Learning from the past...

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
Eastern Mind writes¹,


SS: In my opinion, a misogynist will surely be reborn as a woman. I mean, do we believe in karma and reincarnation, or not? Is it a reality, or just some intellectual concept that may or may not be true?
I have been pondering this for a few days now. What have been my thoughts? If one is a misogynist in this life, then in a future life the person will be female? If one is a thief then , in the next life he is the one robbed of his/her wealth? Of if one is a murderer (today) then in the next life this person becomes the murdered?

We are dealing with opposites or the retribution of one that is the offender changing places with the offended.
Many will say to every action there is a reaction. Some also may say there is an equal and opposite reaction ( this is more from the laws of physics). Do we think then that this is the model of karma and its various types ¹ ?

My thoughts are the following. If the offender in this life becomes the offended (in the next life), where is the lesson learned, the reflection of actions that should not have been done if the person does not recall doing them? If in this life, the offender is the offended then there is the possibility ( me thinks) for reflection and growth if in fact that ignorance is not abundantly thick.

One more example: Take a dog. The dog has an accident on your carpet in your home ( this may be foreign to many the live in India, as far-and-few allow dogs into the home). Now wait six months, and then punish the dog. What will be the good , or lesson that comes from this punishment 6 months later?

Like that - where is the benefit of the lesson in a future life if one cannot recall actions that may have stimulated a result without any audit trial to the source of the action? Are we then thinking about the 'model' correctly ? Are we missing something?

Kṛṣṇa said¹ 'unfathomable is the course of action'. We at times are bewildered at the events of life; What was the audit trail back to this action? We hear often 'Why did it happen to me ?'

praṇām

words and references

From EM's post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4342&page=3 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4342&page=3)
HDF post on karma and influences : http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3656&highlight=karma (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3656&highlight=karma)
Kṛṣṇa - Bhāgavad gītā - Chapter 4, 17th śloka - gahanā karmaṇaḥ gathiḥ -
gahana गहन - inexplicable , hard to be understood ~ unfathomable
karmaṇaḥ or karman कर्मन्- act , action , performance
gati गति- path , way , course , method

[Eastern Mind]

Yajvan:

lol

Glad my post made you think. Then the reverse happened. Your post made me think. Now there's quick karma I suppose. My explanation, I see, didn't go far enough.

Yes you are right. The karma of a future life caused by poor action in this life may very well be slowed or even stopped completely.

Lets stick with the same example, although I think the principle is the same for many aspects of life. If the misogynist later sees his mistakes through gained understanding, and then works on earning punya in that regard, such as donating or helping build a woman's shelter, then surely his karma would be lessened. Similarly, he could do penance, such as yatra, or kavadi, or silence. So now I see how it is not destined in such a definite, eye for an eye way. it is far more complicated than that, I see.

However, if the misogynist, or the thief remained that way, unrepentant until his death, it may well be a different matter.

Thank you for this knowledge.

Aum namasivaya

[saidevo]

I have also been thinking about the type of retribution bad karma might bring in. While it is easy to see that a person suffering in this life is due to the individual's own actions in the past lives, what puzzles me is that why should some people have acute propensities at all towards evil actions such as murder, torture, rape, robbery of all kinds, etc. and resort to them habitually? It is not logical to say that these people exhausted all their good karma in previous births so they need to start afresh? If that be so, why should they start with bad karma in this life, specially when they should have accumulated a good amount of knowledge about dharma and adharma in their previous lives by virtue of their good karma?

That bad karma extracts retribution 'in kind'--"as you sow, so you reap"--'a coconut seed cannot produce a mango tree'--was part of early Christian philosophy. It seems that somes Hindus believed in this idea: during our boyhood days, our Grandma used to scare us if we killed a butterfly saying that in the next birth "you will be born as the butterfly, the butterfly as you and would torture and kill you just as you did to it today!" Some of us were really scared at such a possibility!

If bad karma has to extract its retribution 'in kind', then a person committing ten murders in this life should necessarily have ten more lives to be murdered in those lives. The same thing would be true of other sinful acts. This sames highly illogical, every which way you look at it.

Thus, it is logical to think, as Yajvan has pointed out, that part of the fruits of good karma is to reduce the balance of bad karma. This is the reason that we find in our PurANAs Indra coming over to bathe in a holy river in Kadambavanam, Madurai, set up a Shiva temple and worship him, to wash away the results of bad karma; SrI RAmA setting up and worship a Shivalingam that has come to be named after him as RAmAlingam at RAmeshvaram to wash away the sin of his killing RAvaNA; and the belief that bathing in a holy river like Ganga would wash away the sins, where there is actute regret on the sinner's part.

If we pit the various kinds of suffering--by physical and mental ailments, being victims of robbery, rape, torture and other kinds of sinful acts incurred--against the sins and crimes committed in the world, IMO, we might find that the suffering is more than the crimes committed and that of the types of suffering, physical and mental ailments rule the roost. This could be the reason that sages like Swami SivAnanda has opined that bad karma manifests primarily in the form of physical and mental ailments. ('Karma and Diseases', http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/karmadisease.pdf). Pandit Shriram Sharma Acharya discusses in his book 'The Absolute Law of Karma' the various types of ailments caused by the various types of karmas. (http://www.awgp.org/english/books/lawofkarma.pdf).

Now, what do you think about the question that I mentioned in the first para--about some people having acute propensities towards crimes in their current lives?

