Friday, March 23, 2012

The myth of the atheists exploded........

Unable to understand Vedanta and just because unqualified Braahmans/higher casts distorted the system these people revolt against the unfailing principles in the name of science. Just go through the comments..


You Never Go Full Profound

 LIJE

37 COMMENTS:

Ramesh said...
Re: That is why you never go full profound. You just stay at profound and give others the chance to find profoundness in whatever way they like.


Is there any instance when others are denied to stay at profoundness in the history of the Sanatan Dharma (Hinduism) and AS A TRUE INTENT TO BE SO and so you saying as if such a chance is denied?


Others are preached/indoctrinated here so that ultimately they start questioning and learn it themselves. Brahman is that ultimate truth which is known by this method alone where contradictions are well settled. Belief is a system for those unable to reason out critically in Hinduism and do so for their welfare. 


You people only MISINTERPRET EVERYTHING EXACTLY FOR THIS REASON‼
Lije said...
Ramesh,

I didn't mean that some people are consciously and deliberately stopping other people from attaining enlightenment. What I should have said is that some people don't recognize that there are many ways and forms of enlightenment (like The Double Rainbow) and insist that something like Brahman is the Ultimate Truth and there is only one way to get to it. That is what I consider as "going full profound"

Also, as I've said elsewhere on my blog, Enlightenment is a state of the brain. It has nothing to do with questioning something and learning something by ourselves. All that are rationalizations to ascribe meaning to the experience. That is why when you go full profound, you will deny meaning that others have found via ways which your rationalization doesn't agree with.

People like me haven't misinterpreted anything. I've always held that different people can find meaning and purpose to their lives in different ways and that to them is the ultimate realization of their lives. Show me one instance where I said anything contrary to that. It is only you who thinks there is one Ultimate Truth just because you believe so. I have never denied your experience but don't expect me or any freethinker to buy your rationalization of the experience.
Ramesh said...
Here are immediate examples of your misrepresentations:


1. Re: some people don't recognize that there are many ways and forms of enlightenment (like The Double Rainbow) and insist that something like Brahman is the Ultimate Truth and there is only one way to get to it.


It is in Hinduism that recognises many ways of enlightenment. Here people become enlightened even by analysing a simple atom, dog, crow whatever that you can name and never unique. But there is only one kind of enlightenment i.e. Ultimate truth and whether his ultimate quest has been quenched or not will be the unique test of his enlightenment.


Lije look at one thing: In Hinduism enlightenment is not a condition of state of mind/brain or experience or anything else except a simple 'Knowledge' just like 2+2=4.. Just know/digest it and over. It is that knowledge after which the ultimate quest (root cause of all pain) of the human beings is quenched. It will never happen by science. Reason: Its own ‘means’. Brain/mind/experiences etc is purely scientific as you claim. People claiming as you state do it for entirely different reasons and are never Jnani as per original tenets of the Hinduism/shastras and only those people have ruined this Hinduism. So don’t compare them with Hinduism and lose your direction. You are arguing against Hinduism not not their people. People are mostly always with frauds for lack of sufficient reasoning.


2. Re: I've always held that different people can find meaning and purpose to their lives in different ways and that to them is the ultimate realization of their lives.


This is nothing but stating that either there is no such a thing like 'truth' or 'if it exists they are as many as the number of people realizing themselves'!

How absurd!! In your world of truth people will judge each other by different units (truths, each others own experiences etc) and fight will begin among themselves thinking that they are using the same units for every day life.
If it is really so then definitely I have every right to rob others and live lavishly since that alone is what I understand from my present life! Are you agreeing? Can you ever refute me on critical reasoning? Why I should be moral? Don’t say that it is an innate nature of human beings or there is invisible hand (invisible means again blind belief one). What can be convenient to you can very well be inconvenient to me. Then why agree on common rules? Why play the fair game? Any justifications? 


Please note that by enlightenment only one thing is meant: Truth unchangeable if at all it exists and has to be unique just as units of measurement like cm, inch etc otherwise only confusion and destruction of the world with our own hands. Rest assured!
Lije said...
Ramesh,

I think I see where you are coming from. Replace this sentence "It is only you who thinks there is one Ultimate Truth just because you believe so." with "It is only you who thinks your personal experience is The Ultimate Truth just because you believe so."

That and I've clearly defined what enlightenment is. I do not equate it with "T"ruth. There are fact propositions and then there are value propositions. You are mixing both.
Ramesh said...
Dear Lije,


Re:"It is only you who thinks your personal experience is The Ultimate Truth just because you believe so."


Did you read my last but one comment? I repeat - In Hinduism enlightenment is not a condition of state of mind/brain or experience or anything else except a simple 'Knowledge' just like 2+2=4.. Just know/digest it and over. It is that knowledge after which the ultimate quest (root cause of all pain) of the human beings is quenched.......etc.



I am least interested in how you define the ‘enlightenment’; I am concerned only with the fact that you are imposing your definition on that of Sanatan Dharma. Generally, by enlightenment truth alone is sought. Let us say if E=mc2 becomes enlightenment if practically it is true. Such a sort of enlightenment isdn't experienced by man. However, it would be just like enlightenment if this equation proves practically correct and so it does. Now going by the definition (of Sanatan dharma and not the distorted yours one) By this argument E=mc2 can't be enlightenment because it is only partial expression of the 'theory of everything'. Enlightenment should mean the one by knowing which your ultimate quest is quenched forever. 


Why are you people defining the things yourself and imposing it on Vedanta, Sanatan Dharma for which they never stand and yeh! they never opposed what you said in r/o science and its achievements. Sanatan Dhamra is making such a sort of Science only precise and Healthy. See my site.


What I find in your video (of enlightenment, your sort) is joy of marvellous beauty, the joy which gets decayed with the finding of other better scenes. A joy becomes enlightenment when it is permanent, once for all. And so it doesn't remain just a joy but mind, intellect etc gets permanently stable, fully quenched for having realized (like 1+1=2, or E=mc2) what everything is, since there remain no curiosity to look after or to solve as is science finding at present.


See if you could understand the sanatan dharma in the right perspective and particularly what I have bee arguing. Yes but it requires extraordinary effort and sincerity. Lifeless things like computer can even understand Science if it fed with proper data and definitions. You are human beings. You are expected to see beyond science but knowing full well the limitations of scientific method and however with total scientific temper and critical reasoning. Since it has not been there, there is every reason to call you people biased and interpreting very different things alien to Sanatan Dharma.

One complaint against you people- we state one thing about Vedanta and Sanatana Dharma and you argue quite other things having biased with the notion of scientific methods as unfailing and absolute one. Science gets corrected when due. But why expect santan dharma to be so which is ultimate. Problem is that you do not try what it says and mean fully ignoring (for lack of critical reasoning) that it NEVER contradicts your sort of science and above all refuse to understand it by offering YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION. Too much biased and insincere in approach!
Lije said...
Enlightenment isn't where you get a theory of everything. It is an experience in the brain and the rationalization that follows.

So it is not The Ultimate Whatever. If it was, Sanatana Dharmics would have thrown out the abominable varna dharma a long time back. And wouldn't have written sexist texts like Vichar Sagar. So go figure.
Ramesh said...
Re: Enlightenment isn't where you get a theory of everything. 


That’s your definition of enlightenment. Umpteen number of times I have stated it. Who gave you the right to impose it on sanatan Dharam?


Re: It is an experience in the brain and the rationalization that follows.


Very very absurd!!! It is the joy, happiness and all that accompanies the ‘ultimate knowledge’ which is experienced and not the Brahman itself. That’s simply knowledge. It is said to be experienced in the sense that knowledge of that expels all that unquenched curiosity (and so cause of misery) that surrounds the universe and SO it gives the experience of eternal joy for having solved the mystery.


Re: So it is not The Ultimate Whatever. If it was, Sanatana Dharmics would have thrown out the abominable varna dharma a long time back..


Poor friend!! There has not been varna dharma in sanatan dharma in the sense you think. Just as you people are misinterpreting all the Itihasas so has been the fate with Varna Dharma. Do you agree with the qualifications to do certain things? If yes then so is this. It is not by birth it is by qualification to understand! Please understand. There have been many Pandits who have ruined such a Hinduism by misinterpreting the Shastras.
Lije said...
I'm not going split hairs on definitions of words. But I'll leave this here:

Now imagine these same circuits become hyperactive as sometimes happens when you have seizures originating in the temporal lobes (TLE or temporal lobe epilepsy). The result would be an intense heightening of the patient's sensory appreciation of the world and intense empathy for all beings to the extent of seeing no barriers between himself and the cosmos—the basis of religious and mystical experiences. (You lose all selfishness and become one with God.) 

>>Do you agree with the qualifications to do certain things? If yes then so is this. It is not by birth it is by qualification to understand!<<

That's a lousy argument. Show me the evidence where all children, regardless of their station of birth were given the same training, and then based on how they take up to various subjects, they were assigned vocations.

