Guest guest Posted January 22, 1999 Report Share Posted January 22, 1999 The Law of Karma (Cause and Effect) The law of karma explains the entire phenomenon of life on the basic principle of cause and effect. The law of karma goes beyond the law of destiny and it covers the past, present and future. According to the law of destiny, we are just the product of the past. The law of karma says that we are not only a product of the past but we are also the producers of the future. With reference to our past actions we are a product. However, we are solely responsible for producing our future. We are product-producer at one and at the same time. When we pay our attention to our past, we believe that we became the hero, victim or a slave. But when we shift our attention to the future we become the architect, the artist and the master. When we look back, we become a pessimist and if we look ahead, we can become an optimist. As a pessimist we see only the difficulty in every opportunity. As an optimist we are able to visualize the opportunity in every difficulty. We can apply the law of Karma to transform our negative attitude into positive attitude using the correct framework. We may be able to appreciate that our present difficulties are the creation of our past unintelligent actions. It is up to us to realize our potentials by seeking the opportunity to create a better future. The law makes us to be aware that we are the masters of our own destiny. As it is, we are bound by our own past. At the same time we are free to act as we will. Freedom and bondage seem to coexist in all of us. We are like the driver of a train. We can drive the train to wherever we please (free-will) but our movement is restricted by the tracks (destiny) laid down already. Both free-will and destiny play an important role in every action. Free-will is an independent variable and destiny is dependent and it is binding. The independent element is the purushartha or self-effort. The dependent element is the prarabdha or destiny. We are free to choose our action but every action is also subject to the influence of self-effort and destiny. We should recognize that the consequence of our action depends both on the self-effort and our destiny. Our present destiny or fate is the result of our past actions in the past. Our prarabdha is the sum total of our past purusharthas. Our destiny is the effect caused by our past self-effort. If our self-efforts in the past have all been positive, our present destiny will be positive. If they have been negative, our destiny will be negative. Our destiny is proportional to our self-efforts. Destiny is comparable to the bank balance. Savings in the past will result in positive balance. Borrowers will have negative bank balance. Still the earning capacity is independent of the bank balance and we always have the option of changing the bank balance from negative to positive. This is the law of economics. The law of karma uses the same common sense principle. If we use purushartha (self-effort) to our advantage we rise and if we abuse it, we fall. The law is infallible. It is important to know that our effort creates our destiny. We fail to understand this rule and attribute our success or failure to God. God is only the substratum of all activities. God has nothing to do with the mode of activity. God helps those who help themselves. This is the law of nature. When we put in effort, when we fully deserve anything, we get it. But without effort, without deserving we will never get it. There is a saying "First deserve and then desire." Vedanta says, "Deserve and do not desire." If we really deserve, objects reach us of their own accord. The law is unfailing. It never happens that we richly deserve something and we are denied. This is a misconception. If we fail to achieve our objective remember that we do not deserve it. It only confirms that something has gone wrong with our effort. References: 1. Essentials of Hinduism, by V. Krishnamurthy, Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, India 2. Vedanta Treatise, by A. Parthasarathy Vedanta Life Institute, Bombay, India (1984) 3. Sources of Indian Tradition, Volume I By A.L. Basham, etc. Columbia University Press, New York Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 1999 Report Share Posted January 24, 1999 Namaste I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me please. Thanks a million. Om Shanti Kathi > > Ram Chandran [sMTP:chandran] > Saturday, January 23, 1999 3:36 PM > Advaitin List > The Law of Karma (Cause and Effect) > > Ram Chandran <chandran > > The Law of Karma (Cause and Effect) > > The law of karma explains the entire phenomenon of life on the basic > principle of cause and effect. The law of karma goes beyond the law of > destiny and it covers the past, present and future. According to the > law of destiny, we are just the product of the past. The law of karma > says that we are not only a product of the past but we are also the > producers of the future. With reference to our past actions we are a > product. However, we are solely responsible for producing our future. > We are product-producer at one and at the same time. When we pay our > attention to our past, we believe that we became the hero, victim or a > slave. But when we shift our attention to the future we become the > architect, the artist and the master. > > When we look back, we become a pessimist and if we look ahead, we can > become an optimist. As a pessimist we see only the difficulty in every > opportunity. As an optimist we are able to visualize the opportunity in > every difficulty. We can apply the law of Karma to transform our > negative attitude into positive attitude using the correct framework. > We may be able to appreciate that our present difficulties are the > creation of our past unintelligent actions. It is up to us to realize > our potentials by seeking the opportunity to create a better future. > The law makes us to be aware that we are the masters of our own > destiny. > > As it is, we are bound by our own past. At the same time we are free to > act as we will. Freedom and bondage seem to coexist in all of us. We > are like the driver of a train. We can drive the train to wherever we > please (free-will) but our movement is restricted by the tracks > (destiny) laid down already. Both free-will and destiny play an > important role in every action. Free-will is an independent variable > and destiny is dependent and it is binding. The independent element is > the purushartha or self-effort. The dependent element is the prarabdha > or destiny. We are free to choose our action but every action is also > subject to the influence of self-effort and destiny. We should > recognize that the consequence of our action depends both on the > self-effort and our destiny. Our present destiny or fate is the result > of our past actions in the past. Our prarabdha is the sum total of our > past purusharthas. Our destiny is the effect caused by our past > self-effort. If our self-efforts in the past have all been positive, > our present destiny will be positive. If they have been negative, our > destiny will be negative. Our destiny is proportional to our > self-efforts. > > Destiny is comparable to the bank balance. Savings in the past will > result in positive balance. Borrowers will have negative bank balance. > Still the earning capacity is independent of the bank balance and we > always have the option of changing the bank balance from negative to > positive. This is the law of economics. The law of karma uses the same > common sense principle. If we use purushartha (self-effort) to our > advantage we rise and if we abuse it, we fall. The law is infallible. > > It is