Disccussion on Free-will

[Guest guest]

>

> Sringeri Acharya Shri Chandrasekhara Bharati Swamigal has beautifully

 

>

> " failure only means that your present exercise of free-will is not sufficient

to counteract the result of the past exercise "

 

 

Namaste, LEt me use my free will to write one message on this thread. I found

the above quote interesting. So this exercise of free will is also bound by past

actions, right ? A seeker may encounter several obstacles in the path - for

e.g. dullness, mental impurities, anger etc and can try to use his/her free will

to go beyond these flaws but this exercise also seems bound by the past. So

where is the free will

 

regards,

Shailendra

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Ramesh you wrote

 

" so any decision you take has causes

ranging from external circumstances to your own mental inclinations,

predispositions, emotions, etc. "

 

I agree with your opinion. In matters of this nature we cannot ignore our

experience apart from scriptures.

I would like to add that the circumstances, inclinations, emotions etc of

not only since birth but those inherited through DNA also may affect the

decisions.

 

Pranams

 

 

 

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

<rkmurthywrote:

 

>

>

> 2009/5/26 putranm <putranm <putranm%40>> wrote:

> <<Perhaps all of our positions have validity corresponding with our notion

> of 'i'.>>

>

> avidyA is the superimposition of knowerhood on the Atman, thus bringing

> about the tripod of knower, known and knowledge. Any position or viewpoint

> implies a knower and is hence an outcome of avidyA. The

> pAramArthika, strictly speaking, is not a standpoint. It is a way of

> indicating the transcendence of viewpoints, without having to reject any of

> them (even mutually opposing ones).

>

> In his kArikA-s, gauDapAda states that advaita is " avirodha " to all views.

> With this understanding, I would agree with your statement above.

>

> <<My position on this question of will is based on pratyaksha pramana (take

> appropriately), wherein people have 'immediate'-knowledge/conviction of

> both

> the capacity to self-will and of law-abidance. (i.e. of both will and

> law).>>

>

> Leaving vedAnta aside for the time-being, if we discuss this issue in a

> general sense, we soon find that a distinction between will & destiny, or

> between choice & fate, is not always easy to make. The world as we

> see it as a matrix of cause & effect, so any decision you take has causes

> ranging from external circumstances to your own mental inclinations,

> predispositions, emotions, etc.

>

> Once the individual's own mind is brought into the cause-effect framework,

> the distinction between will & destiny seems to become hazy.

>

> Ramesh

>

>

[Guest guest]

sriram ji :

 

in my research i found that our karma from poorva janma is 33% and 77% is free

will to create our own future.the trinity of siva,brahma,vishnu with active

participation of parvathi,saraswathi,lakshmi=destroys avidyam,creates

vidyam,finally sustains, both destruction as well as creation on account of the

two previous consciousness.

 

suresh.

 

 

advaitin , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi wrote:

>

> Dear sir,

>

> If *free will* is a myth, why are we working in offices for salaries / wages.

Infact, why *should* we work?

>

> If everything runs on *fate*, then why are we not sitting at homes quietly

waiting for salaries to fall from heaven. Let us resign and sit at home quietly

waiting for the month-end to come.

>

> I expect the same words when one's boss gives a *pink slip* and fire off.

>

> regs,

> sriram

>

> advaitin , " bagawan_sastry " <bagawan_sastry@> wrote:

> >

> > advaitin , Ramesh Krishnamurthy <rkmurthy@> wrote:

> > Sir,

> > In this universe everything is being dne Mechanically.What we say Free

will is also under the rule of " Cause and Effect " theory.For every action there

is a reaction.In our Human life this reaction may be seen or experienced by the

same person in His/her very birth itself.If not in the next Birth/Births.If it

does not experienced in the same birth it

> > does not meal that there is no Rection for his/her action/deed.

> > There is a Saying that " Destiny Leads the Man " .What is this Destiny?

> > It is also called as " Fate " What is it?It is nothing but the Fruit of one's

Previous action/Karma.Thare is another saying that " Buddhih karmanu

> > saeene " what is the meaning of this?It means one's intelligence acts

according to his/her Karma done previously.so we can conclude that man

> > is not independent.His/her actions are led by his/her fate created

> > accrding to previous actions.Free will is a Myth

> > with regards

> > Sd/bagawan_sastry

> >

>

[Guest guest]

If we take in to consideration that in the context of sadhana to drop the

feelings of I and mine and merge the Self, it may be difficult to achieve

progress for those who believe in free will as it may tend to inflate the

ego for sucess or despair in times of failure.The scriptures suggest the

approach of the feeling of non doership for all actions This non doership

feeling may not be meant at the time of doing actions . At the time of

doing actions one shpuld act within legal and ethical limits as if one has

full freedom. Only at the time accepting results one should believe that he

was not the doer and the so called freedom exercised was only apparent but

not real. The arguments such as why should one go to office and why not sit

at home are not tenable for nobody does so for argument sake without the

support of one's own reasons.

