free will and prArabdha

[Guest guest]

--- Durga <durgaji108 wrote:

This topic has been extensively discussed in the past.

 

Just in simple statements - what I have is prarabda and what I do with

what I have is free-will. Free will is there until I am free from will.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

>

> Just in simple statements - what I have is prarabda and what I do

with

> what I have is free-will. Free will is there until I am free from

will.

>

 

Dear Sada ji, Nicely said. However, this exercise of the free will

itself is tethered to the prarabdha. For example, constraints imposed

by mental and physical equipment, may not leave much scope for free

will. My life experience teaches me that you may have all the free

will and positive intentions (acharah prathamo dharmaha), some

unknown, unforeseen or unthinkable events/forces/energies can change

the course of your life.

 

regards,

Shailendra

[Guest guest]

Shailendraji - PraNAms

 

The law of action and results are precise - God by definition has to be

impartial and says so - samoham sarva bhuuteShu. He neither favors

anybody nor makes them suffer. Everybody reaps their own karma done

knowingly or unknowingly - like if a child puts hand in the fire, it is

bound to get burned - that is the law.

 

Hence no result in the world comes without a fulfilling cause - whether

one wins millians in lottery and looses phenomically in stocks. Thus

there is power of destiny - results of the precious action.

 

But humman being has will to act in the present - that is purushArtha -

to do, not to do and do it another way. The future prarabda is past

prarabda modified by the present action. Hence there is a room for

progress inspite of the past. In fact, even if one has bundle of

sancita karma, the current effort has dominating effect on the past

too. One can wipe out all the past by present right living. Bhagavan

Ramanuja says it is like lighting a match to the heap of cotton hill.

Hence Shankara says - sat sanghatve nissangatvam. Hence power of sat

sangh is glorified in our scriptures. Sat sangh includes, company of

good, association of good thoughts, participation in the advaitin list!

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

--- bhatnagar_shailendra <bhatnagar_shailendra wrote:

 

> >

> > Just in simple statements - what I have is prarabda and what I do

> with

> > what I have is free-will. Free will is there until I am free from

> will.

> >

>

> Dear Sada ji, Nicely said. However, this exercise of the free will

> itself is tethered to the prarabdha. For example, constraints imposed

>

> by mental and physical equipment, may not leave much scope for free

> will. My life experience teaches me that you may have all the free

> will and positive intentions (acharah prathamo dharmaha), some

> unknown, unforeseen or unthinkable events/forces/energies can change

> the course of your life.

>

> regards,

> Shailendra

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shailendraji:

 

Sadaji has already provided his explanation on how Prarabda operates

on different individuals. You are correct in saying that one's free-

will is itself constrained due to past Prarabda. We should also be

aware that Vedanta doesn't claim that free-will is constant across

the spectrum of the population and consequently we all act

differently when we face the same event such as a train accident but

the outcome of the acccident is not the same for all! Some die, some

get severe injuries and some with no injuries. Different people had

made choices - some didn't board that train, some chose to sit at the

rear compartments, etc., etc. The observers may label some as lucky

and some as unlucky. Those who prepare well for an event will be

always luckier than those who are unprepared!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , " bhatnagar_shailendra "

<bhatnagar_shailendra wrote:

>

> >

> > Just in simple statements - what I have is prarabda and what I do

> with

> > what I have is free-will. Free will is there until I am free from

> will.

> >

>

> Dear Sada ji, Nicely said. However, this exercise of the free will

> itself is tethered to the prarabdha. For example, constraints

imposed

> by mental and physical equipment, may not leave much scope for free

> will. My life experience teaches me that you may have all the free

> will and positive intentions (acharah prathamo dharmaha), some

> unknown, unforeseen or unthinkable events/forces/energies can

change

> the course of your life.

>

> regards,

> Shailendra

>

[Guest guest]

Hello!

 

Those who prepare well for an event will be

always luckier than those who are unprepared!

 

THAT is a highly questionable statement! Maybe think

twice and three times about that!!!