important to know that our effort creates our destiny. We fail to > understand this rule and attribute our success or failure to God. God > is only the substratum of all activities. God has nothing to do with the > mode of activity. God helps those who help themselves. This is the law > of nature. When we put in effort, when we fully deserve anything, we get > it. But without effort, without deserving we will never get it. There is > a saying "First deserve and then desire." Vedanta says, "Deserve and > do not desire." If we really deserve, objects reach us of their own > accord. The law is unfailing. It never happens that we richly deserve > something and we are denied. This is a misconception. If we fail to > achieve our objective remember that we do not deserve it. It only > confirms that something has gone wrong with our effort. > > References: > 1. Essentials of Hinduism, by V. Krishnamurthy, > Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, India > 2. Vedanta Treatise, by A. Parthasarathy > Vedanta Life Institute, Bombay, India (1984) > 3. Sources of Indian Tradition, Volume I > By A.L. Basham, etc. > Columbia University Press, New York > > > > ------ > To from this mailing list, or to change your subscription > to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at and > select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left. > ------ > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy > focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available > at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 1999 Report Share Posted January 24, 1999 Greetings Kathirasan: The questions that you have raised are quite important. This question was discussed in greater details by members of this list at Advaita-L . Please refer to Advaita archives at URL: http://listserv.tamu.edu/archives/advaita-l.html for the following articles. Item # Date Time Recs Subject 000430 96/08/23 16:09 92 Re: Self-realization and Karma 000433 96/08/24 12:44 54 Re: KARMA 000435 96/08/26 09:49 78 Re: Self-realization and Karma 001647 97/05/12 15:15 14 Non-existance of Freewill 001679 97/05/18 23:49 28 Re: Non-existance of Freewill 001951 97/07/10 15:19 93 Re: The Karmas and our destiny 002417 97/09/21 18:00 89 Re: doership, pre-ordained etc 002421 97/09/22 09:19 20 Re: doership, pre-ordained 002425 97/09/22 12:53 79 the non-reality of free will 002436 97/09/23 09:36 142 Re: doership, pre-ordained etc 002530 97/09/30 07:59 31 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002544 97/10/01 01:51 45 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002568 97/10/01 13:31 40 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002573 97/10/01 11:53 55 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002576 97/10/01 17:57 101 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002577 97/10/01 15:28 68 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002599 97/10/02 11:02 86 Re: The Riddle of Fate and Freewill 002618 97/10/03 12:56 47 Re: Karma 002770 97/10/20 08:12 39 More Karma 003634 98/03/04 13:34 25 Freedom of Choice..... 003639 98/03/05 23:40 40 Freedom of Choice...... 003642 98/03/06 22:14 41 Re: Freedom of Choice .... 003719 98/03/18 11:36 81 Beyond Karma I also request other members (including Sada, Charles, Jonathan, Greg, Frank, Nanda, Gummuluru, Aikya) to respond to Kathirasan's question. -- Ram Chandran Burke, VA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 1999 Report Share Posted January 25, 1999 >K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan > >Namaste > >I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes >dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me >please. Thanks a million. > >Om Shanti >Kathi Ram Chandran <chandran I also request other members (including Sada, Charles, Jonathan, Greg, Frank, Nanda, Gummuluru, Aikya) to respond to Kathirasan's question. -- Ram Chandran Burke, VA Greetings Kathirasin Sri Rama Chandran in his post has provided very elegant analysis of the role of Praarabda(destiny) and Purushaartha(self-effort) and their interplay. If free will is truly just an effect there it is no more free will, since it is the product of some cause. To simply state - what we have is destiny and what we do with what we have is free-will. To do or not do or do it another way (kartum shakhyam, akartum shakhyam, anyathaa kartum shakhyam) are always three choices for a being that is given an intellect to think. Unlike animals, which are driven by instincts, human has intelligence (as Huxley put it - conceptual thinking power) and he has no choice but to choose at every moment of his life - to do, not to do or to do in a different way. This is what has been referred to by as Ram as free-will. That choice to exercise the choice could be result of his past - since to be born as human is the blessing of many lives - as Shankara emphasizes in VivekachuuDaamani durlambham trayamevaitad daivaanugraha hetukam| manushyatvam, mumukshutvam mahaapurusha samsrayaH|| Three things are very difficult to get (in the order) and indeed is the blessings of divine power. Birth as a human, even after human-birth a desire for liberation and, furthermore an acquaintance with great soul that can lend his hand. A brief introductory statement of Sri Mohan (Mic Clark) is close example of what Shankara was emphasizing. Hence to be born as an intelligent being is an effect - but once born one is endowed with free-will. Free-will is provided to make or mar ones future, as Ram discussed elaborately. Free will is there for those who are willing. It is driven by ones own desires which are product of likes and dislikes or vaasanas. Hence as long as one is under the pressure of vaasanas - the desires will be there and to fulfill ones desires one has to act - and there is a free-will to act. How one acts, however, is again dictated by ones value system which is influenced by ones education, culture, upbringing and his past experiences. Although I have free-will to act, I may become a slave to my past habits and has no energy to fight back against my own impulses and say I donot have much choice. The moment I start taking control of my life and begin methodically exercise my choice dictated by proper value system then I grow and I succeed not only in the material field but spiritually too. Hence right way of living or manual for self-unfoldment is emphasized by all scriptures and in Vedanta it is systematized into purushaartha - Dharma, artha, kaama and moksha as the very pursuit of life for a human. Righteous living, earning wealth to security and fulfilling desires and finally the liberation. They have rightly enclosed artha and kaama within the bounds of dharma and moksha - that earning has to be within the righteous means and full filling kaama or the desires should be directing towards moksha. Purushaartha is there because man is given the free-will to act. But once liberated, there is no more desire to act for once happiness, since he already full and complete. Hence any action that comes from the available equipments is only for the benefit of the society. One becomes a witness to the actions as the nature itself takes over what appropriate action are required for the situation. Then the free-will is the free-will of the Lord who is making use of the equipments available for the benefit of the society. Hence, is free-will a dependent or independent - The situation or the environment that one is facing to act is dependent on the result of actions of the past - this is Praarabda that Ram has discussed. Free-will is given to a human (actually earned by his past actions) and that is just the capacity to act within the means and choices available for his actions. How one exercises his free-will is dictated by his value system. Evolution is possible by re-educating one self and setting high goals in life that provides the direction or guide lines to act. Hence sadhana is emphasized as essential for ones evolution. When one is ready, Lord provides the right environment including appropriate teachers and books or advaitinLists for ones evolution! 