I know you can't show me because The Ultimate Whatever is so Ultimate that it can't even comprehend as basic a fact as that qualifications are a function of the environment and instead believes in Ultimate silly things like innate gunas. The Ultimate result is that Ultimately varna has no other option than to become birth based.

Here's an example of how a society does it the proper way, without making any Ultimately lame excuses.

And that is precisely why Vedanta is only confounding talk and can never pay rent. It's Ultimate social implications are so Ultimate that one can Ultimately see the Ultimate depravity of the said Ultimate implications in Ultimate action.
Arvind Iyer said...
This recently published TED talk by Jonathan Haidt enlists the many means through which people have experienced what might be called 'self-transcendence', of which very few are even remotely religious.

Also relevant maybe this recently published article on the Neurologica blog on the autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR), which might offer clues as to why the unlikeliest of experiences maybe found compelling and even profound by us.
Ramesh said...
Here is rapid rejoinder for want of time,

Re: Show me the evidence where all children, regardless of their station of birth were given the same training, and then based on how they take up to various subjects, they were assigned vocations.


Did you forget that that training and knowledge is imparted to the pupil depending on what he questions, what interest he develops what natural instincts are prominent in him and what ability he has to overcome the same after each stage of understanding and his ability to grasp.

Lije, all cannot be given the same training. Don't you see how many meanings this 'brahman' has? Are they all true? You think yours alone is correct and is absurd‼

To start with mango and apple needs to be treated separately. Human being is not NECESSARILY so! Walya koli was robber by birth something untouchable by birth. Did not he become Valmiki Rushi greater than the Brahmin? Shabari was also degraded by birth. Did not Rama eat her fruit tasted by her? Did not see could know what the brahmins fail? Ravan was Brahmin by birth, but wasn't he treated like Rakshas due to his gunas? Wasn't Hanuman a monkey by birth? Isn't the greatest of Brahmin worship him for getting the knowledge? I haven't studied scriptures and Itihasas otherwise I would have given you the fitting examples far better!


See MY comments on http://sabhlokcity.com/2011/11/why-cant-muslims-and-christians-enter-hindu-temples/

for better understanding of the Hindu concepts.


Do your have the answers? You can't except gross PERVERSIONS as abundantly available as above.

Enlightenment: Hundred times I have told upon it. refer earlier comments. What YOU state is YOUR VERSION and never that of SANATAN DHARMA. If YOU cannot understand why malign the other? Simply because you have the freedom of expression and that others can be influenced easily my friend? Either question logically or declare it is not your area and unqualified for the same! Why feel shame for this? Sorry if you are hurt but responsibility is yours since I am being compelled to repeat the same things again and again.

I appreciate your link http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/

My dear friend what I see is that link it is the inherent interest that is guided properly. Hindu varnashrama is no more different from that. When your sort of practice (above link) goes the transition of thousand of years as has been the case with sanatan dharma it resembles to that of Varna Shrama. It is the people who make it rigid and not the original hypothesis. Blame people who practise this sanatan dharma and not the very sanatan dharma. Learn the difference if you can
Ramesh said...
Re: And that is precisely why Vedanta is only confounding talk and can never pay rent. It's Ultimate social implications are so Ultimate that one can Ultimately see the Ultimate depravity of the said Ultimate implications in Ultimate action.

Quite Appreciated!That is why exactly every moment we need the Guru to interpret the things AS THEY ARE! It is the dearth of them which has ruined everything to this level in Hinduism.


You may agree that fruits of science (all the comforts like gun, bombs etc) should not get into the hands of fanatic like N Korea, Afghanishtan etc (Hinudu, Muslim, Christen including the athiests)since by Hindu term they are unqualified for the same and hence untouchable in that respect, sense and TO THAT EXTENT ALONE (availability of science etc). Is not it the duty of everybody to ensure it to THAT EXTENT ALONE? A Jnani (or rational one in scientific term) alone can decide who is fanatic here! Won't you support such a rational man?


Now the circumstances have changed. As per the Hindu laws Varnashram should get changed as per Desh and kal. (change is the law of nature- Bhagawat geeta). And this Change is always in consonance with the knowledge prevelant at a particular time and space. To this extent change should have occurred. However stupid man has revolted against the Jnana in the name of science thinking that it will ultimately reveal everything!
Lije said...
How can a student read when they haven't been taught to do so? How can a student ask questions on calculus when they haven't been taught the basics of mathematics? That is what primary education of today does. Teach the basics. Then based on the student's proclivity, they can take up specializations.

So, I ask again. Show me the evidence where all children were taught the basics. Don't quote scripture. I too can quote from Harry Potter and Lord of The Rings. 

And on the need of a guru, I've written it here. Without bambozzling the population of the need of a guru, how else can one maintain the depraved ethics of Vedanta?
Ramesh said...
Dear Lije,

1. Re: Show me the evidence where all children were taught the basics.

Before you talk of the teaching, let you talk first of BASICS. For you reading, mathematics, primary education etc is BASIC. Will you please let me know to what extent these are assumed to be basic in Sanatan Dharma in view of transmission of knowledge primarily through Shruit (hearing) and Smriti (memory) etc and how much importance has been accorded to this your sort of BASICS there? 

Dear friend, cessation of all pain (quenching of ultimate quest and other comforts of the sort of modern science being at lower level) by virtue of ‘ultimate principle’ i.e. ‘theory of everything’ alone was the goal, essence and content of the Sanatan Dharma. Keeping in view this alone the reading, interpretation etc was prohibited to other less qualified (Varnashram, women etc) and people of other faith. This did not mean that physically it was denied to them. It meant only that they did not have any authority to do so. However by qualification they did interpret the Shastras (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Shudra_Hindu_saints, http://agniveer.com/821/vedas-and-shudra/) there are many other outstanding rishis belonging to these shudras, I am least interested in such factual data. 

Till now and forever Jnana is and will be treated as ‘open’ Secret of the universe. By the term ‘open’ everybody including all castes will be open to have an access to it unlike you sense (reading, mathematics, basic, primary education, basics etc). But by term ‘secret’ only qualified/eligible will be allowed to interpret it AS THEY ARE. Aren’t you people now can read all the shastras? But alas! Only to have it perverted grossly and mislead the community with both the Sanatan Dharma and Science!! It was exactly in this sense that they were forbidden and not in technical sense (reading, mathematics, basic, primary education, basics etc) as you state. However technically things happened as you state subsequently because of the cross breed of Brahman entered this community which were no more different from your community (in respect of reason and logic please and not in respect caste by birth note). So reason, if any, should be attributed to those and not the Sanatan Dharma as I have stated so many times before in this thread.

2. Re: Don't quote scripture. I too can quote from Harry Potter and Lord of The Rings. 

How foolish! All you people write about castism, enlightenment, Jnana, Sanatan Dharma, Vedanta, Ramayan, Mahabharat, Hinduism, and there practical implications on human community.....etc only by quoting from those sources and ask me not to quote from scripture (unlike we quote from Harry potter etc).

Dear, all our thinking bears to these scripture unlike the Harry Potter etc. What the scripture is to us so is not the Harry Potter to science but it is the science to Harry Potter so. Note the difference if only you can understand. Therefore we can authoritatively state from Scriputes but you can’t from Harry Potter. Harry Potter is imagination to science, scripture is not so to us (it is so for you thing is different).

Continued.......
Ramesh said...
.....From previous
3. Re: And on the need of a guru, I've written it here

That’s what you think and not what Sanatan Dharma is! Yours only perverted for reasons so well illustrated here and there.

4. Re: Without bambozzling the population of the need of a guru, how else can one maintain the depraved ethics of Vedanta?

One cannot maintain the Vedanta except either with the help of Guru (who will initiate the follower to a level suitable to his capacity and not necessarily to the Brahman) or the one himself who knows and is put to rest ultimately on his own with the check and balances (assimilating the contradictions so abundantly prevalent in Vedas, Shastra etc) in the Vedanta. Only these two methods and no other. No Guru in Sanatan Dharma has stated me what I know of it today (they also pervert it) I myself have got satisfied with the texts on my own with like Vichar sagar. In Sanatan Dharma there is no difference between Guru and the Brahman. Test for such a Guru is: He stands quenched ultimately in every respect. Of course ‘theory of everything’ will be one of the corollaries of having his quest satisfied which science won’t be inventing for millenniums to come!

So, will you avoid grossly perverting the interpretations and be sincere in approach truly critical in reasoning and logic just to do the justice to science as reasoned out above?
Lije said...
You very conveniently side stepped the main issue – that Varna Dharma is birth based, by rambling on The Ultimate Whatever. So to bring it on track, I ask again – show me the evidence were, all children in were taught the basics. I only mentioned current school subjects as an example. Correcting for time, the basics would be something like clean your own bathroom, pickup your own shit, martial skills, memorizing stuff, math, astrology etc... Then based on how a student fares (or cannot fare), they can be assigned a Varna. Did that happen in the glorious reign of The Ultimate Whatever? No.

