Guest guest Posted January 18, 1999 Report Share Posted January 18, 1999 Continuing on the theme of 'causality' Revered Sirs I am grateful to the response from Sri Sadanandji. This is a very interesting topic. Sri Sadanandji has put forward few points. Basically from what I understand he states that 'causality' belongs to the realms of 'buddhi and time'. (1) Point 1 raised by the response is that this 'causality' comes out of to the realm of 'Buddhi'. I respectfully disagree. I feel that it cannot be true because Buddhi is the determining faculty of the 'mind' (mahat) hence the law of causation cannot be primarily that which belongs to just one aspect of the mind (and not others). (2) Point 2 raised by the response that 'causality' belongs to the realm of 'time'. Here too I respectfully disagree. I can give you examples of how the micro explain the macro world - here time does not enter into the equation and yet causality is present. Before I take up other points raised by Sri Sadanandji's response - I respectfully request other members to throw more light on this interesting topic. pranams jay of Vivekananda Centre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 1999 Report Share Posted January 19, 1999 >"Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda > >Continuing on the theme of 'causality' > >Revered Sirs > >I am grateful to the response from Sri Sadanandji. This is a very >interesting topic. >Sri Sadanandji has put forward few points. Basically from what I understand >he states that 'causality' belongs to the realms of 'buddhi and time'. > >(1) Point 1 raised by the response is that this 'causality' comes out of to >the realm of 'Buddhi'. I respectfully disagree. I feel that it cannot be >true because Buddhi is the determining faculty of the 'mind' (mahat) hence >the law of causation cannot be primarily that which belongs to just one >aspect of the mind (and not others). Greetings and thanks for the feed-back - Here is some clarification of my thoughts. Buddhi as I understand - is not only nischayaatmika aspect or determining faculty, but also an inquiring aspect too. Inquiry into what is the cause for the observed effect is done by Buddhi and that one agrees and disagrees with others conclusions is also by Buddhi; That is how the knowledge takes place through vichaara - an activity of Buddhi. But bottom line of what was important in my discussion was that the inquiry is in the realm of thoughts or it is of subtler field- kshetram and there is a kshetraJNa, the knower of the field - the subject-object discussion which reduces back to the cause-effect relation. The rest of the emphasis of my discussion is to deduce that thoughts which are effects arise from the cause, sustained by the cause and go back into its cause - hence into its material cause - And that is nothing but the subject, the consciousness. Hence cause-effects are only adhyaasa or superimpositions. > >(2) Point 2 raised by the response that 'causality' belongs to the realm of >'time'. >Here too I respectfully disagree. I can give you examples of how the micro >explain the macro world - here time does not enter into the equation and yet >causality is present. I would be delighted to read your examples of the micro which is beyond the time! > >Before I take up other points raised by Sri Sadanandji's response - I >respectfully request other members to throw more light on this interesting >topic. > >pranams jay of >Vivekananda Centre Welcome for the thought provoking discussions and I join the Vivekananda center in welcoming others input on the topic. Where is everybody? Aikya, Greg, Murthy, Wikner, and other spirited discussers. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 1999 Report Share Posted January 19, 1999 Hi Sadananda and jay of Vivekananda Centre (welcome also!), >Welcome for the thought provoking discussions and I join the Vivekananda >center in welcoming others input on the topic. Where is everybody? Aikya, >Greg, Murthy, Wikner, and other spirited discussers. I was lurking... What about the Mandukya Upanishad, which argues eloquently against the notion of causality altogether. I'm away from the book now, but the second and third chapters use diamond-sharp logic to show the illogicality of any such phenomena as cause-and-effect. --Greg Goode Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.