My current take on it is that those people should have graduated from their previous births in the animal kingdom into first-time human births in the current live, so they are yet to be exposed to 'satsangh' about good karma.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté saidevo and EM,

Thank you for considering the question and position on karma. I think both of you bring merit to the discussion and allow
us to extend the thinking a bit deeper.
saidevo writes,

Now, what do you think about the question that I mentioned in the first para--about some people having acute propensities towards crimes in their current lives?

My current take on it is that those people should have graduated from their previous births in the animal kingdom into first-time human births in the current live, so they are yet to be exposed to 'satsangh' about good karma
This is a most excellent question as I see it. What makes me scratch my head is why is the 'gravity' to act pulling in the negitive direction?
Could it not just as easily pulled in a sattvic¹ direction? Why so? The SELF by its nature is pure, clear, without blemish. Does it not bring some influence?

Yet saidevo points to the pickle of some who are constantly on the 'wrong side of the tracks' and the tendency to promote evil and mayheim.
I have known some of these people and I am perplexed. If given the option they would opt for greed, misgiving, and in many ( most) instances at the demise or expense of others.

Perhaps our discussion on this will bring some clarity to this subject. One may say, 'In the grand scheme of things these people play their part ' yet it is to my chagrin that my comprehension of this matter is highly inadequate.

praṇām

words
sattva सत्त्व - the quality of purity or goodness. Considering sāṃkhya, it is the highest of the three guṇas or constituents of prakṛti; it renders a person true , honest , etc.

[Eastern Mind]

Good question, Saidevo. I too have pondered this. Why the propensity to obvious unkind acts?

As a teacher, there were many days that I felt perplexed at this as some child would come in having been bullied by another. Or some kids would just get it while others wouldn't.

I remember one child in particular, who simply could not understand the sportsmanship concept of equal playing time. I tried so many times to alter his thinking to no avail. Later as he moved on, I learned that he had had a brain tumor and had passed away. This lead to the conclusion that he couldn't learn this concept because of a brain malfunction. So the point I took away is that it is complicated, this thing called karma. I also have been taught that karma can strike via odd routes, maybe taking a circular path through several people before coming back. It is not necessarily in the same direct eye for an eye. There are many extenuating circumstances. Think of a soccer ball being kicked around.

But my original point that Yajvan quoted was more the second part: Look, do we believe in karma or not? If so, then stop your whining. (I've witnessed Hindus who claim to understand karma, but then when viewed by me from a distance, they obviously didn't.)

Prayer to dieties, and getting the grace of Gods and/or Guru can also lessen the impact. Subramuniyaswami's analogy was that if you have the karma to get a broken leg, you might see a movie where a guy breaks his leg, and 'feel' the pain through that for 5 minutes (in a strong reaction that you don't understand) rather than through 24 hours , and then 3 moinths or recuperation.

Now, the other question: My current take is that they are just young souls, incapable of understanding at this point in evolution. Again though in reality its more complicated than that. In the case of the schoolyard bully, often you can see a direct correlation between child and parent. Young souls attract young souls. Anava plays a definite role here.

Aum Namasivaya

[atanu]

But my original point that Yajvan quoted was more the second part: Look, do we believe in karma or not? If so, then stop your whining. (I've witnessed Hindus who claim to understand karma, but then when viewed by me from a distance, they obviously didn't.)

Namaste All,

That is obviously the best and IMO, the truth for most of us to lesser or greater extent. In a discussion (through pm), ZN said:"---adversity makes one forget and whine endlessly". But adversity only opens the viveka towards cause-effect chain.

Those who can desist from whining while facing acute or chronic adversities are the real sages, who have truly surrendered.

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

Here is one way of looking at this matter… yet it does not contribute to why some gravitate towards mischief and negitivity, but may help with a POV of what gets acted upon ( karma) and what is free from the reins of karma.

Actions are the virtue and ownership of the 3 guna-s i.e. it is the 3 guṇa-s or constituents of prakṛti that act. One's true nature, Divine nature, the SELF (ātman), is uninvolved in actions. Some may call this sākṣin¹ or the witnessing part of consciousness. No matter it is the guna-s that act within the guna-s.

When we are attached to the body - all is felt by us. The good , the not so good, etc. Hence karma acts on us ( body, mind, etc) but cannot act on the ātman as the ātma is outside this field of the guṇa-s . This is why Śrī Nisargadatta Mahraj says the following:
Q: The universe does not seem a happy place to live in. Why is there so much suffering?
Śrī Nisargadatta Mahraj:
Pain is physical, suffering is mental. Beyond the mind there is no suffering. Pain is merely a signal that the body is in danger and requires attention. Similarly, suffering warns us that the structure of memories and habit, which we call the person (vyakti¹) is threatened by loss or change. Pain is essential for the survival of the body, but none compels you to suffer. Suffering is due entirely to clinging and resisting. It is a sign of our unwillingness to move on, to flow with life.

The Dali Lama says it this way, Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

Why is it inevitable? - If we have a body it is subject to the elements, to falling, to bumps and bruises. It ( body and components) lives in a bounded world of the laws of physics. The ātman is outside of these constucts, but in ingorance, it appears the SELF is the 'self' and attached to the bumps and bruises the world thows at it.

