In this thread we post evidence or ideas for why the material

>>17150241
Oh man, so many possible Demiurges in Gaudiya-Vaishnavism.

You could start at the first quadruple expansion and say any one of Aniruddha, Sankarsana, Pradyumna, or Vasudeva are the Demiurge. Maha-Vishnu fits the bill well - He sleeps in the Causal Ocean and the countless universes are manifest from Him. Then there's Garbodakasayi-Vishnu, who enters each universe to provide the source and maintenence of matter, and from whom Brahma's lotus sprouts.

Then there's Brahma, the first jiva soul who uses that sourced matter to be the universe's Prime Creator. Considering that Brahma is the first that isn't considered Param-Isvara, my view is that he is the closest Vedic parallel to the Demiurge.

http://www.lotussculpture.com/brahma.html

>>17150723
Prabhu, I have heard from a fellow devotee that there are "evil" Bramha's with hundreds of heads in different material universes. However I have been unable to find scriptural evidence in this regard. Might you be able to shed some light on this?

>>17150241
The number of the beast is 616 and carbon atomic number is 6

At least l2rp faggot

There is a star
You are part of the start
it radiates into another star
the twin stars share a position equidistant from a center

As the twin stars can be amassed together so too can the whole of star networks

As any object exists it must be between two stars; only one star can hold a position
therefore you are between two stars
the stars are equally massed and thus equidistant

there is only one position between two stars and herein. This position is called "now". Massive gyration is the cause of time, so we either believe in an omnipresent viewpoint's abstraction, that a looming eye can catch everything in its gaze, or we believe that there is only right here which is now.
inb4 toy logic

>>17150723
Goswami!!

File: 1439661453255.png (584KB, 1400x2700px) Image search: [Google]

584KB, 1400x2700px

only a blind god could love creatures as despicable as humans! ;^)

posting this comic before someone else does

>>17150775
the lion faced serpent=dad
you didn't get jacked off into existence, religiosity
is old school attempts to make a universally accepted reference of reality. IE tying languages together so stick beating cannibals don't kill but their own selves.

I'll never be a father=lesadpredemiurge

>>17150723
Not sure about this. The Demiurge / Archons are the creator of the material world, and people. If you ever read Hypostasis of the Archons, you read about these beings that created man and listed after the women they made (this is part of the real story of Genesis), these are the entities people summon to manipulate matter and other people to gain advantages in their situations at the price of being embodied by these entities.

This is the opposite of Prabhupada's journey Back to Godhead, because we see all the material conditioned souls trying to return Home and back to God, which is Nirvana, it is Salvation, it is true Spiritual Freedom. This is how Vishnu fits into the role of God, being the Supersoul, knowing the defects in the material world, there is a distinction.

Early Gnostics knew the Creator god wanted to enslave them, which still goes on today. However, all the material must be maintained, and God would obviously be able to intervene no problem, material and non material.

>>17150738
Evil? Never heard of evil Brahma's. Will be back later to comment if this is still here.

>>17150857
>>17150738
There is a place in the Chaitanya-Charitamrita where Lord Chaitanya tells of a meeting between Krishna and multiple Brahmas. It starts at Verse 58: http://www.vedabase.com/en/cc/madhya/21

>CC Madhya 21.59 — “Once, when Kṛṣṇa was ruling Dvārakā, Lord Brahmā came to see Him, and the doorman immediately informed Lord Kṛṣṇa of Brahmā’s arrival.
>CC Madhya 21.60 — “When Kṛṣṇa was so informed, He immediately asked the doorman, ‘Which Brahmā? What is his name?’ The doorman therefore returned and questioned Lord Brahmā.

