shvu Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Omniscience vs freewill I've had this doubt for a long time and was wondering if anyone has taken up this paradox and resolved it. Or perhaps someone here can offer some useful insights on this topic. If God is omniscient, as claimed in most religions, it/he is completely aware of the future. This means God is aware of every action, thought that will be carried out by a human x at any given point of time. If x's actions are known beforehand, what is meant by freewill? For instance, Krishna towards the end of the Gita, concludes his long didactic talk by telling Arjuna to reflect on the discussion and decide his next course of action. If Krishna was omniscient, he would have known exactly what Arjuna would do next, in which case Arjuna didn't have a choice. He could never have chosen not to fight the war. To make this more complex, Krishna also says at one point that Arjuna has no choice ! Being bound by your own duty born of nature, O son of Kunti, you, being helpless, will verily do that which you do not wish to do owing to indiscrimination. - BG 18.60 Anyway, the BG aside, I would like to see support (or the lack thereof) for a reconciled view. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raga Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 The living entity is bound by the shackles of karma since beginnigless time. The past actions bring about the future scenario one is to face. The present and future desires of the living entity are influenced by the past deeds of the living entity. In this way, Bhagavan knows the path of karma for the living being since its infinte past to its infinite future. The function of free will is only imaginary in the context of action in this world. In truth, actual free will, influence of choice, can be applied in a choice between matter/spirit. In other words, the chain of karma is broken by transcendent intervention. An experience which brings the jiva an experience of its existence beyond the shackles of matter brings along with it a possibility for a tangible choice, something not pre-dictated by the laws of karma, but rather arising out of the desire of the Lord. However, let us consider yet another thing: What is the meaning of "free" will? The proposition of absolute free will implies independent existence. However, the living entity is known to be an aspect of the Lord, albeit possessing a separate sense of identity. Given the fact that only the Lord exists, and there is nothing outside of Him, the question of free will is rendered meaningless, as there are no premises on which absolute free will could exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Yes a very intriguing question. One that has plaqued me for along time with no resolution. One thing is that simply knowing how someone will act doesn't mean you are forcing them to act in that way. But then it can be argued that something known to you must be forcing them to act in that way or how did you know it before hand. And since we are talking of God, and God means Controller then again where is the freewill? I have deeply sought to pinpoint freewill within myself to no avail. Yet I can sense that it is there. Was it my choice to respond to shvu's question or did the modes of nature force me to? Is a mixture possible,where we choose what type of energy will control us. Is there some subtle point where the soul chooses its response to the controlling enviroment and in that way calls for a change, which Supersoul hears and accomodates. The fact that all jivas are in their own unique situations points to freewill also. Sorry for just mulling over the question out loud without offering anything more substantial. I hope someone else will be more fruitful, as this is an important question for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Another thing that points to my freewill is my own fear of loving Krsna. I sense that I have a choice to love Him or not. But once I really surrender to loving Him I will be controlled by that love. I fear being controlled by that yet i am now controlled by the three gunas. I can only determine that free will and being the controlled energy of Krsna exist simultaneously. And that is a paradox my little mind cannot accomodate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 raga i didn't see your post. You put it up as i was formulating mine. You accept that we "started" out in maya correct? I accept that we started out in a neutral state and chose to experience this side. I aslo believe that we choose to be placed in the position of awaremenss between the variegated worlds of maya and vaikuntha. In other words that we choose to be, before we choose where to be. that to me is the perfection of free will. Anyway I'll shut up now and just try to listen to others for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Krishna is not omniscient, omnipotent or omnipresent. When he plays his lila he doesn’t know where Radha is and looks for her. He is overpowered by her love. Every night he is in a particular place where he meets with her. The conception of omni-etc. doesn’t give room spontaneous love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raga Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Krishna is not omniscient, omnipotent or omnipresent. When he plays his lila he doesn’t know where Radha is and looks for her. He is overpowered by her love. Every night he is in a particular place where he meets with her. The conception of omni-etc. doesn’t give room spontaneous love. You should read Visvanatha's Raga Vartma Candrika (second chapter) and see how he deals with Krishna's simultaneous abhijnata (all-knowingness) and mugdhata (bewilderment). Is there aisvarya in Vraja, what do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raga Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 raga i didn't see your post. You put it up as i was formulating mine. You accept that we "started" out in maya correct? I accept that we started out in a neutral state and chose to experience this side. I aslo believe that we choose