Does Vedic God of Agniveer and Arya Samaj deserve worship?

Terms used in this article

1. Vedic Religion: Means the religion of the Vedas as interpreted by the protestant Hindus like Arya Samaj, Agniveer and their likes.
2. Vedic God: The conception of God claimed to be truly Vedic by the protestant Hindus like Arya Samaj, Agniveer and their likes.

The Vedic Religion as interpreted by the Protestant Hindu cult Arya Samaj and their modern polemicist Agniveer holds the doctrine of eternity of soul and matter. This doctrine strips God of His attribute of Lordship. As God created neither the souls nor matter, but both are eternal like God, there is no reason why the Vedic God should be held as the Lord of the souls and of matter. What right has He to be their Lord? He not being their creator, some reason should be assigned for His Lordship over them. They are held to be co-eternal with God; God did not bring them into existence; How did he, then, come to have authority over them? Did He buy them by paying a price for them? Did he conquer them as one power conquers another? Or has He come to have power over them by long possession? It must also be remembered that the Lordship of God is unlike the Lordship of man. As man is imperfect so his lordship is also defective, and to think God to be Lord in the sense in which man becomes lord is to bring down God to the level of man. But man cannot equal God is any of His atrributes.

In short Vedic followers can assign no valid reason for the Lorship of God over souls and matter which are not His creatures. However, the Noble Quran does not make God the Lord of all souls and of every particle of matter without assigning any reason for it. The Noble Quran says,

الَّذِي لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَلَمْ يَتَّخِذْ وَلَدًا وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ شَرِيكٌ فِي الْمُلْكِ وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيرًا

He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: no son has He begotten, nor has He a partner in His dominion: it is He who created all things, and ordered them in due proportions. [Surah Furqan 25:2]

We see around us that all things are restrained within certain limits and cannot go beyond them, so are also the souls. To see how the limits are set of bodies, one need only observe the Sun, the moon and the earth. The moon completes one revolution around the earth is about 29 days while the earth completes its revolution around the sun in about 365 days. The earth cannot reduce the time of its revolution to 29 days, nor can the moon extend the period of its revolution to 365 days. The moon and the earth cannot make any alteration in these periods. So, the Being who has set these limits on the planets and other heavenly bodies is God. These limitations point to a limiter viz. one who has bound various things with various limits. A careful observer will witness that in all things there is a remarkable limitation.

The limitation that is observed in physical things also exists in the case of souls. Now, the Vedic theory that the souls were not created by God, but they are co-eternal with Him, interferes with the uniformity of God's plan. It is clear that both the limitations, viz., the limitation imposed on the bodies and the limitation imposed on the souls, are under the same law and both fulfill the same purpose, i.e., both show that this universe can serve as an evidence of the Creator only if there is in it a uniformity of plan pointing to a Creator. That the universe may afford a proof of God's existence, it is necessary that the inequality which is to be seen in the powers and faculties of bodies and animals should not be regarded as the necessary consequence of our deeds in a previous life, but should be held as designed by God to serve as evidences of the existence of the Maker. All the universe must be believed as te pure work of God which He has brought into existence, not under any compulsion to accomodate Himself to the chances of transmigration/reincarnation, but of His own free will so that human race may propagate on the earth, and every thing that is necessary for its sustenance and comfort may be provided. Taking this view of the universe, we may regard it as affording a testimony of the existence of God. But if it be supposed that all these things which are a source of blessing to humans, came into being by chance, as the doctrine of rebirth/transmigration leads one to conclude, they cannot prove the existence of God, for in that case they cannot be supposed to follow any fixed law and to constitute a purposeful and wisely organized system.

