When I wrote an article about ‘Moral dilemma’* in my blog
last year my friend Rajagopalan had come up with some fresh ideas and arguments . It prompted me to write a
sequel to the original article (again see in my blog)* Now this one is my third
posting on the related subject, again using ideas for inputs from Mr. Rajagopalan.
Writings
by David Bain a lecturer in philosophy at the University of
Glasgow also have great influence in the following blog.
So now let us interact.
At present I am sitting
in front of my computer keying this article; I can see my computer in front of
me; and while reading this article on your computer screen you are also doing
the same thing; seeing the computer. Now let me ask you; what makes you believe
that you are doing that?
‘What a simplistic question’;
you may retort. Let me hasten to add that I mean no offence.
Okay you believe in your senses. But the
question is; don’t you know that these senses do mislead many a time?
When you immerse a
straight stick in water; half submerged it looks bent. We have seen drawings of
‘Pen-rose stairs’ perpetually and eternally climbing but always taking you to
the same spot where you have started.
Now look at the
following illustrations. Don’t you agree that those redlines look different in
length (on is shorter than the other) though by exact measurement it can be
seen that they are of the same length
This Muller-Lyer
illusion shows how much we can believe in our senses. Look at a Barometer and it can predict the
possibility of a rain in the immediate future though you are inclined to
confirm it by actually going out and checking it. But in all cases you cannot
do the same. You cannot get out of the experience and conduct a reality check
to confirm that what you experience is right. Coming back to our earlier
assumption that a computer does exist in front of you cannot be independently
verified.
There is a very well
known example frequently quoted and which was originally used by Shankara - the
snake and rope illusion. A rope taken to be a snake is a delusion which was
cleared when more light was provided.
In our case the
existence of the computer can be reasonably confirmed because someone else
watching at the same direction or the pet dog looking and seeing the picture
flicking across the screen do see something. We can assume the reliability of
sensual evidence because there is uniformity to a great extent.
Now let us come to the
choice we make for our actions. Do you think that you have really decided to
read this article of your own or you were just following something which was
originally decided much before you have even thought of reading it?
All of us have heard about the big bang theory and the
creation of this universe. Let us imagine that Raju had existed immediately
after this bang. Let us also assume that he
had unlimited intelligence and memory, and knew all the scientific laws
governing the universe and all the properties of every particle that then
existed.
Thus equipped, billions of years ago, he could have
worked out that, eventually, planet Earth would come to exist, that you would
too, and that right now you would be reading this article.
You are now reading this
article and no one deny the fact that you chose to read it but at the same time
there were causes for your choices (in your brain for example certain events).
For those events also had causes in-turn and as a chain going back to the first
bang.
In other words your
reading of this article was predictable for Raju even much before your
existence and you as such could have done nothing about it.
Now of course Raju did
not exist and hence he did not predict that you will be existing now. But the point is that had he been there -with
all the faculties mentioned-; he could have.
In other words everything is destined to the last alphabet and you and I
just enacting the roles stipulated.
You may argue that
according to modern Physics, there exists a kind of fundamental randomness in
this universe and this will upset the scheme of Raju’s predictions.
But does this give you
solace? I doubt, for in this world in
the lives of ordinary people when someone does something unpredictably we question
it and raise doubts whether he or she had acted freely and responsibly. In
other words the so called free will looks incompatible with randomness and
casual determination taking us back to our initial argument that no one does
anything freely and responsibly.
Now let us take the
following stanzas from Bhagavad Gita.
‘yad ahamkaaram aas’ritya Na yotsya iti
manyase
Mithyai’sa
vyavasayas te Prakrits twam niyoksyat’
(Gita
18-59)
‘If indulging in self-conceit, you think and resolve “I
will not fight”, vain is this resolve of yours. Your nature will compel you (to
fight)’ Gita 18-59)
“mayai’
vai’ te nihatah purvam eva
Nimittamatram
bhava savyasachin”
(Gita 11-33)
‘By me alone have these (opponents lined up in front)
been killed already. O Savyasachin (Arjuna) you be merely an instrument’.
Isn’t it the same argument we were struggling to put
forward, explained vividly in this great Book.
So we can now say with confidence that immediately after
the “Big Bang” when the “Srishti Kalpa” began, Brahman (Raju?) existed. There
was no time Brahman (Raju) did not exist. In fact the worlds existed in him.
Once again taking up our hypothesis about Raju whom we
now can call the Brahman “possessed unlimited intelligence and memory, knew all
scientific laws that governs this universe and all the properties of the
particles that existed and all these
laws and principles were his and all those particles existed and existing are
his creations. Existence of any free will is impossibility”.
Here I quote a famous French Mathematician Pierre Simon Laplace, who said:
“
An intellect which at a given instant knew all the forces acting in nature, and
the position of all things of which the world consists-supposing the said
intellect were vast enough to subject these data to analysis- would embrace in
the same formula the motions of the greatest bodies in the universe and those
of the slightest atoms; nothing would be uncertain for it, and the future, like
the past, would be present to its eyes”
“prakritim
yanti bhutani, nigraha kim karishyati”
“Actions
flow inevitably of the working of the Prakriti, No restrains what so ever hence
can avail”
None of us ever do anything in our free will and
responsibly. Only the very vein and ignorant does think that he is the
doer.
Let us now conclude. I am sure that many of you will not
agree fully with the above line of presentation. Some may totally disagree and
rubbish it and you have all the rights to do so. My only request is; when you
reject any conclusion kindly find the true reason for doing so. Kindly diagnose
where tha argument has gone wrong.
This at least gives us permission to put every thing in
the correct perspective. There may be
surprises still existing. One thing is certain; even when our common sense is
remaining in tact; our understanding is widended.
Finally let me quote Eliot;
“........the end of exploring,
Will be to arrive where we started,
And know the place for the first time.”
And see what the Zen master Daito told his disciple Emperor
Godaigo.
We were parted many thousands of kalpas ago, yet we have not been separated even for a moment. We are facing each other all day long, yet we have never met”
We were parted many thousands of kalpas ago, yet we have not been separated even for a moment. We are facing each other all day long, yet we have never met”
*also see
No comments:
Post a Comment