Introduction:
In times of distress, an individual’s natural reaction is to seek aid from external sources. For a certain section of humanity, this external factor consists of prayer-divine intervention to remedy ills wrought. This, though, is in itself a quagmire. If an all-powerful Being is the cause of right and wrong than by what means are both doled out and to whom? All religions have their own arbitrary definitions of good and bad allowing them to threaten non-conformists with the fruits of wrong while promising heaven to those who follow them and are by default in the right. However, if we extrapolate this chain of thought then we arrive at the Epicurean Paradox.
The Epicurean Paradox:
Epicurus (341 BC-270 BC) was an ancient Greek philosopher who imparted a new branch of intellectual outlook known as Epicureanism. His most famous-or equally infamous-legacy is the Epicurean Paradox which applies to every belief system presupposing divine laws outside human grasp. Why is it a paradox? The summary below clarifies its torturous logic for the religious soul:
(a) Does evil exist? Affirmative.
(b) Can a Divine Being ameliorate evil? Affirmative.
(c) Is this Being, in question, conversant with the existence of evil? Affirmative.
(d) Does this Being aim to ameliorate evil? Affirmative.
If yes, than why is their evil? If it exists to test us than an all-knowing Creator is well aware of our future course of action. Such a machinist puppeteer is well aware of our reaction to any eventuality which it manifests. Why the need to confirm what is already known? On the opposing end of the spectrum, let us presuppose the existence of a Satan or Iblis. Why would a perfect Creator tolerate their existence/was it not aware of their eventual rebelliousness? On the other hand, if such a Being could have fashioned Creation sans evil than why didn’t it?
The Sikh Purview:
Epicurus lived prior to Christ and the rise of modern faiths which persist today. His paradox, though, calls into question their very existence. Indeed, the man has been immortalized by the quandary which he fashioned to confront religion with. What, then, is the Sikh purview vis-a-vis the Epicurean Paradox?
It must be noted here that Sikhi’s rationale behind mankind’s being, its existence, is far removed from the labyrinthine arguments offered by conventional religiosity. Why do humans exist? Let us rephrase the question: what is the purpose of life?
Epicurus’ paradox questions the presupposition of a perfect Creator Being holding the lure of a painless life in its hands. He is essentially asking, why the lure? Why not gift such a life to humanity overall? It is a seemingly controversial truth that religious societies are often immoral cesspits and entirely regressive. While this is admittedly a sweeping generalization, one must also consider history. The retreat of the Dark Ages and Judeo-Christian theocratism allowed the Renaissance to emerge and usher in a new age of enlightened civilization. While some elements of consideration were adopted from the old order, the general frame work was dismantled.
Epicurus preempted the rise of theocratic states in which imperfect man committed himself to translating a perfect Creator’s will on earth. And herein lies, the key to unlocking his paradox as far as Sikhi is concerned-imperfect man. Is man imperfect? Conventional religiosity hammers the point strongly so. But while man is imperfect by virtue of some ancestral quaff in the past, does this mean he is unintelligent? That he must be given a purpose in life and cannot fashion his own based on his empirical and perceptual interaction with Creation? That he must be led by the noose and cannot lead himself? That he cannot ascertain immorality and morality for himself?
Gurmat holds that a man bereft of self-realization is in an infantile stage. The problem of evil, in the Sikh praxis, arises not from a divine faux-pas but from ignorance. Ignorance of reality or Hukam which enunciates that a human retains free will and has been given the intelligence to chart their own course in life. Obviously the Creative Intelligence being supreme, it is aware of the outcomes of both negative and positive courses adopted by the individual. The individual, though, is at liberty to interact autonomously with Hukam and reap what they sow.
ਆਪਿ ਬੀਜਿ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਖਾਂਹਿ ॥
“You, yourself, are the planter and you alone are the recipient of what you sow.”
-Guru Granth, 1192.
ਜੋ ਮਾਗਹਿ ਠਾਕੁਰ ਅਪੁਨੇ ਤੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੋਈ ਦੇਵੈ ॥
“Whatsoever one strives for, that they are made recipient of from the Master.”
-Guru Granth, 681.
Why Ignorance?
The Gordian knot of why ignorance exists runs parallel to the ludicrous assertion that duality must be rejected. Logically, a renunciative belief system will emphasize that good and evil are transitional terms and hold no meaning in the greater scheme of things. However, an Epicurean argument will even make these systems agree that there exists something defined as evil which allows one to adjudge and evince the existence of good. While evil indeed implies visceral pain, its existence is rooted in ignorance. An individual ignorant of the divine gift of intelligence bequeathed to them by a creative Maker is naturally ignorant of humanity’s collective potential. This sees them attempt to suppress another and even derive them of their life. However, one reaps what they sow. How do we judge the fruits of both? Through wisdom. How do we measure the potency of both good and evil? Through each other. In light of the paradox, this leads to another question:
If morality is divine by its naturalness than where does unnatural immorality stem from?
