"Complicatedism"

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

RenukaJi,

Referring to Purusha Sukta/Sruti verses

padosya vishva bhutani tripadasya amritam divi
All the beings form only a quarter (part of) Him. The three-quarter part of His, which is eternal, is established in the spiritual domain. (Text Three)

So, Only one part of the space undergoes creation/evolution and the other 3 parts are eternal/avikAra (never changing/permanent/imperishable).
There must exist some eternal suris (omniscient and powerful ambassadors) that serve Him and assist in the creation. And, those liberated
in the created samsaric karmic world must reach an eternal place, and that must be His abode. This is called the Transcendence, which is
beyond the reach of karmic selves.

That doesnot mean, He isolates Himself from the created world, He also pervades this created (1 part) world through His immanence.
He is the controller, supporter, nourisher, justice giver etc.

Once we baddha jivas attain mOksha, they will become muktAs, and attain the Omnisicence( JnYana) of the Lord Himself and
perceive/enjoy things like Him [eating with the King at His hosted banquet]. But, these muktAs will not have powers like the King. But,
nitya-suris are like the king's ministers and the body-guards, and at any time have more access to Him vyapAram/wealth].

His ministers and body-guards in the created world, are the devAs, demons (devas' progeny to execute karmic results). I read in some
commentary for Brh. Upa, that Agni is the Brahmana God/deva, Indra/Rudra/Chandra/varuna are kshatriya gods, Vasus/Rudras/Adityas/maruts
are vaishya gods, pusan/prithvi are sudra gods/goddess, depending on the nature of assistance/power they provide in the evolution of the Universe/creation.
So, DevAs are also like nithya-suris of the created world. Their positions, though have a long-standing, may change depending on their end-results of their karmAs.

Demons[asuras/rakshasAs/yakshAs] are also powerful devAs, but execute the negative actions, thus help in the evolution. For example, Vritra, the
thunder-cloud-demon or some ozone like layer, was destroyed or scared away by Indra, to save the Sun, thus promoting rain/evaporation etc. So, all
those are regents that help in the evolution and the business of the Lord/Creator. All, work in their own mind, will and skill, thus working towards emancipation,
knowingly and unknowingly [but supported by the Will of the Lord].

Dear Govinda ji,


Thanks for reply...but my question is still not answered as what was the determining criteria to decide who became Nithya Suris and who became jeevas.

I was discussing with my mother last night about Nithya Suris and we sort of think this.

For creation to take place..Maya came into existence and the Sattva reflections of Brahman in the substratum of Maya is Saguna Brahman.

Rajas reflection are Jeevaatmas.

Tamas reflection is Prakirti(Nature)

Saguna Brahman forms are manifestation of Brahman that do not go through the torments of life and death in Ocean of Samsara..hence they are eternally "free" and not "bound".

So Nithya Suris are the Satttva reflection of Brahman.

Just like how when Lord Vishnu came as Lord Rama....Lord Vishnu took birth and Rama, Adishesa as Lakshmana, the Sankha as Bharata and the Chakra as Shatrghana.

All four were the potencies of Narayana...so same way I guess Nithya Suris are the Sattva potencies of God....hence there is no selection criteria.

correct me if wrong.

 

[Jaykay767]

Hi Palindrome,

The concept of Moksha, Self-realization, Nirvana etc.. are very advanced concepts of our religion. They were written by the great geniuses like Adi Shankara, Ramanujam, Madhavacharya etc..

A friendly brotherly suggestion, pl don’t make sweeping statements that all these don’t exists, unless you are a bigger Genius than all of them OR you have met God & realized there is NO such thing as Moksha etc..

Cheers,

 

[palindrome]

Hi Palindrome,

The concept of Moksha, Self-realization, Nirvana etc.. are very advanced concepts of our religion. They were written by the great geniuses like Adi Shankara, Ramanujam, Madhavacharya etc..

A friendly brotherly suggestion, pl don’t make sweeping statements that all these don’t exists, unless you are a bigger Genius than all of them OR you have met God & realized there is NO such thing as Moksha etc..

