KARMA-The free will Vs VIDHI-The fate

[Rohit]

No egg, whether it is in pre-fertilisation or post-fertilisation state, can develop the notion of self-identity. In fact, early life entirely lacked the faculties to develop any notion, none whatsoever; forget entirely about them having any faculty for self-identification right at the beginning of their Absolute Evolution.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[kannannn]

When are evolved from pancha bhootas, the five basic elements of nature and evolved into microorganisms, plants and animals and finally humans, how can we say about the first life.

Karma, and responsibility to action starts the moment we think "I".
The moment we think "I" then we become responsible for the actions.

Hope the above answers makes it clear.
I think thamiz's question still holds good. What justifies the death of a child in the first generation of humans who started to think "I"?

[pradheep]

No problem in answering step by step of your questions. But be aware like many others when you get the answer and when you dont have anything else to ask, dont call me confused or deluded.

Here is the answer to the first question posted above.

The "I" notion does not start with human. Right from bacteria it starts. The "I" notion makes life to procreate and sustain. The "I" does not want to die. It wants to be immortal and so it evolves physically to be immortal without realizing that the "Aspect" behind the ego is immortal. The "I" notion evolves until human and in human birth the way to get rid of "I" notion exists. More based on your following questions.

[Rohit]

Then we are at a loss to know when exactly the idea of Karma came into existence. When did human beings became responsible for what they did? I beleive thats the concept behind karma .. to be held accountable for one's deed.

[Rohit]

The self-determination and accountability of the individual soul rests on its capacity for free choice. This is exercised only in the human form. Whilst in lower species, the atman takes no moral decisions but is instead bound by instinct. Therefore, although all species of life are subject to the reactions of past activities, such karma is generated only while in the human form. Human life alone is a life of responsibility.

[NOV]

Religions have become part and parcel of this world. If you think criticising can be allowed in this forum then kindly remove those rules or else please actuate them instead of just letting go these bunglers.

Yes, we have been lenient and have allowed academic discussions on religion.

However, trashing of any religion will not be tolerated. Let this be a reminder to all discussants of this section.

p/s: take it up in PM if you have any issues on Hub policies.

[thamiz]

The "I" notion does not start with human. Right from bacteria it starts.

Right from bacteria?

Oh come on!!!!

Are you sure you wrote what you tried to mean :?:

[Rohit]

The "I" notion does not start with human. Right from bacteria it starts.
Right from bacteria?

Oh come on!!!!

Are you sure you wrote what you tried to mean :?:
Before the evolution of single cell life began; there was only matter, energy and their mutual interactions and transformations i.e. E=mc^2 and E = hf at work. There was absolutely no life that could develop any faculty and then a notion for self-identification nor any means to instinctively desire to multiply, reproduce or regenerate.

So, even the single cell life like bacteria absolutely refuses to support the fallacies and fabrications dispensed by our dear friend.

Nonetheless, one thing is clearly implied that only matter/energy i.e. E=mc^2 and E = hf is immortal, which is the only and absolutely necessary Aspect for all life forms.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamizhvaanan]

Thanks pradeep, nice to know that you are willing to answer ... hope you dont abscond in future :P
When are evolved from pancha bhootas, the five basic elements of nature and evolved into microorganisms, plants and animals and finally humans, how can we say about the first life.:yes: that complicates the definition of Life and :ty: .
We dont need to define Life to deny the existence of karma, whereas as a proponent of karmic theory, you need to clarify this :lol2: :ty: again :D

The "I" notion does not start with human. Right from bacteria it starts. The "I" notion makes life to procreate and sustain. The "I" does not want to die. It wants to be immortal and so it evolves physically to be immortal without realizing that the "Aspect" behind the ego is immortal. The "I" notion evolves until human and in human birth the way to get rid of "I" notion exists. More based on your following questions.While we cant even determine when life started, where do I now go to look for the beginning of "I" :huh:

All these talks of I and We serves well when you are putting forth a doctrine, but let us please define the context of our arguement, coz u ard bringing in science here. Are you talking about a karma as a myth or theory or fact ? :huh:

[thamizhvaanan]

The law of karma underpins the process of transmigration of the soul. Karma literally means "action," but more often refers to the accumulated reactions to activities. Thus we talk of "good karma" and "bad karma," which are stored reactions that gradually unfold to determine our unique destiny.Then in that case, we may very well dismantle our justice systems :huh: . Everybody is just playing out his or her karma. Nobody is really good or evil. Nobody is really responsible for anything they do. We're all just karmic pawns lumbering according to pre-conceived formulae... a mere cause and effect :huh:

[pradheep]

Dear Thamizh,
I am talking perfect science. Religion and science are seeking the answers for the Truth, one searches out and other the inner.

Bacteria also has this "I" thought. That "I" thought makes it survive all hard ships. Bacteria is resistant to antibiotics and even tries to live inspite of that hostile environment?. why should it do that, why should it survive. The basis for that impulse , is that "I".

One thing is very clear to all of us. You do not want to admit simple logical reasoning. Just tell me what is illogical about what i wrote about the survival factor of a bacteria.

What you cnanot comprehend is the "truth" that the inanimate matter give rise to awareness without a base?. You cnanot grasp what I am conveying. Please do not be offended. I will try my best to convey. I am not that intelligent to convey in words. I am short of words.

I dont obscond replying. I am busy with other work. sorry.

[thamizhvaanan]

One thing is very clear to all of us. You do not want to admit simple logical reasoning. Just tell me what is illogical about what i wrote about the survival factor of a bacteria.I dunno why, but your reasoning doesn seem all too simple. I dont find anything illogical abt survival factor of bacteria (infact I never spoke of it :roll: )

You say that a soul gets its karma right from the moment it assumes Life ( whose definition u obscured in ur previous post). Earlier you said that in first life it derives it karma from its parents ( parent of a bacteria? :confused2: ) and later u also say that for choosing the first life's parent, the spirit goes on looking for a parent with thoughts similar to its previous life ...

simple reasoning ... :sigh2:

When u deal with humans its easy .. there is much diversity in their deeds and thoughts so that u can blame their destiny on either of those. But assume everything started with mr.bacteria, ages back. No matter how much Survival factor was there, the truth is that all have similar behaviour aka instincts. If a whole biosphere is to grow out of these similar thoughts, is it not reasonable to expect that all will have same karma? :huh: Do u mean to say all organisms had the same karma until human species evolved?

And pls answer the questions I posed to nemesis as well... :D

[thamizhvaanan]

Dear Thamizh,
I am talking perfect science. Religion and science are seeking the answers for the Truth, one searches out and other the inner.Why cant u people agree to the simple fact that all these ideologies were formed when man's understanding of nature was at its primitive worst. He tried to frame laws and theories about the things he saw, but still based on his limited knowledge.

No wonder these theories throw up more questions when applied to modern discoveries like Mr.bacteria. And all the explanations that you offer, trying to encompass science into primitive ideologies sounds adhoc. You just keep piling new new theories make it work.

[thamizhvaanan]

I think thamiz's question still holds good. What justifies the death of a child in the first generation of humans who started to think "I"?

[Shakthiprabha.]

Just tell me what is illogical about what i wrote about the survival factor of a bacteria.

What you cnanot comprehend is the "truth" that the inanimate matter give rise to awareness without a base?. You cnanot grasp what I am conveying. Please do not be offended. I will try my best to convey.

A matter of interest

...

http://xark.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/11/bacteria_blogs_.html

http://www.peterussell.com/SCG/EoC.php

[thamiz]

Dear Thamizh,
I am talking perfect science.
Bacteria also has this "I" thought. That "I" thought makes it survive all hard ships.

Yeah, bacteria is certainly not goiing to show up here to speak for him/herself and say, "No". Humans like you and me can use bacteria not only for making buttermilk but also for defending the "karma theory!! 8-)

I am certainly trying to think like how you think but unfortunately you make it so difficult and irrational! :(

[Shakthiprabha.]

Matter of interest
______________

http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/050418_bactfrm.htm

[kannannn]

Bacteria also has this "I" thought. That "I" thought makes it survive all hard ships. Bacteria is resistant to antibiotics and even tries to live inspite of that hostile environment?. why should it do that, why should it survive. The basis for that impulse , is that "I".
That would lead to the next question: why did we evolve on the earth in the first place? What purpose does Karma serve on final analysis? But survival can be explained in terms of evolution and passing down the best genes to successive generations.

The development of consiousness and self-awareness are some of the most important subjects of present research and the answer is not as easy as it seems. But that apart, let us take the mirror test that was used to test if animals are aware of their own self. Only a handful of animals have passed the mirror test. Does that mean animals that are not aware of their selves are not a part of the karma cycle? And where does that leave bacteria? (Do they even have a nervous system to be aware of their self?) And plants?


Just tell me what is illogical about what i wrote about the survival factor of a bacteria.
Nothing. It's just that you are painting yourself into a corner by making things more complicated and confusing.


I will try my best to convey. I am not that intelligent to convey in words. I am short of words.
We are also trying to understand things from your perspective. Afterall, isn't that the basis of any debate?

[thamiz]

Matter of interest
______________

http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/050418_bactfrm.htm

Well, where does it say, bacterium has an "ego" or thhnks as "I" in that article ? :roll:

[SRS]

That would lead to the next question: why did we evolve on the earth in the first place?

Originally there was an energy source. In science, this is called the "singular energy." Hindus call it as "shakthi." It is through this singular energy that the Universe came into being. However, energy does not simply disappear. It simply transforms itself. Matter can be transformed into energy (as has been demonstrated by particle physics) and vice-versa). This transformation of the singular energy source is still going on, which is why so-called evolution is still going on.


What purpose does Karma serve on final analysis?

What purpose does gravity serve? You can feel the effects of gravity immediatly; the effects of karma are more subtle.


But survival can be explained in terms of evolution and passing down the best genes to successive generations.

It is not as simple as that. If the tendency of the universe is to gravitate towards disorder, how do you explain the startling amount of symmetry one finds in nature? In simple terms: why is ice less dense than liquid water? Why do bacteria have more ability to survive than any organisms? Why is there an ozone layer protecting the inhabitants of the Earth from harmful UV rays? Why does the Earth revolve around the Sun, instead of say, Mars? The list of such statistical "anomalies", in fact, can easy run into the hundreds of millions. Leaving open the question of whether in fact, they can be considered statistical anomalies in the first place (if one considers the sum total of all the so-called statistical anomalies, then there ceases to be a statistical anomaly).

On the contrary, the evidence indicates the presence of a driving force behind the creation (and maintenance) of the Universe. Implying, of course, the existence of a Creator God. This is the most fundamental issue; unless there is a foundation that posits "God" at the base, such concepts as "karma" and "evolution" will get lost in a myriad of materialistic/mechanical jargon which lead to nowhere.


And plants?

It has been scientifically demonstrated that plants do indeed respond to emotions, in ways other than can be characterized entirely as "mechanical."

[thamizhvaanan]

SRS ... we were talking abt karma :roll:

atleast neengalachum naan ketta kelvikku badhil sollungalen :roll:

[thamiz]

It has been scientifically demonstrated that plants do indeed respond to emotions, in ways other than can be characterized entirely as "mechanical."

Scietifically they found that for geting a publication, I think! :lol:

There are so many worhtless articles including "cold fusion" exist in literature but that does not mean it is accepted! :lol:

[thamiz]

SRS ... we were talking abt karma :roll:

atleast neengalachum naan ketta kelvikku badhil sollungalen :roll:

he cant understand thamizh or thamiz! :)

So, English please! :)

[kannannn]

On the contrary, the evidence indicates the presence of a driving force behind the creation (and maintenance) of the Universe. Implying, of course, the existence of a Creator God. This is the most fundamental issue; unless there is a foundation that posits "God" at the base, such concepts as "karma" and "evolution" will get lost in a myriad of materialistic/mechanical jargon which lead to nowhere.
SRS, I think you misunderstood my question. What purpose does it serve for a 'higher being' to test our morality? Why do we have to go through this cycle? As for the driving force, there are numerous debates on the involvement of 'God' in evolution. One such is this (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132-1,00.html)


It has been scientifically demonstrated that plants do indeed respond to emotions, in ways other than can be characterized entirely as "mechanical."
SRS, do you believe that bacteria and plant are aware of the 'self'? Do you believe that they are also a part of the cycle of Karma?

[SRS]

SRS, I think you misunderstood my question. What purpose does it serve for a 'higher being' to test our morality?

I am not sure that the "higher being" created the universe merely to test our morality.



Why do we have to go through this cycle?

Energy is always transformed in cycles.




SRS, do you believe that bacteria and plant are aware of the 'self'? Do you believe that they are also a part of the cycle of Karma?

Of course. The Universe is interconnected, and "living" beings on the planet even more so. That is why I take issue with the idea of a purely mechanistic Universe. None would argue that in terms of development, the human consciousness is well beyond that of any other species. However, do you percieve the interaction of these millions of different species to be purely mechanical? Does the affection a dog feels for its master, for example, based purely on instinct? Does the dog really lick the face of the master only because the dog thinks that without the master, the dog will starve to death, forgotten, in some alley? Now, that is only one interaction. Plants - the interaction here is somewhat more complex. It has been demonstrated that plants are more likely to flower favourably if, besides the bare essentials, the emotions of the owner toward the plant do not border on the hostile. It is true that the first order of buisness of any species is survival. The day to day to life will generally revolve around assuring this survival. However, I ask you, is this all you do? Do you spend 24 hours assuring your survival? Again, despite the simplicity of the example, we are moving away from the idea of a purely mechanical (in effect, atheist) universe. Despite the fact that you may be the product of millions of random mutations, your existence is not in fact so random. So I ask you, where does this structure, this order, come from? One answer will be, that it is partly due to karma.

[SRS]

One of the first to research the concept was the Indian scientist Sir Jagdish Chandra Bose, who began to conduct experiments on plants in the year 1900. He found that every plant and every part of a plant appeared to have a sensitive nervous system and responded to shock by a spasm just as an animal muscle does. One visitor to his laboratory, the vegetarian playwright George Bernard Shaw, was intensely disturbed upon witnessing a demonstration in which a cabbage had violent convulsions as it boiled to death. Bose found that the effect of manures, drugs, and poisons could be determined within minutes, providing plant control with a new precision. In addition, Bose found that plants grew more quickly amidst pleasant music and more slowly amidst loud noise or harsh sounds. He also claimed that plants can "feel pain, understand affection etc.," from the analysis of the nature of variation of the cell membrane potential of plants, under different circumstances. According to him, a plant treated with care and affection gives out a different vibration compared to a plant subjected to torture. In conclusion, he said: "Do not these records tell us of some property of matter common and persistent? That there is no abrupt break, but a uniform and continuous march of law?" [2]

- From Wikepedia

[SRS]

What effect can music possibly have on a inanimate (non-living) object, or objects without a consciousness? If you play music near a rock, the rock will obviously never respond. Therefore, a rock and a plant (the plant responds) are clearly different. What Bose did is take this one step further. He clearly demonstrated that the response of the plant is due to the plant possessing a nervous system. And to demonstrate that the plant has a nervous system he analyzed cell membrane potential and found the required variation.

[kannannn]

SRS, do you believe that bacteria and plant are aware of the 'self'? Do you believe that they are also a part of the cycle of Karma?

Of course. The Universe is interconnected, and "living" beings on the planet even more so. That is why I take issue with the idea of a purely mechanistic Universe. None would argue that in terms of development, the human consciousness is well beyond that of any other species. However, do you percieve the interaction of these millions of different species to be purely mechanical? Does the affection a dog feels for its master, for example, based purely on instinct? Does the dog really lick the face of the master only because the dog thinks that without the master, the dog will starve to death, forgotten, in some alley? Now, that is only one interaction. Plants - the interaction here is somewhat more complex. It has been demonstrated that plants are more likely to flower favourably if, besides the bare essentials, the emotions of the owner toward the plant do not border on the hostile. It is true that the first order of buisness of any species is survival. The day to day to life will generally revolve around assuring this survival. However, I ask you, is this all you do? Do you spend 24 hours assuring your survival? Again, despite the simplicity of the example, we are moving away from the idea of a purely mechanical (in effect, atheist) universe. Despite the fact that you may be the product of millions of random mutations, your existence is not in fact so random. So I ask you, where does this structure, this order, come from? One answer will be, that it is partly due to karma.
Hmm.. It is purely through a freak chance (right distance from the sun, etc..) that conditions on earth were conducive for evolution. But we digress. Let me put things in perspective. Pradheep's answer to the question of Karma first taking effect was this:

Bacteria also has this "I" thought. That "I" thought makes it survive all hard ships. Bacteria is resistant to antibiotics and even tries to live inspite of that hostile environment?. why should it do that, why should it survive. The basis for that impulse , is that "I".
Never mind that neither plants nor bacteria have any nervous systems to be aware of self. If there was a premature death in the first generation of oragnisms that were 'self-aware' :roll: , what karmic history contributed to this?

PS: from the Wiki page:
"In the scientific community as a whole, paranormal biocommunication has been subjected to much criticism, and is largely regarded as a pseudoscience"

From this (http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e28/28.htm) site: "The information system of plants is by far inferior to that of animals. No as effective system as circulation, for example exists for the distribution of molecules and cells. Neither do plants have a nervous system. "

[pradheep]

You say that a soul gets its karma right from the moment it assumes on looking for a parent with thoughts similar to its previous life ...

Dear friend,
All the questions you have asked , let me answer it in a summary.

All living beings are manifestation of the Ego. Ego means "I", the phsycial body and so different from rest of it. it is there from bacteria to human. But the level of Ego is different based on its evolutionary state. When we take a dog out for an evening walk, it will not go and stand before the mirror and check its appearance as a human does. For a human the Ego is much advanced, where it thinks what others will think about himself or herself which dog does not have. Like that the intensity and vairations of Ego are different for different beings. But the common factor of Ego is "I" am the physical body.

please read this article and then get back to me and so it will be easy to discuss.

http://sakthifoundation.org/river-9.htm



Do u mean to say all organisms had the same karma until human species evolved?

Karma is cause and effect. Each organism get different karma. If a bacteria moved to land and evolve then it has a different karma. if it stayed in water then it has different karma.



And pls answer the questions I posed to nemesis as well... what was it.



Why cant u people agree to ..... but still based on his limited knowledge.

If that is so, according to you , you cannot graps the highest. You are what you think you are.

No wonder these theories throw up more questions when applied to modern discoveries like Mr.bacteria. And all the explanations that you offer, trying to encompass science into primitive ideologies sounds adhoc. You just keep piling new new theories make it work.

What i say is simple. What is complicated in it. I am ready to explain, step by step, provided you have the patience and will.


Yeah, bacteria is certainly not goiing to show up here to speak for him/..theory!!

Man has the highest intellect to use anything in this world to fullfill his ego, the pity is that he cant use his own mind to know his Real "Self or nature".


why did we evolve on the earth in the first place? What purpose does Karma serve on final analysis? But survival can be explained in terms of evolution and passing down the best genes to successive generations.

To know who we are. See http://sakthifoundation.org/river-9.htm


The development of consiousness and self-awareness are some of the most important subjects of present research and the answer is not as easy as it seems. But that apart, let us take the mirror test that was used to test if animals are aware of their own self. Only a handful of animals have passed the mirror test. Does that mean animals that are not aware of their selves are not a part of the karma cycle? And where does that leave bacteria? (Do they even have a nervous system to be aware of their self?) And plants?

The animals are aware of themselves otherwise they will not escape dangers. Everything is. will write more after you http://sakthifoundation.org/river-9.htm

[Rohit]

Karma, and responsibility to action starts the moment we think "I".
The moment we think "I" then we become responsible for the actions.

The "I" notion evolves until human and in human birth the way to get rid of "I" notion exists.

I am talking perfect science. Religion and science are seeking the answers for the Truth, one searches out and other the inner.

Bacteria also has this "I" thought. That "I" thought makes it survive all hard ships. Bacteria is resistant to antibiotics and even tries to live inspite of that hostile environment?. why should it do that, why should it survive. The basis for that impulse , is that "I".

Ego means "I", the phsycial body and so different from rest of it.

If this "I" were not the self, the latter would not have been experienced as inward, for it is this "I" that separates the inner from the outer world of objects. It is because this "I" feels itself miserable that one wants to attain Freedom, and if Freedom meant the destruction of this "I", nobody would try for such liberation (perhaps that is why, according to both Pradheep and SRS, bacteria adapt to the harshest of environment and survive :lol: ). Neither is it any consolation to say that, though the "I" is destroyed, consciousness exists; for nobody would try to bring about this state destroying himself, moreover, consciousness cannot exist without this "I", for the nature of consciousness is to manifest objects to this "I" , and when the "I" and the objects do not exist, consciousness also cannot exist, even as the act of cutting cannot exist when the wood-cutter and the axe are absent.

To consider this "I", the knowing subject, experienced to be such through states of consciousness like "I know", to belong to the sphere of the objective world is self-contradictory, like the statement "my mother is barren".

Source:
Chapter 1.1.1 VI
Brahama Sutras: Sri-Bhasya
Advaita Ashrama
5 Dehi Entally Road
Calcutta
700014
This also evidently proves that Pradheep contradicts the above quoted passage from Brahama Sutras - Sri-Bhasya while SRS contradicts Pardheep's views, which in essense contradicts one another and also evidently proves that the sum total of such stastical anomalies indeed nullify one another through such mutually contradictory arguments.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamiz]

Man has the highest intellect to use anything in this world to fullfill his ego, the pity is that he cant use his own mind to know his Real "Self or nature".

How about bacteria?

Are they not egoistic like humans ?

Can they (bacteria) use their own mind to know the Real "self or nature" :?:

[pradheep]

Can they (bacteria) use their own mind to know the Real "self or nature"

Dear Thamizh
If you had my link then you would not have asked this question. Anyway i will answer. Bacteria has Ego , the "I" notion but cannot realize the Self because of poorly developed intellect. Only through intellect one can get move in the direction of realization. But one has to go further. Just with intellect one cannot. It is just the mile stone in the path. Then finally one has to go into selfless service and shed the Ego of "I" through that and only then one realizes the Self. For this one takes many births for purification of the Ego. In humans you will find some are like bacteria parasitic, some symbiotic, some like plants, some like animals, some like insects, few like human, and very rarely divine (self realized).
These are the steps of self realization. So the whole purpose of life is self realization. If some one thinks it is just to live thinking they are just the body , then they die and born again until they shed that thought and ralizing that their real nature is that Brahman, the unlimited.......

[thamizhvaanan]

If that is so, according to you , you cannot graps the highest. You are what you think you are.Your "HIGHEST" is so replete with contradictions that, it looks nonsense to me :) ... thats why I am raising so many questions and ur essay type answers doesn answer them :evil:

ok.. Here i list all of the unanswered questions I have raised so far:


If karma is true, why dont we get rid of all justice systems? everyone is just playing out his karma... no one is really responsible for wat he does.. Are we just plain pawns in the hands of destiny? Everything is just mere cause and effects?


If a whole biosphere is to grow out of these bacteria, is it not reasonable to expect that all will have same karma?


I think thamiz's question still holds good. What justifies the death of a child in the first generation of humans who started to think "I"?

[Shakthiprabha.]

thamiz wrote:


Man has the highest intellect to use anything in this world to fullfill his ego, the pity is that he cant use his own mind to know his Real "Self or nature".


How about bacteria?

Are they not egoistic like humans ?

Can they (bacteria) use their own mind to know the Real "self or nature"

Real self or nature, is SO DIFFICULT to even GRASP, FOR MOST OF US, with EVOLVED ego and highest intellect!

BACTERIA's ego evolution or intellect prescence is understood to be just at its minimal.


If the theory of ego evolution is understood, then the question wont arise at all.

____________________


However pradeep, I have a question...

the so called realised souls, lets say DO THINGS WITH DETACHMENT, like gita's verses, DO UR DUTY dont cry bout WHAT IT BRINGS US.

If they maintain that, I assume, THE KARMA or CAUSE EFFECT THEORY does not affect them!

If thatS the case, why should karma affect LESSER EVOLVED EGO, like bacteria, or other unicellulor organisms or even trees which are not completely EVOLVED in reasoning or senses, to BE RESPONSIBLE for its action?

[thamizhvaanan]

If thatS the case, why should karma affect LESSER EVOLVED EGO, like bacteria, or other unicellulor organisms or even trees which are not in its complete EVOLVED in reasoning or senses, to BE RESPONSIBLE for its action?:thumbsup:

[Shakthiprabha.]

If karma is true, why dont we get rid of all justice systems? everyone is just playing out his karma... no one is really responsible for wat he does.. Are we just plain pawns in the hands of destiny? Everything is just mere cause and effects?

I look at it this way. Not all of us believe IN THEORIES. Its personal view whether or not to believe in DESTINY or KARMA .

Karma is A THEORY OF some religious beliefs only. WORLD IS FULL OF PPL following different theories and religious beliefs or NON-RELIGIOUS athiestic beliefs too :)


Hence, if x commits crime against y, and y is a non-believer of karmic theory, or belongs to anohter religious belief, then LAW or JUSTICE SYSTEMS is easier. Its is something SOCIALLY ACCEPTED.

