The Problem of Evil and its apparent solutions - Part II

The Problem of Evil and its apparent solutions - Part II

Indra, the supreme Vedic deity

In the previous article of this series, I discussed how the Abrahamic religions have attempted to tackle the Problem of Evil, and the questions raised by it on the existence of an Almighty, all-good God. I also covered the views of the Parsi (Zoroastrian) and Vedantic religions on the matter. But however, the Indo-European religions of the old days, together with the only surviving mainstream IE religion of today (although highly modified), Hinduism, have their own ways of handling the problem. However, the question raised by Epicurus was not necessarily known, at least in its formal language, to the early makers of these religions. Still, it's interesting to see how these religions stand out in the test.

The Early Indo-European Religions 

Ranging from the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European religion to the Vedic religion of the Indo-Aryans, we have a number of candidates here for tackling the issue. However, although the linguistics and characteristics of these religions might differ at a secondary level, the primary way these religions might employ the answer the question is quite similar, structurally speaking.

In almost all Indo-European religions, such as the Vedic religion of India, the Hellenic religion of ancient Greece and the Norse religion, we have the mythological stories of battles between two main groups of divine beings, the gods and the demons. There are different names attributed to them in different religions. For example, in ancient Greece, the gods were divided into two primary pantheons, the Titans, former rulers of the universe, and the Olympians, who rebelled against them and seized the control over the universe.

Ahura Mazda

In the Vedic religion, we have Devas and Asuras. It is to be noted that in the Vedas themselves, the term 'Asura' does not always refer to anti-gods. For example, Varuna has been called an Asura, and so is Agni. Yet, in later mythologies, both of them turn into Devas. In post-Vedic Hinduism, however, Asuras were necessarily competitors for the throne of heaven, although not always evil. Still, battles between the two rival factions of the Devas (Gods) and Asuras (demons) are very common in the Hindu mythological tales.

Since the topic at hand here revolves around the issue of early forms of Hinduism, we'll necessarily take the Vedic religion into account.

What do these religions say about the Problem of Evil 

The existence of evil in the world has always been a question of interest to the people of the ancient times. It is interesting to see that most of these religions do not attribute characteristics such as omnipotence and omnipresence to any singular deity. Thus, no supreme god reigns over the pantheons of these religions, although very powerful deities such as Zeus, Indra and Odin might lead them.

Let us take the example of Indra. As the leader of the Vedic Gods of the Aryan religion, Indra commands the gods in battle. He is most specially regarded as the slayer of the demon Vrtra. In the Vedas, we see that Vrtra might actually refer to the antithesis of gods, a giant snake or dragon-like creature(he has been called Ahi repeatedly in the Vedas, meaning snake). In the battle, Indra first visits Tvstr, the weaponsmith of the Gods, who presents him with the Vajra (thunder). He drinks Soma heavily, and then proceeds to battle. Finally, he destroys Vrtra, frees the waters (rains) and Dawn-Goddess Ushas from Vrtra's captivity, thereby unleasing a new era.

Early explanations of this account of battle might be that, the God of rain and plenty (Indra) battles the demon of draught (Vrtra), defeating him and bringing in the much required showers for harvest. This matches the event of the arrival of the monsoons beautifully.

The doctrine is Karma is quite simplified
in this picture

However, another interpretation might be put forward in this case. In later Shaivite traditions, the Vedic Indra is hailed as a form of Shiva, the destroyer. And thus, Indra, as a manifestation of Shiva's Tamas (destructive and disruptive form), battles evil (Vrtra). In the Yogic philosophy, Indra might even be interpreted as the symbol of resourceful spiritual activity, the dynamic nature of the Yogi, his internal positivity, that slays the demon of draught (to be interpreted as sleuth, lethargy and static nature).

It is to be mentioned and understood here, that Indra, even though the most powerful of the Vedic deities, is not necessarily omnipotent. Similarly, in the Greek tale of Titanomachy, we see how Chronus (Saturn) frees the Typhon from the depths of Tartarus. Typhon, as a demon of disruption and chaos, can be thought to symbolize evil. And as the hero, Zeus battles the Typhon and defeats him.

In the Norse account of Ragnarok or the final battle between the gods and demons, we see Thor slay Iormungandr. Here, the latter is a massive serpent that encircles the earth.