Cheers,

A request, please do not make comments of genius, etc. Putdowns are unnecessary. Am not saying anything different from what Jiddu Krishnamurthy said. Nothing different from non-brahmanical philosophical schools. Other than Adi Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhava, there were several others. My own guru (guru's guru actually) took Jeeva Samadhi. He is one of those listed here: Shrines of Great Siddhas - Siddha Jeeva Samadhi Worship - A Powerful Spiritual Practice - Agasthiar.Org Just Consider all these path-showers (or gurus) to be variations, speaking about their own path. No need to accept or reject any path if one is looking to examine himself. Also, note Each philosophy squabbled with the other. Example, Adi Shankara criticized the panchasamskara ritual of stamping shanka chakra on the arms, and such a criticism could mean anything, whether he be a genius or not. We need not put parents, elderly people, acharyas (of any school), forefathers, gurus, etc on a high pedestal. We respect them. Need not mean they are infallible. They too were just human, just as we are.

 

[Jaykay767]

Palindrome, as I said earlier, if you can prove through a logical, clear & structured analysis that Moksha, Self realization don't exist, I will agree. In the absence of such philosophical analysis, I cannot agree to your assessment !! so what if the different philosophies squabbled with each other ? Also, our Vedic Religion puts our elders, parents, Guru's at a very very high pedestal & many of us choose to follow this.

 

[palindrome]

Palindrome, as I said earlier, if you can prove through a logical, clear & structured analysis that Moksha, Self realization don't exist, I will agree. In the absence of such philosophical analysis, I cannot agree to your assessment !! so what if the different philosophies squabbled with each other ? Also, our Vedic Religion puts our elders, parents, Guru's at a very very high pedestal & many of us choose to follow this.

Through a logical, clear, structured analysis one can prove anything or disprove anything. What you consider 'vedic religion', is very potholed too. Arguments can be made and supported either ways, for or against any particular point. Just as how Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhava did. Not just about Moksha but other points also. There is no necessity for such things, for those who wish to explore the self. Probably that is why Siddhas did not involve in philosophical debates. Also as said earlier, what am saying is not my assessment alone. I was merely sharing some stuff with you. Not looking to convince you. Please follow where your heart chooses. Thanks.

 

[Govinda]

Dear Govinda ji,For creation to take place..Maya came into existence and the Sattva reflections of Brahman in the substratum of Maya is Saguna Brahman.Rajas reflection are Jeevaatmas.Tamas reflection is Prakirti(Nature)

Before I answer your question, help me understand, what do you mean by reflection of Brahman? Then, What/where is real Brahman? Where did Maya come from? What is its nature - matter or jiva??

 

[renuka]

Before I answer your question, help me understand, what do you mean by reflection of Brahman? Then, What/where is real Brahman? Where did Maya come from? What is its nature - matter or jiva??

Dear Govinda ji,


I had written in forum before in Maya thread.
I will paste again.
All inputs were from Sathya Sai Geeta.

Kindly read..I will discuss more on Tuesday cos its a holiday tomorrow for me cos of general elections here.

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/literature/3851-maya-prakriti-cosmic-deluder.html

Q)Is it possible to discover the begining or the end of Maya?
Can anyone know when Maya will end?

A)None can discover the begining of Maya.neither the personalized God(Easwara),nor the individual self(jeeva) nor the objective world(Prakrithi) can ever suceed in discovering the begining of Maya which brought them into existence and started the chain of
"act--consequence-act'
Nevertheless one can suceed in discovering when Maya will end!
When will it end?

When the objective world is ignored,set aside,denied or discovered to be immanent in the Divine,the jeeva is no more.
Easwara(personalized God) is also superflous and disappears.And when the Easwara has faded out,the Brahman alone is.
When a personalized God,jeeva and prakrithi(the objective world) are non existent in the developed consciousness of man,Maya the progenitor of all three cannot persists.

before that :Maya is the Will that caused The Personalized God(Easwara),Jeeva and the objectiveworld(Prakriti).
Maya is like a mirror...
When the Sattvic nature is reflected in it...Personalized God(Easwara) results....
When Rajasic nature is reflected in it....Individualized Self(Jeeva) results...
When the Tamasic nature is relected in it....The Objective world(Prakriti) results...

 

[sangom]

Palindrome, as I said earlier, if you can prove through a logical, clear & structured analysis that Moksha, Self realization don't exist, I will agree. In the absence of such philosophical analysis, I cannot agree to your assessment !! so what if the different philosophies squabbled with each other ? Also, our Vedic Religion puts our elders, parents, Guru's at a very very high pedestal & many of us choose to follow this.

Dear Shri Jaykay,

Since you mention "our vedic religion" it may be of use to know that the concept of Moksha and rebirth are found nowhere in the Rigveda. The idea of rebirth came into our belief system only in the time of the Upanishads.

