Wait a minute, the means I take work for me. Hitler invaded, Ted Bundy killed, and they were thrilled about it. Any purpose assigned me by God is no different than yours, be happy.
not really
as I mentioned before, the pursuit of happiness is a given.
the means you take to fulfill that propensity is your responsibility
Yet for some reason I can't be happy if I do it a certain way?
An obvious hierarchy exists.
Not even your most dogmatic liberal would suggest that Ted Bundy's means for happiness are just as valid as anyone else's.
Then happiness is not mine or anyone's purpose. You just gave a purpose for God, which is to give us a purpose, not a happy situation at all.
perhaps if you also assign that the purpose of the conditioned world is the best god has on offer for the pursuit of happiness
If God wants us to be happy then is it safe to say He is not?
not at all
Of the many distinguishing aspects between god and the living entity, god can lay claim to being fully independent. Regardless of whether we are conditioned or liberated, our scope for life/happiness is always involved in issues of contingency
Or should we strive to be as happy as He is?
We should strive to be as happy as he is. Meaning that we both share the same nature (eternal, blissful and cognizant). If we take it that happiness requires that we impersonate god (ie possess opulence with a mood of being the independent enjoyer) we lose scope of our constitutional position (aka temporary, distressed and full of ignorance)
If I have two nations full of happy people fighting each other for the right to maintain their happiness then I, the unhappy one, may have to pick up a gun one day and use it just to keep you and your fellow revelers happy.
conflict is inherent to the material world since.
You might have noticed that the BG is set on a battle field
BG 1.32 O Govinda, of what avail to us are a kingdom, happiness or even life itself when all those for whom we may desire them are now arrayed on this battlefield? O Madhusüdana, when teachers, fathers, sons, grandfathers, maternal uncles, fathers-in-law, grandsons, brothers-in-law and other relatives are ready to give up their lives and properties and are standing before me, why should I wish to kill them, even though they might otherwise kill me? O maintainer of all living entities, I am not prepared to fight with them even in exchange for the three worlds, let alone this earth. What pleasure will we derive from killing the sons of Dhrtarastra?
Would your band of merry men be so inclined to return the favor to someone so unhappy as I?
If fighting is your nature, you will act according to that nature.
BG 18.59 If you do not act according to My direction and do not fight, then you will be falsely directed. By your nature, you will have to be engaged in warfare.
Happy is so subjective, so different for everyone
Sure that's the material world for you - no scope for co-operative living. You can't even eat a cake without some ant trying to rain on your parade by eating it before you.
What kind of god gives a shit about a little bag of water's happiness?
Depends on what scope one has for happiness. If you're looking for happiness in the pursuit of propriety, distinction etc then sure, god doesn't give a shit about that (or more specifically, he assigns the laws of the conditioned world to facilitate such futile pursuits).
If one is looking for happiness in the pursuit of re-instating one's spiritual nature then he will walk 10 000 steps for every one of yours.
