Deepak Chopra and Intent

Deepak Chopra and Intent


Five Spiritual Mysteries: #2 Why Does God Let Bad Things Happen?

posted by Admin

In every spiritual tradition, different as they are, God is taken to be the moral compass for human beings. He may or may not be a punisher.  He may or may not sit in judgment, watching and weighing our every move. He may or may not be a He, since the God of Judaism, for example, is without form. But in some way the notion of good and evil, right and wrong, the light versus the dark, goes back to a divine source.

 

In secular society this link isn’t as strong, and for someone with no religious beliefs, morality has no connection to God. Yet the connection has been crucial for at least two thousand years in the Judeo-Christian world. In the Indian spiritual tradition, particularly Vedanta, God is not personified. The deity is conceived as cosmic consciousness. One of the strongest arguments offered by atheists is that a just and loving God doesn’t exist.  If God did exist, why do bad things happen to good people? If there is divine love, how can the Holocaust even be conceivable? For opponents or religion as well as mild, everyday doubters, a God who sits back and permits wholesale suffering is on shaky ground.

 

Is there a deeper mystery here, or have we been duped into accepting a myth, as militant atheists insist?

 

www.deepakchopra.com

Follow Deepak on Twitter

We must approach the question without assumptions, and as it happens, both sides of the debate stubbornly cling to a large number of assumptions.  Sometimes these preconceived notions overlap, which further muddies the waters. Here are some preconceived ideas that you may well believe:

 

1. God is human and has human traits.

2. God shares our human sense of time and is watching us minute by minute.

3. God’s reasons cannot be understood by human beings.

4. The divine notion of right and wrong is the same as what we call morality.

5. There is an eternal cosmic war between God and Satan.

6. God and Satan represent absolute good and absolute evil.

7. God doesn’t need to justify his judgments to us here down below.

 

I think most people have been exposed to these seven assumptions one way or another. Each one is a double-edged sword, offering proof of God to believers and a source of ridicule for militant atheists. Yet none of these assumptions stands up to the demand for proof that we’ve become used to in the age of science. They are articles of faith; in some cases they are the inheritance of archaic ages. Insofar as militant atheists accuse religions of fostering cultural mythology, their case is pretty credible. What is Satan, for example, but an inherited myth?

 

If you think that God is like a loving Father sitting above the clouds, or a punishing patriarch quick to anger, either conception is a projection. The infinite has been reduced to the finite; a mystery has been unraveled by turning it into a human predicament. To feel that you are a good person who is suffering unjustly is a very human predicament, and it’s just as human to cry, “Why is God doing this to me?”  But there can be no credible answer if we stay within the limits of everyday morality. A loving father who arbitrarily punishes his child would be guilty of abuse – he would be a very bad human father, in fact.

 

So the question of why God allows bad things to happen isn’t a simple human question, even though the answer makes a tremendous difference to how humans live their lives. It’s a spiritual question, a mystery that requires deeper thought.  In the world’s wisdom traditions, the following possibilities exist.

 

- God knows the true nature of our souls and treats us accordingly.

- God set the universe in motion and then walked away from his creation.

- God has a larger view of good and evil than we can comprehend.

- God is transcendent and can only be understood in a state of higher consciousness.

 

Depending on which of these views you accept, God’s relation to bad things changes radically. A God who knows your soul and is treating you accordingly is a God who puts the whole burden on the believer. The believer must figure out how to avoid sin and live virtuously, while God peers through an X-ray machine into every crevice of the believer’s life, exposing secret darkness and hypocrisy. At the other extreme, a God who created the universe and walked away delivers no judgments of any good, neither punishing sin nor rewarding virtue. The cosmos operates mechanically, and we are caught in the machinery, subject to accidents and the grinding of it gears.

 

Yet all four conceptions have the advantage, if we are intellectually honest, of doing away with a God who is simply a human being in disguise, a projection of human traits write large. In the next post we’ll see which line of reasoning leads to the best answer of how God relates – if at all – to the bad things that happen to us.

 

(To be cont.)



Advertisement
Comments read comments(1)
post a comment
Ernie Rosenberg

posted April 13, 2014 at 1:53 pm


I find this to be such an important question. My heart longs to rest with an answer that allows me peace. One answer that does serve me is that God gives us the fruits of our actions, partly because it’s fair and also so that we can learn from what we’ve done.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Naïve Realism, Or the Strange Case of Physics and Fake Philosophers (Part 2)
By Deepak Chopra, MD and Menas Kafatos,PhD   Scientists have assigned  the role of Mister Answer to science, the source of knowledge on every subject. This is peculiar because science does not accept a complete body of knowledge at any one time as final, therefore no answer can be final.

posted 10:14:04am Aug. 18, 2014 | read full post »

Naïve Realism, Or the Strange Case of Physics and Fake Philosophers
In a most unexpected way, physics has started to criticize its own sense of reality. Noted figures are speaking out against other noted figures, and heads are being knocked. A prime example: In the blog section of Scientific American, the highly respected South African physicist and cosmologist Geor

posted 9:54:26am Aug. 11, 2014 | read full post »

Is a Mind-Element Needed to Interpret Quantum Mechanics? Do physically undetermined choices enter into the evolution of the physical universe? Part 3
 By Deepak Chopra, MD and Henry Stapp, PhD Our previous two posts on the role of mind in nature have argued that rational analysis of the empirical evidence entails that the world is not only influenced by ideas, but consists of them. Of course, the everyday experience of a physical reality made o

posted 11:07:52am Aug. 04, 2014 | read full post »

Is a Mind-Element Needed to Interpret Quantum Mechanics? Do physically undetermined choices enter into the evolution of the physical universe? Part 2
By Deepak Chopra, MD and Henry Stapp, PhD The time is ripe for a theory of cosmic mind to be seen by all scientists, not as a speculative notion that conflicts with basic scientific principles, but as a necessary part of a rational science-based understanding of ourselves and nature. The earlie

posted 11:10:54am Jul. 21, 2014 | read full post »

Is a Mind-Element Needed to Interpret Quantum Mechanics? Do physically undetermined choices enter into the evolution of the physical universe?
By Deepak Chopra, MD and Henry Stapp, PhD Pick at random any TV show about the universe, and the visuals will be dominated by a black void sprinkled with billions of galaxies. Such images give the impression of a vast emptiness foreign to human existence. Our bodies would perish within minutes

posted 11:14:45am Jul. 14, 2014 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.