 

I request those members who are adept in scriptures to interpret this

concept of free will in the light of KARTHRUTWA BHAVA and the process of

Surrender. A small request high sounding word juglary may be contained and

concepts explained in simple words with examples nearer to practical life.

 

with pranaams to all

 

Ramana Sarma

 

.. n Wed, May 27, 2009 at 5:45 PM, sureshbalaraman <

sureshbalaraman wrote:

 

>

>

> sriram ji :

>

> in my research i found that our karma from poorva janma is 33% and 77% is

> free will to create our own future.the trinity of siva,brahma,vishnu with

> active participation of parvathi,saraswathi,lakshmi=destroys avidyam,creates

> vidyam,finally sustains, both destruction as well as creation on account of

> the two previous consciousness.

>

> suresh.

>

> advaitin <advaitin%40>, " sriram "

> <sriram_sapthasathi wrote:

> >

> > Dear sir,

> >

> > If *free will* is a myth, why are we working in offices for salaries /

> wages. Infact, why *should* we work?

> >

> > If everything runs on *fate*, then why are we not sitting at homes

> quietly waiting for salaries to fall from heaven. Let us resign and sit at

> home quietly waiting for the month-end to come.

> >

> > I expect the same words when one's boss gives a *pink slip* and fire off.

> >

> > regs,

> > sriram

> >

> > advaitin <advaitin%40>,

> " bagawan_sastry " <bagawan_sastry@> wrote:

> > >

> > > advaitin <advaitin%40>, Ramesh

> Krishnamurthy <rkmurthy@> wrote:

> > > Sir,

> > > In this universe everything is being dne Mechanically.What we say Free

> will is also under the rule of " Cause and Effect " theory.For every action

> there is a reaction.In our Human life this reaction may be seen or

> experienced by the same person in His/her very birth itself.If not in the

> next Birth/Births.If it does not experienced in the same birth it

> > > does not meal that there is no Rection for his/her action/deed.

> > > There is a Saying that " Destiny Leads the Man " .What is this Destiny?

> > > It is also called as " Fate " What is it?It is nothing but the Fruit of

> one's Previous action/Karma.Thare is another saying that " Buddhih karmanu

> > > saeene " what is the meaning of this?It means one's intelligence acts

> according to his/her Karma done previously.so we can conclude that man

> > > is not independent.His/her actions are led by his/her fate created

> > > accrding to previous actions.Free will is a Myth

> > > with regards

> > > Sd/bagawan_sastry

> > >

> >

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " sureshbalaraman " <sureshbalaraman wrote:

Dear Balaramanji,

will you plz enlighten us By reaveling

your research details,How you came to the conclusion that

33%Fate and 77% freewill works out for every one.Is it same

for all human beings ordiffer from person to person?

When two persons contest for the same seat(say MLA/Mp)

only one will be succeeded and the other cannot.What would be the

reason for this?is it lack of Freewill or Fate in the case of defeated

candidate?plz explain in detail.

Thanking you

Sd/bagawan_sastry

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Ramana Sarma-ji,

 

I am not adept at interpreting scriptures. I have not studied much either. For

me, the bottomline is the following common-sense understanding:

 

1. This world that I see including the seer me is ONE - Brahman.

2. Due to beginningless ignorance, I see it as separate from me and ridden with

threatening duality. What I see and experience is not the truth - it is only a

false appearance on truth.

3. Free-will belongs to and has to do only with that realm of false appearance.

It is therefore a falsity.

4. The goal of Advaita is not to propitiate and aggrandise falsity. It is to

unravel the truth clouded by falsity.

5. Free-will, therefore, is not a cause to be espoused by an Advaitin engaged

in the quest of the truth of himself.

6. The tall order for him is to surrender himself totally on the altar of truth

without any tinge of ego, agency or doership.

6. To say one can perform unbinding actions entertaining at the same time a

sense of free-will cannot be total surrender.

7. karmani eva adhikAra is a sort of delegation of authority granted by the

Lord and should be understood as the Lord acting through us. Someone signing

for the Chairman & Managing Director doesn't have any false notion that he

himself is the Chairman & Managing Director. He is only exercising the power of

the latter on the latter's behalf.

