One of the big problems with Reality is that it is not always this way or that way— black or white. It can also defy our perception and logical thinking. So, we have to keep a few basic points in mind. Bhagavān has various potencies. Some of them are mutually contradictory. Yet, they exist in Him with perfect harmony. His potencies are transrational. It does not mean that they are always acting in an illogical manner. It means that they act both ways — sometimes logically and sometimes beyond logic. He is independent. That does not mean that He is frivolous and does not follow any norms. He follows norms but is not bound by them. The only binding principle is love and nothing else. And love knows no laws.
Besides, another important point to keep in mind is that Reality appears in one way from our perspective and in another way from His perspective. Śāstra speaks about both perspectives but does not tell us which perspective it is talking about. To give a practical example, to us the earth looks flat. No matter how great a scientist you are, you will see the earth as flat. But to a person in space, it looks round or elliptical. Who is right? You may say that the person in space is right. But that is not really true. He is right from his perspective. As far as the person on the ground is concerned, the earth is flat. So, the earth has both aspects. Seen as a whole, it is not flat but elliptical, but if only a small part of it is focused on, it is flat.
One may say that one view is the absolute truth and the other view is a relative truth. Yes, this is true, but the relative truth cannot be undermined. It has practical applications. We make most of our plans considering the earth as flat. If I want to build a house, I consider the plot to be flat, and I face no adverse or wrong results. So, for most of our dealings, it works fine to take the earth as flat.
To give another example: From our point of view, a table is a solid object. From the quantum point of view, it is mostly space. Who is right? You may say that the quantum view is right, but as far as we are concerned, the table is a solid object. And our knowledge has a lot of practical value in comparison to the quantum vision. We can live without quantum vision but not without our Newtonian vision.
So similarly, when we analyze things from Bhagavān’s point of view, not even a leaf moves without His sanction. He is the supreme regulator. There is no free will or any such thing because if we had free will, then He could not be the Supreme Regulator or Master. There would be total chaos on earth. We would be able to will and defy His authority or defy the law of karma and escape unpalatable reactions. But that is not possible, nor is it our experience. So, from His perspective, He is in control. Therefore, He says that a person bewildered by ego thinks himself/herself to be the doer when in reality everything is done by the guṇas of prakṛti. He also says that no one can transcend His māyā consisting of the guṇas without surrendering to Him. So, we are not free. If we were free, we could choose to be under māyā or to get out of it. But we cannot choose unless He makes us choose. In fact, unless He informs us, we do not even know that we are under māyā. We would never have known. So where is the question of will if we do not even have the knowledge of the options available?
But when we see things from our point of view, we can see that we are not like machines that have absolutely no choice and it is impractical to think like that. God Himself asks us to surrender to Him. If we had no choice, then what is the sense in asking us? So, we must have some will. But I do not call it free will, because it is not completely free. God has free will, and we have conditioned will. Our will is conditioned by the amount of knowledge we have, the extent of control we have over our minds and senses, and our past karma. If I am a man born in India, I cannot suddenly will to be an American woman. It will not work. I have so many limitations. But God can will, and it happens—therefore He is called satyakāma and satyasaṅkalpa.
So, a devotee’s perspective is different from that of a jñānī or yogī or a materialist. A devotee sees everything as the will of Bhagavān. On the other hand, an atheist does not even believe that there is God. He thinks he is in control and has free will. A jñānī may have a different perspective. From their own perspective, they all seem right. But the fact remains that God is the Supreme Regulator and we have a little ability to make decisions. Unless we get help from outside, it is not possible to free ourselves from our conditioning or to become a devotee. Kṛṣṇa tells this to Uddhava (SB 11.22.10): “Since this is not possible for a jīva, who is conditioned by ignorance without beginning, it is accepted that there is another person [Īśvara], who is the knower of truth and giver of knowledge.”
One of the big problems with Reality is that it is not always this way or that way— black or white. It can also defy our perception and logical thinking. So, we have to keep a few basic points in mind. Bhagavān has various potencies. Some of them are mutually contradictory. Yet, they exist in Him with perfect harmony. His potencies are transrational. It does not mean that they are always acting in an illogical manner. It means that they act both ways — sometimes logically and sometimes beyond logic. He is independent. That does not mean that He is frivolous and does not follow any norms. He follows norms but is not bound by them. The only binding principle is love and nothing else. And love knows no laws.
Besides, another important point to keep in mind is that Reality appears in one way from our perspective and in another way from His perspective. Śāstra speaks about both perspectives but does not tell us which perspective it is talking about. To give a practical example, to us the earth looks flat. No matter how great a scientist you are, you will see the earth as flat. But to a person in space, it looks round or elliptical. Who is right? You may say that the person in space is right. But that is not really true. He is right from his perspective. As far as the person on the ground is concerned, the earth is flat. So, the earth has both aspects. Seen as a whole, it is not flat but elliptical, but if only a small part of it is focused on, it is flat.
One may say that one view is the absolute truth and the other view is a relative truth. Yes, this is true, but the relative truth cannot be undermined. It has practical applications. We make most of our plans considering the earth as flat. If I want to build a house, I consider the plot to be flat, and I face no adverse or wrong results. So, for most of our dealings, it works fine to take the earth as flat.
To give another example: From our point of view, a table is a solid object. From the quantum point of view, it is mostly space. Who is right? You may say that the quantum view is right, but as far as we are concerned, the table is a solid object. And our knowledge has a lot of practical value in comparison to the quantum vision. We can live without quantum vision but not without our Newtonian vision.
So similarly, when we analyze things from Bhagavān’s point of view, not even a leaf moves without His sanction. He is the supreme regulator. There is no free will or any such thing because if we had free will, then He could not be the Supreme Regulator or Master. There would be total chaos on earth. We would be able to will and defy His authority or defy the law of karma and escape unpalatable reactions. But that is not possible, nor is it our experience. So, from His perspective, He is in control. Therefore, He says that a person bewildered by ego thinks himself/herself to be the doer when in reality everything is done by the guṇas of prakṛti. He also says that no one can transcend His māyā consisting of the guṇas without surrendering to Him. So, we are not free. If we were free, we could choose to be under māyā or to get out of it. But we cannot choose unless He makes us choose. In fact, unless He informs us, we do not even know that we are under māyā. We would never have known. So where is the question of will if we do not even have the knowledge of the options available?
But when we see things from our point of view, we can see that we are not like machines that have absolutely no choice and it is impractical to think like that. God Himself asks us to surrender to Him. If we had no choice, then what is the sense in asking us? So, we must have some will. But I do not call it free will, because it is not completely free. God has free will, and we have conditioned will. Our will is conditioned by the amount of knowledge we have, the extent of control we have over our minds and senses, and our past karma. If I am a man born in India, I cannot suddenly will to be an American woman. It will not work. I have so many limitations. But God can will, and it happens—therefore He is called satyakāma and satyasaṅkalpa.
So, a devotee’s perspective is different from that of a jñānī or yogī or a materialist. A devotee sees everything as the will of Bhagavān. On the other hand, an atheist does not even believe that there is God. He thinks he is in control and has free will. A jñānī may have a different perspective. From their own perspective, they all seem right. But the fact remains that God is the Supreme Regulator and we have a little ability to make decisions. Unless we get help from outside, it is not possible to free ourselves from our conditioning or to become a devotee. Kṛṣṇa tells this to Uddhava (SB 11.22.10): “Since this is not possible for a jīva, who is conditioned by ignorance without beginning, it is accepted that there is another person [Īśvara], who is the knower of truth and giver of knowledge.”
This quiz is Just Wonderful, and it links to articles to get more information about the Topic Just Great!