Guest guest Posted January 25, 1999 Report Share Posted January 25, 1999 Namaste First, I would like to thank all of you wonderful friends for helping me dispel my doubt. However, I have more to ask and say. Please correct me if I am wrong and I hope to learn more from the much knowledgable list members. Firstly, I can't seem to accept that 'Free-will' is after all Free. Anything that's within the realms of Maya is bound by Time, Space or Causality. As such, the free-will belonging to the buddhi which is a faculty of the mind cannot exist on its own. It has to be dependent if accepted as such. I find Sri Jay's illustration about the rope and the goat very valid. Somehow or rather I find it difficult to accept the term 'free-will'. 'Will' seems more appropriate. Please comment. Om Shanti Kathi > > sadananda [sMTP:sada] > Monday, January 25, 1999 8:34 PM > advaitin > 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 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 >K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan > >Firstly, I can't seem to accept that 'Free-will' is after all Free. >Anything that's within the realms of Maya is bound by Time, Space or >Causality. As such, the free-will belonging to the buddhi which is a >faculty of the mind cannot exist on its own. It has to be dependent if >accepted as such. I find Sri Jay's illustration about the rope and the goat >very valid. Somehow or rather I find it difficult to accept the term >'free-will'. 'Will' seems more appropriate. > >Please comment. > >Om Shanti >Kathi Shree Kathirasan, Your very first statement itself is an exercise of your free-will. The freedom beyond maaya is the freedom of the absolute that Greg referred to. There is no further discussion of even a will and will-er. The concept of maaya and the free-will at the Buddhi level obviously within the realm of maaya and is time bound. Free-will arises when there is a doer-ship. When I recognize that I am no more a doer there is no question of free-will either-- you are just a witness and hence Krishna declares - prakRityaivaca kramaani kriyamaanaani sarvashhaH| yaH pasyati tadaatmaanam akarthaaram sa pasyati|| All activities are performed by the prakRiti alone whoever sees this, sees that one is a non-doer in all the actions. PrakRiti is nothing but maaya. Actions and results - causes and effects all are time bound and within the realm of maaya. If we know that, in its true import as Krishna emphasizes, then one can see that one is never a doer and therefore question of free-will never arises. Free-will is a will to act, not to act and act in a different way. That comes into picture when one has the notion that one is actor or doer. That arises when one is not free from his ignorance! Thus free-will is the freedom of the prisoner - as JK refers to. Hence let us be clear in this - All the freedom that we are talking about (and we can talk about) is the freedom of the prisoner who is chained by his ignorance as implied by the simple example of Bhaghavaan Ramakrishna paramahamsa. Hence in our discussion we should be aware when we jump from one reference (absolute freedom) to the state of Jeeva who is bounded by maaya. So long as we take the maaya to be real, it is no more maaya and projected world is then real and within that frame of reference, all laws including the laws of free-will operate. Buddhi is part of the suukshma shareera and it is, like gross body, the product of kaaraNa shareera (causal body which is nothing but vaasanaas). Within this frame of reference, the laws of causation and the effects and results operate. As a human who has intelligence, I have a choice to exercise my choice to act, not to act and to act differently. I do have limitation of my equipments - physically at body level, mentally at mind and intellect level - within my limitations I have a choice to make - Should I be a vegetarian or non-vegetarian, should I eat Indian food or Chinese food or Mexican food or bland American food - I have a choice - My choice can get more and more limited if no food is available or limited food is available. Then to be or not to be - that is the question! What is available, as Ram discussed, depends on my prarabda- results of my previous actions upto that point in time - As I see it, most of the confusion in terms whether there is a free will or not etc. arises when we jump from one reference to the other, sometimes without even recognizing that. From absoluteness all this discussion has no relevance. From the relative sense or vyavahaara which is the real of maaya, all laws operate in a self-consistent manner since Iswara the creator of these laws is sarvaJNa - all knower who cannot fault. Within the creation there are laws that are mendable or amendable but also laws that we can either mend or amend - such as gravitational laws or physical laws that govern the universe and including the cause-effect laws. For example you have a choice to respond to this or not to respond to this and how you want to respond to this, should you decide to respond. Some in the past responded in such a language that the moderator forced himself to exercise his free-will. They exercised their free will and he exercised his free-will. All laws are self-consistent. Even people behave inconsistently - they are still consistent within the frame work of their minds. There is an order within the disorder. If one has correct perspective one can see the beauty everywhere and the grandeur of the creation. True, free-will does not mean absolutely freedom since in absolute freedom this question of free-will does not arise. Free-will is within the vyavahaara and bounds of maaya - but if we know 'in truth' that it is maaya, then we have already changed the reference and Krishna's statement above operates - then the whole discussion has no meaning - It falls within the part of maaya or iswarya of the Lord. 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 26, 1999 Report Share Posted January 26, 1999 Namaste Sri Sadananda Thanks alot for the beautiful explanation. And all the patience you had to write an elaborate mail. I truly appreciate it. I feel my doubts are cleared and I owe it to all the list members who contributed. Thanks a million. Om Shanti Kathi > > sadananda [sMTP:sada] > Tuesday, January 26, 1999 8:29 PM > advaitin > Re: Free-Will > > sadananda <sada > > >K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan > > > >Firstly, I can't seem to accept that 'Free-will' is after all Free. > >Anything that's within the realms of Maya is bound by Time, Space or > >Causality. As such, the free-will belonging to the buddhi which is a > >faculty of the mind cannot exist on its own. It has to be dependent if > >accepted as such. I find Sri Jay's illustration about the rope and the > goat > >very valid. Somehow or rather I find it difficult to accept the term > >'free-will'. 'Will' seems more appropriate. > > > >Please comment. > > > >Om Shanti > >Kathi > > Shree Kathirasan, > > Your very first statement itself is an exercise of your free-will. > > The freedom beyond maaya is the freedom of the absolute that Greg referred > to. There is no further discussion of even a will and will-er. The > concept of maaya and the free-will at the Buddhi level obviously within > the > realm of maaya and is time bound. Free-will arises when there is a > doer-ship. When I recognize that I am no more a doer there is no question > of free-will either-- you are just a witness and hence Krishna declares - > > prakRityaivaca kramaani kriyamaanaani sarvashhaH| > yaH pasyati tadaatmaanam akarthaaram sa pasyati|| > > All activities are performed by the prakRiti alone whoever sees this, sees > that one is a non-doer in all the actions. PrakRiti is nothing but maaya. > Actions and results - causes and effects all are time bound and within the > realm of maaya. > > If we know that, in its true import as Krishna emphasizes, then one can > see > that one is never a doer and therefore question of free-will never > arises. > Free-will is a will to act, not to act and act in a different way. That > comes into picture when one has the notion that one is actor or doer. > That > arises when one is not free from his ignorance! Thus free-will is the > freedom of the prisoner - as JK refers to. > > Hence let us be clear in this - All the freedom that we are talking about > (and we can talk about) is the freedom of the prisoner who is chained by > his ignorance as implied by the simple example of Bhaghavaan Ramakrishna > paramahamsa. Hence in our discussion we should be aware when we jump > from > one reference (absolute freedom) to the state of Jeeva who is bounded by > maaya. So long as we take the maaya to be real, it is no more maaya and > projected world is then real and within that frame of reference, all laws > including the laws of free-will operate. > > Buddhi is part of the suukshma shareera and it is, like gross body, the > product of kaaraNa shareera (causal body which is nothing but vaasanaas). > Within this frame of reference, the laws of causation and the effects and > results operate. As a human who has intelligence, I have a choice to > exercise my choice to act, not to act and to act differently. I do have > limitation of my equipments - physically at body level, mentally at mind > and intellect level - within my limitations I have a choice to make - > Should I be a vegetarian or non-vegetarian, should I eat Indian food or > Chinese food or Mexican food or bland American food - I have a choice - My > choice can get more and more limited if no food is available or limited > food is available. Then to be or not to be - that is the question! What > is > available, as Ram discussed, depends on my prarabda- results of my > previous > actions upto that point in time - > > As I see it, most of the confusion in terms whether there is a free will > or not etc. arises when we jump from one reference to the other, > sometimes > without even recognizing that. From absoluteness all this discussion has > no relevance. From the relative sense or vyavahaara which is the real of > maaya, all laws operate in a self-consistent manner since Iswara the > creator of these laws is sarvaJNa - all knower who cannot fault. Within > the creation there are laws that are mendable or amendable but also laws > that we can either mend or amend - such as gravitational laws or physical > laws that govern the universe and including the cause-effect laws. > > For example you have a choice to respond to this or not to respond to this > and how you want to respond to this, should you decide to respond. Some > in > the past responded in such a language that the moderator forced himself > to > exercise his free-will. They exercised their free will and he exercised > his free-will. All laws are self-consistent. Even people behave > inconsistently - they are still consistent within the frame work of their > minds. There is an order within the disorder. If one has correct > perspective one can see the beauty everywhere and the grandeur of the > creation. > > True, free-will does not mean absolutely freedom since in absolute freedom > this question of free-will does not arise. Free-will is within the > vyavahaara and bounds of maaya - but if we know 'in truth' that it is > maaya, then we have already changed the reference and Krishna's statement > above operates - then the whole discussion has no meaning - It falls > within > the part of maaya or iswarya of the Lord. > > 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 27, 1999 Report Share Posted January 27, 1999 On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 K Kathirasan <kathirasan wrote: > Firstly, I can't seem to accept that 'Free-will' is after all Free. > Anything that's within the realms of Maya is bound by Time, Space or > Causality. As such, the free-will belonging to the buddhi which is a > faculty of the mind cannot exist on its own. It has to be dependent if > accepted as such. I find Sri Jay's illustration about the rope and the > goat very valid. Somehow or rather I find it difficult to accept the > term 'free-will'. 