> CC Madhya 21.65 — “‘Why did you inquire which Brahmā had come to see You? What is the purpose of such an inquiry? Is there any other Brahmā besides me within this universe?’
>CC Madhya 21.66 — “Upon hearing this, Śrī Kṛṣṇa smiled and immediately meditated. Unlimited Brahmās arrived instantly.
>CC Madhya 21.67 — “These Brahmās had different numbers of heads. Some had ten heads, some twenty, some a hundred, some a thousand, some ten thousand, some a hundred thousand, some ten million and others a hundred million. No one can count the number of faces they had.

The CC is really only scripture for Guadiya-Vaishnavas, though.

File: 1420928534418.jpg (128KB, 515x615px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 515x615px

>>17150723

OP here.

Any explanation or proof for the Demiurge must not fall foul of Occams Razor. That means not multiplying explanations beyond what is causally necessary.

In my thesis the Demiurge is not a being, more like a cosmic geometry that we can find in all living things. And he does not want to enslave us, we are merely pawns in a vast cosmic war between him and the Creator (Origin). A universe without the Demiurge is a universe without life. Comsmology has shown that without symmetry breaking in the early universe, there would have only been a sea of photons left and no heavier elements would have been able to form because no matter.

There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of Brahma's, Vishnu's, or whatever other mysthical beings. New Age nonsense.

>>17150829

Returning the Godhead, Nirvana, Salvation, Heaven, etc... are all just variations on the same theme, death. Death is how we return the Origin but the Origin is not out creator.

>>17153570
>Any explanation or proof for the Demiurge must not fall foul of Occams Razor.

You realize your very first post ran afoul of Occam's Razor, right?

>we post evidence or ideas for why the material world was created by a Demigod

This is a conclusion you have reached, and are now trying to find evidence to fit it. This is the OPPOSITE of scientific research. Nor have you shown why the Demiurge is not an unnecessary inclusion in the model of Creation.

You then posit bits from the Quran and Bible, yet somehow this is not introducing extraneous items, while providing Demiurge evidence? Why does the indication of a Demiurge from another tradition with "higher" beings introduce unwanted items?

Last, then I'll leave the thread because I really was just trying to give more corollary info relating to secondary creators, it's rather ironic that you deride one of the oldest religious traditions out there as "New Age."

>>17153607
>You realize your very first post ran afoul of Occam's Razor, right?

OK, but it can't fall too foul of Occam's Razor is what I'm saying.

Starting with the minimum explanation, that the Demiurge is merely a geometry, a distortion of space-time, we can explore the possibility without geting into ridiculous realms and ancient mythologies created by those who had no knowledge of science.

>This is a conclusion you have reached, and are now trying to find evidence to fit it. This is the OPPOSITE of scientific research.

Well, it's a hypothesis I've formed, and now I want to assess the evidence for it. The reason being that there may be a supernatural cause for the existence of the cosmos, as this is now suggested by scientific knowledge itself... a begining which cannot have had a material cause. Of course, as you say it must stand up to rational scrutiny otherwise it's subjective nonsense. Supporting evidence from other traditions is acceptable as long as it doesn't breech the bounds of absurdity. I think that supposing any being with conscious intent outside of organic life would probably do that.

>>17153570
Death to eternal life, either a new physical coat or an afterlife away from the imperfect material world.

Our origin isn't the physical creator when it comes to belief in demiurge. The point is to worship God in Spirit with love and devotion

>>17150829
>this is part of the real story of Genesis
I think that's the Book of Enoch which is Genesis Apocrypha (one of the texts considered for inclusion in the Book of Genesis but rejected).

>>17153570
>beyond what is causally necessary
what makes something causally necessary?

>A universe without the Demiurge is a universe without life
As I understand it the Demiurge is the creator of this world, which is the world of illusion or "Maya" in Hinduism, and there isn't anything real here, it's all a lie.

>There is no evidence for Brahma
What about the similarities in monotheistic religion across the world - in Egypt, Ancient Greece, the Middle-east and India? It seems something consistent and repeatable is there, even if it's "only" in our heads.

>Nirvana is a variation on the theme of death
Nirvana happens when you're alive, though. So does becoming "one with the Godhead" in the yogic tradition.