His mind would be at peace if he relys on something which he BELIEVES BEFORE HIS EYES. Hence justice systems are needed.



If a whole biosphere is to grow out of these bacteria, is it not reasonable to expect that all will have same karma?

It is a probability of intereaction, place, time, movement between them.

if species

x and x intereacts... diff result
x and y
x and z
x , y and z combination...

where, when, how, speed, movement etc factors too determine.


hence multiple karma would be formed, as per the impact of action... diff reactions and hence karma would result.

:roll: :?

[thamizhvaanan]

SP, the reason why I raised the first question is that, "If karma is such a scientific theory, and capable of being accepted as a universal law, why do we have to go for judiciary system" ... just to show that it cannot be proven beyond doubt.

According to karma, if a bad thing is happening to one person, it is his destiny.. it is for his past deeds. Why should we punish the criminal then.. he is just executing the karma .. giving the person wat he deserves.

All these discussions assuming we have several births, to which i shall come to later.


hence multiple karma would be formed, as per the impact of action... diff reactions and hence karma would result. may be yes, but I would repeat ur question... Is mr.bacteria accountable? Coz the instinct is the same .. only the surroundings and situations changes over which the organism has no control. SO how fair is it to blame/reward mr.bacteria.

[pavalamani pragasam]

Is there an element of escapism here? :roll:

[Shakthiprabha.]

hence multiple karma would be formed, as per the impact of action... diff reactions and hence karma would result. may be yes, but I would repeat ur question... Is mr.bacteria accountable? Coz the instinct is the same .. only the surroundings and situations changes over which the organism has no control. SO how fair is it to blame/reward mr.bacteria.

yes, Thats my question too, posted previously..

:?

[Shakthiprabha.]

Is there an element of escapism here? :roll:

pp maam the whole cause and effect theory is so strong that THERE IS NO ESCAPSIM AT ALL.

eVERY action has equal opposite reaction!

Its just that, WE WONT get to see, the cause and its effect at the same point of period :?

[thamizhvaanan]

Is there an element of escapism here? :roll: Yes PP madam... Karmic law is a law for escapism. It blames the current condition of a person on his past deeds rather than pointing to the society or his current deeds that is responsible.

If karma is true, everybody is getting wat he deserves. Even the child brutalized to death deserves it for something it commited in its past life. The mentally ill, the diseased, the surpressed people deserve their current status for what they did in previous life. So is a slave beaten to death.

We can see where this leads to .. a person born as slave deserves his social status. I DONT want to indulge in caste discussion here ... but karmic system is a perfect excuse to endorse birth-wise social status.

[Shakthiprabha.]

Is there an element of escapism here? :roll: Yes PP madam... Karmic law is a law for escapism. It blames the current condition of a person on his past deeds rather than pointing to the society or his current deeds that is responsible.

If karma is true, everybody is getting wat he deserves. Even the child brutalized to death deserves it for something it commited in its past life. The mentally ill, the diseased, the surpressed people deserve their current status for what they did in previous life. So is a slave beaten to death.

We can see where this leads to .. a person born as slave deserves his social status. I DONT want to indulge in caste discussion here ... but karmic system is a perfect excuse to endorse birth-wise social status.

If its not his desires, then what is it which differentiates a happy person and situationally a sad person tv?\

JUST CHANCE?

chance that I am born this way?
and you are born that way?
and someone else other way?

Its just permutation and combination of CHANCE, which differentiates, every individual's

action,
surroundings,
reaction,
result,
plight,
thinking,
attitude,
views

etc?

[thamizhvaanan]

Chance rules only to a certain extent. We cannot deny that we as a society, along with the respective individual, are morally repsonsible for the current state of any individual. There has to be some accountability SP, not an accountability that jumps across imaginary birhts and life's, not an accountability that seeks excuses in past life, not that points to something which can never be proven.

Our present life is here .. we construct it. If there is an obstruction from the society, well... it is to be blamed or corrected.



Its just permutation and combination of CHANCE, which differentiates, every individual's

You HOPE that it is not by chance. Or else things wont even out. Karma as a hypothesis explains why bad things happen to gud ppl and gud things happen to bad ppl. Thats why we all want to beleive in it.

But the hypothesis that karma exists bcoz universe is balanced is inherently flawed. Since bad things also happen to bad people and good things also happen to good people, one might well suppose that there is no rhyme or reason why anything happens to anybody. Lemme quote spinoza here ... that completes my current arguement :D


". . . . good and evil fortunes fall to the lot of pious and impious alike . . . ."

[Shakthiprabha.]

I aint talking about why bad things happen to good or vice versa tv.

OFCOURSE accountability and responsibility SHOULD be there as a social accepted system. ELSE, IT PAVES easier for ppl to elude away from their deeds.

Law and justice IS NEEDED only for man, CAUSE, WE REASON...

WHY THINGS happen.

Its not needed till animal evolution, WHEN REASONING does not happen.

LETS keep aside, that LAW and JUSTICE which man made, because ITS NEEDED, as a social being and WE ALL KNOW or ACCEPT IT.

nobody WHO BELIEVES in cause effect theory TALK THAT WE DONT WANT LAW OR JUSTICE or say WE ARE NOT ACCOUNTABLE or responsible for deeds

__

This is beyond WHY GOOD THINGS and WHY BAD things happen to good or bad ppl either way.


__

Except cause effect theory IS THERE any other theory or proof WHICH explains... not EXTERNAL events on any life, BUT THEIR BEHAVIOUR as such...?

( we are not talking good or bad befalling them, lets assume probabilty is equal for good or bad to fall upon anybody)...

X and Y born to same parents, RAISED under same roof, surroundings......


THINK DIFFERENTLY?

BEHAVE differently?

VIEW or PERCEIVE differently?

ACT differently?

[thamizhvaanan]

Except cause effect theory IS THERE any theory or proof WHICH explains... not EXTERNAL events on them(like good or bad)... BUT THEIR BEHAVIOUR as such... You answered it SP .. its random. There is no other reason to suppose that there has to be a past life which influences an unborn baby's behaviour.

Proof is simple ... randomness is what we observe .. But inorder to beleive the past life theory, existence of past life has to be proved. We cant base our beleif on unproven ideologies.

[thamizhvaanan]

This is beyond WHY GOOD THINGS and WHY BAD things happen to good or bad ppl either way.
The reason i kept on going back to good things and bad things theory is that beleif in balanced universe is the only reason why anyone would beleive in a theory like karma.

Just to substantiate diversity of characters and behaviour we need not bring in a complicated theory like karma. As we have been seeing it is leading to more questions than answers.

[Hulkster]

Another thing to state is that what happens to us is usually decided by our actions in the prelude of what has happened...if we all watch our actions we can prevent the bad things and receive the good things...although there are instances where we are totally helpless...like drunk car driver just swerving onto the road to hit a stationary bench where i am seated on. Like TV said...karma is a hypothesis and thats where it stays as...thesis rather than fact...it is more appropriate to describe it as human's possible explanations of why good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people rather than focussing on the reality of the world. :D

[pavalamani pragasam]

There is a concept called Providence which speaks about a pre-programmed scheme of things unfurling as life rolls on witnessing both good & bad happenings which however have a MEANING which each individual comes to understand sooner or later or never!

The attractive feature about Providence is it is essentially BENEFICIAL to everybody in the long run! Haven't we heard about the wise axiom- 'nadappathellaam nanmaikke'?

The best story told to explain this is the story of a king & his minister who has the habit of uttering this mantra,'nadappathellaam nanmaikke' after each & every incident.

When the king cuts off his finger accidentally while slicing a fruit the minister chants his usual mantra. The enraged king immediately shuts him in the prison which decision also is received with the utterance of the same mantra.

The king sets off on a hunting spree & gets lost in the woods. He is captured by a cannibal tribe who wanting to offer him as a gift at the altar find in the last minute he has one finger missing hence not a perfect gift to offer to their deity. To his immense relief he is let off & comes panting back to his palace & tells his minister about how his mantra uttered at his cutting the finger had been proved right.

The king is sorry for putting him in the prison. The minister calmly points out that if he were not in the prison he would have accompanied the king & eventually captured by the tribals & offered on the altar in the king's stead having no maimed finger or any other defect!

It needs great courage to accept life as it comes with equanimity! All world is a stage in the bard's words & we play out our role which is planned in coherence & compassion. A healthy philosophy of life altogether. :D

[Hulkster]

Well as for characters..there is really a formula to see how it comes.

Base character - Mannerisms derived from either the father or the mother side or a mixture of both

+

Surrounding influences - This may be influences from a incident,personality,home anything or anybody that can cause a human being to change his characteristics

=

Character of human being :D

[Shakthiprabha.]

TV,

Why then ppl with particular energy field, happen to attract similar energy fields only?

example, a balanced person is more composed, and dont do any RANDOM action to Bring himself in problems.

AN imbalnced person, IS CHAOTIC, and would do ANY random action, can even lose his compose of mind

if everything is so random, WHY DO PREDICTED individuals BEHAVE THE SAME WAY, till they die AND DONT ACT RANDOM or different?

SP, tomm can act random, and think like scientist or murder someone.

TV, can tommorrow, act think random and steal something or start believing in god

xyz, who is behind the bar now, CAN THINK OR ACT random, and tommorrow become a composed saint who believes in SOME RELIGIOUS THEOLOGY?

why does not these happen?

RANDOM is JUST RANDOM, which can happen to anyone anywhere at anytime, IF YES, why a single person remains AS EXPECTED?

[thamizhvaanan]

PP madam :D

[Rohit]

[tscii:2a2de89255]
Real self or nature, is SO DIFFICULT to even GRASP, FOR MOST OF US, with EVOLVED ego and highest intellect.

If thatS the case, why should karma affect LESSER EVOLVED EGO, like bacteria, or other unicellulor organisms or even trees which are not completely EVOLVED in reasoning or senses, to BE RESPONSIBLE for its action?
Whether it is a single cell bacteria or any human being with any dispositional belief, they all experience whatever they do within the inescapable empirical reality. There is no other way, non-whatsoever. Whether they like it or not, admit it or not, they all are empirical realists and remain as such; and their notion of "I" does not and cannot go away, but simply changes its state into different perspectives without being able to escape the inescapable process of cause and effect.

On the contrary, matter/energy i.e. E=mc^s and E =hf have no Ego i.e they are NOT Ego => /Ego, but when it transforms into various life forms, both Ego and /Ego states evolve with varying degrees; and yet these both states remain within empirical reality.

Nonetheless, one’s final ability to understand and grasp the true nature of Ultimate Truth, the only Transcendent Reality rests upon one’s ability to grasp the true meaning of Transcendence i.e. "Beyond Any Possible Experiences"; and one can only realise that intellectually without becoming pray to any belief system.

Therefore; whether one likes it or not; admits it or not, it is all down to individuals, and how far one is prepared to go before one can truly realise that Ultimate Truth and/or Ultimate Reality.

:D :) :thumbsup:[/tscii:2a2de89255]

[thamizhvaanan]

start believing in god
:shock: I do beleive in god ... :roll:

[Hulkster]

X and Y born to same parents, RAISED under same roof, surroundings......


THINK DIFFERENTLY?

BEHAVE differently?

VIEW or PERCEIVE differently?

ACT differently?

SP akka one thing we have to understand is that the human character will keep on adapting and changing till the end and that means even if they are brought up together and in the same way..a influence from a personality or incident can simply change their behaviour.

If you mean their base character...not all children are born with the exact amount of cells and genes from their parents (exceptional case = siamese twins)...this may constitute the difference in their views and behaviour. It is best to analyse such instances using factual thinking rather than coming up with theories or waiting for them as it complicates even further :D

[Shakthiprabha.]

Base character - Mannerisms derived from either the father or the mother side or a mixture of both

+

Surrounding influences - This may be influences from a incident,personality,home anything or anybody that can cause a human being to change his characteristics

=

Character of human being :D

CHARACTER also builds on THINKING and PERSPECTIVE differences of the same situation.

Given same gene, and surroundings, NOBODY thinks or perceives THE SAME WAY. (even identical twins differs )

they differ. THAT MAY BE BECAUse IT IS random. LIKE tv said.

However, I still ask tv, WHY NOT THE SAME RANDOM probability exist in a larger span of life in anyone's behaviour.

[Hulkster]

TV,

Why then ppl with particular energy field, happen to attract similar energy fields only?

example, a balanced person is more composed, and dont do any RANDOM action to Bring himself in problems.

AN imbalnced person, IS CHAOTIC, and would do ANY random action, can even lose his compose of mind

if everything is so random, WHY DO PREDICTED individuals BEHAVE THE SAME WAY, till they die AND DONT ACT RANDOM or different?

SP, tomm can act random, and think like scientist or murder someone.

TV, can tommorrow, act think random and steal something or start believing in god

xyz, who is behind the bar now, CAN THINK OR ACT random, and tommorrow become a composed saint who believes in SOME RELIGIOUS THEOLOGY?

why does not these happen?

RANDOM is JUST RANDOM, which can happen to anyone anywhere at anytime, IF YES, why a single person remains AS EXPECTED?

Akka think like this way..its not really random...it depends on what we want to think...and this gives way to the actions we want to take...as i said no human being is limited to a permanent state of mindset...it is able to change with anything or anybody it comes across....in other words every moment..even if it is in solitary mode...still can spark a change in your mindset...those who are very deterministic and have a strong preference to stick to their character may avoid any influences and still remain the same...its a mix of what you want to think and whether your character accepts the thinking :D

[thamizhvaanan]

Why then ppl with particular energy field, happen to attract similar energy fields only?

idhu endha ooru science? :irked:

SP .. enna solla vareenga :huh: u asked how come twins have different behaviour and character... I their behaviour is random ... it doesn mean that they act randomly :banghead:

When I say random.. I am saying that the way a child reacts to it surroundings, the way it observes/absorbs characters differs randomly. While I find it unreasonable to ascribe its character to a past life, I dont mean that ppl behave randomly. It is still an evolution, a growth of an individual into a social being. Only the seed is random ... in the sense, it neednot follow a pattern.

And regarding predictions and stuff ... I dont buy that :irked: I will refute that later... now bored :( :lol2:

[thamizhvaanan]

We always tend to ascribe a pattern to behaviour of ppl ... but when we find that it is too much digressing from any kinda pattern, we tend to attribute it to invisible/incomprehensible pattern. I guess past life theory is also one and thats why you would like to beleive in it.

[Hulkster]

CHARACTER also builds on THINKING and PERSPECTIVE differences of the same situation.

Given same gene, and surroundings, NOBODY thinks or perceives THE SAME WAY. (even identical twins differs )

they differ. THAT MAY BE BECAUse IT IS random. LIKE tv said.

However, I still ask tv, WHY NOT THE SAME RANDOM probability exist in a larger span of life in anyone's behaviour.

Akka you misread my post....what you have mentioned is what i mentioned earlier...first of all we have a base character which comes from our genes..this does not necessarily mean we will be the same throughout our life...every moment that this individual will encounter till the end of the person's life can mould the character to a another one.....it is based on our acceptance.

TV :frightened: how can a human thinking different for the same situation be something that might be random? there are cases of individuals thinking alike given the same situation...it all depends on how their mindset is built upon their growth in this world.

[Hulkster]

Twins act differently despite being all in the same roof...SP akka...your trying to analyse from their probable composition rather than analysing from a real-time composition..real-time meaning despite being twins..their thinking,behaviour,characteristics will change according to how inspired they are by the influences they come across every moment.

Unless we have two human beings who have encountered same situations,same life-scope,same parents,same style of upbringing...then we can judge how different their behaviour is...:D

[Shakthiprabha.]

Why then ppl with particular energy field, happen to attract similar energy fields only?

idhu endha ooru science? :irked:

Lets leave that science, I dont know science, and I think I used wrong words :oops: THOUGH I KNOW what I meant :irked: :roll:




SP ... If their behaviour is random ... it doesn mean that they act randomly :banghead:


When I say random.. I am saying that the way a child reacts to it surroundings, the way it observes/absorbs characters differs randomly. While I find it unreasonable to ascribe its character to a past life, I dont mean that ppl behave randomly. It is still an evolution, a growth of an individual into a social being. Only the seed is random ... in the sense, it neednot follow a pattern.

A clarification now.

Observation, conclusion, obsorption, and grasping etc which happens at subtler, say mind level are at random, NOT THE ACTION performed by the body. Is that what u are saying?

U are differentiating ACTION as something we do physically alone, as a result of SOMETHING we which we perform at random at mind level?

So can we say, PHYSICAL actions are all DEFINTELY, FOLLOWING pattern given the same RANDOM situation at mind level?


now hulk says...


..Akka think like this way..its not really random...it depends on what we want to think...

So, its not really random?

It depends on MINDSET?

and WE DECIDE what we wanna think?

when we can decide, we also become accountable? is it not?

or the result of our decisions... is just random too.?

one DECIDES to commit crime, AND escapes off... never gets caught in his life time.

So CAN WE SAY, randomly that he was not be punished? Since wrold is NOT PERFECT.! right?

____________

P.S:

I aint a science student, lets all agree to understand me, as inllectually very dull a person, who expects PATIENCE, from every body for my zero understanding of science, other general theories and some terms here. :cry3:


Now, PLEASE go ahead and explain me to clear my doubts :( :idea:

[Hulkster]

Yeaps what we decide is what we think..and yes we are accountable for what we decide..its interlinked you see. If he does not get punished it is a mixture of the decisions of the concerned individual including him...if the other individuals made the correct decisions he would have got caught..if not he would escape..;D

[Shakthiprabha.]

Yeaps what we decide is what we think..and yes we are accountable for what we decide..its interlinked you see. If he does not get punished it is a mixture of the decisions of the concerned individual including him...if the other individuals made the correct decisions he would have got caught..if not he would escape..;D

IF we are accountable for what we decide......

but alas... mixture of WRONG decisions of individuals around him, MADE HIM ESCAPE...

he escapes too, NEVER to pay for what he did. (till he died)

then, according to u, when does he become accoutable? Where? how?

[Shakthiprabha.]

That's circular argument and doesn't prove anything.

Exactly!

There are countless streams of dependent, independent, interdependent events occuring in nature and around us. Such events occur in series, in parallel or both. Such events occur randomly, pseudo-randomly or systematically or in a combination of the three. Such events can be caused either by conscious entities or by unconscious entities or a combination of both. Finally, such events can occur under the influence of any combination of these factors; and therefore, can be attributed to these factors. Based on the number of factors (though I have listed only 10, there can be more), there are 1023 ways in which an event can occur; and the probability of predicting the occurrence of a specific event and also identifying the precise combination of these factors is less than 0.1%. As one can see; as the number of factors involved reduces, the probability of predicting the correct outcome increases; and when there is only one factor, the probability of predicting the correct outcome becomes 100%.

Karma involves conscious actions, but it is not the only factor that decides the final outcome of an event as there are many other factors that also play crucial part in deciding the final outcome.

Therefore, any prediction based on just one's own karma can carry only a very tiny probability of 0.1% of it ever being correct while the probability of it being false is more than 99.9%.

:D :) :thumbsup:

okei rohit,

Karma, assuming, may be responsible for 0.1 PERCENT to cause an event.

nothing is in a complete circle, all are probabilities... then... all are RANDOM...

can we say IMPERFECTION, AND IMBALANCE AND RANDOMNESS is the nature of nature (absolute truth) ?

AM I right, when I say Randomness means has no logic or rational action as a part of it?

then ...

Is not random theory the MOST illogical and IRRATIONAL theory where REASONING has NO PLAY AT ALL?

:? :? :?

[Shakthiprabha.]

If thatS the case, why should karma affect LESSER EVOLVED EGO, like bacteria, or other unicellulor organisms or even trees which are not completely EVOLVED in reasoning or senses, to BE RESPONSIBLE for its action?

I am also waiting for PRADEEP's answer for this question. :?

[thamizhvaanan]

he escapes too, NEVER to pay for what he did. (till he died)

then, according to u, when does he become accoutable? Where? how?
But the hypothesis that karma exists bcoz universe is balanced is inherently flawed. Since bad things also happen to bad people and good things also happen to good people, one might well suppose that there is no rhyme or reason why anything happens to anybody.In simple words... there is no proof that life in this world is a fair deal. :D

[Shakthiprabha.]

he escapes too, NEVER to pay for what he did. (till he died)

then, according to u, when does he become accoutable? Where? how?
But the hypothesis that karma exists bcoz universe is balanced is inherently flawed. Since bad things also happen to bad people and good things also happen to good people, one might well suppose that there is no rhyme or reason why anything happens to anybody.In simple words... there is no proof that life in this world is a fair deal. :D

Fine let us conclude now...as per our understanding...

so, nothing is FAIR.. and.... universe is IMBALANCED.

Can I ask u further questions tv :? :oops:

(I am known for asking questions only... NEVER ANSWERING :lol: )

u said U BELIEVE in GOD.

What is ur understanding of the TERM GOD?

[thamizhvaanan]

I aint a science student, lets all agree to understand me, as inllectually very dull a person, who expects PATIENCE, from every body for my zero understanding of science, other general theories and some terms here.sarcasm or being modest :shaking:

[pavalamani pragasam]

Life is a zigsaw puzzle. Not all succeed in assembling it- get to see the full picture ie the explanation for the scheme of things! The whys & hows. The dawning should be a convincing, comforting experience! Some are lucky to experience it!!! And had the wisdom to tell us:

"Ethu nadanthathO athu nanRaagavE nadanthathu."

[Shakthiprabha.]

I aint a science student, lets all agree to understand me, as inllectually very dull a person, who expects PATIENCE, from every body for my zero understanding of science, other general theories and some terms here.sarcasm or being modest :shaking:

NO! :oops:

I really am not a science student, SOME basic terms, SLIP MY MIND :?

a small portion of SARCASM is there too. I dont deny :P :oops:

[thamizhvaanan]

What is ur understanding of the TERM GOD?pretty long answer SP :oops: And not the appropriate thread also.

Of all the people, I guess u wud know the difficulty in coming up with short replies :wink:

[thamizhvaanan]

nothing is FAIR.. and.... universe is IMBALANCEDI meant it is not the case always. Eitherway, would you challenge that notion and prove that Universe is balanced?

[Shakthiprabha.]

What is ur understanding of the TERM GOD?pretty long answer SP :oops: And not the appropriate thread also.


I dont know tv, I MAY BE WRONG... but, according to me,
all theories HAS ANSWERS when u look at in totality (NOT in its finite view), else it may seem ABSURD OR IRRATIONAL.

karma, if exists, or if it does not exist too, may be linked with WHAT IS GOD (not the generic term here) or the understanding of

lot of terms like

GOD,
CONSCIOUSNESS
MATTER
ENERGY
AWARENESS
NOTHINGNESS
DEATH

Then too many reasoning is LINKED with our acceptance of OTHER TERMS.

hmm...

:?

my contribution of CONFUSION is over :lol:

As one of my friend rightly pointed out, AGNOSTICS are most irritating ppl on earth :oops: ... WHO BUT CONFUSE everyone :lol:


Of all the people, I guess u wud know the difficulty in coming up with short replies :wink:

:sigh2: :yes: :D :)

[Rohit]

[tscii:2d5e07521d]


That's circular argument and doesn't prove anything.

Exactly!

There are countless streams of dependent, independent, interdependent events occuring in nature and around us. Such events occur in series, in parallel or both. Such events occur randomly, pseudo-randomly or systematically or in a combination of the three. Such events can be caused either by conscious entities or by unconscious entities or a combination of both. Finally, such events can occur under the influence of any combination of these factors; and therefore, can be attributed to these factors. Based on the number of factors (though I have listed only 10, there can be more), there are 1023 ways in which an event can occur; and the probability of predicting the occurrence of a specific event and also identifying the precise combination of these factors is less than 0.1%. As one can see; as the number of factors involved reduces, the probability of predicting the correct outcome increases; and when there is only one factor, the probability of predicting the correct outcome becomes 100%.

Karma involves conscious actions, but it is not the only factor that decides the final outcome of an event as there are many other factors that also play crucial part in deciding the final outcome.

Therefore, any prediction based on just one's own karma can carry only a very tiny probability of 0.1% of it ever being correct while the probability of it being false is more than 99.9%.

:D :) :thumbsup:

okei rohit,

Karma, assuming, may be responsible for 0.1 PERCENT to cause an event.

nothing is in a complete circle, all are probabilities... then... all are RANDOM...

can we say IMPERFECTION, AND IMBALANCE AND RANDOMNESS is the nature of nature (absolute truth) ?

AM I right, when I say Randomness means has no logic or rational action as a part of it?

then ...

Is not random theory the MOST illogical and IRRATIONAL theory where REASONING has NO PLAY AT ALL?

:? :? :?
No SP; that is not what it means. What it means is that every action (cause) that is capable of producing reaction(s) (effects) is not necessarily the single independent factor to cause a specific event; there are many other factors that influence the entire sequence of events causing one to act, or rather react, in a certain way. On the other hand, the one who acts is merely responding to the situations he/she didn't expect and/or create.

