2005-09-07

Perspectives

There is no reality in the world. There are only perceptions. The perceptions are colored by the experiences that we have gone through. We usually hear what we want to; see what we want to. Even when we see something new, it is only an interpretation of our own view of the world.

------------------------------------------
I have to go. I want to go.

The difference in the above sentences is not just lexical. The difference refers to the way we have come to think. Even where the latter sentence is appropriate, we use the former. Many things in life are done voluntarily, not perforce. But the language that we use is so much structured in the ‘compulsion’ paradigm that repeated usage of such language reinforces that we are living in a world where free will is absent

--------------------------------------------
Have heard of many definitions of Economics, but one which most appealed to me was – it is a study of incentives. How appropriate! Economics is all about individual incentives. People make choices, which sometimes may appear not beneficial to themselves, but only end up maximizing their incentives. Giving a tip to a waiter at a restaurant to which we may never return may make our wallet lighter, but will surely make our hearts lighter too.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

The notion that there is no truth in this world is self defeating since if the truth is that there is no truth then that itself is THE truth...
This is the eternal on-going debate between the advaitins (led by Sankara) and Vaishnavas represented by many Vaishnava acharyas like Madhva, the former claiming that everything is finally illusion, for which they also earn the title of "Mayavada". To this, vaishnava acharyas respond by saying that if everything is illusion, then how come your efforts within this illusion lead to reality? Meaning, mayavadis take so much trouble by way of medidation etc to realize the truth. but, if everything is illusion, then the efforts within this world are also illusory and hence should not lead to anything real (viz moksha). its like dreaming that you are working very hard and waking up and finding a salary for the hard work in your dreams...
hence proved - there cannot be no truth. there has to be some truth.

V said...

I have got addicted to your blog. As I’ve already said, tired of praising the stuff that you write. To counter what anon has said -

1) Maya is not mere illusion! It has a lot of philosophical subtlelity. The simile of getting salary after the dream is totally misplaced. Maya is not mere illusion - the very basis of the argument that anon posted.
2) Coming to the point that there is no reality in this world. It is completely untrue that the world is a “dream”. It is a perception of the reality. It is due to the ignorance of the person (avidya) a person sees his perceived notion of this material world. This is precisely the reason why we have varied opinions and views on the same issue. As avidya gets reduced the “one” view of this world emerges.
3) Vijay is right because as long as we are in this ignorance, materialistically there is no absolute reality and there is no absolute right or wrong. It is all about our perceptions. Just think about it if we had a new sense organ we might have perceived this world in a totally different sense! Or if the entire human race did not have the gift of sight the perceived view of this world would have been entirely different!

itheabsolute said...

hi anon

thanks for posting ur perspective.

i strongly feel that world and life are what we feel about them / how we see them. to that extent they cannot be real.

but i respect ur views. thats what makes ur world different from my world.

cheers

itheabsolute said...

hi v

thanks for making my life easy by provinding supporting views in my favor.

life is interesting because there are many perspectives.

i, the absolute is about my view of life. again, my views keep changing as i get new information/ data points/as i undergo new experiences.

thanks for dropping by the blog regularly. need people like u to encourage me and keep me going.

cheers

Anonymous said...

V & Vijay..
Well, as we do realize, what philosophers have not accomplished from time immemorial, we cant in a few posts, but in any case, i am tempted to post this last comment --
V is right in saying that maya is not completely untrue... in fact that was precisely my point (and also that of acharyas like Madhva). But, Sankara's followers claim that maya is infact totally untrue - "Brahma satya, jagan mitya"
mitya means untrue...they dont ascribe any reality to this world and ultimately thats the reason they finally stop all activity, interactions with people and even talking. Because, it comes in their way of realizing that this world is untrue...
whereas, Vaisnavas believe that this world is one of the many energies of Lord Hari, albeit its role is to chasten the rebellious souls of this world to finally surrender to the Lord (something like the police dept). so, it is not untrue. to that extent we are all in the same page (the dream allegory is given to counter arguments from those who claim that the world is untrue - the mayavadis).
the notion i was trying to dispute was only that ultimately there has to be some absolute truth and everything cannot be relative. if everything is just relative then life loses sanity because one can then do whatever he likes because in his perspective he is based on the truth... yet, when we see the universe, we see that there are superior laws that apply to everyone irrespective of what WE believe. its not that i believe something and hence it applies to me and someone doesnt belive in it and hence it doesnt apply to him.. no, it is applicable to everyone irrespective of our BELIEFS. therefore, they are called the "LAWS OF NATURE" and not "BELIEFS ABOUT NATURE" Hence, intuitively, we can understand that there is indeed something beyond just what we BELIEVE and we only need to inquire as to how to approach that ABSOLUTE.

