Book Overview
Title: Does God Exist?
Author: Hans Kung
Translated from German by Edward Quinn
Publisher: Collins Fount Paperbacks, 1978
Pages: 839
This is the most scholarly book I have ever read. It was a birthday gift
I received in 1986 from a Catholic priest who taught me philosophy for two
years. I had abandoned religion as well as God though it might be truer to say
that God had given me up. I was a student of religion. I had ample faith in
God. I used to pray half a dozen times a day. I wrote love poems to Jesus. “You
took the brush and colours danced in my heart.” The ‘you’ in lines that smacked
explicitly of romance in my poems was Jesus. I wrote those love poems when I
was a student of philosophy. The only teacher to whom I dared to show those
poems was the one who gifted me Hans Kung’s magnum opus on my 26th
birthday when I had already proclaimed my atheism loudly enough. [The details
are in my memoir, Autumn
Shadows.]
Hans Kung is one of the most profound theologians of the Catholic
Church. The Church was not quite pleased with many of his views and so he was
even barred from teaching theology. He has written many books though I have
read only two of them, the other being his History of the Catholic Church.
This book is so profound that it will engage even a voracious reader for
months.
The book looks at God from various angles: philosophy, psychology,
mysticism, and religion with a focus on Christianity. Even science and
mathematics make their presence felt in many parts of the books. The very
opening sentence of the book is: “It is not surprising that mathematicians in
particular have always had a special interest in an unconditional, absolute
certainty in the realm of life and knowledge.” There is no mathematics without
certain absolute truths. Hans Kung begins his exploration of God’s ontology
with none other than Rene Descartes, the mathematician who gave us coordinate
geometry without which much of classical mathematics would not exist. Descartes
was a philosopher too. I think, therefore I exist. That remains his most
famous saying. Like all mathematicians Descartes had to establish his
philosophical edifice on a self-evident, absolutely true proposition.
Kung begins with a questioning of those absolute propositions of
philosophy. “Does not consciousness include in addition to and together with
rational thinking also willing and feeling, imagination and temperament,
emotions and passions, which just cannot be attributed rationalistically to
pure reason, but have their own reality, often opposed to reason?” He asks. Man
is not just a cerebral robot. He needs more, much more, than reason to guide
him, to give him meaning in life.
The eminent theologian then moves on to a lot of other philosophers like
Blaise Pascal, Hegel, Feuerbach, Karl Marx, Nietzsche, Kant, and Wittgenstein
and discusses them in great detail. Anyone who is interested in philosophy will
find this book thoroughly exhaustive and stunningly thought-provoking. Kung not
only summarises the views of these philosophers elegantly but also critiques
them subtly and sharply.
He also takes necessary insights from psychology. Adler, Jung and Freud
all come under Kung’s piercing scanner. By its very nature, Kung informs us, “psychological
interpretation alone cannot penetrate to the absolutely final or first reality.”
God remains beyond the rationality of philosophy and the analytics of psychology.
Isn’t God an experience? The last part of Kung’s voluminous book focuses
precisely on that question. No one can arrive at God without faith. In fact, no
one can make life meaningful without the fundamental trust which enables us to
say Yes to reality.
Being a Catholic priest, Kung obviously offers us the God of Christianity
in detail though he would never suggest that Jesus’ God is the only true God. On
the contrary, he states clearly that the Christian experience of God is only
one of the many possible experiences. He dismisses any claim to universalism on
the part of Christianity as “a sign of provincialism”.
People can and do experience God in their own ways. Kung quotes William
James’s definition of religion as “the feelings, acts and experiences of
individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand
in relation to whatever they may consider the divine.” Whatever. Even a
wedge of rock that is made to look like a phallus can lead the believer to a
divine experience.
For Kung, Jesus is the foundation of his divine experience. The God of
Jesus is different from the tyrannical and capricious Yahweh of the Old
Testament. Here is a God who loves, who cares, who is compassionate. Jesus is
the “embodiment of a new attitude to life,” says Kung, “and a new life-style.”
Jesus enables him to accept the evils of life. “I cannot myself attach a
meaning to my living and suffering,” Kung says, “but I can accept it in the
light of the completed life and suffering of this one man.” The sufferings of
Jesus act as the buffer for Kung.
Well, that is where I parted ways with Hans Kung. If Jesus were indeed
God, omnipotent and loving as Christianity envisages him, why couldn’t he show
us a better way than that of the cross? As I put the mammoth book down some time
in 1987 [I think I took about a year to read it], I realised that I had not
travelled much farther from the mathematical logic of Descartes. My approach to
reality remains intellectual even today in spite of the strong element of
romanticism in me. I can stand in awe before a tulip. I can pet a kitten with
the tenderness of a new mother. My love can turn passionate where passion is
required. But when it comes to grappling with life’s realities, my intellect
jumps to the fore.
God is an emotional experience. Even when profoundly religious people
like Hans Kung give me intellectual reasons for their faith in God, I know
ultimately even for them God is an emotional experience. Otherwise God is
nothing. God is the awe that the tulip springs in me. God is the tenderness
that the kitten extracts from my heart. God is the passion in my romance.
Hans Kung may find it difficult to experience that awe, tenderness and
passion without the person of a God to uphold them. He concludes his book thus:
“Does God exist? Despite all upheavals and doubts, even for man today, the only
appropriate answer must be that with which believers of all generations from
ancient times have again and again professed their faith.” What is it? It
begins with faith and ends in trust, Kung answers in the last lines of the book.
It is the instinctual faith of the infant in its mother; it is the conscious
trust of the adult in the love that lies beyond.
Thank you mathaikkal.
ReplyDeleteWelcome. But why murder my name? ')
DeleteIndeed, god is an emotional experience. I believe that we all have the same experience, the believers see them through the name of god while the non-believers don't. Thank you for yet another suggestion. :)
ReplyDeleteYes, Dashy, it's a question of the way rather than the destination. Ways differ. Hinduism, Christianity, or whatever. Or literature in my case.
DeleteThis book may not be easily available.