For example, you wouldn’t respond to my post that I have not posted yet, but you may respond to one, only after I have posted one, as you just did. Similarly, I wouldn’t, or rather couldn’t respond to those un-posted posts, until they are posted and I have read them. Likewise, I wouldn’t be writing this post, with these specific contents; had you chosen not to respond to my post.

Moreover, my previous post (rather contents of it) was nothing but a random event for all of you, as no one could predict the time and contents of my post until I have posted it. Similarly anyone else’s post is a random event for me, as I cannot predict who is going to post next and with what contents.

So, one’s action (read it as karma), in its entirety, is nothing more than a random event for others even when it is not entirely a random event for the one who acts, but the one who acts is at the mercy of many other random events, which may well be an action or actions of others, or may well be other natural causes or a combination of all, which are beyond the power and/or control of the one who acts when he/she faces the unexpected situation.

Despite all these randomness, we all know what is being discussed here, but that condition remains true only until someone suddenly comes and throws a red herring or posts fallacies. The prediction of that event and understanding that as such is nothing but logic or reason. :)

Such randomness, which become more and more predictable as we learn more about characterising them and also learn the laws that govern them (number of factors and the way they behave), is the true nature of this empirical reality.

I hope this is clear enough to clarify your query.

:D :) :thumbsup: [/tscii:2d5e07521d]

[thamiz]

Can they (bacteria) use their own mind to know the Real "self or nature"

Dear Thamizh
If you had my link then you would not have asked this question. Anyway i will answer. Bacteria has Ego , the "I" notion but cannot realize the Self because of poorly developed intellect.

You are theorizing with absolutely no results or evidences. The only fact in your theory is that bacteria is poorly developed.

Saying that bacteria do have "ego" is something outrageous!

You are sure will be seriously condemned by scientists who work with bacteria and made a significant contribution in that field.


In humans you will find some are like bacteria parasitic, some symbiotic, some like plants, some like animals, some like insects, few like human, and very rarely divine (self realized).

Have you seen humans who are born with serious birth defects and with some serious brain damage?

I never have seen them having an "ego" or whatsoever with them.

They hardly know about anything as their brain is not working so well.

Do you ever think about such humans when you are talking about "ego" or "I notion" about humans in general :?:

[Hulkster]

then, according to u, when does he become accoutable? Where? how?

When he makes the wrong decision and the others who are involved make the right decisions..than he can get caught...if you look carefully...the way life revolves and every act that happens every moment is sort of calculated through the actions of everyone/everything involved at that moment :D

[goodsense]

the way life revolves and every act that happens every moment is sort of calculated through the actions of everyone/everything involved at that moment

This is why when we come to examine a particular position of someone reflective of karma, we need to examine the contribution (good or bad) or role played by all to or in that position.

[Hulkster]

Yeah but we cant use karma to judge that...what happens in that moment is decided by human beings..their actions might lead onto repercussion or success depending on how they execute it...its purely decision based..totally real-time...theres no karma whatsoever.

[thamizhvaanan]

the way life revolves and every act that happens every moment is sort of calculated through the actions of everyone/everything involved at that momentThis is why when we come to examine a particular position of someone reflective of karma, we need to examine the contribution (good or bad) or role played by all to or in that position.pls dont confuse both. What Mr.Hulk is trying to say is that, a current event is a result of a sequence of past events, not necessarily related to the our first person.

To make it clear, let us say that 5 ppl including me were involved in a murder. Today I walk to the market and get killed by a drunken driver.

What mr.Hulk says is that my tragic end is a result of both my decision to walk to the market today and also coz of the drunken lunatic deciding to get behind the wheels.

What a karmic philosopher says is that, I get killed coz i participated in a murder some days back. Well he does complicates the theory a bit more to account for the fact that the other 4 culprits are still safe and sound.

According to karmic theory, their net karma (sum of positive and negative deeds) is either positive or the karma is saving its best punishment for their next lives. So they survive now.

As imaginative and well-thought-out the theory might sound, it is beleived to be the correct formula that drives the world.

Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands :roll:

[Hulkster]

TV i am awaiting as well...they are using a theory that cannot be proven using real-time living scopes....rather its a decision made in "after-life"..:exactly:

[pavalamani pragasam]

A convenient philosophy created in goodwill, perhaps!

[thamizhvaanan]

A convenient philosophy created in goodwill, perhaps!PP madam, I have absolutely no qualms with a philosophy. But I want to know wether karma is being offered as a prescriptive philosophy or as a descriptive fact?

In its prescriptive form, I have earlier pointed out the practical deficiencies of karmic philosophies... wherein it serves as an excuse for birthwise discrimination as well as vindicates unfair issues.

In its descriptive form, it is found to be at conflict with existing scientific theories, as can be seen from several questions being raised on how well the law applies universally. Infact much of our discussion has been focussed on challenging the descriptive nature of karmic philosophy.

Now, I want to know on wat grounds is this philosophy upheld and the justification for that. :)

[Shakthiprabha.]

I DO NOT BELIEVE its prescriptive.

I do believe to a great extent, Its descriptive, IF WE TEND to analyse in a totality form rather than just the present condition alone :?

If someone decides something which changes his life, then, ALL AROUND HIM, who contribute to his decision, or DID NOT CONTRIBUTE too, would do such things, so that his karma and their karma would do its mathematical calculations to set their karmic balances right or wrong.

In other words, if a person is convicted of murder, the JUDGE who passes verdict, the murdered, other ppl who contribute indirectly, witnessess etc, have some LINK with other ppl in picture here, where by their cause and effect calculations would readjust itself between all those who are linked, based on the current happening.


but yes, no PROOF :?

I know many of u would laugh your heart out, for this THEORY which has NO PROOF.

Nevertheless, I BELIEVE, in cause and effect theory as of now.

I aint closed, and I am always open to new views.

IF SOMEDAY, with my continued analysis, I find theory is NOT convincing, lemme think bout it later.

as of now, I AM CONVINCED.

[pavalamani pragasam]

Definitely I am against it being held as an excuse for birthwise discrimination as well as for vindicating unfair issues.

In a way like religion & god this is also a matter for moral support for ordinary mortals without sufficient self-confidence, I suppose. Not a very serious part of true life! Not a genuine, compulsory guidance either! The truth is in spite of all our scientific advancement the mindset of the majority of the people is still deeply embedded in old thought patterns. Not bold enough to think differently, independently! People need imaginary 'crutches' to walk! A pity indeed!

[thamizhvaanan]

SP honest reply :clap: (as always :D )

Anyway .. I will reply to u later and also to ur previous question that i absconded :lol2:

:D

[thamizhvaanan]

Definitely I am against it being held as an excuse for birthwise discrimination as well as for vindicating unfair issues.

In a way like religion & god this is also a matter for moral support for ordinary mortals without sufficient self-confidence, I suppose. Not a very serious part of true life! Not a genuine, compulsory guidance either! The truth is in spite of all our scientific advancement the mindset of the majority of the people is still deeply embedded in old thought patterns. Not bold enough to think differently, independently! People need imaginary 'crutches' to walk! A pity indeed!PP madam ... a real example that happened just two days back.

I was coming back from the college by MTC bus. A handicapped person was limping and getting down the bus while another fellow was in a hurry to get into the bus. So he stepped on him or banged him (watever :roll ) .. after getting down the bus the handicapped person started shouting at him for moving so rudely... He was foulmouthing so much that it made every passenger sick :( .

After sometime one person inside the bus commented "adhaan kadavul avarukku correct'a thandana koduthirukaaru" . Wat do u say .. is this an appropriate comment?

We take it for granted that handicapped ppl and dispreviliged ppl have to be humble. If they arent... we blame their misery on their karma. We see a lotta arrogant ppl everyday, but we dont pass comments on them like this. but when a handicapped commits the same, we feel that we have the moral license to accuse them. All based on karma philosophy.

I feel without karma philosophy, our society wudnt have tolerated unjust practices like young widows, casteism etc., Likewise some of the cheap mentality of indian public owes to this beleif. When someone avoids a widow in public functions or considers them as a bad luck, all for no mistake done by the widow, they feel that bcoz of her karma, the widow deserves it.

Well, I got lots to say on the way the karmic philosophy has failed practically to instill discipline in general public.

[Shakthiprabha.]

Its very sad and definitely MOST ANNOYING comment tv :(

Yes, karmic philosophy has given way to lot of indiscipline and passing on the bugs easily.

IF understood well, cause and effect theory is as such sensible theory ....

ONLY PPL MAKE IT wrong. Ignorance and EGO of ppl make it wrong, make them use these wonderful theories TO THEIR self satisfying benefit.

If someone believing something is doing wrong, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THE BELIEF may be wrong. It may be right too.

__

I have a funny story to lighten up this thread (based on cause and effect... which is really laughable here... and THOUGHT PROVOKING too)

A boy was hittng a dog, in a very inhuman way.

The boy's father advised him not to do so,

"adutha piravila athu unnai vanthu adikkum"

boy replies

"unakku theriyathuppa... .athu pona piravilai ennai adichathukku, I AM GIVING BACK"

:rotfl2:

Where is the end, when we look at things this way. It forms a circular argument :)

Lifie is funny, with bundle of unsolved mysteries :D

[SRS]

Never mind that neither plants nor bacteria have any nervous systems to be aware of self.

If plants don't have a nervous system, then why do they respond to soothing music? Now, I am not saying plants have a nervous system in the exact same form as humans, however the fact that they respond to stimuli such as music shows that they have something equivalent to what we would call a "nervous system." Now, of course, if you don't agree that plants respond to soothing music, then discussion is baseless, and a waste of time to continue the discussion further. However, enough research has been conducted into the matter so that I stand by my original assertion.

Dr. T. C. Singh, head of the Botany Department at Annamalia University, India, has conducted research into the effects of music on plants. He discovered not only that constant exposure to classical music caused plants to grow at twice their normal speed, but also went on to find what seemed to be one of the main causes of this accelerated growth. In his experiments, the violin was found to be one of the most life-enhancing instruments of all.

Yet, perhaps the most interesting and significant of all of Dr. Singh's findings was that later generations of the seeds of musically stimulated plants carried on the improved traits of greater size, more leaves, and other characteristics. Music had changed the plants' chromosomes!

faculty.weber.edu/molpin/healthclasses/1110/bookchapters/musicchapter.htm - 117k -

There is another experiment referred to on the webpage, in which the experimenter found that the plants actually wrapped themselves around a speaker!



If there was a premature death in the first generation of oragnisms that were 'self-aware' :roll: , what karmic history contributed to this?

If one looks at the different avataras of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time. Just as important as karmic history is that these different life forms are interconnnected. Each one serves its own purpose, as miniscule an organism as it may seem. Without nitrogen fixing bacteria, there would be no nitrogen cycle possible. The importance of plants needs no justification.


PS: from the Wiki page:
"In the scientific community as a whole, paranormal biocommunication has been subjected to much criticism, and is largely regarded as a pseudoscience"

ESP is also regarded as "pseudoscience" by the scientific community. Do you want to deny that ESP is also false? If every phenomenon could be completely described by science, much of the meaning of existence itself would, as Einstein once pointed out, be rendered meaningless. Luckily, science does not attempt to do that, in itself an impossible task. Science works with what is observable, or else describable in some coherent mathematical form or, in the ideal case, a combination of both. There are times when both approaches fail. For example, what was the source of the singular energy that led to the Big Bang? Science does not attempt to answer such a question, it merely assumes that the singular energy was there to begin with.




From this (http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e28/28.htm) site: "The information system of plants is by far inferior to that of animals. No as effective system as circulation, for example exists for the distribution of molecules and cells. Neither do plants have a nervous system. "

Look at this picture:

http://www.ag.uiuc.edu/~vista/html_pubs/irspsm91/images/membrane.gif

For readers who are not aware, ions are simply electrically charged atoms. It is this fluctuation in ion concentration that is responsible for an impulse. The important point is that the plant cell is able to maintain different concentrations of ions inside and outside of its cell membrane. A fluctuation in ion concentration is what we mean when we say that a plant responds to a stimulus. By measuring these fluctuations, one can indeed conclude that a plant responds to music. In a human brain cell - neuron - impulses are transmitted in a similar manner - via a fluctuation in ion concentration. The process is more complex in humans because there are many more pathways but the idea is essentially the same. What the article refers to as "inferior" is a reference to complexity.

[Rohit]

In a way like religion & god this is also a matter for moral support for ordinary mortals without sufficient self-confidence, I suppose. Not a very serious part of true life! Not a genuine, compulsory guidance either! The truth is in spite of all our scientific advancement the mindset of the majority of the people is still deeply embedded in old thought patterns. Not bold enough to think differently, independently! People need imaginary 'crutches' to walk! A pity indeed!
Well said words, Pavalamani Pragasam! :)

[Rohit]

Nevertheless, I BELIEVE, in cause and effect theory as of now.
The theory of karma adopted in Hinduism is more akin to that developed by Jainism and it is operative only at the metaphysical level of souls/atmas. Also, it will be quite incorrect to treat it quite as the law of cause and effect, for the law of cause and effect, as understood scientifically, is not compatible with the theory of karma of souls/atman as it is currently being discussed here. :)

This is what I posted some posts ago.


The theory of karma was hypothesised and subsequently developed by Ascetics and Sramanas of ancient India and subsequently used by them as a framework to explain the nature and various puzzling aspects of human conditions.

- The Jainas were the pioneers of harmonising the law of karma with the process of redemption.

- The law of karma as conceived and developed by Buddhists greatly differs from the law of karma conceived and developed by the Jainas.

- The law of karma in Buddhism is more reflective of the universal law of cause and effect, applicable to every tangible and intangible thing that exists.

- The law of karma in Jainism is operative at the metaphysical level of souls/atmas, the very existence of which Buddhism had categorically rejected.

- The law of karma is absolutely incompatible with the Advaita Vedanta doctrine.

- The law of karma was adopted in Hinduism and made compatible with the Pseudo-Dvaitic and Dvaitic doctrines.
:D :) :thumbsup:

[goodsense]

TV,

I am not ignoring you. I had that comment in mind for sometime. It's just that I felt that Hulkster gave me the opportunity to bring it out. So I am not sure if I am or not with you guys in the arguments developing and sorry, for now, I am not able to participate further on the topic. :D

[SRS]

What is the advaita concept of liberation?

In the advaita analysis, human life and behavior is explained on the basis of the theory of karma , which sets the cycle of rebirths into motion. All actions, good or bad, create their own karmic residues called vAsanas , which exhibit their results over a period of time. The karma which has already started taking fruit is called prArabdha karma. This is the karma that is responsible for the current birth. The accumulated karma which is yet to take fruit is called sancita karma. As long as the cycle of rebirths continues, more karma will be done in the future, and this is called Agamin karma. Liberation (moksha) is the way out of this endless cycle.

[SRS]

What is the relationship between advaita and buddhism? Is advaita a mere copy of buddhism?

No, advaita is not a mere copy of buddhism. For a few centuries now, advaita has been criticized as being "pracanna bauddham" - buddhism in disguise. This criticism stems mainly from some of the vaishNava schools of vedAnta, but it is misplaced. Firstly, there is no one "buddhism" and for the criticism to be valid, it must be specified which school of buddhism is being referred to. SankarAcArya expends a lot of effort criticizing many of the philosophical positions taken by various schools of buddhism in his commentaries. Among modern academic scholars, advaita vedAnta is most often compared with the madhyamaka and yogAcAra schools of buddhism. This has been inspired mainly by the fact that the mANDUkya kArikAs, written by gauDapAda, Sankara's paramaguru, exhibit a great familiarity with this school of buddhism.

However, if it is held that advaita vedAnta is essentially the same as madhyamaka buddhism, it must be pointed out that such a view stems from a misunderstanding of the important tenets of both advaita vedAnta and madhyamaka buddhism. There are many key details in which advaita differs from the madhyamaka school of buddhism. As for yogAcAra, the points of similarity arise from the fact that both advaita vedAnta and yogAcAra buddhism have a place for yogic practice, as do other schools of Indian philosophy. For further details, consult http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/gaudapada.html.

[SRS]

Firstly, there is no one "buddhism"...

That is what I have maintained over and over again on this forum. The various schools of Buddhism that have been formed since the time of Buddha's death are full of Hindu gods, some more than others. I encourage the readers here to keep that in mind..

[Rohit]

Here goes the TCB again, absolutely :x. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Only for those who are genuinely interested in facts

Advaita Vedanta is nothing but Buddhism in disguise

- GauDapAda is the first historically known author in the Advaita VedAnta tradition.

- GauDapAda is traditionally said to have been the guru of Govinda BhagavatpAda, who was the guru of SankarAcArya.

- GauDapAda composed the GgauDapAdIya kArikAs (GK), which constitute an expository text on the mANDUkya upanishad.

1. The philosophy of Sankaracarya (born about 600 AD), is really just Buddhism in disguise, as explained by Padma Purana (mayavada-asac-chastram pracchanam bauddham ucyate).

2. This can be demonstrated by the chronology of key Mayavadi philosophical explanations, which appear first in Buddhist scriptures and later show up in the philosophy of Sankara and his followers.

3. That Mayavada had stolen the salient features of Sunyavada was not unnoticed by the Buddhists themselves.

4. Buddhism had exercised a profound influence on Sankara's mind to the extent that the tradition opposed to Sankara holds that he is a Buddhist in disguise and his mayavada but crypto-Buddhism.

5. It is well known that Sankara is criticised by his opponents as a "Buddhist in disguise" (pracchanna-bauddha) and his philosophy as mayavada [1] which is but crypto-Buddhism.

6. Among the Vedantins, Bhaskara (750-800) is probably one of the earliest critics against Sankara. He called the Mayavadin "one who depends on the doctrine of the Buddhist" (Buddhamatavalambin), and says that this position has been negated by the author of Brahmasutra.[2] Afterwards, Yamuna (918-1038), Ramanuja (1017-1037), Madhva (1197-1276), Vallabha (1473-1531) and other Vedantins severely criticize the Advaita Vedanta, pointing out that it is in essence nothing but a Buddhist doctrine.[3]

7. Then, in the latter part of the sixteenth century, Vijnanabhiksu of the Samkhya school shows in his Samkhyapravacanabhasya that the mayavada of the Vedantins is of the same standpoint as that of the Vijnanavadin's [4] and criticizes the Vedanta school as a whole. In justifying his criticism, he quotes a verse from the Padmapurana which states that the mayavada is an incorrect theory and is Buddhist doctrine.[5]

8. The Sunyavada philosophy teaches that sunya (void) is an inexpressible and transcendent truth (a concept echoed in Sankara's explanation of Brahman).

Sources:

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/mayavada.htm

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2004/05/02/stories/2004050200170400.htm

http://www.nagarjunainstitute.com/buddhisthim/backissues/vol11/v11sankara.htm
.
.
.

:) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

If the TCBs do not have the capicity to garsp what has been said; no one else but they themselves are the culprits.


The traditional philosophical schools in India had have been classified under two, mutually exclusive headings, which are (1) Astika (Which literally means: Theist) and (2) Nastika (Which literally means: Atheist)

The Nastika (Atheist) schools are those which explicitly reject the authority of the Vedas; and they are:

1. Lokayata or Carvaka (Materialists)
2. Bauddha (Including a Number of Schools of Buddhism)
3. Jaina or Syadvada (Jainism, Including Digambara And Svetambara Groups)

The Astika (Theist) schools are those which accept the authority of the Vedas; and they are:

1. Nyaya
2. Vaiseshika
3. Yoga
4. Samkhya
5. Purva Mimamsa
6. Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta)

Reference Source:

http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ind-phil.html


The prominence to karma is due to Buddhism. Buddhist lay a great emphasis on past deeds. Adi Shankara brought this into hinduism.
Though, it is the Jainas who first harmonise the law of Karma with the process of redemption; nonetheless, the above statement is a creditable confirmation of one of the many facts regarding Buddhism.

The law of karma as conceived by the Buddhists, differs greatly from the law of karma conceived by the Jainas. The law of karma in Buddhism is more reflective of the universal law of cause and effect, applicable to every tangible and intangible thing that exists. While the law of karma in Jainism is operative at the metaphysical level of souls/atmas, the very existence of which Buddhism categorically rejects.

The law of karma, or more precisely the law of cause and effect, is absolutely inescapable by anything that exists; and either way, it is utterly incompatible with the Advaitic Monism. Therefore, one can clearly see the sheerness of imbecility committed by the Advaitins.

However, many elements of the Jaina's law of karma can be made compatible with the Dvaitic doctrines.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

If one looks at the different avatars of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time.

I tell people there is No lakshmi shiva vishnu sitting up in heaven.

It looks as though I am an atheist. I dent existence of Lakshmi as a lady sitting in a lotus and showering gold coins.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

The only conclusion that can be drawn without any reasonable doubt is; ignorance of the TCBs is eternal, omnipresent and immortal. It ceaselessly appears everywhere, recapitulating all its various aspects.

For example:

In the Caitanya-caritamrta of Krishna-dasa Kaviraja, the following verse (Madhya 20.263-264) summarises the principles of incarnation:

srsti-hetu yei murti prapance avatare
sei isvara-murti 'avatatra' nama dhare |

mayatita paravyome sabara avasthana
visve avataidhre 'avatra' nama ||

"The avatara or incarnation of Godhead, descends from the Kingdom of God"

Lord Krishna is the Primeval Lord, the fountain head of all avatara.

Lord Buddha is also the incarnation of Krishna who appeared when materialism was rampant and materialists were using the pretext of the authority of the Vedas. Lord Buddha came to stop all this nonsense - Ch.4 text 7

Lord Krishna is accepted as the Supreme Person of Godhead not only by himself but also by the authorities like Narada, Asita, Devala, and Vyasadev.

Out of the five basic subject matters in Bhagavad-Gita, it is established that Krishna, the supreme godhead, the supreme controller is the greatest of all.

"I" am the father of this universe, the mother, the supporter and the grandsire. "I" am the object of knowledge, the purifier and the syllable om. "I" am also the Rg, the Sama and the Yajur Vedas. - Ch.9 text 17

"I" am the only enjoyer and master of all sacrifices. Therefore, those who do not recognise my true nature, fall down. - Ch.9 text 24

To those who are constantly devoted to serving me with love, "I" give the undersanding by which they can come to me. - Ch.10 text 10.

To show them special mercy, "I" dwell in their hearts, destroy with the shining lamp of knowledge the darkness born of ignorance. - Ch.10 text 11

Source:
Bhagavad-Gita as it is - By A.C. Bhaktivedanta Sami Prabhupada

:D :) :thumbsup:

[kannannn]

If plants don't have a nervous system, then why do they respond to soothing music? Now, I am not saying plants have a nervous system in the exact same form as humans, however the fact that they respond to stimuli such as music shows that they have something equivalent to what we would call a "nervous system." Now, of course, if you don't agree that plants respond to soothing music, then discussion is baseless, and a waste of time to continue the discussion further. However, enough research has been conducted into the matter so that I stand by my original assertion.
Whatever research has been done doesn't prove anything. I'm trying to get the 'Mythbusters' link that dealt with the issue. Let me see if there is any luck. If plants do have emotions, is it right for us to be even vegetarians?

If one looks at the different avataras of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time.
Oh! We have had discussions on this in the thread on Vishnu's avatars. There is no such evolutionary pattern.


Just as important as karmic history is that these different life forms are interconnnected. Each one serves its own purpose, as miniscule an organism as it may seem. Without nitrogen fixing bacteria, there would be no nitrogen cycle possible. The importance of plants needs no justification.
I am not denying the importance of organisms in our life cycle. But the question is, are they aware of their self? Do they have 'ego'?

Science works with what is observable, or else describable in some coherent mathematical form or, in the ideal case, a combination of both. There are times when both approaches fail. For example, what was the source of the singular energy that led to the Big Bang? Science does not attempt to answer such a question, it merely assumes that the singular energy was there to begin with.
That's the beauty of our universe. All such mysteries awe us push us harder to find answers. In Dawkin's words, "My mind is open to the most wonderful range of future possibilities, which I cannot even dream about, nor can you, nor can anybody else. What I am skeptical about is the idea that whatever wonderful revelation does come in the science of the future, it will turn out to be one of the particular historical religions that people happen to have dreamed up. ..I don't see the Olympian gods or Jesus coming down and dying on the Cross as worthy of that grandeur. They strike me as parochial. If there is a God, it's going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.

[Rohit]

If one looks at the different avataras of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time.
When poor "Godhead" itself is stuck in the never-ending cycle of births and deaths with an "I" ego, it incontrovertibly proves that that poor "Godhead" must be failing miserably to realise the Ultimate Truth and attain Nirvana as taught by Buddha.

Haven't I been telling you that there is absolute nothing that can escape the law of cause and effect?

And precisly this is what Buddha taught.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamiz]

If plants don't have a nervous system, then why do they respond to soothing music?

Do plants have a brain too ? :roll:

BTW, it is an "YES or NO" question! 8-)

[SRS]

Whatever research has been done doesn't prove anything. I'm trying to get the 'Mythbusters' link that dealt with the issue. Let me see if there is any luck. If plants do have emotions, is it right for us to be even vegetarians?

