God Exists

[amala]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Just my thought: "Middle path" does not spell Semi-Denial.Middle path means NOT being in the extreme ends of the spectrum.

Agreed. Moderation is the key....

 

[Yamaka]

Just my thought: "Middle path" does not spell Semi-Denial.Middle path means NOT being in the extreme ends of the spectrum.

In my view, "the Agno-Theists" who I believe are swelling in numbers in hundreds of millions are a good news to the Rationalists/Naturalists/Atheists... because

The inertia to move these people from one extreme is very enormous... the fact that they have already moved away from the Theist end is a great progress, IMO. Thanks to real independent thinking fostered largely by science and technology, I believe.

I am sure most of their children will be to our side very soon. Lol

Wait & watch.

 

[Yamaka]

"He was particularly interested in abnormal and religious psychology as he found in them the clue to understanding human belief in the existence of God and soul. Because of his study and reflection, Gora concluded: …it was man that made god out of psychological necessity in primitive times. Metaphysical justification of the existence of god was a clever after thought of civilized man to preserve the faith, at best for its use as a sanction for moral conduct and at worst for aiding exploitation of the gullible masses." -- From Gora, as posted by Subbudu1


Hello All:

In short, I have been saying "Some men created the Organized Religions and their Gods to control and to exploit unsuspecting innocent peoples".

Thank you, Subbudu Sir for posting this here.

Cheers.

ps. "But she was still traditional in her looks with a tilak on her forehead, mangalasutra in her neck and bangles on her hands. Now she got rid of all these symbols of tradition from her body which she considered as a mark of servitude of women to men and customs." - About Gora's wife, Saraswathi.

My wife, although an "Agno-Theist", does not wear "all these symbols of tradition in her body"... She also considers them "as a mark of servitude of women to men and custom".

Very interesting...to tell you the least.

 

[ShivKC]

Agreed. Moderation is the key....

if love/belief towards god be kept in middle path, as supported by sh.yamaka inferring, this shift towards middle path is seen good trend, supporting atheist views, i have a query here.

is it also advisable to choose the middle path when it come to 'the love towards our own children?'.

should we love our children to the best maximum and be closer, or, choose a middle path?

 

[ShivKC]

"He was particularly interested in abnormal and religious psychology as he found in them the clue to understanding human belief in the existence of God and soul. Because of his study and reflection, Gora concluded: …it was man that made god out of psychological necessity in primitive times. Metaphysical justification of the existence of god was a clever after thought of civilized man to preserve the faith, at best for its use as a sanction for moral conduct and at worst for aiding exploitation of the gullible masses." -- From Gora, as posted by Subbudu1


Hello All:

In short, I have been saying "Some men created the Organized Religions and their Gods to control and to exploit unsuspecting innocent peoples".

Thank you, Subbudu Sir for posting this here.

Cheers.

since you have addressed this post to ALL, i have a query.

any society needs a control. law/order/police is all set for this. there are something which these orgs cannot control / answer. like, debauchery, life after death, purpose of life etc etc. do you have any better control system, apart from religion. if atheism can be a good control for society, pls explain it how, lets have a good debate.

sad to say, you keep on posting this rants and raves, but havent responded to the detailed post which i have wrote countering your views of religion is all bad. could you pls try to respond them.

 

[nachi naga]

religion is bedrock of stability in society.science itself is god ,how anyone can deny the existance of god is baffling,when all you see around you within you the spectacular mystic opulence in play.another name for god is science,imho.

 

[Nara]

I am going to talk about a good man.

Dear Subbudu sir, I am very glad you have brought Gora to the attention of the members of this site. He is one of the inspirational leaders of India, not very well known. I welcome interested members to visit this site for more information on Gora and the center dedicated to his works.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

religion is bedrock of stability in society.science itself is god ,how anyone can deny the existance of god is baffling,when all you see around you within you the spectacular mystic opulence in play.another name for god is science,imho.

Well... many have said that Nature is God... and now we hear that Science is God and all that..

Neither Nature nor Science expects any poojas, prayers and offerings from anybody!

Just junk them.. then Nature is God.... I will agree.

I am opposed to all the Man-made Gods manufactured (by men) in the Books of Vedas, Puranas, Bible, Koran, Torah etc.. they all expect rituals of prayers all day everyday!

That's what I hate, to tell you the truth.

 

[Nara]

I hate, to tell you the truth.