Logically, man dies and leaves just a dead body which starts stinking within two days of death and perishes within a short time thereafter if left within mother earth. Such a vegetable-like body gets upgraded to the level of individuals who think very highly about their "self" due to the fact that some power gives "life" to such bodies for periods varying from person to person. We do not know, as yet, (logically and clear and structured analysis) whether this "self" continues to exist after death of a person. Our mantras for after-death ceremony has this following known as karna mantra:

आयुषः प्राणँ सन्तनु । प्राणादपानँ सन्तनु । अपानाद्व्यानँ सन्तनु । व्यानाच्चक्षुषः सन्तनु । चक्षुषः श्रोत्रं सन्तनु । श्रोत्रान् मनस्सन्तनु ।मनसो वाचँ सन्तनु । वाच आत्मानँ सन्तनु । आत्मनः पृथिवीँ सन्तनु । पृथिव्या अन्तरिक्षँ सन्तनु । अन्तरिक्षाद्दिवँ सन्तनु । दिवस्सुवस्सन्तनु ।

(āyuṣaḥ prāṇam̐ santanu | prāṇādapānam̐ santanu | apānādvyānam̐ santanu | vyānāccakṣuṣaḥ santanu | cakṣuṣaḥ śrotraṃ santanu | śrotrān manassantanu |manaso vācam̐ santanu | vāca ātmānam̐ santanu | ātmanaḥ pṛthivīm̐ santanu | pṛthivyā antarikṣam̐ santanu | antarikṣāddivam̐ santanu | divassuvassantanu |)

The word santanu means "spread, extend" in the imperative mood. Therefore, what was envisaged by this mantra (in kāṭhaka saṃhitā :' āpastamba śrautasūtra) was that on death happening, the prāṇā will extend from out of the āyuṣ or the living being, from out of the prāṇā will extend or stretch out the apāna and apāna > vyāna > cakṣuṣaḥ (the eyes or sight) > śrotraṃ (ears or the power of hearing) > manaḥ (the mind) > vācam̐ (words or the power of speech) > ātmā (commonly known as soul) > the earth > the atmosphere > the sky > suvaḥ (the heavens).

The noteworthy point here is that the ātmā is considered to extend to the earth and it does not seem to exist further on. Hence our own religious practice supports the view that the ātmā or soul does not live on but gets absorbed into the earth. With such a perishable ātmā how is it possible to have "self-realization" if by the word "self" we denote the ātmā or soul?

I wish our very knowledgeable members ponder over this mantra.

 

[palindrome]

Sangom Sir has put it so well. Yagnavalkya too realized the same (that there is nothing after death). Yagnavalkya's guru was Ashtavakra whose life story and some conversation on the self is here. It is no different from what the sufi saint Muaziz Darvesh said (no prayer, just yoke onto the self), and perhaps on doing that one realizes nothing there. The Ganga Upanishad records the life of Dara Shikoh (who was killed by Muhiuddin AKA Aurangazeb) and his conversation with the sufi Darvesh. It was made into a TV serial. The song would make anyone cry -- Upanishad Ganga - (Full) Episode 5 - YouTube

 

[palindrome]

The noteworthy point here is that the ātmā is considered to extend to the earth and it does not seem to exist further on.

Am curious to know your views on this:
yadi nAsti Atman kim asti punarjanmasya saMyate karmAntaram? If there is no AtmA what is karma self-contained within rebirth? yadi nAsti Atman kim asti karma? What is karma? If there is no AtmA what is the role of karma ? Am aware you are well versed in sanskrit. Sir, it will be nice if you may try to put your views within a form of shloka. Thank you Sir.

 

[sangom]

Am curious to know your views on this:
yadi nAsti Atman kim asti punarjanmasya saMyate karmAntaram? If there is no AtmA what is karma self-contained within rebirth? yadi nAsti Atman kim asti karma? What is karma? If there is no AtmA what is the role of karma ? Am aware you are well versed in sanskrit. Sir, it will be nice if you may try to put your views within a form of shloka. Thank you Sir.

Palindrome,

Since the AtmA or soul of the kind which is very commonly imagined by most (hindu) people is said to be non-existent (I am told that even Adi Shankara is of the same view, but I have yet to trace out where exactly he says so and how then he links the individual to brahmajnAna and brahmAnanda etc.) and since all the observed inequities in this world can be explained satisfactorily, logically and systematically, only by the Karma theory, we are forced to conclude that it is not the AtmA which is behind rebirth/s but Karma and Karma alone. It is Karmas whose phala (result/s) is not yet experienced (sanchitha karma or prArabdham, as people usually put it) which causes a new birth in such a way that in this new birth the person will experience as much of the karmaphalas as is humanly possible.