'Will' seems more appropriate. Will (saMkalpa), whether considered free or not, is a function of the mind (bRhad 1.5.3). It can be viewed as that activity of mind existing between cause and effect, i.e. desire plus action. Whether this energy is spent mechanically in seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, or is more intelligently directed to purifying the mind, is where the freedom of choice comes in: you are free to spend your energies in worldly pleasures, or in seeking knowledge. nirbandhas tattva-vidyayA indra-jAlatva-saMsmRtau prArabdhasyAgraho bhoge jIvasya sukha-duHkhayoH The function of knowledge is to show the illusory nature of the world, and the function of fructifying karma is to yield pleasure and pain to the jIva. [ PD 7:177, tr. Swahananda ] Your choice is between these two (or more precisely, karma provides the opportunity to strengthen or weaken true knowledge). How much freedom you have in that choice, depends on the mix between knowledge and karma: an animal, having no such knowledge, has no choice at all; and a jivanmukta, having total knowledge, has no choice either! You have a bit of both, so you are free to choose in which direction to go. How easy that choice is to make, depends on your time horizon: whether the gratification of desire is to be immediate or deferred -- That which in the beginning is like poison, but in the end like nectar, that happiness born from the tranquility of one's own mind, is declared to be sattvic. That which in the beginning, through contact between the senses and their objects, is like nectar, and in the end like poison, that happiness is declared to be rajasic. That happiness which both in the beginning and afterwards, deludes the self, arising from sleep, indolence, and negligence, is declared to be tamasic. [ BG 18:37-39, tr. W.Sargeant ] So you have that choice -- whether you want it or not -- to move in the direction of liberation or in the direction of bestiality. If you merely deny that choice, you will by default move towards bestiality, simply because it is easier and more mechanical. It is your choice: you are free to choose. That is the free will granted to Man. Regards, Charles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 1999 Report Share Posted January 27, 1999 >Charles Wikner <WIKNER > >Will (saMkalpa), whether considered free or not, is a function >of the mind (bRhad 1.5.3). It can be viewed as that activity of >mind existing between cause and effect, i.e. desire plus action. >Whether this energy is spent mechanically in seeking pleasure and >avoiding pain, or is more intelligently directed to purifying the >mind, is where the freedom of choice comes in: you are free to >spend your energies in worldly pleasures, or in seeking knowledge. > > nirbandhas tattva-vidyayA indra-jAlatva-saMsmRtau > prArabdhasyAgraho bhoge jIvasya sukha-duHkhayoH > > The function of knowledge is to show the illusory nature > of the world, and the function of fructifying karma is to > yield pleasure and pain to the jIva. > [ PD 7:177, tr. Swahananda ] > >Your choice is between these two (or more precisely, karma provides >the opportunity to strengthen or weaken true knowledge). How much >freedom you have in that choice, depends on the mix between knowledge >and karma: an animal, having no such knowledge, has no choice at all; >and a jivanmukta, having total knowledge, has no choice either! >You have a bit of both, so you are free to choose in which direction >to go. How easy that choice is to make, depends on your time horizon: >whether the gratification of desire is to be immediate or deferred -- > > That which in the beginning is like poison, but in the end like > nectar, that happiness born from the tranquility of one's own > mind, is declared to be sattvic. > > That which in the beginning, through contact between the senses > and their objects, is like nectar, and in the end like poison, > that happiness is declared to be rajasic. > > That happiness which both in the beginning and afterwards, > deludes the self, arising from sleep, indolence, and negligence, > is declared to be tamasic. > [ BG 18:37-39, tr. W.Sargeant ] > >So you have that choice -- whether you want it or not -- to move >in the direction of liberation or in the direction of bestiality. >If you merely deny that choice, you will by default move towards >bestiality, simply because it is easier and more mechanical. > >It is your choice: you are free to choose. >That is the free will granted to Man. > >Regards, Charles. Charles - beautiful analysis. One is free to choose what choice he wants and defalt is also a choice too. As you imply in the last sentence as a human you have no choice but to exercise the available choices including choice not to act. You have choice in the action but not in the results which are future to the action - as Krishna hammers in the famous sloka - ."karmanyevaadhikarste maa phaleshu kadaachana" 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...
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.