So one asks - why does the sum total of one's actions move an individual to bad behaviors ( evil ones) that bring distraught to the family of man? And why does one person get the 'go ahead' to be this agent of grief?
This I cannot comprehend and appreciate , yet my genuine hunger to understand this grows as I watch people and try to learn.

praṇām

words


sākṣin साक्षिन् - seeing with the eyes , observing , witnessing ; an eye-witness , witness ; Hence Consciousness as an
observer.
vyakti व्यक्ति - visible appearance or manifestation , becoming evident or known or public

[Eastern Mind]

Namaste, Vannakkam,

I wouldn't want to underestimate the powers of the base instincts of lust, power, fear, anger, and such. Ordinary base people who live in chakras below the muladhara will do crazy things. "I'd walk a mile for a camel".

Aum Namasivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté


It seems to me ( therefore), there is only one way out of this pickle; become the sakṛdāgāmin¹ सकृदागामिन् - returning only once again.


praṇām

words
From sakṛd (or sakṛt) + āgamain


sakṛt - once, immediately
āgamain - coming or approaching

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~



Śrī Nisargadatta Mahraj says the following:
Q: The universe does not seem a happy place to live in. Why is there so much suffering?
Śrī Nisargadatta Mahraj:
Pain is physical, suffering is mental. Beyond the mind there is no suffering. Pain is merely a signal that the body is in danger and requires attention. Similarly, suffering warns us that the structure of memories and habit, which we call the person (vyakti¹) is threatened by loss or change. Pain is essential for the survival of the body, but none compels you to suffer. Suffering is due entirely to clinging and resisting. It is a sign of our unwillingness to move on, to flow with life.



Dear Yajavan:
With respect I would like to expand on this.

Pain and suffering cannot clearly be separated and the words mostly have similar meaning. Pain is usually thought of physical and suffering is thought of mental or emotional pain. Suffering can also be a mental reaction to physical or emotional pain. Whatever it is, these words usually go together.
I agree physical pain is necessary for our survival. Disease leprosy is the best example as we observe the people inflicted with this disease become disfigured as they lack pain sensation and become very vulnerable for the harsh environment. It is relatively easy to treat physical pain with medications and others.

Maharaj says suffering is due to clinging and resisting, sign of our unwillingness to move on. That can be true but for most ordinary people including me this would be a very difficult and become philosophical with abstract thoughts. I commend Maharaj to find life like that, but I cannot.

I see there is power in suffering as it begs “human” beings to experience sympathy, compassion understanding and to relate to the needy. It awakens human spirit and heart. It is God in human who get moved by the saddest of the human experiences. The ability to be helpful, compassionate, and sympathetic and to relate to the needy is not a sign of weakness and in fact it is a sign of strength and not to be afraid of getting involved. Pain humbles us and helps in overcoming our egotism. Tragedy makes us realize we are not self-sufficient. Becoming spiritual is not an escape mechanism but it is to embrace the mystery of pain and suffering.

Love..............VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté


VC writes,


I see there is power in suffering as it begs “human” beings to experience sympathy, compassion understanding and to relate to the needy

Yes, I see your point yet I do not think it takes suffering to accomplish this. I also think that when one suffers his or her's attention is on their own condition and little attention is given to others. Perhaps after the suffering subsides , then if there are lessons that are learned, the extension of the heart may in fact encompass others and compassion will flow out.


Why would I suggest there may be other ways to find compassion, friendliness , etc. throughout and applied to society? It is based upon the experience of what one considers their own back yard and how far one's SELF extends.

This is the fundamental precept of spirituality - that one's SELF extends beyond the body. That it is not just other humans that are an extension of one's SELF but the environment, the cosmos. Being compassionate to all living things is a natural state. Why so? Because it is an extension of your SELF.


When one experiences ekam evādvitiyam¹ , one truly without a second - where could there be a person or a place where aninimity or dis-harmony would reside?

praṇām

1 . eka एक (one) eva एव (indeed , truly , really) a अ (not) dvaita द्वैत (two,duality) - one truly without a second

[saidevo]

Namaste Yajvan.

Your useful observation that the (gross and subtle matter of the) world is teeming with the interplay of the three 'guNas', which readily influences a soul taking physical reincarnation, IMO, further strengthens my proposition that the congenetial criminal capabilities of some souls is due to their first-time human birth, having graduated from the animal kingdom.

Since (six layers of the) subtle matter (of the six planes inside the gross earth) permeate each other forming endless combinations of matter and energy, it is easy to see that our physical body or the subtle mind is not insulated from outside influences. This means that we are affected in body and mind by the gross and subtle matter, energy and thought processes outside us, which readily influence our own body and mind processes.

Of the physical matter, the mineral kingdom is of the grossest kind, with only one sense (which is perhaps felt as tactile) to advance its status. The vegetable kingdom has its two senses, creatures like the ants, bees etc. have three senses, birds four, animals five and man six senses. (This is what I remember vaguely from somewhere I read while I was young and I might be wrong). The more the number of senses, the less the density of matter, and more the scope of interaction; and where there is mind, there is scope for spiritual advancement, which is nothing but progressing towards the knowledge of the immanent Atman.

Consciousness of Atman is veiled the deepest in matter in the mineral kingdom. The consciousness of a rock is only the consciousness of its atoms and molecules, so it cannot get to know its Atman unless the soul (or life-force) inside it reincarnates into the lower-grade matter of the vegetable kingdom and above. This reincarnation happens progressively, depending on the state of advancement and purity in the previous incarnation.

