Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 Jeremy I will hazard a guess. Hinduism believes in 'yonis'. It says that after traversing through 8.4 million yonis, one reaches the stage of a 'human being'. The animals and other forms according to this version are probably at one of the stages in the 8.4 million. We can call this evolution of the physical form. At this stage the forms have some common elements these are put so beautifully in a Sanskrit sloka. " Aharamcha, nidra, bhayamcha, maithunamcha' which means that eating, sleeping, fear and sexual union are the four elements that are common to all living beings. When the living forms transforms to the next higher stage and finally reaches the 'human' stage it's physical evolution is probably complete. At this stage the spiritual evolution begins and once this is fully achieved after taking birth life after life that the 'human' attends the final goal 'oneness with God'. The life forms are not here to aid humans. Just as humans are not here to aid any one. All living being are in the 'school' of nature and are doing their studies at different levels if this analogy can help explain the issue better. The other forms belong to primary school while humans are perhaps at the secondary school. SOme of the humans have 'graduated' and some like Ramakrishna are 'teachers'. I don't know whether my reflection has helped. Regards Yours sincerely Milind Sathye Department of Finance and Banking University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, Queensland 4350 Australia Phone 61 +7 + 4631 5509 Fax 61+ 7 + 4631 2625 web page: http://www.usq.edu.au/users/sathye Jeremy Frost [frost] Tuesday, 24 April 2001 8:33 Ramakrishna [ramakrishna] The meaning of life Hello All, I was wondering...if the most important or chief aim of our existence on earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, what are other life forms role in the equation? Human beings have been given a consciousness which enbles us to comprehend the world around us and forge the path towards enlightenment but what about other life forms, those commonly held to be " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant eaters? They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of humanity is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem entirely logical. I can grasp and accept with some reservation that indeed we are here for the main purpose of uniting with God but to my limited knowledge not many philosophies have talked about the role of other aspects of creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the above question? Thanks, Jeremy Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah Vivekananda Centre London http://www.vivekananda.co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Swami Vivekananda once said " if you think you are weak, you become weak in the same manner if you think yourself strong, strong you become " . analyzing this wordings of the great master provides deep insight to your query. everything depends on our manner of projection,ie how do we want to project ourself(our personality) or the world. for example if we wish to project our selves as some one more powerful than OTHERS or more beautiful, more intellectual. looking from the other side we are implicitly trying to degrade others. Who are this OTHERS, in actual(according to vedanta philosophy) is you, yourself. but due to our ignorance, We keep on desiring, this worldly pleasures. for example looking deep to the aspect of desire. like myself desiring to feel a taste of apple. requires, in first place that apple tree be present. but this would require my thoughts to be manifested. and this manifestation would naturally lead myself to be projected into a apple tree. similarly there are many examples like this; like my intense desire to establish supremacy over OTHERS over a number of times combined with some other desires might rise to an extent that, it might lead me to manifest into that particular object, that might be ((Alexander(victorious king of historic times)) or Lion etc) depending upon the intensity. but than who are this OTHERS, but none other than the manifestation of ourselves, in case of Lion this OTHERS might be dear or a zebra. and when you keep on thinking deep on this issues honestly, you would certainly feel this and get a much clear picture. So if you desire for a pleasure you have to be prepared for the pain (if associated)also. i would just repeat few sayings of the great master. what ever you think positive or negative that will come to you with same intensity. hope, this helped. with regards rahul what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant eaters? >They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see >through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? >To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of >humanity >is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other >aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem entirely >logical absolutely true, > " Jeremy Frost " <frost >Ramakrishna ><Ramakrishna > >[ramakrishna] The meaning of life >Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:32:40 -0700 > >Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief aim of our existence on >earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, what are other life >forms role in the equation? Human beings have been given a consciousness >which enbles us to comprehend the world around us and forge the path >towards >enlightenment but what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant eaters? >They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see >through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? >To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of >humanity >is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other >aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem entirely >logical. I can grasp and accept with some reservation that indeed we are >here for the main purpose of uniting with God but to my limited knowledge >not many philosophies have talked about the role of other aspects of >creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the above question? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > > _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Hi Jeremy! Great question! Here's one way to look at it: If you hold that there is a real creation then you have these philosophical problems (another example of which is the " problem of evil " )...However, if you hold a strict Advaita position, then you regard the manifest world as the product of your own misperception of the one, non-dual Reality... There is only the " appearance " of life-forms...you, me, bunny rabbits, anteaters, elm trees, etc. are all a product of ignorance. If I were able to perceive truly, I would perceive only Brahman....and actually (on this view) there is no " perception " since there is no distinction between my so-called-self and Brahman. Perhaps the only remaining philosophical problem is: whose ignorance is it? To which Shankara cleverly replied, " whosever has it " . If bunny rabbits and anteaters and you and I are still experienced after enlightenment, then there is a problem... Otherwise, no problem. From another angle: manifestation requires appearance of differences (otherwise, no manifestation). But these are appearances only, not qualitative differences. Bunny rabbit is not evolving godward...bunny rabbit IS god! And if I don't experience bunny rabbit as god, the problem is mine, not bunny rabbit's. Best regards, Mkewbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Jeremy- Vedanta believes that God is present in all life forms. Yet only humans have the potential to realize their own divinity. But as you might already know, animals are recognized as part of God and should not be harmed, not even for food. The principle of " ahimsa, " or nonviolence, must be practiced with all living things. This principle is pervasive in Hinduism and Buddhism, hence the strong emphasis on vegetarianism. --- Jeremy Frost <frost wrote: > Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief > aim of our existence on > earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, > what are other life > forms role in the equation? Human beings have been > given a consciousness > which enbles us to comprehend the world around us > and forge the path towards > enlightenment but what about other life forms, those > commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, > aardvarks and ant eaters? > They do not have a developed enough consciousness to > enable them to see > through maya and reach union with God/ their true > selves. What about them? > To say that they are just here to aid in the > efficiency & growth of humanity > is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it > minimizes the role of other > aspects of creation and when looked upon more > closely doesn't seem entirely > logical. I can grasp and accept with some > reservation that indeed we are > here for the main purpose of uniting with God but > to my limited knowledge > not many philosophies have talked about the role of > other aspects of > creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the > above question? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > > > Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Namaste Milindji What a beautiful explanation? Thanks. Really enjoyed it. Regards. > > Milind Sathye [sMTP:sathye] > Tuesday, April 24, 2001 6:00 AM > 'Ramakrishna ' > RE: [ramakrishna] The meaning of life > > Jeremy > I will hazard a guess. Hinduism believes in 'yonis'. It says that after > traversing through 8.4 million yonis, one reaches the stage of a 'human > being'. The animals and other forms according to this version are > probably > at one of the stages in the 8.4 million. We can call this evolution of > the > physical form. At this stage the forms have some common elements these are > put so beautifully in a Sanskrit sloka. " Aharamcha, nidra, bhayamcha, > maithunamcha' which means that eating, sleeping, fear and sexual union are > the four elements that are common to all living beings. When the living > forms transforms to the next higher stage and finally reaches the 'human' > stage it's physical evolution is probably complete. At this stage the > spiritual evolution begins and once this is fully achieved after taking > birth life after life that the 'human' attends the final goal 'oneness > with > God'. > The life forms are not here to aid humans. Just as humans are not here to > aid any one. All living being are in the 'school' of nature and are doing > their studies at different levels if this analogy can help explain the > issue > better. The other forms belong to primary school while humans are perhaps > at > the secondary school. SOme of the humans have 'graduated' and some like > Ramakrishna are 'teachers'. > I don't know whether my