Along with this binding karma there is also a certain degree of freewill but the extent of such freewill also varies from one person to another. (The very recent case in Kerala, of a 6-year old Namboodiri girl who was killed by all kinds of inhuman tortures by her stepmother readily comes to my mind; this girl reportedly did not ever complain to anyone including her classmates or teachers, nor did she tell any neighbour. Post mortem revealed that she had had no food for 15 days at the time of death. And the poor kid's private parts had been destroyed beyond any repair by throwing scalding water, it is reported. I was so overcome by the ghastliness to which women will go, on reading about this case in the newspaper, that for two days I could not get sleep and was only imagining that if only I had known about this, I would have adopted the girl even at this age. But, you see, the free will available in this case extended only to the poor child bearing silently all the atrocities and then succumbing to death.) In some cases such freewill makes a person achieve phenomenal success in the material world (like Bill Gates) or in the spiritual line (like the Yajnavalkya story) but it need not work equally effectively for every one.

The strange thing is that this world cannot just exist even for a fraction of a second without action or Karma and this applies to humans also. The new Karmas then add up to the previous balance-in-arrears and cause yet another birth and so on, ad infinitum;this appears as "samsAra" to ordinary people like us, who are guided mostly by our feeling of "I"ness.

Liberation or Moksha can be considered in the light of the above background as a person not accumulating enough Karma/s as to entail yet another birth happening. "Self-realization" is the realization of the above principles.

But our great Acharyas as also the other prophets like Jesus and Mohammed made us ordinary individuals responsible for our salvation; this necessitated that something of the "I" ness is made responsible for the sufferings/happiness in the future (whether it be purgatory or hell and heaven as in Christianity or the equivalent concepts in Islam or the rebirth as in hinduism). I do not think the Acharyas did not know the truth but they wisely made the continuum of the "I" ness so that some amount of ethical discipline could be expected from the average individual. (According to the above proposals of mine, it will not be sangom who will be enjoying or suffering the results of my (sangom's) good and bad Karmas respectively but some unknown xyz who will be born for that purpose. This will immediately create irresponsible attitude, and people will try to enjoy every which pleasure they want even if it entails bad Karmas.)

I am not well-versed enough to answer in the form of sanskrit sloka/s but the answers to your queries are :
yadi nAsti Atman kim asti punarjanmasya saMyate karmAntaram? Karma & karmaphalas.
yadi nAsti Atman kim asti karma? Karma is not "linked" or "attached" to the AtmA; karma forms a separate entity and works as the causative factor in determining the details of a new life taking shape (growing in the womb or within the egg). On death the karma gets out from the dead body and attaches to the AtmA within the new birth. It is possible that Shankara's "adhyAsa" referred to this karma only.

 

[palindrome]

Thank you very much Sir.

If Karma is not linked to Atman, and is independent, what defines it? Action of the self alone?

 

[Govinda]

Dear Govinda ji,I had written in forum before in Maya thread.

I will paste again.All inputs were from Sathya Sai Geeta.Kindly read..

I will discuss more on Tuesday cos its a holiday tomorrow for me cos of general elections here.http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/literature/3851-maya-prakriti-cosmic-deluder.html

This one topic, [and the link given] will open up 100's of questions and objections. So, I would leave it at that.

Everything that exists, be the Creator or the Matter/Prakriti (incl. of 5 elements) and jivas (devas or humans or animals or any living species) are Real (Reality).

There is nothing that is illusory, if named so, they should be understood as something beyond our comprehension. With proper senses or knowledge (incl. of jnAna),we can comprehend anything.

So, Maya mentioned in the BG or other scriptures, should be understood as referring to the 'Magnificient Power of the Creator', that we are unable to know or overcome [with our singlehanded effort!]