From the vegetable kingdom onwards, consciousness is based on the cells and grouped up into the consciousness of limbs and finally the brain, which is the nothing but the physical conduit to mind. Since mind is formed only sketchy in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, a plant, bird or animal cannot have direct Self-Realization in their states of life. Thus it takes a human birth to be firmed up and advance in the journey towards Self-Realization.

A soul (jIvAtma) that takes birth as a human for the first time, has in its physical constitution, gross and subtle matter that are predominantly animalistic in nature, since the mind is yet to develop into a human mind. Such was perhaps the status of the cavemen of the ancient days whose survival was more by instinct than by mental planning and wisdom.

The souls that have incarnated as humans today with congenital criminal capabilities, are much like the cavemen who lived by instinct rather than wisdom and mental planning, although these humans are born of normal parents in most cases. Therefore, the negative combinations of 'guNas' of the world readily arouse their animal proclivities and make them indulge in crime, creating mayhem and murder.

Why should these people with congenital criminal capabilities be born of normal parents? This is, I think, mostly to give them enough opportunities of spiritual advancement. If they should only be born of parents of the same nature as theirs, not only would the population of the world be teeming with 'asuras' but there would be much less scope of redemption for such people.

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ

Q: The universe does not seem a happy place to live in. Why is there so much suffering?
Śrī Nisargadatta Mahraj:
Pain is physical, suffering is mental. Beyond the mind there is no suffering. Pain is merely a signal that the body is in danger and requires attention. Similarly, suffering warns us that the structure of memories and habit, which we call the person (vyakti¹) is threatened by loss or change. Pain is essential for the survival of the body, but none compels you to suffer. Suffering is due entirely to clinging and resisting. It is a sign of our unwillingness to move on, to flow with life.




Dear yajavan:

Maharaj says suffering is due to clinging and resisting, sign of our unwillingness to move on. I consider other way around that we do not like to embrace mystery, we keep clinging to the fact that all can be explained with simple human logic and we resist to the fact that spirituality is not an escape mechanism. BG is clear in describing as "Unfathomable".

Love .....VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté saidevo,


Your useful observation that the (gross and subtle matter of the) world is teeming with the interplay of the three 'guNas', which readily influences a soul taking physical reincarnation, IMO, further strengthens my proposition that the congenetial criminal capabilities of some souls is due to their first-time human birth, having graduated from the animal kingdom.
This reminds me of what Ādi Śaṅkara-ji taught¹,

for all things subject to birth, birth in a human body ( or nara-janma) is rare (durlabham). Even rarer to obtain are strength of the body
and mind. Rarer still is purity. More difficult then these is to desire to live a spiritual life (vaidika dharma mārga). Rarest of all is to have an understanding of the scriptures.
As for discrimination between the SELF and the not-self (ātmānātmaviveka), direct SELF-realization, continuous union with brahman ( the Absolute), final and complete liberation are not to be attained without meritorious deeds (puṇya) done in 100 billion (śata-koṭi) well-lived years.

praṇām


1. Vivekacūḍāmaṇi , 2nd śloka

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~


This reminds me of what Ādi Śaṅkara-ji taught¹,

final and complete liberation are not to be attained without meritorious deeds (puṇya) done in 100 billion (śata-koṭi) well-lived years.






I am curious to know why exactly 100 billion, why not 101 billion? Are we sure 100 billion years are enough doing punya ? What is “well lived years “? How well is well enough to complete Punya? What I gather from this arbitrary huge number and the quality of deeds is that the literal liberation or moksha is an illusion or a myth. The message is just to forget about earning Moksha. It is insane there are people waiting for 100 billion years.

But Sankara’s statement is also true! Final and complete liberation is the state of perfectness. Perfection/liberation/Moksha is the fruit of action. It is not action itself. BG clearly instructs at least to me to be persistent and persevere in the action alone but not in the fruit of action, so to say not even to dream about the fruit. It goes on to say if I do even a mediocre simple action (no quality or the quantity is attached) without any condition (Love or Vikarma) Moksha / liberation goddess will come down and place a garland around my neck and takes away all my Karmic baggage. (Vinoba in Geeta Pravachan)

Beautifully explained by Vinobha.

Love...........VC

[vcindiana]

, .............
................. congenital criminal capabilities ....

Dear Sai: I commend you for your far reaching thinking and trying to explain in a simpler form of pain and suffering. You indeed are a spiritual scientist. And I am not sarcastic because it does take an immense effort on your part on thinking like this.
I view life is difficult and is very complex and it has been spelled out in BG as unfathomable. I explained in my other thread under Geeta’s interpretation there are so many things spiritual or scientific in this world we barely know. Einstein supposedly a genius himself said we can only observe and theorize.
But exploring science or spirituality is healthy and there is great deal of learning and growing to seek for a better life in this world. My only contention is we cannot escape mystery.
You use the term congenital criminal capabilities and I wonder do you consider the animal kingdom has so much criminal capabilities like us? Before any action there has to be a thought process and you think an animal can think to anger some, kill some, rape some like we humans do? I have 2 dogs and the love they pour on me is much more than I can return. You know the story about Dharmaraya and his dog. Almost all animals do not attack unless they are provoked. We can learn a lot even from “wild” animals.
You may be right in another way that the people have those emotional centers in the Amygdala/ limbic system in their brains set wrong. It is possible the anger centers may be firing more frequently. Who knows scientist may come with a pill for anger just like they have for depression. Or a precision neurosurgical intervention to modify the center! The point is this is all still mystery.
You mention about cavemen. You think a lot more people because of their PUNYA over “satakoti” as Sankara put it, their souls became refined and more civilized? Do we have evidence all cavemen were all of highly criminal characteristics?
On a flip side how do explain congenital mental diseases such as CP, Down’s syndrome etc…Are these observed in animals? There is so much, I cannot explain in this world. I love the word “Unfathomable” in Geeta. For me it is better just to accept mystery of this world. It teaches me humility.