reflection has helped. > > Regards > > Yours sincerely > Milind Sathye > Department of Finance and Banking > University of Southern Queensland > Toowoomba, Queensland 4350 > Australia > Phone 61 +7 + 4631 5509 > Fax 61+ 7 + 4631 2625 > web page: http://www.usq.edu.au/users/sathye > > > > > Jeremy Frost [frost] > Tuesday, 24 April 2001 8:33 > Ramakrishna > [ramakrishna] The meaning of life > > > Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief aim of our existence on > earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, what are other life > forms role in the equation? Human beings have been given a consciousness > which enbles us to comprehend the world around us and forge the path > towards > enlightenment but what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant > eaters? > They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see > through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? > To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of > humanity > is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other > aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem > entirely > logical. I can grasp and accept with some reservation that indeed we are > here for the main purpose of uniting with God but to my limited knowledge > not many philosophies have talked about the role of other aspects of > creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the above question? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > > > > Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah > Vivekananda Centre London > http://www.vivekananda.co.uk > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Swami Vivekananda once said " if you think you are weak, you become weak in the same manner if you think yourself strong, strong you become " . analyzing this wordings of the great master provides deep insight to your query. everything depends on our manner of projection,ie how do we want to project ourself(our personality) or the world. for example if we wish to project our selves as some one more powerful than OTHERS or more beautiful, more intellectual. looking from the other side we are implicitly trying to degrade others. Who are this OTHERS, in actual(according to vedanta philosophy) is you, yourself. but due to our ignorance, We keep on desiring, this worldly pleasures. for example looking deep to the aspect of desire. like myself desiring to feel a taste of apple. requires, in first place that apple tree be present. but this would require my thoughts to be manifested. and this manifestation would naturally lead myself to be projected into a apple tree. similarly there are many examples like this; like my intense desire to establish supremacy over OTHERS over a number of times combined with some other desires might rise to an extent that, it might lead me to manifest into that particular object, that might be ((Alexander(victorious king of historic times)) or Lion etc) depending upon the intensity. but than who are this OTHERS, but none other than the manifestation of ourselves, in case of Lion this OTHERS might be dear or a zebra. and when you keep on thinking deep on this issues honestly, you would certainly feel this and get a much clear picture. So if you desire for a pleasure you have to be prepared for the pain (if associated)also. i would just repeat few sayings of the great master. what ever you think positive or negative that will come to you with same intensity. hope, this helped. with regards rahul what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant eaters? >They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see >through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? >To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of >humanity >is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other >aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem entirely >logical absolutely true, > " Jeremy Frost " <frost >Ramakrishna ><Ramakrishna > >[ramakrishna] The meaning of life >Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:32:40 -0700 > >Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief aim of our existence on >earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, what are other life >forms role in the equation? Human beings have been given a consciousness >which enbles us to comprehend the world around us and forge the path >towards >enlightenment but what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant eaters? >They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see >through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? >To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of >humanity >is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other >aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem entirely >logical. I can grasp and accept with some reservation that indeed we are >here for the main purpose of uniting with God but to my limited knowledge >not many philosophies have talked about the role of other aspects of >creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the above question? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > > _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Hi, Greetings everybody. They call me Sandeep and just dropped by. Very interesting thoughts from Jeremy. Some conceptual two cents........ > > Jeremy Frost [frost] > Tuesday, 24 April 2001 8:33 > Ramakrishna > [ramakrishna] The meaning of life > > > Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief aim of our existence on > earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, what are other life > forms role in the equation? Who is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God (whatever be your conception of God)? That " entity " which believes itself to be separate from God, Source, Consciousness, whatever, is it not itself an illusion, established and perpetuated by the power of Maya? Hence would not it be akin to trying to lift yourself by your boot straps? Separation itself is a myth and thus would not an attempt to bridge the separation, actually be the perpetuation of the separation? It's like trying to be free. The very attempt for freedom is the perpetuation of the fact that one is not free in first place. On the other issue raised about other life forms, as the Human Genome project has shown there is not much of difference between a slug and the human body-mind complex, at the essential gene structure level. However there is a quality of " sentience " , in the human body-mind complex, which is also present in animals and to a lesser degree in the plant life forms. The distinguisging feature is the added dubious quality of " entitification " to the attribute of " sentience " in the human body, by which there is a sense of a " me " . Thereby there is a sense of a " subject " , a " self " , cognizing objects, forgetting that, such a subjectivity is an illusion due to Maya. And that in essence the human body-mind complex is yet another cognised object, like any other animate or inanimate object constituting phenomenality. Human beings have been given a consciousness > which enbles us to comprehend the world around us and forge the path > towards > enlightenment San: Says who? Human beings have a quality of sentience which allows the senses to cognise what they sense, as external inputs. To this the power of Maya resulting in an entitification, brings about a sense of personal doership, a sense of ownership. " My " thoughts " My " actions " My " forging towards enlightenment " My " spiritual values " My " experiences, both profanme and profound. Whereas all that is happening is the Impersonal functioning of Totality or Consciousness, " through " the billions and billions of body-mind complexes, some of which are labelled as " human beings " . Apperception, awakening, enlightenment are just names given to that acausal, non-volitional occurrence in certain body-mind complex where the sense of personal doership is wiped out. The sense of " ownership " is no more. But such an occurrence can only be non-volitional from the point of view of the illusory " me-self " . For any act or doing by the " me-self " , is the perpetuation of the " me-self " . And the presence of the illsuion is the absence of reality or Truth. Conceptually speaking. but what about other life forms, those commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, aardvarks and ant > eaters? San: For them the issue of enlightenment itself does not arise. They are fully enlightened and not aware of the fact, because there is no self to cognize anything, the enlightened state or the unenlightened state. The " dis-ease " of enligtenment is only in man. But the disease is also perfectly appropriate. Nothing in phenomenality can happen which is inappropriate. > They do not have a developed enough consciousness to enable them to see > through maya and reach union with God/ their true selves. What about them? > To say that they are just here to aid in the efficiency & growth of > humanity > is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it minimizes the role of other > aspects of creation and when looked upon more closely doesn't seem > entirely > logical. It is the non-sentient being, which by contrast ,defines " sentience " in some body-mind complexes. Phenomenality is this very dialectic duality where seemingly opposites do not oppose each other but actual define each other. Thus they, by the very non-sentience, define " sentience " and make up the very mosaic of phenomenality. Perfectly appropriate and definetly not an " aid " for humanity's evolution or spiritual growth. > I can grasp and accept with some reservation that indeed we are > here for the main purpose of uniting with God San: I am suggesting, there is no purpose. I am suggesting separation from God never took place, for unision to ever be possible. It is Impersonal Consciousness in movement, that , through a process of entitification, takes on a personal identity(s) and in such personal identity, enables, a further sense of personal doership through the power of Maya, whereby a " me " appears to come into existence. In an Ocean, a " wave " appears, and appears to be distinct, separate, but pick up a " wave " in your hand and all you will have in the palm of your hand is the Ocean. With a " me " , a " you " is immediately born and now a relationship between the billions of " me " s and " you " s is possible, which is what makes up the mosaic of Life. It is the same Impersonal Consciousness which ends the sense of " personal doership " in some body-mind complex, such an occurrence, which the audience label it as enlightenment, awakening, apperception. No individual self has any role to play in all this. Thus a sage or a clown are no different. In the sense in one, apperception has non-volitionally happened, and in another not yet. Thus there is no kudos for the sage for " his " awakening, or any shame for the clown for his