Referring to Post#157

There are no reflections of Brahman or anyone or anything. He was the cause of creation, using His Maya/Divine Energy. The subtle primal matter (prakriti) and jivas belong with Him, the aggregate called Tamas (not the gunas!). Like microbes, convert/modify the milk to curd, He was instrumental in producing various forms/objects . From this tamas, mahat, ahmakara all senses, mind and the five elements and cosmic objects reflecting them arise.

sattvam rajas tama iti gunah prakrti-sambhavah
nibadhnanti maha-baho dehe dehinam avyayam BG-14:5

Prakriti's nature consists of 3 modes/gunas, Once jiva comes in contact with this prakriti, he becomes conditioned.

prakrutim svamya avashta abhya , vishrujaami punah punah: |
bhuutagrAma-mim krtsnam avasham prakrutEr vashaath ||

Prakruti, which is My own power, effortlessly controlling, I send forth these, again and again,
these multitude of beings, helpless under the sway of Prakruti. 9.8

Coming to the reflection concept, Space, Air are pervaded everywhere. Do you think the space you are in (e.g: Delhi), and the
space I am in (Chennai) are they reflections or manifestations? Is (or Are?) the air you breathe and that I breathe, reflections?

Then, what did Krishna mean by 'maya tatam idam sarvam'?He pervades (covers/extends/spread) everywhere and everything!

 

[renuka]

This one topic, [and the link given] will open up 100's of questions and objections. So, I would leave it at that.

Everything that exists, be the Creator or the Matter/Prakriti (incl. of 5 elements) and jivas (devas or humans or animals or any living species) are Real (Reality).

There is nothing that is illusory, if named so, they should be understood as something beyond our comprehension. With proper senses or knowledge (incl. of jnAna),we can comprehend anything.

So, Maya mentioned in the BG or other scriptures, should be understood as referring to the 'Magnificient Power of the Creator', that we are unable to know or overcome [with our singlehanded effort!]

Referring to Post#157

There are no reflections of Brahman or anyone or anything. He was the cause of creation, using His Maya/Divine Energy. The subtle primal matter (prakriti) and jivas belong with Him, the aggregate called Tamas (not the gunas!). Like microbes, convert/modify the milk to curd, He was instrumental in producing various forms/objects . From this tamas, mahat, ahmakara all senses, mind and the five elements and cosmic objects reflecting them arise.

sattvam rajas tama iti gunah prakrti-sambhavah
nibadhnanti maha-baho dehe dehinam avyayam BG-14:5

Prakriti's nature consists of 3 modes/gunas, Once jiva comes in contact with this prakriti, he becomes conditioned.

prakrutim svamya avashta abhya , vishrujaami punah punah: |
bhuutagrAma-mim krtsnam avasham prakrutEr vashaath ||

Prakruti, which is My own power, effortlessly controlling, I send forth these, again and again,
these multitude of beings, helpless under the sway of Prakruti. 9.8

Coming to the reflection concept, Space, Air are pervaded everywhere. Do you think the space you are in (e.g: Delhi), and the
space I am in (Chennai) are they reflections or manifestations? Is (or Are?) the air you breathe and that I breathe, reflections?

Then, what did Krishna mean by 'maya tatam idam sarvam'?He pervades (covers/extends/spread) everywhere and everything!

Dear Govinda ji,

Thanks for reply.

You asked:

Coming to the reflection concept, Space, Air are pervaded everywhere. Do you think the space you are in (e.g: Delhi), and the
space I am in (Chennai) are they reflections or manifestations? Is (or Are?) the air you breathe and that I breathe, reflections?

Space/Air come under elements and the 5 elements are formed by a process called Pancikaranam which is quintuplication of the primordial 5 elements.

I had already mentioned in my earlier posts that Prakirti is the Tamas reflection.


Then you also asked this:

Then, what did Krishna mean by 'maya tatam idam sarvam'?He pervades (covers/extends/spread) everywhere and everything!

Lord Krishna's words are self explanatory..He said that God is all pervading.
That is the meaning of the word Vishnu.



Govinda ji..I think further discussion will be really hard..not that I do not have answers but I think I have explained myself in some of the earlier post and I feel I am repeating myself too many times just to get the same point across.


Thank you anyway for all the replies.

 

[Raghy]

Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

….since all the observed inequities in this world can be explained satisfactorily, logically and systematically, only by the Karma theory, ….

I refer to your message in post #161. In my opinion, all the observed inequities in this world may not be explained by karma theory. My own karma theory may be good for my life in this birth. I can’t think that as a continuing serial.

Mostly all the inequities are present due to the six undesirable qualities namely, kama, krodha, lobha, moha, mada and madcharya. If overcome those qualities, we will not witness any inequity without attempting to correct it. In your message you did mention you would have adopted that poor child… Such a thought was possible only because you did not have any of the undesirable qualities with respect to that poor child.