Ha, so you agree, you hate to tell the truth, of course, all atheists hate truth, atheists are haters, by saying they have no faith they insult those who have faith, by saying they don't believe they spew hatred, they surely hate themselves and their parents, and their siblings, and their friends, and you agree you hate .....

 

[renuka]

if love/belief towards god be kept in middle path, as supported by sh.yamaka inferring, this shift towards middle path is seen good trend, supporting atheist views, i have a query here.

is it also advisable to choose the middle path when it come to 'the love towards our own children?'.

should we love our children to the best maximum and be closer, or, choose a middle path?

Dear ShivKC,

Same question I had asked myself once about love with regards to children.I feel its better to apply "middle path" that is do our parental duties,shower them with love(Not excessive) but dont be too attached and dont have any expectations too.
That doesnt spell neglect in anyway.Thats just being balanced I feel.

 

[subbudu1]

Dear Subbudu sir, I am very glad you have brought Gora to the attention of the members of this site. He is one of the inspirational leaders of India, not very well known. I welcome interested members to visit this site for more information on Gora and the center dedicated to his works.

Cheers!

http://www.positiveatheism.org/india/lavbio.htm

Unfortunately many people dont realize this. They have a tendency to get angry with sceptics and atheists and even agnostics but they have nothing to say about the fake gurus, the corrupt priests, and the evils that prevail within the boundaries of tradition and culture.
Let me complete this with some quotes from Gora's son Lavan's autobiography.

The year of my birth, 1930, was the year when Gandhi started, as part of India's national liberation movement, the civil-disobedience campaign against the British salt tax

My father, Gora, had already for some years been active in the national liberation movement, and this tax protest was its greatest undertaking to date, so he named me "Lavanam," which means "Salt" in Sanskrit and other Indian languages. As far as I know, no one else has been given this name. It had a great influence on my development. Even as a child I was an ardent Gandhian.

As a child I attended public meetings with my father, including various lectures which Hindu preachers would often give on philosophy, mythology, tradition and nationalism. At one such lecture, when I was eight years old, the speaker not only declined to answer a rather harmless question posed by my father, but even declared that the meeting would be terminated forthwith unless the atheist were to leave (which my father courteously did). I was struck by this authoritarian inability to handle a perfectly sensible question. In thinking about it, I decided that learning is a two-way affair and calls for etiquette as well as openmindedness.

Gora was an academic, teaching biology in a succession of colleges in southern India and Sri Lanka. His atheism caused him to be dismissed twice, in 1933 and again in 1939, but on each occasion his record as a teacher and as a social worker on weekends and during vacations led to his reappointment by higher authorities. In 1940, however, he decided to devote himself fully to the causes of atheism, socio-economic equality and the national liberation movement. With the approval and coöperation of my mother, he quit his job in 1940, left a relatively sophisticated mode of urban life and went to a remote village, Mudunur (twenty miles from Vijayawada), where a group of people who had heard him lecture invited him to relocate. There he founded the Atheist Centre, the first such center as far as I know. I was the years old, and very proud of his initiative.

One day when I was 14, my father asked all his colleagues at Mudunur what they might do to further the cause of atheism. Offers were made to write a book, produce a film and so on. My offer was to go around the world. I was thinking of how Buddhism and Christianity had been spread by missionaries willing to risk their lives. The offer drew laughter, but I did not forget it.

In the mid-1940s Gandhi invited Gora to bring his family to Sevagram so that the two of them could discuss Gora's atheism -- and also, it soon became clear, so that Gandhi could judge first-hand the mettle of our family and the colleagues who accompanied us. Thus I had the opportunity to live at Sevagram when Gandhi was there.

When I joined Vinoba, his daily meetings to exhort landowners to give away some of their holdings would always start with a 40-minute prayer, drawing upon texts from all the religions practiced in India. As an atheist I was concerned about this, so I proposed to translate whatever Vinoba said before the prayer, then step down from the dias in order to dissociate myself from the prayer itself, and then resume translating afterwards. Vinoba, who respected individual liberty no less than Gandhi had, readily accepted this arrangement even though I was a youngster and far less eminent than he.

But then, after three meetings conducted in htis way, he asked me whether I would be willing to remain with him on the dias if instead of conducting a prayer he presided over five minutes of silence. As an inexperienced young man, I wanted to be more clear so I asked him what he would sugthe audience think about during those five minutes. I thought he might tell the Hindus to think of their god, the Muslims of theirs, the Christians of theirs, and so on. But to my surprise, he said he would ask them all to think about truth, non-violence and compassion -- the binding factors among humans! I was overwhelmed by his generosity and felt that he was continuing where Gandhi had left off. Now there was no need to step down.

