[Advaita-l] Disccussion on Free-will
michael at shepherd87.fsnet.co.uk
Sun May 24 06:01:58 CDT 2009
Here is one sensitive area on which Eat and West just might agree -- that
the illusion of freewill is given to man in order for him to recognise and
transcend illusion !
As for 'sentience' -- I suspect that the pandits would say that the corect
word is 'consciousness' and that a volcano 'acts' but is not by this,
conscious of its nature, nor its cause, nor its effects..thus does not
fulfil Samkya in revealing Truth..
From: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org]On Behalf Of Mahesh
Sent: 24 May 2009 11:36
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Disccussion on Free-will
>> Only a couple of clarifications from my end - prakRti, strictly speaking,
>> represents only the insentient.
When you use the word 'strictly', what I understand is that the antakarana
(i.e. manas, buddhi, citta & ahamkara) is constituted of insentient prakRti
but the reflection of Brahman in it causes it to have sentience. So one can
loosely call in 'sentient prakRti'. Now even 'insentient prakRti' acts e.g
volcanos erupt, tsumanis occur, etc. The laws governing the two may be
different but they both do 'act'.
When Krishna says: "all actions are done by the prakRiti alone"? The use of
"alone" here implies that, there is no doer over & above prakRti. Our world
(as of today) can be understood as actions done by sentient & insentient
prakRti, both acting under some laws, which may not necessarily be
identical. Technically speaking, we still don't know the laws under by which
'sentient prakRti' acts. However, one hopes one does not need to abandon
cause-effect principles in order to explain them. If so, all actions done by
prakRti have a cause & a resultant effect - where then is 'free' will?
>> Individual 'free will' is an illusion on the same level as the notion of
the 'individual' itself.
What I understand here is that when the 'individual' is no more, one
transcends will of any kind. However, my contention, as argued above, is
that even when an 'individual' exists, 'free will' is an illusion.
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Neither jnaani nor ajnaani really acts.
> > and
> > >> Otherwise there is no difference between jnaani and ajnaani. Neither
> > is really a doer at >> any time.
> > If there cannot be an ownership of action by either the jnaani or
> > then it implies that prakRiti, representing everything in the Universe
> > (sentient & insentient), acts as one unified whole. What causes it to
> > Purusha or Brahman. Individual action then is a myth. Which, oddly
> > supports my position that individual 'free will' is an illusion. It is
> > universal, all pervading prakriti that is causing you & me to act but
> > delusion, we think we act out of our own free will. Or, in Sri
> > words, the Mother is the one that causes you & me to act.
> > Unless, my reasoning is flawed somehwere...
> Only a couple of clarifications from my end - prakRti, strictly speaking,
> represents only the insentient.
> Individual 'free will' is an illusion on the same level as the notion of
> 'individual' itself. So long as there is a you vs. me in my mind, there is
> an 'individual' I and this 'I' has both destiny and will. So individual
> is not a myth in and of itself; it is dependent upon the notion of the
> Hotmail® goes with you.
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list