Thus, in almost all the accounts, we see that a legendary hero or god battles the serpentine creature of evil. Thus, a sort of dualism emerges, where the evil isn't controlled by the god who battles it. But in the war that follows, the god usually emerges triumphant. But since the god or the hero isn't omnipotent, evil might exist still in the universe following his triumph, emerging in yet newer forms.

Another interesting point to note is that, usually evil is considered a byproduct of chaos or disorder, while good and order are considered symonymous. This may not sound right to everyone, but I guess it's a good early way of simplifying the problem.

The Yogic interpretation of the Vedic battle - Manichaenism? 

The Trimurti, Brahma, Visnu and Maheshwara

In the Yogic interpretation of the cosmic duel between Indra and Vrtra, we see that Indra symbolizes dynamic nature and activity of the Purusha or the Yogi, while Vrtra can be considered to symbolize passivity (draught is a time when the nature remains static, without much activity), and the lower principles of being. Thus, Indra is a representation of the higher being, or the spirit, while Vrtra stands for the desires of the flesh that need to be conquered.

Thus, seeing Indra as the spirit and Vrtra as the body of flesh and blood, we approach a solution that is very close to the Manichaen interpretation of the Problem of Evil. In the Manichaen religion, God isn't all-powerful. Good arises from the spirit, while evil arises from the body. A constant battles follows, between the two. Thus, evil is thought to exist independently of the concept of a powerful (but not all-powerful) god.

Similarly, to re-visit the Parsi scenario, Ahura Mazda is potent but no omnipotent. A constant battle must go on before Angra Manyu is finally defeated. And it is the responsibility of the just and noble man to side with Ahura Mazda and his aspect the Spenta Manyu, in this battle against evil.

Post-Vedic Hinduism on the Problem of Evil 

Following the transformation of the Brahminic religion of the Vedas, we see the rise of a new system of theology, focusing more on the presence of an all-powerful, all-good God. To the Vedantic Rishi, even this 'God' might be nothing more than an illusion, but to the general masses, a Trimurti of Godhead, consisting of Brahma, Visnu and Shiva gradually emerges. The Trimurti is the Sakara (manifested) form of the supreme God, and are one and the same. When God creates, he is Brahma. When he preserves and protects, he is Visnu. And when he finally destroys and transforms the cosmos, he is Shiva. This concept of the Trimurti didn't initially gather many supporters, primarily because of the staunch devotion of the Vaishnavites to Visnu and Shaivites to Shiva, who thought it better to champion their respective gods as the supreme head of the cosmic order rather than leading ground for potential opponents.

In the Vedantas, we see that the whole world (the material world, primarily) is nothing other than an illusion. It's an imperfect reflection or a perfect reality, the Brahman. Brahman is beyond good or evil, while the world appears to house them both. Thus, the very good and evil that we witness are part of that illusion.

The God of the Vedantas is similiar to the impersonal
god of Spinozha, who doesn't concern himself with
the material world

In Shankaracharya's resolution of the problem, good and evil only appear to exist in the phenomenal world, the material world. One merely harvests he results of his own Karma and thus the omnipotent Brahman, who has granted free will to all his living creations, is not responsible for the suffering of the individual. However, beyond this world, as a wise man realizes, no evil or good exists.

In the more popular and mainstream form of Hinduism, we see that the human kind is considered to have free will. God doesn't appear to interfere in the actions of the human being, and thus should not be held responsible for the consequences that the Jeevatma (the soul) has to deal with.

Here, something called the path of Dharma (righteousness) is taken into account. Hinduism is a very complex religion, but a general hypothesis that we can build is that, all human beings (according to Hinduism) are expected to behave in accordance with the Dharma. What this Dharma actually is, is difficult to explain. But generally speaking, we can draw the conclusion that it is essentially the right way of living, the system of actions that is in alignment with the laws of the universe. Whoever opposes the Dharma suffers, whoever follows it is rewarded, but only in the long run.

In Sri Ramakrishna's beautiful example, we see that Ishvara (God) is considered to be analgous to a lamp. On its one side, a man goes on faking currency. On the other side, another goes on reciting Gita. Ishvara or the lamp gives light (opportunity for action) to both of them. But in the long run, the former is imprisoned, while the latter receives spiritual enlightenment. Thus, Brahman should not be held responsible for the suffering or reward that the individual soul brings on itself.