Vinoba's generosity encouraged me to discuss theism and atheism with him. As a not-very-well-read young man, I often felt silenced by the sheer weight of his immense scholarship, yet when I expressed my feelings freely and frankly, he would produce arguments to strengthen my position. On one occasion he told me, citing a sage from Maharastra (the province of which Bombay is the capital), that one should feel in one's heart that there is a god, in order to avoid arrogance, but should behave as an atheist. My association with Vinoba, the "Walking Saint of India," broadened my vision and trained me to interact meaningfully with theists.

Sometimes he would set me a difficult task. In 1950 he wanted to conduct and adult-education program in one of the slums of Vijayawada, but the residents were adamant in their ignorance and, worse, their fatalism. Some of our co-workers tried and failed to engage their interest, so I was asked to try. The first day I went, these good people declared, "God has written on our foreheads, condemning us to be illiterate, ignorant, poor, untouchable; what can we do?" (They considered it their destiny in this life. According to Hindu belief, their souls might fare differently in their next lives in this world.) They told me, "Please don't waste your time and ours!" It was quite a challenge, so I stood up abruptly and, touching the forehead oft he person sitting next to me, exclaimed, "If anyone has written on your forehead condemning you to be illiterate, ignorant, poor, untouchable -- he is your enemy, and my enemy! Bring him here! What right does he have to inscribe on your forehead such a fate? We must punish him!" Then I touched the next person's forehead and, wiping my hand across it, declared: "I sweep off from your forehead whatever has been written there! I am writing a new message! If you come daily to me you will become a different person!" They were taken aback by my offensive behavior, so I left; but when I came back the next day, some of them were waiting for me, and thereafter the adult-education classes caught on. That is the kind of fulfilling work that my father taught us all to do.

In my 20s I had no time to think of courtship. At 30, I married a woman whose father, Gurram Joshua, was a unique personality: born poor, he had held his head high and became a superbly elegant and renowned poet at a time when poetry was normally a monopoly of the high-caste rich. He dedicated his poetry to the cause of social equality and humanist values. He and my father though born into different castes became good friends in 1950, and within a few years decided to complement their friendship with a caste-free matrimonial relationship. Joshua's third daughter, Hemalata, and I had never met, but we agreed with our parents' idea and we were married in Sevagram before Mahatma Gandhi's hut in 1960. Ever since, she and I have been together in all our activities. I am proud of her very active role in developing positive atheism into a way of life.

I had had the privilege of meeting Martin Luther King Jr. when he visited India in 1959 along with his wife, Coretta Scott King, and Bayard Rustin. In his study of Gandhian thought, he had read my father's book, An Atheist with Gandhi, and had noticed how my father on one occasion said, "I want atheism to make man self-confident and to establish social and economic equalities non-violently. Tell me, Bapu, where I am wrong," and Gandhi replied, "I can neither say my theism is right nor your atheism wrong. We are seekers after truth.... Whether you are in the right or I am in the right, results will prove." Dr. King told me that this passage had led him to adopt a similar attitude toward atheism.

We work to promote knowledge, human service and fellowship. We consider it invaluable to show the world, as my dear father showed Gandhi, that to do good and to be good, god and religion are unnecessary. To that end we have founded three autonomous organizations: (1) Arthik Samata Mandal, for the promotion of economic equality, (2) Vasavya Mahila Mandali, for women's emancipation, and (3) Samskar, for the reformation and rehabilitation of socially abandoned people. These organizations receive financial help from international funding agencies and from various branches of the Indian government. Their work embraces the great variety of developmental, social-work and social-reform programs touching directly the whole spectrum of day-to-day live in dome 350 Indian villages and urban areas, and influencing many others indirectly.

