiculous of thinking them to be monotheistic in any sense.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Now, that we’ve learned how desperately Ishwar’s in need of prakriti and Human souls, but let’s see another scenario, where Ishwar has run into bankruptcy. Moolshankar (Day<\/span>\u0101nanda Saraswati)<\/span><\/em>, wrote in his ‘Bible of Hate’<\/em><\/strong>
\n(Satyarth Prak<\/em><\/span>\u0101sh)<\/span><\/em> :<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

13. No, there can be no dearth of souls, because the emancipated souls are replaced by new ones that God creates.<\/strong><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

A <\/strong>\u2013 “\u2026Fifthly, if you say that God creates new souls, the material out of which He creates them will eventually run short<\/strong><\/span>; because a bank, however wealthy it may be that has a constant drain on it, but has no income, is sure to become bankrupt sooner or later.”<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u2013 [Satyarth Prakash, Ch 9, pg. 287, Tr.Chiranjiva Bhardawaja]<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Q. God replaces the saved souls with the newly created souls on earth. So they never come to an end.<\/strong><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

A\u00a0<\/strong>–\u00a0“\u2026If God creates new souls, the material out of which He creates them, will be exhausted<\/strong><\/span>; for, however much a treasure may be, it will sooner or later run out, if there be nothing bat drawings upon it and no puttings in it.”<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– [Satyarth Prakash, Ch 9, pg. 264, Tr.Durga Prasad]<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

What, you’ve read above is a question posed to Moolshankar related to emancipation souls (he was trying to refute the notion that souls are created at which he fails drastically)<\/em>, and while answering this question Moolshankar states that “matter” is limited and will get exhausted one day or the other<\/span>. It’s the protestant Hindu belief that except god (Ishwar)<\/em> the other 2 entity are finite. Hence this makes Moolshakar assert that “prakriti” (Primordial matter)<\/em> is limited and one day will get depleted.<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

This belief of limited or finite prakriti (Primordial matter)<\/em> strengthens our argument of Ishwar being dependent and provides a blow to the so-called, distortedly fake, Omnipotence of Ishwar. <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Mavericks like us would question \u2013 <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

What if prakriti (Primordial matter)<\/em> gets depleted? <\/strong><\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n