2005-09-07

Perspectives

There is no reality in the world. There are only perceptions. The perceptions are colored by the experiences that we have gone through. We usually hear what we want to; see what we want to. Even when we see something new, it is only an interpretation of our own view of the world.

------------------------------------------
I have to go. I want to go.

The difference in the above sentences is not just lexical. The difference refers to the way we have come to think. Even where the latter sentence is appropriate, we use the former. Many things in life are done voluntarily, not perforce. But the language that we use is so much structured in the ‘compulsion’ paradigm that repeated usage of such language reinforces that we are living in a world where free will is absent

--------------------------------------------
Have heard of many definitions of Economics, but one which most appealed to me was – it is a study of incentives. How appropriate! Economics is all about individual incentives. People make choices, which sometimes may appear not beneficial to themselves, but only end up maximizing their incentives. Giving a tip to a waiter at a restaurant to which we may never return may make our wallet lighter, but will surely make our hearts lighter too.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

The notion that there is no truth in this world is self defeating since if the truth is that there is no truth then that itself is THE truth...
This is the eternal on-going debate between the advaitins (led by Sankara) and Vaishnavas represented by many Vaishnava acharyas like Madhva, the former claiming that everything is finally illusion, for which they also earn the title of "Mayavada". To this, vaishnava acharyas respond by saying that if everything is illusion, then how come your efforts within this illusion lead to reality? Meaning, mayavadis take so much trouble by way of medidation etc to realize the truth. but, if everything is illusion, then the efforts within this world are also illusory and hence should not lead to anything real (viz moksha). its like dreaming that you are working very hard and waking up and finding a salary for the hard work in your dreams...
hence proved - there cannot be no truth. there has to be some truth.

V said...

I have got addicted to your blog. As I’ve already said, tired of praising the stuff that you write. To counter what anon has said -

1) Maya is not mere illusion! It has a lot of philosophical subtlelity. The simile of getting salary after the dream is totally misplaced. Maya is not mere illusion - the very basis of the argument that anon posted.
2) Coming to the point that there is no reality in this world. It is completely untrue that the world is a “dream”. It is a perception of the reality. It is due to the ignorance of the person (avidya) a person sees his perceived notion of this material world. This is precisely the reason why we have varied opinions and views on the same issue. As avidya gets reduced the “one” view of this world emerges.
3) Vijay is right because as long as we are in this ignorance, materialistically there is no absolute reality and there is no absolute right or wrong. It is all about our perceptions. Just think about it if we had a new sense organ we might have perceived this world in a totally different sense! Or if the entire human race did not have the gift of sight the perceived view of this world would have been entirely different!

itheabsolute said...

hi anon

thanks for posting ur perspective.

i strongly feel that world and life are what we feel about them / how we see them. to that extent they cannot be real.

but i respect ur views. thats what makes ur world different from my world.

cheers

itheabsolute said...

hi v

thanks for making my life easy by provinding supporting views in my favor.

life is interesting because there are many perspectives.

i, the absolute is about my view of life. again, my views keep changing as i get new information/ data points/as i undergo new experiences.

thanks for dropping by the blog regularly. need people like u to encourage me and keep me going.

cheers

Anonymous said...

V & Vijay..
Well, as we do realize, what philosophers have not accomplished from time immemorial, we cant in a few posts, but in any case, i am tempted to post this last comment --
V is right in saying that maya is not completely untrue... in fact that was precisely my point (and also that of acharyas like Madhva). But, Sankara's followers claim that maya is infact totally untrue - "Brahma satya, jagan mitya"
mitya means untrue...they dont ascribe any reality to this world and ultimately thats the reason they finally stop all activity, interactions with people and even talking. Because, it comes in their way of realizing that this world is untrue...
whereas, Vaisnavas believe that this world is one of the many energies of Lord Hari, albeit its role is to chasten the rebellious souls of this world to finally surrender to the Lord (something like the police dept). so, it is not untrue. to that extent we are all in the same page (the dream allegory is given to counter arguments from those who claim that the world is untrue - the mayavadis).
the notion i was trying to dispute was only that ultimately there has to be some absolute truth and everything cannot be relative. if everything is just relative then life loses sanity because one can then do whatever he likes because in his perspective he is based on the truth... yet, when we see the universe, we see that there are superior laws that apply to everyone irrespective of what WE believe. its not that i believe something and hence it applies to me and someone doesnt belive in it and hence it doesnt apply to him.. no, it is applicable to everyone irrespective of our BELIEFS. therefore, they are called the "LAWS OF NATURE" and not "BELIEFS ABOUT NATURE" Hence, intuitively, we can understand that there is indeed something beyond just what we BELIEVE and we only need to inquire as to how to approach that ABSOLUTE.