8. Besides when it is clearly taught that actions belong to prakriti/guNAs, why

should an Advaitin rush head over heels to own them up in the name of free-will?

It may be argued that it is not a real owning up. Whatever the explanation,

free-will smacks of some degree of independence. It is, therefore, illusory and

inadvaitic.

9. I don't think I wrote all this exercising my free-will because this

situation is not of my making, the way I reached here is not of my making, this

language, the words I used - they are not of my makinig. What is of my making

then? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I myself belong to the Lord and I am

always at His Feet. Life is a petal on His Feet - as a poet mused.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

_________________________

 

advaitin , vrsarma podury <rpodury wrote:

>

> I request those members who are adept in scriptures to interpret this

> concept of free will in the light of KARTHRUTWA BHAVA and the process of

> Surrender. A small request high sounding word juglary may be contained and

> concepts explained in simple words with examples nearer to practical life.

>

[Guest guest]

Dear All ,

 

On a lighter vein ...no offense meant  :

 

We seem to have so much free will  to discuss so much on free will ???

This thread has been going on endlessly !

 

Pranams

 

ramesh

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

 

 

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair

Re: Disccussion on Free-will

advaitin

Thursday, May 28, 2009, 2:30 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Shri Ramana Sarma-ji,

 

I am not adept at interpreting scriptures. I have not studied much either. For

me, the bottomline is the following common-sense understanding:

 

1. This world that I see including the seer me is ONE - Brahman.

2. Due to beginningless ignorance, I see it as separate from me and ridden with

threatening duality. What I see and experience is not the truth - it is only a

false appearance on truth.

3. Free-will belongs to and has to do only with that realm of false appearance.

It is therefore a falsity.

4. The goal of Advaita is not to propitiate and aggrandise falsity. It is to

unravel the truth clouded by falsity.

5. Free-will, therefore, is not a cause to be espoused by an Advaitin engaged in

the quest of the truth of himself.

6. The tall order for him is to surrender himself totally on the altar of truth

without any tinge of ego, agency or doership.

6. To say one can perform unbinding actions entertaining at the same time a

sense of free-will cannot be total surrender.

7. karmani eva adhikAra is a sort of delegation of authority granted by the Lord

and should be understood as the Lord acting through us. Someone signing for the

Chairman & Managing Director doesn't have any false notion that he himself is

the Chairman & Managing Director. He is only exercising the power of the latter

on the latter's behalf.

8. Besides when it is clearly taught that actions belong to prakriti/guNAs, why

should an Advaitin rush head over heels to own them up in the name of free-will?

It may be argued that it is not a real owning up. Whatever the explanation,

free-will smacks of some degree of independence. It is, therefore, illusory and

inadvaitic.

9. I don't think I wrote all this exercising my free-will because this situation

is not of my making, the way I reached here is not of my making, this language,

the words I used - they are not of my makinig. What is of my making then?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I myself belong to the Lord and I am always at His

Feet. Life is a petal on His Feet - as a poet mused.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

____________ _________ ____

 

advaitin@ s.com, vrsarma podury <rpodury > wrote:

>

> I request those members who are adept in scriptures to interpret this

> concept of free will in the light of KARTHRUTWA BHAVA and the process of

> Surrender. A small request high sounding word juglary may be contained and

> concepts explained in simple words with examples nearer to practical life.

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

You said it!

 

WE *SEEM* TO HAVE!

 

MN

____________

 

advaitin , ramesh chivukula <ramesh_chiv wrote:

> On a lighter vein ...no offense meant  :

>  

> We seem to have so much free will  to discuss so much on free will ???

> This thread has been going on endlessly !

>

[Guest guest]

PraNAms

 

On the same vein rameshji - I thought it was our fate that we had all this free

will to go through all these fate-full or should I say pain-full posts! No

offence is intended.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, ramesh chivukula <ramesh_chiv wrote:

 

On a lighter vein ...no offense meant  :

 

We seem to have so much free will  to discuss so much on free will ???

This thread has been going on endlessly !

 

Pranams

 

ramesh

[Guest guest]

dear sastry ji :

 

this research was primarily for my own 'self' and i am sorry to have not

mentioned in my previous post.as i am not yet done with my 'self' realisation,i

guess i cannot answere to your queries now,sincerely.As that would amount to

going against my own conscience.Each of us,are unique,with an unique ability to

comprehend,life experiances.I shall come to you,whenever i am ready to share

fully with my anubhavam.Untill then,i request you to have shraddha & saburi.

