Destiny of Actions or Action of Destiny
G: But is this stochastic destiny process in consistent with the concepts of Karma falla (Fruits of Actions) and Rebirth? Do you believe in rebirth?
S: Rebirth of what? Rebirth of body takes place through a process of corpses degenerating into other materials, then some such materials getting into some human bodies as water, food, etc and then living bodies through procreation give birth to new bodies. It is not the rebirth of a particular body that once stopped functioning. To the extent the mind and the ego are intrinsically related to a part of body, that is the brain, we cannot talk of rebirth of a particular mind or a particular ego. Something independent of the body, mind and ego and yet a part of the living being does not die when the body dies, can probably get attached to a new body. But what is that something. Is it an experience of a body when it was alive?
G: Let us assume it is an experience.
S: If it is an experience, I do not know as yet how it could get attached to a new body. Maybe, such past experience can get attached to a new body by some mechanism through the stochastic destiny process. But a new body can always retrieve this past experience from books where the experience is recorded or by accessing an invisible experience store space provided the body has such a capability.
G: But does destiny link from birth to birth? For example, if I have done good deeds this birth I will have good life next birth.
S: The cause and effect or Karmafalla relationships are definitely a part of the stochastic destiny process. If the past experience carries into a new body, the experience itself may have an impact on what the new body or form does or the way it behaves. This is a kind of cause and effect relationship. But I am not sure this has anything to do with what you call good deeds leading to good life in a new body, called rebirth. In any case, the existence of cause and effect relationships between a previous body and a new body emerging after the extinction of the former, does not necessarily give rise to the possibility of rebirth of the particular entity of the past. All these aspects I am yet to explore. But all this possibilities cannot be called as rebirth of a particular thing of the past. In a continuous stochastic process of transformation, it is possible to that history may partially or fully repeat but that does not mean rebirth.
G: But rebirth is an integral part of Hindu philosophy.
S: Maybe, but it may not mean rebirth of the particular entity of the past. In the water cycle from vapors to clouds to rainfall to river water to ocean or melting of ice to formation of ice, we can see forms being recreated again and again. But is there any separate identity of the particular ice or particular water atom from one cycle to another? I don’t think so. The attachment to the continuity of the existence of the particular is the illusion created in the human mind by the destiny principle for its own smooth functioning.
G: Can you elaborate on this aspect of the illusion a little more?
S: Look when you play a game of carom or ludo, you use coins of different colors. How they move on the board depends on the chances emanating from how you arrange the coins on the board and the throw of the dice or your strike at the coins. Whether you succeed or fail and win or lose, you do not identify each coin as an entity of permanence for the game. In fact, you do not even distinguish between any two white coins or one blue coin with another. But if you had marked the coins with separate numbers you could have tracked how lucky or unlucky each coin is over repeated throw of dice or strike-hits or in their movements across the board over successive games. You do not do that. You play the game. Win or lose but do not get attached to or angry fall in love with a particular coin of a particular color. This illusion is not there in these games including the game of cards, except occasionally when the losing party overturns the board in disgust or throws away the complete pack of cards.
G: But this illusion remains when human beings deal with themselves.
S: Yes, they do not see themselves as undistinguishable white or black coins, each of which moves in deferent directions depending on the strength of the force of the striker, the angle of force, the impact of bouncing on the edges and collisions among coins along the path of their travel. The human beings cannot see themselves as being a piece in the pack of cards getting distributed to and played on by hands of varying skills. Carom coins and cards have no mind and therefore no illusion that they make any choice whatsoever in deciding their movements. Human mind is imparted with the illusion of independence. And this is an integral part of the Destiny Principle.
G: This part may appear OK. But what about rebirth in the sense of Atman getting into another body after the first body dies? Hindus seem to believe in this.
S: Yes, Hindus do so. But Atman then Atman can never die. Atman must be of permanent existence. If Atman is of permanent existence, it never changes. The question is whether there are separate Atmans each with separate identities? Let us assume they are not. Then the question of rebirth does not arise. If Atman is the Pure Knowledge, it is not something that can have separate identity just because we assume that Atman resides in or behind each human body or mind or intellect. Let us assume that there are numerous Atmans. But Atmans being of permanent existence has the Knowledge of the Principles of the Creation or the Universe. Atmans cannot therefore have any illusion that they have separate identities.
G: Then, where does the realization take place?
S: That is a separate issue for discussion.
G: Fine. Tell me one thing now. Why is it that no one is willing to accept the Destiny Principle as Truth and yet you seem to have total belief in this?
S: Because each one of us is destined to have different beliefs in accordance with the Destiny Principle. The Destiny principle is either true or false. Either a person believes in the Destiny Principle as Truth or does not believe so. There are four possibilities. The worst case scenarios are that (a) one believes in something as True when it is not True and (b) one does not believe in something which is True. My position may be an instance of (a). I may be destined to change my position if I stumble on to an alternative principle explaining the Universe, which is more convincing than the destiny principle. So far nothing of that sort has come my way,
G: Then, how do you explain the developments taking place in societies, nations and civilization over time?
S: I have always only one answer: All that happens is the manifestation of the Destiny Principle.
No comments:
Post a Comment