By Ananta Ram das (HĂ©ctor Rosario, Ph.D.)
Dandavat pranams. All glory to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga.
I have watched with great concern the decline in the standards of scientific preaching as devotees fall prey to scientific or philosophical arguments they cannot correctly counter. As a result, they either lose faith in Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s teachings or try to integrate their misconceptions into the philosophy, thus deviating from the acaryas.
Before going any further, let me state my conviction that a faithful reading of Srila Prabhupada’s books will give us all the necessary tools to defeat any philosophical opponent. But for that to take place, honesty and humility on our part are the most important factors. (Of course, this faithful reading will also lead us to follow the four regulative principles and to chant a minimum of sixteen rounds of the maha-mantra daily.)
There have been two recent postings on Dandavats that deceptively portray good news with regard to scientists believing in God. But the question arises as to what kind of God they believe in. I have had recent exchanges about God with a mathematician/philosopher of international stature and with an equally prominent scientist. These exchanges have been quite fruitful and I summarize the arguments I used which have made them take the philosophy of Caitanya Mahaprabhu seriously, even if they do not become devotees in this lifetime.
Many of these scientists who believe in God either believe in some kind of impersonal god or some kind of an evolving god. I should add that many of them, like Genome Project Director Dr. Francis Collins, believe in “Theistic Evolution,” which incorporates Darwinian evolution into their philosophy. The question that most troubles them is the problem of evil. They see the omnipotence of God as inconsistent with God’s absolute benevolence. Unable to reconcile the existence of evil with the omnipotence and absolute goodness ascribed to God, they opt to drop the requirement of omnipotence as they feel more comfortable doing so than with dropping God’s absolute goodness.
Regarding an evolving god, to say that God evolves seems to put him at the whim of an objective nature (apparently more powerful than Him) that determines Himself. Under this prism, it seems that God has been reduced to a mere sorcerer who may know much, have some power, and might even be eternal, but who is nonetheless subject to higher forces.
Many people see God as a supplier of pleasure if you pay the market price (in the form of penance, prayer, mercy, and what have you). Yet, such a god seems to be no better than a harlot. In contrast, we see God as someone we can choose to serve without any other motive than to love Him. Whatever comes out of that relationship, if anything at all, just let it be.
If God is the Creator of all that exists and the origin of all that be, then He must be the origin of evil itself. This is where many religions either collapse or look for alternatives to explain the question of evil.
God is the origin of everything, good or bad [See purport to BG 10.4-5]. In fact, he is the origin of evil itself – via free will. The question is now, why do souls possess free will?
Free will is the (limited) ability to choose. God is the possessor of absolute free will (complete independence), whereas souls, as part and parcel of God, have only a limited amount of said free will (incomplete independence). Hence, as His manifest absolute benevolence, we possess free will and can either choose to walk towards God (and love Him) or walk away from God (and rebel against Him). Free will allows for the possibility of a loving relationship with God, for love rarely, if ever, exists in slavery. When we misuse our independence, however, all kinds of havoc run loose.
As a result of our actions, we take on different bodies to collect the fruits of said actions, be they good or bad. The problem of evil is no longer a problem, but a mere consequence of free will, which in turn exists as a primary constituent of God’s infinite potencies. Thanks to free will we can relish a relationship with God.
At this point, if these scientists honestly consider themselves theists and have devoted some time to serious philosophical deliberations, you may refer them to Teachings of Lord Caitanya or to any other book Krishna dictates from the heart. Let Srila Prabhupada and the Vaishnava acaryas continue the preaching.
I pray these realizations have been of some value to devotees, and to scientific preachers in particular. We know scientific preaching is very dear to Srila Prabhupada and it will certainly please him if we can honor his legacy.
Hari bol
— HĂ©ctor Rosario, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Mathematical Sciences University of Puerto Rico, MayagĂĽez Campus PO Box 9018 MayagĂĽez, PR 00681
One must understand that there is no scientific preaching of religion because religion is the highest science whatever God had created so far. It is the science of unlimited freedom once it is realized. Thus when one talk about religion, one must talk about unlimited freedom and how to achieve it. There is no limit of that freedom and there is no boundary of that freedom that is called “Will of God”. So how can it be compared with material freedom in material concept of science which is bounded by material limit? Thus one scientist when becomes true scientist, without looking for material nature of life, one finds existence of God which is source of limitless freedom. That is the beginning of true scientific process to look at God.
For example, in this material world everything has a boundary. Say, you bought one plot of land and construct a house. But you don’t have freedom that one bird can not come and sit on your house, or even can fly above your house. To stop that, you need to keep many security persons to watch at your house and if birds are flying towards your house they have to stop it. But still it is very difficult task to do so in day after day. Similarly for any insects or other natural creatures, even one grass to stop growing in your land, is very difficult to stop. So that is very material nature of bounded soul, even though one posses some material assets, still they are not completely free to use and control this asset under his own will.