Our close association with the Gandhian movement is facilitated by the fact that Gandhi in his maturity evolved from a traditional Hindu to a dedicated secularist who considered it important to confine god-belief and religion to the private sphere of life. Indeed he felt strongly that public life should be shorn of all the sectarian feelings that set one human against another. Yet alas, his public use of religious language contributed to such misunderstandings and mistrust that it became impossible to prevent the horrific division of India in the name of religion -- uprooting millions of innocent people and entailing mass slaughter -- and his own assassination by a religious fundamentalist.
After having declined in 1941 to meet Gora ("Atheism is a denial of self.... I have no time to spare for talks"), Gandhi in his last years came to cherish him ever more warmly ("You are a member of my family. Come to me any time you find me not engaged with others"), and in some of their last meetings planned to help him write a book-length exposition of atheist philosophy and to conduct my elder sister's wedding in an atheist ceremony. Gandhi was deeply impressed by Gora's moral qualities, and in view of his own constant search for moral truth, his opening to atheism seems to me a promising sign for the future of humanity.

 

[subbudu1]

Well... many has said that Nature is God... and now we hear that Science is God and all that..

Looks like people want to add new names to God. May be today we should say Vishnu Koti namam instead of sahasranama. Said in good humour, devotees of Vishnu, please dont feel offended.

What I dont like is twisting the religion this way and that, so that old meanings are completed wrapped up and changed in accordance with modern ideas and science. If there was a god and a purana, it was there much before us and so the ideas should be consistent and not finetuned to change as per time. One can present things in a new way, but not change its meaning altogether and make the works sound metaphorical where none is intended.

 

[ShivKC]

there is nothing as such atheists hate theists, or their truths.

atheism itself is a religion, and a part of faith construct too. to an extent, american court had given a ruling about this in 2003.

atheists do have a strong faith that there is no super natural power. believing that something doesn't exist itself is a faith. one may even believe that the russels celestial tea pot exists, and since it can be proved by science, this belief as such could be another form of faith. vice versa is also a faith.

like theists, atheist also has rituals. theists ritualise birth and death ceremies as god given act. but i wonder why atheists celebrate birthdays/obit gatherings when they birth/death is a natural process of this darwin world, and just like any other animals, they should not be even remembering these days.

atheists do have rituals similar to pongal in celebrating harvest festivals? after all, harvest is natures effect, and sun god has no role there it seems.

atheists do have their scriptures. their avadhar of a Non-God version is mr.darwin, and they often refer their scriptures handed over by betrand russel, richard Dawkins etc.

who said, atheists don't attempt prioritization? its very much evident here in this forum itself, and few members here, have already got converted to atheism,very recently.

 

[ShivKC]

Dear ShivKC,

Same question I had asked myself once about love with regards to children.I feel its better to apply "middle path" that is do our parental duties,shower them with love(Not excessive) but dont be too attached and dont have any expectations too.
That doesnt spell neglect in anyway.Thats just being balanced I feel.

Doc,in most of the literature's/scriptures, mothers love is portrayed as the 'ultimate love'/ unconditional love, and not as a middle path love. may be fathers love is treated as middle path love, cos he shares it, in between wife & children.

we have seen lot of incidences, where mothers have given up their life to save the life of their children. like, mother saving the child from the fire, but she getting succumbed. in literatures/histories, mothers have voluntarily offered themselves to chose death, to barter and save the child.

if mother has to take a middle path, the equation goes like this.. both lives are equal, same value, and to choose one out of that, first the selfish gene should work, and mother should choose herself to be saved, than the child. an atheist with a view on economics would say, "mother is learned/earning/aged/productive to this world than compared to the new born child, which is only few weeks older than the fetus, so let the strong survive (darwin said so)".

i have underlined the word , selfish gene, because, the book 'selfish gene' by richard dawkins in the holy scripture of atheists..

if world has to function as per the selfish genes ideology of richard dawkins, a mothers love would have been like any other animals in the survival of fittest kingdom, and mothers wouldnt have been taking the middle path, rather would be choosing 'selfish path', like how a lioness eats its own cub, when hungry.

 

[renuka]

Doc,in most of the literature's/scriptures, mothers love is portrayed as the 'ultimate love'/ unconditional love, and not as a middle path love. may be fathers love is treated as middle path love, cos he shares it, in between wife & children.

we have seen lot of incidences, where mothers have given up their life to save the life of their children. like, mother saving the child from the fire, but she getting succumbed. in literatures/histories, mothers have voluntarily offered themselves to chose death, to barter and save the child.

if mother has to take a middle path, the equation goes like this.. both lives are equal, same value, and to choose one out of that, first the selfish gene should work, and mother should choose herself to be saved, than the child. an atheist with a view on economics would say, "mother is learned/earning/aged/productive to this world than compared to the new born child, which is only few weeks older than the fetus, so let the strong survive (darwin said so)".

i have underlined the word , selfish gene, because, the book 'selfish gene' by richard dawkins in the holy scripture of atheists..

if world has to function as per the selfish genes ideology of richard dawkins, a mothers love would have been like any other animals in the survival of fittest kingdom, and mothers wouldnt have been taking the middle path, rather would be choosing 'selfish path', like how a lioness eats its own cub, when hungry.

