The Problem posed by Artificial Intelligence to the non believers

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

paradhi buddham nee alla
unni par indhriya karanam nee alla
yarai nee "unnarvu" enram
iyyan anbai uraitha sol
anantham thozhi.

... thayumanava swamigal

 

[ozone]

The atma along with the trappings is the jivatma and indeed there is nothing outside the living entity called as jivatma.

We seem to agree here. So when jivatma departs from a body, in what form does it appear or stay?

The important point is that, atma which manifests in a new body represents the continuation of that which manifested in the previous body but now acquires the new body according to the accumulated karma. So a jivatma has a lineage and doesn't come and go in isolation.

You seem to claim that jivatmas are distinct and can be associated with a specific body only.
What happens when the jivatma exits a body and it is yet to find another body. In what form will it be and where?
Further. this contradicts with the statements that the Atma in one person is the same as in another which is the same as parabrahman.
How do you explain this?

Absence of karma of what?

it is same as the accumulated karma referred by you above. Sorry, I could not come up with a better word. I referred to the instance where there is no further accumulation.

 

[sravna]

So when jivatma departs from a body, in what form does it appear or stay?

This is a matter of detail. I do not want to comment upon this at the moment. But my point is there is an order and continuity in the way karma accumulates and for that we need an entity which spans across births. IMO, the jivatma does this job because it is associated with both the eternal and ephemeral aspects.

You seem to claim that jivatmas are distinct and can be associated with a specific body only.

It is not my claim. That is the common understanding of what jivatmas are.

What happens when the jivatma exits a body and it is yet to find another body. In what form will it be and where?
Further. this contradicts with the statements that the Atma in one person is the same as in another which is the same as parabrahman.
How do you explain this?

How does this contradict? Can you elaborate?

it is same as the accumulated karma referred by you above. Sorry, I could not come up with a better word. I referred to the instance where there is no further accumulation.

Again, accumulated karma of what ?!

 

[C RAVI]

1)........ So when jivatma departs from a body, in what form does it appear or stay?

2).......... What happens when the jivatma exits a body and it is yet to find another body. In what form will it be and where?

3)Further. this contradicts with the statements that the Atma in one person is the same as in another which is the same as parabrahman.
How do you explain this?



.

Shri Ozone, I know your queries are address to Shri Sravan. I would like to share my views too, hoping, yourself and Shri Sravna would not be offended.


Correlate my replies with the listing in the above quote.


1) When the Atma is out, I reiterate when the Atma is out (because it can be called as Jivatma only when it occupies a physical body) from the Body, it floats in a subtle form along with the bundle of learning and experiences and subjected to reappear in physical form to complete and pay off accumulated Karmas. Only after assuming a physical body the Soul/Atma can activate it's "I consciousness" to perfrom amidst Maya, bearing the challenges of accumulated gunas and karma.


2) Long ago I got to understand that, the Atma leaves only at the right time when the other physical body is determined and ready for it to assume. The Atma is considered to be assuming its another body within 24 hours/1 day. This one day of the world of Atma/Consciousness is equivalent to 12 months/365 days of this physical world's time calculations.

In certain cases, the Atma is subjected to be wandering restlessly when it is destined to be wandering, as per Karma. And undergoes many sufferings as "Pretha", that can not be comprehended by us, in our living state.

It will be subtly in a formless state BUT would recognize itself with it's "I consciousness". But can not attempt towards paying off Karma being not accupying a physical form.


3) When it is said that the Atma in one person is the same as the Atma in another person, it only means that - All the Atma's are reflections of ParaBrahman in this physical world of Maya. All the Atma's are challenged by Maya and are made to experience everything that Brahman has created. All the Atmas are capable to recognize the truth and identify itself with Brhaman. The only difference is, such realizations and identification of the truth by Atmas differs in time. All the atmas are in learning process and all the Atmas would get dissolved in the same single Supreme entity/Consciousness, at some point of time.

 

[sravna]

As Ravi beautifully analyzes, the realization by the jivatma that self or atman is brahman is when liberation is attained. It is for this self-realization that one goes through so many life forms and human births.

