Human Nature...

[auh]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Upon reading some of the recent posts, I am more inclined to toe the line of reasoning that religious injunctions, about a purported god either as in a conscious, willing and able super power or as an all pervading universal force (in whatever manner it may be), are all a means of regulation - of the self and of the other.

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I dont want to delve too much into imagined situations but the basic premise of this thread is to suggest that the instinctive nature of humans is to seek pleasure and avoid pain (dianetics anybody?), in whatever form and substance it may be. That is why we find even those purported of high morals and ethics falter at times.

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

 

[sangom]

Upon reading some of the recent posts, I am more inclined to toe the line of reasoning that religious injunctions, about a purported god either as in a conscious, willing and able super power or as an all pervading universal force (in whatever manner it may be), are all a means of regulation - of the self and of the other.

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I dont want to delve too much into imagined situations but the basic premise of this thread is to suggest that the instinctive nature of humans is to seek pleasure and avoid pain (dianetics anybody?), in whatever form and substance it may be. That is why we find even those purported of high morals and ethics falter at times.

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

Shri auh ji,

I agree that the most central point of existence for humans is to live as happily and comfortably as possible, and this means avoiding anything unpleasant or is cause of discomfort, ordinarily.

Religion, in my opinion, was a later addition to human society, even later than probably agriculture. Religion became 'organised' or 'streamlined' much later. And then, religion which was the creation of human mind (mostly) and human intellect (partially) caught the humans in a stranglehold, and is still going strong or, may be stronger, in the case of many people of different countries. The situation is that many such people will even behave in kind of masochistically, under the injunctions of religion; we have the Aztecs and right now in our midst, people driving "Soolams" through their cheeks and other parts of the body, walking barefoot on burning cinders, etc., as examples. Fasting, the 'branding' of certain supposedly holy signs on the bodies (much like cattle-branding by cattle breeders!), and even tattooing of the cross or some other 'holy' word/s on bodies, are all examples of how the religious brainwashing works. These very same people will most likely follow the primal rule of avoiding discomfort in all other aspects of their lives (epidural or spinal anaesthesia for reducing/eliminating labour pain is one example).

 

[renuka]

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

I would have to agree..pleasure is the word.

Pleasure need not always mean happiness.Pleasure is more of a sensation.

But at the same time I am starting to feel there is something beyond happiness cos happiness per se is state that does not last too long.Sorrow will rear its head sooner or later to be replaced by happiness in the never ending cycle of bipolarity. What lies beyond happiness is another story all together.

 

[Vaagmi]

Upon reading some of the recent posts, I am more inclined to toe the line of reasoning that religious injunctions, about a purported god either as in a conscious, willing and able super power or as an all pervading universal force (in whatever manner it may be), are all a means of regulation - of the self and of the other.

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I dont want to delve too much into imagined situations but the basic premise of this thread is to suggest that the instinctive nature of humans is to seek pleasure and avoid pain (dianetics anybody?), in whatever form and substance it may be. That is why we find even those purported of high morals and ethics falter at times.

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

My thoughts on this:

Humans by nature are inquisitive. And until they get a fairly satisfactory answer to their curiosity/query they are restless. The order, the disorder and the difficult to perceive order in disorder around them in the universe has always been a nagging pain for the humans because the realization that they do not know much about them and so the fact that they are not in command of anything has been something which they could not live with. It was against the very nature of their being.

Thus the struggle for the primary needs -food,shelter,clothing and mating-may take away their attention from the riddle that is the universe. But once they are satisfied, religion comes to the top of order of priority. The mind goes after it because it is mysterious and has a compelling beauty about its mistique.

That is why after avoiding discomfort, the mind comes back to questions in spirituality. If you can not speak religion to a hungry man, you can not but speak religion to a satisfied human being either. The beauty of Hinduism is that it recognizes this fact most beautifully in its aphorism "Atma is anandamaya" in Thaithriya upanishad.

 

[prasad1]

I would have to agree..pleasure is the word.

Pleasure need not always mean happiness.Pleasure is more of a sensation.