You put a person in the right environment, chances are good that they will develop the right skills. But The Ultimate Whatever is ignorant of that fact because it believes in nonsense like karma andgunas. Given the sycophancy showered at The Ultimate Whatever, one should expect decent morals from it.

And you perfectly illustrated the need for a guru. It is no different than what I'm saying. To appreciate only a certain kind of music, put it on a pedestal, and use the prefix “Ultimate” copiously, you definitely need to believe in the need of a guru and that guru should be in the perfect position to deliver. He should be able to show you the beauty of that music, ignoring all other forms of music.

Now for some pointless hair splitting, totally unrelated to the main point which you have side stepped – the depraved morals of The Ultimate Whatever.

There are different ways you could use scripture – one is to identify moral premises, which doesn't need the scriptures to be entirely factual. What is needed is that a set of people live by those moral premises. So if there are people who live by the morals espoused in Harry Potter, I will use Harry Potter literature to analyze the premises.

But if you tell me that there are flying broomsticks, I will laugh it off. It is an extraordinary claim and needs extraordinary evidence. Scriptures are full of such extraordinary claims.

To split the hair even more finely, I can't use Hogwarts as evidence of how schools are run in the real world. For that, I need to collect evidence from the real world – like see how schools are run in the real London. Not the fictional one.
Lije said...
I'll make it even more explicit - the very idea of Varna Dharma is fundamentally flawed. Given its premises, there is no situation in which it could not have become birth based. 

Till date, The Ultimate Whatever is oblivious to that fact and keeps pretending that it is not birth based and turns to fiction to cite evidence.
Ramesh said...
Re: You very conveniently side stepped the main issue – that Varna Dharma is birth based, by rambling on The Ultimate Whatever. So to bring it on track, I ask again – show me the evidence were, all children in were taught the basics. I only mentioned current school subjects as an example. Correcting for time, the basics would be something like clean your own bathroom, pickup your own shit, martial skills, memorizing stuff, math, astrology etc... 

I am afraid you will ever SEE the exact answers given to you! Here I go once again.

Let you be sure and intact about the fact that everything in Sanatan Dharm comes from only one thing ‘ultimate principle’ (consisting of Brahman and Maya)then may be you talk about basics, caste, women, superstitions, belief, eligibility, all super feats performed in purnas, ramayaan etc, science whatever the hell it may be in the universe. Let you be firm that this is so from our side.

Now re: clean your own bathroom, pickup your own shit etc. Abraham Lincon was by cast cobbler by birth as per my knowledge (sorry if otherwise). So do you expect him to mend his own shoes even when he became President of USA? He may do so on his own as a hobby or for his own reasons but note that he has every right to engage THE OTHER, specialists to this task because of HIS PRIORITY OF PRESIDENTIAL TASK. So my dear friend a true Brahman (or anybody) never denies to pick of his shit etc just because his priorities are different and not because he is ordained not to do so by this ultimate principle. Now re: martial skills, memorizing stuff, math, astrology etc. These sort of questions I have already answered and here I copy and paste: “…….Keeping in view this alone the reading, interpretation etc was prohibited to other less qualified (Varnashram, women etc) and people of other faith. THIS DID NOT MEAN THAT PHYSICALLY IT WAS DENIED TO THEM. IT MEANT ONLY THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO DO SO. HOWEVER BY QUALIFICATION THEY DID INTERPRET THE SHASTRAS (E.G. HTTP://EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/LIST_OF_SHUDRA_HINDU_SAINTS, HTTP://AGNIVEER.COM/821/VEDAS-AND-SHUDRA/) THERE ARE MANY OTHER OUTSTANDING RISHIS BELONGING TO THESE SHUDRAS, I AM LEAST INTERESTED IN SUCH FACTUAL DATA”. 

In above reference please note that it may be martial skill, memorising stuff, maths, astrology, ayurveda, yoga whatever it may be are INTEGRAL PART OF ‘JNANA’ and accordingly alone it is imparted as above. You neglect this aspect and hence DIFFERENTIATING them from the JNANA. 

continued........
Ramesh said...
......from previous.


re: You put a person in the right environment, chances are good that they will develop the right skills. But The Ultimate Whatever is ignorant of that fact because it believes in nonsense like karma and gunas. Given the sycophancy showered at The Ultimate Whatever, one should expect decent morals from it.

There isn’t any thing like RIGHT environment and BAD environment. However the circumstances it may be, the INDIVIDUAL is always free and independent (core of Hindu philosophy). What you talk of is of the Vyavahara-ground activities. There aren’t strict rules which govern them. I repeat “
परिवर्तनहि सन्सार का नियम है/”- Bhagawat Geeta. 

All are not born equal in r/o of capacity to understand, do a thing, exhibit some talent etc. Mango seed IS MOST LIKELY to give rise to the mango tree and not that of Apple. Because it may happen that by hybridization, treatment and all that stuff it may be made to give a tree of Apple but NEVER AS A RULE. This statement of mine will be understood by those who know the POWER of science. Exactly so is the case with the system of education of Santan Dharma. Since a Skill (picking up shit, cleaning, martial acts etc) may just go perverted that the practical knowledge of such a skill is restricted to the definite class of people and NEVER AS A RULE. A Brahman student should be denied the knowledge of Vedas, Martial act etc if tendency is against the TRUE KNOWLEDGE. Similarly a Shudra by dint of his Knowledge (Which need NEVER come from Vedas, Upnishads etc but may easily come from few devotional songs addressed to Rakshasas, by acts of being Prostitute, by killing of innocents, doing adharmic acts, by picking shits etc) equals the Brahman not to talk of getting skilled at martial acts etc and which has been your main ‘issue’. Where come the question of denying it. 

Karma and Gunas go on losing their rigidity as one becomes more and more sharp in reason, logic and the same becomes nil the moment he realizes the TRUTH. Karma, Gunas, Rebirth, Heaven, Patal etc hold their validity to the extent of his logic and ability to reason. If you understand Geeta, Vichar Sagar (not just read it with biased and perverted intellect) you may understand it and may also come to know that Vichar Sagar in fact glorifies sex as in modern times and MUCH MORE the moment you UNDERSTAND IT in 7th chapter. Given the current level of your sincerity, reasoning ability you are not allowed to read those. Either you should find ‘theory of everything’ using the scientific method or search the Guru to quench your quest till then you are neither here nor there and still think you are correct‼! (science is always approximation till it finds ToE, the moment it happens, ToE will coincide with ‘ultimate principle, if not nobody will question you either. Therefore till that (infinite time?) you have to hold back.) 

If you think all this sidetracking, irrelevant then **Please do one thing: Show me the evidence where all children were NOT taught the basics.** and I will try the other way. Lets us other logic. I do not know the evidence where all children were not taught the basics. How about this, dear Lije? It may amply prove whether it is the perverted knowledge or the sincerity which is guiding you!
Lije said...
I'm judging The Ultimate Whatever by what kind of a society it resulted in – which is – a few people found a way to perpetuate power by installing a birth based system of vocations. Even though you have dishonestly shifted the burden of proof, here's the evidence you ask for: there is no mention anywhere in ancient Indian history of all children in a village being taught the same basic skills. Teaching was mostly birth based. Some texts of fiction mention sporadic instances of Varna hopping. That is all.

Regarding who is qualified to learn what, I have a much better understanding of human biology than you do. (I'm not boasting. Just stating a fact). So your analogy of mangoes and apples is untenable. Humans share a common biology and there are some consequences because of that. One has to wonder why The Ultimate Whatever is ignorant of such science.

In every comment you type, you keep exemplifying the depraved morals of The Ultimate Whatever. I posses a wide range of skills – from cleaning to mending to science to engineering to philosophy and so on. Those skills aren't mutually exclusive. That in essence sums up the moral bankruptcy of The Ultimate Whatever. The very idea that specialization in something precludes some other things is the signature rotten stench of casteism.
Lije said...
Some more evidence:

Indian populations, although currently huge in number, were also founded by relatively small bands of individuals, the study suggests. Overall, the picture that emerges is of ancient genetic mixture, says Reich, followed by fragmentation into small, isolated ethnic groups, which were then kept distinct for thousands of years because of limited intermarriage — a practice also known as endogamy.

This genetic evidence refutes the claim that the Indian caste structure was a modern invention of British colonialism, the authors say. "This idea that caste is thousands of years old is a big deal," says Nicole Boivin, an archaeologist who studies South Asian prehistory at the University of Oxford, UK. "To say that endogamy goes back so far, and that genetics shows it, is going to be controversial to many anthropologists." Boivin fears that the study might be 'spun' by politicians seeking to maintain caste structures in India, and she calls on social scientists and geneticists to collaborate on such "highly politicized" issues.


Which exposes the intellectual bankruptcy of the likes of Agniveer.
Ramesh said...
1. Re: I'm judging The Ultimate Whatever by what kind of a society it resulted in – which is – a few people found a way to perpetuate power by installing a birth based system of vocations.

Just because E=mc2 ULTIMATELY resulted in destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima blaming the Einstein or E=mc2 can only be attributed to you people!