to be placed in the position of awaremenss between the variegated worlds of maya and vaikuntha. In other words that we choose to be, before we choose where to be. that to me is the perfection of free will. Yes, as I understand it from the scriptures, bondage is anAdi, literally beginningless. We never started out, we have eternally been rotating in the cycle of maya. Free will is often spoken of, but I wonder if anyone can point me to any passage in the scriptures where free will would be mentioned. What'd the equivalent Sanskrit term be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted January 16, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 If one accepts God as omniscient, I am inclined to go with Raga that what we perceive as freewill in only apparent or more specifically, there is no freewill. If there is no freewill, it follows that everything is predetermined, which raises the question of variations. Why is one person's karma negative while someone else's karma is positive? What could be the basis? This reminds me of tattvavaada's taaratamya. I should learn more about it. On the other hand, if we accept the possibility of free will, it means God is not omniscient and has no knowledge, or has limited knowledge about what we will do next. God knows beforehand, the events during the course of one's life which are based on past karma, but does not know events that will create new karma. However, this position contradicts BG 7.26. Theist, The Vedaanta schools hold that karma is beginningless. But it can have an end, which is reaching the ultimate place as described in the Gita. Once this point/equilibrium is reached, there is no return. Raga, BG 18.63 is a strong indicator of freewill. On the other hand, 18.60-61 deny freewill. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 dear shruv prabhu, let me try to answer it. only god has full freedom. we living beings have only limited freedom. the limits to our freedom is caused by god, prikriti, and ourselves. what ever freedon we have, it has boundaries. within boundaris, we have choices/freedom. god also has made laws/rules: material laws, spiritual laws, law of karma, etc. we do not know all these laws, god does, and they bound us. so, the living beings in the material world are put in a puzzle that is very complicated. all people want happiness, but most do not get it. after many births a soul finally does find a way to god and gets god. so, rather than saying we are under direct control of god, we could say we are under the control of god's laws which act out fair upon us according to our karma. in gita god gives all ways how to go to him and what will happen if one does not follow his advise. also, one who surrenders to god fully, he gets break from his past bad karma. god knows our state of mind, what we know and do not know. so even though he gives us freedom and we can act freely any way we want, god actually knows how we will act any time. one who acts freely has ego like "i am free, i will do that and not that". a devotee says, "god, you tell me how i act. and i will act that way." some time a devotee says, "i am surrendered, i do not know any way. please help." then if the devotee qualifies, god intevenes his set laws, and guides/ takes the devotee out of trouble. here the devotee says, "i have no freedom, and i do not know what to do. so please help me. i totally depend upon you." then god, out of love could help directly if the devotee qualifies. just as god knows everything, very god conscious persons also know a lot more future than ordinary people. just as god does not tell us future, they too usually do not tell us future, but they could guide us how to use our freedom. when a person will have many oppertunities to exercise his free will in his life, he would not know where he may land after x years, but god knows it. similary god knows what will happen to a nation or to the whole earth at a time. quality of a person affacts the environment around it. e.g. if a terrorist comes in the neighborhood, you can guess what will heppen. it causes others to arm and get ready to handle that guy. if a saint comes in the neighborhood, the effect will be different. thus each person conributes to the society positively or negatively by his quality and karma. hope this helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul108 Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Free will is just a matter of serving Krishna voluntarily or by force of nature. It is important to remember that the living entity has free will, and that living entity is the soul, not the body. Every body does what Krishna wants. The soul has the choice to like it or not. The wise soul rejoices in Krishna's freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Interesting subject. shvu, in personalism the will is considered to to be the marker of the individual living being. It is integral to the soul itself. I wonder how this question even fits in with impersonal doctrine. I don't see how it can. Are you coming over? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif raga, Can not Krsna excercise His will to allow the jivas to also partake of this quality? Don't I have any say in how I want to serve Him? Wouldn't a lack of individual will remove any sense of difference between the Lord and the jivas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted January 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Interesting subject. shvu, in personalism the will is considered to to be the marker of the individual living being. It is integral to the soul itself. In which case, one must take the position that God is not omniscient. His knowledge about the future is limited for he does not know what decisions we will make, because we have freewill and can choose anything. For instance, I am at the bakery, trying to choose between strawberry cheesecake and Tiramisu. If I had freewill, the chances of choosing Tiramisu are 50%. In this case it follows that until I make a decision, God *does not know* what my choice will be. But if God already knows that I will eventually choose cheesecake, then my chances of picking Tiramisu are 0%. It was already predetermined that I would go to the bakery and after some thought would choose cheesecake *only* and not Tiramisu or anything else. My freewill is only apparent. The way I see it, an omniscient God and freewill are mutually exclusive. They cannot both be true at the same time. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 Theist said: One thing is that simply knowing how someone will act doesn't mean you are forcing them to act in that way. I have to agree with this. The act of knowing what someone will do does not negate their choice of actions and desires to bring about that action. Their free will to desire an outcome existed. All actions are carried out by God. The individual has no capacity to realize his will. We can simply will, and it is God alone who manifests that will as action. Thus in reality the living entity has never acted, he has simply willed. God's knowledge of what we will desire doesn't negate the process we went through to create that desire. But before discussing whether God knows the future, we should first define what we consider to be the future. Some schools of philosophy define the future as a possibility of events - in their view no fixed future actually exists. Thus the future is a nonexistent entity, which is beyond being known or not known. To not be aware of a nonexistent entity is not a deficiency in one's knowledge, rather it is correct knowledge - as that which does not exist cannot be conceived. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 http://www.asitis.com/3/36.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 In which case, one must take the position that God is not omniscient. His knowledge about the future is limited for he does not know what decisions we will make, because we have freewill and can choose anything. Here is a problem with that conclusion shvu. You say His knowledge about the future would be limited. That implies that we have an understanding of what the future is. That implies an understanding of time. Myself I don't understand time. Some say that the so-called future has already happened and that the past is happening now. To say that God can't know the future is to place Him under the control of time. He says however in the Gita "Time I am..." It could be that the choice between tastey treats you are contemplating 'now' has already been chosen by you and God saw you make that choice. I don't know what the truth of the matter is, but I do know that as a being that is not omniscient I am not qualified to say that God is not omniscient. I just don't have all the facts to make such a declaration. For instance, I am at the bakery, trying to choose between strawberry cheesecake and Tiramisu. If I had freewill, the chances of choosing Tiramisu are 50%. In this case it follows that until I make a decision, God *does not know* what my choice will be. But if God already knows that I will eventually choose cheesecake, then my chances of picking Tiramisu are 0%. It was already predetermined that I would go to the bakery and after some thought would choose cheesecake *only* and not Tiramisu or anything else. My freewill is only apparent. The modes alone are active. So your choice may not really be your choice. I agree there. It seems as though we are choosing because we identify with the mind that is supposedly making the choice. But that doesn't say your will had no play in bringing you to that position. Locating a freewill amidst all this matter that is influencing us is something I have yet to do. But that does'nt the freewill doesn't exist just because I have yet to locate it. The way I see it, an omniscient God and freewill are mutually exclusive. They cannot both be true at the same time. As above. I do see how this plays into impersonalism from a certain angle. For without the will of the jiva you can prove the illusory nature of the jiva. And without the jiva and thus all his "chosen" interactions being real we are left with void or brahmajyoti. And then it may be argued that God can't be omniscient because there is really nothing to be known. So I see this question as a valid challenge for personalists to take up. Although it may come down to "its acintya", "take it on faith". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 18, 2003 Report Share Posted January 18, 2003 The answer is.............. There is no freewill- the past determines the present. And before you say 'but i could decide to do what i wasnt going to do' and ie move your hand to show you control it, the underlying factors to the reasoning for you proving that point have come from the past- experiences or genetics. You thought it would be a good idea to move your hand to show you controlled it- but the reason why you thought it was a good idea come from your previous experiences in this lifetime (or previous lifetimes?) or your genetics. The present is always dictated by the past and any thought of consciously changing the present also stems from the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul108 Posted January 18, 2003 Report Share Posted January 18, 2003 Richard, Material nature, i.e. gross matter, does not have free will. Spiritual nature, i.e. Krishna and the innumerable spirit souls, has free will. When the spirit souls lovingly submit to the will of Krishna, they are truly free, but when they try to use their free will for their own selfish purposes, they get caught up in matter and their free will is checked on account of their association with matter and the natural confusion that results. If all you know of is material nature, then it does appear that nothing has free will. However, the living entities are not material. Stop being so concerned with material bodies. Actual life is spiritual, not material. You can read about the distinction between the body and the soul in Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Chapter 2. Of course it's a good idea to read the Introduction first, then Chapter 1, and then Chapter 2. Hare Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.