In my humble opinion, karma theory was made only to manipulate gullible people. I noticed so many persons treat others unjustly and then said the persons suffered due to the karma of the victims!

…we are forced to conclude that it is not the AtmA which is behind rebirth/s but Karma and Karma alone.

Why should there be any rebirth? For that matter, why should there be any birth at all? If someone has to have a birth due to ‘karma phalan’, how did the first birth take place when there was no karma at all?
Kindly tell me in simple terms, please – Rama caused death to so many 100s of asuras and vanaras. He did not go away taking the loss of his wife as his ‘poorva janma karma phalan’. From what you say, he should/would have collected a massive load of karma. ( Rama was quite egoistic. At one stage in the war, Ravana was made to loose all his weapons. Then, instead of killing and finishing him off, Rama humiliated Ravana by refusing to kill him and asking him to come back the next day. Kumbakarna came to the scene only after that. All the killings could be avoided but for Rama’s ego. Those killings should have piled up massive karma burden for Rama). So, would Rama taking many many rebirths to wash away these karmas?

I could ask a similar question about Krishna too.

In my opinion, karma theory is just a humbug to manipulate the gullible persons.

Kindly share your opinions, please.

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

Thank you very much Sir.

If Karma is not linked to Atman, and is independent, what defines it? Action of the self alone?

Karma is a stand-alone entity, as much real as the Supreme Reality. Karma is not linked as we normally view in criminal jurisprudence to crime and punishment; punishment to be meted out to the one who committed the crime. In the Karmic law the effects of Karma have to experienced; just as a thrown thrown upwards will fall according to the laws of physics, on anyone and not necessarily pick and choose the thrower, and if nobody comes in its way, the stone falls to the ground. But when we talk of Karma in its universal aspect, similar items may be very few and some living being has to experience the results of each and every Karma. It can be the original doer only if the result is experienced within the same life-time; otherwise it could be anyone just as one who did not throw the stone upwards but happens to come under its impact when it falls down.

But this is something which goes against our perceived norms of justice and equity. It, however, has universal relevance.

what defines it? Action of the self alone?

Action of one's own during the present life time plus whatever karmas the person has carried down at the time of birth; the latter need not be karmas done by the same person (since we do not see the same "person" being born again as a child but talk about the same jiva taking a next birth, for which we have no evidence or proof.

 

[C RAVI]

Sri. Sangom, Greetings.


....... ( Rama was quite egoistic. At one stage in the war, Ravana was made to loose all his weapons. Then, instead of killing and finishing him off, Rama humiliated Ravana by refusing to kill him and asking him to come back the next day. Kumbakarna came to the scene only after that. All the killings could be avoided but for Rama’s ego. Those killings should have piled up massive karma burden for Rama). So, would Rama taking many many rebirths to wash away these karmas?

I could ask a similar question about Krishna too.


Cheers!

Shri Raghy,



If and only if we consider Rama and Krishna as mere human being who took birth on this Earth like any other humans and ended up accumulating pile of Negative Karma due to their EGO, Injustice, crookedness and cruelness then the points you raised against them is "correct", IMO.

 

[palindrome]

Rama caused death to so many 100s of asuras and vanaras. He did not go away taking the loss of his wife as his ‘poorva janma karma phalan’. From what you say, he should/would have collected a massive load of karma. ( Rama was quite egoistic. At one stage in the war, Ravana was made to loose all his weapons. Then, instead of killing and finishing him off, Rama humiliated Ravana by refusing to kill him and asking him to come back the next day. Kumbakarna came to the scene only after that. All the killings could be avoided but for Rama’s ego. Those killings should have piled up massive karma burden for Rama). So, would Rama taking many many rebirths to wash away these karmas?

Killing an unharmed man who cannot defend himself was against the norms of war. Hence, Rama let Ravana go. It was not due to the ego factor.

Is Mantara who instigated Kaikeyi; and is everyone who played a role in kuru politics, responsible for loss of lives? Perhaps there is 'collective karma' indeed which comes about by the synchronization of individual karmas (just my view, though this is not supported by scriptures of various religions).

As you may be aware, the concept of karma is non-vedic; and associated with diverse shramana belief forms, including the ones which gave rise to the siddha tradition of southindia. It was formulated into a preaching openly for common humans with a lovely sutra by Buddha (and hence Buddha is called kammavada which in Pali means one who propounded karma).

