vaidix at hotmail.com
Sun Apr 12 13:35:22 CDT 2009
Br. Pranipata Chaitanya,
>I do not think any other creature other than human beings are fit to be
>classified under above nature because they do not have any choice of
>adhering to or acting against dharma. (They do not have free-will).
Kindly provide a reference to this. Looks like another western religious influence which says
only humans have soul.
Br.U. says 'purushovAva sukRtam bateti', meaning purusha is well made, meaning others are
not so well made (Remember the trivRtkarana argument which has coarse, medium and fine.
Likewise we can have creatures different grades of being well made). In Br.U, purusha
could be cosmic purusha, and can not be taken to mean only humans. IMO, purusha could
be cosmic purusha + any creature built on the purusha template (having eyes, ears, mouth, body, hands/forelegs legs/hindlegs. I am not clear about how far purusha extends as
per shastraic definition.
Agreed that animals do not have higher faculties. But we can not exclude animals from
free-will because then we would exclude cow which is placed even higher than brahmana
among devas. Go-suktam of atharva veda says cow has its own infallible will that can bring
destruction to any one even kings who do not show respect to it. If we exclude animals,
we would also be going against Ch.U. story of Baka -Dalbhya in which shruti explains a
version of uthgItha sung by dogs.
Rediscover Hotmail®: Get quick friend updates right in your inbox.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list