Dear it is the people who should be blamed and it is exactly for them that most of the rules like caste (which is specific to qualification) are framed so that people like those who played havoc like in Japan are barred from the knowledge of E=mc2. (Request use the relevant sense to understand this one if possible)

2. Re: Even though you have dishonestly shifted the burden of proof, here's the evidence you ask for: there is no mention anywhere in ancient Indian history of all children in a village being taught the same basic skills

It is you who are blaming against Ultimate principle. It is just natural that burden is yours .Don’t you know the simple law in real life which the courts all over the world follow‼‼‼ Didn’t you prove your flawed logic?

3. Re: Regarding who is qualified to learn what, I have a much better understanding of human biology than you do. (I'm not boasting. Just stating a fact). 

The ultimate principle is nothing except a fact. Who are you (people) to know the fact pending the theory of everything. Is there anybody to state who is correct between us? Impossible [That is why (one of the reason) the ultimate principle].

4. Re: So your analogy of mangoes and apples is untenable. Humans share a common biology and there are some consequences because of that. 

Dear Lije, there are still finer elements which constitute the biology (like chemical reactions, molecules, atoms- in fact there isn’t anything like biology except maths, physics, chemistry) which in fact are common between mangoes and apples. That is why a stage may definitely come when mango seed will give apples in future. And this is the consequence of those common things! So do you agree that I know better biology than you? 

5. Re: One has to wonder why The Ultimate Whatever is ignorant of such science.
Still any doubt who is ignorant of the science in view of above FACTS as argued?


....continued.
Ramesh said...
....from previous


6. Re: I posses a wide range of skills – from cleaning to mending to science to engineering to philosophy and so on. 

What is the wonder then? So am I. So were many Brahmans, kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras (you may cite contrary examples if any).

7. Re: That in essence sums up the moral bankruptcy of The Ultimate Whatever. 

Still any doubt as to the moral bankruptcy of you people in view of last comment?

8. Re: The very idea that specialization in something precludes some other things is the signature rotten stench of casteism.

Which precise statement did you draw the above inference? Or just the stench of your rotten reasoning, logic?

9. Re: ….This genetic evidence refutes the claim that the Indian caste structure was a modern invention of British colonialism,…..

Who denied that castism is not a part of Sanatan Dharma? Issue has been whether it was birth based or Patrata (eligibility) based! Why jump from this to that and blame others for similar things? 

Will you be ever logical and reasonable while arguing? Still do you find yourself sincere enough?
Lije said...
Science is not an ethical system. Something like secular humanism is. More importantly science doesn't use the prefix "Ultimate". Being defeasible is at its core.

You again conviniently side stepped the evidence I gave you. Firstly, you don't have any evidence other than from fiction to say that Varna is not birth based. When I did show you the evidence, you keep making lame excuses. Communism is perfect on paper. It leads to the perfect society. But that is not how it should be judged. You look at how it fared in the real world.

Did you even read the PNAS paper I linked to?

What kind of an inane argument is that mango seeds can give apples in the future? Of course, given knowledge is probabilistic, it is possible that mangoes become apples. But it takes a special kind of daftness to latch onto very small probabilities and flaunt it as being extremely probable.

Even then, we humans are already here. In the present. It takes an even more special kind of daftness to ignore that and fantasize about hypotethicals.

Did you even read the Agniveer nonsense you linked to? The Nature news article I linked to is in direct contradiction to it.

Finally,

Is there anybody to state who is correct between us?

Yes. When it comes to science, that is easy. You do an experiment. If you say you can levitate, I'll simply ask you to jump off a building. That settles who is correct and who is not.

When it comes to subjective experiences, there is no easy way other than to take what one says on face value. That is why Harry Potter is real. That is also why Vedanta is just gobbly-gook (not because it is inherently nonsensical. But because of its evangelists and preachers who have no way of showing x other than to say x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x)
Ramesh said...
1. Re: Science is not an ethical system. Something like secular humanism is. More importantly science doesn't use the prefix "Ultimate". Being defeasible is at its core.

That’s you people’s definition of science. The vedantic science includes all that what you call plus ethics, ultimate, castism, Brahman and all stuff etc they are all scientific. That’s why hundred times I have told that Vedata never crosses modern science but includes all that which science may know after theory of everything. Do you remember? Why impose your one on us? We aren’t contradicting your science!

2. re: You again conviniently side stepped the evidence I gave you..........

I repeat your evidence: there is no mention anywhere in ancient Indian history of all children in a village being taught the same basic skills. Teaching was mostly birth based. Some texts of fiction mention sporadic instances of Varna hopping. That is all.

Evidently it is lame evidence as vividly cleared earlier. You haven’t refuted them. Instead your real evidence is this: “Communism is perfect on paper. It leads to the perfect society. But that is not how it should be judged. You look at how it fared in the real world.” And I answered it like this: Just because E=mc2 ULTIMATELY resulted in destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima blaming the Einstein or E=mc2 can only be attributed to you people! Did you ignore it purposely? There is a link between communism on paper and its faring in real world, link being that of Human beings. If this human being is not governed properly nothing is sufficient for him. Hindu rules provide for that exactly. 

3. re: What kind of an inane argument is that mango seeds can give apples in the future? Of course, given knowledge is probabilistic, it is possible that mangoes become apples. But it takes a special kind of daftness to latch onto very small probabilities and flaunt it as being extremely probable.

Can you re-read what I stated? I repeat I stated: “Mango seed IS MOST LIKELY to give rise to the mango tree and not that of Apple. Because it may happen that by hybridization, treatment and all that stuff it may be made to give a tree of Apple but NEVER AS A RULE.” Do you know about metal transmutation? It is exactly similar to that!! Isn’t that 100% sure. No probability!! Simple science but may take far more scientific development. Just lack of understanding as to what I say. Point was that we have to effect such transmutation/mango to apple etc whereas among human beings it can happen on their own with or without good environment! See if you could get the point after my repeated attempts!!

Isn’t your link PNAS paper irrelevant/misplaced one in the above context?

My agniveer link was limited to as to what the Vedas are to tell about Shudras. More than this I am not interested in that at present here.
Ramesh said...
...from previous

4. re: Is there anybody to state who is correct between us? Yes. When it comes to science, that is easy. You do an experiment. If you say you can levitate, I'll simply ask you to jump off a building. That settles who is correct and who is not.

My dear friend I am talking about we, the human beings and what we see (say biology as per original reference). In other words I am talking about matter born consciousness (we human beings, the one who judges) and the matter (building, levitating, universe and all that). Who is correct? Either matter born consciousness or the matter itself? Who will judge? Isn’t the matter itself since it is that which is there ultimately? WHO established the reality of matter after all (and all that constituting the scientific method)? What a nonsense and foolishness!! I talk one thing you take it different!! Is it the reasoning, logic of you people? Horrible!!

5. re: When it comes to subjective experiences, there is no easy way other than to take what one says on face value. That is why Harry Potter is real.

So is the dream real while we are in the dream! But there is a state called waking which declares that dream is illusion. Does the science (universe) know the state from where it come? How etc. Either wait for theory of everything or be in illusion like dream! Am I correct? Vedanta states that there is hardly any difference between the reality of the Harry Potter and the relative real universe!! Know it using the ultimate principle, if you can’t approach the Guru appropriate.

6. Re: That is also why Vedanta is just gobbly-gook (not because it is inherently nonsensical. But because of its evangelists and preachers who have no way of showing x other than to say x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x because x is x)

We never say x is x because x is x. Instead we say x is x because there isn’t, in fact, anything like x. Still we call it x till such a time when we see (realize, enlighten) that there is not anymore x including the one who asks it except the illusion! It is exactly for this reason that it is the science which suffers from infinite regress and never the Vedanta though it appears it so because of the perverted logic of you people. Science will cease from suffering this problem of infinite regress till ‘theory of everything’ is found. After that it will be same as that of Vedanta.

This last point of comment should convincingly prove the rot, perverted logic/reason, gross bias within you people. 

If not then at present my transmutation technology (say reason, logic) to change you people from say mango (contrary to ultimate principle) to apple (pro ultimate principle) will be insufficient till such a moment we find ‘theory of everything’. Till that period you will be uqualified/ineligible and hence of the caste of like shudras confined to the task of research/technology and will be barred from APPLYING the same to the HUMAN SOCIETY else you will cause the havoc like that of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am just seeking the political system which will ensure it. Help the cause for betterment and survival of all!!!
Lije said...
Let's remember that it is the depraved ethics of The Ultimate Whatever that is under the spotlight. You indulged in what-aboutery by citing e=mc2. But as I said, science is not an ethical system. So any argument along those lines is a strawman.

So shining the light back on, you earlier said "the INDIVIDUAL is always free and independent (core of Hindu philosophy).". Had you really read the paper I linked to, you would have seen why it is so very relevant - relevant to the extent that it entirely rubbishes the core of Hindu philosophy. If you think the paper is too technical to read, I'll try to find a simpler source.
Ramesh said...
1. Re: Let's remember that it is the depraved ethics of The Ultimate Whatever that is under the spotlight. 