ShivKc Ji,

You got me wrong.I would willingly give up my life for my son or anyone who I love becos I do come with a compassionate heart(I am not prasing myself but i can still feel sad even when i see a dead animal on the road)

When I was 18.,my dog had got stuck in the house window and his neck was at the risk of being cut and I carried him broke the glass with my bare hands and saved him and i was cut also in that process.
I would have done it even it was an unknown dog.Thats love for a fellow creature in the world.

Off late here in Msia many accidents take place where cars are catching fire and people get burnt alive and this has moved me a lot and I carry a fire extinguisher in my car in case it comes in handy for anyone.
Thats just being considerate for fellow humans.

May be our definition of middle path differs.Middle path is not being Selfish but rather being Selfless.In middle path we dont make choices to apply the survival of the fittest rule.Middle path is all about duty without undue attachment.

I remember when I was unmarried and worked in a rural set up the place where i worked had a day care centre with lots of kids and when I was free i would go play with them.
One day one Indian nurse there who was married with one child told me .."doc now you are single hence you love other peoples kids but when you have your own you wont care for others kids"

I disagreed with her and when I became a mother myself I realized that a child is a Gift from God and everyone's child is also a gift.
Like some woman who marry widowers with kids start ti ill treat the step kids once they have their own kids..thats selfish cos if we love a man(husband) why cant we love what is his too?

I am not saying that I am above everything can sing Sukhe Dukhe Same Krtva all the while.
Not being able to get in to Forum itself due to technical problems with my Internet Service Provider was making me a bit pissed and i finally asked my self the question "why am i so attached to Forum?"
So we learn as we face situations.

Love is like a double edge sword..it can bind you and at the same time liberate you.

Love All Serve All can never go wrong and that the Middle Path.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Renukaji,
If you don't get the thing you are deeply attached to you get disappointed,
the starting point of trouble. This is what Lord Krishna tells Arjuna. By
vairagya and abhyasa you must overcome it.

 

[DrBarani]

Love All Serve All can never go wrong and that the Middle Path.

I think both of you are right -

1. ShivKC is on the money : Mother's love is not a matter of debate. It is unconditional, unlimited, sacrificial.

2. Renuka is also right - she is talking about middlelane but not opposite direction of the Love Boulevard.

I see no conflict! Sorry, didn't mean to jump into this interesting little thread, but I have to defend mothers on anything they do! Even the lioness example - I don't think the lioness kills the cub because she is hungry but when she is hungry the cub will also be hungry... so better it is dead than suffer starvation... I believe it may be a case of euthanasia. I will defend mothers over even Gods!

 

[renuka]

Renukaji,
If you don't get the thing you are deeply attached to you get disappointed,
the starting point of trouble. This is what Lord Krishna tells Arjuna. By
vairagya and abhyasa you must overcome it.

Yes sir,

Deep attachment sometimes comes with Self Interest(Selfish Gene) but the Middle Path comes with Selflessness and Vairagya.

 

[tks]

ShivKc Ji,

You got me wrong.I would willingly give up my life for my son or anyone who I love becos I do come with a compassionate heart(I am not prasing myself but i can still feel sad even when i see a dead animal on the road)

When I was 18.,my dog had got stuck in the house window and his neck was at the risk of being cut and I carried him broke the glass with my bare hands and saved him and i was cut also in that process.
I would have done it even it was an unknown dog.Thats love for a fellow creature in the world.

Off late here in Msia many accidents take place where cars are catching fire and people get burnt alive and this has moved me a lot and I carry a fire extinguisher in my car in case it comes in handy for anyone.
Thats just being considerate for fellow humans.

May be our definition of middle path differs.Middle path is not being Selfish but rather being Selfless.In middle path we dont make choices to apply the survival of the fittest rule.Middle path is all about duty without undue attachment.

I remember when I was unmarried and worked in a rural set up the place where i worked had a day care centre with lots of kids and when I was free i would go play with them.
One day one Indian nurse there who was married with one child told me .."doc now you are single hence you love other peoples kids but when you have your own you wont care for others kids"

I disagreed with her and when I became a mother myself I realized that a child is a Gift from God and everyone's child is also a gift.
Like some woman who marry widowers with kids start ti ill treat the step kids once they have their own kids..thats selfish cos if we love a man(husband) why cant we love what is his too?