clowning. Conceptually speaking some two cents.......... Cheers Sandeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 I think this is a better reply to Jeremy's question than the one that I gave earlier. Thanks mkewbird. well done Regards Yours sincerely Milind Sathye Department of Finance and Banking University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, Queensland 4350 Australia Phone 61 +7 + 4631 5509 Fax 61+ 7 + 4631 2625 web page: http://www.usq.edu.au/users/sathye MKEWBIRD [MKEWBIRD] Tuesday, 24 April 2001 15:01 Ramakrishna Re: [ramakrishna] The meaning of life Hi Jeremy! Great question! Here's one way to look at it: If you hold that there is a real creation then you have these philosophical problems (another example of which is the " problem of evil " )...However, if you hold a strict Advaita position, then you regard the manifest world as the product of your own misperception of the one, non-dual Reality... There is only the " appearance " of life-forms...you, me, bunny rabbits, anteaters, elm trees, etc. are all a product of ignorance. If I were able to perceive truly, I would perceive only Brahman....and actually (on this view) there is no " perception " since there is no distinction between my so-called-self and Brahman. Perhaps the only remaining philosophical problem is: whose ignorance is it? To which Shankara cleverly replied, " whosever has it " . If bunny rabbits and anteaters and you and I are still experienced after enlightenment, then there is a problem... Otherwise, no problem. From another angle: manifestation requires appearance of differences (otherwise, no manifestation). But these are appearances only, not qualitative differences. Bunny rabbit is not evolving godward...bunny rabbit IS god! And if I don't experience bunny rabbit as god, the problem is mine, not bunny rabbit's. Best regards, Mkewbird Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah Vivekananda Centre London http://www.vivekananda.co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 Perhaps (1) since we (humans, animals and other beings) are all part of one larger organism (this is clear not only from religion, but from ecology), we are all here to help each other; and (2) does anyone know whether Sri Aurobindo's ideas about evolution are helpful here? --- Milind Sathye <sathye wrote: > Jeremy > I will hazard a guess. Hinduism believes in > 'yonis'. It says that after > traversing through 8.4 million yonis, one reaches > the stage of a 'human > being'. The animals and other forms according to > this version are probably > at one of the stages in the 8.4 million. We can > call this evolution of the > physical form. At this stage the forms have some > common elements these are > put so beautifully in a Sanskrit sloka. " Aharamcha, > nidra, bhayamcha, > maithunamcha' which means that eating, sleeping, > fear and sexual union are > the four elements that are common to all living > beings. When the living > forms transforms to the next higher stage and > finally reaches the 'human' > stage it's physical evolution is probably complete. > At this stage the > spiritual evolution begins and once this is fully > achieved after taking > birth life after life that the 'human' attends the > final goal 'oneness with > God'. > The life forms are not here to aid humans. Just as > humans are not here to > aid any one. All living being are in the 'school' > of nature and are doing > their studies at different levels if this analogy > can help explain the issue > better. The other forms belong to primary school > while humans are perhaps at > the secondary school. SOme of the humans have > 'graduated' and some like > Ramakrishna are 'teachers'. > I don't know whether my reflection has helped. > > Regards > > Yours sincerely > Milind Sathye > Department of Finance and Banking > University of Southern Queensland > Toowoomba, Queensland 4350 > Australia > Phone 61 +7 + 4631 5509 > Fax 61+ 7 + 4631 2625 > web page: http://www.usq.edu.au/users/sathye > > > > > Jeremy Frost [frost] > Tuesday, 24 April 2001 8:33 > Ramakrishna > [ramakrishna] The meaning of life > > > Hello All, > > I was wondering...if the most important or chief > aim of our existence on > earth is to pierce the veil of maya and realize God, > what are other life > forms role in the equation? Human beings have been > given a consciousness > which enbles us to comprehend the world around us > and forge the path towards > enlightenment but what about other life forms, those > commonly held to be > " lower " such as doggies, kitties, bunnies, goats, > aardvarks and ant eaters? > They do not have a developed enough consciousness to > enable them to see > through maya and reach union with God/ their true > selves. What about them? > To say that they are just here to aid in the > efficiency & growth of humanity > is an anthropocentric view to the extreme, it > minimizes the role of other > aspects of creation and when looked upon more > closely doesn't seem entirely > logical. I can grasp and accept with some > reservation that indeed we are > here for the main purpose of uniting with God but > to my limited knowledge > not many philosophies have talked about the role of > other aspects of > creation. Does Vedanta have an explaination to the > above question? > > Thanks, > Jeremy > > > > > Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah > Vivekananda Centre London > http://www.vivekananda.co.uk > > 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.