Jump to content

Free Will, Hukam, Karam?


TheFancyBanana
 Share

Recommended Posts

We are walking along the road, no other person can see us, we pick up someone's dropped purse, with a large amount of money, and their I.d.

Choice 1.

We contact that person, and give their purse back to them.

Choice 2.

We keep the cash, and discard the purse.

What causes us to choose action 1, and what causes us to choose action 2?

The person choosing action 2, is under the heavy influence of maya. The person choosing action 1, is not under the heavy influence of maya.

When we were first created, we did have a clean chit, in terms of no previous karams, but the fact remains, that as jeevs, we were placed under the influence of maya, I.e. Kaam/krodh....otherwise the game cant be played out by Waheguru.

There is free will, but our hands are tied, eyes blindfolded, and shackles around the feet, are placed by maya. Only Naam removes these bandan, and then we have liberation, where there is no I fluency of the 5; hence the life of a Gurmukh....

Waheguru....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen both sides of the argument, Sam Harris presents a pretty good argument for no free will using biology/biochem.

What my problem is this, say for example you would be able to simulate reality for an individual person and clone it 1,000,000,000,000 times over for a situation with 100.00000000000000000000% exact same conditions in the Universe down to the smallest particle and time would the situation a person is in play out the same way each time?

For example if you were sitting in class and this situation was multiplied X times with the same exact conditions in the Universe and you chose to leave class early, would this happen in all the 1,000,000,000,000 times with the same exact conditions leading up to that decision?

I thought about this specific situation in philosophy class last semester and it bothered me since.

Good question. The problem with choice is as I have bolded above in the quote is not under our control so to say we chose was never under our control in the first place. The way our brain works is we first get a thought and then after we have had the thought we become aware of the thought. Lets give a practical example when we do gurmantar repetition; let say we do this mentally and sometimes thoughts come in our head. We were supposed to be doing gurmantar repetition so who gave us the thoughts that interrupted our naam? They were never in our control to begin with. Science when looked at the brain it found neuron impulses before a thought was propagated and without those neuron impulses there was no thought. Science does not know who or what is causing the impulses but I believe it to be God as he is pulling the strings behind the show.

So coming to answer sam Harris's question of the simulated individual choosing to leave class early in one simulation and of this happening in other exact simulations is that choice is not under the individuals control but in the individual creating the simulation. So the choice would be for the person playing God in the simulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we were first created, we did have a clean chit, in terms of no previous karams, but the fact remains, that as jeevs, we were placed under the influence of maya, I.e. Kaam/krodh....otherwise the game cant be played out by Waheguru.

There is free will, but our hands are tied, eyes blindfolded, and shackles around the feet, are placed by maya. Only Naam removes these bandan, and then we have liberation, where there is no I fluency of the 5; hence the life of a Gurmukh....

Waheguru....

Naam removes previous karams so we have no karma remaining but if we had no previous karams to start of with then shouldn't we be liberated in both situations? Using your theory maya would still effect a person without karma be it with naam or without then there is no escape. Can maya effect or influence a person without karma?

So you said the jeev is placed under maya by God thereby god is causing the individual to do evil or good. Lets say we do naam and we get our karma amount to zero then how do we know that god won't just put us into the grips of maya again like he did when we started of?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are walking along the road, no other person can see us, we pick up someone's dropped purse, with a large amount of money, and their I.d.

Choice 1.

We contact that person, and give their purse back to them.

Choice 2.

We keep the cash, and discard the purse.

What causes us to choose action 1, and what causes us to choose action 2?

The person choosing action 2, is under the heavy influence of maya. The person choosing action 1, is not under the heavy influence of maya.

I sincerely disagree. The problem with choice is that it is not under our control so to say we chose was never under our control in the first place. The way our brain works is we first get a thought and then after we have had the thought we become aware of the thought. Lets give a practical example when we do gurmantar repetition; let say we do this mentally and sometimes thoughts come in our head. We were supposed to be doing gurmantar repetition so who gave us the thoughts that interrupted our naam? They were never in our control to begin with. Science when looked at the brain it found neuron impulses before a thought was propagated and without those neuron impulses there was no thought. Science does not know who or what is causing the impulses but I believe it to be God as he is pulling the strings behind the show.

What causes us to choose action 1, and what causes us to choose action 2?

Only God chooses to do both actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. The problem with choice is as I have bolded above in the quote is not under our control so to say we chose was never under our control in the first place. The way our brain works is we first get a thought and then after we have had the thought we become aware of the thought. Lets give a practical example when we do gurmantar repetition; let say we do this mentally and sometimes thoughts come in our head. We were supposed to be doing gurmantar repetition so who gave us the thoughts that interrupted our naam? They were never in our control to begin with. Science when looked at the brain it found neuron impulses before a thought was propagated and without those neuron impulses there was no thought. Science does not know who or what is causing the impulses but I believe it to be God as he is pulling the strings behind the show.

So coming to answer sam Harris's question of the simulated individual choosing to leave class early in one simulation and of this happening in other exact simulations is that choice is not under the individuals control but in the individual creating the simulation. So the choice would be for the person playing God in the simulation.

The question was actually mine, none of what I mentioned had anything to do with Sam Harris lol.