I am not saying that I am above everything can sing Sukhe Dukhe Same Krtva all the while.
Not being able to get in to Forum itself due to technical problems with my Internet Service Provider was making me a bit pissed and i finally asked my self the question "why am i so attached to Forum?"
So we learn as we face situations.

Love is like a double edge sword..it can bind you and at the same time liberate you.

Love All Serve All can never go wrong and that the Middle Path.

Sri Shiv, Doc -

Let me give you my perspective.

Most love, including love for our children or anyone else tends to be selfish love (at least some part of it) . In other words if you feel full and satisfied because of their company then it is selfish love though many will not label it that way.

Only when we are totally fulfilled and complete (pUrNam) that it is possible to love someone unconditionally since there are no expectation of others in our interaction.

(Some of the situations that Renu has described tend to be much more selfless in my view)

A love for someone or something when truly selfless will not cause binding or attachment.

Attachment oriented love will always cause hurt and guilt to different degrees when things do not go the way we want.

Regards

 

[sravna]

Sri Shiv, Doc -

Let me give you my perspective.

Most love, including love for our children or anyone else tends to be selfish love (at least some part of it) . In other words if you feel full and satisfied because of their company then it is selfish love though many will not label it that way.

Only when we are totally fulfilled and complete (pUrNam) that it is possible to love someone unconditionally since there are no expectation of others in our interaction.

(Some of the situations that Renu has described tend to be much more selfless in my view)

A love for someone or something when truly selfless will not cause binding or attachment.

Attachment oriented love will always cause hurt and guilt to different degrees when things do not go the way we want.

Regards

I would like to offer my perspective here. I will use the very enlightening quote from BG : " Do your duty and do not worry about the results". So applying this concept I think one would have an attachment towards one's parents, spouse etc, not in the normal sense of the word where we are not able to separate doing something from the results, but in this attachment is you do love your relationships and do all that you would do to them in the normal sense of attachment. This way it is like a feeling you could do nothing better or more perfect and so you are able to detach yourself from all consequences. Love here should be equated with doing one's required duty towards others.

We need to be more dutiful with respect to certain individuals eg. parents than others in the society but that wouldn't be termed selfish as long as we are able to show the required detachment.

 

[renuka]

Its not easy being Selfless but there is no harm trying.I will tell you all a personal experience again it happened in that rural set up I was working before.
This set up came with me and another doc and it was a real remote and small government set up.

Once there was an accident where one whole family of 6 hurt in a crash and 2 children were dead and the rest seriously injured and I was the only one running around handling all and told the nurse to call the other doc to help out.

The other doc's wife asked to speak to me and told me that her husband is in prayer and per their religion he cant come till he finishes his prayer.
I told her please tell him to come as soon as possible cos i need help or i will lose even the other victims.

Then she called me again and asked me this"My husband wants to know what race are the victims"

I was at my wits and I yelled back at her saying "your race only" and slammed the phone down.

The other doc came after he finished his prayers.

Once his own child had a fall and the very same doc was unable to stitch his own son and I had to do it for him.

He took his time to come when it was not his own blood but for his own blood he could not even stitch a simple wound.

 

[renuka]

I would like to offer my perspective here. I will use the very enlightening quote from BG : " Do your duty and do not worry about the results". So applying this concept I think one would have an attachment towards one's parents, spouse etc, not in the normal sense of the word where we are not able to separate doing something from the results, but in this attachment is you do love your relationships and do all that you would do to them in the normal sense of attachment. This way it is like a feeling you could do nothing better or more perfect and so you are able to detach yourself from all consequences. Love here should be equated with doing one's required duty towards others.

We need to be more dutiful with respect to certain individuals eg. parents than others in the society but that wouldn't be termed selfish as long as we are able to show the required detachment.

May I add?

Buddham Sharanam Gacchaami( I surrender unto intellect)
Dharmam Sharanam Gacchaami(I surrender unto Dharma)
Sangam Sharanam Gacchaami(I surrender unto Society/World)

Step by Step to Vasudhaiva Kutambakam.

The Middle Path shown to us by Lord Buddha.

 

[tks]

Its not easy being Selfless but there is no harm trying.I will tell you all a personal experience again it happened in that rural set up I was working before.
This set up came with me and another doc and it was a real remote and small government set up.

