 |
| Image courtesy: destinyontheopenroad.blogspot.com |
I used this as the primary topic of discussion at an 'intellectual forum' at Sri Krishna Vrundavana in Toronto recently, attended by over ten. Here's an account of the discussion.
We started the discussion off by borrowing a question that was used in the wonderful Harvard course Justice.
The question, in a simplified thought experiment setting, is the following:
A train is going on a track that forks ahead. On the default path at the fork, the train will go on to hit a group of 10 people sitting on the tracks. If the train were to go down the other path, the train will hit a group of 4 people sitting on the tracks. You have the ability to do nothing, or flip a switch that will make the train switch paths (from the default).Since this is a thought experiment, assume that you do not have the ability to communicate with the two groups of people in any way, that the train is silent enough that the people cannot hear it, and you cannot do things other than flip the switch. The only two choices available to you are clear:
- Let the train proceed on its default path, and allow it to kill 10 people
- Switch the train's path, and allow it to kill 4 people
This topic made for a wonderful discussion, with the majority preference being flipping of the switch. The argument made was that killing the smaller group of people was the less disastrous outcome.
The following questions and points were raised/made by different people in the discussion.
- In deciding that killing a smaller group of people was more desirable, what about the characteristics of those people? What if the 10 people were bandits, and the 4 were good people? We don't know anything about these 2 groups of people, so can we only go by their numbers? If we flipped the switch, and it turned out that the 10 were bad people who would cause additional damage to the world around them, are we willing to take responsibility for our 'flip the switch' decision?
- Perhaps the 4 people were sitting on the tracks in the non-default path knew that trains do not use that path. If we decided to flip the switch, would it not be grave injustice to them?
- Note that it is not at all possible to leave out the concept of justice. It is inherent in the world that we live in, human-enforced justice aside.
- Whichever choice we made, it is to be assumed that it was that group's karma/prarabdha (destiny due to their own past deeds) that they were suffering their fate that day.
- It was interesting to note that from this though experiment emerged the concept of destiny/fate, and that of their deeds. Further, if the group that would get killed included a just-born baby, what deed had it committed in its present birth yet? The only explanation can be that in its part birth, the baby had committed deeds that resulted in its present punishment. And hence, there needs to be a soul in everybody which explains rebirth.
- Following from the above point, if there was some (justice) system that kept track of the soul's deeds, surely there must be rules that are checked against? Every act of mine, even a good/evil thought, must be covered under this system?
- It is possible to argue that the system that pervades is just that - a system, and that there is no God-like entity who is controlling what happens.
On to the concept of God..
If we did consider that there was a God, if He were simply a justice enforcement system, is He really necessary? It is useful to consider formal schools of thought to help us answer this and other questions.
At this point, the discussion moved on to some of the key Vedic schools of thought - that of Sankara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, and Madhva. Here is my best understanding of these schools, and also what was presented at the discussion.
Sankara's Advaita defines the world (that we see and experience) as a Maya, an illusion. Every sensory perception - sight, touch, etc., is an illusion. However, the soul that evolves by gaining knowledge of the truth eventually cuts through the Maya and realizes that it is part of the whole, Brahman (God; not to be confused with Brahmana, of the Varna system). Isvara, on the other hand is the God that we perceive due to Maya - the one with form and attributes, which He otherwise does not possess, for He is nirguNa. Souls (you and I) are part of the whole that is Brahman, and do not have a real existence, although we are required to escape Maya through knowledge.
Ramanuja's Visishtadvita defines the world as part of Brahman's body. The plants outside, the sky, our own bodies, the trash in our kitchen, etc., are actual parts of His person. The soul goes through an evolutionary phase, as in Advaita, and with the grace of God, attains salvation and an escape from the material world. Unlike Advaita, though, Brahman does exhibit plurality through the different souls, who are all inferior to Brahman Himself, Brahman being the all-seeing, knowing God with compassion. In salvation, though, the souls become one with Brahman, i.e, lose their difference with Brahman.
Nimbarka's Dvaitadvaita defines the world as at once being homogenous and plural. A common example given is that of the earth being homogenous while also exhibiting plurality with individual parts such as stones of different forms.
Madhva's Dvaita defines the world as being perfectly real, with the world around being part of jada, or a mass of lifeless material. Brahman, a distinct entity, is all-seeing, knowing, does have unique and an infinite, complete, positive list of attributes - compassion (the order of this attribute being infinite, and indescribable in its entirety), etc. The souls are all independent entities, at all times, and in various stages of evolution on their path towards their end state. The souls, are further classified as overall good/bad/middling, with the good souls proceeding on to bliss, the bad ones proceeding on to eternal damnation, and the middling ones in a permanent cycle of birth and death.
Each of these schools of thought has adherents, and a deeper study of each one is necessary to see where our own position on God might lie. You will be surprised how many assumptions you already have about His qualities, and of the world around you...