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 25, 1999 Report Share Posted January 25, 1999 At 09:42 AM 1/25/99 +0800, K Kathirasan ADM NCS wrote: >I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes >dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me >please. Thanks a million. Hari Om! What/who would free will apply to? You as the jiva, or the Absolute which is your true nature? To paraphrase a great writer, Wei Wu Wei, "The relative can never be free, The Absolute can never be bound." If the concept of free will is said to apply to the jiva, then the jiva cannot be free. What the jiva decides or chooses is totally determined by the thoughts, feelings, desires, etc. that arise in the mind and heart. These, in turn, are totally dependent upon the biological makeup, as well as the societal and familial conditioning -- none of which is under the control or the choice of the jiva. Simply put, the "choices" made by the jiva are all beyond the control of the jiva. On the other hand, if the concept of free will is said to apply to the Absolute, then there is nothing BUT freedom. There are no conditions or boundaries or limitations at all upon the Absolute. --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 1999 Report Share Posted January 25, 1999 This cause effect topic is curious. In our everyday lives we must rely on it in order to function. If fire is lit under the water pot, the water will boil. We must rely on that, otherwise there will be problems (water will boil away, pot will break; or we will sit waiting with a pot of cold water, hoping for tea.) If anyone has been following the impeachment trial here in the US, the difficulty of exactly defining cause and effect is well brought out. House Manaager Hutchison well described a series of events in time sequence and made the argument that the preceding had a cause/effect relationship with the latter. The President's lawyers said that because "a" precedes "b", does not mean that "a"caused "b". Casue and effect is rather slippery and belongs firmly to the realm of our daily transactional lives. It usually does not stand much analysis or investigation. Now there are other topics which have been being discussed here recently. That is karma and reincarnation. Reincarnation remains ever a matter of belief, that is, something which cannot be proven without doubt, without a variety of alternative explanations which logically work just as well as the idea of individual reincarnation. In spite of studies like those of Dr. Ian Stephenson of past life memories which can be verified, we can still come up with alternative explanations. Karma and reincarnation are useful ideas and thus also fall into the realm of the transactional realm. True, reincarnation means we must involve nonphysical conditions far beyond the water boiling for tea example, but it is still transactional.. In the realm of karma and reincarnation, both useful ideas, free will is essential. Unless you have choice whether to do something, not do it or do it differently, to enact the cause, how can there be an effect in your current life or in a future lifetime. The animal does not choose it is said but acts from instinct. Also the animal has no "I". Maybe it has a group sense but not a developed "I". Besides not worrying whether its horms are more or less attractive than those of another bull, the bull has no "I" to accumulate a record of wrong and right actions. Indiividual people seem to have this ego, seem to have the ability to judge the intention and quality of their own actions. There seems to be free choice which also seems to be underdeveloped in some people (who live on automatic pilot) and well developed in others who are more thoughtful and try to choose their actions consciously. Free will, karma and reincarnation seem to be part of the transactional life of individuals with biographies, times of birth and death. Debates about their exact nature will continue endlessly because this entire realm, the daily lifetimes, the transactional realm, is the realm of the apparently real, the Maya if you will. What of the Self itself, the Atma which is Brahman? As existence, consciousness, ever adequate, the Self has no shape which needs to come into being, no limbs with which to act, let alone choose. Choosing (free will) belongs to buddhi. Action belongs to the mind, voice and body. These are the arena of free will enlivened by the self. We must learn about the fire under the water pot in order to function in our physical lives. So that level of causality is crucial in our growing up years. As youth and adults, we may develop a love for being awake in our lives so that our choices are conscious and we can learn from our mistakes. At that pont, the limits of the transactional world will surely reveal themselves and we may be compelled to learn about that Self which does not change. Is it in Katha that the teacher says we have been so well trained all our lives to look outward but that the truth is within? Similarly we are so carefully trained as doers, in dharma, in the action/reaction, the karma and reincarnation list of shoulds, that it may take a while to get used to the truth that I am the Existent Consciousness which not only does not act, but never acted, cannot act, doesn't even have preferences, what to talk of free will, a karma record and lists of past lives. For most of us, this is very radical. However, even from the point of view of the person in the world, it is freeing, like nothing else, from all those factors which limit the effectiveness of actions in daily life. What if the current cultural formula for success and happiness is bunk? What if all the things people have said about your worthiness is total hot air? What if your own beliefs about your goodness (or lack of it) are, well, like lies that you've picked up or formulated based on incorrect understanding? What if it is true that you are the existence of everything that ever was, the consciousness of every being who ever existed or will exist? When others see you through the lens of their own understanding and biography, what if you are the consciousness envisioning what they see? What if, right here and now, you have complete freedom? What would you do with your life? This is a "free will" outside the usual discussions of the topic. Aikya sadananda <sada advaitin <advaitin > Monday, January 25, 1999 4:34 AM Re: The Law of Karma (Cause and Effect) >sadananda <sada > >>K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan >> >>Namaste >> >>I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes >>dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me >>please. Thanks a million. >> >>Om Shanti >>Kathi >Ram Chandran <chandran > >I also request other members (including Sada, Charles, Jonathan, Greg, >Frank, Nanda, Gummuluru, Aikya) to respond to Kathirasan's question. > >-- >Ram Chandran >Burke, VA > >Greetings Kathirasin > >Sri Rama Chandran in his post has provided very elegant analysis of the >role of Praarabda(destiny) and Purushaartha(self-effort) and their >interplay. > >If free will is truly just an effect there it is no more free will, since >it is the product of some cause. > >To simply state - what we have is destiny and what we do with what we have >is free-will. To do or not do or do it another way (kartum shakhyam, >akartum shakhyam, anyathaa kartum shakhyam) are