"There may well not be—I will say, more strongly than Clark does, I do not think there logically can be—any numeric limit to the souls or worlds that God creates, nor that God can or should arbitrarily, voluntaristically limit himself to some portion of what he may be the Creator of (that is, anything logically conceivable)."
I should think mere experience should be sufficient to prove this false. For instance I (meaning the specific human being living on this particular planet at this particular time, not some hypothetical alternative version of myself in a multiverse) could logically have a twin brother named James. There is nothing contrary to logic in James existing in the same womb and growing up alongside me. Whereas, in actual fact, I have no such brother.
Allow me to make a few clarifications regarding South Asian religious thought. At the beginning of your text, perhaps following the statements of the book you're reviewing, you talk about liberation as a shared goal between, I'm assuming, "Hindus" and Buddhists. But it's complicated to put all Hindus into the same sack because, actually, you're talking about impersonalist Hindus, whose radically monist philosophy is a vedic translation of the Shunya-vad idea of Buddhists: that Supreme Reality is Nothing. Because stating that Brahman and Atman are one and the same means in practice that God doesn't exist; oneness and nothingness - a vast, all-encompassing void OR light - are basically the same thing.
But Vaishnavism, at least its Gaudiya branch, accepts that God will always be Supreme and living entities will always be minute, however divine in nature. Going beyond this material world, attaining liberation or moksha, is only (like the other three Purushartas) an intermediate stage and not really a goal in itself: the Supreme Purusharta is prema - pure, unconditional, ecstatic love for God. The contingent nature of our worldly identities must be left behind, yes, but only for the sake of realizing our true spiritual identity, which, like God Himself, is eternal. It takes two to tango!
This is related to the Acynthia Bhed Abhed doctrine taught by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the 15th century, which is also known as qualified dualism. Haribol!
Excellent.
Just started reading it last night. A Perennial Digression episode with Clark would be a real treat!
"There may well not be—I will say, more strongly than Clark does, I do not think there logically can be—any numeric limit to the souls or worlds that God creates, nor that God can or should arbitrarily, voluntaristically limit himself to some portion of what he may be the Creator of (that is, anything logically conceivable)."
I should think mere experience should be sufficient to prove this false. For instance I (meaning the specific human being living on this particular planet at this particular time, not some hypothetical alternative version of myself in a multiverse) could logically have a twin brother named James. There is nothing contrary to logic in James existing in the same womb and growing up alongside me. Whereas, in actual fact, I have no such brother.
Allow me to make a few clarifications regarding South Asian religious thought. At the beginning of your text, perhaps following the statements of the book you're reviewing, you talk about liberation as a shared goal between, I'm assuming, "Hindus" and Buddhists. But it's complicated to put all Hindus into the same sack because, actually, you're talking about impersonalist Hindus, whose radically monist philosophy is a vedic translation of the Shunya-vad idea of Buddhists: that Supreme Reality is Nothing. Because stating that Brahman and Atman are one and the same means in practice that God doesn't exist; oneness and nothingness - a vast, all-encompassing void OR light - are basically the same thing.
But Vaishnavism, at least its Gaudiya branch, accepts that God will always be Supreme and living entities will always be minute, however divine in nature. Going beyond this material world, attaining liberation or moksha, is only (like the other three Purushartas) an intermediate stage and not really a goal in itself: the Supreme Purusharta is prema - pure, unconditional, ecstatic love for God. The contingent nature of our worldly identities must be left behind, yes, but only for the sake of realizing our true spiritual identity, which, like God Himself, is eternal. It takes two to tango!
This is related to the Acynthia Bhed Abhed doctrine taught by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the 15th century, which is also known as qualified dualism. Haribol!
Excellent review. Have you seen Babylon 5. If so, what do you think about it? Thought it might interest you as it is a political sci fi epic.