Let me correct it as: It is not the depraved ethics of the Ultimate Whatever that is under the spotlight but instead it the logic and scientific reasoning which decides (proves or disproves) as to the depraved OR OTHERWISE ethics of the ultimate whatever which is under the spotlight.

SO I THINK THIS SHOULD PROVE THE STRAWMAN ARGUMENT OF YOURS!!

2. Re: Had you really read the paper I linked to, you would have seen why it is so very relevant - relevant to the extent that it entirely rubbishes the core of Hindu philosophy

Doesn’t "the INDIVIDUAL is always free and independent (core of Hindu philosophy)" allows you to remain what you are and what I am? Do you mean we are same in our approach to life, universe? Never. That is what core of Hindu philosophy is! I never meant that molecules and laws governing the chemical reactions occurring in brain etc are different from person to person as you seem to understand. If your linked paper still mean different why not you put its summary in a paragraph of few lines so that I can understand you better and see how it was relevant?

3. Yes, you have left a good numbers of questions unanswered which will simply explode the myth of you people’s ethics! Please use to think before you write a comment on Ramayana, Mahabharat, Puranas, Vedas and all that matters for the sake sanctity of reason and logic which runs common to both of us.
Lije said...
I see you still haven't read that paper. It probably takes the same amount of time to read it as it takes you to repeatedly whine about logic and reason.

The nonsense of Karma and Gunas lies not in the fact that humans are indeed different from each other (in some aspects), but in the fact that they completely ignore the effects of environment and magically expect a person to rise against them (that should do in way of the gist of that paper). They then use that excuse to perpetuate a system of birth based oppression. Which in effect is what The Ultimate Whatever is Ultimately capable of - camoflaging depraved ethics by profuse use of the prefix "Ultimate".
Ramesh said...
Thanks for providing the essence of the linked paper. I appreciate this observation and do sympathises with it, I did become emotional and got touched, it hurt me badly as I read it explicitly since that has what happened in Hinduism and is exactly the reason why we find the criticisers like you and nirmukta.

There are three elements:
1. Ignorance of the effects of environment 
2. magically expecting a person to rise against them
3. use the excuse to perpetuate a system of birth based oppression 

I have clarified each them as follows respectively

1. “Ignorance of effects of environment”- In fact the scientific universe is the great environment. Here the whole of Hindu scriptures (starting with Vedas, Upnishadas, Puranas, ramayaan, mahabharat ....etc) is the Hindu version of this environment called the ultimate one. Do remember that it is simply one version of the probable 10^500 (However in vedantic view ABSOLUTELY infinite numbers) versions that latest scientific research shows (Vadhavan blog). 

In view of this it is wrong to argue that Sanatan dharma ignores the effects of the environment. Hinduism accepts the responsibility of creating the environment (not good or bad) called MAYA.

2. “magically expecting a person to rise against them”. Wrong. Please note that only HUMAN BEINGS are expected to rise against them since it is the only species that QUESTIONS AND POSSES THE QUALITY CALLED QUEST. The moment they (shudra or anybody lower than them) raise a question that’s a beginning of their rise against the environment. AND THIS ALONE IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND TILL THIS HAPPENS THERE IS A THING LIKE GUNAS AND KARMAS. Refer: Vichar Sagar for this.

3. “use the excuse to perpetuate a system of birth based oppression”. I answered it like this: Just because E=mc2 ULTIMATELY resulted in destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima blaming the Einstein or E=mc2 can only be attributed to you people! 

Dear let us assimilate the fact that it were the unqualified Shudras (though Brahmans by birth) which used this knowledge of E=mc2 (say ultimate principle) for destruction of Japan (perpetuation of a system of birth based oppression). So let us blame these politicians (braahmans by birth not by qualification) who got hold of the knowledge (though ultimately imaginary one) using which they bombed the innocents. My purpose lies in rooting them out and re-establishing the knowledge as it is!

So dear it is not the ultimate which is responsible but the middlemen who twists the things. Just because you received the empty parcel you need not blame the sender. Confirm if postman had played the mischief! 

That is why GURU was placed on par with the Brahman. It were the ill Gurus who played the mischief—ref: Bhagawat Puran.
Lije said...
The environment - A child born into a family of manual scavengers. The family isn't allowed in some parts of the village as they are "impure".

The magical expectation - The child should be able to learn complex subjects on his/her own. He/she should have the innate karma given gunas for that. (By complex subjects I mean something like arithmetic/algebra which is required for something like the post of a tax administrator. No need to split hairs on this).

The excuse - "The fact that a child is born in such a low family is evidence that he/she has accumilated bad karma from the past life. If the cosmic laws will, then the child will magically acquire knowledge of complex subjects and will hop Varnas. But we will not do a single thing, a single thing to teach the child anything. Gunas decide what a person is capable of. Since the child has no knowledge of math, it is evidence that he/she lacks the required gunas."

I don't care how good a system is on paper or what its apologists think how great the system is. Talk is cheap. Talk is worthless when it can't walk the talk. Statements like "Good for all", "Justice for all" are cheap talk. Where is the implementation?

An ethical system like secular humanism doesn't claim to the perfect system or use superlative adjectives. It accepts that it can go wrong and since no superlative adjectives are used, there are few ego issues in clingling on to outdated dogma. I've linked to how one such system fared in Finland. The Ultimate Whatever has been in existence for thousands of years. So, where's the path with the footprints of the talk?
Ramesh said...
Dear Lije,

It appears that you converted the issue of ‘PRINCIPLE/THEORY of Vedantic prudence’ into the ‘ACTUAL PRACTICE of Vedantic prudence’. Needless to say that I entirely agree with you on what has been actually observed and so has been the case with the hundreds of Sanatan saints throughout the 2nd millennia like Jnaneshwar, Tukaram, Namadev, Ramadas, Basaveshwar etc who are still rectifying the system ……

However here I think I am arguing about the very ‘PRINCIPLE/THEORY of Vedantic prudence’ and not the actual practice by agreeing the practice is in contravention to the original. And entirely DISAGREE that actual practice can anymore be attributed to the ‘original theory’ and illustrated the same with remarks like “Dear let us assimilate the fact that it were the unqualified Shudras (though Brahmans by birth) which used this knowledge of E=mc2 (say ultimate principle) for destruction of Japan (perpetuation of a system of birth based oppression). So let us blame these politicians (braahmans by birth not by qualification) who got hold of the knowledge (though ultimately imaginary one) using which they bombed the innocents. My purpose lies in rooting them out and re-establishing the knowledge as it is!”

Vedantic science comprises of all including material science, ethics and all that unknown. 

To start with Hindu system of school education was something on the lines of that of Finland (as proved by the Vedantic discussions etc)however during the course of time it turned into what we witness it today and so is likely to be with the Finland system unless and until every moment RIGHT TEACHER (GURU) ensures the logic and reason behind such an education so that desired effect doesn’t suffer. I entirely agree that Hinduism failed to sustain the continuous chain of such enlightened (for this unique understanding) Teachers.

And hence the need of such Jnanies (teachers) who will cleanse the system so that probable disaster in the form of ultimate science (I call it ultimate because that alone will be thought of as true in modern times and not because it not falsifiable) since definitely there are the persons in the present world who are unqualified or wield the power either in the name of religion or otherwise.

So before proceeding further help me confirm whether you are arguing about the ‘ultimate principle’ or ‘its actual practice’ or ‘correcting the system’! I originally deal only with the ‘ultimate principle’. OR still adamant saying that it is the consequence which decides the truth of principle (like attributing shooting a man with gun to the invention of gun by the science or attributing the Nagasaki disaster to the development of atom bomb by the science)? OR else prove these examples are irrelevant and misplaced.
Lije said...
I have already shown that the principle itself is wrong. You weren't even willing to read that argument (the PNAS paper). There is no such thing as free-will, where free-will is defined as - given the exact same situation, including your enivironment, you cannot chose to act differently. The Ultimate Whatever believes in such a free will in the name of gunas and karma.

And that is precisly why there never could have been a situation like that in Finland. That system believes that basic education is a fundamental right. Had it believed in gunas and karma, there would be no basis for that fundamental right. The right exists because it believes that equality means equal opportunity. The key words are "equal opportunity".

An individual is never free from the environment. That is why The Ultimate Whatever is incapable of understanding "equal opportunity". That is why it is the Ultimate failure in principle, and in practice.
Ramesh said...
Re: The Ultimate Whatever believes in such a free will in the name of gunas and karma.

So do you mean that for Ultimate principle ‘gunas and karma’ are basic to the ‘free will’? See also if you could explain what WE (not PNAS) mean by free will. Please confirm this and my next comment will follow. Will you for the sake of sincerity of your arguments? 

Also see if it is possible for you to keep the same goal post either of principle or of practice!

Waiting...
Lije said...
I don't care about what you mean by free-will. I have already defined what I mean by it. To simplify it, free-will ignores that we are fully caused beings and as such does not take the environment into consideration. Gunas and karma do the same mistake. 

