Why did God create this illusion and send us souls to reap our karmas birth after birth?

You are selfish and this selfish mind on seeing its own selfishness reacts to change itself. Now, is it the unselfish mind that changes or is it that the selfish mind? The mind that is unselfish cannot desire to become unselfsh obviously.

The selfish mind also cannot become unselfish. Because the isn't it the selfish mind that perpetuates the thought to become unselfish. But can the selfish mind think an unselfish thought?

What instrument of change do you have? The mind again. Can dust be cleansed by dust.

Can the mind change the fact of selfishness? It can't because it is occupied with creating the pattern for unselfishness and is not really attending to selfhsisness. Its running away from what is.

What you are doing is just changing the mask. Beneath you are just the same. All this is the way of the mind, of the ego to perpetuate its existence.

The self centred activity of the mind has no end. All change here is superficial. Positive and negative karmas are both like chains, positive karma may be a golden chain but a chain.

If enlightenment is your aim, you need to renounce karma althogether, positive or negative. The problem is not the karma but the self, the ego. "Be an island unto yourself", said the Buddha and how true it is.

There is no god to help you, its just a psychological crunch, a projection of your mind. It is very well known that mind has the ability to project images, like in dreams. When you concentrate hard on an image, most probably you ill experience it.

Zen Buddhists call this makyo. It just a dirty trick of the mind. There are the following arguments to consider against the theory of God: 1.

Only those things can be said to be created which are composite. Assuming that the world is a composite entity. Then it must be having some simple constituents which would be indivisable further and cannot be regarded as composite as it is through the combination of simple elements that the composite is formed.

So why not assume that the world was formed out of these simple elements and not through the action of god. 2. The world is co extensive with time and space.

Can we talk about a space in the world where there is arise to acquire something unacquired but how can a perfect god have desires? No space. Imagining things outside the boundary of space itself includes the idea of space.

So where was god residing when he created the world. 3. A motive also has to be ascribed to god in which case we have to assume that he has desires.

And if he has a motive that he is like any limited being. Its a sign of imperfection. The injustice that we see prevailing in the world is also a reason to consider whether there actually is a just god or not?

4. On your inference that the world is created because it is a cause you extend the law of causation to non empirical realms which is unwarrantable as you assume again that the world is outside the law of causation and yet implied by it which is contradictory. 5.

Creation requires will. Is this will eternal or non eternal. If it is eternal then either there will be creation always ot there will be non creation always as that which is eternal cannot change.

If it is non eternal then God may be said to be conditioned by time and space. 6. Creation is an act and requires a body but God according to you is bodiless.

Again if God has a body it would be finite and material. Again a bodiless god cannot create the world as we he would have no means to do that. If god creates the world out of himself then even he gets corrupted while creating the world and ceases to be god, if he can remain unaffected by his creation out of himself even then the theory remains implausible because you have to assume parts of god and that would make him a composite entity.

If he creates the world out of pre existing matter, then he cannot be infinite because there is another eternal entity besides him. The hypothesis of God is therefore untenable and worth rejection. Hence the idea of god has been classified as wrong view.

Again even saints can direct you, show you the way, thats what Buddha said, and thus he was called Tathagata or the one who shows the way. No one can carry you to moksha. One can provide food to the hungry but to satisfy hunger no one can eat on his behalf.

Consider also the words of Swami Vivekananda, "The old theory said that he is an atheist who does not beleive in god, the new theory says that one who does not beleive in himself is an atheist.

In the above line, you used the word "gods", while below you use "god". The meaning becomes different. Gods is used for so many deities (DEVATA's).

They are not considered to be perfect, though they are pious & good. The word God, in Hindi is known as PARAMESHWAR, BHAGAWAN, PARAMAATMA, etc. He is perfect. As far as KARM & MOKSHA are concerned, a common man doesn't want MOKSHA.

He even doesn't know the meaning of MOKSHA. He wants several other things. In fact he really doesn't know, what he wants.

Throughout the life he runs behind so many things & still doesn't become clear, what he wants. & why SATKARM's hinder the MOKSHA, you will be able to understand, only when you would completely grasp the knowledge, that is there in our religion - in Ved's, in Geeta, in Upanishads'. Aum Namah Shivay.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.