Advaita from First Principles (II): Why EVERYTHING has to be Predestined!

In the previous post I had mentioned how the two basic powers of God of Omnipotence and Omniscience lead to certain startling logical conclusions. We pick up on Omniscience now and see where it leads us.

“Omniscience” means “all knowing”, as we all know (!). Again, if we believe in God, we have no option but to grant Him full Omniscience. Actually, every doctrine in the world happily attributes Omniscience to God. And then balks in horror from the logical consequence of the same, in that everything in the world becomes immediately predestined. There cannot be any “free-will” with respect to actions then for any entity in the world. Arthur Osborne explained it well in his quite brilliant editorial in the Mountain Path, April 1967, Pg 93.

“If anything exists already in the Divine foreknowledge of an Omniscient God, then it cannot be changed by man’s free will; if not then God does not know what is going to happen and is not Omniscient. If it is a cinema the whole story is already on the film, what has not yet been shown on the screen as well as what has been, even though the audience does not know what is coming; if it is an impromptu television show the operator also does not know what will come next”.

Our life and history is nothing but a film, half played out and half in the can, and not an impromptu TV show wherein we have the freedom to do and say whatever we wish. And necessarily EVERY small thing too in the world then has to be predestined - the shaking of the telephone wire in the wind, the falling of a leaf from a tree; for, who is to say which is a “small” act, which need not be predestined? We bend down to pick the small leaf that falls, and the bullet intended for us whizzes harmlessly overhead; and thus a “big” act is averted. Very simply, if ALL is not predestined, then God does not know what is going to happen the next moment, and loses His power of Omniscience. And if we deny Omniscience to God, the Entity then immediately becomes unviable, and we are essentially saying that there is no “God”.

Which then leads us on to the other most vexed question in theology - of “free will”; if every act in the world is predestined, what free will does a woman/man have? Every religion has tackled this question differently and all the multifarious approaches are beyond the scope of this post. Herein we focus on the Advaitic position and Sri Bhagavan’s teachings on the subject.

Sri Bhagavan repeatedly affirmed that every ACT in the world is predetermined, whether the act be “small” or “big”; however, free will is available to us in that we can choose the mental attitude to have when faced with the unfolding of these continuous and endless predetermined acts. The Great Dealer will deal the cards to us from our store of accumulated karma, we can then choose to be happy or sad with the event with a sense of identification or not. If we do not hold on to our sense of agency, eschew any sense of “doer-ship”, then whether the act be good or bad, the endless chain of karma will snap - leading to freedom. 

[From “Day by Day with Bhagavan”, Pg 77, (on 3.1.46, afternoon)]

“It is true that the work meant to be done by us will be done by us. But it is open to us to be free from the joys or pains, pleasant or unpleasant consequences of the work, by not identifying ourselves with the body or that which does the work. If you realize your true nature and know that it is not you that do any work, you will be unaffected by the consequences of whatever work the body may be engaged in according to destiny or past karma or divine plan, however you may call it. You are always free and there is no limitation of that freedom.”

[From “Day by Day with Bhagavan”, Pg 78, (on 4.1.46, afternoon)]

“With reference to Bhagavan’s answer [above] to Mrs. Desai’s question on the evening of 3.1.46, I [Devaraja Mudaliar] asked Him, ‘Are only the important events in a man’s life, such as his main occupation or profession, predetermined, or are trifling acts in his life, such as taking a cup of water or moving from one place in the room to another, also predetermined?’

Bhagavan: “Yes, everything is predetermined”

I: ‘Then what responsibility, what free will has man?’

Bhagavan: “What for then does the body come into existence? It is designed for doing the various things marked out for execution in this life. The whole programme is chalked out. ‘Not an atom moves except by His Will’ expresses the same truth, whether you say ‘Does not move except by His Will’, or ‘Does not move except by karma’. As for freedom for man, he is always free not to identify himself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasures and pains consequent on the body’s activities.”

[From “Day by Day with Bhagavan”, Pg 211]

“It does not really rest with a man whether he goes to this place or that or whether he gives up his duties or not. All that happens according to destiny. All the activities that the body is to go through are determined when it first comes into existence. It does not rest with you to accept or reject them. The only freedom you have is to turn your mind inward and renounce activities there.”

[From “Mountain Path 1982, Pg 23; “Quotations from the Maharshi” noted down by C. V. S. Aiyer when he visited Sri Skandasramam on 19.6.1918]

“A man might have performed many karmas in his previous births. A few of them alone will be chosen for this birth and he will have to enjoy their fruits in this birth. It is something like a slide show, where the projectionist picks a few slides to be exhibited at a performance, the remaining slides being reserved for another performance. It is possible for a man to destroy his karma by acquiring knowledge of the Self. The different karmas are the slides, karmas being the result of past experiences, and the mind is the projector. The projector must be destroyed, and there will be no reflection, and no samsara.”