But at the same time I am starting to feel there is something beyond happiness cos happiness per se is state that does not last too long.Sorrow will rear its head sooner or later to be replaced by happiness in the never ending cycle of bipolarity. What lies beyond happiness is another story all together.

I agree that pleasure is the word. Like some have pleasure in BDSM, etc. So pleasure is fleeting, Happiness is a state that once achieved, we should not loose it. Happiness is achieved with knowledge of true self. So we are seeker of Happiness, at least that is what our scriptures tell us. I am equating Happiness to Sanskrit word Ananda.

 

[JR]

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I find the above analysis pretty interesting! Ofcourse, societies do evolve to satisfy the needs and desires of the groups contained within. This sentence along with the fact that 'identification within a subgroup' warrants some special sanctions in order to provide for the unique needs of its exclusive members perhaps gives us special cases such as societies in which polygamy, etc are allowed!

I tend to think that societies with all their rules and regulations evolved to promise humans of 'fair treatment' -- that what is good for the goose is good for the gander! However I do not think that if primary needs are satisfied, men would forget religion. Unless death and disease are conquered, man would always realize there is an ultimate power that cannot be conquered and will be engaged on a quest to find the same! Also myriad of other human emotions such as fear, shyness, anger, lust, etc, give man a taste of 'miniature hell' that he will always remember that there is something called 'supreme bliss' in which state he does not feel any of these and will therefore be on the lookout for the same.

Also I think that the instinctual nature of man is to 'rise above others'. The other forms of gratification acquired through pleasure seeking satisfies his basic demands of a human life, but when they are satisfied, his immediate next pursuit is to procure gratification through acquisition of name and fame for himself, to satisfy the demands of the 'self'. Thus we see individuals competing with individuals, societies and civilizations competing with others, countries fighting among themselves, etc.

 

[renuka]

I agree that pleasure is the word. Like some have pleasure in BDSM, etc. So pleasure is fleeting, Happiness is a state that once achieved, we should not loose it. Happiness is achieved with knowledge of true self. So we are seeker of Happiness, at least that is what our scriptures tell us. I am equating Happiness to Sanskrit word Ananda.

Agreed..but just one point I beg to differ very slightly..that is ..Ananda is Bliss.
Happiness is Sukha.

I think there is a thin line of difference.

Technically its hard to define bliss..till today I have no idea what bliss is!LOL

Happiness on the other hand might be like a feeling of well being which is still much dependent on sensory input.

That is happiness is still felt by the means of the senses and also desire could be the substratum for happiness.
Most humans feel "happiness" when their needs and demands are met without a decline for at least a stipulated period of time.

Once that time frame is over and their desires/demands are no entirely met or they desires/demands grow leaps and bounds they lose the state of happiness.

So happiness in my opinion is not a permanent state..hence even in Geeta Lord Krishna says Sukha Dukhe Same Krtva..be equiposed in Happiness and Sorrow.

Lord Krishna was rather clear on this which can only mean that Happiness and Sorrow are reverse and obverse of the same coin.

Now what is Bliss?

Is Bliss a coin without sides?

Bliss I seriously do not know how to define.

But all I can deduce is Bliss does not have desire as its substratum and Bliss is felt directly without a medium san senses.. in more of a radiation fashion..like how the sunlight reaches us..but here the sun is not outside of us but rather rising within us like a Jnana Bhaskara when the knowledge of True Self dawns upon us.

 

[auh]

Dear all, thanks for your comments, and some are quite interesting. Just a few thoughts on some"

The doc

But at the same time I am starting to feel there is something beyond happiness cos happiness per se is state that does not last too long.

This might be very well a result of our conditioning that there is always something beyond... Millions and millions of people have lived and died before us. Not one proof of "beyond happiness", all along the years. Perhaps equanimity of the mind, but then again that would be another form of conditioning.

Shri Vaagmi - Yes, what you have said is right and I differ but in one aspect. Humans want to be in control as they would like everything to be worked out in their favour. Hence, I would put this in line with "avoiding discomfort".
Where I differ is on the view about religion/spirituality - religion is theology; spirituality is exploration without requiring a common consensus. Hence, people may venture into spirituality after their basic needs are satisfied and that is natural for they want some recreation for the mind (another way to keep it entertained and drive off boredom). Once they "believe" in something it is but for a gain.