Love..............VC

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

VC writes,


Yes, I see your point yet I do not think it takes suffering to accomplish this. I also think that when one suffers his or her's attention is on their own condition and little attention is given to others. Perhaps after the suffering subsides , then if there are lessons that are learned, the extension of the heart may in fact encompass others and compassion will flow out.



Dear Yajavan: If there is no pain and suffering what is the use of compassion, sympathy, help the needy which are nothing but Love in action. What compassion you would extend to a person enjoying life with abundant health (Physical and emotional) and wealth?



.................
............Why would I suggest there may be other ways to find compassion, friendliness , etc. throughout and applied to society? It is based upon the experience of what one considers their own back yard and how far one's SELF extends.



There is no “experience” unless one has a relationship with other be a person or an environment. Relationship is the internal mirror I can reflect to understand my character, and it is not going to appear spontaneously in my back yard of SELF.
This is just my personal understanding
Love ............VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté Vcindiana


If there is no pain and suffering what is the use of compassion, sympathy, help the needy which are nothing but Love in action. What compassion you would extend to a person enjoying life with abundant health (Physical and emotional) and wealth?


There is no “experience” unless one has a relationship with other be a person or an environment. Relationship is the internal mirror I can reflect to understand my character, and it is not going to appear spontaneously in my back yard of SELF.
Love ............VC

We come from different teachings and experiences. Sympathy is feeling sorry for another. Empathy is 'feeling' what another feels and understanding their condition. This comes naturally when one sees all as an extension of themselves.

You mention,


There is no “experience” unless one has a relationship with other be a person or an environment
Yet the wise that are realized beings do in fact have relationships with others... How can this occur when there is not-two (advaita)?

you mention,


Relationship is the internal mirror I can reflect to understand my character, and it is not going to appear spontaneously in my back yard of SELF.
Yes, this is fine, yet is not final - it is not the conclusion of what can be experienced. That is how we differ.

You speak of your experiences now, and I respect those experiences - yet there is more and this resides within the field of consciousness, of Being, of exploring and expanding this state of existence in ones daily life. That is how we see things differently.

The wise tell us there is more to see and understand then meets the eye. This I have taken to heart over the years. That is my path. It is greatly influnced and shaped by my exeriences, teachings and study.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

One lesson I am learning that I read today:
Remember, not getting what you want is sometimes a wonderful stroke of luck.
This I find true again and again, but then forget.

Do you have any lessons to learn that you can identify ?

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté




One lesson I am learning that I read today:
Remember, not getting what you want is sometimes a wonderful stroke of luck.
This I find true again and again, but then forget.

Do you have any lessons to learn that you can identify ?



No one has any lessons they are learning? Perfection¹ has come to this earth sooner then I thought http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

praṇām

1. sākṣātkāra साक्षात्कार- evident or intuitive perception , realization

praṇām

[Eastern Mind]

lol

Vamakkam:

Yesterday when I read this, my immediate reaction was, "to keep my mouth shut". My lesson.

What I mean is to take the time to deliberate, so that a more meaningful well thought out answer may come out, rather than just the first reaction. So here I am, a day later responding. I know that I speak too quickly at times.

One such time is when asked if I am able to do something in the way of volunteering. My immediate response is 'yes," and then later I have these regrets, "Oh why did I sign up for that?"

Another is in debate, or discussion. Sometimes it just comes out all wrong, and you didn't mean what you said, if you know what I mean.

So yes, that's my lesson. "Only speak what is true or helpful."

Thank you for suggesting such a practical thread.

Aum Namasivaya

[saidevo]

Namaste VC.

I have only suggested a proposition--which is nothing more than my opinion--for the congenetial criminal capabilities of some human souls, without meaning to generalise on the animals or cavemen. But the facts you have presented about animals sent me thinking and digging the Net to some extent.

1. As Tim Radford says in this interesting article, dogs have been with humans for 15,000 years, so the domestic dog might not be a real test animal to explore the mental capabilities of animals. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/dec/18/hunting.animalwelfare)

The experiments of training conducted on animals and birds to explore their mental capabilities might indicate that they learn and acquire some of those capabilities only after the training. Such research, I think, is better conducted in the natural habitats of the animals without any human fillip, rather than in experimental laboratories with domesticated environments. And then there could be a world of difference in the behavioural and mental capabilities of wild and domestic animals.

I think from the examples cited in the above article, that animals do have emotional capabilities, but their emotions might more be derived from the instincts built into (or rather around) their souls than from conscious and contemplative mental thinking. This is not to say that the animals have no mind, but only that their mind is sketchy and primitive, which might account for their recognition and communication capabilities.

One reason for the far lesser mental capabilities of animals might be the belief that animals have only group souls.

I think scientific research has not established conclusively till date that animals do have contemplative mental capabilities and a sixth sense.

2. There was a time when our cavemen were just born, without any capabilities of communication, language and thoughts about their environment. All of these features they might have picked up over long periods of time by observation, experiment and experience and then training their fellow humans.

As we know, initially, the cavemen only resorted to hunting for food, which was based laregly on emotion and instinct, rather than conscious planning. The first result of development of human mind acquiring the capability of conscious contemplation and planning was perhaps the advent of agriculture.

3. Your observation about possible deficiencies in the brain accounting for wild emotions calls for the question, "why should only some human brains have that problem?" So the answer is beyond the physical.

4. Whatever man might say and find out, I am sure as you say that mystery will always exist and we might need to just accept it for what it is.

[satay]

namaskar,
I read the other day that "it hardly takes any wit or wisdom to criticise something. It takes a wise person to present pros and cons of both sides of an issue."

I have been pondering over this for many days...


hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

No one has any lessons they are learning? Perfection¹ has come to this earth sooner then I thought http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

praṇām

1. sākṣātkāra साक्षात्कार- evident or intuitive perception , realization

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté satay


namaskar,
I read the other day that "it hardly takes any wit or wisdom to criticise something. It takes a wise person to present pros and cons of both sides of an issue." I have been pondering over this for many days...

Yes, IMO this is true. True debate is quite useful. In the 6 schools of Indian philosophy (saḍ-darśana) a method is employed to
curtail blatant criticism. A philosopher ( or debater) is required to state the views of his opponent first before formulating
and offering his POV. This was known as the prior view or pūrvapakṣa¹. Then follows the conversation and debate and finally
the conclusions (uttarapakṣa).

The offering here is the thoroughness of the conversation, sharing of ideas and the useful exchange of views. The notion is the avoidance of word warfare (jalpa). Yet that does not infer that the questions, proposals, points of view were not riveting and to the point. The notion was/is to arrive at the truth. The truth should pervade facts offered on both sides.

'Pure blatant criticism' in my view is devoid of this quality - of capturing the truth in facts and allowing them to come to the surface for inspection. Criticism as an exercise may in fact be called jāti. We know this word jāti as birth, yet it also means a futile objection without principles behind it, i.e. founded merely on similarity or dissimilarity. To me we can fit blatant criticism into that idea.

praṇām

[Eastern Mind]

Satay and Yajvan:

I have been dwelling on something similar to this one for a VERY long time. How do we distinguish from the inside on the difference between observation and criticism?

Examples : That driver is driving too fast. (He's an idiot.) Is it observation without the second part? Is it still just an observation even with the second part. When does it turn into negative criticism? Where is that line that is crossed. As you say, criticism is not healthy, and yet we are taught to be keen observers as well. I faced this daily as a teacher regarding kid's work. So do you have any secrets for being able to notice the line?

Aum namasivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté EM (et.al)



Satay and Yajvan:

I have been dwelling on something similar to this one for a VERY long time. How do we distinguish from the inside on the difference between observation and criticism?

Examples : That driver is driving too fast. (He's an idiot.) Is it observation without the second part? Is it still just an observation even with the second part. When does it turn into negative criticism? Where is that line that is crossed. As you say, criticism is not healthy, and yet we are taught to be keen observers as well. I faced this daily as a teacher regarding kid's work. So do you have any secrets for being able to notice the line? Aum namasivaya

A reasonable question. As I see it there are 3 parts:
A = input - the driver is driving too fast.
B = internal dialog - going though the filters of one's POV, values, etc.
C = output - 'the guy is an idiot'.

It is this internal dialog that determines how 'C' is formulated. Once this internal dialog is quieted/silenced ( the mind is still), then there is no judgement, hence:
A = the driver is driving too fast.
B = _______________________
C = The driver is driving too fast.


praṇām

[saidevo]

A verse in the Tamil dharma work ARaneRich chAram (Essence of Dharma) written by the Jain poet Tiru MunaippADiyAr has a very helpful advice on research and criticism:

காய்தல் உவத்தல் அகற்றி ஒருபொருட்கண்
ஆய்தல் அறிவுடையார் கண்ணதே--காய்வதன்கண்
உற்றகுணம் தோன்றா தாகும் உவப்பதன்கண்
குற்றமும் தோன்றாக் கெடும்

kAytal uvattal akaRRi oruporuTkaN
Aytal aRivuDaiyAr kaNNatE--kAyvatankaN
uRRaguNam tOnRA tAkum uvappatankaN
kuRRamum tOnRAk keDum

Prejudice, and preference, removing them, towards a thing (or subject)
to study is for the wise--with prejudice
existing features won't be seen; with preference
the faults won't be seen either, and spoil the work.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté satay,


namaskar,
I read the other day that "it hardly takes any wit or wisdom to criticise something.

I was thinking of this today and idea came to me (it was stimulated by a radio program). It made me think of the differences between two notions, that is:

cynical - distrusting or disparaging the motives of others ; showing contempt
skeptical - having doubt; showing doubtHaving doubt or saṁśaya¹ , seems to be a reasonable state of mind. It allows the person to query, inspect and discover information
that may erase this doubt. It allows for growth. It also gives one permission to ask more questions and probe for answers.

Yet this cynicism has different motives. If I were offering a word from the Nyāya school of thinking, the closest I would come to cynical
maybe perhaps fallacy or hetvābhāsa¹. This hetvābhāsa means the reason which appears as, but is really not, a valid reason.

Lets look a bit deeper into this word - hetu means the motive or cause ~ the reason + vā or hurting, an arrow + bhāsa or light, luster,
impression made on the mind. Or the reason that some hurt that dampens the light or luster made on the mind.