always three choices for a >being that is given an intellect to think. Unlike animals, which are >driven by instincts, human has intelligence (as Huxley put it - conceptual >thinking power) and he has no choice but to choose at every moment of his >life - to do, not to do or to do in a different way. This is what has >been referred to by as Ram as free-will. That choice to exercise the >choice could be result of his past - since to be born as human is the >blessing of many lives - as Shankara emphasizes in VivekachuuDaamani > durlambham trayamevaitad daivaanugraha hetukam| > manushyatvam, mumukshutvam mahaapurusha samsrayaH|| >Three things are very difficult to get (in the order) and indeed is the >blessings of divine power. Birth as a human, even after human-birth a >desire for liberation and, furthermore an acquaintance with great soul that >can lend his hand. A brief introductory statement of Sri Mohan (Mic Clark) >is close example of what Shankara was emphasizing. > >Hence to be born as an intelligent being is an effect - but once born one >is endowed with free-will. Free-will is provided to make or mar ones >future, as Ram discussed elaborately. Free will is there for those who are >willing. It is driven by ones own desires which are product of likes and >dislikes or vaasanas. Hence as long as one is under the pressure of >vaasanas - the desires will be there and to fulfill ones desires one has to >act - and there is a free-will to act. > >How one acts, however, is again dictated by ones value system which is >influenced by ones education, culture, upbringing and his past experiences. >Although I have free-will to act, I may become a slave to my past habits >and has no energy to fight back against my own impulses and say I donot >have much choice. The moment I start taking control of my life and begin >methodically exercise my choice dictated by proper value system then I grow >and I succeed not only in the material field but spiritually too. Hence >right way of living or manual for self-unfoldment is emphasized by all >scriptures and in Vedanta it is systematized into purushaartha - Dharma, >artha, kaama and moksha as the very pursuit of life for a human. Righteous >living, earning wealth to security and fulfilling desires and finally the >liberation. They have rightly enclosed artha and kaama within the bounds >of dharma and moksha - that earning has to be within the righteous means >and full filling kaama or the desires should be directing towards moksha. >Purushaartha is there because man is given the free-will to act. But once >liberated, there is no more desire to act for once happiness, since he >already full and complete. Hence any action that comes from the available >equipments is only for the benefit of the society. One becomes a witness >to the actions as the nature itself takes over what appropriate action are >required for the situation. Then the free-will is the free-will of the >Lord who is making use of the equipments available for the benefit of the >society. > >Hence, is free-will a dependent or independent - The situation or the >environment that one is facing to act is dependent on the result of actions >of the past - this is Praarabda that Ram has discussed. Free-will is given >to a human (actually earned by his past actions) and that is just the >capacity to act within the means and choices available for his actions. >How one exercises his free-will is dictated by his value system. Evolution >is possible by re-educating one self and setting high goals in life that >provides the direction or guide lines to act. Hence sadhana is emphasized >as essential for ones evolution. When one is ready, Lord provides the >right environment including appropriate teachers and books or advaitinLists >for ones evolution! > >Hari Om! >Sadananda > > > > > > > > >K. Sadananda >Code 6323 >Naval Research Laboratory >Washington D.C. 20375 >Voice (202)767-2117 >Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > >------ >To from this mailing list, or to change your subscription >to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at and >select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left. >------ >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 1999 Report Share Posted January 25, 1999 At 10:32 AM 1/25/99 -0800, Aikya Param wrote: Hari OM Aikya, >What if the current cultural formula for success and happiness is bunk? >What if all the things people have said about your worthiness is total hot >air? What if your own beliefs about your goodness (or lack of it) are, >well, like lies that you've picked up or formulated based on incorrect >understanding? What if it is true that you are the existence of everything >that ever was, the consciousness of every being who ever existed or will >exist? When others see you through the lens of their own understanding and >biography, what if you are the consciousness envisioning what they see? What >if, right here and now, you have complete freedom? What would you do with >your life? This is a "free will" outside the usual discussions of the >topic. These are great questions. Let me ask you a question. If we ARE the consciousness of every being who ever existed, and we ARE the consciousness that sees what everyone sees, and we DO right now have complete freedom, then... Then isn't it consciousness as Consciousness Itself that has all these things, not Aikya, Greg, etc.?? Consciousness appears as the illusory entities, but the illusory entities do not inherit by themselves all the attributes of That (Consciousness) in which they appear. This is like the difference noted by William Samuels, in a book called THE CHILD WITHIN US LIVES. It is more accurate and humble to say that "God is being me" than to say that "I am God." --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, K Kathirasan ADM NCS wrote: > K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan > > Namaste > > I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes > dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me > please. Thanks a million. > > Om Shanti > Kathi > Namaste. My two cents worth of view on this topic. Everything we perceive (and/or infer) in this objective world is an effect. It is an effect of the "past" causes. The ultimate cause for all this is ignorance. Anything that is perceived/inferred in the wake-up state and the dream-state is bound by cause-effect (kArya- kAraNabaddhau - GauDapAdakArika 1.11). Destiny and free-will are no exception. Destiny is generally understood as an effect of the previous actions performed by the jeeva either in this life or in previous lives. This can be traced ad-infinitum backwards to the same moment when avidyA has started which is anAdi, without beginning. The whole concept vanishes when we get rid of our ignorance. Free-will can be understood as what the jeeva thinks is his/her freedom to act in a given situation to do one way, or to do in a different way, or not to do at all. Little does he/she know that whatever way he/she acts (including non-action) is not really the free choice, but if we have a glimpse of the future, we will know that is exactly the way the jeeva would act in that situation. Thus the free-will is not really a free-will. This is also an effect, the effect of our viveka, our sense of discrimination between what is right and what is wrong. Our viveka is an effect of our past understanding, our past actions, which can again be traced as effects all the way to beginning of avidyA, which is anAdi, without a beginning. While avidyA has no beginning, it has an end. The end is when our final layer of ignorance is peeled out.. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 >Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy > > >Free-will can be understood as what the jeeva thinks is his/her >freedom >to act in a given situation to do one way, or to do in a different way, >or not to do at all. Little does he/she know that whatever way he/she >acts (including non-action) is not really the free choice, but if we >have a glimpse of the future, we will know that is exactly the way the >jeeva would act in that situation. Thus the free-will is not really a >free-will. This is also an effect, the effect of our viveka, our sense >of discrimination between what is right and what is wrong. A word of caution. Free will is intimately related to action and actor - Action has relevance only in the present - result which is an effect is future to the action. Choice is choice in the present. I have no choice in the past nor in the future - only choice is choice in the present. Free-will as I understand is not what Jeeva thinks or does not think that he has free will or not- As long as he has intellect to use - he has a choice and that is part of being a man. Also that he has a choice to act or not to act, has a relevance only in the present where action can be done. When someone behaves like animal and looses the control of intellect and act without thinking or - without thinking properly or impulsively or instinctively- In that case they are only two legged animal - free-will is cut off since he is now an animal and no more a man. When he comes back to human state he may start repenting why he acted like a brute. That repentence is again a present choice of action because he has intellect to think. But as long as one is human (it is the glory of being a human and has a part of the creative mind of the Iswara -man is created in the image of the God!), he has no choice but to exercise his choice. Let us analyze the future now - In future, when one thinks about his past actions and environments, and now makes a new judgment call, whether he exercised his choice in the past properly or not, and brooding about his past or and come to a decision intellectually that he did not have any choice or much choice but be prisoner of his environment, and thus intellectually he can pass the buck -all that choice of evaluation is his intellectual choice to brood about the past and at that time when he is brooding over his past - that evaluation is again thinking which is an action in the present when he is thinking. Thus as long as he has the notion that he is an actor - kartutva bhaava, he had the choice, however limited that choice was. He exercised that choice and therefore he is accountable for the choice he exercised. If he has no choice at any time then he is not accountable either for the actions that resulted and he should not have vaasanaas resulting from those actions and there is no bondage for him. Choice comes along with the kartutva bhaava and accountability also comes with it. All are of course are due to ignorance. When one has realized, one is a different reference state and all this discussion of free-will has no meaning. >Our viveka >is an effect of our past understanding, our past actions, which can >again be traced as effects all the way to beginning of avidyA, which >is anAdi, without a beginning. One should be careful here. Viveka that I have up to the point in time is due to my past experiences, provided I used my intelligence to learn from my past experiences. But viveka is not just due to past alone - then no learning in my present actions can come and this discussion on advaita vedanta will be useless since we cannot learn from each other. I am able to learn from others only because my intellect is available to explore the unknown. In the future, I can say I was destined to learn - But that is only a conclusion of the intellect at that time which is a present at that time. But when the learning is going on it was present, and I had a choice to keep my mind open or close or to withdraw completely. >While avidyA has no beginning, it has an end. The end is >when our final >layer of ignorance is peeled out. True and that is true for all "ignorance" - including the ignorance of chemistry or vedanta etc. But for the ignorance to get pealed, the intellect has to be available - for that vichaara has to take place. Vichaara is not predestined - It is a present action that I have to choose. As long as I am ignorant (or think I am ignorant), effort is needed to prepare the mind so that learning takes place. Leaning is not by will - or one cannot will the knowledge. But preparation of the mind so that it is conducive for learning is an effort or sadhana - Hence Shankara's famous statement - "chittasya shuddaye karma na tu vastuupa labhyaye". Otherwise sadhana has no role, evolution become a predestined. Hence I would be very careful in discussing what reference we are discussing these issues. As discussed my last post, within maaya, the laws are self-consistent and it is part of vyavahaara where effects and results and choices and free-will are all flow within the realm of time. Once one transcends the time then this discussion also ends since it has a beginning. As one see, these discussions which are result of free-will on the part of discussers and the by-standing readers is becoming a vehicle for learning to take place for those intellects that are open to knowledge. Hari Om! Sadananda > >Regards >Gummuluru Murthy > >------ >To from this mailing list, or to change your subscription >to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at and >select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left. >------ >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy >focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available >at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > 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 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 Namaste. Rather than a pointwise response to Shri Sadananda's post (in response to my earlier post of today), I like to present a state-of-the-thinking response at the moment. In a latter post, I will try to address the many important points raised by Shri Sadananda. As per my understanding: 1. VyavahArika to paramArtha is not a discontinuous or a hard boundary. The intellect tries to understand paramArtha, has glimpses of It and reverts back to vyavahArika mode (for various reasons). If the frequency of crossing this boundary is quite frequent, then finally, the jeeva settles in paramArtha. How do we get to this boundary? Due to God's grace. Human effort is required, no doubt, but it is my belief that the human effort is due to God's grace. 2. I do not see a major difference in what Shri Sadananda is saying and what I am saying. Shri Sadananda is emphasizing the kart^rtvabhAva- the doership. In my thinking, kart^rtvabhAva is present only in a very pale form. Taking the example which Shri Sadananda uses (posting the article in Advaitin list, for example), in my understanding, kartr^tvabhAva is in pale shape only. Without the I-thinking, the jagat does not function (and posting on the advaitin list is part of the jagat). Strength of the kartr^tvabhAva defines how close or how distant we are from that vyavahArika-paramArtha boundary (ahambhAvodayAbhAvo bodhasya paramAvadhih - VivekachuDAmaNi). 3. Shri Sadananda implies in his post that the present is a fleeting second while the past and the future are both infinite in either direction. In my understanding, present has a much wider span, while the past and the future are only blurs. 4. Shri Sadananda touches on the topic of human acting like an animal and loosing intellect. Here, my understanding is: the human does not loose intellect. Intellect is part of that human embodiment. If at one time the human behaves in an animal fashion, that is the action which that intellect has arrived at at that time and is a reflection of that intellect. That is part of the intellectual development of that jeeva. Hopefully, I will be able to prepare another post on this detailing some of my understanding. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 Re your question-- If we ARE the consciousness of every being who ever existed, and we ARE the >consciousness that sees what everyone sees, and we DO right now have >complete freedom, then... Then isn't it consciousness as Consciousness >Itself that has all these things, not Aikya, Greg, etc.?? Consciousness >appears as the illusory entities, but the illusory entities do not inherit >by themselves all the attributes of That (Consciousness) in which they appear. To each one, Aikya, Greg, etc., who is (to be ungrammatical) "I"? We are carefully trained to identify with the body and mind, with the biography in order to function in life. If we become spiritual and adventure in our thinking slightly off the purely physical plan, we may add to the present biography, the biographies of other lives, real or imagined. If, when Greg, Aikya, etc think of themselves, they are thinking of their individual minds, their individual biographies, then "Consciousness" can seem to be something separate. The commentaries of Adshankara say simply (to the point of being dry and dull) and relentlessly make the point that the self of Greg, Aikya, etc. is Consciousness, and that consciousness is one, not two. It is one because it has no form. To count a second, there must be an edge acknowledging which you can count the second. Thoughts have a form. The mind as a collection of thoughts has a form. The biography, the king of thought collections, the core of the individual mind, has form. Thoughts, minds and biographies are sort of real. They are real enough to enable each to experience life, but not real enough to pass the test of being the same in all three periods of time. Even though Greg has his own memories and biography, different from Aikya's, different from Sadananda's, different from Charles Wilner's, different from his neighbor's on each side, from each co-worker, there is no basis to conclude that anyone can count more than one consciousness which has no form. It is one self, one consciousness, which is real and many formful minds and biographies which are only sort of real. When Greg and Aikya, etc. are clear that the formless, nondual (non-triple, non-centenary, non-millenial...am I making up words?) consciousness is that they mena when they say "I", it will be clear. They (Aikya, Greg, etc) are the consciousness that looked out of the eyes of the dinosaurs, out of the eyes of those human beings who first set foot on the moon, out of the eyes of kings and paupers, saints and sinners, and that they are free. When, by habit, in spite of exposure to teaching, it is not quite clear, it may seem that the attributes of Consiousness do not belong to them. The best part is that what is suggested to solve that problem is to continue to listen to qualified teachers expound the teachings. A most pleasant corrective. Oh, by the way, the name Aikya means oneness. We were studying Taittiriya Upanishad when Swamiji gave me the name. We kept coming across Adishankara talking about jiveshvara aikyam, the oneness between the Lord and the individual, or, if you like, the oneness between the totality of consciousness and the stuff of creation and the individual in terms of existence, consciousness and adequacy. Aikya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan Namaste I have this doubt. Is free-will an effect? If it is, then it becomes dependent. If it is not, how does it arise? Could someone enlighten me please. Thanks a million. Om Shanti Kathi [...] Jan: I could observe at least three independent levels of (automatic) thinking (*) and these thought processes will go on until one reaches total inner silence. The rule "what comes in, must go out" applies here too: when a (collection of) thought(s) gains sufficient momentum, one becomes conscious of it and often one is forced into action. So if there is free will, it is manifested first in accepting or rejecting a thought or an idea. Rejecting or accepting will depend on (memory of) experience or thoughts already present on the matter. It leads to the musing one has a free will only two times: in "loosing" the state of pure consciousness and in the decision to "gain" it again: all "in-betweens" are the due to chain of cause and effect Vivekananda center: I have found the best and most satisfying answer from Sri Ramakrishna. He uses simple language and says. A goat is tied with a rope to a post. The goat happily grazes within its circle of freedom. The goat thinks that it is free to decide where to graze. [...] Jan: The only choice for the goat would be to stop grazing; it will make the animal worthless for the owner, who in the context of the story would have had no choice but to release the goat. Likewise, we remain caught in the game of life as long as we are satisfied with it. * Long ago I could observe that when breath, walking and repeating mantra were performed in a synchronized manner, the mantra would start a life of its own, producing a level of thought that would be on the surface during practice and continue under the surface when having to think. Once this was observed, the "mode of operation" became clear and three levels could be detected, the third being rather faint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 1999 Report Share Posted January 27, 1999 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy >1. VyavahArika to paramArtha is not a discontinuous or a hard boundary. >The intellect tries to understand paramArtha, has glimpses of It and >reverts back to vyavahArika mode (for various reasons). If the frequency >of crossing this boundary is quite frequent, then finally, the jeeva >settles in paramArtha. > >How do we get to this boundary? Due to God's grace. Human effort is >required, no doubt, but it is my belief that the human effort is due >to God's grace. Murthy gaaru - that there is a boundary and that one has to cross back and forth until one settles in the Brahman etc., itself a concept within the realm of maaya. These are all notions in the mind. But as long as you feel it, it is so! manaeva manushyaanam kaaraNam bandhamokshayO| bandhaaya vishayaasaktam mutyair nirvishayam srutam|| Mind alone is the cause for the bondage and liberation Longing for pleasures or happiness outside is the bondage and no more longing for them (discovering that happiness within) is the liberation Shree Charles Winker has put this beautifully in his response to Free-will post. >2. > > in my understanding, kartr^tvabhAva is >in pale shape only. Sorry It is not clear to me what you mean by pale shape! >Without the I-thinking, the jagat does not function >(and posting on the advaitin list is part of the jagat). It is not just 'I' thinking - not only I am but I am this or that is the problem. Once I identify that I am the limited (body, mind or intellect) - then I have to do something to solve the problem of limitation and Karthutvabhaava automatically arises. >Strength of the >kartr^tvabhAva defines how close or how distant we are from that >vyavahArika-paramArtha boundary (ahambhAvodayAbhAvo bodhasya paramAvadhih >- VivekachuDAmaNi). The boundary being imaginary, the how close or how far depends only on our imagination! We are as far as we imagine ourselves to be. Remember bondage is only notional and everything associated with bondage are equally notional. But within vyavahaara which itself is notional, all the notions are self-consistently appear to be real! >3. Shri Sadananda implies in his post that the present is a fleeting >second while the past and the future are both infinite in either >direction. In my understanding, present has a much wider span, while >the past and the future are only blurs. I am sorry if my post implies that. What I was conveying is the present is only the real - action can be done in the present, enjoyment is only in the present and life itself is in the present and in present what is there is only our presence. Hence future, past are imaginations in the present. Let us examine responses again: Murthy gaaru wrote: >Little does he/she know that whatever way he/she >acts (including non-action) is not really the free choice, but if we >have a glimpse of the future, we will know that is exactly the way the >jeeva would act in that situation. Thus the free-will is not really a >free-will. My response was: _______ Let us analyze the future now - In future, when one thinks about his past actions and environments, and now makes a new judgment call, whether he exercised his choice in the past properly or not, and brooding about his past or and come to a decision intellectually that he did not have any choice or much choice but be prisoner of his environment, and thus intellectually he can pass the buck -all that choice of evaluation is his intellectual choice to brood about the past and at that time when he is brooding over his past - that evaluation is again thinking which is an action in the present when he is thinking. Thus as long as he has the notion that he is an actor - kartutva bhaava, he had the choice, however limited that choice was. --------------------- I see lot of run-on sentences - but the ideas I think are clear. What I have implied is that in the future when I begin brooding about my past, that brooding action or evaluations etc. are present action at the intellect level. I may brood about my past. and make new conclusions about my accountability. But the truth is when the past was present I had the choice to act since I had the notion that I was the doer. Now which is "future" with respect to my past, I can make new notions about my role in the past - whether I had the choice or no choice etc. But these brooding actions are my present choice of action! To brood or not to brood of my past is the question! I have to choose! >4. Shri Sadananda touches on the topic of human acting like an animal >and loosing intellect. Here, my understanding is: the human does not >loose intellect. Intellect is part of that human embodiment. Remember the slokaas in Ch. II B.G: Dhyaato vishayaan pumsaH... to the Buddhinaashat praNasyati - In the moments of Kaama and Krodha - one looses the intellect and acts like an animal. Intellect is a discriminative thought process and when it is not available or circumvented, that is what is referred to loosing the intellect since it is ineffective or unavailable at that condition of impulsive action. >If at >one time the human behaves in an animal fashion, that is the action >which that intellect has arrived at at that time and is a reflection >of that intellect. That is part of the intellectual development of >that jeeva. This depends on how one looks at the situation. The split between the intellect and mind occurs due to vaasanas interjecting in between. One can become slave to the mind rejecting the better judgment of the intellect due to pressure of Kaama and krodha - Krishana declares : shaknotii haiva yassoDhum praakshareera vimokshanaat| kaamakrodhodbhavam vegam sa yuktaH sukhii naraH|| One who has the capacity to withstand the pressures of kaama and Krodha (raaga and dwesha or likes and dislikes) before one kicks the bucket, that human is the real yogi and he is the one who is happy. The "sin" is defined as the divergence between the mind, the emotional center, and the intellect, the discriminative center. One can have highly developed intellect but mind is not integrated with it - See the fate of President Clinton. Yoga brings that integration - It is not the lack of intellectual development but lack of will to act what one thinks is right and gets carried away what one feels like doing at the impulsive moment due to pressure of kaama and krodha. You may call this lack of appropriate intellectual development - then it is OK - Hence depends on how one defines the intellect vs. mind. > >Hopefully, I will be able to prepare another post on this detailing >some of my understanding. Sure, will be delighted to study. Hari Om! Sadananda > >Regards >Gummuluru Murthy 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 27, 1999 Report Share Posted January 27, 1999 >"jb" <kvy9 >Jan: I could observe at least three independent levels of (automatic) >thinking (*) and these thought processes will go on until one reaches total >inner silence. The rule "what comes in, must go out" applies here too: when >a (collection of) thought(s) gains sufficient momentum, one becomes >conscious of it and often one is forced into action. So if there is free >will, it is manifested first in accepting or rejecting a thought or an idea. >Rejecting or accepting will depend on (memory of) experience or thoughts >already present on the matter. It leads to the musing one has a free will >only two times: in "loosing" the state of pure consciousness and in the >decision to "gain" it again: all "in-betweens" are the due to chain of cause >and effect Jan - Beautiful - Levels are there to go both ways - up in the ladder of evolution or down into the gutters. That choice is ours to make - and that is the expression of free-will or sadhana. Shankara in his Bhajagovindam emphasizes this upward ladder - sat sanghatve nissanghatvam nissanghatve nirmohatvam| nirmohatve nischala tatvam nischala tatve jiivan muktaH|| Company of the good develops detachment and detachment leads to removal of delusion and when the delusion is removed the mind is becomes calm and serene and in the serene mind lead to liberation while living. On the same token Krishna emphasizes and warns the downward ladder - in fact these are the famous slokas of B.G. II- slokas 62-63- that describe step by step how psychological degradation of an individual occurs. These I referred to in my response to Shree Murthy gaaru. But the fact remains that choice to evolve or go down in the drain is our to make! Hari Om! Sadananda > >Vivekananda center: I have found the best and most satisfying answer from >Sri Ramakrishna. He uses simple language and says. A goat is tied with a >rope to a post. The goat happily grazes within its circle of freedom. The >goat thinks that it is free to decide where to graze. [...] > >Jan: The only choice for the goat would be to stop grazing; it will make the >animal worthless for the owner, who in the context of the story would have >had no choice but to release the goat. Likewise, we remain caught in the >game of life as long as we are satisfied with it. > >* Long ago I could observe that when breath, walking and repeating mantra >were performed in a synchronized manner, the mantra would start a life of >its own, producing a level of thought that would be on the surface during >practice and continue under the surface when having to think. Once this was >observed, the "mode of operation" became clear and three levels could be >detected, the third being rather faint. > > > > >------ >To from this mailing list, or to change your subscription >to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at and >select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left. >------ >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy >focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. List Archives available >at: /viewarchive.cgi?listname=advaitin > 