Arguing on definitions is pointless hair-splitting. Just substitute the word with its meaning. I've already given you plenty by way of meaning.
Ramesh said...
Thanks Lije,

Re: To simplify it, free-will ignores that we are fully caused beings and as such does not take the environment into consideration. Gunas and karma do the same mistake. This much information is quite sufficient for me.

In fact in the ultimate principle except Brahman (absolute truth) everything is environment called Maya-relative truth (Ma meaning no +Ya mening this whole universe-like dream or Harry potter). Thus we-(whole universe) as per ultimate principle are never a caused one[ just as no cause can be attributed to the events in dream/harry potter though IT APPEARS TO BE SO] and still we find dream/Harry potter to be real SO LONG WE ARE sleeping/in a state of imagination since there is a state called waking (for dream) and relative truth (for Harry potter) to which when compared we can know what the truth is. But there isn’t a state in the day to day life of human beings (except Vedantic parmarthic) in relation to which waking can be felt like a dream. That is why this Maya is also called to be Mithya. Brahman cause nothing not even Maya. Both never contradict but complement (this is ultimate principle). 

Where does the ultimate principle espouses the cause of free will? Does it differ from gunas and karma etc if any? Never! There are more than one theories of creation of universe in Vedas. There is host of dharmic karmkand, Gunas, Karma, past life, rebirth, paap-punya, heaven, hell etc are all created (not as truths) and correspond to the different states, stages of the human beings in the present life itself and are DESIGINED SO THAT ULTIMATELY IT HELPS HIM TO GET RID OF THE GRIEF, PAIN FROM WHICH HE HAS BEEIN SUFFERING. All this process being complicated and skilfully dealt at, interpreted by the qualified Guru (teachers) only.

There isn’t any arrangement in scientific world which can hold a man ACCOUNTABLE (theory of invisible hand being highly insufficient) as a result of which worldly prosperity, running behind quest which will always be unquenched (illusion) can only be the goal of human beings and hence cause of misery, destruction in the end.

If you find anything contrary in the ultimate principle please quote it.

So are you yourself propagating your own version of ‘ultimate whatever’ and proving it nonsense you yourself again? Have you ever tried to know the most basic concept of Maya? If not interested with what authority you people argue against Sanatan Dharma in the absence theory of everything? Which yardstick do you use to establish the absolute reality of scientific methods/science? If it is relative how would you differentiate it from Vedantic Maya? There is Brahman which accounts for the infinite regress of the maya what is there to account for your sort of relative universe-scientific methods?

In the absence of satisfactory answers to all the above why don’t you think you are all espousing the wayward, groundless reasoning just BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN LAPSE IN THE PRACTICLA APPLICAITONS OF ULTIMATE PRINCIPLE?


Caution: Avoid slipping into change of goal post from that of principles to practical applications ref. Earlier comments of mine.
Lije said...
My sighs could produce a tornado. We have people being discriminated against heavily, just because of a birth based oppression system, which is due to the factors explained in my comments above. And yet here you are, talking about how it is all maya, all designed to deliver them from pain. Promise heaven (deliverance from 'illusion') and arrogate gatekeepers (Gurus) for that heaven. But don't do a thing to remove a flawed system. Mother Theresa would have been so very proud of this Ultimate Principle. I'm done with this discussion.
Ramesh said...
Re: We have people being discriminated against heavily, just because of a birth based oppression system ...But don't do a thing to remove a flawed system.

That’s altogether different issue and effort has been there as explained earlier. But this oppression, discrimination is not because of the factors explained in your comments but because of MISINTRERPRETATIONS just like you people do abundantly.

Essence: Criticism should be because of the oppression, discrimination and not because there is necessarily a fault with the principles, values which it cherishes. Issue should be that of ‘REFORM’ and not ‘REVOLT/REBELLION’ that too in the name of SCIENCE!

Anyway discussion was quite better than at Nirmukta forum though you people always miss sincerity, logic and reason and change of goal post though others are barred, warned for the same reason!

Thanks for the freedom offered here, anyway.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Does God exist?



What a confusion! God is not a thing to be proved or disproved. Can you ever prove what is 1 (unit)? It is just a definition. So is the God at least in Hinduism. Rather passing the burden to prove the God onto those who believe it why not try to understand it and if not question it? Are you/atheists CONVENIENTLY ignore this just to hide your inability to reason?

Here is stenger's Conclusion:

The universe looks just like it can be expected to look if
✦Humans are the source of morals and values.
✦Evil is not prevented by a 3O God.
✦The universe and life are not designed.
✦Humans do not possess supernatural souls.
✦No truths about universe have been supernaturally
revealed.
✦Universe arose naturally.
✦Not congenial for humanity.
✦Laws of nature came from nothing


Still don't you find above conclusions JUST A LITTLE PART of the 'Ultimate principle'? Serious problem with your/atheist's understanding.


Great thing lies ahead: Despite of above like conclusions by 'Ultimate principle' it puts up the CONCEPT of God (not as reality). That's where the reason is put to test. ONLY THOSE FACE WHO HAVE IT. It can't be matter of proof of God but to understand the concept for the very reason.


ALL THIS IS CALLED HINDUISM where Dvaita (universe) and Advaita (brahman) complement each other and is a theory put by Maharshi Ved Vyasa.


Note God is such a thing without which no major impact can be made upon the present world scenario SMOOTHLY. So all the political aspirants PLEASE UNDERSTAND WHAT GOD IS without which your beginning is likely to be as confused.

Friday, August 19, 2011

All India Against Corruption Supporters please read it!!

People keep complaining that they can't contest elections, that the corrupt – with muscle power and money – have taken over the parliament, and that it has lost legitimacy.
That is why, they tell me, India is supporting an unconstitutional movement for reform that over-rides the parliament.
Fine. I understand that.
Indeed, that's what I've written in BFN, that the laws of India ARE DESIGNED FOR CORRUPTION.
I understand the anguish of those who find that their leaders are THOROUGH RASCALS.
I understand why Baba Ramdev wants to hang the corrupt, and why Anna Hazare wants to have a Jan Lokpal who will bring these parliamentarians to account. The parliament has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of millions of Indians.
But consider what I'm saying, for a moment.
Consider a à¤®à¤¹ासंग्राम. Consider an ULTIMATE BATTLE against the corrupt.
Consider a battle that doesn't BEG these rascals to give people the Lokpal. Consider a battle where we don't have to have Anna Hazare fast unto death in front of CORRUPT RASCALS.
Consider a battle that SUCCEEDS in winning a great future for you and your children.
Today the parliament is like a fort occupied by India's enemies. Inside it is the Congress – India's No.1 enemy, and BJP – which is not far behind.
And so, if your own representatives have become your No.1 enemy, then what should you do?
पर्लिअमेंट में सेंघ लगाओ!

Breach the parliament. Break into it. Become MPs yourself.
The only way to change India is to OVERTHROW THESE CORRUPT POLITICAL PARTIES.
And to do that we need a good political party, that will bring INTEGRITY, PROSPERITY, AND FREEDOM TO INDIA.
We need a party that will bring CAPITALISM, not socialism, a party that will bring prosperity and honesty, not poverty and corruption.
And so, join the Freedom Team of India and let's launch a à¤®à¤¹ासंग्राम.
Note that FTI is NOT a political party, but its leaders WILL JOIN A NEW PARTY TO DEFEAT THESE CORRUPT RASCALS WHO GOVERN INDIA.
Let's unite to BREAK INTO THE PARLIAMENT – through the hustings.
Let's DEFEAT these evil forces who govern India. It is a battle between the WHITE forces of good, and the BLACK forces of evil.
* * *
We want a Lokpal. And we SHALL have it. But without begging anyone.
But we want MUCH more than the Lokpal. We want a large PACKAGE OF REFORMS. We must deal with the causes of corruption, not just try to fix those who are already corrupt. We must ensure that the corrupt and criminals can't enter parliament in the first place.
To enact a PACKAGE OF REFORMS, we need to get elected ourselves, and we will then ENACT the entire package of reforms that India needs.
It is not that hard, really. It only needs one per cent of thousands of people who are currently running about in the streets in Ramdev's and Hazare's protest movements to join FTI. Once we have 1500 members ready to contest elections, we will start planning to contest parliamentary elections in 2014.
If you do that, and work together as a team, I promise you, I guarantee you – YOU WILL GET WHAT YOU WANT.
So don't be beggars. Don't plead in front of a THOROUGHLY CORRUPT MANMOHAN SINGH. This man doesn't deserve even the dust of your feet, of your chappal.
LET'S DRIVE OUT THIS FOOLISH SLAVE OF THE CORRUPT CONGRESS PARTY.
Join hands to OVERTHROW these rascals who are destroying India – through the hustings. Join FTI.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

More Understanding of the 'Ultimate Principle'