 

suresh.

 

 

advaitin , " bagawan_sastry " <bagawan_sastry wrote:

>

> advaitin , " sureshbalaraman " <sureshbalaraman@> wrote:

> Dear Balaramanji,

> will you plz enlighten us By reaveling

> your research details,How you came to the conclusion that

> 33%Fate and 77% freewill works out for every one.Is it same

> for all human beings ordiffer from person to person?

> When two persons contest for the same seat(say MLA/Mp)

> only one will be succeeded and the other cannot.What would be the

> reason for this?is it lack of Freewill or Fate in the case of defeated

> candidate?plz explain in detail.

> Thanking you

> Sd/bagawan_sastry

>

[Guest guest]

In a rather heavier vein, may I ask you, Sir, why you think what others write is

pain? Isn't there some derogatory tone in your language for which any other

ordinary mortal in this List would have undoubtedly earned a yellow card? I am

asking this because I don't mind even a red one or any other colour for that

matter.

 

MN

_________

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada

wrote:

>

>

> PraNAms

>

> On the same vein rameshji - I thought it was our fate that we had all this

free will to go through all these fate-full or should I say pain-full posts! No

offence is intended.

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

>

> --- On Thu, 5/28/09, ramesh chivukula <ramesh_chiv wrote:

>  

> On a lighter vein ...no offense meant  :

>  

> We seem to have so much free will  to discuss so much on free will ???

> This thread has been going on endlessly !

>  

> Pranams

>  

> ramesh

>

[Guest guest]

Nairji - my praNAms - First my sincere apologies if my mail has offended anyone

participating on this thread- No derogatory is or was intended to anybody. No

one is identified in the mail other than the fat that the fate is always sound

painful and while we have choice in freewill - that is all. From my perspective

they are two sides of the same coin.

 

If the moderators want to give me yellow card, it is definitely their

prerogative and I will accept it with humility. Without their moderation the

list would have gone bazzar. My thanks to them for keeping it respectable.

 

I know they are sensible people dedicating their efforts to maintain the

standard of this list and deliberate a lot before they give anybody a yellow or

red card or to decide what mails deserve the yellow or red cards. Let us leave

it to them to make the decision even in this case. I will abstain myself from

voting if the issue comes to the moderator list. Every moderator is as much

accountable to his post as anybody else on the list. That has been the policy,

as far as I know.

 

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/28/09, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

In a rather heavier vein, may I ask you, Sir, why you think what others write is

pain? Isn't there some derogatory tone in your language for which any other

ordinary mortal in this List would have undoubtedly earned a yellow card? I am

asking this because I don't mind even a red one or any other colour for that

matter.

 

MN

[Guest guest]

Dear nairji

 

 

 

Thank you very much for the lucid exposition and it clarified my doubts.

 

 

Pranams

 

Ramana Sarma

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Madathil Rajendran Nair <

madathilnair wrote:

 

>

>

> Dear Shri Ramana Sarma-ji,

>

> I am not adept at interpreting scriptures. I have not studied much either.

> For me, the bottomline is the following common-sense understanding:

>

> 1. This world that I see including the seer me is ONE - Brahman.

> 2. Due to beginningless ignorance, I see it as separate from me and ridden

> with threatening duality. What I see and experience is not the truth - it is

> only a false appearance on truth.

> 3. Free-will belongs to and has to do only with that realm of false

> appearance. It is therefore a falsity.

> 4. The goal of Advaita is not to propitiate and aggrandise falsity. It is

> to unravel the truth clouded by falsity.

> 5. Free-will, therefore, is not a cause to be espoused by an Advaitin

> engaged in the quest of the truth of himself.

> 6. The tall order for him is to surrender himself totally on the altar of

> truth without any tinge of ego, agency or doership.

> 6. To say one can perform unbinding actions entertaining at the same time a

> sense of free-will cannot be total surrender.

> 7. karmani eva adhikAra is a sort of delegation of authority granted by the

> Lord and should be understood as the Lord acting through us. Someone signing

> for the Chairman & Managing Director doesn't have any false notion that he

> himself is the Chairman & Managing Director. He is only exercising the power

> of the latter on the latter's behalf.

> 8. Besides when it is clearly taught that actions belong to prakriti/guNAs,

> why should an Advaitin rush head over heels to own them up in the name of

> free-will? It may be argued that it is not a real owning up. Whatever the

> explanation, free-will smacks of some degree of independence. It is,

> therefore, illusory and inadvaitic.

