Guest guest Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 I have not kept up with this thread on Advaitin but here are some thoughts and comments on the "Fate" V. "Free Will" debate. Will pass this on to NDS and HS for those interested. Inquiry about Fate and Free Will is important but there should be no compromises. It should be taken to the limit (within one's own mind). What does it mean? It is the intensity of the inquiry that is needed not the evaluation of "truth" or "falsity" of the doctrine of predetermination (or free will). You can rest assured that from the perspective of the Self, both doctrines, "free will" and "predetermination", are equally unreal and have no standing what so ever! People have pointed out that Ramesh Baleskar states that everything is predetermined. So what? On an issue of this subtle nature, relying on authority is not the best strategy, especially if the goal is that of Self Knowledge. It seems to me that what Baleskar or anyone else says on the matter is quite irrelevant. What do you say? That is important. The actual inquiry on this matter, in order to be fruitful, must take place in one's own consciousness with focus and intensity. Sri Ramana once indicated to a devotee that all was predetermined. At other times the Sage pointed out that reading of scriptures and spiritual practice are premised on Free Will. Both statements have their uses in particular times and places. A devotee may find either philosophy useful. The inquiry about "Fate" and "Free Will" is a device only to open up within to the Self- Knowledge, the Heart, that is untouched by either fate or free will. The constructs of "fate" and "free will" depend on each for meaning and can have no independent existence. It is only minor teachers who are obsessed with "Fate" and the "deterministic" nature of the world who attempt to maintain consistency in their responses. Baleskar certainly fits that category. A true master is not interested in logic or consistency for their own sake. S/He has no investment in "free will" or "determinism." These are mere tools that maybe useful for inquiry. Once the inquiry into the nature of consciousness starts, that itself becomes the tool. The main thing is consciousness, not the constructs that have consciousness as their source. If you follow the constructs outwards, you see the world and are bound. If you follow the constructs inwards through inquiry, you see that You Yourself Are the Consciousness untouched by fate or free will. Love to all Harsha /join Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 Namaste Venkatji, You said: >4. If I have no free will, the scriptures themselves >and all the sadhanas prescribed by them - karma theory, >papa, punya, purushaarthas, Bhakti, Dhyaana, Jnaana >all - become purposeless. I am not sure why Sri Madathil apologizes for his 'intrusion'. I thought that was the purpose of this list. I realize that you had addressed your question to Sadanandaji, but I thought we were all allowed to participate. If there is something I don't understand about the etiquette of this list, I do hope that Sri Ram will enlighten me. Now based on a face-to-face discussion (how fortunate!) with Sri Ram last night, I believe that Sri Madathil has the right idea, from the official Advaitin perspective. It is true that there is no free-will at the paaramaathika level, but there is the *illusion* of free-will at the vyavahaarika level, which is as real as the reality which we (falsely) ascribe to the Jiva. (A rather sophisticated argument, when you think about it.) This is what Sri Ram told me, and if I got it wrong then I must start to worry about my mental faculties. Also, Sri Ram suggested that we were all correct, and were simply confused - as usual - about which level we were speaking from. To be honest, I still have a tiny bit of a problem with this, since I remain convinced (with Sri Dennis) that even the vyavahaarika level is fully deterministic, which seems to preclude any meaningful notion of free-will, as I argued before. (But then, if the free-will is illusory, I am correct after all. It all gets quite subtle.) Anyhow, the point I would like to make to you is this. Assume that I am correct, that everything at the vyavahaarika is deterministic and fore-ordained, and that this negates free-will. I still think that your conclusion quoted above is incorrect. Even in a deterministic (read 'robot-like') world, sadhana can be useful. It simply amounts to good programming. The sadhana is replacing a bad computer program in our vasanas with a good one. So by all means, continue with Sadhana! Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 Dear Sri Benjamin- Ji, I whole heatedly agree. Seeing everything as the will of God is the purest form of devotion. Would you not agree then that my calling Ramesh a minor teacher is the "Will of God". That is what I meant when I said, "you have to take it to the limit". Whether you believe in fate or free will is not really relevant. The question is, with either belief, are you willing to take it to the limit? That is sadhana. It leads to Self Realization. Love to all Harsha Benjamin Root wrote: > > Dear Harsha-ji > > Don't be too 'harsh-a' [ :-) ? ] with Ramesh Balsekar and call him a > 'minor teacher'. Seeing everything as the 'will of God' can be the > purest form of devotion. It amounts to total surrender. And total > peace. > > Besides, it's inspiring to have a successful businessman who is also > an Advaitin. Can you imagine Bill Gates assuming that role? Only in > India... > > And after my lame joke above, I'd like to add another. > > In my previous post to Venkatji, I ended with: > > "So by all means, continue with Sadhana!" > > After I sent it, I wished I had written: > > "So by all means, continue with Sadhana and Sadananda!" > > :-) > > Om! > Benjamin > > Sponsor > <http://us.ard./M=249982.3083889.4452939.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=17050759\ 91:HM/A=1524963/R=0/*http://hits.411web.com/cgi-bin/autoredir?camp=556&llineid=3\ 083889∝=egroupweb&pos=HM> > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity > of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Terms of Service > <>. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 Harvey wrote: > I have noticed that despite billing himself as a close > student of Ramana's, Balsekar doesn't seem to place much > emphasis on inquiry. My understanding is that Balsekar bills himself as a direct student of Nisargadatta ... close to but not identical to Ramana! (Of course, both Ramana and Nisargadatta are must-reads for Adviatins.) Om! Benjamin 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.