[From “Conscious Immortality”, Pg 130]

“Individual human beings have to suffer their karma, but Iswara manages to make the best of it for His purpose. God manipulates the fruit of karma; He does not add or take away from it. A human being’s subconscious state is a warehouse of good and bad karma. Iswara chooses from this warehouse what will best suit the person’s spiritual evolution at the time, whether pleasant or painful. Thus nothing is arbitrary.

Surrender and all will be well. Throw all responsibility onto Iswara. Do not bear the burden. What can destiny do then? If one surrenders to Iswara, there will be no cause for anxiety. If you are protected by Iswara, nothing will affect you. The sense of relief is in direct proportion to the reliance on Iswara or the Self.

When a person surrenders as a slave to the Divine, eventually there is a realization that all one’s actions are the actions of Iswara. The sense of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ are lost. This is what is meant by ‘doing the will of God’.”

[From “Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi”, Pg 599; Talk No. 643]

D: The Gita seems to emphasise karma. For Arjuna is persuaded to fight; Sri Krishna Himself set the example by an active life of great exploits.

M: The Gita starts saying that you are not the body, that you are not therefore the karta. One should act without thinking that oneself is the actor. The actions go on despite his egolessness. The person has come into manifestation for a certain purpose. That purpose will be accomplished whether he considers himself the actor or not.

D: What is karma yoga? Is it non-attachment to karma or its fruit?

M:  Karma yoga is that yoga in which the person does not arrogate to himself the function of being the actor. The actions go on automatically. The question [about non-attachment to the fruits of actions] arises only if there is the actor. It is being all along said that you should not consider yourself the actor.

D: So karma yoga is kartrtva buddhi rahita karma – action without the sense of doership.

M: Yes. Quite so.

[From “Living by the Words of Bhagavan”, Pg 238; Annamalai Swami once asked that if one has a desire for events to happen in a particular way, will they end that way].

Sri Bhagavan said: “If a person has done a lot of punya in the past, right at this moment whatever he thinks will happen. But he will not be changing what is destined. Whatever he desires will conform to what is to happen anyway. His desires will conform to that which was already determined by the desire or will of the Supreme.”

Advaita from First Principles (I): Why is Duality impossible?

[At the outset let me mention that, occasionally, philosophical discussion necessitates opposition to one particular doctrine or the other. So when I write that key features of “Duality” do not logically follow, it does not imply that I am being disrespectful towards that faith and its adherents. Far from it. Only the doctrine is being tested to see if it withstands the force of commonsense, simple reasoning. And we may remember, for every faith be it Dual or Non-Dual, it is the associated practices that are the more important factor for spiritual advancement.

So why bother at all with doctrine someone may ask? Why is it important that a doctrine be logically cohesive? I would say - because then it leads to a solid conviction in the teachings. So, if my Guru has taught me the Advaita position that I am basically made by God from God-stuff, I accept it at a particular level alright, but being an immature sadhaka still have a lingering doubt as to - how is it really possible? And if logical argument can help me achieve full conviction in the teachings, hopefully spiritual advancement will follow quickly].

And so let me ask …

Why can the Paramatman (God), logically, NOT be different from the Atman (individual Jiva)? That every person, animal, insect, sand or even the water in the gutter has necessarily got to be made by God from His Own Stuff? In effect, why is Duality impossible?

The point arose from a discussion I had recently with a follower of a very popular Bhakti oriented group in India. Their ideology is not particularly different from other such groups and goes something like this: There is an all powerful God, Paramatman.  Then there are individual beings, Jivas, who are made of a baser material which is necessarily other than God-material, and who have something called an Atman within them; the Atman is separate from Paramatman and is like a chip off the old block so as to say, a tree grown from the seed of Paramatman, but intrinsically separate, and to evermore remain separate; Paramatman resides away somewhere in heaven or an equivalent place, far away from the madding crowd, but in-charge of everything.

The separation of the material of which world-objects are made of and the individual Atman from God, is necessitated by one of the most vexed problems in theology – the problem of evil, of bad characters like murderers etc, and the existence of dirty, filthy material like excreta in the world. How can the immaculate and perfect God exist inside a murderer or rapist? How can gutter water or excreta be also made of God-stuff? How could God wage war causing untold suffering, torture and death to millions? The simple way out then is to say – that objects of the world like gutter-water and excreta are not made of God-stuff. Atman is like a seed planted from the mother tree – God, but not directly from God Himself. Just like a plant can be short and bony, or tall and leafy, Atman can thus be more God oriented (i.e. for a good person), or can be less God oriented too (and be a bad person then). But it is absolutely separate from God who is the only Perfect Being.

Sadly, however, the problem of evil, torture and excreta in the world needs to be addressed in some other way. For, as the following discussion will show, the definition of “Paramatman”, God, itself ensures that Dualism of any sort becomes impossible. Let us examine how:

For a start, we can all agree that the 2 basic and unarguable powers of Paramatman or God are Omniscience and Omnipotence. That is, God is all knowing, and He is also all powerful. Each one of these powers leads to certain startling but logical conclusions that are undeniable really. Herein we shall see how the power of “Omnipotence” leads to Dualism being impossible (and leave the implications of “Omniscience” to be tackled later).