The research doesn't prove anything only if an alternate reason can be found. If an alternate reason cannot be found, then the hypothesis can be confirmed as correct.

The following, from a professional botany journal, confirms my original hypothesis (that plants do indeed respond to music):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Kpp8K6yDKz4J:www.botany.org/plantsciencebulletin/psb-1974-20-4.php+The+Sound+and+Music+of+Plants+(De+Vorss+and+ Company,+1973)&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

All of the experiments I have referred to so far have been conducted by professional academics (for example, Sir Jagdish Bose), who have no motivation to push any Vedic agenda.

On the contrary, I cannot consider that research for mythbusters is conducted by professional academians, unless of course you can explicitly state their names and qualifications.



Oh! We have had discussions on this in the thread on Vishnu's avatars. There is no such evolutionary pattern.

That is your opinion. However, for the record, I will state my opinion, as well as offer reasons:

The famous scientist , J B S Haldane, who gave up his British citizenship and became an Indian and settled in Calcutta, observed that the Dasavataras are a true sequential depiction of the great unfolding of evolution.

If you analyse the avatars of Vishnu , you can observe an uncanny similarity to the biological theory of evolution of life on earth.

The first avatar of Vishnu is Matsya or fish.( According to science, life originated in water).

The second avatar of Vishnu is Kurma or tortoise.( the evolution of the fish to the amphibean tortoise).

The third avatar of Vishnu is Varaha or the boar. ( the evolution of the amphibean to the strictly land animal).

The fourth avatar of Vishnu is Narasimha or the man-lion. ( the evolution of the land animal to a humanoid form with animalistic charecterestics ).

The fifth avatar of Vishnu is Varaha or dwarf ( the evolution of the animal-man to purely human in dwarf form).

The sixth avatar of Vishnu is Parashurama ( the evolution of the dwarf to a physically well-developed and ferocious warrior).

The seventh avatar of Vishnu is Rama ( the evolution of the ferocious warrior to Rama, who is considered as the ideal man or the maryada purushottama and the embodiment of morality , ethics and righteousness).

The eighth avatar of Vishnu is Krishna ( the evolution of Rama , the ideal man to Krishna who is considered as the ideal yogi, the superman who is known for his manysidedness and allrounded character , as I mentioned in the thread 'Krishna : Zorba the Buddha' in the Hinduism forum).

The animal evolution and development connotations bear striking resemblances to the modern scientific theory of Evolution.

I will take the position of J.B. Haldane on this one.




That's the beauty of our universe. All such mysteries awe us push us harder to find answers. In Dawkin's words, [b]"My mind is open to the most wonderful range of future possibilities, which I cannot even dream about, nor can you, nor can anybody else. What I am skeptical about is the idea that whatever wonderful revelation does come in the science of the future, it will turn out to be one of the particular historical religions that people happen to have dreamed up. ..I don't see the Olympian gods or Jesus coming down and dying on the Cross as worthy of that grandeur. They strike me as parochial. If there is a God, it's going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.

If there is no God, then the Universe must of necessity be mechanical (like a clock). However, the approach of modern science has not been to necessarily establish the absolute occurence of an event, but predict its likelihood within a prescribed statistical range. I am not sure how well the statistical approach corresponds to the mechanistic viewpoint. If nature runs like a clock, why was her creation a statistical anomaly (a byproduct of the randomness of gases mixing combining to form proteins, and so on)... why has this mixing of gases to create "life" occured only in Earth's biosphere and not on other planets? Or is the simple answer that the symmetry we percieve around us really an illusion... maya maybe? By the way, Dawkins is a confirmed atheist, whatever is said and done.

[SRS]

BTW, it is an "YES or NO" question! 8-)

Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus. Ameobas have no brains. They respond to stimulus. So what is your point?

[pavalamani pragasam]

Reflex action can't be equated to deliberate action?!

[thamiz]

BTW, it is an "YES or NO" question! 8-)

Worms have no brains.

And who told you that worms dont have brain?


Earthworms are the simplest organisms to have a central nervous system, which includes a distinct brain that is connected to groups of nerve cells organized as a cord running along the entire length of the body (see picture).

Someone seems to disagree with YOU! :lol:

My point is DONT MAKE SENSELESS statements like this!

[SRS]

BTW, it is an "YES or NO" question! 8-)

Worms have no brains.

And who told you that worms dont have brain?


Earthworms are the simplest organisms to have a central nervous system, which includes a distinct brain that is connected to groups of nerve cells organized as a cord running along the entire length of the body (see picture).

Someone seems to disagree with YOU! :lol:

My point is DONT MAKE SENSELESS statements like this!

Just a moment.


Instead of a nose, ears, and eyes, earthworms have a nervous system throughout their bodies that controls actions in response to environmental stimuli, such as vibrations, heat, cold, moisture, light, and the presence of other worms. They have no brain , however, so worms do not ponder their lowly lot in life, nor do they plan a strategy for obtaining their next meal or crossing the sidewalk safely.

http://lhsfoss.org/fossweb/teachers/materials/plantanimal/earthworms.html

[SRS]

brain: a. The portion of the vertebrate central nervous system that is enclosed within the cranium, continuous with the spinal cord, and composed of gray matter and white matter. It is the primary center for the regulation and control of bodily activities, receiving and interpreting sensory impulses, and transmitting information to the muscles and body organs. It is also the seat of consciousness, thought, memory, and emotion. b. A functionally similar portion of the invertebrate nervous system.

So, a worm doesn't have a brain, it has nerves. Thats why the article you gave said "distinct" brain. Because it is not a brain in the formal sense, it is a cluster of nerves.

[thamiz]

http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/invert.html

Earthworm

The nervous system of the earthworm is "segmented" just like the rest of the body. The "brain" is located above the pharynx and is connected to the first ventral ganglion. The brain is important for movement: if the brain of the earthworm is removed, the earthworm will move continuously. If the first ventral ganglion is removed, the earthworm will stop eating and will not dig. Each segmented ganglion gets sensory information from only a local region of its body and controls muscles only in this local region.

Earthworms have touch, light, vibration and chemical receptors all along the entire body surface.


THERE is a PICTURE also given SHOWING the BRAIN of an earthworm

[SRS]

Reflex action can't be equated to deliberate action?!

When a plant responds to music, is it reflexive or deliberate? You have to ask, if it was reflexive, why exactly was it reflexive? To give an example of a reflexive action, when you touch a hot stove (with your finger), your finger will automatically move back. When you touch the hot stove, however, the number of cells in your finger does not multiply, and the finger does not in any way "grow." This is also consistent with the "fight or flight" response associated with the autonomic nervous system (ANS); the ANS is responsible for you moving your finger back. The basic point is, reflexive actions do not lead to cell growth in any way. In this case, it was shown that soothing music had a direct effect on the growth of the plants.

If it was not reflexive, then the only possibility left is that it was deliberate. In one of the links I gave here, the plant actually wrapped itself around a speaker! Do you need more evidence that such action is deliberate?

[SRS]

The "brain" is located above the pharynx and is connected to the first ventral ganglion.

Do you understand why the "brain" is in quotation marks? There is a difference between "brain" and brain. The fact that the first "brain" in the paragraph is in quotation marks means that all further references to the "brain" should be considered in the exact same context, including the "brain" shown in the picture.

The author is saying what I said earlier: it is not a brain in the formal sense, it is a cluster of nerve cells.

[thamiz]

There is a (central nervous system) cns and it is attached to the brain and controlled by it in earth worm.

You can keep saying the "brain" is not equlat to brain!

Fine!

Have you ever been wrong, ever :?:

In the picture the brain is shown as BRAIN!

[SRS]

There is a (central nervous system) cns and it is attached to the brain and controlled by it in earth worm.

You can keep saying the "brain" is not equlat to brain!

Fine!

Have you ever been wrong, ever :?:

In the picture the brain is shown as BRAIN!

Do you know how to read? Figure out why he said "brain" and not brain. Maybe for idiots like you, he can create a seperate webpage and write "brain" everytime. Meanwhile, the rest of us know, when he says "brain" not brain, in the FIRST mention of the word brain, then any mention of BRAIN following the first "brain" should be read as "brain" despite the LACK of quotation marks. As the rest of us literate people also know, "brain" means it is not a BRAIN in the conventional sense!

[SRS]

If one looks at the different avataras of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time.
When poor "Godhead" itself is stuck in the never-ending cycle of births and deaths with an "I" ego, it incontrovertibly proves that that poor "Godhead" must be failing miserably to realise the Ultimate Truth and attain Nirvana as taught by Buddha.

Haven't I been telling you that there is absolute nothing that can escape the law of cause and effect?

And precisly this is what Buddha taught.

:D :) :thumbsup:

Unless you can be absolutely clear as to which particular school of Buddhism you are referring to, it is redundant to speak of Buddhist this and Buddhist that. There is no Buddhist school that follows the teachings of the Buddha exactly; largely because the Buddha himself never left any writings. So even these interpretations of "what the Buddha said" are based, to a large extent, on hearsay.

[thamiz]

Do you know how to read?

Does it really matter whether I know how to read or not :?:

There are lots and lots of readers to this thread now. Every reader of this thread is reading your statement that


Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus.]

They will also read my post showing the BRAIN of an earthworm!

And I am sure everybody here has a BRAIN to understand too!

And please, please STOP your "justification" !!!

[Rohit]

Here goes the TCB again, absolutely :x. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Buddhism asserts and accepts interdependent origination, emptiness and Nirvana as taught by Buddha, irrespective of the sect. Period :)

Only for those who are genuinely interested in facts

Advaita Vedanta is nothing but Buddhism in disguise

- GauDapAda is the first historically known author in the Advaita VedAnta tradition.

- GauDapAda is traditionally said to have been the guru of Govinda BhagavatpAda, who was the guru of SankarAcArya.

- GauDapAda composed the GgauDapAdIya kArikAs (GK), which constitute an expository text on the mANDUkya upanishad.

1. The philosophy of Sankaracarya (born about 600 AD), is really just Buddhism in disguise, as explained by Padma Purana (mayavada-asac-chastram pracchanam bauddham ucyate).

2. This can be demonstrated by the chronology of key Mayavadi philosophical explanations, which appear first in Buddhist scriptures and later show up in the philosophy of Sankara and his followers.

3. That Mayavada had stolen the salient features of Sunyavada was not unnoticed by the Buddhists themselves.

4. Buddhism had exercised a profound influence on Sankara's mind to the extent that the tradition opposed to Sankara holds that he is a Buddhist in disguise and his mayavada but crypto-Buddhism.

5. It is well known that Sankara is criticised by his opponents as a "Buddhist in disguise" (pracchanna-bauddha) and his philosophy as mayavada [1] which is but crypto-Buddhism.

6. Among the Vedantins, Bhaskara (750-800) is probably one of the earliest critics against Sankara. He called the Mayavadin "one who depends on the doctrine of the Buddhist" (Buddhamatavalambin), and says that this position has been negated by the author of Brahmasutra.[2] Afterwards, Yamuna (918-1038), Ramanuja (1017-1037), Madhva (1197-1276), Vallabha (1473-1531) and other Vedantins severely criticize the Advaita Vedanta, pointing out that it is in essence nothing but a Buddhist doctrine.[3]

7. Then, in the latter part of the sixteenth century, Vijnanabhiksu of the Samkhya school shows in his Samkhyapravacanabhasya that the mayavada of the Vedantins is of the same standpoint as that of the Vijnanavadin's [4] and criticizes the Vedanta school as a whole. In justifying his criticism, he quotes a verse from the Padmapurana which states that the mayavada is an incorrect theory and is Buddhist doctrine.[5]

8. The Sunyavada philosophy teaches that sunya (void) is an inexpressible and transcendent truth (a concept echoed in Sankara's explanation of Brahman).

Sources:

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/mayavada.htm

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2004/05/02/stories/2004050200170400.htm

http://www.nagarjunainstitute.com/buddhisthim/backissues/vol11/v11sankara.htm
.
.
.

The TCBs must sort out among themselves and agree on the type of their belief.

Would TCBs first do that? :lol:

:) :thumbsup:

[thamiz]

Do you know how to read? !

READ your statement given downhere ALOUD!!!!


Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus.]

NOW READ the quote from a scientific article ALOUD!!!!


Brain, Heart.
An earthworm has a brain, a small bundle of nerve tissue located on top of and right a the frong of the pharynx. It is connected to a nerve cord that runs along the body cavity, under the gut, providing nerves for muscles and other organs in each segment of it's body.

Blood is pumped throughout a worms' body by several (usually 3, 4 or 5) pairs of hearts, which are prominent vessels surrounding the oesophagus, one pair in each of several successive segments.

If you know how to read then you shound understand that your statemetn is absolutely ABSURD!

So, STOP the NONSENSE of talking about quotation. Because there is NO QUOTATION HERE for the brain !!! :lol:

http://www.reln.com.au/html/body_introducingworm.html

[Rohit]

The TCBs must sort out among themselves first and then choose the type of belief they want to blindly follow.


If one looks at the different avataras of Vishnu, he sees higher and higher forms of evolutionary development each time.
Irrespective of everything, the following applies. :)

When poor "Godhead" itself is stuck in the never-ending cycle of births and deaths with an "I" ego, it incontrovertibly proves that that poor "Godhead" must be failing miserably to realise the Ultimate Truth and attain Nirvana as taught by Buddha.

Haven't I been telling you that there is absolute nothing that can escape the law of cause and effect?

And precisly this is what Buddha taught.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[kannannn]

[tscii:9746397532]
The following, from a professional botany journal, confirms my original hypothesis (that plants do indeed respond to music):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Kpp8K6yDKz4J:www.botany.org/plantsciencebulletin/psb-1974-20-4.php+The+Sound+and+Music+of+Plants+(De+Vorss+and+ Company,+1973)&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
A little further down the link, we find this response from Arthur W. Galston, a noted plant biologist:

"The trouble with The Secret Life of Plants is that it consists almost exclusively of bizarre claims presented without adequate supporting evidence. Thus, if the unwary reader believes.much of what Tompkins and Bird have set down, he will be cluttering his mind with mythology rather than science.. In time, the effects of this book will fade away — you can't fool too many people for too long a time."


The famous scientist , J B S Haldane, who gave up his British citizenship and became an Indian and settled in Calcutta, observed that the Dasavataras are a true sequential depiction of the great unfolding of evolution.
I found three sites on the internet proclaiming the same. Now, none offer the source of this claim. Which book is it? Which year? Just for the record, there is a missing link between fish and amphibians. And also for the record, Tortoises are reptiles, not amphibians. Of all people, Haldane should have known that.

I will not bring the existence of God into the discussion now, lest we digress.

Also, you haven't answered the question on plant emotions: Is it right for us to devour plants and cause them pain if they have emotions?[/tscii:9746397532]

[SRS]

Do you know how to read? !

READ your statement given downhere ALOUD!!!!


Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus.]

NOW READ the quote from a scientific article ALOUD!!!!


Brain, Heart.
An earthworm has a brain, a small bundle of nerve tissue located on top of and right a the frong of the pharynx. It is connected to a nerve cord that runs along the body cavity, under the gut, providing nerves for muscles and other organs in each segment of it's body.

Blood is pumped throughout a worms' body by several (usually 3, 4 or 5) pairs of hearts, which are prominent vessels surrounding the oesophagus, one pair in each of several successive segments.

If you know how to read then you shound understand that your statemetn is absolutely ABSURD!

So, STOP the NONSENSE of talking about quotation. Because there is NO QUOTATION HERE for the brain !!! :lol:

http://www.reln.com.au/html/body_introducingworm.html

Very scholarly article from Reln Plastics Pty Ltd. Perhaps they manufacture plastic brains, seeing as how your "natural" one is clearly dysfunctional?

As for the rest of it, readers here are intelligent enough to know that if a scholarly authority uses quotation marks around the term "brain" and the website of a plastics company leaves out the quotes, which source is more correct than the other!

[SRS]

[tscii]


Buddhism asserts and accepts interdependent origination, emptiness and Nirvana as taught by Buddha, irrespective of the sect. Period :)

Irrespective of sect? That is the joke of the century.

The Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions welcomed these local deities and have admitted some of their cults into the liturgies in honour of buddhas and bodhisattvas. Such favoured deities include Mahakala, the great black divinity; the mother goddess Hariti; Kuvera, the god of wealth; and especially Hayagriva, a fierce horse-faced god who is powerful in driving off unconverted demonic forces. The Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions have also identified local deities as manifestations of various buddhas and bodhisattvas. This process is particularly prominent in Japan, where the identification of buddhas and bodhisattvas with indigenous kami (Japanese: “god” or “spirit”) has included both the great gods (for example, in the identification of the buddha Mahavairocana with the great ancestral Sun goddess, Amaterasu) and the kami of local territories.

In other cases that are equally widespread, local gods and demons have been conquered, converted, and taken into the pantheon or relegated to the periphery (where they may still require propitiation). Perhaps the most interesting example is found in Tibet, where it is commonly believed that Buddhism became established in the 8th century only as the result of the wholesale subjugation of local deities—a subjugation that must, from time to time, be repeated through the performance of rituals marked by their dynamism and ferocity.

In Theravada, Buddhism has had to come to terms with local beliefs. In some cases well-organized pantheons have been built. In Sri Lanka, for example, various local, Hindu, and Buddhist deities hold places within a hierarchy headed by the Buddha himself. In Myanmar the traditional hierarchy of local nats is headed by Thagya Min nat. Identified with Indra, he becomes a divine protector of Buddhism, who reigns in the Heaven of the Thirty-three Gods.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-68752/Buddhism#300598.hook

[kannannn]

Very scholarly article from Reln Plastics Pty Ltd.
Hmm.. actually the article at the bottom says:
"From: Earthworms for Gardeners and Fisherman. CSIRO 1978. East Melbourne."
CSIRO is Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.

[SRS]

[tscii:febf5b8448][quote=SRS]The following, from a professional botany journal, confirms my original hypothesis (that plants do indeed respond to music):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Kpp8K6yDKz4J:www.botany.org/plantsciencebulletin/psb-1974-20-4.php+The+Sound+and+Music+of+Plants+(De+Vorss+and+ Company,+1973)&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
A little further down the link, we find this response from Arthur W. Galston, a noted plant biologist:

"The trouble with The Secret Life of Plants is that it consists almost exclusively of bizarre claims presented without adequate supporting evidence. Thus, if the unwary reader believes.much of what Tompkins and Bird have set down, he will be cluttering his mind with mythology rather than science.. In time, the effects of this book will fade away — you can't fool too many people for too long a time."

There is no inconsistency. The only claim in the book I am supporting is that plants respond positively to soothing music. Those who wrote the book did not perform the experiment themselves. The claim that plants respond positively to soothing music cannot be judged in relation to other claims. My concern lies exclusively with a single claim, a claim that has been verified not only by Backster, but a Sir Jagdish Bose (renowned Indian botanist), another botanist at Annamalai University (I provided the link earlier), as well as research conducted 30 years ago by a researcher in Colorado. As far as I am concerned, these investigators are all professionals, who have published their results in professional journals, and are not in league in with each other.


The famous scientist , J B S Haldane, who gave up his British citizenship and became an Indian and settled in Calcutta, observed that the Dasavataras are a true sequential depiction of the great unfolding of evolution.

I found three sites on the internet proclaiming the same. Now, none offer the source of this claim. Which book is it? Which year? Just for the record, there is a missing link between fish and amphibians. And also for the record, Tortoises are reptiles, not amphibians. Of all people, Haldane should have known that.

Then it is a misquote by Haldane, I presume. I am merely quoting Haldane, or presumably what Haldane is reported to have stated.




Also, you haven't answered the question on plant emotions: Is it right for us to devour plants and cause them pain if they have emotions?[/tscii:febf5b8448]

The plant is no longer alive, once it has been seperated from its roots.

[SRS]

Very scholarly article from Reln Plastics Pty Ltd.
Hmm.. actually the article at the bottom says:
"From: Earthworms for Gardeners and Fisherman. CSIRO 1978. East Melbourne."
CSIRO is Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.

I doubt garderners and fisherman will suffer greatly for lack of distinction between "brain" and brain.

This is a tiresome discussion. Those who thinks earthworms possess a brain in the conventional sense should read a neuroanatomy book. In the case of vertebrates, the brain is the most highly developed organ. The evolutionary significance of the brain, therefore, cannot be underestimated. This is why it makes no sense to speak of the "brain" of an earthworm (the earthworm being a very early player on the evolutionary stage) and the brain of a human or monkey, without giving any proper context. The brain of a human is capable of x1000 more functions than any so-called "brain" of the earthworm. As I have stated repeatedly the "brain" of an earthworm is merely a cluster of nerve cells, able to stimulate muscles in the usual way. Hopefully there is no need for me to explain the complexities of the human brain here; but notice that if I did, I would start with the specialized nature of the parts which comprise the human brain, a specialization altogether lacking in the so-called "brain" of an earthworm.

Hopefully by now the point is clear!

[kannannn]

As far as I am concerned, these investigators are all professionals, who have published their results in professional journals, and are not in league in with each other.
Fair enough. We agree to disagree on this :thumbsup:

That still leaves us with the critical question:



Also, you haven't answered the question on plant emotions: Is it right for us to devour plants and cause them pain if they have emotions?[/tscii]

The plant is no longer alive, once it has been seperated from its roots.
If plants have emotions, and killing it causes pain, how can vegetarianism be justified? Extending the argument (from the point of view of vegetarianism), can we also justify murder of animals and even fellow humans?

[SRS]

[quote=SRS]As far as I am concerned, these investigators are all professionals, who have published their results in professional journals, and are not in league in with each other.
Fair enough. We agree to disagree on this :thumbsup:

If you have any lingering doubts as to the professional credentials of the Annamali University professor, or Sir Jagdish Bose, etc. I am willing to provide the necessary information.





If plants have emotions, and killing it causes pain, how can vegetarianism be justified? Extending the argument (from the point of view of vegetarianism), can we also justify murder of animals and even fellow humans?

When you say killing a plant causes it pain, I am not sure of exactly what type of pain you are speaking of. Usually the pain that we associate with ourselves is the result of the brain sending signals to the nerves, or else the inflammatory response to a cut, etc. The type of pain the plant feels may well be a different type of pain than we ourselves are subject to.

Finally, who is to say that every plant dies a violent and painful death?

[pavalamani pragasam]

:omg:

[Shakthiprabha.]

Dear all,

We are all hear to SHARE our knowledge.
nOBODY is less known or NOBODY knows entire universe.

LEts share our knowledge. iTS wonderful to kindle our thoughts in diff direction, who knows we may land up understanding so many things which we did not know until now.

The more we learn, the more it should strike us, HOW MEAGRE is our ego and LET GO OUR EGO.

Please lets share our views with mutual respect. It is beneficial for all of us.

Let all of us be OPEN to others views too.

:(

[Shakthiprabha.]

Rohit,

I said I believed in CAUSE N EFFECT.

I thought KARMA and cause and effect are same. :?

Can u tell me how different they are :?

[Rohit]

If anything, it evidently proves again and again that the following forms of fallacies have been committed again and again by the TCBs in order reduce the increasing intensity of dissonance experienced.

1. Subjectivism: Fallacious propositions that violate objectivity: I believe/want to believe p to be true; therefore p is true.

2. Straw Man's Fallacy: Distortion of opponent's position, usually by stating it in an oversimplified or extreme form, and then refute the distorted position, not the real one.

3. Reference Effect: Erroneous perception and evaluation of situation based on fallacies.

4. Redundancy: Increasing confidence in redundant data or information.

5. Non-Sequitur: The conclusion does not follow from the premises; the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion. Another name for the fallacy is "irrelevant conclusion"

6. Mental Blockade: Failing to think objectively upon receipt of facts.

9. False Assurance: Ascribing credibility to contradicting data or information.

13. Begging the Question (Circular Argument): Because p-->p.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The CD count of TCBs is approaching 850 only 150 to go. Please keep going

Basic Points Unifying The Theravada and the Mahayana

1. The Buddha is our only Master.

2. We take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha.

3. We do not believe that this world is created and ruled by a God.

4. Following the example of the Buddha, who is the embodiment of Great Compassion (mahaa-karu.naa) and Great Wisdom (mahaa- praj~naa), we consider that the purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living beings without discrimination and to work for their good, happiness, and peace; and to develop wisdom leading to the realization of Ultimate Truth.

5. We accept the Four Noble Truths, nameley Dukkha, the Arising of Dukkha, the Cessation of Dukkha, and the Path leading to the Cessation of Dukkha; and the universal law of cause and effect as taught in the pratiitya-samutpaada (Conditioned Genesis or Dependent Origination).

6. We understand, according to the teaching of the Buddha, that all conditioned things (samskaara) are impermanent (anitya) and dukkha, and that all conditioned and unconditioned things (dharma) are without self (anaatma).

7. We accept the Thirty-seven Qualities conducive to Enlightenment (bodhipak.sa-dharma) as different aspects of the Path taught by the Buddha leading to Enlightenment.