Smt. JR

I tend to think that societies with all their rules and regulations evolved to promise humans of 'fair treatment'

Yes, a classic example of what would happen if the promise is not delivered, might be the French revolution, and the disintegration of our very own birth based system.

Unless death and disease are conquered, man would always realize there is an ultimate power that cannot be conquered and will be engaged on a quest to find the same!

We wade into spirituality/religion believing that it would lead to realization, and not the other way around ! Nobody seems to have "realized" any ultimate power that they could empirically prove. If at all, it is only the very diverse, erratic and non-commital nature that goes on rotating its wheels.

These are my initial comments, and I will also explore along, with all of you... if this thread moves.

 

[renuka]

The doc This might be very well a result of our conditioning that there is always something beyond... Millions and millions of people have lived and died before us. Not one proof of "beyond happiness", all along the years. Perhaps equanimity of the mind, but then again that would be another form of conditioning.

.

Dear Auh,

Conditioning to an extent does influence our thinking but at times we do start to wonder on our own..that nothing is ever permanent..so what is it that does not change?

I have no idea if it's our own mind that is looking for a balance and does not like the constant see- saw tilting our lives to either end of the spectrum on regular basis hence comes up with the idea of a steady non changing state. It's much easier to the mind if life was a predictable auto pilot mode.

So is the concept of Brahman/God actually "mind made?" That is a mind that is seeking balance "creates" Brahman/God hoping for a state of non changing..what some call Heaven/Paradise/Firdaus/Vaikunta/Kailash?

In fact Vaikunta technically means sans hindrance/sans inertia..again a hint of a steady state.

So what is it now? What are we looking for?

 

[zebra16]

I would have to agree..pleasure is the word.


But at the same time I am starting to feel there is something beyond happiness cos happiness per se is state that does not last too long.Sorrow will rear its head sooner or later to be replaced by happiness in the never ending cycle of bipolarity. What lies beyond happiness is another story all together.

Is that state which we call Bliss is nothing but happiness, but without the anxiety that happiness would end at some time?

What would the state of mind in deep sleep be called, which is beyond happiness or its cousin sorrow?

 

[renuka]

What would the state of mind in deep sleep be called, which is beyond happiness or its cousin sorrow?

Somehow the state of deep sleep can only be explained upon waking.
When we are in deep sleep we do not know that we are in deep sleep...even the so called blissful deep sleep is only realized upon waking that "I had a blissful deep sleep"

On its own deep sleep really cant not be felt(this is my personal opinion).

So something that can not be felt fully on its own is hard to define as being beyond happiness.

 

[zebra16]

Upon reading some of the recent posts, I am more inclined to toe the line of reasoning that religious injunctions, about a purported god either as in a conscious, willing and able super power or as an all pervading universal force (in whatever manner it may be), are all a means of regulation - of the self and of the other.

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I dont want to delve too much into imagined situations but the basic premise of this thread is to suggest that the instinctive nature of humans is to seek pleasure and avoid pain (dianetics anybody?), in whatever form and substance it may be. That is why we find even those purported of high morals and ethics falter at times.

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

I would agree with this post. But the cause of ever changing needs and desires may need analysis. Why are the needs and desires of society keep changing? Is it because of scientific inventions? Is it because another society came in possession of booty either naturally or through invention or discovery?

Why does the society go to long extent to make the non-society members fall in line with their (society's) ideas and views even when non-adherence does not materially alter the society's position?

Why do religions prefer to share their "God" (only) with others but they would not share their riches?

 

[yesmohan]

Belief in God and future life appears to be superstitious for those who thing that life ends with pursuit of food, shelter, clothing and mating. The very thought of Pursuit of God is to be invoked with self conciousness and critical spirit of humanity which are all beyond the imagination of ordinary personalities.

 

[auh]

What would the state of mind in deep sleep be called, which is beyond happiness or its cousin sorrow?

This one made me pause but only for a fraction. In the OP, I had stressed the utmost human instinct to "avoid discomfort". Sleep is a state, which perhaps may fall under "avoidance of discomfort"...

... Why are the needs and desires of society keep changing? Is it because of scientific inventions? Is it because another society came in possession of booty either naturally or through invention or discovery?

Would it be right to say - curiosity (leading to exploration)?

Why does the society go to long extent to make the non-society members fall in line with their (society's) ideas and views even when non-adherence does not materially alter the society's position?

I think society was (is?) initially formed by members who hold converging views on known topics, perhaps to derive mutual benefit according to one's strengths and weaknesses. And if it should so happen that at any point of time thereafter, a view arises different to the group, the society tries to pull it back, probably due to many reasons, a few of them being - mindset (inferring an inability to accept since they are conditioned), majority vs minority, losing power/control, differing opinions.

What is non-material in the initial states could snowball if left unfettered.

Why do religions prefer to share their "God" (only) with others but they would not share their riches?

Sharing God is easy since it is an abstract and has no tangible outflows...

 

[sangom]

Somehow the state of deep sleep can only be explained upon waking.
When we are in deep sleep we do not know that we are in deep sleep...even the so called blissful deep sleep is only realized upon waking that "I had a blissful deep sleep"

On its own deep sleep really cant not be felt(this is my personal opinion).

So something that can not be felt fully on its own is hard to define as being beyond happiness.

There can be neither Sukha (happiness) nor Ananda (Bliss) in deep sleep, as such. But, on waking up from the deep sleep one may feel great sukha or even Ananda, and this is wrongly taken by the human mind as what was experienced during the deep sleep. Similarly, there is neither sukha nor Ananda possible in that so-called highest stage of spiritual awareness. And the vast majority of human beings are not, imho, seeking such realization; they commit karmas of myriad kinds — good, bad and the ugly — and die. These Karmas become the cause for further births happening. The priorities and preferences change from one era to another so as to suit the Karmic experiences necessary for those born in each era.

 

[renuka]

There can be neither Sukha (happiness) nor Ananda (Bliss) in deep sleep, as such. But, on waking up from the deep sleep one may feel great sukha or even Ananda, and this is wrongly taken by the human mind as what was experienced during the deep sleep. Similarly, there is neither sukha nor Ananda possible in that so-called highest stage of spiritual awareness. And the vast majority of human beings are not, imho, seeking such realization; they commit karmas of myriad kinds — good, bad and the ugly — and die. These Karmas become the cause for further births happening. The priorities and preferences change from one era to another so as to suit the Karmic experiences necessary for those born in each era.

Agreed.

 

[cmano1981]

It is not always about seeking pleasure.. for challenge people runs Marathon, people do fasting, piercing and suffering in the name of God. For duty, parents do compromises for benefit of children and for their spouse. Many of them like politicians, even though they have lot of money - do not want to spend it and they think will benefit their future children & grand children. Humans do things for what they think is right or good rather than just pleasure.

 

[JR]

It is not always about seeking pleasure.. for challenge people runs Marathon, people do fasting, piercing and suffering in the name of God. For duty, parents do compromises for benefit of children and for their spouse. Many of them like politicians, even though they have lot of money - do not want to spend it and they think will benefit their future children & grand children. Humans do things for what they think is right or good rather than just pleasure.

Humans persue activities for the following reasons:

1. Survival

2. Sensory Gratification

3. Upliftment.

4. Establishment

5. Emancipation

While the first 2 categories are self-explanatory, by the 3rd I mean everything they need to do in order to 'get out of a situation' - to arise from it. Such circumstances include the 3 D's (death, deformity, disease). So humans pursue activities to 'uplift' themselves.

Once uplifted, the next goal is to pursue activities that will procure a name and fame to 'establish oneself' as the 'self' demands this. This is where Sanyas and tapaswis come into picture. By letting go of mere pursuit for 'establishing oneself', tapaswis aspire for the higher goal of 'self-emancipation'.

On further analysis, I would say that the very first reason, "survival instinct" of different forms is the very reason behind all other activities themselves!

A man seeks sensory gratification for "survival". (As he cannot survive forever feeling dull - sensory gratification invigorates him).

A man seeks upliftment for "survival". (As he cannot survive enduring pain for a very long time).

A man seeks establishment for "survival". (As he cannot survive without recognition for a very long time).

Finally, a man seeks emancipation for "survival". (As he cannot survive the cycle of birth and death forever).

Thus the need for 'survival' serves as his basic instinct behind every action of his.

Auh ji, what do you think? Any feedback is welcome.

 

[JR]

Why does the society go to long extent to make the non-society members fall in line with their (society's) ideas and views even when non-adherence does not materially alter the society's position?

Auh ji had given a good reply to this one. But when I read the above one, my thoughts were stimulated and I too have an answer for this:

Non-adherence or non-compliance of some members is not without perceived deficit to a society. It does translate to being materially a loss for a society. The power structure is lost, without power there is less adherence to stated rules and regulations, without rules and regulations there is non-conformance leading to private ownership of land, wealth and materials and with private ownership, there is no income for the society. Even speaking from non-governance aspect of society, as in a belief system or religion, non-conformance would lead to more frictions among members living in a place together, which would make them antagonistic to each other in the long run and less and less productive to meet even individual needs.

Why are the needs and desires of society keep changing? Is it because of scientific inventions? Is it because another society came in possession of booty either naturally or through invention or discovery?

As a society comes into existence, after sometime, it 'matures'. The members after settling down with a basic way of living, out of the comfort and spare time granted to them via technological inventions as well as out of things like 'peer pressure' (advancements and achievements made of another society) and thanks to revolutionary concepts and principles, evolves out of its present state, matures and this is how it changes.

For example, working women and widow remarriages. A 100 years ago, women were simply idle at home, Then came the concept of educating them, and finally sending them to the workforce. With more financial capability of the womenfolk, came the acceptance for widow remarriages as women started to get recognition and a strong personal identity within the society. Also widow remarriages were partly a result of peer pressure from having Western societies as role model.

 

[auh]

I give one more example to cite the instinctive nature of humans to avoid discomfort - Consider an accident on a busy road. In India, there would be no one to help them out (or perhaps the % would be very few).

I had seen, earlier, on a busy Noida road, a man, wife and his children having met with an accident, the man was trying to access help. Not one stopped and later his wife and children died due to blood loss. This tragedy could have been averted if any of the other passer-bys had stopped to help. They perhaps did not do this either due to complications with police, or they felt it was a hassle to stop by and help. It was a remoreseless decision taken in line with personal comfort zones and preferences. (this was captured on cctv and was on yahoo site for some time).

Hence, even within order, humans tend to adopt the least discomfort method as much as possible, to survive.

P.S. I am unable to access this site from my home pc and hence was unable to continue this thread

 

[auh]

Humans persue activities for the following reasons:

Thus the need for 'survival' serves as his basic instinct behind every action of his.

Auh ji, what do you think? Any feedback is welcome.

Yes, survival is the driving reason for anything, even religion !

 

[talwan]

As the title is called/named ''Human Nature'' I try to explain this as below.
It is the 'Reaction' of Human to 'situations' that they face makes their 'Nature'.
I use the word 'subhavam' of the Individual to react to the situation.
In a given situation let us see the reactions based on the Nature/Subhavam.
Say, A man suddenly faces a tiger appearing before him.
His reaction would be to a) Run away b) fight with it to kill c)Trap it/over power to tame it etc.
After gaining Knowledge,experience his reactions will gain a refinement,Maturity.When He is in a group his reactions will change than he is reacting as an Individual.
Thus comes other developments like religion etc.
Alwan

 

[a-TB]

Upon reading some of the recent posts, I am more inclined to toe the line of reasoning that religious injunctions, about a purported god either as in a conscious, willing and able super power or as an all pervading universal force (in whatever manner it may be), are all a means of regulation - of the self and of the other.

I tend to think that humans are inherently prone to instinctive actions (I use this word to avoid the labelling of good and bad, at least for now!), and thus any rule or policy goes against their will. It would be adhered to as long as the individual and collective needs (as aligned to the self) are satisfied. And perhaps that is why we see societies evolve to the everchanging needs and desires of the sub groups contained within. These needs and desires are given a low priority when survival of the society is at stake, and hence there is a priority scale involved here. For example, if we were to assume that the primary needs - food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority.

I dont want to delve too much into imagined situations but the basic premise of this thread is to suggest that the instinctive nature of humans is to seek pleasure and avoid pain (dianetics anybody?), in whatever form and substance it may be. That is why we find even those purported of high morals and ethics falter at times.

The primal nature of humans. Avoid discomfort - no holds barred.

Thoughts anybody?

Mr Auh - It is well written but I am unable to find the connection to any 'recent post' . I cannot even find anything insightful or correct statements to my 'dense' mind LoL

If the message is : "Avoid discomfort - no holds barred", then I say that all life forms do this, not just human beings. In fact even a cat goes and lies where the sun is nice on its back. If it is summer, the same cat wants a nice place which is shady. Animals fight to seize the best situation for themselves all the time.

I will say that human nature is more complex. A fireman goes into a house on fire to save a child! He may end up losing his life in the process. In this act he is not avoiding discomfort. I heard a fool in Chennai wanted to set himself on fire to free 'Amma' !

Connections drawn to religion also does not make sense. You say:
"food, shelter, clothing and mating - are taken care of, probably religion would be at the lowest priority."
This is the view of those living a good life.

In fact religion and its feudal beliefs are strong only among the poor and they are exploited the world over.

The suicide bombers are mostly recruited out of those living in poverty so they can meet their virgins in heaven (even priority of mating is after religious edict LoL)

 

[JR]

If the message is : "Avoid discomfort - no holds barred", then I say that all life forms do this, not just human beings. In fact even a cat goes and lies where the sun is nice on its back. If it is summer, the same cat wants a nice place which is shady. Animals fight to seize the best situation for themselves all the time.

I will say that human nature is more complex. A fireman goes into a house on fire to save a child! He may end up losing his life in the process. In this act he is not avoiding discomfort. I heard a fool in Chennai wanted to set himself on fire to free 'Amma' !

It seems that human beings, while they do act in a manner to avoid discomfort at all times, yet are ready to embrace pain at selective moments.

Since as in the case of a firefighter, when there is a threat to the best interests of the society (as in danger to life of its members), the humans are ready to compromise and seek pain in an effort to overcome this danger. Here, threat to the society is perceived as threat to the individual himself.

Thus we can say that although avoiding discomfort can be the definition for the normal behavior of an individual, modifiers to this are needed. When we think along this line further, we can say that losing an individual is pain of greater kind than subjecting oneself with exposure to fire. Thus a firefighter risks fighting against the fire in an effort to avoid the greater discomfort and pain of losing the life of a society member. Therefore behavior of humans should be defined as 'avoid discomfort - of the worser kind'.

 

[Vaagmi]

It seems that human beings, while they do act in a manner to avoid discomfort at all times, yet are ready to embrace pain at selective moments.

Since as in the case of a firefighter, when there is a threat to the best interests of the society (as in danger to life of its members), the humans are ready to compromise and seek pain in an effort to overcome this danger. Here, threat to the society is perceived as threat to the individual himself.

Thus we can say that although avoiding discomfort can be the definition for the normal behavior of an individual, modifiers to this are needed. When we think along this line further, we can say that losing an individual is pain of greater kind than subjecting oneself with exposure to fire. Thus a firefighter risks fighting against the fire in an effort to avoid the greater discomfort and pain of losing the life of a society member. Therefore behavior of humans should be defined as 'avoid discomfort - of the worser kind'.

The vedic definition of Atma that it is always anandamaya is itself an aphorism on which volumes can be written. Elders have said the Ananda mentioned in the upanishad is not happiness or avoiding discomfort. But it is "எப்போதும் தனக்கு அநுகூலமாகவே இருத்தல்". An exact translation into English is beyond me. Please think about it and you will understand the true meaning of the word and you will become an enthusiast of vedic learning. LOL.