Where as in spiritual world, freedom is complete and everything is control by wish. So that wish is unlimited and eternally free called “God’s will”. God is supreme person who is called Krsna. Another meaning of Krsna is “all attractive”. Who attracts every soul towards Him because He can fulfill all wishes of every living entity by His own will. That’s why it is called God’s will, that is one wish fulfilling tree. A tree that can bear any kind of fruits by wish of God and can fulfill all wishes of devotees. So a true scientist must look for inventing such a tree that can fulfill all wishes as wished. Until that is not invented, Krsna will attract all souls towards Him and everybody have to look for Krsna only. That is the ultimate science existing in this universe in the form of Krsna Consciousness and one trure scientist must search for that science only by practicing Krsna Consciousnes. All glory to Prabhupada! All glory To Mohaprabhu! Haribol!
This is a very interesting subject, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss it here. It’s probably safe to assume that most readers here know at least the basics of the philosophy on this topic, but I find the nuisances to be captivating. Hopefully some more capable thinkers here can point out the errors in my reasoning.
“In fact, he is the origin of evil itself – via free will.”
Why only via free will, and how is free will defined in this context? As a part of Krishna’s marginal energy, it seems to reasonable to believe that my nature is not mine alone but is part of Krishna’s nature. I do not think of myself as the primary origin of anything, thus if I have the tendency to commit evil, then it seems that this tendency would ultimately originate in Krishna.
In the matter of defining free will, when I consider that my sense perception, memory, intelligence, and ability are under Sri Krishna’s full control, it is hard to feel responsible for my actions or experiences. If a fully competent person gives control to one who is not competent, I would be inclined to hold the competent person responsible for the mess that would likely ensue. If, for example, my 10-year-old child asked to drive my car, and I allowed it, any accident that resulted would certainly be my fault. The same would be true even if the child was not my offspring, even though my various abilities are all very limited, because I was the last competent person in charge. So I do not know how the living entities can be blamed for their situation, when our competence must certainly be infinitesimal compared to Krishna’s.
It is said that this highly limited free will allows a loving relationship with God, yet we find ourselves in the opposite situation as the actual consequence. Why is this Krishna’s plan? We are taught that the material world serves as the miserable playground for those of us who chose to misuse our free will. I do not see much difference between “You must serve Me with full love and devotion,” and “If you so much as interrupt your loving devotional service for half a moment, I will have you exiled to suffer millions of abominable lives and deaths in all sorts of disgusting bodies.” Who can say love exists in such a fearful situation? I do not know the situation on Krishna’s planet, but I struggle to make sense of the explanation we have been given.
Indeed I have to wonder if we have been cheated, and why. Isopanisad describes Vishnu as “…who has been fulfilling everyone’s desires since time immemorial.” I doubt that we all asked to be sent to a world of misery and death, and once here we are bewildered. Actually, if one is to put the bewilderment on a timeline, it would have to be exactly concurrent with the interruption in our devotional service. How could we interrupt our devotional service if we were not already bewildered, and how could we be bewildered if we were fully engaged in devotional service? With that reasoning, I would have to conclude that the cause of both the bewilderment and the interruption of devotional service must have been arranged by a higher power than myself.
Personally I do not believe Krishna is lacking in either goodness or power, but I must admit that I do not yet understand how to reconcile these two qualities while considering the situation that Krishna describes as miserable. It’s not for lack of trying, but maybe some folks here can help with this. Also I wouldn’t be so hard on the scientists, who are also trying to make sense of the world using the best means they know. It does not seem very nice to disparage them when we are so much accustomed to using their inventions.
Dear Ananta Ram Prabhu,
It is enlivening to see devotees in our movement preaching to the scientists and intellectuals, and attempting to present Krsna Consciousness (KC) in a scientific fashion. I believe that such efforts go a long way towards widespread acceptance of our movement by the society in general.
You write: “Before going any further, let me state my conviction that a faithful reading of Srila Prabhupada’s books will give us all the necessary tools to defeat any philosophical opponent. But for that to take place, honesty and humility on our part are the most important factors. (Of course, this faithful reading will also lead us to follow the four regulative principles and to chant a minimum of sixteen rounds of the maha-mantra daily.)”
I think that honesty and humility starts with applying to our preaching presentations the same rigors we demand of science and scientists. We need to understand the message we are spreading in a proper scientific context, only then we can attempt to present KC to scientists and science minded individuals. For example, we need to examine all the claims we are making in our preaching efforts to make sure they pass the basic criteria of science, i.e. that they are based on observable ,objective, and empirical evidence, subject to reason and logic. Otherwise we risk being completely ignored by such people.
Ultimately, it would be very beneficial if renowned devotee scientists like yourself presented a comprehensive review of our philosophy, as well as moral and social teachings in our movement for the benefit of all devotees interested in preaching to the scientists. Over the years we have managed to scientifically present selected fragments of our message to the world, but much work still remains.
Thank you for raising this important subject matter.
y.s.
“In fact, he is the origin of evil itself – via free will”
Dear Pandu Das Babaji, I am not in agree with your above statement because “free will” and “less free will” is two different things. When you think God who is Krsna, one and origin of everything, then there is no evil because in that stage God is single person, only alone. So what is the use of evil? Can one single person do evil to himself? Naturally not. But when Krsna created universes and then created his images to control all universes, then there is many, depending on size of universes one image is more powerful other is less. So evil begins when division starts. “Division is the origin of evil not Krsna’s free will” Meaning that “Less free will compare to Krsna or among different universes created by Krsna is origin of evil”.
For example. Say you are owner of this entire world and there is no other except you to enjoy this world, so for you there is no evil doer. But when you create some one like you to maintain this world, or such many persons then one starts thinking why I will have less than the origin, though I look same like the origin? That’s what Bible says that when Lord created Adam and Eve, Satan came, means evil came into existence.
So conclusion is “Complete free will no evil, divided free will, origin of evil”. Following Krsna consciousness, one can achieve complete free will. To achieve that, only way is loving relationship with Krsna. If the relationship is other than loving relationship, other than “Prema Bhakti” then there always exits evil more or less. That is the case for demigods. That’s why Radha Krsna is supreme loving relationship and always supreme deity of worship through out all universes. Other than Radha Krsna, all relationship must have some kind of existence of evil and thus always enjoys less free will than Radha Krsna. All glory to Chitannya Mohaprabhu! All glory to Prabhupada! Hare Krsna! Haribol!
Dear Prabhus,
Dandavat pranams. All glory to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga.
Thank you for you supportive comments and questions. If you would like to write directly to me, you may do so at or .
Evil does not apply to God — even though He is the origin of evil itself via free will — simply because “evil is that which distances us from God” whereas “good is that which draws us near to God.” The distance from God to Himself is zero. When the distance is zero (when there is contact), there’s no good or evil, but simply transcendence. The three modes of nature apply when we are away from God, not when we are situated in the transcendental platform, that is, where there is no distance from God to ourselves because we are in contact with him having surrendered our free will.
I pray this helps clarify the confusion.
Your servant,
Ananta Ram das
Hare Krishna Devotees of the Lord. PAMHO. AGTSP.
Scientific preaching is not just another target to preach. A scientist has they own symbolic universe, where words often gain another implication. In that way, one must to know the paradigm correspondent to the science our “preached scientist” studies.
There are unlimited forms of God. And there are hundred of conceptions of God among human race. And all of them are in a way or another precise for the platform of enlightenment one posses. We all agree that among all personalities of God, KRISHNA is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and that Vishnu is the Supreme Lord among all lords of the universe. But to be the supreme does not means to be the only. As a matter of fact, supreme means superior to others, so there is a need of others to be the supreme. Those others are Lord Brahma, the creator god, Lord Siva, the destructor god, and Sri Parvati, the Material Nature itself.
As Srila Prabhupada says, anyone can build, anyone can destroy, but only Vishnu can maintain. So Vishnu is the Supreme. Because He is beyond the influence of time, because He is the Supreme Time, and the Supreme Controller.
But sometimes we meet people who are in a different platform of understanding. It is very common in local cultures that people feels that” cosmic connection” with Mother Nature, Uma, Parvati. Some scientist see everything in chaos, and some people see God as a Supreme Male who controls Nature, which are attributes of Sri Siva. And Finally there is the common feeling that God is the Creator of everything, the supreme Father, Brahma.
As vaishnavas, our duty may be not to try to change their comprehension of God, but to lead them to a higher platform of understanding. The Supreme Truth: “Isvara paramah krisna sat-cit-ananda vigraha”
Almost every scientific discover has a portion of true. Even being limited to a type of understanding and preconception. But a portion of true is nothing. It is there where it lies their mistakes. They grab a part as the whole. And the whole is Krishna. Not Brahma, not Siva, not Nature, not Vishnu. Just Krishna. nityo-nityanam cetanas-cetananam eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman.
Every word, every concept, every true a scientist could found adds to this statement. But this statement is the starting point for any investigation. Srila Prabhupada allows intellectual speculation, but mental speculation is totally forbidden. In relation to raso ´ham apsu kaunteya Prabhupada said we can speculate HOW Krishna is the taste of water, that is intellectual speculation, but we CAN NOT speculate IF Krishna is indeed the taste of water. Any attempt we made in order to understand God is acceptable as a positive action towards oneself enlightenment, and we must encourage people to keep their mode, and gradually, with love, humility and respect, bring them to the light of Srila Prabhupada´s words and servants. As Ananta Ram das said: “Let Srila Prabhupada and the Vaishnava acaryas continue the preaching”.
your servant
satyaki dasa.