8. There are three ways of attaining bodhi or Enlightenment, according to the ability and capacity of each individual: namely as a disciple (sraavaka), as a Pratyeka-Buddha and as a Samyak-sam-Buddha (perfectly and Fully Enlightened Buddha). We accept it as the highest, noblest, and most heroic to follow the career of a Bodhisattva and to become a Samyak-sam-Buddha in order to save others.

9. We admit that in different countries there are differences with regard to the life of Buddhist monks, popular Buddhist beliefs and practices, rites and ceremonies, customs and habits. These external forms and expressions should not be confused with the essential teachings of the Buddha.

Source: Walpola Rahula; The Heritage of the Bhikkhu; (New York, Grove Press, 1974); pp. 100, 1137-138.

http://www.serve.com/cmtan/buddhism/Misc/unify.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Points_Unifying_the_Theravada_and_the_Mahaya na

http://web.mit.edu/stclair/www/basicpoints.html

TCBs, please keep incrementing your CD count. :lol:

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamizhvaanan]

:omg: It started with Mr.bacteria. Now Mr.earthworm takes over :?

Mr.SRS, would you mind to answer some of my questions pls.

For instance, wether you would suggest Karma as a Prescriptive Ideology or Descriptive theory or both?

In future, I will quote some of my pts for ur convenience :D

[kannannn]

When you say killing a plant causes it pain, I am not sure of exactly what type of pain you are speaking of. Usually the pain that we associate with ourselves is the result of the brain sending signals to the nerves, or else the inflammatory response to a cut, etc. The type of pain the plant feels may well be a different type of pain than we ourselves are subject to.

Finally, who is to say that every plant dies a violent and painful death?
My train of thought has stopped in its station. What were we arguing? :lol: Oh, yes! so that essentially means bacteria and plants (and earthworms, by your definition) don't have a brain sending out signals. That would also mean, they don't have an ego and concept of 'I'. How would they then fit into the theory of Karma?

Also TV's question is very pertinent.

For instance, wether you would suggest Karma as a Prescriptive Ideology or Descriptive theory or both?

See you all after the Easter break :wave: !!

[thamizhvaanan]

A long overdue reply :D


Observation, conclusion, obsorption, and grasping etc which happens at subtler, say mind level are at random, NOT THE ACTION performed by the body. Is that what u are saying?

U are differentiating ACTION as something we do physically alone, as a result of SOMETHING we which we perform at random at mind level?

So can we say, PHYSICAL actions are all DEFINTELY, FOLLOWING pattern given the same RANDOM situation at mind level? My answer is NO!

May be the word RANDOM is misleading you. My explanation lies in chaos theory. In chaos theory, a body that is highly sensitive initial conditions, appears to behave randomly, due to accumulation of errors in its initial conditions, eventhough the system is intrinsically deterministic. In theory, it states that it is possible for a butterfly flapping its wings in brazil, to set off a tornado in Texas.

In other words, it is possible that a very small occurence can produce unpredictable, and sometimes drastic events.

You raised a question why twins behave differently. Let us simplify that and take two plant seeds. Assume that both the seeds are from the same plant and of same age. It is quite possible for us to construct a reasonably identical environment for both the plants to grow. In that case, it is reasonable to expect the growth of both the plants to be similar to an extent.

But unlike plants, the number of parameters that a baby is sensitive to, is way too many. So it is impossible for us to construct a controlled environment, repeatable enuf, to analyze the growth of two individuals. Plus, from chaos theory, sensitive systems can produce aggravated results in response to minor errors. It is impossible for twin children to be exposed to same set of conditions, for eg., even the position of embryo differs from child to child. So, it is unreasonable to find any similarity in their behaviour.

So, basically it is not exactly random, eventhough it is random :mrgreen:


In other words, if a person is convicted of murder, the JUDGE who passes verdict, the murdered, other ppl who contribute indirectly, witnessess etc, have some LINK with other ppl in picture here, where by their cause and effect calculations would readjust itself between all those who are linked, based on the current happening.Well, you do beleive in this, Whereas I am apprehensive, because such a calculation would involve too many events to consider and it should also impact or result in a number of events, that goes on like a chain reaction. To fit all these chain reactions into a calculation and still be fair, is a big deal. But my main pt is that, there is no reason/proof for me to beleive that such calculations exists.

I BELIEVE, in cause and effect theory as of now. SP, a quote from an article related to ur current stance. Pls go through the whole article also :D

"And if that wasn't enough, quantum mechanics also removes causation from the world. Consider an undecided atom. Say it does decay. What caused that decay? The uncertainty principle denies the existence of any influence smaller than the atom's own h-sized chunk of reality. When the atom decays, it just does; entirely randomly, entirely without cause. Everything we see ultimately depends on quantum events that have popped out of h-shaped packages of uncertainty. Quantum mechanics offers us a world without reason."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4113727-103677,00.html
All pains to prove that, karma philosophy isnt descriptive either :noteeth:

[thamiz]

Do you know how to read? !

READ your statement given downhere ALOUD!!!!


Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus.]

NOW READ the quote from a scientific article ALOUD!!!!


Brain, Heart.
An earthworm has a brain, a small bundle of nerve tissue located on top of and right a the frong of the pharynx. It is connected to a nerve cord that runs along the body cavity, under the gut, providing nerves for muscles and other organs in each segment of it's body.

Blood is pumped throughout a worms' body by several (usually 3, 4 or 5) pairs of hearts, which are prominent vessels surrounding the oesophagus, one pair in each of several successive segments.

If you know how to read then you shound understand that your statemetn is absolutely ABSURD!

So, STOP the NONSENSE of talking about quotation. Because there is NO QUOTATION HERE for the brain !!! :lol:

http://www.reln.com.au/html/body_introducingworm.html

Very scholarly article from Reln Plastics Pty Ltd. Perhaps they manufacture plastic brains, seeing as how your "natural" one is clearly dysfunctional?

As for the rest of it, readers here are intelligent enough to know that if a scholarly authority uses quotation marks around the term "brain" and the website of a plastics company leaves out the quotes, which source is more correct than the other!

It is a wonderful example to show here that you can neither do science nor can accept the FACTS! :rotfl:

[Rohit]

Rohit,

I said I believed in CAUSE N EFFECT.

I thought KARMA and cause and effect are same. :?

Can u tell me how different they are :?
Dear SP,

Though Thamizhvaanan has already given you the necessary feedback regarding your stand, but as you have specifically asked me to comment, here is what I can offer you in response.

As I have said before, it is not the terms, concepts or words that can be said to be true or false, it is the doctrines, beliefs and theories that can be said to be true or false.

If you have chosen the word karma for cause and effect; well, there is nothing wrong in it. However, the next task for you is to define it clearly in non-circular, universally acceptable terms, declare your assumptions or hypothesis if any and then apply your theory to explain events you observe, and then check whether it corresponds to reality or not, whether it is applicable universally or not. If it fails to explain what you claim to explain, your theory gets refuted; and is of little use. That is how it works. :)

I hope this will help you in reconsidering your stand.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

This is what the Western World thinks about karma:


But from Western eyes, it is not desirable to have good karma either. Reverend Moises Roman explained that in Hinduism belief, you reincarnate into a cow, not as a punishment, but because you have been very good and have reached a very high level of development. In fact, in Asia, it is an ideal to stop reincarnating and become free of the supposed endless cycle of birth and re-birth, whereas to a New Age westerner, it is a welcome idea to keep reincarnating.

According to economists, India, which has a free market and is a democracy, should have an excellent economy. Yet it is one of the poorest parts of the world because there is little support for equality and charity.

http://www.gaglio.co.uk/crossnews/editorials.htm

:D :) :thumbsup:

[SRS]

My train of thought has stopped in its station. What were we arguing? :lol: Oh, yes! so that essentially means bacteria and plants (and earthworms, by your definition) don't have a brain sending out signals. That would also mean, they don't have an ego and concept of 'I'. How would they then fit into the theory of Karma?

You have to first of all assume that the existence is transient. That, in fact, all living beings are subject to death and decay. This is the ultimate reality, whether we are speaking of a tiny bacterium, a human, or a plant. If a living being is subject to decay and death, it then follows that the reason for the decay and death is due to the "ego" and "I" as brilliantly explained by Pradheep here. There cannot be any exception to the rule here.



Also TV's question is very pertinent. For instance, wether you would suggest Karma as a Prescriptive Ideology or Descriptive theory or both?

I do not know what the difference between the two is. Perhaps you or TV could clarify.

[SRS]

Do you know how to read? !

READ your statement given downhere ALOUD!!!!


Worms have no brains. They respond to stimulus.]

NOW READ the quote from a scientific article ALOUD!!!!


Brain, Heart.
An earthworm has a brain, a small bundle of nerve tissue located on top of and right a the frong of the pharynx. It is connected to a nerve cord that runs along the body cavity, under the gut, providing nerves for muscles and other organs in each segment of it's body.

Blood is pumped throughout a worms' body by several (usually 3, 4 or 5) pairs of hearts, which are prominent vessels surrounding the oesophagus, one pair in each of several successive segments.

If you know how to read then you shound understand that your statemetn is absolutely ABSURD!

So, STOP the NONSENSE of talking about quotation. Because there is NO QUOTATION HERE for the brain !!! :lol:

http://www.reln.com.au/html/body_introducingworm.html

Very scholarly article from Reln Plastics Pty Ltd. Perhaps they manufacture plastic brains, seeing as how your "natural" one is clearly dysfunctional?

As for the rest of it, readers here are intelligent enough to know that if a scholarly authority uses quotation marks around the term "brain" and the website of a plastics company leaves out the quotes, which source is more correct than the other!

It is a wonderful example to show here that you can neither do science nor can accept the FACTS! :rotfl:

Let the readers judge that for themselves. I don't care any for your worthless opinions; from now on, I will ignore every posting you make here.

[pradheep]

Dear Friends
I lost your discussions in my busy schedule. I am back and will try to answer when i get time.

To being with I will answer the questions Kannan and Thamizh asked.

Yes you are right people use karma philosophy to back their weakness and a crutch to support their actions. I will explain this with a common comment that had upseted many of my family members and friends. They proudly declare their acheivements as their own intelligence and hard work. But when asked about their failures they say it is their fate.

I told them that is how the ego acts. It will take all credits to it and then failures on fate. I told them your acheivements are also fated like your failures. You should either say everything failures and acheivements are because of you or say both of them are fated.

This is how our egoe's function and make use of Karma theory to hide failures. Simiarly the Ego likes to hurt others and so use this karma theory to hurt handicapped or widows etc. The theory does not ask such weak people to be hurted or harmed. These people are meant to be helped.

Karma theory is 100% correct to the core. But people use it for their ego to function to the mamximum. In the name of religion over centuries people have been tortured. In this modern times science also is being used for torture. For selfish purpose science is being used by politicians and others to acheive their means.

so the problem is not of the religion or science, it is the Ego centered nature of man that causes problems. This is why in the journey to realization, the ego has to be transcended. One has to do things not for the Ego self but for the good of others. will continue based on your questions.

[SRS]

[tscii:4201abe840]For T’ien-t’ai monks in eighth century China, the belief in a universal Buddha-nature blurred the distinction between sentient and nonsentient life-forms and logically led to the view that plants, trees, and the earth itself could achieve enlightenment. Kukai (774–835), the founder of the Japanese Shingon school and Dogen (1200–1253), the founder of the Soto Zen sect, described universal Buddha-nature in naturalistic terms, “If plants and trees were devoid of Buddhahood, waves would then be without humidity” (Kukai); “The sutras [i.e., the dharma] are the entire universe, mountains, and rivers and the great wide earth, plants and trees” (Dogen). Buddhist environmentalists cite Dogen’s view as support for the preservation of species biodiversity.

http://environment.harvard.edu/religion/religion/buddhism/index.html

So, it is not just Hindus that believe plants possess a consciousness. [/tscii:4201abe840]

[thamiz]

so the problem is not of the religion or science, it is the Ego centered nature of man that causes problems.

Pradheep:

You are saying the "ego" in human causes all the problems. As if other than humans are all being fair and living happily!

Have you ever heard of parasitic attitude of Cuckoo birds?

They DONT RAISE their own "daughters". They go and lay their egg in some other birds nest. They abuse the ignorance of other birds to bring up their own "chicks"



Many of the Old World species and some New World species are brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other birds. The best-known example is the European Common Cuckoo. The cuckoo egg hatches earlier than the host's, and the cuckoo chick grows faster; in most cases the chick evicts the eggs or young of the host species. The chick has no time to learn this behavior, so it must be an instinct passed on genetically. The mother still feeds the cuckoo chick as if it were her own, the chick's open mouth serving as a sign stimulus for the host to feed it.[1]

Female parasitic-cuckoos seem to specialize and lay eggs that closely resemble the eggs of their chosen host.

Tell me about the "karma" of the parasitic-cuckoo bird here!

[pradheep]

The "I" the ego is there right from bacteria to human, then why talk about cuckoo bird alone. The basic "I" - Ego is in all living beings which make them to escape death, the ego protective mechanism. Then as they evolve the Ego evolves to judgements, fights, war etc. The "I" feeling is the one that creates karma. The "I" feeling of bacteria to survive is the driving force for it to adapt new habitats and evolve into species.

so the thought of the bacteria to survive causes is the seed for its karma - cause and effect.

So Ego varies in its degree in different species based on its growth of mind and intellect.

Hope this is clear to you. If you understand this Ego , then karma theory is so easy to understand.

[thamizhvaanan]

Karma theory is 100% correct to the core. :roll:
I guess its time for me to give up. I am not getting any answers, only uncorroborated statements :cry:

[Shakthiprabha.]

rohit,

I shall take time to reply. I wanna analyse a lot. Gimme time.

tv,

excellent article. I WANNA READ MORE INDEPTH.... I shall come back when I have queries in mind :ty:

I really am happy and thankful FOR THAT ARTICLE. :)

pradeep,

Interesting enough. I agree a LOT iwth u right now. I shall get back after reading all ur articles.

good luck friends.

I REALLY AM HAPPY discussing things here.

I SHALL GET BACK..

:wave:

[Shakthiprabha.]

However pradeep,

When the DISCRIMINATION is not there in beings that are lower in intellect, than human (say animals , trees etc) then HOW SOME OF THEM evolVE to HUMAN LEVEL... and SOME dont?

What makes SOME species evolve AND some to STAGNATE?


Kinda silly question I suppose. I aint sure even if the question is right :oops:

bye for now.

[SRS]

What Pradheep said is correct. Even in Buddhism, enlightenment can be achieved only after a thorough struggle overcoming the "ego" and the "I." Karma is one measure of the success of this struggle.

[pradheep]

HOW SOME OF THEM evolVE to HUMAN LEVEL... and SOME dont? What makes SOME species evolve AND some to STAGNATE?

Dear Sk
No question is silly if it is meant to understand. There is no stagnation. All species are evolving to the next level. Around us we see babies, toddlers, children, adolescent youth, middle aged men and old aged. It looks as though these age groups are stagnant, but they are all passign through the same stages. One species move to the next and other to the next, so it looks stagnating, static. But really they are dynamically moving further.
Hope this is clear.

Dear SRS,
Yes in all spiritual traditions including Buddhism this is the core to enlightenment. Buddha himself has tried hard to give up his attachments of wife, children, kingdom, friends, worldly pleasures to attain the spiritual kingdom of enlightenment. If you get a chance see the movie the little buddha. Beautifully they portray how the symbolism of ego is shown during the journey of enlightenment. It is a must see movie.

Dear Thamizh,
I know this frustration happens. One takes births after births to understand this. You cannot be impatient in few weeks. If you wish you may continue asking questions. But the Ego is interested only to show the "Truth" is incorrect, for it to continue to show its power. It wants to live and not die. It wants immortality. That becaomes the root cause for karma and the succeeding birth after birth, until it is transcended.

[thamizhvaanan]

Dear Thamizh,
I know this frustration happens. One takes births after births to understand this. You cannot be impatient in few weeks.Dear Pradheep,
Please dont try to project as if I am frustrated because I am incompetent in basic comprehension. I am frustrated because of lack of any commitment from your side to make a sincere reply.


But the Ego is interested only to show the "Truth" is incorrect, for it to continue to show its power.Well, I guess I have every reason to beleive that the same applies to your ego. You are trying to show that your philosophy is the "Truth". The fact that you keep repeating the term "HIGHER knowledge" shows that intrinsically you are egoistic about your opinions and I see that "comparative term" as an attempt to lowball other's knowledge.

To put all my demands in simple words

Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands You can very well go through the context under which I said that, if that particular post eluded you.
http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?p=975161#975161

There are still a number of unanswered questions, but how many times should i quote myself :banghead:

[thamiz]

Karma theory is 100% correct to the core. :roll:
I guess its time for me to give up. I am not getting any answers, only uncorroborated statements :cry:

You seem like new in this kind of discussion. You never get any answers and often come to this conclusion! :lol:

[thamiz]

Pradheep:

Anyway, I want to take simple example of "lifestyle" and "culture" and "exploiting parasitic attitude" of Cuckoo bird here.

Now, please leave the bacteria for a while!

Tell me why cuckoo is born to be parasitic and never want to bring up its own kids :?:

[thamizhvaanan]

Karma theory is 100% correct to the core. :roll:
I guess its time for me to give up. I am not getting any answers, only uncorroborated statements :cry:You seem like new in this kind of discussion. You never get any answers and often come to this conclusion! :lol::cry:

[pradheep]

Tell me why cuckoo is born to be parasitic and never want to bring up its own kids

Dear TZ,
We have cuckoo women who does not want to bring up their kids. They leave their kids at day care center. what is the reason, shear lazziness or Tamasic. Everyone wants to give up responsibilites to others. We love restraunt food because of tamas or laziness. One of the feature of Ego is tamas- lazziness, the cause of most of the sufferings.

Cuckoo had that thought and developed such a trait. All traits we see in different species are its own choice. If it can adapt to that choice and live then it continues with that trait.

So is with human beings. All our life stlye are based on our choices that we make. Nothing is by chance, it is by choice.

This is the basis of karma. karma is not by chance it is by choice. Our thoughts with many factors contribute to the actions and end results- KARMA.

Please go ahead with question by question and so I will not miss answering one single question of yours. Because of my time, I appreciate if you can stick on to one question a time.

[SRS]

HOW SOME OF THEM evolVE to HUMAN LEVEL... and SOME dont? What makes SOME species evolve AND some to STAGNATE?

Dear Sk
No question is silly if it is meant to understand. There is no stagnation. All species are evolving to the next level. Around us we see babies, toddlers, children, adolescent youth, middle aged men and old aged. It looks as though these age groups are stagnant, but they are all passign through the same stages. One species move to the next and other to the next, so it looks stagnating, static. But really they are dynamically moving further.
Hope this is clear.



Dear Pradheep:

That is a good question Shakthi asked. I would take it one step further and ask you, why do some species go completely extinct? Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma? I am also interested to know, can karma be considered as a form of energy? And, is the karma of one living being unique to that living being. Because if karma were energy, energy could be transmitted in various ways. So there would be overlap between the karma of one fellow and another. Thank you for your explanations.

[Shakthiprabha.]

thx pradeep :)

yup its clear.

srs's question was t here in my mind too.

HOW/WHY SOME SPECIES goes extinct?

[thamiz]

One of the feature of Ego is tamas- lazziness,

A feature of "ego" is laziness?

According to who :?:

[SRS]

Dear SRS,
Yes in all spiritual traditions including Buddhism this is the core to enlightenment. Buddha himself has tried hard to give up his attachments of wife, children, kingdom, friends, worldly pleasures to attain the spiritual kingdom of enlightenment. If you get a chance see the movie the little buddha. Beautifully they portray how the symbolism of ego is shown during the journey of enlightenment. It is a must see movie.

The reason I brought up Buddhism, is that it seems many here are using karma as an excuse to gain leverage on Vedanta. For example, Rohit suggested that karma is not even compatible with Vedanta! Karma concept is there in various forms of development in all the major religious philosophies.

[thamiz]

[tscii:3a72b495c1]


One of the feature of Ego is tamas- lazziness,

A feature of "ego" is laziness?

According to who :?:



e·go /ˈigoʊ, ˈɛgoʊ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ee-goh, eg-oh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural e·gos.
1. the “I” or self of any person; a person as thinking, feeling, and willing, and distinguishing itself from the selves of others and from objects of its thought.
2. Psychoanalysis. the part of the psychic apparatus that experiences and reacts to the outside world and thus mediates between the primitive drives of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment.
3. egotism; conceit; self-importance: Her ego becomes more unbearable each day.
4. self-esteem or self-image; feelings: Your criticism wounded his ego.
5. (often initial capital letter) Philosophy.
a. the enduring and conscious element that knows experience.
b. Scholasticism. the complete person comprising both body and soul.
6. Ethnology. a person who serves as the central reference point in the study of organizational and kinship relationships.

Now we need to rewrite the definition of "ego"![/tscii:3a72b495c1]

[pradheep]

Dear SRS

Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma? I am also interested to know, is karma a form of energy.

Karma is not carried in the body. Body is just a vehicle only, so the extinct of a species at the form level is not relevant. The thought patterns (vasanas) in dinasors have not extincted, (body has extincted when found unsuitable to adapt to nature) but have taken the next state of body which is suitable to adapt in nature.
The water in the ocean (liquid form) transform into gas form and then fall as snow (solid) form in mountain peaks. They then melt and then run into streams, rivers and finally to ocean. the basic is water , but the forms or states keep changing.
Same way the Ego thought from bacteria to human just takes only different forms and different means of expressions. so the body form is really irrevelant.

Hope this is clear.

[SRS]

:omg: It started with Mr.bacteria. Now Mr.earthworm takes over :?

Mr.SRS, would you mind to answer some of my questions pls.

For instance, wether you would suggest Karma as a Prescriptive Ideology or Descriptive theory or both?

In future, I will quote some of my pts for ur convenience :D

I do not know what you mean by ideology vs. descriptive. Kindly define each one, then I can give you a better answer.

[SRS]

Dear SRS

Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma? I am also interested to know, is karma a form of energy.

Karma is not carried in the body. Body is just a vehicle only, so the extinct of a species at the form level is not relevant. The thought patterns (vasanas) in dinasors have not extincted, (body has extincted when found unsuitable to adapt to nature) but have taken the next state of body which is suitable to adapt in nature.
The water in the ocean (liquid form) transform into gas form and then fall as snow (solid) form in mountain peaks. They then melt and then run into streams, rivers and finally to ocean. the basic is water , but the forms or states keep changing.
Same way the Ego thought from bacteria to human just takes only different forms and different means of expressions. so the body form is really irrevelant.

Hope this is clear.

How are the thought patterns transmitted one from one species to another? You will agree that the thought patterns of more complex animals are more advanced than the thought patterns of simpler animals. We are taught that bad karma will lead to a lower birth. So if a human is reborn as a dog or cat, for example, his thought patterns become much simpler... is that correct? It is easy to see the truth of what you said, that the body is just a vehicle; however, one can categorize the complexity of the thought patterns according to the physical form of the body?

[thamizhvaanan]

Prescriptive -- theory to guide ppl
Descriptive -- facts that define our world..

hope thats clear SRS

[thamizhvaanan]

the way life revolves and every act that happens every moment is sort of calculated through the actions of everyone/everything involved at that momentThis is why when we come to examine a particular position of someone reflective of karma, we need to examine the contribution (good or bad) or role played by all to or in that position.pls dont confuse both. What Mr.Hulk is trying to say is that, a current event is a result of a sequence of past events, not necessarily related to the our first person.

To make it clear, let us say that 5 ppl including me were involved in a murder. Today I walk to the market and get killed by a drunken driver.

What mr.Hulk says is that my tragic end is a result of both my decision to walk to the market today and also coz of the drunken lunatic deciding to get behind the wheels.

What a karmic philosopher says is that, I get killed coz i participated in a murder some days back. Well he does complicates the theory a bit more to account for the fact that the other 4 culprits are still safe and sound.

According to karmic theory, their net karma (sum of positive and negative deeds) is either positive or the karma is saving its best punishment for their next lives. So they survive now.

As imaginative and well-thought-out the theory might sound, it is beleived to be the correct formula that drives the world.

Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands :roll:

[Designer]

thx pradeep :)

yup its clear.

srs's question was t here in my mind too.

HOW/WHY SOME SPECIES goes extinct?

SP : if one subscribes / believes in Karmic Law/ theory -

as the individual soul evolves through different births, its Karmas get exhausted one after another, taking it higher up the ladder of lifeforms.

But its also believed that, the net sum of souls in any yuga is constant. so as the soul evolves to the next higher level and takes the body of the higher life form, the number of the lower species of lifeforms correspondingly decreases.

That could be the reason why the Human population is increasing dramatically, while the population of various species of flora, fauna, other mammals are dwindling over the decades or centuries.

Of course, this explanation will satisfy only if a person believes in Karmic law, or atleast views the whole thing in the light of Karma.

[thamizhvaanan]

Designer,forget the micro-organisms ... ants are the most abundant species on the planet.

cockroaches are the most succesful species to survive so many years ...

Does karma explain this?

[Designer]

Designer,forget the micro-organisms ... ants are the most abundant species on the planet.

cockroaches are the most succesful species to survive so many years ...