Cynicism IMHO accomplishes this hetvābhāsa. It is able to criticize with fault intended, to perhaps dampen the luster of another, yet also reduce the luster of one's own mind!

That said, doesn't cynicism come ~naturally~ with the grind of life. We see the same offending things in society, politics, others' behavior
and it is quiet natural to gravitate to this level of thinking.
So, the question becomes , how does one keep one's perspective fresh, clear, uncluttered that it avoids the rut that can cause
this hetvābhāsa to raise its head?

praṇām

words

saṁśaya संशय uncertainty , irresolution , hesitation , doubt
Components of hetvābhāsa
hetu हेतु- " impulse " , motive , cause , cause of , reason for
vā वा- we know as wind; yet a deeper looki yields the following:
vā as strong , powerful, also to hurt , injure; an arrow
bhāsa भास -light , luster,, brightness ; impression made on the mind , fancy

[Eastern Mind]

So, the question becomes , how does one keep one's perspective fresh, clear, uncluttered that it avoids the rut that can cause
this hetvābhāsa to raise its head?



Yes, this puts it right to the core. Of what use is any philosophy without some practical application. One of my favorite quotes from my Guru is: "Wisdom is the application of knowledge."

So today I was working away on the lawn or watering or some such thing, can't really remember, caught myself thinking about a certain so and so, and just started mentally chanting "Om Namasivaya". It took awhile but my thoughts did go back to less critical stuff and more just into enjoying the day. But the key is to catch it before it gets to the point of no return, so to say.

My wife and I with concentration, and vows, can actually travel now, without getting into long criticising sessions, or long arguments. But it does take a little concentration. We watch nature as it goes by the car and keep our comments to that.

Aum Namasivaya

[vcindiana]

Satay and Yajvan:



This is an interesting question. This is a very common type of events I see almost every day. While driving some time or other I see some one driving very slow in front of me or some one else cuts me off in the middle of a road or some one not looking at the traffic sign making wrong turn etc…my first gut reaction is shouting at him or her “You Idiot or you stupid “or using some flowery words as though I have never done some thing like that. It is a gut reaction; something comes out of my mouth like a natural reflex, with no “Conscience” working...
It is interesting, BG uses the word “Avidya” for ignorance and purposely it avoids name calling like we do. The person who does the wrong thing does not know that he is doing wrong . This truth appeared to be well understood by Vyasa, Pluto and JC. The person who has violated traffic rules probably did not understand the rules. Or even though he did know the rules he was in a hurry to meet some dead line. Or there was a short term lapse of memory that he did not know what he was doing. Or his mind was transiently occupied with his family or work problems (which frequently happen to Me.) or he did not know the risk of rash driving. There are so many possibilities. What ever it was he was ignorant not necessarily stupid or idiot or some other I enjoy calling him at that moment. Now, not knowing what happened to him I am equally ignorant enough to immediately criticize him. Now we have two ignorant people!! That is amazing what I do in avidya. Using Yajavan’s favorite quoted words, it is important to be well established in SELF in my actions or reactions, but I know honestly as a human being it is impossible all the time. Have you tried sailing especially in a small cat? If so you will know what I mean.
Love................VC

[saidevo]

Namate Yajvan.



Yet this cynicism has different motives. If I were offering a word from the NyAya school of thinking, the closest I would come to cynical
maybe perhaps fallacy or hetvAbhAsa. This hetvAbhAsa means the reason which appears as, but is really not, a valid reason.

Lets look a bit deeper into this word - hetu means the motive or cause ~ the reason + vA or hurting, an arrow + bhAsa or light, luster,
impression made on the mind. Or the reason that some hurt that dampens the light or luster made on the mind.


Seems there are other words in Sanskrit for 'cynical' and 'cynic'. MWD has the following words:

sarvAbhishangkin - mistrusting all
sarvAbhisaMdhaka - deceiving everyone
sarvAbhisaMdhin - a cynic, caluminator

This link has a good number of words that prefix 'sarva':
http://sanskrita.org/wiki/index.php/sarva?setlang=es

Historically, a cynic was a member of the Greek school of philosophers who held virtue to be the only good and stressed independence from worldly needs and pleasures: they become critical of the rest of the society and its material interests.

Today a cynic is one who is critical of the historical cynic!

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté saidevo,




Seems there are other words in Sanskrit for 'cynical' and 'cynic'. MWD has the following words:

sarvAbhishangkin - mistrusting all
sarvAbhisaMdhaka - deceiving everyone
sarvAbhisaMdhin - a cynic, caluminator



thank you for the additions... I will add them to my list!

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
VC writes and offers the following:



Using Yajavan’s favorite quoted words, it is important to be well established in SELF in my actions or reactions, but I know honestly as a human being it is impossible all the time. Have you tried sailing especially in a small cat? If so you will know what I mean

Establishment of the SELF is not a selected action that one chooses the same way one may choose a state of mind i.e. ' I will remain positive, I will not get angry, I will act like ___________ ( fill in the blank)'.
Once one is 'possessed of the SELF', or ātma sākṣātkāra¹ there is no time it is lost , misplaced, or overshadowed by any human experience.

Well how does this occur? By one's sādhanā. And what does this do? It seperates the SELF from the non-SELF. Ādi Śaṅkara-ji¹ says it this way: That person is liberated who seperates the SELF ( which is unattached, actionless) from all perceived sense objects as one seperates the tender core of the munja grass ( a type of grass) from its covering, and who then remains firmly established (possessed) in the SELF.

This comes from ones sādhanā over time. If one (initally) is looking for the SELF, via the eyes, it will be missed. We find the SELF, silence, from inward facing some call pratimīlana¹. More on this if there is interest at this HDF post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3220 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3220)

praṇām
words

ātma आत्म - is ātman, ones essence, core Being + sākṣātkāra साक्षात्कार - realization; evident or intuitive perception
From Vivekacūḍāmaṇi , 155th śloka
pratimīlana or prati+ mīlana - prati प्रति back , again , in return + mīlana मीलन- the act of closing the eyes
sādhanā साधना- we know as spiritual practice; this word means bringing about , carrying out , accomplishment , fulfilment , completion , perfection - leading straight to a goal

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
VC writes and offers the following:



Dear Yaj: Thank you for your comments. I do understand Self is not something I can just choose or even not to choose. Not something I force on my self to be something “good”. I see SELF is to realize what I am. Self is something I want to be true to myself. As you say it requires Sadhana. My take is Sadhana is nothing but practice. An old adage is Practice makes perfect. I do not believe that. Practice makes me a better person, not perfect. No one can claim to fully possess SELF. Of course one can taste it. That is good.



I am not sure there is any single human being on this earth who is completely possessed of the SELF. It is only an illusion. Human experience is highly complicated but equally gratifying. If there is something called God, He did not create this world for nothing. A person who claims he completely knows SELF has nothing to learn, nothing to grow, nothing to be humble and there is nothing to be grateful. These are just my observation only but I may be wrong.

Love................VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC


Dear Yaj: Thank you for your comments. I do understand Self is not something I can just choose or even not to choose. Not something I force on my self to be something “good”. I see SELF is to realize what I am. Self is something I want to be true to myself. As you say it requires Sadhana. My take is Sadhana is nothing but practice. An old adage is Practice makes perfect. I do not believe that. Practice makes me a better person, not perfect. No one can claim to fully possess SELF. Of course one can taste it. That is good.

Thank you for your post. I would ask what is the 'practice' you practice?

And, if the Self is not possible to attain i.e. 'possessed of the SELF', or ātma sākṣātkāra, then there is no need for the Upaniṣad-s , as that is their intent - the unfoldment of the SELF. And one best tell the ṛṣi-s that their sight and knowledge is flawed.

The SELF is a real experience . You say 'a person can taste it' and I agree. Yet once established it does not go away i.e. it is upalabdhi - uninterrupted knowledge; the knowledge of knowing the SELF personally. This is the part you perhaps have not had the opportunity of seeing; the sādhu or sadvī that lives this fullness.



I leave you with the wisdom of the ages: The sage yājñavalkya, in the Bṛhadaraṇyaka Upaniṣad, Maitreyī Brāhmaṇa, 7th śloka, says (to Maitreyī):

This brāhmaṇa ( source of knowledge) this kṣatriya (source of power) all these worlds (lokaḥ or levels of creation) these gods (devaḥ), these veda-s, these beings, all this is ātma ( Brahman, paramātman) - the SELF.

praṇām

words

upalabdhi उपलब्धि - uninterrupted knowledge; obtainment , acquisition

[Eastern Mind]

Namaste:

I once heard the realisation of the Self as the great non-experience. In my belief, it is no illusion. Its just so deep that these intellectually gridded minds of ours can't see it. But yes we can sense its existence. There are self-realised beings on the planet today. Again, I have been told that "everything changes" and that it is as much effort to come out as it is to go in. Imagine that ... working on being able to come out of inner calm, inner peace, enough to be able to function in the world.

Aum namasivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté EM,
very well said...


Namaste:

I once heard the realisation of the Self as the great non-experience. In my belief, it is no illusion. Its just so deep that these intellectually gridded minds of ours can't see it.

I am drawn to what svāmī Lakṣman-jū has taught...
avidyā¹ is not so much about what you don't know, but what you do know that is just not right.

the world is flat
the sun goes around the earth
the universe is shrinking
I am the body
I only live once
the rope is a snake
the SELF cannot be a full time uninterrrupted (upalabdhi) experiencepraṇām

avidyā अविद्या - from a or 'not' + vid ' to know' = to not know = ignornace, the basis of moha or delusion of mis-understanding.

[saidevo]

Namaste EM.



I once heard the realisation of the Self as the great non-experience. In my belief, it is no illusion. Its just so deep that these intellectually gridded minds of ours can't see it. But yes we can sense its existence.


Nicely put. I wonder... An experience is usually felt emotionally (even bliss, happiness are emotions) during its tenor and remembered later in visualization. How best can a common person who has not had it, understand as to how the 'non-experience'--the awareness in the fourth state of existence--is felt and later remembered? How does a JnAni 'feel it', being always in that state of existence?

When we look unfocussed for long at a gridded object, a running ceiling fan for example or a tiled floor, we become aware of the grids of the object dissolving momentarily into the background, but when this awarness turns into a thought, the eyes focus suddenly and the object looms back with all its grid, form, and shape.

In deep sleep, our mind is totally unfocussed on any thought, so the third state of existence persists, but then we are not 'aware' of it--only remember it later as an experience, or rather non-experience, of peace and bliss. It is really an awesome puzzle that a JnAni is ever in the state of TurIya and yet walk and talk and speak normally with the people around, giving no hint of his holistic awareness.