Guest guest Posted January 9, 2001 Report Share Posted January 9, 2001 Dear Gummuluru, Please excuse the phrasing of these remarks lest they seem disrespectful but what is 'bhagavadkR^ipa'? I have never come across the term and Monier-Williams does not help. I was trying to keep the discussion simple but this post seems to have complicated the discussion drastically. I no longer know what people are talking about! I will certainly agree with some members who claim that no conclusion can be reached if all of this is really necessary in order to 'clarify' the issues involved! Sincere best wishes, Dennis >From the perspective from which I am putting the >point across, the discussion is not about fate versus free-will >but bhagavadkr^ipa versus puruShArtha. PuruShArtha here has >the same meaning as free-will in these discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2001 Report Share Posted January 10, 2001 Gummuluru Murthy wrote: > > I use the word bhagavadkr^ipa to mean divine grace. The point I was > trying to make in that discussion (may be the discussion has a lot > more to offer and I requested, probably, a pre-mature cut-off) is: > it is the bhagavadkr^ipa that determines the day-to-day happenings > and maintenance of the jagat. The so-called free-will of human > is part of bhagavadkr^ipa. Without the bhagavadkr^ipa operating, > the human's free-will, if he/she has some, is for nought. Ishwara > does not require human free-will for maintenance of the jagat. > Human free-will does not change Ishwara's intentions. Thus, what > I am saying is: humans think they have free-will and think they > are working on their own accord while a higher truth is Ishwara > is managing things in the vyavahArika, the way things are supposed > to unfold. > hariH OM! murthyji- i see this matter first and foremost as a complete mystery. however, if i had to curve it into a communicable system of [allow me to call it] 'logoic metaphysics,' the above is exactly the way i've come to systemically organize it as well. another [apparently being overlooked factor] is that we would be propounding strong *inescapable* dualism if we attribute egos with free will...on *any* level. this is, in fact, the ONLY hub from where the only real form of illusion gets spun!! (no oxymoron intended! :-) viz. it's only when we consider a given thing **apart** from brahman, that mithya is born. there can be no freewheeling egos. if there were this world would be *pure* chaos! here's something interesting to contemplate: we have highly intelligent international terrorists. we have weapons' grade plutonium available on the black market. we have detailed instructions for making nuclear warheads, a mouse click away! why haven't they used such yet? (well, perhaps i just gave someone the idea. murthyji, please remove this from the archives! hahaha! .. but i need to make this valuable point this one time.) moreover, this point, this email, and the chances or not of this info giving the wrong idea to the wrong people, have all already been predetermined. fact is, isvara has reasons to keep this particular global Playhouse stabilized. and that's why nothing like such scenario will come to pass...at least not for some time. namaste, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2001 Report Share Posted January 10, 2001 On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Dennis Waite wrote: > Dear Gummuluru, > > Please excuse the phrasing of these remarks lest they seem disrespectful but > what is 'bhagavadkR^ipa'? I have never come across the term and > Monier-Williams does not help. I was trying to keep the discussion simple > but this post seems to have complicated the discussion drastically. I no > longer know what people are talking about! I will certainly agree with some > members who claim that no conclusion can be reached if all of this is really > necessary in order to 'clarify' the issues involved! > > Sincere best wishes, > > Dennis > > > >From the perspective from which I am putting the > >point across, the discussion is not about fate versus free-will > >but bhagavadkr^ipa versus puruShArtha. PuruShArtha here has > >the same meaning as free-will in these discussions. > > namaste Dennis, I use the word bhagavadkr^ipa to mean divine grace. The point I was trying to make in that discussion (may be the discussion has a lot more to offer and I requested, probably, a pre-mature cut-off) is: it is the bhagavadkr^ipa that determines the day-to-day happenings and maintenance of the jagat. The so-called free-will of human is part of bhagavadkr^ipa. Without the bhagavadkr^ipa operating, the human's free-will, if he/she has some, is for nought. Ishwara does not require human free-will for maintenance of the jagat. Human free-will does not change Ishwara's intentions. Thus, what I am saying is: humans think they have free-will and think they are working on their own accord while a higher truth is Ishwara is managing things in the vyavahArika, the way things are supposed to unfold. 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.