Problem of Rocks

Over the years, a multitude of creative arguments have been formed to undermine the existence of God. By focusing on the fundamental qualities of the divine, namely omniscience, omnipotence and benevolence, philosophers have attempted demonstrate that such qualities are actually logically impossible. For example, many argue that “problem of rocks” reveals the paradoxicality of omnipotence, or the idea that there is an all-powerful entity. The theist is presented with a dilemma: “Can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?” If God can create a rock that is so heavy that he cannot lift it, then there is something that he cannot do, namely lift the rock in question. If God cannot create a rock that is so heavy that he cannot lift it, then there is something that he cannot do, namely create such a rock. Either way, then, there is something that God cannot do, and if there is something that he cannot do then he cannot be omnipotent.

While many philosophers attempt to deconstruct the riddle by referring to linguistics, the saint Prabhupada had his own original response. In the 1970’s, he was posed with the same question by representatives from MENSA - “Can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?” Prabhupada’s answer was simple, yet sublime and profound – “yes, he can indeed create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it... but then he can lift it!” That was the end of that conversation.

The world we live is characterized by boundaries, quantities and restrictions. We tend to approach the divine with these conceptions, and thus fail to recognize that the spiritual reality is beyond the dimensional limits that regulate our daily functioning. In the spiritual strata power is not static – it is ever increasing. Personality is ever expanding. The relationships between those personalities are ever fresh, and ever-deepening. And the happiness derived from such interactions is like an expanding ocean. Thus, since there is nothing static about the spiritual paradigm, it will always prove problematic to try and box it within a material construct.

Read more »

Reality Check

Someone recently pointed out two different statements in the Bhagavad-gita, arguing what they felt to be a contradiction and inconsistency within the presentation. We discussed, debated and churned the topic, exploring the issue from numerous angles of vision. We considered the context and background to each statement, and carefully analysed each word. After a lengthy discussion, not only did we resolve many of the doubts, but we actually felt a heightened understanding and comprehension of the subject matter. It was actually an incredibly refreshing conversation.

It reminded of speed bumps (yes we all hate them!). As we cruise along in our car, we can easily slip into autopilot, and lose consciousness of our speed and surroundings. The speed bumps force us to slow down and become more aware of our mode of driving. Similarly, seeming contradictions and confusions in scriptural writings could be seen as literary speed-bumps. Often, we superficially wiz through ancient texts and give minimal thought and consideration to the words we’re reading. Encountering apparent contradictions can force us to slow down and consider the concepts with greater attention and depth. Through intensified contemplation and deepened deliberation, we realize that the ‘inconsistencies’ are actually paradoxes – concepts which on a superficial level seem to clash, but on a higher level can be reconciled. Thus, we mature and advance our spiritual understanding.

In another sense, however, we may not always be able to logically reconcile truths which exist on a higher platform. One must accept that aspects of the spiritual reality will remain inconceivable to the human mind and intelligence. Those from ‘scientific’ backgrounds may point this out as the downfall of the spiritual approach – to sheepishly concede that we cannot know something, and instead conveniently attribute it to some metaphysical reality beyond our grasp. A cop-out they may say. However, to recognise the limits of our intelligence and perception may also be considered an exhibition of humility and honesty. After all, in this universe there are many planets. On the planet earth there are many countries. In one country, there are thousands of cities, and in one city there are hundreds of streets. On one particular street there may be a dwelling, inside which there are many rooms. In one room, someone may be proudly sitting, thinking they have understood (or will understand) the essential truths behind the entirety of the cosmos. A little ambitious, bordering on childish, wouldn’t you say?

Read more »