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello,

The preparation also includes one getting fully ready to receive the " fruit of

action "

- whatever it be - with " prasada budhi " ...

Ultimately that is the real preparation, and one who understands that and ready

has less of problem in facing the vyvaharika reality. Is that right?

 

But then that is possible only with education and understanding

which results in understanding what is DHARMA and when one understands that

one is inclined to follow Dharma.

 

namaskaram

 

 

Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote: Hello!

 

Those who prepare well for an event will be

always luckier than those who are unprepared!

 

THAT is a highly questionable statement! Maybe think

twice and three times about that!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Best Jokes, Best Friends, Best Food. Get all this and more on Best of

Groups.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

 

> Those who prepare well for an event will be

> always luckier than those who are unprepared!

 

Hello Steve:

 

The " preparation " is already part of the " event " ...

(as well as the un-preparation)...

 

Regards,

Mouna

[Guest guest]

Mouna--

 

> Those who prepare well for an event will be

> always luckier than those who are unprepared!

 

I did not write the above sentence. I questioned it.

It is a dubious statement which cannot be proved.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste dear Sri Steve:

 

Every statement that we make (whether it is made after thinking once,

or twice or three times) including yours is also questionable! Truth

can never be explained by a statement and that is part of the problem!

 

Prepare well consists of two components (1) PrAbdha (past sadhana or

equivalently efforts of past free-will actions)and (2) current sadhana

or equivalently current free-will actions. In other words Prepare well

determined by both fate (determined by PrArabdha) and free-will.

 

My statement will be highly questionable if it includes only the one

component - current free-will alone! Most of the disappointments are

due to our ignorance not appropriately accounting for PrArabdha. The

outcome of an event becomes uncertain because no one knows the exact

level and degree of the play by PrArabdha.

 

Let me stop here because there is no way for me to stop anyone to

question what I stated before, now or in future! I should be humble

enough to accept this simple fact stop!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

>

> Hello!

>

> Those who prepare well for an event will be

> always luckier than those who are unprepared!

>

> THAT is a highly questionable statement! Maybe think

> twice and three times about that!!!

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Pranams

Quite a fascinating series of posts have ensued on this topic - i have

been under time constraints to contribute - but would like to (or feel

compelled to :-)?) take a few minutes to pen a few thoughts.

 

With regards to the improbabilities of the probability of

orchestrating prarabdha - it may perhaps be worthwhile here to pause

for a second and remind ourselves of where we stand -

a human body alone has trillions of bacteria in his gut and on his

skin, each representing a separate jiva. in the time it takes me to

blink a few trillion of them have died and another trillion born -

perhaps reborn if this alone was their field of activity.

If you add up the trillions of plant,animal and microbial life both

land and multiple time more so in sea, you have a dazzling array of

infinite jivas - all on just Earth - bhulokA - there are quite

possibly manifold more jivas in the other lokas as well.

Confining ourselves to the time-scales of the bhulokA alone, a year of

Brahma is composed of 360 day/night cycles of Brahma, or 720 kalpas,

or 8.64 billion human years. Each kalpa (composed of a 1000 mahAyugAs)

is reigned over by a succession of 14 Manus, and the reign of each

Manu is called a manvantara. A single manvantara is approximately 71

maha yugas.A maha yuga is 4,320,000 human years. There are fourteen

Manus in one kalpa - in this (the Shwetavaraha) kalpa we are in the

period of the seventh (vaivaswata) Manu. One blink of Brahma-ji and

crores of our lifetimes are already over - such is the Divine Order,

ordained in turn by karmas accumulated over an infinite number of

prior births over an infinite number of prior cycles of creation and

destruction. What then to speak of determination of death in one lifespan?

 

So in and through all this " theistic " determinism - is there any scope

for this infinitesmally small human being to have free will? Yes - the

very Order has bestowed upon the human - a power - that is called

icchAshakti - the capacity to desire, to have an intention, a

sankalpa. This icchAshakti, a deliberate capacity to choose - is

lacking in animals and plants - the tiger has to choose between two

deer and decides to run after one of them - it looks like he did

exercise a choice but it really was no choice - were the scenario to

replay a hundred times over the tiger would have chosen that one deer

only, at that one time and place only, as such alone is the diktat of

the Order. In the case of humans alone, is a very small and limited

capacity " to will " " freely "

The freely is in quotes because there are constraints.

A big percentage of what he wills is pre-determined by a variety of

factors that have led-up to that one point in time and cannot truly be

considered as being a component of his freedom to choose. However it

cannot be denied that there is a very small portion of his subsequent

action that is completely untainted by any colourations from the past.

This is what gives rise - simultaneously and seemingly paradoxically -

to the twin concepts of moral responsibility as well as forgiveness

depending on which aspect of this construct one wishes to lay more

emphasis on (- and that itself is to a large extent governed by our

own prior colorations primarily alongwith a small portion of " free " will!)

 

We can liken this to a torrential stream consisting of our prarabdha

karmas which is violently hurtling us inexorably towards pre-ordained

destinations along the banks - we have little control over the

torrents save our own capacity to make small deliberate movements of

our own vehicles - the key here is that these small deliberate moves

have the capacity to add up, to summate, into not only helping us

navigate but also change the kaleidoscope of our river-banks, as well

as the vehicles themselves, lending them greater senses of potency,

and channeling them into easier landscapes where perhaps the torrents

themselves are forced to ease up some, ultimately to be stopped by the

dam (sethu) of self-knowledge as built by a benevolent Guru, by

carefully building on the words of the Shruti.

 

Practically speaking what this means is that anything I do, or someone

else does, we have no way of EVER knowing the percentage of what part

of this was pre-ordained and what part of it we had some choice in.

[in one point in the Yoga Vashishta it is said that at exactly the

same point in every creation, the same act of the Bhagwad Gita is

repeated with the same players Arjuna and Krishna - talk about

complexities of orchestration!] And moreover the result of this action

or karmphalA is again determined indirectly y the factors responsible

for that action and also to a limited extent on the intention that

went into that action. The amount of effort one puts in can within the

constraints of the system influence its result. (One important point

though - this entire karma bundle can and does get burnt to ashes in a

single flame of jnAna - this Krishna himself alludes to in the Gita,

Ch4 - so one does not need to despair that " if my next many lifetimes

are already predestined am i not assured of not attaining

self-knowledge in this birth? " )

Every moment of time, with every blink of the eye, we are at

infinity's cross-roads, at once at the mercy of the next moment, at

once the victims of the prior, at once the masters of that ONE moment.

What we need to do, what we can do, indeed what we alone can do, in

fact what alone we can do, is to mindfully seize the moment and to

act, by tremendous effort, by our own recurrent firm sankalpa, to

ensure that our actions consistently over time are in keeping with

dharmA, are less tainted by our raga-dveshAs, are more " act " ions and

less " re-act " ions, humbly recognizing all along the fact that what

they are is mostly about purva-samskAra that is aided by our own

purushArtha - then slowly but surely we change the very tone of the

torrent of prArabdhA that will dictate our future actions, which in

turn will await our future sankalpAs to sync with. For such alone is

our lot - no choice, but to choose.

 

Humble Pranams

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

>

> Dear All,

>

>

>

> I have decided not to post any further messages (after this one) on the

> topic of determinism versus free will. After all, as Michael (I think)

> pointed out, we do seem to discuss this every year (although it

always seems

> popular!) I will, however, very briefly try to summarize the

situation as I

> see it.

>

>

>

> The philosophical positions vary considerably. At the free-will end

of the

> spectrum is the extreme 'libertarianism' of philosophers such as St.

> Augustine and Sartre. This says that, as long as we are physically

able to

> do something, have the opportunity to do it and are not constrained from

> doing it by some outside force, then we may freely choose to do it

(or not)

> without anything, inside or out, 'making' us act one way or the other.

>

>

>

> Universal determinism is the general belief that everything that happens

> does so necessarily as a result of the causes that precede it.

>

>

>

> Theistic determinism (or predestination) claims that these causes

are the

> will of a God or gods. Some variants of this allow that we ourselves may

> have some free will within the overall constraints. This is

effectively what

> I understand to be the general view of advaita at the vyAvahArika level.

> i.e. our actions are largely determined by our karma but there is a

limited

> amount of scope for free will within this. (Karma is 'effectively'

the same

> as control by a god in the sense of being a 'ghostly power'.)

>

>

>

> Fatalism is not quite the same thing. This maintains that some

events (such

> as the time, place and nature of our death) are totally predetermined -

> nothing that we do can prevent these from happening - but for the

rest of

> the time, the status quo is maintained (e.g. karma + limited free will).

> This is the view that I believe was being expressed by Sastri-ji,

and for

> which I was seeking scriptural reference since my feeling is that it is

> contrary to the tenets of advaita.

>

>

>

> Naturalistic determination is the belief that every event is the natural

> outcome of prior causes such as genetic and environmental factors

(and that

> no god is involved). 'Soft' determinism allows that some of these

causes are

> our own desires, thoughts and feelings at the time of action (this

is my own

> view). 'Hard' determinism denies that these are relevant. This is

the view

> of people like B. F. Skinner.

>

>

>

> Soft determinism is also called 'compatibilism' meaning that belief

in both

> free will and determinism is not necessarily logically inconsistent

(both

> libertarianism and hard determinism are therefore 'incompatibilist'

> beliefs). The crucial, practical aspect here is that compatibilism makes

> moral responsibility meaningful, whereas it is not meaningful for

> incompatibilism.

>

>

>

> The 'bottom line' as far as I am concerned is that the absolute

reality of

> the situation is that there is no one to have free will so that the

entire

> discussion is academic. We know that it is the case that advaita

utilizes

> teaching methods that are appropriate to the level of understanding

of the

> student. 'Explanations' are given and later withdrawn as the

understanding

> grows. Ultimately, all explanations must be withdrawn, since brahman is

> beyond any description or understanding. The Mandukya kArikA

explains that

> there has never been any creation and yet descriptions of the

creation are

> given in many of the other Upanishads. This need not be a problem as

long as

> the other Upanishads are taught first!

>

>

>

> It seems perfectly reasonable that karma should be taught to the early

> seeker, so that he starts to act rightly and without claiming the

fruit. And

> it is reasonable that free will is allowed so that the seeker can

'choose'

> to seek the truth. It does seem that other teachings are potentially

> dangerous, however. On the website, I was recently asked a question

about

> the teaching of Ramesh Balsekar et al and gave the following reply:

>

>

>

> " This idea that there is no one to act, no free will and therefore no

> responsibility is one of the most dangerous ideas to have been taken

up by

> neo-advaitin teachers. It runs completely contrary to traditional

advaita by

> failing to recognize that, at the level of the world (apparent

though it may

> be), people exist as separate individuals who act and interact. It is

> intrinsic to the whole process of seeking on a path and eventually

becoming

> enlightened. This process cannot be bypassed by attempting to deny

it before

> the mind is ready. As you say, these false ideas effectively license

the ego

> to do whatever it wants. This is, of course, completely contrary to what

> advaita is really about. "

>

>

>

> I feel that ideas such as that our death is totally predetermined

may also

> be used in a negative sense. As I pointed out in an earlier post, it

seems

> necessarily to follow that everything leading up to that event (i.e.

one's

> entire life) must also be predetermined (in a hard sense). This

being the

> case, what would be the point in pursuing any path to the truth?

This will

> either happen or it won't according to whether it is en route to the

> appointment with death.

>

>

>

> I could obviously do lots more research and write much more about the

> various aspects of the subject, which I have only touched on above (and

> probably got wrong!) but I have lots of other things to do and this is

> definitely keeping me from them!

>

>

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

>

>

>