By the nature of Hukam, and its very design, we can attest to the fact that the Creator is not deterministic. If the latter is false than Creation’s existence is futile; akin to a puppeteer plying their trade while the puppets are devoid of any self-awareness. Where there is wisdom (good) there is naturally ignorance (evil) as both are intertwined yardsticks to measure the other with. That said, though, adjudging the potency of both should be done with the same impartiality as is present in Hukam. One should master the art of exercising their intelligence autonomously before passing judgement. The antithesis is aptly summarized by Gurbani:
ਗਾਫਲ ਗਿਆਨ ਵਿਹੂਣਿਆ ਗੁਰ ਬਿਨੁ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਨ ਭਾਲਿ ਜੀਉ ॥
ਖਿੰਚੋਤਾਣਿ ਵਿਗੁਚੀਐ ਬੁਰਾ ਭਲਾ ਦੁਇ ਨਾਲਿ ਜੀਉ ॥
ਬਿਨੁ ਸਬਦੈ ਭੈ ਰਤਿਆ ਸਭ ਜੋਹੀ ਜਮਕਾਲਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੭॥
“Without wisdom, we tend to fear death more than is necessary. Careless and senseless, the common man runs helter-skelter and fails to seek out and discover the truth. Various goods and bads pull at him and through inner conflict he is finished.”
-Guru Granth, 751.
Good and Bad while powerful terms are relative concepts. This, however, cannot be made the grounds to dismiss their conceptual existence as being purposeless. Interaction with both incentivizes us to grow as humans. Deriving another Being of their life purposelessly is an evil which hampers the universal ecosystem while inculcating vice within us which will eventually manifest in the form of a mental or physical consequence. Contrastingly, serving another Being is a good- the rationale beyond which is the direct opposite of committing evil. Did the Creator intend the existence of ignorance and pain? As aids for our human progression, yes.
ਦੁਖੁ ਦਾਰੂ ਸੁਖੁ ਰੋਗੁ ਭਇਆ ਜਾ ਸੁਖੁ ਤਾਮਿ ਨ ਹੋਈ ॥
“Pain is that panacea which disallows us to wallow in lethargy arising from ease.”
-Guru Granth, 469.
ਸੁਖੈ ਕਉ ਦੁਖੁ ਅਗਲਾ ਮਨਮੁਖਿ ਬੂਝ ਨ ਹੋਇ ॥
“After ease comes pain, this is the natural order of things but the ignorant individual denies this.”
-Guru Granth, 57.
The Purpose of Life:
We have established that ignorance is the root of evil, however without ignorance wisdom cannot be adjudged just as there can be no peace without war. This is a necessary duality. Denying it divorces one from leading a moral life. However, why should we lead a moral life?
ਆਪਣ ਹਥੀ ਆਪਣਾ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਕਾਜੁ ਸਵਾਰੀਐ ॥੨੦॥
“With your own hands, resolve your own affairs.”
-Guru Granth, 474.
The human existence should not be dependent upon external factors but internal conviction to outdo one another in the realm of humanist progression. This internal conviction arises from the true Dasam Dwar, the brain:
ਪੀਊ ਦਾਦੇ ਕਾ ਖੋਲਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਖਜਾਨਾ ॥
ਤਾ ਮੇਰੈ ਮਨਿ ਭਇਆ ਨਿਧਾਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਰਤਨ ਲਾਲ ਜਾ ਕਾ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਮੋਲੁ ॥
ਭਰੇ ਭੰਡਾਰ ਅਖੂਟ ਅਤੋਲ ॥੨॥
ਤੋਟਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਵਧਦੋ ਜਾਈ ॥੩॥
“Open the treasure trove of your ancestors and let your mind be awed by the wealth therein. Priceless diamonds lie within. This trove is overflowing to the brim and will never run out…”
-Guru Granth, 186.
The moral life liberates us from the quagmire which is ignorance, disallowing us to inflict pain on ourselves by our very own hands. It must be noted here that there are several forms of pain referred to in Gurbani but the most base is the pain which permeates in the absence of wisdom. Only when one obtains wisdom rooted in the truth is this form of pain ameliorated. A relevant example of mastering this pain is provided in the form of death. Gurbani enunciates that with death an eventuality, life came into being. It is natural for life to culminate in death. Whereas an unnatural death is to be avoided and/or only dealt out in the most extreme of circumstances, it is futile to oppose the natural death for it is a surety. However, those who are ignorant of this reality and are unable to accept it-they suffer in pain upon their loved ones passing away.
Conclusion:
Pain in Sikhi is a corollary of free will. It is a progressive aid which empowers us to learn, to acquire guidance and progress as humans; to push our limits and intellectually/mentally evolve as humans. Does ignorance have divine origins? To a degree, yes. But the evil emanating from this ignorance is of man’s own making given mankind’s liberty in the form of free will. Ignorance is a yardstick, but evil is the result of accepting that yardstick as an absolute. How to prevent this? The answer lies in the societal structuralism which is enunciated by Gurbani which liberates individuals to discover and think for themselves while using their empirical faculties to impartially consider the outcomes of good and bad. As far as a Sikh is concerned, the Epicurean Paradox calls into question the existence of a deterministic and mechanist God. Not one who has bequeathed humankind the rationale to decide its own course in life.
Recently I was contemplating determinism vs free will. I came to the conclusion that God knows the choices that you will have presented to yourself, but does not know what choice you will make, the same answer you have came to. But if this supreme intelligence is all knowing, it would know the decision you make, otherwise it would not be all knowing. I do not have the best knowledge of Guru Granth Sahib as I have just started reading Bhai Sahib Singh’s first Guru Granth Sahib Darpan, but in Gurbani is this Intelligence just vastly superior to us, or is it all knowing?
Thank you a lot for the work the sikh renaissance is doing, I’m glad I found it.
I was wondering however if you could give a quick summary of the answers to epicureans questions so I can quickly reference them, it’ll be greatly appreciated.