Here is a comment posted on http://discovery.sabhlokcity.com/your-views/


Recently I came across one of your basic thought vide http://sanjeev.sabhlokcity.com/. And undoubtedly your DOF, BFN and the other forthcoming books and all that is seen in your blogs including the ideology (at least to some extent) of FTI  are the functions of this knowledge/thought of yours. As such this thought even though dealt in at your personal blog doesn’t make it personal but a social one as all these contribute to the social cause. In this sense alone, I post this comment here rather than at the above link. You may remove it from here to there only to harm feedback to DOF.
You wrote-
1.       Re:
My main message to everyone is simple: Find the truth YOURSELF. That means everything you think you know (and I think I know) is subject to question. Our lives are therefore only a preliminary essay in the truth; a feeble attempt to seek answers. Any ambition beyond that is, that we may actually know something, is delusional.
In this connection,
Do you think everybody is capable of finding a truth himself/herself on their own?

a.       If your answer is yes, then there will be as many truths as the number of persons in the world. It’s entirely absurd since truth can be only one. i.e. defining the same thing as many ways as the number of persons will only mess up the things.
Example: It is just like asking everybody to define his own unit of length (say for example), then one will measure in cm, other in inches and so on. This system will run smoothly as long as everybody is isolated i.e. unsocial and when these all will be required to live socially there will only be a conflict since each will pursue his own unit assuming that his alone is truth. And this is what exactly is happening in present age. Different religions [assuming to be a unit (~of measurement) or set of conventions originally invented to streamline the life of social human beings] are pressing for their own ways assuming them alone to be truth. I am afraid if your theory of freedom also promotes the same! Because the responsibility and accountability along with such other things which you propose to impose on this freedom are themselves likely to be the results of these individual conventions (truths i.e. as many definitions of responsibility, accountability etc as the no of individuals) which you seem to be promoting!

b.       If answer is no, then everybody has to follow the same set of units or conventions {to be called as TRUTH} and everybody has to obey it. It amounts to saying that the rest of the people should believe in the interpretations of these conventions/units by a specialist, expert, scientist (to be called as Gnani in Indian tradition). Here note that the Gnani (Don’t feel taboo since he is just a specialist like you) is a one who alone knows the usefulness of the conventions/units to be defined just like a technician. Everybody cannot be made to understand why it is so defined as such or what it means [i.e. they are supposed to test only the final product like TV or mobile without going into intricacies of how it works since every individual cannot afford it] because that convention/unit (Truth~Gnan) would be the result of convenience and usefulness which takes into account all the facets of human being over a period of time and is judged in every possible way by such an expert. (How it is to be done is a different thing altogether e.g. approach of FTI.)

     Example: All the people within a same religion obey the beliefs (conventions/units) and hence fewer conflicts compared to the situation in case 1 as above. Of course, even in this case problems arise not because of the beliefs (conventions/units) themselves but because these are not interpreted (change meanings) accordingly as per the time and space by taking into account physical (scientific) advances etc by an expert (Gnani). Thus it is not a question of beliefs but question of interpretation of the same by experts.

c.       May I know which answer do you prefer to your very very basic proposition either 1, 2 or something else?

d.       Key to my intention in asking above is that NOTHING IN THE UNIVERSE (INCLUDING ITSELF) IS ABSOLUTE AND THE UNIVERSE TAKES THE FORM WE THINK IT TO BE MOST CONVENIENT  (e.g. at present as an energy)- A COROLLARY OF ‘THE ULTIMATE PRINCIPLE’.

Hence a basic question of finding a truth by individual doesn’t arise at all!!


2.       Re:
"Who exactly am I?" This question will need a response more subtle and complex than the mere routine description about my career or life journey. But unfortunately, I'm not quite sure at the moment who, or more precisely, what I am. Does my consciousness, also found equally among all human beings, exist outside space and time – or does it have properties like any other form of energy? I'm going to explore this issue in one of my future books, but it currently appears unlikely to me that I'll make any major breakthrough. Let me park this question for now, anyway, and revert to more mundane, material things that we are more comfortable talking about.

a.       This question should have formed the part of “Creation, stardust and carbon”. Without above question soul of this chapter is missing. In this sense this comment is relevant here.
b.       It is an answer to this question that breaks the barrier of an individual from the social one since an answer can only be a unique and then there remains nothing such as a personal except some mundane things! It is a question which sowed the seeds of all the religions and they evolved as an answer to this question. Answers were different hence the different religions. However their answers they were able to carry the people with them, the reason being not the absolute truth of the answers but the existence of the answers itself. What we need today is a unique answer consistent with the science [which I tried at “The Ultimate Principle” –which you have taken for as a personal one.] which alone may show us a way to carry the people with us for the sake of better society like FTI is promoting and not for the sake of people itself for gaining popularity alone.
c.       When you parked that question, was not that a death? Here death means living without eyes. Without an answer however we proceed that will all be only blindfolded!  Its aftermath say DOF etc will ever be an eye opener then? People (except few intelligentsias) will never follow you because you expect the majority to understand on themselves which has happened never in the past nor will ever happen in the future. Not all the People (by their limitation in the genes itself) possess the power to identify the truths by themselves which you expect. Majority understands the language of sentiments, emotions, sympathy and a similar language. It is this language consistent with the final truth that we need to specialize in order to establish the ideal society by way of FTI. We need this majority to bring a change for once and all.


3. If you think anything above as personal then rest assured that FTI will also be a personal approach of yours   or a group of few which majority will hardly side with for their inherent weakness!

Is it likely to make any basic impact on BOF or BFN or FTI?  I think yes in r/o style of approach and not the goal itself.

N.B.  I don’t have literary skills. Apologies if such omissions occur inadvertently.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Proper understanding of the 'Ultimate Principle'

Shri Sabhlok replied as follows to the 'Ultimate Principle'.

Dear Ramesh, thanks for the detailed note you sent. Just a few points (I'll also send by email).
Re: When it is well known that energy can never be created
True, in a closed system energy can’t be created. However, as Rajaji notes in one of his books, “Out of nothing, nothing can come. The causeless beginning was Sat, being with consciousness”. Anyway, this is the whole point. I have no answer on this. Your assumption is yours. I don’t comment on it.
Re:  the things which do not have origin, they don’t actually exist.
Clearly, I’m lost. Just because energy (according to you) could not have been created, it doesn’t make it non-real.
Advaita School of philosophy states that Brahman is the ultimate truth. And Dvaita states that Maya is truth. The secret is that one is non-existent without the other. 
All this is a philosophical viewpoint. I have no comment since this doesn’t interest me.
Re: Advaita states that Universe never existed as such hence the theory of creation as illustrated in various shastras is for the sake of ‘Common’ human beings. However you put up the theory of creation all hold equally good. It needs only to satisfy the common sense of the common man. Its purpose can’t be more than that.
I talk for the benefit only of common men and women. I don’t care for uncommon men and women. If these theories can feed them, please use them. Else this information is irrelevant. 
Re: Gnani is a one who identifies himself with the above principle, the only truth. And as such he alone holds the authority to interpret or to establish the laws for the rest of the Human beings. 
I disagree. I need to ask many, many questions! Who is this Gnani? You? Then please write a book explaining how to create a wealthy and healthy India using your principles.
Regards
Sanjeev

I replied it as follows:

Dear Sabhlok,
Please proceed to read the following only if you think the ‘Creation, Stardust and Carbon’ is an essential and serious enough chapter of your DoF. Or else I suggest you to acknowledge in DoF itself that this chapter is not of that substantial nature and the discussion on this may be avoided.
I regret my last comment failed miserably to kindle and arouse the much expected curiosity and get the same quenched adequately about the very basic question of scientific creation of universe which, in your view, however, turned out to be a pure personal matter which bothered you the least.
Before I post my future comments on this blog I expect a healthy, deep and sincere attitude as the same has come under doubt for the reasons detailed below and since these may have a lasting effect on both your books.
1.      Re: When it is well known that energy can never be created…….You replied ending that it is my personal assumption and that you have no comments and that further you did not elaborate on ‘sat and consciousness’. May I request you to read the same once again and see whether it is scientific or personal one? Just because it is beyond your personal comprehension doesn’t make it necessarily a personal thing and devoid of the pure science and which at the same time is so relevant to your concerned chapter. Don’t you think you are insincere in accepting your inability to comprehend the same? Don’t you think this attitude of yours make this chapter of yours less serious and devoid of adequate responsibility?
2.      Re:  the things which do not have origin, they don’t actually exist…..You replied that it doesn’t make the universe a non real. Note that ‘Things do not exist’ is a result of the above science (the principle - which you should either understand or be unable to do so but could never call it personal) and that ‘universe is not unrealis what we see and perceive. The secret of universe and also the success of science lies in reconciling these seemingly contradictions which are a result of the same scientific approach. You have poorly failed to realise this implication of the comment and comment on it accordingly.
3.      Advaita School of philosophy states that Brahman is the ultimate truth and…….you ended saying these are philosophical views. Here you have safely ignored the scientific answer provided to the above contradiction by the Advaita and Dvaita. Here you failed to draw a proper line of difference between philosophy and science. It is a result of you strong pre-conviction that these (Advaita etc) are only philosophy- a personal and private things! Do you have any right to call a thing a philosophy when it is in consonance with the science simply because of your pre-conceived ideas and your inability to see the pure science in so called philosophy?
4.      Re: Advaita states that Universe never existed as such hence the theory of creation as illustrated in various shastras is for the sake of ‘Common’ human beings… You replied that you care only for commons….and that my comment is to feed those who feed on it. Is not your theory of Capitalism and Freedom for the commons ones? Then why does not it find instant acceptance by the common Indians/and elsewhere? The answer is- to begin with, every common thing is an uncommon thing till the common understands it. Thus you failed badly to understand that ‘it is a matter of understanding by the common one’ and not a matter of ‘commons and uncommons’ itself. You also indirectly meant (by ‘all are common’) that all men are equal in intelligence and wisdom and in similar respects. They why this different opinions and debates in real life? And why one should listen to Swami Vivekanand and similars? Why not leave all our efforts to set the things right, right now if all are equal? Being all equal there won’t be any cause to fight for!!!. My essence is that all men are not equal, but some are more equal and among these again some are more equal and so on. Thus it forms the pyramid and not a flat in r/o ability, intelligence, qualifications, skills (and also in r/o of governance to be discussed separately) etc. You took the things entirely wayward!!!
5.      Re: Gnani is a one who identifies himself with the above principle, the only truth. And as such he alone holds the authority to interpret or to establish the laws for the rest of the Human beings……… here you decried the Gnani as defined by me (or rather by the principle) and instead exhorted to me to use the above principles to create wealthy and healthy India.  Do you means that in this blog and other similar things we are trying to play against each other and making a time-pass? You fail to see that seating somewhere on the scale of knowledge, wisdom, understanding etc we are not only writing a book but also trying to create a great wealth and health and much more for the Indians through this blog and my comments (ultimate principle – outcome of your chapters insufficient approach) are part of that effort and thus discharging our duty as a Gnani (at least to some extent- till it finds total acceptance)
Thus don’t you think such a sort of understanding on your part is something unmaking of you? My last comment (The ultimate principle as a pure science- and never as a personal thing even though it is my version) is likely to have a lasting effect on your approach (and not in r/o the goal of eradication of all the ills which human is suffering from- with which I myself have identified long ago) and everything in the world. However I do don’t expect this sort of the attitude and superficial level of depth of understanding on your part as detailed above since it will make our effort more tedious and exhaust us unproductively.
In case you find anything in the above comment anything such as a personal (remarks) or private things, then you or me or anybody else will have to forfeit his right to think about the others since the life itself is a thing of personal/private concern (whether it affect the other or not~ treating human unsocial)! I hope you will never agree to this!
I will be grateful to you if you let me know how I misunderstood you or lack the sufficient knowledge in the above reasoning if any (except a sort like yours as above!)

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

The Ultimate truth, the secret of the Universe unveiled.

During the course of the online discussion with FTI and Shri Sabhok there came the occasion wherein I have tried to unveil the secret of the Universe. It reads as follows......

Dear Sabhok,

I regret I got disheartened after a glimpse of ‘Discovery of freedom’ wherein I noticed few misinterpretations/misunderstanding about some issues of Indian philosophy and in this sense alone as ‘adharmic’ in nature. To start with I herein touch only one of the very very basic and fundamental secrete (?) to which you have referred to in the chapter ‘Creation, stardust and carbon’. It relates to the ultimate secret of the universe, its origin and its scientific revelation.

If I am not mistaken you ended with the hope on present day materialistic science to solve the ultimate secret of ‘Energy’ or ‘Universe’.

You also referred to ‘Advaita’, however ended with saying that such things raise more questions than they address without mentioning even a single question about the same.

“The comment here onwards is my own original version or interpretation and I do not pass the responsibility to any other even if I quote others”

Now find herewith the ultimate secret of the universe which is so implicit throughout the work of ‘Maharshi Veda Vyasa’ which the modern world is yet failing to understand for want of pure scientific and unending curiosity ironically for which it is so well known. I apologies for this principle (law) when revealed half (one of the two as mentioned in the following table) may cause havoc as well, as it is just like double edged sword. Hope you understand it to its core. It runs like this..

The ultimate principle: The following two halfs taken together constitute this principle.

Sl no First half (all items grouped under it are identical) Second half (all items grouped under this are identical) Remarks
1 Advaita Dvaita Work of Maharshi Veda Vyasa.(?)
2 Purusha (~male) Prakriti (~female) Similar sage or –do-
3 Shiva Shakti ,,
4 Brahman Maya ,,
5
.
.
7 Energy can never be created Nor it can ever be destroyed. The fundamental law of science.
8 Electric loop Magnetic field -do-; These are never separable, and one is the cause of the other. One is meaningless without the other.
Both these halfs together form a complete and give the universe its present form. The secret unveiled. These are two sides of the same coin which are never separable nor do they cross ever. . …

Explanation: (In the reverse order.)

1. When it is well known that energy can never be created it is utterly nonsense and meaningless even to make effort to account for the existing one. This proposition is very simple but very difficult to grasp and digest. It is purely scientific.

Because there can never be any explanation for the existing energy. To make simple – the things which do not have origin, they don’t actually exist.

As such is it ever possible for the science to account for the existing universe according to its own law? It is never.

The first fall out of the above principle is that the time and space, the two basic concepts exist relatively and are meaningless when talked absolutely. (If I am not mistaken Einsteins theory of relativity states the same. If not I apologies the same for mentioning his name and theory)

2. Similar reasoning holds good for the electric loop and magnetic field for it’s futile to find the origin of each in themselves. (my knowledge about these is limited. If contrary is true this example may be struck, it won’t make any difference upon the above principle)

3. Advaita School of philosophy states that Brahman is the ultimate truth. And Dvaita states that Maya is truth. The secret is that one is non-existent without the other. Tragedy is that both failed to understand the same independently except the work of ‘Maharshi Veda Vyasa’ who took both into account at a time in all his work including the Vedas- (He was not a writer of it only in the sense that existing energy can never be accounted for and hence its existence even before the existence of the universe--- be careful likely to get confused horribly. I can’t write everything for it may run too long)

Advaita states that Universe never existed as such hence the theory of creation as illustrated in various shastras is for the sake of ‘Common’ human beings. However you put up the theory of creation all hold equally good. It needs only to satisfy the common sense of the common man. Its purpose can’t be more than that.

Dvaita states that the common is a common. The principles of advaita are out of the scope of the commons. For theirs sake there must be origin or else only havoc will ensue. Hence the need to accept the Maya or the Existing Energy as the ultimate truth (purely for the sake of Human beings.)

Thus both schools are true at their individual level but by this time you may have understood that they are just two halves of the basic principle ‘ Energy can never be created nor it can ever be destroyed.’ And as such two sides of the same coin each being meaningless without the other.

4. Shiv-Parvati (Shakti) etc ( and it may include the entire Hindu tradition) are just two sides of the above depicted coin. Similar reasoning holds good for Prakriti-Purush and Brahman- Maya etc…….. Or alternatively the Shiv-ling which consists of two parts are actually consists of these two halve. The main linga indicates the “Advaita” and on which this linga is supported, the lower portion indicates the “Dvaita”. ..and Only in this sense this tradition is worth sustaining.

Gnani is a one who identifies himself with the above principle, the only truth. And as such he alone holds the authority to interpret or to establish the laws for the rest of the Human beings. You know only the scientist or technologist alone holds the authority to design the machine. None other is eligible to do the same. Others do by virtue of their knowledge can become a scientist or technologist, the thing is different. If this rule is broken only the distortion is outcome.


Therefore the Dharma is one which Gnani defines who takes into account the entire gamut of truth into account. And the other only follow it.

This comment is incomplete and will be resumed after your considered questions that may follow this. I am eager to know your doubts………at least, in the process, I may get rectified.

Monday, September 6, 2010

comment on the post http://freedomteam.in/blog/content/religious-freedom-and-tolerance

Dear friends,
It is the ‘Dharma’ which gives the animal the form of ‘Being Human’. It was the Hindu Dharma which gave the now thinking animal a form of Being Human. Similar efforts were made by the Jain, Boudha, Christen, Islam etc Dharmas including Hindu which were turned into Religions (English term) due to Veil nature of this animal (Human Beings). It is originally the Dharma which defines the Politics, Governance, Society and so on. Religion is the term which the foreign culture has given the name to this Dharma. Due to inappropriate conceptions of the Dharma, the term Religion not necessarily implies the same thing as the Dharma does.

When Politics is separated from the Dharma, the politics become the law of the animals not of the Human beings. If problems are created with the Politics, then effort to establish the Dharma with its pristine purity should be made and that it could never be separated from the Dharma which is its seed, the father.

At FTI if it is true that the Dharma is being separated from the politics by confusing the Dharma with the English term Religion, it will be more disastrous than any past happenings in the history of the human race.

Is there anybody who can clarify the stand of FTI? Dear Sabhlok, Shantanu……..