> 9. I don't think I wrote all this exercising my free-will because this

> situation is not of my making, the way I reached here is not of my making,

> this language, the words I used - they are not of my makinig. What is of my

> making then? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I myself belong to the Lord and I

> am always at His Feet. Life is a petal on His Feet - as a poet mused.

>

> Best regards.

>

> Madathil Nair

> _________________________

>

> advaitin <advaitin%40>, vrsarma

> podury <rpodury wrote:

> >

> > I request those members who are adept in scriptures to interpret this

> > concept of free will in the light of KARTHRUTWA BHAVA and the process of

> > Surrender. A small request high sounding word juglary may be contained

> and

> > concepts explained in simple words with examples nearer to practical

> life.

> >

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

PranAms.

I wanted to clarify a few points about surrender and free will - i think it goes

beyond semantics as a fatalistic attitude to life is often times thought to be

equivalent to, or worse representative of, an attitude of bhakti or surrender to

the Lord.

 

Let us examine this a little more.

 

I have eyes. These eyes are certainly a Gift from the Lord. In fact they verily

are the Lord. And yet i can make use of the eyes to see things that are to be

seen and things that are not ought to be seen. The Lord as the faculty of vision

is a enabler, the permitter - in the words of the GitA " upadrsta anumanta " - by

training ourselves to see the good, and avoid seeing the bad we evolve

spiritually.

 

Let us take another example. A father gives a bicycle to his young 6 year old

son to ride. The young lad in his exuberance tries to take a sharp turn at a

high speed for the thrill and ends up crashing into a tree. Now whose bicycle is

responsible for the lad's misfortune - certainly at an absolute level that bike

belongs to the father alone, but as it pertains to this incident, we say the

bike belongs to the young boy - he did not exercise adequate caution in using

" his " bike.

 

Similarly when it comes to exercising free will. Someone wrote that at the most

we have a choice. That is precisely what free will means - whether or not we

lead 100% prescripted lives or whether there is some ability intrinsic to us

that enables us to make a conscious choice and one that is not predetermined.

 

That we have a choice is undeniable. In fact there is one and only one thing

that we have no choice in whatsoever - and that is in the necessity to make a

choice. Now this capacity to choose comes from whom? Why from the Lord of

course! Just like every physical and mental faculty comes from Bhagwan so too

does this power - albeit limtited - to act consciously and make a judgemental

choice. This faculty is what separates us humans from the four-legged, and it is

precisly because of this one faculty of free choice that we as humans are

qualified for the purushartha of moksha.

 

Inasmuch as our faculty of vision is a God-given gift, and represents a

manifestation of God Himself (or Herself!) but that does not mean we deny

ourselves the ability to see and pretend we are blind! Denying such a choice is

in fact a denial of something the Lord Himself has endowed us with.

 

So if the position is that " We do have a free will, and I am grateful to the

Lord for endowing me with it " then certainly in that acknowledgement itself is

surrender.

 

However if one denies having any capacity to make a choice, and ascribes all of

ones actions to Bhagwan, then that I am afraid is not surrender but a case of

passing the buck! It is not something that is ever advocated by KrishnA.

 

The very idea of karmaphala - of a fruit of an action - is predicated on the

motivation, on the desire that prompted that act which in turn is based on free

will of the perpetrator of that action.

The Lord gives us organs of action, an intellect and a faculty of choice. Beyond

that He leaves it to the individual. And it is always at the level of the

individual that this discussion has any relevance - only then do we avoid a

mixing up of levels.

 

So if there is a individual abusing these faculties and indulgin in rape, or

murder, or arson, one cannot say it is the Lords will committing that heinous

crime. That the individual in question was incapable of acting otherwise on

account of the burden of accumulated karmas and vasanas from innumerable prior

births - this is a very ill-founded and fatalistic viewpoint, and one that can

be very convenient to use to absolve any sense of personal responsibility. " Such

was Gods will " and " Who can change what the Lord has fated " - are laments of a

weak intellect, tamasic at best - they should not be confused for a sattvik

spirit of surrender where the individual exerts his efforts and tries to raise

himself to a higher ground - this is especially relevant for us in a spiritual

plane.

 

We do have a limited capacity to choose, despite our vasanas, dewpite our past,

and this alone lends shape to our future and determines our future fate! It is

in this manner alone that fate and free will are seen as the twin facets of the

same coin - one leads to the other, and the other derives from the one.

 

The God-given faculty of free choice is for us to use wisely - not to abuse,and

certainly not to deny.

 

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam