We create our God, only to kill him
I was reading the book "Best of Mind tree" when I came across this article. It made me pause and think. It is said, 'to know something and remember it, write it", so here is the article -
When Voltaire remarked that if God did not exist we would have had to invent him, the clever Frenchman almost got it right. Instead of 'if' he ought to have used 'as'. As God did not exist, we had to invent Him. For the so-called Creator is nothing but our own creation, like a conjurer's illusion. And like an amnesic conjurer who has forgotten his own sleight of hand, we take the illusion for reality.
This gives rise to a number of problems, metaphysical and moral. For instance, scholastics in medieval Europe would engage in endless debate about God's omnipotence and the paradoxes it led to. Could God build a wall so high that He could not jump over it? If He were omnipotent, he could build such an unjumpable wall. But by the same token of his omnipotence, He could jump over it.
What the debaters did not see was that both the Wall, and its Athletic Builder, were equally figment of their imagination. As was the debate. The moral problems of God's existence center around the question:if a benevolent and all-powerful God exists, why does He allow bad things to happen to good people? The answer often provided is that it's all part of a Divine Plan which we can't see and therefore can't understand. unfortunately, this makes God sound like an Orwellian Big Brother who works strictly on a need-to-know basis while manipulating our minds and actions.
A far more elegant 'solution' to the problem would be to see that 'bad' things that happen are a result not of a malevolent, inscrutable fate but simply of our won attachment. From the perspective of perfect detachment both 'bad' things and 'good' things disappear.
Then there is the problem of prayer and the role of God as an interventionist in our affairs. If I say my prayers and observe the scriptures, surely God will make my wishes come true. But what if those wishes included my triumph over my neighbour, and equally devout and pious individual who wishes to triumph over me?
What'll God do? Ignore us both? In which case, why are we wasting our time? Or will he leave it all to chance to see which of us wins over the other? In which case, He becomes nothing but a lottery ticket in the sky. So what's the answer? Perhaps that our concepts of 'triumph' and 'defeat', not to mention 'rival', 'piety', 'prayer', and 'God' Himself, are limited and limiting constructs of our won mind.
We create God in our own image. Auden wrote: "O God, put away justice and truth for we can not understand them and don not want them. Eternity would bore us dreadfully. Become our uncle. Look after baby, amuse grandfather, introduce Mariel to a handsome officer. Be interesting and weak like us, and we will lobe you as we love ourselves."
The ancient gods - of Indic or Greek mythology - were whimsical, lustful, mendacious. Just like their worshipers, just like us. Perfect soap opera material for pre-TV days. The Jehovah of the Old Testament was a vengeful, bloodthirsty scourge, reflecting militant tribalism. The New Testament, with its message of peace and goodwill, was the precursor of the MNC: God as a global franchiser, a spiritual counterpart of McDonald's.
When the West got tired of its God, it killed Him via Nietzsche. We have killed God, said the philosopher and unleashed existential angst among his contemporaries. Ramakrishna was much cooler about it. In meditation, when his beloved Mother appeared before him. he took to sword of duality and cut Her in two, severing the bonds of his worship.
Had Voltaire been around, would he have said: If God did not exist, we would have had to destroy Him?
When Voltaire remarked that if God did not exist we would have had to invent him, the clever Frenchman almost got it right. Instead of 'if' he ought to have used 'as'. As God did not exist, we had to invent Him. For the so-called Creator is nothing but our own creation, like a conjurer's illusion. And like an amnesic conjurer who has forgotten his own sleight of hand, we take the illusion for reality.
This gives rise to a number of problems, metaphysical and moral. For instance, scholastics in medieval Europe would engage in endless debate about God's omnipotence and the paradoxes it led to. Could God build a wall so high that He could not jump over it? If He were omnipotent, he could build such an unjumpable wall. But by the same token of his omnipotence, He could jump over it.
What the debaters did not see was that both the Wall, and its Athletic Builder, were equally figment of their imagination. As was the debate. The moral problems of God's existence center around the question:if a benevolent and all-powerful God exists, why does He allow bad things to happen to good people? The answer often provided is that it's all part of a Divine Plan which we can't see and therefore can't understand. unfortunately, this makes God sound like an Orwellian Big Brother who works strictly on a need-to-know basis while manipulating our minds and actions.
A far more elegant 'solution' to the problem would be to see that 'bad' things that happen are a result not of a malevolent, inscrutable fate but simply of our won attachment. From the perspective of perfect detachment both 'bad' things and 'good' things disappear.
Then there is the problem of prayer and the role of God as an interventionist in our affairs. If I say my prayers and observe the scriptures, surely God will make my wishes come true. But what if those wishes included my triumph over my neighbour, and equally devout and pious individual who wishes to triumph over me?
What'll God do? Ignore us both? In which case, why are we wasting our time? Or will he leave it all to chance to see which of us wins over the other? In which case, He becomes nothing but a lottery ticket in the sky. So what's the answer? Perhaps that our concepts of 'triumph' and 'defeat', not to mention 'rival', 'piety', 'prayer', and 'God' Himself, are limited and limiting constructs of our won mind.
We create God in our own image. Auden wrote: "O God, put away justice and truth for we can not understand them and don not want them. Eternity would bore us dreadfully. Become our uncle. Look after baby, amuse grandfather, introduce Mariel to a handsome officer. Be interesting and weak like us, and we will lobe you as we love ourselves."
The ancient gods - of Indic or Greek mythology - were whimsical, lustful, mendacious. Just like their worshipers, just like us. Perfect soap opera material for pre-TV days. The Jehovah of the Old Testament was a vengeful, bloodthirsty scourge, reflecting militant tribalism. The New Testament, with its message of peace and goodwill, was the precursor of the MNC: God as a global franchiser, a spiritual counterpart of McDonald's.
When the West got tired of its God, it killed Him via Nietzsche. We have killed God, said the philosopher and unleashed existential angst among his contemporaries. Ramakrishna was much cooler about it. In meditation, when his beloved Mother appeared before him. he took to sword of duality and cut Her in two, severing the bonds of his worship.
Had Voltaire been around, would he have said: If God did not exist, we would have had to destroy Him?
Labels: God
posted by Abhigyan at 10:43 AM
0 comments