What you replied is the basic argument that Sam Harris makes against free will if I'm not mistaken. I'm still not sure though, after we get the thought what exactly determines the decision and would it be the same if all the conditions in the Universe were exactly* the same and repeated an indefinite amount of time?

Would they be the same every time?

I'm thinking about starting a topic in intellectual thread and we can debate this where I post this situation and have people debate one side vs the opposing. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naam removes previous karams so we have no karma remaining but if we had no previous karams to start of with then shouldn't we be liberated in both situations? Using your theory maya would still effect a person without karma be it with naam or without then there is no escape. Can maya effect or influence a person without karma?

So you said the jeev is placed under maya by God thereby god is causing the individual to do evil or good. Lets say we do naam and we get our karma amount to zero then how do we know that god won't just put us into the grips of maya again like he did when we started of?

When first created, our previous karams were zero, but despite this liberty, we then started doing things under the I fluency of maya.

When Waheguru created the jeev, it is Waheguru himself who comes to the world, in the form of the jeev. Waheguru, in the form of jeev, has to place himself under maya, otherwise the worldly game cannot be played out. Please read Ashtpadhi 21 of Sukhmani Sahib.

Once the jeev becomes liberated from maya, through Naam, the jeev will not go to its influence again:

When a water bubble floats on the water, it appears to be separate from the ocean, but when it bursts it becomes ocean roop. Once it becomes ocean roop, can you bring that particular bubble back?

When everything ceases to be, and all the jeevs become infused in Naam, then is no more individuality.

When Waheguru decides to create the universes again, then the same game takes place, but this time it won't be us, since we lost our individuality, when everything ends:

Jabb akhrakh kart hoo Sabah koh; tum me Milat de kar sabhoo....Sri Chapaee Sahib...

Waheguru...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

then why create us? whats the point of doing anything. we are supposed to reach god. god sent guru nanak to us. why send guru nanak if god is going to choose who will jap naam and who wont. he wouldnt have to send guru nanak or sikhi because he was deciding who does bhagti. why is there kalyug? or any jugs? surely god wouldnt increase paap for his own enjoyment. bani describes a bond with waheguru as a marriage, we are supposed to fall in love with god. but are we falling in love or really going on a journey to god if he is making us do it. why reincarnate people who dont jap naam? the man who drinks alcohol or works off innocent people, it isnt there fault they are doing those things as god is making them do it.

im sorry if my questions annoy you (some people said i shouldnt question. im too nastic apparently).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question was actually mine, none of what I mentioned had anything to do with Sam Harris lol.

What you replied is the basic argument that Sam Harris makes against free will if I'm not mistaken. I'm still not sure though, after we get the thought what exactly determines the decision and would it be the same if all the conditions in the Universe were exactly* the same and repeated an indefinite amount of time?

Would they be the same every time?

I'm thinking about starting a topic in intellectual thread and we can debate this where I post this situation and have people debate one side vs the opposing. What do you think?

Lol yeh really good question though I believe both action and thought are done by God. The decision in my opinion would be dependent on intellect of the individual. The intellect is based on a persons life experiences, what they have studied in life, their up bringing, their responses to the 5 senses etc etc. But like you said in the simulation they had all the same experiences and everything was the same. Therefore it would be likely to be the same action every time but I am also aware of each visual and sensory stimulus does not necessary cause the same action it could be one of many learnt actions. It would be like the matrix when neo is with the architect and they are looking at the screens determining the possible actions he will do next. But the question is who determines that particular action, which I believe to be God as thought and action occur hundredths of seconds before we become consciously aware of them.

Yes that would be a great thing to do. I would also like to hear opposing views but the main reason I am against free will is that it if there was free will it would make God not all knowing... Also having no free will gives the solution to the karmic paradox I mentioned earlier. But I am always open to different opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When first created, our previous karams were zero, but despite this liberty, we then started doing things under the I fluency of maya.

When Waheguru created the jeev, it is Waheguru himself who comes to the world, in the form of the jeev. Waheguru, in the form of jeev, has to place himself under maya, otherwise the worldly game cannot be played out. Please read Ashtpadhi 21 of Sukhmani Sahib.

Once the jeev becomes liberated from maya, through Naam, the jeev will not go to its influence again:

When a water bubble floats on the water, it appears to be separate from the ocean, but when it bursts it becomes ocean roop. Once it becomes ocean roop, can you bring that particular bubble back?

When everything ceases to be, and all the jeevs become infused in Naam, then is no more individuality.

When Waheguru decides to create the universes again, then the same game takes place, but this time it won't be us, since we lost our individuality, when everything ends:

Jabb akhrakh kart hoo Sabah koh; tum me Milat de kar sabhoo....Sri Chapaee Sahib...

Waheguru...

You said "we then started doing things under the I fluency of maya."

Can I ask you what is the difference between the nature of maya and sargun nature of God?

Also you say through naam one gets liberated. I assume you mean they burn away their karama by naam right? You also have given the analogy of the bubble bursting and losing individuality once karma is "burnt" away. If so then what is the difference in the outcome between a person who starts of with no karam and one who burns away their karma, shouldn't they both have no individuality as the outcome is the same.

You say waheguru places himself under maya so does he lose his true nature when this happens? Or does both maya and nirgun remain dependent of each other even when waheguru places himself in maya?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use