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 27, 1999 Report Share Posted January 27, 1999 Namaste. My understanding of what is free-will at this stage of my evolution may be viewed as what I have written in my two previous posts (of January 26, 1999) and this one. I would hope all three posts together would be viewed as a unit rather than piecemeal. On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Shri sadananda garu wrote: > sadananda <sada > > Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy > > > >1. VyavahArika to paramArtha is not a discontinuous or a hard boundary. > >The intellect tries to understand paramArtha, has glimpses of It and > >reverts back to vyavahArika mode (for various reasons). If the frequency > >of crossing this boundary is quite frequent, then finally, the jeeva > >settles in paramArtha. > > > >How do we get to this boundary? Due to God's grace. Human effort is > >required, no doubt, but it is my belief that the human effort is due > >to God's grace. > > Murthy gaaru - that there is a boundary and that one has to cross back and > forth until one settles in the Brahman etc., itself a concept within the > realm of maaya. These are all notions in the mind. But as long as you feel > it, it is so! > > manaeva manushyaanam kaaraNam bandhamokshayO| > bandhaaya vishayaasaktam mutyair nirvishayam srutam|| > > Mind alone is the cause for the bondage and liberation > Longing for pleasures or happiness outside is the bondage and no more > longing for them (discovering that happiness within) is the liberation > Yes, there is no argument about it. Mind alone is the cause for bondage or liberation. We are as close or as far away from the "boundary" as our mind tells. Can we not also ascribe that mind alone is the cause for thinking that we have free-will or that we do not have free-will? I am sure you will agree with this. - My argument in this series of posts is: free-will is an effect, just like destiny is. That is what I stated in my first post. The root cause for all this (these effects) is ignorance, traceable to the beginning of avidyA - anAdi - beginningless. Can we be clear on this above statement ? Is there any objection to the above thinking? -- I agree with Shri sadananda that we set the ground-rules so that we do not jump from vyavahArika to paramArtha and vice versa. What we are looking at are models in the vyavahArika (I stress again the playing field and the mode where this discussion is taking place) which would lead a jeeva to moksha without a discontinuous jump, and models which are consistent with advaitic writings of the past and with upanishads. If we agree on this, let us look at vyavahArika models. After all, in vyavahArika, these are models only. We all agree in vyavahArika, that in paramArtha, there is no action taking place and also that paramArtha is our natural state. Thus, vyavahArika is one where only models can be developed. > > >2. > > > in my understanding, kartr^tvabhAva is > >in pale shape only. > > Sorry It is not clear to me what you mean by pale shape! > > >Without the I-thinking, the jagat does not function > >(and posting on the advaitin list is part of the jagat). > > > It is not just 'I' thinking - not only I am but I am this or that is the > problem. Once I identify that I am the limited (body, mind or intellect) - > then I have to do something to solve the problem of limitation and > Karthutvabhaava automatically arises. > > >Strength of the > >kartr^tvabhAva defines how close or how distant we are from that > >vyavahArika-paramArtha boundary (ahambhAvodayAbhAvo bodhasya paramAvadhih > >- VivekachuDAmaNi). > > The boundary being imaginary, the how close or how far depends only on our > imagination! We are as far as we imagine ourselves to be. Remember bondage > is only notional and everything associated with bondage are equally > notional. But within vyavahaara which itself is notional, all the notions > are self-consistently appear to be real! > I am afraid Shri Sadananda's counter argument in this section is from a paramArtha standpoint. The boundary is certainly real from a vyavahArika viewpoint. Let us keep our discussion to vyavahArika, because from paramArtha, there is no discussion. However again, let us also keep in mind that there are various shades of vyavahArika. Shri Sadananda is well aware of his (and mine also) pujya Guruji's statement that every argument is correct at the level of understanding at which the argument is made. Coming to the boundary between vyavahArika and paramArtha, from a vyavahArika stance, the boundary is there. From paramArtha stance, it is imaginary. From a beginning mumukshu's stance, it is a steep discontinuous boundary. As the mumukshu advances in his/her understanding of the SELF, the boundary becomes gradual, smooth and blurred. But the boundary is still there from a vyavahArika stance. The same applies for kartr^tvabhAva. The kartr^tvabhAva is very strong for a beginning mumukshu, the kartr^tvabhAva becomes weaker (this is what I mean by pale in my above quoted statement) as the mumukshu advances in his/her understanding of the SELF. The kartr^tvabhAva dies out when the mumukshu reaches paramArtha. The same applies for the concepts of free-will. The concept of free-will (the concept that *I* am making the effort) is strong in a beginning mumukshu, this concept becomes weak as the mumukshu advances in his/her understanding of the SELF and the concept dies out when the mumukshu reaches paramArtha. Let us further analyze this concept of free-will. All the above examples are a smooth transition from a beginning mumukshu to reaching paramArtha. I am sure Shri Sadananda agrees with me that it is a smooth transition from beginning mumukshu to paramArtha with no discontinuities in between. Shri Sadananda says human effort is due to human's free-will. I am saying human effort is due to God's grace. Let us take Shri Sadananda's premise to its logical conclusion. There are two difficulties with that premise. 1. Shri Shankara says (in His debate with ManDana Mishra and also in Upadesha sahasrI) that human action does not lead to moksha. If moksha is the result of human effort, moksha then becomes an effect, which is not so. Brahma vidya is not an activity like that of converting Atman which was not Brahman before into Brahman. Further, human effort can be doing one way, doing the other way or not at all. That implies moksha is a process of probability, which is not so. Thus human effort does not lead to moksha. 2. Let us imagine that this jeeva who thinks, by free will he/she puts the human effort and "arrives" at the mokshadwAra. The Absolute can be realized only when the concept of the "I", the ahaMkAra dies out. [VivekachUDAmaNi says "... ahambhAvodayAbhAvo bodhasya paramAvadhih" - The absence of the raise of the sense of "I" of the ego is the culmination of knowledge). That is, for this jeeva, there is a discontinuity at the "boundary" between vyavahArika and paramArtha. Such discontinuity cannot be the case. That means, the kartr^tvabhAva, that the human is doing the effort out of free will has to die out well before the realization of the SELF. That contradicts the model favored by Shri Sadananda. I would be most grateful for any clarifications to my thinking. ----------- There are many other issues which came up in this discussion (like the span of the present, past and future; human intellect and sudden behavior like animal, etc). I think, for the clarity of the main topic, we should restrict our discussion to the main topic only and address the other points in separate threads. > > Hari Om! > Sadananda > Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ 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.