However, no one knows how old the tradition of prohibiting killing of animals and humans is. The vedics were into sacrificing animals (as part of brahmanical sacrifices). Wars were part of vedic tradition. A key discord between devas and asuras was the role of cows. The Zoroastrian tradition holds devas (who killed cows) evil. Maybe an ancient tribal fight based on cows, ownership of cows and how animals are treated (ie, apporach to life or cultural conflict).

A specific set of shramana views (which possibly also gave rise to Zoroastrian beliefs), prohibited the killing of animals and humans. However, afaik it appears it was followed only by shramana followers or by renunciates. With Buddha's open message to people, the common man became aware every action leads to consequential reaction.

Buddha's Karma sutra however, is a broad guideline. The Jain and Buddhist teachings on karma, which can be called the originators of the karma theory into mainstream religions of today, are worth reading into.

 

[tks]

"The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine"

In trying to make sense out of words like Brahman, Karma, Isvara, etc there are no equivalent expression to relate and understand.

Isvara is often understood subconsciously as a generalization of magical figures we experienced as infant - our parents who both gave us what we need and also set us right with consequences.

As adult if a set of ideas are held together by stranger assumptions and making things up it usually is a sign of not knowing what is going on. This is true in every subject including what we call subject of science,

Our human mind has a tendency to complicate resulting in a religion called Complicatedism I suppose

I
Our teachings in Upanishads do have a complete and final say without any contradictions

This can *only* be understood with a qualified teacher (hard to find) and by dropping preconceived notions derived from reading new age books or by discussions in a forum where everyone makes up things (a pleasurable activity I might add) and by imagining things.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

just as a stone thrown upwards will fall according to the laws of physics, on anyone and not necessarily pick and choose the thrower, and if nobody comes in its way, the stone falls to the ground. But when we talk of Karma in its universal aspect, similar items may be very few and some living being has to experience the results of each and every Karma. It can be the original doer only if the result is experienced within the same life-time; otherwise it could be anyone just as one who did not throw the stone upwards but happens to come under its impact when it falls down.

But this is something which goes against our perceived norms of justice and equity. It, however, has universal relevance.


Action of one's own during the present life time plus whatever karmas the person has carried down at the time of birth; the latter need not be karmas done by the same person (since we do not see the same "person" being born again as a child but talk about the same jiva taking a next birth, for which we have no evidence or proof.

Dear Sangom,

You have presented your theory very well. There, still, remains a question that nags me. You said "whatever the karmas the person has carried down at the time of birth". This burden, as we can readily see, is not equal or uniformly imposed. What, in your theory, explains this difference? Is this anomaly a random phenomenon? Perhaps, it is not an anomaly at all, as every jiva is part of the same brahman. I have formed an opinion that seems logical but would like to hear your expert opinion.

 

[palindrome]

In trying to make sense out of words like Brahman, Karma, Isvara, etc there are no equivalent expression to relate and understand.

There is plenty to understand. Including the role of killing and vegetarianism in various religions (it is part of teachings on karma). Maybe a 4th quadrant useless activity for some. But for some, maybe they just want to explore and understand. If there is a compelling desire to understand something, it means there is some 'attachment' to the topic, and hence, it may be better to let such people explore, understand, and get over with it.

Our teachings in Upanishads do have a complete and final say without any contradictions

I disagree. I may choose the words of Zoroaster the final say. Each one gets to decide the 'final' without contradictions. Each one's reality is real and valid.

This can *only* be understood with a qualified teacher (hard to find) and by dropping preconceived notions derived from reading new age books or by discussions in a forum where everyone makes up things (a pleasurable activity I might add) and by imagining things.

If one finds a 'qualified' teacher, good for him or her. There are many qualified teachers in different religions; and which of these imagines things or makes up things who knows. That apart, whatever be the activity of forum posters, there is no need for anyone to bother about what the other is doing. If one wants to take part in discussions, it is their will. Passing useless comments may be a pleasurable activity for some. And these actually comment on 4th quadrant activity of others. Sigh!

Please do not take offense for my saying this. What one thinks to be their ''own valid view'' (including the one on 4th quadrant activity), may be applied in the same manner, but in a context that is unsupportive to their ''own valid view''. If only all forms of reality were one....But well...anyways...all sides which say things are just human after all. Let anyone say, explore, argue, think, etc; these activities need not bother anyone. Nothing is permanent after all, including what one may think is innovative 1st quadrant stuff.