Thus, according to the Vedic doctrine, God cannot be said to be the real Lord and controller of the different shapes of animals, nor can they be said to have come into existence by the will of God. According to the Hindu doctrine of transmigration, it is not the wisdom of God that requires the existence of different kinds of animals, but their existence or non-existence depends on the deeds which make the souls pass through a cycle of transmigration. And as these things have no independent existence, but are dependent on the transmigration for their being, they, coming into existence only through transmigration can bear no witness to the existence of God and we have no reason to believe that all these things will ever continue to exist on this earth. But if it be said that the fact that these things have been continuing to exist in the time past gives us reason to believe that will likewise continue to exist in the future; this argument far from lending any support to the Vedic doctrine, favors the opposite view, viz. that it is not through transmigration but by the freewill of God, that these twigs are brought into existence. The  Hindus admit that cows, horses, men and women have been existing for thousands of thousands of years. Now if their existence had been dependent on the accidents of transmigration, some of these would have disappeared from the earth at some time or the other.

 In short, the Vedic doctrine that the souls are not creatures of God and that the existence of all the living forms depends on the kind of deeds a man has done in his previous birth robs God of his attribute of Lordship.

Is Vedic God Merciful and Just?

The supposed Vedic doctrine of transmigration deprives the Divine Being of the noble attribute of mercy. The souls being their own gods, and not owing their existence to the Divine Being who is powerless to create souls or any of their powers, they are not the property of this namesake God and this God cannot claim to be their Master and Lord. According to the theory of transmigration, all the blessings one receives is a result of their own deeds and not because of the mercy of God. Therefore, Vedic God deserves no gratitude for the comforts of a soul. If man is a Master of a piece of land, he is at liberty to make use of it as he likes; he may use it for constructing kitchen or a toilet. The other party viz. the one that is the property of his master, can advance no claim and demand nothing from the Master as of right.

It is for this reason that those who truly know God, in spite of their wearied exertions, their constant prayers and their continuous almsgiving, throw themselves on the mercy of God. They do not consider their deeds of any account and never assert any right, nor claim to have done their duty to God, for, in reality, good is he who gives others the power to be good and that is none but God. So man cannot demand justice from God for any personal merit of his. According to the Noble Qur'an, God is a Master is the fullest sense of the word. He forgives as well as punishes those who deserve it. There can be no help for man if God would always punish sin. So, very often God forgives sins, obviously according  to a proper procedure, though He sometimes punishes them with a view to admonish the sinner and turn to Himself. The Noble Qur'an says,

وَمَا أَصَابَكُمْ مِنْ مُصِيبَةٍ فَبِمَا كَسَبَتْ أَيْدِيكُمْ وَيَعْفُو عَنْ كَثِيرٍ

Whatever misfortune happens to you, is because of the things your hands have wrought, and for many (of them) God grants forgiveness. [Surah ash Shoora 42:30]

The same chapter again mentions the following

وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَقْبَلُ التَّوْبَةَ عَنْ عِبَادِهِ وَيَعْفُو عَنِ السَّيِّئَاتِ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا تَفْعَلُونَ

God is the One that accepts repentance from His Servants and forgives sins: and He knows all that you do.

The whole Qur'an is filled with verses showing that God forgives sins when the sinner repents and does not persist in evil and prays for pardon. It is even said that God loves those who repent.

إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ التَّوَّابِينَ وَيُحِبُّ الْمُتَطَهِّرِينَ

Allah loves those who turn to Him in repentance and He loves those who keep themselves pure and clean.

In short it is inconsistent with the Divine attribute of forgiveness to punish every sin. He is not a mere Magistrate but He is Lord and Master. The Quran says,

مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ

Master of the Day of Judgment. [Surah al-Fatihah 1:4]

It is apparent that none can be called Lord or Master unless he has power both to punish and to pardon. Allah says in the Qur,an

عَذَابِي أُصِيبُ بِهِ مَنْ أَشَاءُ ۖ وَرَحْمَتِي وَسِعَتْ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

"With My punishment I visit whom I will; but My mercy extends to all things." [Surah A'araaf 7:156]

Again Allah says in the Quran

وَالَّذِينَ إِذَا فَعَلُوا فَاحِشَةً أَوْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ ذَكَرُوا اللَّهَ فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا لِذُنُوبِهِمْ وَمَنْ يَغْفِرُ الذُّنُوبَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَلَمْ يُصِرُّوا عَلَىٰ مَا فَعَلُوا وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ أُولَٰئِكَ جَزَاؤُهُمْ مَغْفِرَةٌ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ

And those who, having done something to be ashamed of, or wronged their own souls, earnestly bring Allah to mind, and ask for forgiveness for their sins,- and who can forgive sins except Allah?- and are never obstinate in persisting knowingly in (the wrong) they have done. For such the reward is forgiveness from their Lord. [Surah Aali Imran 3:135]

Thus, according to the Noble Quran , God being Lord and Master, is able to forgive as to punish, for He can be said to be Lord only if He is able to exercise His power both ways. Last but not the least, there is another verse in the Noble Qur'an which far surpasses others in holding out a promise of forgiveness to all His servants. Allah says,

قُلْ يَا عِبَادِيَ الَّذِينَ أَسْرَفُوا عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِهِمْ لَا تَقْنَطُوا مِنْ رَحْمَةِ اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَغْفِرُ الذُّنُوبَ جَمِيعًا ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ الْغَفُورُ الرَّحِيمُ

Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Such is the powerful and merciful Lord revealed to us by the Noble Quran and whose forgiving and merciful attributes are related in it. But the God presented by the Protestant Hindus/Arya Samjists/Agniveer is is a mere magistrate who punishes or acquits according to as a man is guilty or guiltless, and who does not possess any of the powers of a Lord. Far from it, he is worse off than even human masters. We can pardon the faults of our servants, but their Vedic God cannot pardon the fault of any sinner. Again we deal liberally with our servants and at times give them more than they deserve, but the Hindu's God cannot give His worshipper more than his due. It is for this reason that the Vedic God cannot give eternal salvation to any soul.

Swami Dayanand observes in Satyarth Prakash that God cannot forgive the sin of any man for to do so in injustice.

23. Does God forgive the sins of His devotees or not?

A.- No; for, He were to forgive their sins, His Law of Justice would be destroyed, and all men would become most sinful. Knowing that their sins will be forgiven, they will become fearless and will be greatly encourage to commit sins. For example, if the ruler of a country were to pardon the criminals, they would be encouraged to commit crimes greater still. For knowing well that the king will not punish them, they will be confident in their minds that they will get the king's pardon by folding their palms and doing other acts of humility. Even those who are not criminals, being no longer deterred by any fear of punishment, will begin to commit crimes. Therefore, it is but meet that God should give souls the just fruits of their deeds and not to forgive their sins.

[Satyarth Prakash (Agniveer version), Chapter 7, Question No. 23, Pg. 220-221]

Thus he admits that his God is no more than a judge; He is not Lord. Similarly, he says that God cannot give unlimited reward for the limited deeds of man. But if he is Lord, what harm is there if He gives unlimited reward for limited deeeds, for the actions of a Lord are not restricted by mere justice. For instance, if we are masters of some wealth, and desire to give out of it to beggars, none of the beggars has any right to complain if we give to some more than we give to others. For the same reason, no man has any right to demand justice from God. Since every thing that is man's is God's, no man is justified in claiming His judgment on the lines of justice, nor is it consistent with the dignity of God to vouchsafe to man the priviledge of demanding his rights from Him. Whatever reward God gives to humans is merely a bounty from Him. Our deeds are worthless. We cannot perform any good deeds except with the assistance of God. If the followers of the Vedas say that they acknowledge His Lordship, we cannot believe it. That is only a lip-assertion, for they do not really believe in Him as Lord.

Temporary Salvation of Vedic God

The inability to create new souls has involved the Vedic God in numberless difficulties. One effect of that inability is that He is powerless to grant everlasting salvation. After the souls have enjoyed heavenly bliss for a time, the Vedic God is compelled to turn them out of bliss. But in order to justify this act of His, He, before admitting a soul into the Vedic Salvation-house, keeps back a particle of its sin, and its apparently on account of that particle of sin that the soul is expelled from bliss. Again, it is only for that particle of sin that one soul is given the body of a man, another the body of a woman, another the body of a dog, another the body of a cow, another the body of a goat, another the body of a fowl, and another the body of the reptile that crawls in filth. the followers of the Vedas call their God just, but mark the justice of the Vedic God it was only for a particle of sin that some were made Rishis, and others were given the bodies of dogs and swine. Is there one among the followers of the Vedas; is there one among the newly sprung Agniveers, that extol the Vedas above every other book, who can explain this act of Vedic God?

Why cannot Vedic God everlasting Salvation and why He  feels constrained to turn out souls from bliss after they have lived there for a time is easy to guess. The real cause is His inability to create new souls. If he had granted everlasting Salvation to the souls, the result would have been that there would have been a constant drainage on the limited supply of souls and a time would have come when the whole supply of souls would have been totally exhausted. But on the other hand, the world cannot come to an end, according to the Vedic teaching.  Now the question arises, how the Vedic God is going to keep the world going? Vedic God is powerless to create new souls; and the old souls have all achieved bliss.

The Vedic God is on the horns of dilemma. Either He must take the unjust and cruel step of depriving the souls of the Salvation which they have earned, not through any favor of the Vedic God, but with the sweat of their brows, or the world would come to an end.  Of these two alternatives, He adopts the former, and the poor souls are turned out of bliss to keep the world going. Thus it is really through His own inability to create new souls that Vedic God cannot everlasting salvation to the souls. He is powerless to give a Salvation which should last for ever. But the Vedic God tries to conceal His weakness, as worldly men try to hide heir powerlessness by taking recourse to different stratagems.

Unwilling that His inability to grant everlasting Salvation should be made known, He resorts to a stratagem. He reserves a particle of sin when admitting a soul into bliss, and apparently on account of that particle of sin He turns the soul out of bliss at an appointed time. Is not such conduct disgusting? Was it not in his power to purify the soul even of that particle of sin by imprisoning it in another body for a short period, as He had purified it of other sins by keeping it shut up in various bodies for along time.  Their sin was so insignificant that it was overlooked at the time of the souls entry into bliss, but now for that very sin the soul is being turned out to pass through another series of transmigrations. Such is the Vedic God and such is the Salvation which He grants to His creatures.

Again, an attempt is made to conceal the inability of the Vedic God to grant everlasting salvation by saying that the deeds of man being limited must have limited reward. However, this is only a lame excuse and a desperate attempt to hide the weakness of the Vedic God.  Actually, the solution to this excuse has been provided by the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). He said,

إنما الأعمال با النيات وإنما لكل امرئ ما نوى

Actions shall be judged by the intentions and every person shall have only what he intends. [Bukhari Book 1: Hadith 1]

The righteous people do not intend to worship God and perform righteous deeds only for a limited time. Their zeal to adore God and perform righteous deeds is permanently implanted in their hearts, and if their worship is cut short by death, they are not to be blamed for it, for it is God, and not they, that brings death on them. So they must be rewarded according to their intentions and get everlasting salvation.

Swami Dayanand's illogical arguments in favour of temporary salvation analyzed

In replying to a question of why Everlasting Salvation is not possible, the Swami gives the following arguments (Satyarth Prakash, Chapter 9, Question No. 13, Pg. 286). I will analyze these arguments and how they insult the majesty of God.

1. "... in the place wherein emancipated souls live - otherwise called Heaven - there will be a great deal of hustling, crowding and jostling, as there will be no end of increase in the population for the simple reason that immigration will be so great, whilst emigration will be nil."

My review: This proves that the Salvation House of Vedic God is finite and since Salvation in Vedic Religion is merging with God, it implies Vedic God Himself is finite. He cannot even manage this over crowding properly and thus Vedic God becomes a poor manager. He therefore, kicks out a certain number of souls to make space for the newly emanicipated souls, and avoid over crowding.

2. "...there can be no perception of pain. For example, you would not know sweet taste from bitter or bitter from sweet, if you would only taste one of them - sweet or bitter - all your life-time, because it is only by comparing the flavours of things possessing opposite tastes that we form an idea of both. If a man were always to eat and drink sweet things only, he would not enjoy them so much as one who tastes all kinds of food."

My review: This shows that the Salvation House of Vedic religion is not only a place of bliss but a place of pain also because without pain, bliss is nothing as without bitterness, sweetness is meaningless. What a great logic of the Swami! Therefore, in the Salvation House of Vedic God, there would be friendship as well as enmity, relief as well as fear, enjoyment as well as disease. This salvation can only be suitable for the Swami and his followers.

3. "...God were to give the soul unlimited happiness as the fruit if its actions that are limited (finite), His justice would be destroyed. A wise man does not put on his man's shoulders a load heavier than he can carry. If a man can only carry a load of eighty pounds and his master puts a weight of eight hundred pounds on his head, he is certainly worthy of censure. Similarly, it would not be right for God to load the soul, possessed of finite power and finite knowledge, with everlasting happiness."

My review: Comparing Salvation to a burden demonstrates the real nature of Vedic Salvation i.e. Vedic Salvation cannot develop a person spiritually but it is such a burden, that the less you bear it the better for you.

4. "...if you say that God creates new souls, the material out of which He creates them will eventually run short;"

My review: This argument of the Swami also makes it clear that the reason for not being able to grant everlasting salvation to the souls is that by doing so, the souls will escape from the unjust and unreasonable dominion of the Vedic God, which would render Him jobless, as He is unable to create any souls.

5. "...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. It follows, therefore, that this arrangement alone - viz., Emancipation and then return from it - is the right one."

My review: Swami ji is right. The fear of the Vedic God that He will become bankrupt is a genuine fear. Those people who do not know any creative art and are jobless take extreme care of spending the free wealth they receive in inheritance. Similarly, the Vedic God who has no creative power is very cautious in managing the limited supply of souls.

6. "...there is no man who would prefer life-imprisonment (or hanging) to imprisonment for a shorter term. There being no return from Emancipation, it differs from life-imprisonment only in this respect that one has not to work there."

My review: This shows that Moksha/Mukti is just an imprisonment, the less the better. In fact no Moksha/Mukti is the best. God save us from this Moksha.

7. "...With regard to Emancipation as absorption into God (which is the plea of salvation according to some people) it is like death by drowning one-self into the sea."

My review: If Emanicipation by absoption into God is analogous to death by drowing, still it is better than the prospective Salvation of the Swami where the poor soul will be caught in a whirlpool (God) fighting for life and crying for help.

May the true God protect every soul from such a terrible catastrophe labelled as Salvation.

Vedic scheme of Salvation Disappointing

Of all the religions of the world, the Vedic religion is the only one which represents God as mean and unforgiving. Regrettably for man, He punishes the sins of man most severely, but He lacks the attribute of forgiveness and does not forgive the smallest fault of man, however desperately he may cry for mercy and however sincerely he may repent of his sins. The reason why He is shorn of the noble attributes of mercy and forgiveness is plain enough. There must be as many obstacles to the entry of a soul into bliss as possible to prevent a rapid exhaustion of the limited supply of souls, which though self-existent and co-eternal with Him, have in some mysterious way been placed under His power. Now, if He forgives their sins, this expedites their entry into bliss, but this is inconsistent with His own interests. Besides, if a soul is once forgiven, it cannot be punished again, for to inflict punishment after forgiveness is ludicrous. Hence, if a soul enters bliss after it has all its sins forgiven it, it may reasonably claim and eternal salvation, for a forgiven soul cannot be re-subjected to a life of pain. But an eternal salvation must involve an exhaustion of the whole stock of souls, and if the whole stock of souls is exhausted, the world must come to an end, for the Vedic God is unable to create a single new soul. This is the reason why the Vedic God is represented as utterly unable to pardon the slightest fault of man.

It is obvious that man is weak and he cannot remain completely free from sin owing to his natural weakness. He stumbles at many steps. But the Vedas have no mercy on man and have offered him no way for salvation. They have to offer only one means of salvation which is characterized by extreme vindictiveness and malevolence. Man has to pass through and unending sequence of transmigrations even for the slightest of sins and this notwithstanding the fact that the sinner deserves pity, because his weak faculties which have made him stumble are not from him but were created by God Himself, and He ought to have made some allowance for this circumstance. But, according to the Vedic belief, God, in appointing punishment for the sinner, has not taken this circumstance into consideration and has totally ignored His own share in the matter.