Thus Jivatma is in fact Atman which is trapped by avidya. To see though the avidya is the goal of the jivatma and finally realize the true self.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Shri Zebra,

You feel there must be an "individual characteristic" to karma, i.e., "I" cannot be punished for the Karma performed by "someone else" nor should someone else enjoy the beneficial results of my Karma. But you see, even in the "pending cases example", I feel the institution concerned is aiming only at "clearing" all the pending cases, and is not concerned about who clears which case. I hope you will agree.

I believe that in a somewhat similar way, the institution of the Karmic Law is not bothered as to which worldly entity clears off the accumulated Karmas left over by one person, let us say X. This Karmic load may be taken up subsequently by persons identified as Y, Z, P, Q, R, etc., in successive rebirths. Our confusion, and hence, reluctance to accept such a proposition, arises due to our inability to let go of our ego-sense or "I"-consciousness.

In the larger, universal view, each individual is nothing but a kind of "projection" of the Parabrahman in different physical bodies. There is no ego-sense at that level. Just as our banks are concerned mainly with clearing of all the pending cases, at the universal level, the only concern is about wearing out the accumulated Karmas, not by any particular person/entity.

Yet another problem which I have is about explaining the increase in world population, if we stick to the "one-person-one-ātmā" rule; how are new ātmās created then? And will such new ātmās have any Karma load with them at the start?

Dear Sangom, You were answering some of my questions in the other thead. I see this reply as a continuation of that discussion; Hence, I am writing here, hoping Raghy, the owner of this thread, does not mind.

I was asking whether there is any individual character to karma. From your reply I gather you are proposing that individuals merely exhaust accumulated karma, which is common to all as in bank's pending cases, or add on to this common karma load; that this exhaustion and addition is a constant process; that the cycle of birth and suffering stops only when this common karmic layer is completely exhausted.

If this is the case, however, then the question of "liberation" of an individual or an individual "attaining moksha" does not arise at all. Is this correct? After all, the karmic layer has no individual disposition, and because births continue to happen, this karmic layer is still intact and all the gurus and acharyas whom we thought liberated "their" souls, by overcoming desires, is a false notion?!

 

[sangom]

Shri Sangom,


With what I could come across in couple of discourses during my teenage, it is not the rule that only the Souls that occupied Human Body once would again take an another human body in next birth.

The challenges of the kuli yuga are more and many souls are tend to occupy human body with Animal instinct and crooked mentality.

These souls do have their Karma load based on the basic instincts and other related activities of the species it has taken the form, before bearing the human body.

Dear Shri Ravi,

As you well know, I am also an ordinary person (may be older) and do not have any spiritual or other extra-ordinary intelligence to boast about. I was brought up in a very orthodox Tamil Brahmin household and, having gone through most of what might be called 'a human life-time', having witnessed many good & bad things in my life as also of several others, I have been thinking about Karma, Fate, Freewill and related topics. What I write here reflects my conclusions and I am fully prepared to admit mistake and revert back to our time-honoured views about these items.

I am unable to accept the view that "The challenges of the kuli yuga are more and many souls are tend to occupy human body with Animal instinct and crooked mentality.". We do not have any vedic, upanishadic or even accepted Acharyas' support for this, AFAIK. (Pl. let me know if there are any.) IMO, the concept of Kaliyuga was put forward in the two epics (Kakabhushundi in Tulsi Ramayana, and Yudhishtira in Mahabharata, Vana Parva) and has been taken up with all sorts of licence in the different Puranas.

Now, if 'animal souls' can occupy the same human body along with a so-called 'human soul' which of the living person's aspects will be controlled by each of these? I don't know whether the discourse-givers have any answer for this question! Secondly, in such a scenario, where is the guarantee that those who give such discourses are themselves not guided by the occupant animal souls (may be anything - donkey, monkey, lion, tiger, king cobra even!)? So I respectfully disagree with such notions.

Increasing human population and the extinction of many species of living things cannot be logically explained by even this assumption of more than one soul occupying one human body, or animal souls alone (one in each body, if that is what you meant) occupying human bodies.

As regards instincts, perhaps you are familiar with our Gods, devas and rishis (along with their consorts/ chosen partners for that particular occasion) taking different animal forms and engaging in sexual union, etc. The Rishyasringa story is even more fanciful, though. How can then we exclude the possibility of those born as a result of such animal-sex-unions not having "animal souls"?

I, therefore, reject this Kaliyuga aspect as also 'animal' souls in human bodies. Even without such arguments, a human being can, imo, make himself/herself, as wild and base as any animal - in his instincts and behaviour - just by practices; that is my view.

------

IMO, a person suffering in his life or enjoying in his life can not be based on accumulated karma of every unknown x, y, z unless otherwise it is based on justifiable reasons for an individual as per his/her personal karma.

If particular personal Karma belonging to an individual is not the truth, then the whole concept of Personal Spiritual Practices and personal deeds would make no sense for each individual.


Lord Krishna says - Not to be concerned about the fruits of your duties. Just do your duties sincerely without any personal expectations out of it. Taking this into account, can the truth be that, a right, sincere, uncorrupted and duty bound person would have to bear the wrong doings/sins of any other x, y, z? If that is the case, then that would contradict the whole concepts of Spirituality.

The problem for you appears to me to be the "equitability" and "justice" aspects. But let us reaffirm that all of us are only during the brief interval between birth and death. We just don't have any idea about whence we came and whither we will be going. However, we imagine many things about the two large unknowns and create philosophies and notions.

In the beginning portions of your post - replied by me just above this - you have no doubts about animal souls occupying human bodies due to the exigencies of the so-called Kaliyuga, simply because some pravacanakartas said so. Don't you think this is also equally reprehensible as " a right, sincere, uncorrupted and duty bound person would have to bear the wrong doings/sins of any other x, y, z?". Who took such a decision to put animal souls into human bodies and what were/are the eligibility conditions for such a "promotion"?

If we can allow such an exception, is it really inequitable for " a right, sincere, uncorrupted and duty bound person would have to bear the wrong doings/sins of any other x, y, z?". I will try to explain my views. The right, sincere, uncorrupted and duty bound person inside that human body is, imho, as much the result of the Karmas of X, Y, Z, etc., just as the misfortunes/tragedies which may befall that person. I would request you to read the analogy of the pending cases problem in this post.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

ravi ji
atma activates i-con is incorrect .

atma is i-con.

i-con that relates to jeevan is called atma

pure i-con is brahmam

thats why we have the " tat twam asi" - " you are brahmam "



if one says atma activates i-con , then atma and i-con become 2 different entity.
then you have to define what is atma?

 

[zebra16]

Dear Sangom, You were answering some of my questions in the other thead. I see this reply as a continuation of that discussion; Hence, I am writing here, hoping Raghy, the owner of this thread, does not mind.

Actually it is my fault !! When I had responded to Sri Sangom's post, I had lost my internet connection and had saved the work in MS Word. When the connection was restored, by mistake I had copy-pasted the reply in this thread instead of the other thread "The problems posed by artificial intelligence".

Is there a way to shift these messages to the original thread?

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom, You were answering some of my questions in the other thead. I see this reply as a continuation of that discussion; Hence, I am writing here, hoping Raghy, the owner of this thread, does not mind.

I was asking whether there is any individual character to karma. From your reply I gather you are proposing that individuals merely exhaust accumulated karma, which is common to all as in bank's pending cases, or add on to this common karma load; that this exhaustion and addition is a constant process; that the cycle of birth and suffering stops only when this common karmic layer is completely exhausted.

If this is the case, however, then the question of "liberation" of an individual or an individual "attaining moksha" does not arise at all. Is this correct? After all, the karmic layer has no individual disposition, and because births continue to happen, this karmic layer is still intact and all the gurus and acharyas whom we thought liberated "their" souls, by overcoming desires, is a false notion?!

Dear KB sir,

Yours is a very pertinent doubt. I wish to imagine that if any person X is able to exhaust all the accumulated load of Karmas which is associated with that birth as X, then the Life-giving force will not have to give rise to yet another life. In this process one line of successive births is stopped.

Since our discussions here themselves reveal that there is objection to "my carrying the Karma loads arising from the action of some X, Y or Z in the past", I tend to think that, possibly, our great teachers were aware of this mentality and put forward a slightly different explanation. To believe that "my atma" has been taking ever so many births and undergoing sufferings, is a very good incentive for human beings to strive for liberation.

But it is not clear to me as to how so many new human atmas have come into existence through history. (It is given here that a one million population of 10,000 BCE has increased to the present level of about 6,450 millions. Shri Ravi says that atmas from animals must have come to take up and reside in human bodies. But I do not think we can ever take stock of all living things — from blue whales to ants — and find out whether atmas travel from one category to another, and, if so, whether there is a depletion of population of that category.

My second doubt is about some categories, say, for example Dinosaurs, becoming extinct? Is it becasue all those atmas of the dinosaurs took up other physical bodies? or, did all of them attain mukti?

 

[C RAVI]

ravi ji
atma activates i-con is incorrect .

atma is i-con.

i-con that relates to jeevan is called atma

pure i-con is brahmam

thats why we have the " tat twam asi" - " you are brahmam "



if one says atma activates i-con , then atma and i-con become 2 different entity.
then you have to define what is atma?

Shri HRHK,

From the very beginning my argument is, "I-con" = Atma


I didn't say Atma activates a separate entity called "I-con". I said, Atma though leaves the body carries its "I-con" as the part and parcel of Atma itself, fully loaded with learned knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, understandings, yearnings etc..etc. And when the same Atma occupies a body, the "I-con/Atma" could come into real play in this physical world of Maya, to learn, to pay off karmas and to proceed towards further refinement. That's how inborn personality traits exists in each individual irrespective of the family the person is born into.

Only when the Atma could attain absolute realization, it would shed its sense of uniqueness and separateness from the rest, identifying itself as "I". And when this is attained in absolute blissful state, Atma realizes and finds itself one with the Supreme Consciousness/Brahman.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

I didn't say Atma activates a separate entity called "I-con". I said, Atma though leaves the body carries its "I-con" as the part and parcel of Atma itself, fully loaded with learned knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, understandings, yearnings etc..etc.

Ravi ji,

Here Atma and "i-con" is 2 entity or single entity?

Do you mean "i-con" here to ahankara, the small minded mis-conception of intellect about I-ness.?

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

Again Atma doesnt need to realize anything , only buddhi needs to get purified and reflect correctly about I-ness.

 

[C RAVI]

Ravi ji,

Here Atma and "i-con" is 2 entity or single entity?

/QUOTE]


Kindly go through my posts Nos- 34, 37, 49, 57, 58, 61, 79

 

[C RAVI]

Again Atma doesnt need to realize anything , only buddhi needs to get purified and reflect correctly about I-ness.

The brain provided to all the humans are same. But still the Budhi of individulas differs. The perceptions and level of intellects differens.

Budhi/mind is the one that is influenced by ATMA that represents itself as "I-consciousness". The challenge of the "I-con"/Atma is to effectively use the brain and fine tune budhi, that is self (I-con").

When "I-con"/Atma could effectively modulate/moderates its Budhi, that is "self", it strengthen it selves to work towards positive karma and gradually succeeds in nullifying all the positive and negative karmas.

 

[renuka]

Again Atma doesnt need to realize anything.

Dear Sir,

Well said..echoes well with this...

Aham Nirvikalpo Nirakara Roopaha
Vibhur Vyapya Sarvatra Sarvendriyanam
Sada Me Samatvam Na Muktir Na Bandhah
Chidananda Rupa Shivoham Shivoham


I am all pervasive.
I am without any attributes,
and without any form.
I have neither attachment to the world,
nor to liberation (mukti).
I have no wishes for anything
because I am everything,
everywhere,
every time,
always in equilibrium.


I am indeed,
That eternal knowing and bliss, auspiciousness,
and pure consciousness.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

/QUOTE]


Kindly go through my posts Nos- 34, 37, 49, 57, 58, 61, 79
[/QUOTE]

I don't have the luxury of time to go thru all the posts... But I get the message, sorry for questioning you.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

Atma Vichara is a very subtle subject, need to study through a competent Guru . If subtle points are wrongly understood it can lead to meaningless wanderings. If properly understood it leads to Moksha.

Just look at Buddhist and Jains they worked so hard yet so far due to not properly handling the subject.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

also once you fall in love with your own theory , it is very hard to have an open mind to analyse the subject further.