Once there was an accident where one whole family of 6 hurt in a crash and 2 children were dead and the rest seriously injured and I was the only one running around handling all and told the nurse to call the other doc to help out.

The other doc's wife asked to speak to me and told me that her husband is in prayer and per their religion he cant come till he finishes his prayer.
I told her please tell him to come as soon as possible cos i need help or i will lose even the other victims.

Then she called me again and asked me this"My husband wants to know what race are the victims"

I was at my wits and I yelled back at her saying "your race only" and slammed the phone down.

The other doc came after he finished his prayers.

Once his own child had a fall and the very same doc was unable to stitch his own son and I had to do it for him.

He took his time to come when it was not his own blood but for his own blood he could not even stitch a simple wound.

It is hard to force ourselves to be selfless. We cannot be in denial or in guilt that we have to somehow feel a certain way or the other because a scripture says so. Also it is unnatural to ask someone to be detached in my viw. A true detachment to any object ( say a childhood toy) comes only when attachment to something else (a nice car - adult toy) grows. To genuinely overcome any attachment one has to realize that one is already full and complete. This may take a moment or a lifetime or never (in this life) and no one knows what happens after death though there are models.

That other doctor clearly was both ignorant and selfish. He was praying by doing some rituals, perhaps bartering with 'God' for some good things in his life while lives are being lost by his refusal to move. If true tragedy happens to strike this fellow he may become a pseudo and confused atheist because he was doing a lot of 'blah blah' without understanding for many years and will get angry at his 'God' when life deals a blow that he did not expect. I am not wishing anything bad for that fellow

Anyway, it does not matter what happens to him. You are indeed endowed with maturity to act properly - that is all that matters. I hope you never lose this Satvic nature you are endowed with (though this forum may test your capacity for Rajasic nature

)

 

[sravna]

Becoming detached is indeed the culmination of a long learning process. But the process needs to be set into motion and this is what happens. You learn that you don't be too attached to materialist aspects or too attached mentally. When you achieve that balance is when you are able to be fully detached. I am not familiar with buddhism but it seems that the middle path preached by Buddha is the striking of this balance.

 

[renuka]

Ok Dr Barani I just read this and sharing with you and others.

Mind and Physical Science from S.V Vedic University Series No 49 Research and Publications Wing... Shevadhih Half Yearly Research Journal.

"Advaita postulates three aspects viz Drihsya-Drashta-Druk(Seen,Seer and the Absolute Seer) called Triputis.
When one realizes the Truth both Drashta and Drishya merge in Druk.That is a state that transcends the Triputis.It is undoubtedly difficult to understand this concept.
However what we would like to point out here is the similarity between Triputa Siddhanta and the Omnijective theory of Michael Talbot.

Louise de Broglie of Paris. a Nobel Laureate proved that subatomic particles behave both as particles and waves.He called them "wavicles"
Subsequent Schrodinger came out with an equation to explain the dual behaviour as particles and waves.Later Max Born proved that these wavicles are "probabilty waves".In layman's language they shown the expectations rather than definite positions.

There is a story in Datta Purana.Kartaveeryarjuna approached Lord Dattaatreya with some questions on Dualism.The latter taught him yoga and blessed him with energy transfer(Shakthipaata).After meditating Kartavveryarjuna narrated about his understanding to his Guru in these words.

'Absolute Joy (Chidaananda) manisfests everywhere.I see bliss in every object.There is nothing other than consciousness anywhere"


Next point is: Is matter first or Consciousness first? Dr Max Planck declarede in 1932 that consciousness was primary and matter originated from Consciousness.

Einstein proposed a thought experiment along with Podolsky and Rosen in 1935 refered to as the EPR Paradox.
The gist of the paradox is "The whole universe is closely interrelated.Nothing is a seperate entity is information appears to travel exceeding the limits of the speed of light"

Bells findings says" a pair of related particles though situated several hundred miles apart,will still have some inexplicable connection between them"

British Scientist David Bohm says it is not wrong to think that there is a relationship between these particles and that in reality the whole universe is a single entity.

He also contended that objective reality did not exist and despite its apparent solidity, the whole universe could be a big phantasm."
His views go along the lines of Viratswarupa.

Just sharing what was reading today and typed it here before my ISP troubles me again.Glad I bought this research papers when i was in India in Jan 2011.
Has lots of info but mainly in Sanskrit.