Thank you.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom,

You have presented your theory very well. There, still, remains a question that nags me. You said "whatever the karmas the person has carried down at the time of birth". This burden, as we can readily see, is not equal or uniformly imposed. What, in your theory, explains this difference? Is this anomaly a random phenomenon? Perhaps, it is not an anomaly at all, as every jiva is part of the same brahman. I have formed an opinion that seems logical but would like to hear your expert opinion.

Shri KB,

In my view, Karma is synonymous with the adhyaasa of advaita, though advaita makes adhyaasa as the reason for the jivas being under the spell of this world as reality, which is mAyA. I view the unfructified karma (i.e., those karmas whose results are as yet not come about and has not been experienced by anyone) with which a new birth happens, as the only reason for the inequalities we see among all the creation. One person is probably born with a load of good karmas which bestow on him/her a lucky life, whereas another person is born with a load of bad karmas and consequently suffers a bad life. This is quite in agreement with our traditional belief so long as we hold that the same soul, AtmA, Jeeva or self is born with its old balance of Karma carried forward. But then it will be difficult to explain the karna mantra which says that, on death, the AtmA extends to prithvee or the Earth (i.e., the AtmA stretches over to the Earth and dissolves into the latter).

Hence in a new life it is not the same AtmA which gets in. At the same time we have "jeevO brahmaiva naapara" and so all jeevas are intrinsically the same brahman. It is therefore evident that the same brahman or life force exists in and activates every living body but each gets a different life because of the Karma load it is born with.

Hope I have been able to clarify your doubt.

 

[sangom]

Sri. Sangom, Greetings.


I refer to your message in post #161. In my opinion, all the observed inequities in this world may not be explained by karma theory. My own karma theory may be good for my life in this birth. I can’t think that as a continuing serial.

Mostly all the inequities are present due to the six undesirable qualities namely, kama, krodha, lobha, moha, mada and madcharya. If overcome those qualities, we will not witness any inequity without attempting to correct it. In your message you did mention you would have adopted that poor child… Such a thought was possible only because you did not have any of the undesirable qualities with respect to that poor child.

In my humble opinion, karma theory was made only to manipulate gullible people. I noticed so many persons treat others unjustly and then said the persons suffered due to the karma of the victims!


Why should there be any rebirth? For that matter, why should there be any birth at all? If someone has to have a birth due to ‘karma phalan’, how did the first birth take place when there was no karma at all?
Kindly tell me in simple terms, please – Rama caused death to so many 100s of asuras and vanaras. He did not go away taking the loss of his wife as his ‘poorva janma karma phalan’. From what you say, he should/would have collected a massive load of karma. ( Rama was quite egoistic. At one stage in the war, Ravana was made to loose all his weapons. Then, instead of killing and finishing him off, Rama humiliated Ravana by refusing to kill him and asking him to come back the next day. Kumbakarna came to the scene only after that. All the killings could be avoided but for Rama’s ego. Those killings should have piled up massive karma burden for Rama). So, would Rama taking many many rebirths to wash away these karmas?

I could ask a similar question about Krishna too.

In my opinion, karma theory is just a humbug to manipulate the gullible persons.

Kindly share your opinions, please.

Cheers!

Dear Raghy,

I saw your post just now and will reply tomorrow. (late today). In the meanwhile how will you explain all the observed inequalities and inequities in the world?

 

[prasad1]

Mr. Sangom,

In my view, Karma is synonymous with the adhyaasa of advaita, though advaita makes adhyaasa as the reason for the jivas being under the spell of this world as reality, which is mAyA. I view the unfructified karma (i.e., those karmas whose results are as yet not come about and has not been experienced by anyone) with which a new birth happens, as the only reason for the inequalities we see among all the creation. One person is probably born with a load of good karmas which bestow on him/her a lucky life, whereas another person is born with a load of bad karmas and consequently suffers a bad life. This is quite in agreement with our traditional belief so long as we hold that the same soul, AtmA, Jeeva or self is born with its old balance of Karma carried forward.

I too have similar view.

 

[biswa]

Mostly all the inequities are present due to the six undesirable qualities namely, kama, krodha, lobha, moha, mada and madcharya. If overcome those qualities, we will not witness any inequity without attempting to correct it.

In the midst of the learned members, allow me to present a contrarian idea. The six undesirables are necessary for the whole to stay dynamic and not be a totally boring place.

Without Kamsa, there would be no Krishna, without Ravana there would be no Rama. In fact without an evil demon at each stage, there would not be the 10 avatars of Vishnu. Then how would people feel the glory of God? To appreciate what is good, one has to witness evil.