Eternal Recurrence

[ZarryT]

Dear ZarryT,

‘Life’ is a good terminology, but the sastras (scriptures) term it differently, the creative urge abides in Brahman is called 'Karma'

“The specific creative urge that causes the emanation of all beings is to be understood by the term Karma”. BG: III-27

Love

I'm terming the activity "life". The sastra 'Karma' as the creative urge of brahman is more like the fundamental principles which establish what exactly the activity of 'life' actually is; that which determines the character and nature of a life

[devotee]

I posit that a life without desire and fear is a life not worth living, and that even the liberated will willingly subject themselves to desire and fear for the sake of experiencing a dramatic story. If Brahman wanted to sit in blissful contemplation 100% of the time, there would be no need to be born in the first place.

Brahman is not some being. It is neither being nor non-being. So, your concept of Brahman needs change before you can proceed correctly.

This is to say that freedom from suffering is not identical with no longer experiencing suffering; the freedom just implies that the suffering is no longer a big deal; the agent is the master of their suffering. They still suffer, but they recognize that they want to suffer, and they understand why they want to suffer. The unliberated suffer, thinking that they don't want to; so they are not free from it - it happens to them and they don't think they are in control of it. To tell the unliberated that they suffer because they want to suffer doesn't make sense to them.

It is not what you think. I think you need some time to strike at the root of concepts which stop us from progressing. There is no 'i', no 'you', no 'they' but yet 'i', 'you' and 'they' arise ... not because someone wants ... not because Brahman wants (it would be ridiculous) but because It is like that ! There is no valid ultimate answer to "why"s of this Reality. It is like Laws of Nature. It is as It is. There is no reason why It is so.

Best wishes ....

OM

[ZarryT]

Brahman is not some being. It is neither being nor non-being. So, your concept of Brahman needs change before you can proceed correctly.



It is not what you think. I think you need some time to strike at the root of concepts which stop us from progressing. There is no 'i', no 'you', no 'they' but yet 'i', 'you' and 'they' arise ... not because someone wants ... not because Brahman wants (it would be ridiculous) but because It is like that ! There is no valid ultimate answer to "why"s of this Reality. It is like Laws of Nature. It is as It is. There is no reason why It is so.

Best wishes ....

OM

I already understand Brahman as being neither a being or not-being; brahman is all that which is; it is not a distinct and separate entity. This is already my understanding.

I disagree that there is no valid answer to the "whys" of this Reality. I think the "whys" are, in fact, quite simple and obvious. But we're at very different places on very different paths, i think... I'm not working towards enlightenment, for a start...

[brahman]

I'm terming the activity "life". The sastra 'Karma' as the creative urge of brahman is more like the fundamental principles which establish what exactly the activity of 'life' actually is; that which determines the character and nature of a life

Dear ZarryT,

I'm terming the activity "life".

‘Life’ is a western terminology; equivalent used in Advaitha Vedantha is Jiva, which is the erroneous product of ignorance(Adhyasa/maya/avidya..).

The sastra 'Karma' as the creative urge of brahman is more like the fundamental principles which establish what exactly the activity of 'life' actually is; that which determines the character and nature of a life.

If you agree to this and have a proper understanding of the context of karma, what is the significance of this question?

OP reads

Is it plausible that someone's karma could be proportioned such that the only life they can live once they die is the same life again and so each and every time they die for all eternity they are reborn as themselves at the same time and date to the same parents?

Love

[ZarryT]

Dear ZarryT,



‘Life’ is a western terminology; equivalent used in Advaitha Vedantha is Jiva, which is the erroneous product of ignorance(Adhyasa/maya/avidya..).



If you agree to this and have a proper understanding of the context of karma, what is the significance of this question?

OP reads

Love

My understanding of jiva is that it refers to a life. I use the term life as a name, like "chess" or "football". It's the name of the game, nothing more. I'm not referring to living as such; living is like footballing or chessing.

As for the question, it appears there shouldn't be any conflict between karma and the notion of eternal recurrence, though it would be a very particular case...

[brahman]

My understanding of jiva is that it refers to a life. I use the term life as a name, like "chess" or "football". It's the name of the game, nothing more. I'm not referring to living as such; living is like footballing or chessing.

As for the question, it appears there shouldn't be any conflict between karma and the notion of eternal recurrence, though it would be a very particular case...

Dear ZarryT,


Vedantha examines reality under three categories viz. Sat Cit and Anadana, it is not mere ontology that affirms factors concerning the existence. epistemology as well as axiology to be weighed.

No mixing up of philosophical terminologies and 'frame of references'; I am happy as long as you are happy. Please carry on..

Love