Personal or Impersonal God

Last night - during a get-together - an old question surfaced again:
"I am wrestling between the two opposite thoughts we quite often hear in the Satsangs: 

One is that God is a neutral power, which is a quiet witness who never intervenes.

And on the other hand, we hear that God is very loving and kind - who hears and fulfills all our prayers. 

Aren't these both claims opposite and contradictory to each other?"

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I personally do not see much contradiction between the two.

They are rather complimentary to each other - depending on how we think and which state of mind we are in.

Let's look at both theories and their apparent difference.

         Impersonal, Niraakar, abstract God versus Personal - kind and benevolent Lord:

As I understand, Bhagavad Geeta, Gurubani, and the Nirankari mission support and teach the Vedantic philosophy of Niraakar and Nirgun Brahm which is 'Impersonal God '.

Gurubani says: 

"Roop na rang na rekh kichh, Trai gun te Prabh bhinn" 

God has neither any form nor shape - nor any of the three qualities"
That means neither anger nor compassion or kindness. In other words, Supreme God is a silent witness.

The entire Nirankari philosophy is outlined in the first Shabad of Avtar Bani;
"Roop rang te Rekhon nyaare, Tainu Lakh Pranam karaan" 

                   (Salutation to the Formless, attributeless God)

Bhagvad Gita says :

        "Nadattey kasya chit Paapam, nachaiv sukritam Vibhuh"
Meaning "God neither punishes anyone for their sins nor rewards for their good deeds."
He is just a quiet witness.

It also indirectly implies that we have freedom of choice - that we are responsible for our actions and that no one intervenes in any way.

This is the view of a Brahm Gyani and a Nirankari who believes in the formless Niraakar and Nirguna Parmatma (God).

However, the problem with this belief is that most of us can understand this intellectually - but practically it is extremely difficult to follow.
We cannot always feel, in day-to-day life, that "I am That; a part of Almighty God and in full control"

We can not really see every situation, good or bad simply as an illusion.
We can not always detach ourselves from everything by saying that “I am not a body and nothing of this world affects me".

Most of us, most of the time, feel that we are more or less helpless and we need someone to pray to - who will listen to us, fulfill our desires and take care of us whatever we need.

So, instead of an impersonal God, most of us like the idea of believing in a personal God.

                     Three forms or states of Brahm
The Sanatan Indian philosophy, besides teaching about the abstract Impersonal God, also explains its three forms, namely:
1. Nirgun Brahm : Niraakar and Nirguna
(Formless with no attributes) A silent witness.

2. Ishwar or Paramatma: Niraakar but Sagun Brahm :
Formless God with qualities such as compassion, love and
kindness.

3. Bhagvaan : Sakaar and Sagun:
God in physical form with all the above-mentioned qualities such as the personal Gurus or Avtaars.

First would be considered the Impersonal God while second and third would be the 'Personal God'.
Personal God can be "Niraakar " or 'Sakaar '
Are they different? 

 No.
Do we have to choose one or the other? 

 No.
In reality, all three are the same in different forms. 

It depends on how we look at it.
Goswami Tulasi Das says;
“Agunahi Sagunahi nahin kachhu Bhedaa”

                                      &
“Jo gun Rahit, Sagun soi kaise
Jal, Hima, Upal Bilag nahin jaise”
Meaning: There is no difference between Nirgun Brahm and Sakaar Brahm.
How could that be? Just as water, ice, and steam are not different. They are simply different forms of the same.”

Which belief is good for us? 

Depends on who we are and which level we are at.
Dr. Radhakrishnan divides humanity into three categories.
1. Intellectual
2. Emotional
3. Action-oriented
The first two would be relative here;
Intellectual or Gyani & Emotional Bhakta.

For the first ones, who have the knowledge and control over 'self ' - the path of Nirgun and Niraakaar Brahm is fine. 

But the Bhaktas who are emotional, may not be able to accept and handle the idea of an Impersonal God who is not going to do anything for them. So the second or third path might be better for them.

Lord Krishna says:

"ye yathaa maam prapadyantay taans tathaiva bhajaamyaham

mama vartmanuvartante manuṣhyah paartha sarvashah"

                           (Bhagvad Gita 4:11)

"In whatever way people worship and surrender unto Me, I reciprocate accordingly. 

O son of Pritha - knowingly or unknowingly, everyone follows My path."

In other words - However one worships, He accepts their devotion."

In the end, it all comes down to acceptance and surrendering in whatever way one wants to.
A Gyani will say "It happened the way it happened because of my Karma. God is simply the witness".
A Bhakta will say “It happened because God wanted it to happen this way."
If it happened in his favor, a Bhakta thinks:" He gave it to me because I prayed".
If not in favor: "I prayed but He did not give it to me because, for whatever reason, He did not want it or He has something better."

A Gyani will say "There is no need to pray”.
“Bin boleyaan sab kichh jaanadaa, Kis aage keechai Ardaas”
                               (Gurubani)
A Gyaani thinks “Whatever is going to happen, will happen according to my Karma", and he accepts it.

While Bhaktas find satisfaction in praying.

They believe: 

"Jo maangoon Thakur apnay te, soi soi devai"

 (Whatever I ask, my Lord gives me)

                     and 

"Keeta lodiye kumm so hair pai aakhiye

Kaaraaj day svaar Satguru sach Sakhiye"

                          (Gurbani)

(If you need something done, ask - pray to the Lord and it will be done - your desire will be fulfilled) 

They pray and accept the outcome as "His will.

Unlike a worldly person who will complain and get frustrated or angry, the Gyani and the Bhakta, both will maintain their peace by accepting everything, thru their own respective belief.

I cannot say which would be the right belief for someone else. It depends on each individual's intellectual and mental-emotional state.

Lord Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita:

       " Teshaam Gyani Nitya yukta, EkBhaktir Vishishyate"

“The 'Gyani Bhakta ' is my favorite one” 

- the combination of both. 

As Vishishtha Advaitvaad endorses and advocates the Advaita - Nondualism ideology - but at the same time strongly recommends the Bhakti - faith, devotion, and prayer - until one reaches the level of oneness with the Lord. 

                                       ‘Rajan Sachdeva’