So, necessarily by definition, if one believes in God, one has to believe that He is Omnipotent; that He is all powerful, that He can do whatever He wishes, and that there is no limit placed on His powers. And necessarily He can be the ONLY ONE with such omnipotence. If we do not wish to attribute Omnipotence to God, then fine, that’s a different issue, and we then are basically saying that we do not accept that there is an entity such as God. But for the Dualist’s, particularly, there is such a God. And, there is such a God for the Advaitist too; and so the starting point is that we all accept that there is one Omnipotent God.

So, if we consider the objects we see all around us, what are they made of? As an example let us consider a book, though the same logic is applicable for each and every object in the world. A regression could be built up for the book as: the book is made of paper, paper is made from wood, wood is made of carbon, carbon is made of atoms, atoms are made of electrons and protons and so on, to arrive at one basic building block of nature. Then, what is that basic building block made of? Logically, the basic building block has to be made by God of “God-stuff” only. Because if that is not so, if the basic building block of the universe is a material other than God-stuff, we can then ask what is material ‘X’ made of and who made it? If material ‘X’ is not God-stuff and not made by God, immediately then, a second power, a second Creator, is allowed in the world which is beyond the jurisdiction of God, and hence the Omnipotence Law is violated.

Let us look at this simple logic again. You, me, every blade of grass, excreta, gutter water has to be made from God-stuff only, because God as defined by us as having the power of “Omnipotence”. If we say that a person does not have God within him, we are saying that firstly he is not made of God-stuff. Then he is made from some other stuff, even if he was made by God using that other stuff. Who then made that some other stuff of which the person is made of? If we say that it was God who made that stuff from some other material, then who made that some other material? This chain, an infinite regress, will come to rest only if at some point it be admitted that God made the basic material from His own material, from Himself. For, if it be admitted at any point that someone else made that basic material of the universe, then that someone is a second power rivalling God Himself. Immediately, there is a second “God”, and the Power of Omnipotence stands violated.

Thus everything has to be made of God-stuff and by God Himself. Everything is Advaita or Nondual. Very simply, if God is, Duality cannot exist.

The simple logic outlined above can be said to be enough to tackle the simple doctrines of present day Dualistic sects. But can it withstand the sophisticated reasoning of the great Dualistic Acaryas of the past? The great genius of Sri Madhvacarya for instance? [Whom I admire and revere otherwise as an Amsa of Lord Hanuman, and one of the holiest men to have graced our land].

Well, for me, even given all the sophisticated philosophical constructs and extraordinary genius of Sri Madhvacarya and other Acaryas who followed him, the simple but potent logic outlined above could never really be countered, and to the best of my knowledge, has NEVER been. [As an aside, let me mention that the other basic problem of the existence of evil and excreta in the world, is not really explained completely by any doctrinal system in the world, including Advaita, and we shall look at those interesting attempts in another post perhaps].

But let us see what Sri Madhvacarya’s position was with respect to the basic building block of the universe being different from God-stuff. He of course held that this substance was ‘Prakrti’, Elemental Nature. In his system, ‘Prakrti’, and certain other entities (‘Jiva’, Time, Space, and the Vedas), are NOT created by God, but are primordial in nature and are “eternal”. But even though they are eternal, they are completely dependent on God and subject to the Will of God. So they co-exist with God eternally, but are dependent upon God completely in all transformations that they may undergo. This latter concept was called by him “Paradhina-visesapatti”, “attainment of partial modification owing to the complete dependence upon another”.

So, in his system he held that it is enough to establish the Omnipotence of God if the “eternal” entities were fully dependent on Him. It did not matter that God did not Himself create the eternal entities, nor that they were made of matter other than God-matter; because ultimately it is God’s Will that holds sway. Thus, for Sri Madhvacarya, the power of “Omnipotence” of God is not violated.

Personally, I think it is folks. Because, in the Dualistic systems, the world made from Prakrti, Jiva, Space and Time, logically then has to be “real” (because it is eternal) and comprise of real and tangible matter (unlike in Non-Dual systems wherein the world and all matter is illusory and unreal, thus bypassing the need for a “real” Creator). And thus, because it exists in the “real” sense, Prakriti logically either itself has to be a “Creator” and have powers on par with God, or must have another “real” Creator which now has to be other than our God. And similarly so for the Jiva, Time and Space. Whither Omnipotence for God then?

Also, I cannot accept that that the Jiva, time and space too are “eternal” like God (or Brahman) and exist always, because very simply, as Sri Bhagavan would say, they disappear in deep sleep; and that which comes and goes, cannot be “real” and eternal.

But judge for yourselves folks. For me, since I believe in God, Duality is impossible.