According to the Vedic Religion, salvation is achievable only when a man has become perfectly cleansed from sin. This condition for the attainment of salvation, when judged by the standard of human nature, is one which is impossible to fulfil. Until man has paid all that is due to God, he cannot claim to have scrupulously discharged all the duties of obedience that he owes to Him. But it is evident that whatever degree of perfection a man may attain he cannot be adequately grateful to God for His unlimited favors and cannot fully obey His commands. So, if salvation depends only on this that a man should discharge His duties to God as he ought to do, there should not be the slightest blemish in his obedience to God and that he should never err, then the attainment of Salvation is an utter impossibility. No man will ever accomplish such a high degree of perfection as may entitle him Salvation. It is even said “to err is human”. Such a condition for salvation could not have been imposed by God, for it is beyond the power of man to fulfill it and the laws of nature falsify it. How beautifully Prophet Muhammad has pointed this out in one of his sayings as follows:

قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ لن ينجي أحدا منكم عمله ‏"‏‏.‏ قالوا ولا أنت يا رسول الله قال ‏"‏ ولا أنا، ‏‏‏‏إلا أن يتغمدني الله برحمة، ‏‏‏‏سددوا وقاربوا، ‏‏‏‏واغدوا وروحوا، ‏‏‏‏وشىء من الدلجة‏.‏ والقصد القصد تبلغوا

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "The mere deeds of anyone of you will not save you." They said, "Even you (will not be saved by your deeds), O Allah's Apostle?""Not even I (will be saved) unless and until Allah bestows His Mercy on me. Therefore, do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately, and worship Allah in the forenoon and in the afternoon and during a part of the night, and always adopt a middle, moderate, regular course whereby you will reach your target (Paradise)." He said, [Bukhari, Book 76 (Kitab ar Riqaaq); Hadith 470]

The hard-heartedness of the Vedic God knows no bounds; He knows no mercy.

Imitation of Divine Morals

The perfection of man consists in the imitation of divine morals. Now, according to the Vedic Religion, God never forgives the sins of any man and is a stranger to benevolence, generosity and kindness. Hence it is the duty of the followers of the Vedas to harden their hearts as much as possible, never to think of forgiveness and to regard benevolence and kindness as sins, for it is the height of wickedness to adopt morals which are against the morals of God. But such will not be the morals of a true Muslim; for a Muslim reads in the Qurán that God accepts repentance and forgives sins. He does not make his forgiveness conditional on the fact that some innocent person should be hanged, as the imaginary God of Christians does, but He forgives sins merely on repentance and praying for pardon. So, a true Muslim also forgives those who wrong him. A true Muslim also deals by all men kindly and benevolently, for his God is also benevolent, kind and merciful. But how can we expect high morals from those whose God knows nothing but malice? What high morals can such a God teach others?

God as Creator

It is disappointing that God who created the whole world and who is all powerful is judged by the standard by which His creatures are judged. It is for this reason that it is said that God cannot create soul and matter. He is represented only as a baker who collects His materials from difference sources and bakes a loaf. He buys flour from the flour seller, brings water from the well and borrows fire from a neighbour and is then able to bake a loaf. The Vedic God is no better than a baker, for He also depends on readymade souls and matter for His creation.

The Hindus are wont to address God as their father (Parampita), but how God can be their father is quite incomprehensible. Their souls will are their properties and the matter which composes their bodies with all its properties as uncreated by Him. How then can He claim to be their father? Is He their father in the sense in which one is the father of his adopted son? Believing their souls with all their faculties and the matter composing their bodies with all its properties as self-existence, they cannot call God their Father.

If God is not the creator of the soul, nor of any of its faculties, what right has He to exact worship from it? A Vedic Hindu cannot say like a Muslim ‘All praise is due to God’. When God is not the Creator of his soul or the matter that composes his body, how can He be said to be deserving of all praise? Again, the Vedic religion says that man earns his salvation by the dint of his own arms and all the good that he receives in this world or the next is the pure fruit of his own deeds, which he did with the aid of his own uncreated powers and independently of God’s help. But when there is no bounty which God grants him through His own Grace why should he praise God at all? He has no cause to be grateful to God and he need not thank Him. Nor is it imaginable how a follower of the Vedic religion can worship God? Worship consists of two kinds. The first form of worship consists in praying to God for forgiveness. Man, when worshipping God, prostrates himself on the threshold of the Divine Master, confesses his sins, and asks His pardon most humbly and submissively and implores for Divine assistance to enable him to walk in the paths of righteousness and virtue and expresses his determined resolution to abstain from evil ways. The second form of worship lies in remembering God by contemplating all His excellences and perfections and being occupied in praising Him, mentioning all his qualities. These are two kinds of worship, but a Vedic follower can perform neither form of worship. For according to Him praying for forgiveness is quite useless for God is unable to forgive even a single sin. As to the second form of worship, a Vedic follower does not regard His God as without partner, for according to His belief, the souls and matter are partners with God in eternity. Nor is he a creator of the souls and matter and all their powers and properties, for if he had had a perfect knowledge of the souls and matter and their properties, He ought to have been able to make them. But far from making them, He cannot even add a single faculty to the faculties which they already possess. He has not made souls or matter and, therefore, He cannot be supposed to have full knowledge of their faculties and powers. Does this ignorant Vedic God deserve worship?

No Stimulus for Progress

In fact to deny the divine attribute of forgiveness is to bar the door to spiritual progress. Everybody will admit that man is not born perfect and he stands in need of gradual development. For instance, no man is born with his intellectual faculties fully developed, but they gradually develop as he advances in his age and experience. Similarly, man is also morally imperfect in the first stage of his life. Most children are prone to beat others for slight offenses, and show a readiness to abuse other children and to tell lies. Some are even in the habit of backbiting, stealing and envying. When they are in the vigour of youth, they are mostly overcome by their evil propensities and permit themselves to commit unspeakable deeds. In short, in the case of most men, the first stage of life is defiled by many an unholy act. When men pass the first stage which is marked by evil deeds, the good among them turn to God, repent of their evil deeds, and abandon their evil courses, and become anxious to make the garments of their nature pure. Such is the brief description of the life of most men. Take the case of children. Many times we overlook their faults and forgive them. It gives them the impetus to be good in the future. We also have seen cases when a child is always punished by the teacher for all minor faults; he becomes stubborn and develops feelings of enmity and revenge. Now if it is true that God does not listen to repentance, this means that He does not want to grant salvation to anybody. Now when the behaviour of the Vedic God is so disappointing and when it is settled that when once a man has committed a sin, he must be put In some miserable body, it is vain for man, desiring to deliver himself from the bondage of sin and to attain the nearness of God and to be included in the elect of God in this very life, to make any attempt in that direction. How can he make any promise to God to abstain from evil deeds in the future when he is certain that in the next life he must be a dog, a cat, a pig, or an insect Thus the doctrine that God is unable to forgive any sin is an insurmountable barrier to spiritual progress. Does this God who cannot be as smart as a school teacher, deserve any worship?

In conclusion, I regret to say that the Vedic God is nude of all the high and noble qualities which the God of Islam possesses. Souls and matter are co-eternal with God, therefore, Vedic God is not without a partner in His quality of being eternal. He can create neither soul nor matter, hence He is denied the title of being the Creator. Again, every enjoyment and every comfort that a man enjoys is the result of his own deeds and there is nothing which man is given graciously, hence the Vedic God cannot be spoken of as Rahmaan (Compassionate), Raheem (Merciful), and Raziq (Sustainer) Nor is the Vedic God Lord, for he cannot act as a Lord in His dealings with the human beings. In short, the Vedic God is devoid of all noble qualities and does not deserve the name of God. Nor is there, in fact, any proof of God's existence from the Vedic point of view. The relationship of the Vedic God and Vedic followers is only that of a grocer and customer, who serve each others interests. Actually it is a favour on the part of the Vedic followers that they acknowledge Him as God. Though, the Hindus owe no favour to God, and have nothing to thank Him for, yet the Vedic God should be thankful to the Hindus for their acknowledging Him when they could well do without Him.