Does karma explain this?

TV : true - it could be that so many billions and trillions of bacteria, amoeba & other lifeforms on the lowest scales had died. And the souls in them, having evolved somewhat, had taken/assumed bodies of Ants, cockroaches etc.

[Designer]

TV : some work has come up g2g, so will try to answer your other questions (if any), and ask some of my own too, and participate in this interesting discussion later. :)

[Rohit]

Who Am 'I'?


There can be no witness higher or otherwise than Me than which higher or otherwise witness is not needed/there. 'I' am the One and Only Supreme Consciousness, The One without a Second, Non-Dual, The One and Only Witness; and that is what 'I' am.


There is no arising of Consciousness without conditions. The one, who transcends the Consciousness of the Self, attains Nirvana; the perfect liberation from the endless cycle of Cognitive Degeneration.

Let all the TCBs enjoy the never-ending cycle of births, deaths and rebirths, irrespective of who they are when every time they ask the question "Who Am 'I'?" , set out to search for an answer; and then come up with whatever egocentric and wish riding answer. :lol:

:D :) :thumbsup:

[pradheep]

let us say that 5 ppl including me were involved in a murder. Today I walk to the market and get killed by a drunken driver.

To explain your spiritual plane question, I will use this material plane (body) example, five people drink everyday alcohol and smoke. One person after a few weeks gets cough and goes to a doctor and is diagnozised of liver cancer, while the other four still continues with their life style.

The reason is the person who got liver cancer already had weak immunity on top of that he stressed his body with chemcials from alcohol and tobacco and so he got the disease right away. The other four still has good stock of anti-oxidants in their body and are still in good shape for them to handle the chemical stress.

Hope you can get answer for your question with my example. There are many factors out of which the key is the thoughts (life style) that contribute to the outcome of the results (karma) on each individual. The motherof the guy who got liver cancer , could have poor nutrition and stressed out pregnancy contributing to increased of this individual.

This does not mean that the mother has to be blamed. She had done out of her ignorance or her situation would have made her to do that way. But this guys thoughts leading to a bad life style was the precipitating factor for the outcome of the results.

Hope this make sense to you my dear TmZ.

[thamizhvaanan]

Ofcourse I understand your analogy and the several sub clauses of karmic theory that you are suggesting. But I guess, you didn get my main pt of contention. I will agree to whatever you said before and even more, but only if you can prove.


Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands

[pradheep]

dear tmz,
i dont understand what you mean by "the proof" or "show me". what kind of proof do you need? I get all this knowledge by meditation and also by trancending the Ego. This anyone can get.

[Badri]

I rarely post in this discussion simply because I both believe the Karma theory and don't!! And I certainly dont know what karma is making me post now! :wink: or whether I will accrue any karma because of it! :)


What a karmic philosopher says is that, I get killed coz i participated in a murder some days back. Well he does complicates the theory a bit more to account for the fact that the other 4 culprits are still safe and sound.

According to karmic theory, their net karma (sum of positive and negative deeds) is either positive or the karma is saving its best punishment for their next lives. So they survive now.

Well TV, all that nonsense arises out of an improper understanding of the Karma theory. Perhaps one can use that sort of a theory to frighten a child into doing good things - "If you torture that poor dog, then next birth you will be born as the dog and the dog will torture you". Clearly there can be no logical following up of this.

That said however the simple fact that people have observed namely "Every action having a reaction" is really the root cause of the karma theory. But then even that can be questioned as SP pointed out - is my current action an "action" or is it the "reaction" to something else?

Then again is the classic question - how did the first bad karma arise.

These logical questions clearly nullify the karma theory.

The only thing we can be really sure of is that every action has a reaction, somewhere, somehow. I think it was you who pointed out the chaos theory that a butterfly flapping its wings in A can cause a tornado in B. Can the butterfly therefore be charged guilty of the crime of killing millions?

The entire theory really was invented to keep human beings in line. Left to themselves there probably is not telling what they would do as history attests. Law is like Karma theory too - do something wrong, then do jail time for it!

The same idealogy forms the basis of karma. Do something good and you will enjoy; do something bad and you will suffer. But sometimes we see "bad" people enjoying a good life while "good" people suffer. That would be a big blow for the karma theory. So they added a rider, "if not in this birth then surely in the next you will reap the consequences of your actions"


Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands

What is there to show? Go and put your hand in the fire and you will see!!! :lol:

Karma theory makes logical sense; it explains so many unanswered questions and it is even scientific - Newton's 3rd law! :)

Its silly and absurd interpretations are what weakens it and makes reasonable people question it. If people are not so desperate to prove it right, everything will be alright! :)

[Rohit]

[tscii:04edd86eda]
I rarely post in this discussion simply because I both believe the Karma theory and don't!! And I certainly dont know what karma is making me post now! :wink: or whether I will accrue any karma because of it! :)


What a karmic philosopher says is that, I get killed coz i participated in a murder some days back. Well he does complicates the theory a bit more to account for the fact that the other 4 culprits are still safe and sound.

According to karmic theory, their net karma (sum of positive and negative deeds) is either positive or the karma is saving its best punishment for their next lives. So they survive now.

Well TV, all that nonsense arises out of an improper understanding of the Karma theory. Perhaps one can use that sort of a theory to frighten a child into doing good things - "If you torture that poor dog, then next birth you will be born as the dog and the dog will torture you". Clearly there can be no logical following up of this.

That said however the simple fact that people have observed namely "Every action having a reaction" is really the root cause of the karma theory. But then even that can be questioned as SP pointed out - is my current action an "action" or is it the "reaction" to something else?

Then again is the classic question - how did the first bad karma arise.

These logical questions clearly nullify the karma theory.

The only thing we can be really sure of is that every action has a reaction, somewhere, somehow. I think it was you who pointed out the chaos theory that a butterfly flapping its wings in A can cause a tornado in B. Can the butterfly therefore be charged guilty of the crime of killing millions?

The entire theory really was invented to keep human beings in line. Left to themselves there probably is not telling what they would do as history attests. Law is like Karma theory too - do something wrong, then do jail time for it!

The same idealogy forms the basis of karma. Do something good and you will enjoy; do something bad and you will suffer. But sometimes we see "bad" people enjoying a good life while "good" people suffer. That would be a big blow for the karma theory. So they added a rider, "if not in this birth then surely in the next you will reap the consequences of your actions"


Well, I am still willing to beleive, but I just ask "show me". Hope someone understands

What is there to show? Go and put your hand in the fire and you will see!!! :lol:

Karma theory makes logical sense; it explains so many unanswered questions and it is even scientific - Newton's 3rd law! :)

Its silly and absurd interpretations are what weakens it and makes reasonable people question it. If people are not so desperate to prove it right, everything will be alright! :)
Thank you Badri for putting the already gone haywire thread in a better perspective.

However, I disagree with you on one point.

Karma literally means action and there is nothing in the word karma that expresses the notion of reaction. It is because of this missing concept of reaction; the theory of karma fails to explain both Action and Reaction. Also the title of this thread "KARMA-The free will Vs VIDHI-The fate" fails to take the concept of reaction into proper account.

:D :) :thumbsup: [/tscii:04edd86eda]

[Rohit]

(1) Karma, and responsibility to action starts the moment we think "I". The moment we think "I" then we become responsible for the actions.

(2) All living beings are manifestation of the Ego. Ego means "I", the physical body and so different from rest of it.

(3) But the common factor of Ego is "I" am the physical body.

(4) I told them that is how the Ego acts.

I would take it one step further and ask you, why do some species go completely extinct? Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma?

(5) Karma is not carried in the body. Body is just a vehicle only, so the extinct of a species at the form level is not relevant.
Analysis of the above statements:

(1) When we think "I"; karma, the responsibility to action begins.
(2) All being are manifestation of Ego.
(2) Ego is "I".
(2) Ego is physical body.
(3) Ego thinks "I" am the physical body.
(4) Ego thinks and acts, therefore Ego is the doer of Karma.
(5) But the body does not carry karma (the responsibility to action - (1)).
(5) Body is just a vehicle.
- From (5), it clearly implies that physical body is free of all karma.

- But from (2), (3), (4) & (5) physical body is Ego, "I", thinker and the doer of karma who thinks "I" and carries the burden of karma.
This creates the classical condition of logically explosive contradiction; which unequivocally throws off the whole theory as "expounded" by our dear friend TCB Pradheep, who does not even know or understand that our dear friend Designer has pumped a huge multiplicity of souls in his bucket.


as the individual soul evolves through different births, its Karmas get exhausted one after another, taking it higher up the ladder of lifeforms.

But its also believed that, the net sum of souls in any yuga is constant.

TV : true - it could be that so many billions and trillions of bacteria, amoeba & other lifeforms on the lowest scales had died. And the souls in them, having evolved somewhat, had taken/assumed bodies of Ants, cockroaches etc.
So, it evidently proves once more that the TCBs like Pradheep would never miss to commit the following forms of fallacies.

1. Subjectivism: Fallacious propositions that violate objectivity: I believe/want to believe p to be true; therefore p is true.

2. Reference Effect: Erroneous perception and evaluation of situation based on fallacies.

3. Redundancy: Increasing confidence in redundant data or information.

4. Non-Sequitur: The conclusion does not follow from the premises; the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion. Another name for the fallacy is "irrelevant conclusion"

5. Mental Blockade: Failing to think objectively upon receipt of facts.

6. False Assurance: Ascribing credibility to contradicting data or information.

7. Begging the Question (Circular Argument): Because p-->p.
Conclusion:

It is extremely sad to see that even today, there are people like Pradheep, who would not hesitate a bit to act morally completely irresponsibly and go for exploiting the ignorance of poor people like SP, SRS, Designer and their likes, who are so vulnerable; and therefore, so receptive to misguidance that people like Pradheep would not miss the opportunity to discharge, whatever rubbish that has been flushed into his own insensate head by some other opportunist, into their insensate heads.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[goodsense]

Designer, that was a good summary. I felt that way too. Sorry it got deleted.

[thamizhvaanan]

I get all this knowledge by meditation and also by trancending the Ego. :ty: No more questions.


The entire theory really was invented to keep human beings in line.My point :ty:

[Designer]

Designer, that was a good summary. I felt that way too. Sorry it got deleted.

goodsense :thnx for your comments, but my post was not deleted by Mods.
I had deleted it myself as I wanted to post a different answer.

[Designer]

(1) Karma, and responsibility to action starts the moment we think "I". The moment we think "I" then we become responsible for the actions.

(2) All living beings are manifestation of the Ego. Ego means "I", the physical body and so different from rest of it.

(3) But the common factor of Ego is "I" am the physical body.

(4) I told them that is how the Ego acts.

I would take it one step further and ask you, why do some species go completely extinct? Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma?

(5) Karma is not carried in the body. Body is just a vehicle only, so the extinct of a species at the form level is not relevant.
Analysis of the above statements:

(1) When we think "I"; karma, the responsibility to action begins.
(2) All being are manifestation of Ego.
(2) Ego is "I".
(2) Ego is physical body.
(3) Ego thinks "I" am the physical body.
(4) Ego thinks and acts, therefore Ego is the doer of Karma.
(5) But the body does not carry karma (the responsibility to action - (1)).
(5) Body is just a vehicle.
- From (5), it clearly implies that physical body is free of all karma.

- But from (2), (3), (4) & (5) physical body is Ego, "I", thinker and the doer of karma who thinks "I" and carries the burden of karma.
This creates the classical condition of logically explosive contradiction; which unequivocally throws off the whole theory as "expounded" by our dear friend TCB Pradheep, who does not even know or understand that our dear friend Designer has pumped a huge multiplicity of souls in his bucket.


as the individual soul evolves through different births, its Karmas get exhausted one after another, taking it higher up the ladder of lifeforms.

But its also believed that, the net sum of souls in any yuga is constant.

TV : true - it could be that so many billions and trillions of bacteria, amoeba & other lifeforms on the lowest scales had died. And the souls in them, having evolved somewhat, had taken/assumed bodies of Ants, cockroaches etc.
So, it evidently proves once more that the TCBs like Pradheep would never miss to commit the following forms of fallacies.

1. Subjectivism: Fallacious propositions that violate objectivity: I believe/want to believe p to be true; therefore p is true.

2. Reference Effect: Erroneous perception and evaluation of situation based on fallacies.

3. Redundancy: Increasing confidence in redundant data or information.

4. Non-Sequitur: The conclusion does not follow from the premises; the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion. Another name for the fallacy is "irrelevant conclusion"

5. Mental Blockade: Failing to think objectively upon receipt of facts.

6. False Assurance: Ascribing credibility to contradicting data or information.

7. Begging the Question (Circular Argument): Because p-->p.
Conclusion:

It is extremely sad to see that even today, there are people like Pradheep, who would not hesitate a bit to act morally completely irresponsibly and go for exploiting the ignorance of poor people like SP, SRS, Designer and their likes, who are so vulnerable; and therefore, so receptive to misguidance that people like Pradheep would not miss the opportunity to discharge, whatever rubbish that has been flushed into his own insensate head by some other opportunist, into their insensate heads.

:D :) :thumbsup:

Rohit : It could as well be my Karma which makes me reply to your post! Just because you don't believe in something which others believe in (or have experienced), DOESN'T imply that the others are 'ignorant', 'misguided', 'receptive to misguidance' etc etc, or that you are more knowledgeable than others.

Like another person posted in this thread before, I understood something about Karma, Rebirth, Religion, Spirituality, Liberation, Realisation & God by practising Meditation diligently for some time. I believe the proof of the pudding is in the eating - so why dont you try Meditation for some time? Maybe it would provide you answers to other questions as well, let alone Karma!

[Rohit]

(1) Karma, and responsibility to action starts the moment we think "I". The moment we think "I" then we become responsible for the actions.

(2) All living beings are manifestation of the Ego. Ego means "I", the physical body and so different from rest of it.

(3) But the common factor of Ego is "I" am the physical body.

(4) I told them that is how the Ego acts.

I would take it one step further and ask you, why do some species go completely extinct? Example being dinosaurs. What becomes of their karma?

(5) Karma is not carried in the body. Body is just a vehicle only, so the extinct of a species at the form level is not relevant.
Analysis of the above statements:

(1) When we think "I"; karma, the responsibility to action begins.
(2) All being are manifestation of Ego.
(2) Ego is "I".
(2) Ego is physical body.
(3) Ego thinks "I" am the physical body.
(4) Ego thinks and acts, therefore Ego is the doer of Karma.
(5) But the body does not carry karma (the responsibility to action - (1)).
(5) Body is just a vehicle.
- From (5), it clearly implies that physical body is free of all karma.

- But from (2), (3), (4) & (5) physical body is Ego, "I", thinker and the doer of karma who thinks "I" and carries the burden of karma.
This creates the classical condition of logically explosive contradiction; which unequivocally throws off the whole theory as "expounded" by our dear friend TCB Pradheep, who does not even know or understand that our dear friend Designer has pumped a huge multiplicity of souls in his bucket.


as the individual soul evolves through different births, its Karmas get exhausted one after another, taking it higher up the ladder of lifeforms.

But its also believed that, the net sum of souls in any yuga is constant.

TV : true - it could be that so many billions and trillions of bacteria, amoeba & other lifeforms on the lowest scales had died. And the souls in them, having evolved somewhat, had taken/assumed bodies of Ants, cockroaches etc.
So, it evidently proves once more that the TCBs like Pradheep would never miss to commit the following forms of fallacies.

1. Subjectivism: Fallacious propositions that violate objectivity: I believe/want to believe p to be true; therefore p is true.

2. Reference Effect: Erroneous perception and evaluation of situation based on fallacies.

3. Redundancy: Increasing confidence in redundant data or information.

4. Non-Sequitur: The conclusion does not follow from the premises; the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion. Another name for the fallacy is "irrelevant conclusion"

5. Mental Blockade: Failing to think objectively upon receipt of facts.

6. False Assurance: Ascribing credibility to contradicting data or information.

7. Begging the Question (Circular Argument): Because p-->p.
Conclusion:

It is extremely sad to see that even today, there are people like Pradheep, who would not hesitate a bit to act morally completely irresponsibly and go for exploiting the ignorance of poor people like SP, SRS, Designer and their likes, who are so vulnerable; and therefore, so receptive to misguidance that people like Pradheep would not miss the opportunity to discharge, whatever rubbish that has been flushed into his own insensate head by some other opportunist, into their insensate heads.

:D :) :thumbsup:

Rohit : It could as well be my Karma which makes me reply to your post! Just because you don't believe in something which others believe in (or have experienced), DOESN'T imply that the others are 'ignorant', 'misguided', 'receptive to misguidance' etc etc, or that you are more knowledgeable than others.

Like another person posted in this thread before, I understood something about Karma, Rebirth, Religion, Spirituality, Liberation, Realisation & God by practising Meditation diligently for some time. I believe the proof of the pudding is in the eating - so why dont you try Meditation for some time? Maybe it would provide you answers to other questions as well, let alone Karma!
Thank you Designer for your feedback, but that is not how it works.

There is no arising of consciousness without conditions. Mediation is nothing but a part of such conditioned states.

I have already passed that stage.

No matter how much and how many times one meditates; it is the Ego/I that meditates, it is the Ego/I that says "I meditate..........." and it is the Ego/I that declares his/her subjective and wish riding experiences.

Anyway, thank you again :!:

:D :) :thumbsup:

[SRS]

There is no arising of consciousness without conditions.

What are the conditions that gave rise to the singular energy, which in turn led to the creation of the Universe? Neither you, nor science will ever be able to give a definitive explanation of such. Therefore, the paradox in your (atheist) conception of a purely mechanistic Universe is apparent at the very inception. Because the beginning itself is ambigous from such a perspective.


Now hit START and try again. :lol:

[Rohit]

Let the TCBs continue with their egocentric guesses. Of course, the TCBs must not forget to check their account of Cognitive Degeneration (CD); currently it stands at CD = N = 875.

Let the TCBs enjoy their wish ride in the never-ending, Vicious Spiral of Cognitive Degeneration (VSCD) until they succeed in realising the transcendent Ultimate Truth and Ultimate Reality.

That is the ultimate challenge the TCBs must keep facing; till then, the TCBs have no option but to keep going to START and keep incrementing their CD counts. :lol:

:D :) :thumbsup:

[pradheep]

There is no arising of consciousness without conditions.

Dear SRS and friends,
Awareness and Consciousness are highly misunderstood terms in scientific comunity and by common people. That which arises with conditions is awareness and that which is not conditioned is Consciousness. In sanskrit awareness is chith and consciosuness is "Sath" or Brahmam.

Sath or consciousness is inherent in everything. It is expressed as awareness in beings (conditioned). LIke heat and energy. Energy is inherent nature of every atom. Without energy there is no beings (living or non living beings). This energy is expressed as light heat, sound based on the conditions. When we rub two stones, heat is produced. This means the inherent energy is expressed as heat through rubbing "conditions".

It is shear absurd to say that energy is present through arising conditions. No a rational mind would say heat is arising through arising conditions (rubbing action). Similarly Consicousness is unconditional and awareness is conditonal. We lose awareness and we are declared dead, but not consciousness. Unfortunately except in sanskrit and in other Indian languages we have these two distinct terms.

In English these two terms consciousness and awareness are used loosely to denote the same aspect of Awareness, because of lack of understanding of Awareness and consciouness.

This is the beauty of Self realization. The brain cells through conditions of awareness can be used to realize Consciousness. This can be acheived only when one transcend the Ego. There are eight limbs of this process called ashtanga Yoga.

Before Samadhi is this dhyana, meditation through which one reaching that realization state.

It is a pity that people talk about this realization by reading books and commenting it. Reading books of self realized people is like eating the spitted sugarcane pulp. There will be tinge of some sweetness. But if one has to know the sweetness of sugarcane one has to eat the sugarcane as such and not the spiited pulp of others.

Dear designer,

You are correct, like the above mentioned example, one has to to do meditation one self and realize the truth and not by reading books of self realized people or vedas or upanishads. Reading upanishads or vedic literature and commenting on it is like tasting spiited pulp and commenting the juicness of sugarcane. One has to take a bite of the sugarcane as such.

I am talking not based on any bookish knowledge. I myself has tasted the sugarcane and letting you know.

I am not talking anything based on any beleif system. You experience the Truth by yourself. I am just giving the path or means only.


The entire theory really was invented to keep human beings in line.
Dear Thamizh and Badri,
Yes this is how all of our Ego (including mine) would comment. This is an excuse of our ego to do all karmas. This is how some one uses karma theory to hide his weakness and blame all his failures and problems on karma.

The more we watch our Ego and understand it, it is so thrilling experience to see how it can keep us ignorant of the reality.

Ego does not allow us to go for realizing the truth. It keeps us in beleif systems so that it can continue its tyranny.

Summary: Those who take complete responsibility for all the actions and its effects will understand the truth behind karma theory. For those who wants to blame others, situations, genes, environment will not find the karma theory logical.

[Rohit]

I am talking not based on any bookish knowledge.

I myself has tasted the sugarcane and letting you know.

I am not talking anything based on any belief system.

I am just giving the path or means only.
Miraculously; the post containing above statements clearly explains why sugarcane eaters never become sugarcanes themselves; but habitually remain egocentrics forever. Looks like poor has fatally mistaken spitted pulp of bamboos for sugarcane. :lol: :lol: :lol:

The entire post containing the above quoted egocentric statements evidently proves it once more that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions; and the consciousness arising in mediation is nothing but a part of such egocentrically imposed conditioned states.

The above quoted egocentric statements also evidently prove that no matter how much and how many times one meditates; it is the Ego/I that meditates, it is the Ego/I that says "I meditate..........." it is the Ego/I that makes the egocentric statements such as quoted above; and it is the Ego/I that declares his/her egocentric and wish riding experiences.

So, let the TCBs continue with their egocentric guesses. Of course, the TCBs must not forget to check their account of Cognitive Degeneration (CD); currently it stands at CD = N = 876.

Let the TCBs enjoy their wish ride in the never-ending, Vicious Spiral of Cognitive Degeneration (VSCD).


:D :) :thumbsup:

[selvakumar]

<a href="http://www.astroved.com/archives/newsletter/041007_IN.html"> What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort? </a>

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort? The recent issue of Forbes magazine has listed the billionaires of the world by continent. According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively. Of all billionaires in the world it is said that 60% of them made it from scratch by themselves. I was reading this magazine while coming to San Diego. I am glad I picked it up. It triggered in me certain thought processes that would be useful for my readers. Let me try to answer this question whether destiny or human efforts make you a billionaire. By looking at the celebrity billionaire Oprah Winfrey whose assets according to the magazine are $1.3 billions. Everyone knows that Oprah rose from very humble beginnings. She only wanted to make money according to her age. She is currently 53 and that means that she would be making only $53,000. However she is a billionaire now, making several hundred million dollars annually.

Everyone knows that Oprah is an optimist and a very positive person. She always says that I have made it and you can also make it. No doubt she did make it. But the question still remains, is it Oprahs effort that made it, or her stars that made her a billionaire? Let me try to answer this question just from a rationalistic point of view. There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful. They have not even seen a million dollars in their life. Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded. I just recall a famous line from Thomas Grey in his elegy written for the villagers who died without recognition or fame: many a flower is born; it wastes its fragrance in the desert air. There are genius persons, may they be scientists, political philosophers, or economists, who still cannot get their ideas even to the print media. They die completely frustrated and in poverty.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma. If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so. Ones karma is everything. Karma is the law of spiritual causality. It is the spiritual law of motion that says that there is an equal and opposite reaction to your thoughts and actions. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She only wanted to make modest money consciously. But then her unconscious had a different agenda. Your karma is mostly the unconscious and what matters is the unconscious rather than the conscious. Your unconscious is your karma and is controlled by the planets. The Vedic seers developed this science of astrology to great details.

It is my goal in this lifetime to prove that Vedic astrology is a higher science. Everyone should study astrology in order to know what is going to happen to him or her in the present as well as in the future. For the past few years I have been asking my students to pay attention to happenings in their life. I am delighted to know that there are people who follow the planetary changes on an hourly basis. You should realize that if your karma is bad, it is not going to be uniformly bad throughout ones life. There are ups and downs, meaning good and bad, happenings. Even within one day the nine planets have their own slots of time to bring good or bad things for you. The hora astrology enables everyone to understand good and bad times for everyone on a daily basis

[goodsense]

On the contrary, I have heard people (black) referring to Oprah's wealth, as sinful. We have heard also all kinds of negative lines about rich people, which we could argue, takes away from good Karma.

[Sudhaama]

What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort? The recent issue of Forbes magazine has listed the billionaires of the world by continent. According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively. Of all billionaires in the world it is said that 60% of them made it from scratch by themselves. I was reading this magazine while coming to San Diego. I am glad I picked it up. It triggered in me certain thought processes that would be useful for my readers. Let me try to answer this question whether destiny or human efforts make you a billionaire. By looking at the celebrity billionaire Oprah Winfrey whose assets according to the magazine are $1.3 billions. Everyone knows that Oprah rose from very humble beginnings. She only wanted to make money according to her age. She is currently 53 and that means that she would be making only $53,000. However she is a billionaire now, making several hundred million dollars annually.

Everyone knows that Oprah is an optimist and a very positive person. She always says that I have made it and you can also make it. No doubt she did make it. But the question still remains, is it Oprahs effort that made it, or her stars that made her a billionaire? Let me try to answer this question just from a rationalistic point of view. There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful. They have not even seen a million dollars in their life. Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded. I just recall a famous line from Thomas Grey in his elegy written for the villagers who died without recognition or fame: many a flower is born; it wastes its fragrance in the desert air. There are genius persons, may they be scientists, political philosophers, or economists, who still cannot get their ideas even to the print media. They die completely frustrated and in poverty.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma. If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so. Ones karma is everything. Karma is the law of spiritual causality. It is the spiritual law of motion that says that there is an equal and opposite reaction to your thoughts and actions. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She only wanted to make modest money consciously. But then her unconscious had a different agenda. Your karma is mostly the unconscious and what matters is the unconscious rather than the conscious. Your unconscious is your karma and is controlled by the planets. The Vedic seers developed this science of astrology to great details.

It is my goal in this lifetime to prove that Vedic astrology is a higher science. Everyone should study astrology in order to know what is going to happen to him or her in the present as well as in the future. For the past few years I have been asking my students to pay attention to happenings in their life. I am delighted to know that there are people who follow the planetary changes on an hourly basis. You should realize that if your karma is bad, it is not going to be uniformly bad throughout ones life. There are ups and downs, meaning good and bad, happenings. Even within one day the nine planets have their own slots of time to bring good or bad things for you. The hora astrology enables everyone to understand good and bad times for everyone on a daily basis

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

Backed by my Rich knowledge (mostly by WORST SUFFERINGS, INEXPLICABLE) gained by my Vast and intensive experience of varied hues, nations, regions with mosaic people...

..more than the other avenues of Knowledge from books and others...

...I can answer to the Valid Questions, Perplexive theories, Unravelled mysteries, Unending doubts, Incongruence of Truth with Reality, and Rudimentary concept of Life... raised here...

But... prior to my reply... I am anxious to hear from my other friends here.

My dear Learned Friends,

.. please speak out your rich knowledge on Life.
.

[Rohit]

What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort? The recent issue of Forbes magazine has listed the billionaires of the world by continent. According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively. Of all billionaires in the world it is said that 60% of them made it from scratch by themselves. I was reading this magazine while coming to San Diego. I am glad I picked it up. It triggered in me certain thought processes that would be useful for my readers. Let me try to answer this question whether destiny or human efforts make you a billionaire. By looking at the celebrity billionaire Oprah Winfrey whose assets according to the magazine are $1.3 billions. Everyone knows that Oprah rose from very humble beginnings. She only wanted to make money according to her age. She is currently 53 and that means that she would be making only $53,000. However she is a billionaire now, making several hundred million dollars annually.

Everyone knows that Oprah is an optimist and a very positive person. She always says that I have made it and you can also make it. No doubt she did make it. But the question still remains, is it Oprahs effort that made it, or her stars that made her a billionaire? Let me try to answer this question just from a rationalistic point of view. There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful. They have not even seen a million dollars in their life. Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded. I just recall a famous line from Thomas Grey in his elegy written for the villagers who died without recognition or fame: many a flower is born; it wastes its fragrance in the desert air. There are genius persons, may they be scientists, political philosophers, or economists, who still cannot get their ideas even to the print media. They die completely frustrated and in poverty.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma. If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so. Ones karma is everything. Karma is the law of spiritual causality. It is the spiritual law of motion that says that there is an equal and opposite reaction to your thoughts and actions. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She only wanted to make modest money consciously. But then her unconscious had a different agenda. Your karma is mostly the unconscious and what matters is the unconscious rather than the conscious. Your unconscious is your karma and is controlled by the planets. The Vedic seers developed this science of astrology to great details.

It is my goal in this lifetime to prove that Vedic astrology is a higher science. Everyone should study astrology in order to know what is going to happen to him or her in the present as well as in the future. For the past few years I have been asking my students to pay attention to happenings in their life. I am delighted to know that there are people who follow the planetary changes on an hourly basis. You should realize that if your karma is bad, it is not going to be uniformly bad throughout ones life. There are ups and downs, meaning good and bad, happenings. Even within one day the nine planets have their own slots of time to bring good or bad things for you. The hora astrology enables everyone to understand good and bad times for everyone on a daily basis

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

Backed by my Rich knowledge (mostly by WORST SUFFERINGS, INEXPLICABLE) gained by my Vast and intensive experience of varied hues, nations, regions with mosaic people...

..more than the other avenues of Knowledge from books and others...

...I can answer to the Valid Questions, Perplexive theories, Unravelled mysteries, Unending doubts, Incongruence of Truth with Reality, and Rudimentary concept of Life... raised here...

But... prior to my reply... I am anxious to hear from my other friends here.

My dear Learned Friends,

.. please speak out your rich knowledge on Life.
.
Dear Sudhaama,

I am glad to read your post with anxious eagerness to share your thoughts. Thank you.

Well, let me begin by asking you a few very simple but important questions and request you to share your views on the following factual reality, which speaks for itself; and therefore, there is nothing much for me to elaborate on the lives of Indian people during those times, irrespective of who they were.

Here are the questions:
Q1: In your view, exactly what factors made the entire India to become the horrific victim of waves after waves of foreign invasions; first by a handful of Moguls and then by a handful of Europeans (mainly British) making the entire Indian population slave, rendering hundreds of millions of Indians dismally destitute (poor and impoverished) leaving them in subhuman conditions for over a thousand years?

Q2: Also, to what extent your understanding on the above mentioned historic events correlate to your following appreciative words for the article, as quoted below?

Q3: To what extent the theories of karma and astrology as projected in the article can be used (in your view as well as in reality) as the two interlinked frameworks to explain those historic events?

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

:D :)

[thilak4life]

:roll:

[Sudhaama]

.
.Why POOR FATE for Past India.. under Foreign Invadors?




What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort? The recent issue of Forbes magazine has listed the billionaires of the world by continent. According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively. Of all billionaires in the world it is said that 60% of them made it from scratch by themselves. I was reading this magazine while coming to San Diego. I am glad I picked it up. It triggered in me certain thought processes that would be useful for my readers. Let me try to answer this question whether destiny or human efforts make you a billionaire. By looking at the celebrity billionaire Oprah Winfrey whose assets according to the magazine are $1.3 billions. Everyone knows that Oprah rose from very humble beginnings. She only wanted to make money according to her age. She is currently 53 and that means that she would be making only $53,000. However she is a billionaire now, making several hundred million dollars annually.

Everyone knows that Oprah is an optimist and a very positive person. She always says that I have made it and you can also make it. No doubt she did make it. But the question still remains, is it Oprahs effort that made it, or her stars that made her a billionaire? Let me try to answer this question just from a rationalistic point of view. There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful. They have not even seen a million dollars in their life. Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded. I just recall a famous line from Thomas Grey in his elegy written for the villagers who died without recognition or fame: many a flower is born; it wastes its fragrance in the desert air. There are genius persons, may they be scientists, political philosophers, or economists, who still cannot get their ideas even to the print media. They die completely frustrated and in poverty.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma. If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so. Ones karma is everything. Karma is the law of spiritual causality. It is the spiritual law of motion that says that there is an equal and opposite reaction to your thoughts and actions. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She only wanted to make modest money consciously. But then her unconscious had a different agenda. Your karma is mostly the unconscious and what matters is the unconscious rather than the conscious. Your unconscious is your karma and is controlled by the planets. The Vedic seers developed this science of astrology to great details.

It is my goal in this lifetime to prove that Vedic astrology is a higher science. Everyone should study astrology in order to know what is going to happen to him or her in the present as well as in the future. For the past few years I have been asking my students to pay attention to happenings in their life. I am delighted to know that there are people who follow the planetary changes on an hourly basis. You should realize that if your karma is bad, it is not going to be uniformly bad throughout ones life. There are ups and downs, meaning good and bad, happenings. Even within one day the nine planets have their own slots of time to bring good or bad things for you. The hora astrology enables everyone to understand good and bad times for everyone on a daily basis

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

Backed by my Rich knowledge (mostly by WORST SUFFERINGS, INEXPLICABLE) gained by my Vast and intensive experience of varied hues, nations, regions with mosaic people...

..more than the other avenues of Knowledge from books and others...

...I can answer to the Valid Questions, Perplexive theories, Unravelled mysteries, Unending doubts, Incongruence of Truth with Reality, and Rudimentary concept of Life... raised here...

But... prior to my reply... I am anxious to hear from my other friends here.

My dear Learned Friends,

.. please speak out your rich knowledge on Life.
.
Dear Sudhaama,

I am glad to read your post with anxious eagerness to share your thoughts. Thank you.

Well, let me begin by asking you a couple of very simple but important questions and request you to share your views on the following factual reality, which speaks for itself; and therefore, there is nothing much for me to elaborate on the lives of Indian people during those times, irrespective of who they were.

Here are the questions:
Q1: In your view, exactly what factors made the entire India to become the horrific victim of waves after waves of foreign invasions; first by a handful of Moguls and then by a handful of Europeans (mainly British) making the entire Indian population slave, rendering hundreds of millions of Indians dismally destitute (poor and impoverished) leaving them in subhuman conditions for over a thousand years?

Q2: Also, to what extent your understanding on the above mentioned historic events correlate to your following appreciative words for the article, as quoted below?

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

:D :)

Dear Rohit,

You have raised a GOOD QUESTION... but out of relevance to this thread...

So I have started with my brief reply... in the relevent thread on INDIAN HISTORY and FUTURE INDIA,

http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?p=987791&sid=6bb19300a3a0c9d576fdac9e1001801b#987791

So let us continue discussions parallelly... on both the threads.
.

[SRS]

What makes a billionaire? Is it destiny or human effort?

Karma has nothing to do with material gain or financial success. You cannot take your wealth with you to the grave. 8-)

[Rohit]

.
.Why POOR FATE for Past India.. under Foreign Invadors?




What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort? The recent issue of Forbes magazine has listed the billionaires of the world by continent. According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively. Of all billionaires in the world it is said that 60% of them made it from scratch by themselves. I was reading this magazine while coming to San Diego. I am glad I picked it up. It triggered in me certain thought processes that would be useful for my readers. Let me try to answer this question whether destiny or human efforts make you a billionaire. By looking at the celebrity billionaire Oprah Winfrey whose assets according to the magazine are $1.3 billions. Everyone knows that Oprah rose from very humble beginnings. She only wanted to make money according to her age. She is currently 53 and that means that she would be making only $53,000. However she is a billionaire now, making several hundred million dollars annually.

Everyone knows that Oprah is an optimist and a very positive person. She always says that I have made it and you can also make it. No doubt she did make it. But the question still remains, is it Oprahs effort that made it, or her stars that made her a billionaire? Let me try to answer this question just from a rationalistic point of view. There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful. They have not even seen a million dollars in their life. Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded. I just recall a famous line from Thomas Grey in his elegy written for the villagers who died without recognition or fame: many a flower is born; it wastes its fragrance in the desert air. There are genius persons, may they be scientists, political philosophers, or economists, who still cannot get their ideas even to the print media. They die completely frustrated and in poverty.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma. If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so. Ones karma is everything. Karma is the law of spiritual causality. It is the spiritual law of motion that says that there is an equal and opposite reaction to your thoughts and actions. Look at Oprah Winfrey. She only wanted to make modest money consciously. But then her unconscious had a different agenda. Your karma is mostly the unconscious and what matters is the unconscious rather than the conscious. Your unconscious is your karma and is controlled by the planets. The Vedic seers developed this science of astrology to great details.

It is my goal in this lifetime to prove that Vedic astrology is a higher science. Everyone should study astrology in order to know what is going to happen to him or her in the present as well as in the future. For the past few years I have been asking my students to pay attention to happenings in their life. I am delighted to know that there are people who follow the planetary changes on an hourly basis. You should realize that if your karma is bad, it is not going to be uniformly bad throughout ones life. There are ups and downs, meaning good and bad, happenings. Even within one day the nine planets have their own slots of time to bring good or bad things for you. The hora astrology enables everyone to understand good and bad times for everyone on a daily basis

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

Backed by my Rich knowledge (mostly by WORST SUFFERINGS, INEXPLICABLE) gained by my Vast and intensive experience of varied hues, nations, regions with mosaic people...

..more than the other avenues of Knowledge from books and others...

...I can answer to the Valid Questions, Perplexive theories, Unravelled mysteries, Unending doubts, Incongruence of Truth with Reality, and Rudimentary concept of Life... raised here...

But... prior to my reply... I am anxious to hear from my other friends here.

My dear Learned Friends,

.. please speak out your rich knowledge on Life.
.
Dear Sudhaama,

I am glad to read your post with anxious eagerness to share your thoughts. Thank you.

Well, let me begin by asking you a couple of very simple but important questions and request you to share your views on the following factual reality, which speaks for itself; and therefore, there is nothing much for me to elaborate on the lives of Indian people during those times, irrespective of who they were.

Here are the questions:
Q1: In your view, exactly what factors made the entire India to become the horrific victim of waves after waves of foreign invasions; first by a handful of Moguls and then by a handful of Europeans (mainly British) making the entire Indian population slave, rendering hundreds of millions of Indians dismally destitute (poor and impoverished) leaving them in subhuman conditions for over a thousand years?

Q2: Also, to what extent your understanding on the above mentioned historic events correlate to your following appreciative words for the article, as quoted below?

Q3: To what extent the theories of karma and astrology as projected in the article can be used (in your view as well as in reality) as the two interlinked frameworks to explain those historic events?

Very Well Said... Each and Every word is HIGHLY MEANINFUL AND PRETTY LAUDABLE. !!!

:D :)

Dear Rohit,

You have raised a GOOD QUESTION... but out of relevance to this thread...

So I have started with my brief reply... in the relevent thread on INDIAN HISTORY and FUTURE INDIA,

http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?p=987791&sid=6bb19300a3a0c9d576fdac9e1001801b#987791

So let us continue discussions parallelly... on both the threads.
.
No, dear Sudhaama your avoidance to answer those questions in the pertinent context in this thread, by default, implies absolute incompatibility with this thread; and therefore; throws off the entire article as well as your appreciative words for the article in the bin.

I insist you to give your precise response right here, in this thread, in the contexts of karma and astrology; if you would.

Anyway, your avoidance has said everything. There is not much left for the readers to conclude what they already would have concluded by now.

:D :)

[goodsense]

Karma has nothing to do with material gain or financial success. You cannot take your wealth with you to the grave.

Correct! It's the LEGACY that is left behind.

Even if the materially and or financially successful person decides to give away to the poor and needy in accumulating good karma, it is not the quantity that matters or the amount given away, it's the mind it is done with. To illustrate, even Christian teaching would confirm that the poor woman who gave to beggar the last penny she had, was held in higher esteem than the richer who gave more. It is the mind issue in two-fold; meaning the love and relativity in amount given.

On the note of love, Hinduism also tells us to some effect the same - that a low caste woman kept the sweetest part of a fruit for Lord Rama when she finally met with him and instantly she reached the heights of Moksha. :)

[goodsense]

Indeed, rich knowledge can be reflected in the worse of sufferings. To speak out in sharing it, I for one have learnt my lessons. But one good thing to keep in mind, some of the greastest people had some of the worse sufferings and on top of that, their suffering has been used to ABUSE them. What makes it worse, when the people who have caused the suffering are the ones who use the effects of it to Taunt and ABUSE on a regular basis. Makes you wonder whether they only have human form, but are really and truly sub-humans. What is the driving force? :x

[Sudhaama]

.
.Mind TO GIVE.. matters a lot in Life... to counter Ill-Fate.!!



Karma has nothing to do with material gain or financial success. You cannot take your wealth with you to the grave.

Correct! It's the LEGACY that is left behind.

Even if the materially and or financially successful person decides to give away to the poor and needy in accumulating good karma, it is not the quantity that matters or the amount given away, it's the mind it is done with. To illustrate, even Christian teaching would confirm that the poor woman who gave to beggar the last penny she had, was held in higher esteem than the richer who gave more. It is the mind issue in two-fold; meaning the love and relativity in amount given.

Yes. I quote my experience.

When I was employed at Thirumalai Hills.. as the Civil-Engineer in charge of Construction.. more than 50 years back...

... whenever I faced the worst circumstance of extreme financial paucity...

..my entire Cash-balance on hand (intended for my subsistence), I used to drop in the Sri Venkateswara Swamy Hundi at the Temple...

...and stay totally Empty-handed... STARVING WITHOUT FOOD for the whole day..

Miraculously!... the very next day.!!.. MONEY USED TO RUSH to me VOLUNTARILY from somewhere.!!!..

... mostly from the unexpected sources... Untried quarters... even STRANGERS!.. and more from the due quarters..

...Invariably and unfailingly on every such handicapped situations..

Yes... it is the MIND TO GIVE away.... matters in Life ...

.. which sort of SOULFUL ATTITUDE can mitigate the Onslaughts of Fate.
.

[pavalamani pragasam]

seththum koduththaan Seethakkaathi...koduththu sivanthana KarNanin karangkaL..moottai moottaiyaay paNaththai katti vaiththukoNdu thoongaamal iruppavarkaLaivida veRumkaiyudan/paiyudan nimmathiyaay thoongupavarkaL koduththuvaiththavarkaL! Hell-um heaven-um manathilthaan! paavam puNNiyamum palankaLum manampOlaththaan!

[thamizhvaanan]

seththum koduththaan Seethakkaathi...koduththu sivanthana KarNanin karangkaL..moottai moottaiyaay paNaththai katti vaiththukoNdu thoongaamal iruppavarkaLaivida veRumkaiyudan/paiyudan nimmathiyaay thoongupavarkaL koduththuvaiththavarkaL! Hell-um heaven-um manathilthaan! paavam puNNiyamum palankaLum manampOlaththaan!:clap: :clap:

[Rohit]

---deleted by Moderator as being in extremely bad taste. Kindly refrain from provocative or disparaging remarks.----

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you moderator for acknowledging the bitter taste of truth.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

Indeed, rich knowledge can be reflected in the worse of sufferings. To speak out in sharing it, I for one have learnt my lessons. But one good thing to keep in mind, some of the greastest people had some of the worse sufferings and on top of that, their suffering has been used to ABUSE them. What makes it worse, when the people who have caused the suffering are the ones who use the effects of it to Taunt and ABUSE on a regular basis. Makes you wonder whether they only have human form, but are really and truly sub-humans. What is the driving force? :x
Dear goodsense, would you please care to elaborate on what you have just stated in your above post and provide the wider readers community a few clear examples (by positive identifications and not by negations) of those to whom you wish to call as sub-humans?

[goodsense]

[tscii:5da8b6698e]
Dear goodsense, would you please care to elaborate on what you have just stated in your above post and provide the wider readers community a few clear examples (by positive identifications and not by negations) of those to whom you wish to call as sub-humans?

I wanted to elaborate in the first place, but felt it might not be welcomed or people may form the wrong opinion. To put it bluntly or to repeat what I have been complaining of for sometime, I receive on a regular basis, a string of emails, the contents of which are Taunting and Abusive, all of which relates to things I post on this forum or things going on in my private life here in Ontario when I am being followed and comments drop in striking up conversations in TWOs. Thus, the writer or person giving instructions visits this forum regularly and also have information of my daily life. Someone one is reporting.

The emails are now forwarded to third parties with an explanation and the Toronto police are well aware. Who else is doing this, but the British due to ongoing battles. They use whites and sometimes blacks and alternate strategies when things get too suspicious. The people they use to get information, Taunt and Abuse me, have no idea what they back in Britain have done. You may or may not have noticed posts from one Ceasar Augustus (an educated, experienced, intelligent man; exactly what it takes to see the truth) in the US. He is convinced that my allegations are true and I sought his assistance in reporting to the police recently. Not too many people I can tell this story to and those in Britain know that and are taking advantage of it.

Here is Caesar's email address once again for verification - that we had these discussions as a matter of days ago: caesar_agustus2001@yahoo.com

Now I have no privacy in my life. For security reasons based on the above, I live with Surveillance 24 hours. Everything I do in my own residence is being monitored. I am sure if you have been following my post about my experiences as a student in Britain, you can fill in the rest. It's too personal for me to write all this here, but you have the drift. Now that I am writing my book, it’s worse. They know I am and when I announced it, in a way I was protecting myself.

Were you referring to me in that post that got deleted?
[/tscii:5da8b6698e]

[pradheep]

What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?
Dear Selvakumar,

Material success is only of the success of the many. Modern man give emphasis and focus too much on that only.

To make a billionaire, thought is first , then action and then the result. There are many who thinks, but very few who put that in action and out of that very few get the result. In each stage it depends on all the cumulative effects of the past and the present. This means human effort is needed and that is the only choice left, but the results are based on these factors. This is what Krishna tells to Arjuna that you are only a choice maker but the results of karma is not in your hands, because the obey the laws of Karma.

[Rohit]

[tscii:4b1b4cf8a1]
What makes a billionaire?
Is it destiny or human effort?

"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort?

According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively.

There are many people who have better skill sets and social and ethnic advantage than Oprah, but they did not become successful.

Empirical analysis would likely conclude that it is simply ones own skills that makes one financially successful. If it were so, then everybody who is good in their job would have succeeded.

According to the siddhas and yogis, ones fortune or misfortune is the result of his karma.

If Oprah Winfrey or Bill Gates became successful, it is already in their stars. Their skills do matter but only minimally so.

Ones karma is everything.
Skills means ability, talent, cleverness, expertise etc.
Effort means attempt, endeavour, try etc. which implies action (karma)

There are many who thinks, but very few who put that in action and out of that very few get the result. In each stage it depends on all the cumulative effects of the past and the present. …. the results of karma is not in your hands, because they obey the laws of Karma.
The readers with some analytical skills must have noticed the long series of self-contradictory and self-defeating statements on the same issue, and the above sequence of statements is just a new addition to the series.


"Who becomes a billionaire and is it destiny or human effort?
According to the list America has the most billionaires at 415; Europe and Asia carry the following statistics: 242 and 160, respectively.
From the percentage population point of view, the above statistics clearly implies that the karma of Americans is 6.3 times higher than that of Europeans and 40.6 times higher than that of Asians, which also implies that the karma of Europeans is 6.5 times higher than that of Asians. :?: :?: :?: :!: :!: :!: :?: :?: :?:

Conclusion:

From the above analysis and countless other observations, I can incontrovertibly claim that it is only the human intelligence and proactive efforts, either solo or collectively, that could decisively influence the milestone outcomes, shape the environment and secure future successes, irrespective of the field.

In nutshell; people should be intelligent, proactive and non-fatalist to become successful in any field.

:D :) :thumbsup: [/tscii:4b1b4cf8a1]

[SRS]

---deleted by Moderator as being in extremely bad taste. Kindly refrain from provocative or disparaging personal remarks---

[SRS]

Karma has nothing to do with material gain or financial success. You cannot take your wealth with you to the grave.

Correct! It's the LEGACY that is left behind.

Even if the materially and or financially successful person decides to give away to the poor and needy in accumulating good karma, it is not the quantity that matters or the amount given away, it's the mind it is done with. To illustrate, even Christian teaching would confirm that the poor woman who gave to beggar the last penny she had, was held in higher esteem than the richer who gave more. It is the mind issue in two-fold; meaning the love and relativity in amount given.

On the note of love, Hinduism also tells us to some effect the same - that a low caste woman kept the sweetest part of a fruit for Lord Rama when she finally met with him and instantly she reached the heights of Moksha. :)

Yes, it is the level of development of the mind that will determine the next rebirth. This is the exclusive concern in Buddhism, in fact. As far as I am aware, both the Buddhism and the Hinduism stress detachment from materialism for this very reason. It is too easy to get caught up in maya when one is forever surrounded by one lavish endowment after another. Now, this may not be the case for some people. But it is indeed the case for most people - that is why ashramas were created, for example. An ashrama is an extreme case of one wishing to detach himself entirely from all material possessions and focus exclusively on the development of the mind (relative to spiritual development, in this case).

[thamiz]

Yes, it is the level of development of the mind that will determine the next rebirth.

So believers (especially some experts who undersood karma theory very well) wont get to born again as their brains are fully developed according to some other believers's assessment ?? :rotfl:

I am glad at least their era ends right in this birth as therir mind and brain are fully developed to get to mOksha or wahtever.

The future will be certainly bright without them! :lol:

Their brains and minds must have been half-developed in theri last last birth then? :roll:

Anyway, thanks to karma theory which helps finishing up the last life of "know-it-alls" which makes the future brighter ! :lol:

[thamiz]

pradheep:

Some children born and die on the same day or within few hours of their birth.

What kind of karma they can "serve' in such a limited time when they were "unconscious" :?:

[pavalamani pragasam]

8-)

[thamizhvaanan]

I just got reminded of a T-Shirt philosophy :lol2:

Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who do.

:lol:

[Badri]

I just got reminded of a T-Shirt philosophy :lol2:

Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who do.

:lol:

:lol:

Good one!!!

[a.ratchasi]

:cool2:

[Badri]

AR!!! After a zillion years!! How are you?

Sorry for digression, folks :)

[a.ratchasi]

Hi Badri!! :wave: (will pm you)
------------
sorry all for the digression :wink:

[Rohit]

Karma has nothing to do with material gain or financial success. You cannot take your wealth with you to the grave.

Correct! It's the LEGACY that is left behind.

Even if the materially and or financially successful person decides to give away to the poor and needy in accumulating good karma, it is not the quantity that matters or the amount given away, it's the mind it is done with. To illustrate, even Christian teaching would confirm that the poor woman who gave to beggar the last penny she had, was held in higher esteem than the richer who gave more. It is the mind issue in two-fold; meaning the love and relativity in amount given.

On the note of love, Hinduism also tells us to some effect the same - that a low caste woman kept the sweetest part of a fruit for Lord Rama when she finally met with him and instantly she reached the heights of Moksha. :)

Yes, it is the level of development of the mind that will determine the next rebirth. This is the exclusive concern in Buddhism, in fact. As far as I am aware, both the Buddhism and the Hinduism stress detachment from materialism for this very reason. It is too easy to get caught up in maya when one is forever surrounded by one lavish endowment after another. Now, this may not be the case for some people. But it is indeed the case for most people - that is why ashramas were created, for example. An ashrama is an extreme case of one wishing to detach himself entirely from all material possessions and focus exclusively on the development of the mind (relative to spiritual development, in this case).
Quoted below is what the Western World thinks about the theory of karma as "expounded" in Hinduism and as advocated here by many of its followers. :)


But from Western eyes, it is not desirable to have good karma either. Reverend Moises Roman explained that in Hinduism belief, you reincarnate into a cow, not as a punishment, but because you have been very good and have reached a very high level of development. In fact, in Asia, it is an ideal to stop reincarnating and become free of the supposed endless cycle of birth and re-birth, whereas to a New Age westerner, it is a welcome idea to keep reincarnating.

According to economists, India, which has a free market and is a democracy, should have an excellent economy. Yet it is one of the poorest parts of the world because there is little support for equality and charity.

http://www.gaglio.co.uk/crossnews/editorials.htm

:D :) :thumbsup:

[pavalamani pragasam]

I just got reminded of a T-Shirt philosophy :lol2:

Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who do.

:lol:

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Rohit]

[tscii:8edfaba5e2]
On the note of love, Hinduism also tells us to some effect the same - that a low caste woman kept the sweetest part of a fruit for Lord Rama when she finally met with him and instantly she reached the heights of Moksha. :)
First of all, there is a name given to that low caste woman character. The character’s name was Sabri (the one who is in waiting); and, according to the story, by her selfless service of giving the selected berries to Ram; she earned her liberation.

Now the first questions is; who were/are those even lower or the lowest caste moronic people who would cast or call Sabri as a low caste woman?

The second question is; form where did Sabri get those berries? The obvious answer to this question is; from berry threes that keep growing berries and keep giving them away free of charge to anyone that can consume them as nourishments, irrespective of who or what they are.:!:

In fact, all trees and plants do the same, give away their produces free of charge to anyone who can use or consume them; irrespective of who or what they are; but trees and plants are not liberationed.

Why?

If they were, the entire life would be liberated.

Enjoy the paradox!!!

But don't expect to find clues in your horoscopes.

:D :) :thumbsup:
[/tscii:8edfaba5e2]

[goodsense]

I don't know what fruit it was, but she bit many of them and when she found a sweet one, that is the one she kept for offering.

[goodsense]

With respect to quotes about the western world and Hinduism and inequality in India, here is an article with some interesting sections for skimming.

http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2001/5-6/13_letters.shtml

[Rohit]

[tscii:50ae52086c]
With respect to quotes about the western world and Hinduism and inequality in India, here is an article with some interesting sections for skimming.

http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2001/5-6/13_letters.shtml
Quotes from the same site:


- May 5th (Indian arrival day) is still not a national holiday; the rising tide of suicide among Hindus is still not on the national agenda.

- Moreover, in Guyana today, Hindus are leaving the country in droves, or are living in deplorable conditions!

- statistics indicate that there is an increase in Hindus converted to Christianity,

- Ironically, he has always acted as if Hinduism in Guyana begins and ends with him.

- I read with deep sadness the accounts of Hindus protesting Valentine's Day in India--Hindus committing acts of violence. Ahimsa was forgotten. Non-violent protest was forgotten. Decency was forgotten.

- The Northeast Report …….the complex socio-economic situation of Northeast India. Geographic isolation, differences of language, tribe, religious beliefs, British colonizing practices and the current federal, state and local laws have made life complicated.

- Women in India are very fast following the Western system of marrying a man of their choice. They believe that arranged marriages are mismatched and are fixed under pressure, where a woman is always the sufferer.

Enjoy the paradox!!!

:D :) :thumbsup:
[/tscii:50ae52086c]

[pradheep]

What kind of karma they can "serve' in such a limited time when they were "unconscious"
DEar TZ,
I thought you had no more questions!.

These children terminate the birth and prefer another "re-entry", like you do terminate a class and go for another. I initially joined Bsc zoology and after two months I discontinued and joined Biochemistry. A guy in Biochemistry department terminated after two months when he got MBBS admission. So I occupied that vaccant Biochemistry seat.

[goodsense]

With respect to your comment on quotes from the same site, it all depends on how you read the articles. For example, because of the Marxist ideology practiced by Hindu heads associated with a government that faces demands from different races of people, large number of Hindus fled the country while a smaller percentage (mainly those unable to flee) circum by converting to Christianity, yet no improvement in their lives. The conditions are probably worse.

Hindus that fled Guyana in droves did not come to the west where they mainly reside (US (New York) and Canada (Toronto)) and abandoned Hinduism.

"...Indeed, the people of Indian origin who have come to America from Guyana, Trinidad and Suriname are the hidden Hindus of America. While the Hindus from India are the focus of media stories on religion, the people of Indian origin from West Indies are often overlooked. Yet this community is even more diehard and staunch in its Hindu beliefs than Indians from the motherland.."

"If you have to grade the Guyanese for the upkeep of the Hindu religion on a scale of one to ten, they will get 9.5."

http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1995/8/1995-8-02.shtml

In numerous postings in this new hub, I have already presented sites on the Hindus from Guyana in Toronto. Not any different from those in New York and we are all well familiar with Pundit Sukul and Prakash Gossai (someone you can set up all night and listen to - his teachings and singing) from New York. Large crowds would gather here at his Yagnas in the summer, no one wants to miss out on him. In fact, there is a larger number here - more than Indians from India too.

[Rohit]

I initially joined Bsc zoology and after two months I discontinued and joined Biochemistry. A guy in Biochemistry department terminated after two months when he got MBBS admission. So I occupied that vaccant Biochemistry seat.
Of course! No wonder why there is an ever-increasing number of Hindus converting to other religions and freely adopting the western system and western way of life, chucking all such gobbledegook into the trash bins. Looks like the poor also had no choice but to helplessly follow the same trend.

This also clearly explains why most Indian politicians keep changing parties; and why Indian people and Indian politicians whole heartily accepted a foreigner as their one and only unquestionable leader; simply because they could find not a single Indian from a massive population of over a billion, who is capable enough and worthy enogh of the position.

Enjoy the paradox!!!

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Rohit]

Irrespective of how one reads and/or writes; the wishful fallacies posted here and there cannot hide the factual/ground realities; nor such fallacies can be offered to prove the issue when the proper way of doing so, demands thorough examination of everything under critical scrutiny. In nutshell, fallacies always remain as fallacies, irrespective of how they are written/presented and/or how they are read and/or comprehended, I am afraid. Period!

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamiz]

What kind of karma they can "serve' in such a limited time when they were "unconscious"
DEar TZ,
I thought you had no more questions!.

So did I. :)


These children terminate the birth and prefer another "re-entry", like you do terminate a class and go for another. I initially joined Bsc zoology and after two months I discontinued and joined Biochemistry. A guy in Biochemistry department terminated after two months when he got MBBS admission. So I occupied that vaccant Biochemistry seat.

Yeah but you decide and switch to biochemitry.

The child decides and changes its mind there :?: I thought it was unconscious to make a decision. :roll:

Or God drirects the child's path with some special attention as he/she changed the mind :?: :roll:

[pradheep]

The child decides and changes its mind there I thought it was unconscious to make a decision.

Child is not not a stone, it is conscious and can make choices at the spiritual plane more than the materialistic plane.


Or God drirects the child's path with some special attention as he/she changed the mind

what is the God you are talking about?

[thamiz]

Child is not not a stone,

Nobody said, child is a stone here! :)


it is conscious and can make choices at the spiritual plane more than the materialistic plane.

How do you know that :?:


what is the God you are talking about?

The one who directs the child's destiny.

[pradheep]

How do you know that

As i told before , through Meditation.



The one who directs the child's destiny.
Is the one, a male or a female?

[thamiz]

How do you know that

As i told before , through Meditation.

Really?!

You did not tell me THIS ONE :)



Is the one, a male or a female?

How does it matter? :roll:

Your biochemistry mentor teaches (D) or (L) amino acid based on their SEX?

Or they teach the same chemistry no matter what sex they are :?:

[pradheep]

You did not tell me THIS ONE
Dear absent minded professor, TZ,
please check last week messages when I Wrote through meditation, you replied no more questions. can you recollect.


male or female
I asked to know "your" concept of the god, which/that controls the child destiny..according to you.

[thamiz]

You did not tell me THIS ONE
Dear absent minded professor, TZ,
please check last week messages when I Wrote through meditation, you replied no more questions. can you recollect.

Would you mind QUOTING here to prove that I am absent minded! Thanks!



I asked to know "your" concept of the god, which/that controls the child destiny..according to you.

Sex does not matter to me! :)

[pradheep]

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:39 pm
dear tmz,
i dont understand what you mean by "the proof" or "show me". what kind of proof do you need? I get all this knowledge by meditation and also by trancending the Ego. This anyone can get.

[thamiz]

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:39 pm
dear tmz,
i dont understand what you mean by "the proof" or "show me". what kind of proof do you need? ?.

YOu dont know how to QUOTE a POST??? :o

It is a pity! :(

THAT is not ME who asked any proof THEN. You are misquoting here.

[pradheep]

sorry Thamizh i did not put in quote and bold it for you. Now i have edited it. hope this makes you happy.

Okay back to the question....what do you mean by the word "God" or your understanding about tyhe word "God'.

[Rohit]

[tscii:ba7eb797db]
What kind of karma they can "serve' in such a limited time when they were "unconscious"

DEar TZ,
I thought you had no more questions!.


You did not tell me THIS ONE
Dear absent minded professor, TZ,
please check last week messages when I Wrote through meditation, you replied no more questions. can you recollect.


I get all this knowledge by meditation and also by trancending the Ego. :ty: No more questions.


The entire theory really was invented to keep human beings in line.My point :ty:
Exactly this what is expected to happen to the poor TCBs who first get "hooked", then heavily "tanked", and then get ready to go for a wish ride; and eventually trap themselves in such fatal conditions that are impossible to escape. The inevitable effect is, they get severe form of Alzheimer’s, which completely debilitates them from recollecting anything; forget altogether about them ever remaining in the position to recollect who is who and what is what. :lol: :lol: :lol:

The above quoted posts unequivocally prove exactly that without any reasonable doubt.

Let me extend a helping hand.

Dear TCB, for your own good and to help you recollect "things" for future reference, please first try to remember that thamizhvaanan and thamiz are two different persons; and only then go to the next stage. Please reduce your "consumption" first to help you avoid such fatal mistakes out of confusions and then try to learn things step by step.

This will help, only if you help yourself. :wink:

:D :) :thumbsup:[/tscii:ba7eb797db]

[thamiz]

Rohit: I guess he just mixed up the names as both sound the same! :)

[Rohit]

Rohit: I guess he just mixed up the names as both sound the same! :)
Yes thamiz, that evidently shows and proves our poor friend's ability, or rather sheer inability, to discern things properly and correctly. :)

[pavalamani pragasam]

:shock:

[Shakthiprabha.]

I think, in this thread, (or is it in every thread? )

a. 'hitting another's ego'
b. answering tit for tat with a childish behaviour, is getting more prominent, than THE REAL SUBJECT discussions or the QUEST to learn :(

sad.

It arises because ALMOST ALL OF US FEEL ' Only I am right', period.

Nobody seems to think OTHER PERSON may also be RIGHT.

Opening up the intellect, letting go the ego, IS THE MOST TOUGHEST thing anybody can do.

[Shakthiprabha.]

I have an unstoppable urge to quote the story of VISHWAMITRA here.

Vishwamitra was refused to be acknowledged as BRAHMA RISHI(or gnani) by sage Vasishta .

It was only later, when Vishwamitra LET GO HIS mammoth EGO, and showed signs of BEING HUMBLE, was he PRAISED as a real gnaani OR KNOWLEDGEABLE person.

Nobody has reached ultimate level, or can be considered Knowledgeable of 'THE REAL TRUTH', UNLESS, one let go the EGO.

[Shakthiprabha.]

What kind of karma they can "serve' in such a limited time when they were "unconscious"
DEar TZ,
I thought you had no more questions!.

These children terminate the birth and prefer another "re-entry", like you do terminate a class and go for another. I initially joined Bsc zoology and after two months I discontinued and joined Biochemistry. A guy in Biochemistry department terminated after two months when he got MBBS admission. So I occupied that vaccant Biochemistry seat.

Fine, as much as I know,

Its the CHILD's desires/vasana that TERMINATES with a particular surroundings, and choses another.

For some reaction/effect it had to be born in a womb for some months, when that SURROUNDINGS is not ITS DESIRE anymore, involuntarily the child stops to live in this particular surroundings.

The child may not have developed brain or conscious enough to TAKE DECISION with it physical mind or form, but SUBCONSCIOUSLY it had prepared to live in that womb or surroundings for that much period of time only.

DO I MAKE SENSE? Or Where am I wrong? or Any other better explanation / understanding from anybody?

[Rohit]

ALL OF US FEEL ' Only I am right', period.

Nobody seems to think OTHER PERSON may also be RIGHT.
As long as there are conditions, irrespective of what they are, the Ego of I, It, You, Him, Her, Them, Others.....etc. etc. will persist. No matter how much and how many times one tries under those conditions, there can be no liberation from the Vicious Spiral of Cognitive Degeneration (VSCD). Period.

Only by Transcending the Conciousness of Self, Nirvana can be attained, the perfect liberation from the Vicious Spiral of Cognitive Degeneration (VSCD). Period.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[thamiz]

For some reaction/effect it had to be born in a womb for some months, when that SURROUNDINGS is not ITS DESIRE anymore, involuntarily the child stops to live in this particular surroundings.?

Shakthi: you need to be CAREFUL when theorizing! 8-)

Extrapolate your theory for 40-yr old man dying in an accident!

If dying too young was child's desire, dying at 40 is the man's desire :?:

That too leaving his kids and wife crying on account of his desire :?:

Does not make any sense to me! :confused2:

[Rohit]

[tscii:091f23978a]
DO I MAKE SENSE?
A simple answer to the question is, absolutely NO. On the contrary; such explanations make nothing but absolute nonsense. Period.


Where am I wrong?
The explanation primarily uses the following two forms of fallacies.

1. Begging the Question (Circular Argument): Because I want p to be true; therefore, p is true.

2. Non-Sequitur: The conclusion does not follow from the premises; the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion. Another name for the fallacy is "irrelevant conclusion".
One can easily confirm the sheer nonsense committed under such fallacies.

One just has to recollect some of the most gruesome acts (read it as karma) committed by the Hindu society in the past (maybe even in present), when the surviving widows of dead men were forced by the society to burn themselves to death (Sati) against their will, choices and/or desires.


Any other better explanation / understanding from anybody?
Yes there is a simple, natural and scientific explanation for this; and that is, the conditions were not quite conducive for the child to survive, irrespective of his/her parent’s choice or desire; or for that matter, anyone else’s choice or desire.

:D :) :thumbsup: [/tscii:091f23978a]

[goodsense]

I have to agree with Shakthi's earlier two post of today. This is why I made the decision two days ago to abstain and concentrate on other things at hand. The focus is indeed wrong and this is why I refrained from further challenges that can go on and on and nothing gained, but time lost and being left with nothing but frustration.

Some of us already have too much to do and come here and get caught up even when we don't mean to. In addition to the other reasons for not writing too explicitly, our extremely busy lives can cause us to be negligent when we write and hence, wrongly accused. So, we are only left with one choice.

Will drop by in my own time. :)

[Rohit]

:shhh: How the idea of one and blinded choice constitute the fatal fallacy of false dichotomy?



It is customary that women between the age-group of 10-50 are not allowed inside the Sabarimala temple.

Poor bachelor Lord Ayyappa is now in the midst of a controversy as to whether a woman visited him or not. The world is aghast as to how could a fertile woman go to Sabarimala and touch the feet of the Lord.

Pune, March 7: Women are banned from the Shani Shingnapur temple at Ahmednagar district.

The story was no different at the Vitthoba temple in Pandharpur, where women were not allowed in till very recently.

Foreigners are not allowed to enter leading Hindu temples in Orissa, including the Jagannath temple at Puri and the Lingaraj temple here.

Priests at the Jagannath Temple in Puri Friday destroyed the food and performed purification rituals after Paul Rodgier, a 55-year-old American Christian, entered the temple Thursday afternoon.

Even late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi - a born Hindu - was not allowed to enter the temple when she was in power because she had married a Parsi.
http://www.chennaionline.com/columns/variety/2006/07sabarimala.asp

http://epradeep98.blogspot.com/2006/07/jayamala-vs-sabarimala.html

http://membres.lycos.fr/sacw/spip.php?article75

http://religion.info/english/articles/article_202.shtml

http://www.secularindia.com/news/2007/03/05Activists%20criticise.htm

Would this make you :ashamed: :?:

:D :) :thumbsup:

[Shakthiprabha.]

Rohit,

Ive mentioned once before, that, HINDUISM, takes care of ALMOST EVERYBODY regardless whatever mental maturity they may be.

It has lessons for LKG kids, PHD level and MUCH MORE which many cant conceive too.

What we TAKE FROM THIS RELIGION, depends on WHERE ONE STANDS.

The particular customs sounds dumb to some who has SURPASSED those levels.

Remember, t here are MILLIONS out there, who mental grasping capacity is much different.

RELIGION IS SOMETHING which caters to EVERYBODY.

It cant talk SCIENCE at LKG level.

MOST RELIGION has SYLABUS for PROFESSIONALS

some other RELIGION HAS SYLABUS FOR KIDS FROM LKG to 10th grade

As far as I know, HINDUISM is one of those FEW RELIGIONS, which has syllabus for ALMOST ALL GRADES imaginable.

[Shakthiprabha.]

I FAIL TO UNDRERSTAND, THAT, in WHAT WAY, talking about hinduisim and THESE LINKS, in context to the current issue?

[maithree]

I FAIL TO UNDRERSTAND, THAT, in WHAT WAY, talking about hinduisim and THESE LINKS, in context to the current issue?



Well keep in mind that Hinduism is being discussed here, so seculars and "intellectuals" feel that primal urge to say something abt it. :)

It's not like we're talking abt islam or xtianity. if those were being discussed, then yeah, no critisism or skeptisism etc will be posted even if it is in Context, since that is what secular and intellectual seem to mean! :thumbsup:

[Sudhaama]

.
.Fate: COMMON SUBJECT irrespective of RELIGIONS .

Why this NEGATIVE TREND of Hindu, Secular, Religions etc.?

Let the Hubbers put forth their Views basing on the Christian or Muslim or Hindu approach...

...or even on ATHEISTIC APPROACH... Let us welcome...

.. so long they are not Hurting anybody's Sentiments and Personal faiths.
.

[Rohit]

ALMOST ALL GRADES imaginable.
Yes SP, I entirely understand the above stated solitary idea of all imaginable grades.

However, one does wonder; which grades among all imaginable grades do those widows who were/are burnt to death (Satis) and also those women who were/are discriminated on a solitary ground of gender fall into? I am sure; there must be a solitory, imaginable idea on that too.

:D :) :thumbsup:

[selvakumar]

On the contrary, I have heard people (black) referring to Oprah's wealth, as sinful. We have heard also all kinds of negative lines about rich people, which we could argue, takes away from good Karma.

Fine. Good question indeed. The article I posted dealt with the same. Problem here is : Good / Bad - Many with same talent and skill sets don't reach that level. We have many examples for this. Only very few people reach such a position. Whether they deserve that or not is a diff question altogether. The article explains the same but in a diff angle. "Two flowers from the same location can reach diff levels. One might find its place around GOD's neck. The other one might spend its life by decorating one's bed "

[SRS]

ALMOST ALL GRADES imaginable.
Yes SP, I entirely understand the above stated solitary idea of all imaginable grades.

However, one does wonder; which grades among all imaginable grades do those widows who were/are burnt to death (Satis) and also those women who were/are discriminated on a solitary ground of gender fall into? I am sure; there must be a solitory, imaginable idea on that too.

:D :) :thumbsup:

Yes... don't forget that in the entire history of the world, it doesn't matter that other countries have burned people alive, practiced slavery until 1865, and racial discrimination until 1965, dropped two atomic bombs killing hundreds of thousands at one go, illegally invaded another country under false pretenses to steal millions worth of oil (leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of natives in the process), etc., etc. The practices of sati (in which the woman willingly sacrifices herself to the fire) and arranged marriages are far, far worse! :lol:

Elsewhere in the hub, "Rohit" has put the sole blame for foreign invasions of India on the native Indians themselves.

[pradheep]

Dears Sp,
You are right. It is finally choice only. The environment and situation are only secondary factors. We are only choice makers. Example, my cousin committed suicide few years back when she was only 30 years old leaving behind three year old son and a very loving husband. He lost his job and was trying for a job in gulf. Few of his attempts failed and for that she did this act.

Now there are wives in worse family situations who dont die, but look at my cousin. I can quote many examples, one of is a young boy of two and half years old undergoing leukemia. The amount of chemo and radiation he is undergoing is ashtoinishing doctors how he can withstand it. He is not prepared to die because he has made his choice. For us we would think what a 2 year old kid would choose.

There are several instances where people have overcome death in many harsh conditions, but it is mere choice that makes it, whether the situation is favorauble or not.

Dear Sk, look at our friends, there are ridiculing human beings as mere machines succumb to the fate of environment, here we are saying it is our choices that make it.

This is the optimistic attitude of sanatana dharma. All other doctrines of buddhism, jainism, christianity, or zorastrianism or any other isms are its children at various phases of growth.

Core of sanatana dharma is freedom from all limitations (Ego) and its core is the freedom of choices it allows for individual. Look at Mahabharata and its core Gits saying that everyone are choice makers shaping their own destiny.

Where else can you breath this freedom of air on Earth?

[Rohit]

Carefully read and try to grasp the following, how dogmatism mercilessly triggers a relentless flow of self-contradictory and self-defeating statements and also the dissonance-ridden fallacies; and makes the heedless believers completely receptive of every trash that can be flushed into their insensate heads by a few charlatans :!: :?:


The practices of sati (in which the woman willingly sacrifices herself to the fire) and arranged marriages are far, far worse! :lol:

Elsewhere in the hub, "Rohit" has put the sole blame for foreign invasions of India on the native Indians themselves.

Dear Sk, look at our friends, there are ridiculing human beings as mere machines succumb to the fate of environment, here we are saying it is our choices that make it.

Core of sanatana dharma is freedom from all limitations (Ego) and its core is the freedom of choices it allows for individual.

Where else can you breath this freedom of air on Earth?
Which directly implies that, 16th April 2007: Thirty American students committed collective suicide by making a free choice of getting shot by a fellow student.

He and his wife were at a dinner party in Berlin when a guest expressed a belief in astrology. Einstein ridiculed the notion as pure superstition.

Another guest stepped in and similarly disparaged religion. Belief in God, he insisted, was likewise a superstition.

"I am a determinist. I do not believe in free will.

His belief in causal determinism was incompatible with the concept of human free will.

Einstein, on the other hand, believed that a person's actions were just as determined as that of a billiard ball, planet or star. "Human beings in their thinking, feeling and acting are not free but are as causally bound as the stars in their motions.

This determinism appalled some friends such as Max Born, who thought it completely undermined the foundations of human morality. "I cannot understand how you can combine an entirely mechanistic universe with the freedom of the ethical individual," he wrote Einstein. "To me a deterministic world is quite abhorrent.

For Born, quantum uncertainty provided an escape from this dilemma.

Is this Spinoza's God? "I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism

I don't think I can call myself a pantheist.

Do you believe in immortality? "No. And one life is enough for me."

Scientists aim to uncover the immutable laws that govern reality, and in doing so they must reject the notion that divine will

"The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of a God..."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298-2,00.html
Enjoy the paradox :lol: :lol: :lol:

But don't expect to find any clues in your horoscopes.

:D :) :thumbsup: