Best of both worlds

[amala]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Ok if one is Theist then surely they should also believe in the Law of Karma isn't it? If one believes in Karma then surely what happened is rightly deserved? If so isn't interfering with it by mob justice or evil good or taking the law/revenge/dharma in ones own hand equivalent to interfering with Karma?

SravnaJi already said the word pragmatic instead of postive hypocrisy and i think that makes a difference.

 

[sangom]

Ok if one is Theist then surely they should also believe in the Law of Karma isn't it? If one believes in Karma then surely what happened is rightly deserved? If so isn't interfering with it by mob justice or evil good or taking the law/revenge/dharma in ones own hand equivalent to interfering with Karma?

SravnaJi already said the word pragmatic instead of postive hypocrisy and i think that makes a difference.

Smt. Amala,

I am not clear about this post; does it refer to mine or Shri Ravi's. And, if your comments are in respect of my post, kindly make your points clearer.

 

[C RAVI]

I could see some confusions here with my opinion on "positive hypocrisy" in the same line of considering it just as a casual expression to help a spiritual person understand to be pragmatic, as highlighted by Sri Sravna. Neither to be dogmatic with closed eyes and fail to cope up with the practical life of the present world nor to give up inner spiritual self to keep one self away from committing bad karma.

In my previous two posts on this, I have clearly expressed the importance of being "Pragmatic" for a person while retaining his inner spriritual self. This may make a person consider onself a hypocrite. But it is not to be taken as such as long as this can help him retaining his inner spiritual self as per his belief on God, Spirituality and Karma Theory as well would not harm onself and others, being bit different outwordly for the better.

This opinion of mine is neither my EGO (as stated by Shri Sangom in his post #125) nor my ignorance of the term "hypocrisy". All my posts referring to "positive hypocrisy" was to substantiate the importance of being "spiritual pragmatic" as suggested term by Shri Nara and not to claim the validity of the expression itself.

 

[C RAVI]

Shri Sangom,

Referring your post #125 and with reference to the post no.126 by Amala,


First considering a common man in the society -

If a husband finds a criminal making an attempt to rape his wife and wife is obviously strugglight to escape, objecting him and suffering mental and physical pain -

1) Will any husband would take it as his and hers karma and keep quiet to refrain from going violent and attacking the rapist? In making such attempts of attackng the criminal to resuce his wife either he may badly hurt him and make him fall unconscious/immovable or eventually end up killing him.

2) Is that ok if husband is keeping clam and merely restricting the criminal ineffectively and in return get himself injured or killed ONLY for the sake of Legal Justice to take actions on this criminal later, doesn't matter what his wife undergoes?



- Considering the social factor

3) If all the terrorists like Ajmal Kasab states that he/she been trained and brain washed and made to behave like a ROBOT, would that be a right move to just keep the person imprisoned and releave him from capital punishment? Is that the justice done to the family members of innocent victims and the pride and security of India? Woud not this make jihadi terrorists to keep indulging in such attacks more casually?


4) If as a final resort police had to kill a criminal to safeguard the society in the pretext of ENCOUNTER is injustice to criminal and criminal's family/dependable members, than what about the wellfare of thousands of people in the society?


If a man is criminal and playing havoc on the society and succumb to police ENCOUNTER, many a chance of his family members to suffer some way as their Karma. We all are selfish atleast emotionally when it is pertaining to our own family members. But a family member as true humanist and righteous person would not find it injustice (knowing the criminal member's choices and activities) BUT for sure would sincerly moan over this person's demise and pray the allmighty to put his soul in peace.

 

[sangom]

Shri Sangom,

Referring your post #125 and with reference to the post no.126 by Amala,


First considering a common man in the society -

If a husband finds a criminal making an attempt to rape his wife and wife is obviously strugglight to escape, objecting him and suffering mental and physical pain -

1) Will any husband would take it as his and hers karma and keep quiet to refrain from going violent and attacking the rapist? In making such attempts of attackng the criminal to resuce his wife either he may badly hurt him and make him fall unconscious/immovable or eventually end up killing him.

2) Is that ok if husband is keeping clam and merely restricting the criminal ineffectively and in return get himself injured or killed ONLY for the sake of Legal Justice to take actions on this criminal later, doesn't matter what his wife undergoes?



- Considering the social factor

3) If all the terrorists like Ajmal Kasab states that he/she been trained and brain washed and made to behave like a ROBOT, would that be a right move to just keep the person imprisoned and releave him from capital punishment? Is that the justice done to the family members of innocent victims and the pride and security of India? Woud not this make jihadi terrorists to keep indulging in such attacks more casually?


4) If as a final resort police had to kill a criminal to safeguard the society in the pretext of ENCOUNTER is injustice to criminal and criminal's family/dependable members, than what about the wellfare of thousands of people in the society?


If a man is criminal and playing havoc on the society and succumb to police ENCOUNTER, many a chance of his family members to suffer some way as their Karma. We all are selfish atleast emotionally when it is pertaining to our own family members. But a family member as true humanist and righteous person would not find it injustice (knowing the criminal member's choices and activities) BUT for sure would sincerly moan over this person's demise and pray the allmighty to put his soul in peace.

Dear Shri Ravi,

I find there is a lot of confusion in what you write between "Dharma" as envisaged in Hindu scriptures, "common law", "criminal law" and the kind of jurisprudence we in India have adopted for following.

The first example you give is well covered by our Cr.P C, AFAIK, and even if the intruder is killed by the husband, he may get only a suspended sentence. Members who are experts in law may kindly explain further. But the fact is even the law does not envisage the husband (normally in India guns are rare in homesteads) to keep quiet.

That does not mean that what the husband in a private home does to protect his wife will justify similar action by empowered police with weapons who are on the look out for criminals, under the guise of "encounter"; they have to follow the provisions of Law. Recently the killing of a naxal 40 years or so ago in a similar fake "encounter" has come before the CBI court and an IG of Police was given life imprisonment.

IMHO, Dharma is a much more complex and highly subtle phenomenon. Since I am not an authority on Dharma, I am unable to say how the examples will have to be analysed from the Dharma pov. But the word "Dharmah sanaatanah" seems to have been used in the broad sense of ancient custom; an example given by Shri Saidevo is reproduced below (see here the original post):

"It is there stated that in the olden time women were subject to no restraint, and incurred no blame for abandoning their husbands and cohabiting with anyone they pleased ... A stop was, however, put to this practice by Uddalaka Shvetaketu, whose indignation was on one occasion aroused by a Brahman taking his mother by the hand, and inviting her to go away with him, although his father, in whose presence this occurred, informed him that there was no reason for his displeasure, as the custom was one which had prevailed from time immemorial.

The verse in question occurs as follows in the ITX transliteration at:
ITRANS Text

mahAbhArata, Adi parva 114.13:
kruddha.n taM tu pitA dR^iShTvA shvetaketumuvAcha ha |
mA tAta kopa.n kArShIstvameSha dharmaH sanAtanaH || 13 ||

Kisari Mohan Ganguli's translation of the verses in context:
Translation of Mahabharata of Vyasa by Kisari Mohan Ganguli , Stories and Characters from Mahabharata, Mahabharatam in Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, Hindi..

"One day, in the presence of Swetaketu's father a Brahmana came and catching Swetaketu's mother by the hand, told her, 'Let us go.' Beholding his mother seized by the hand and taken away apparently by force, the son was greatly moved by wrath. Seeing his son indignant, Uddalaka addressed him and said, 'Be not angry. O son! This is the practice sanctioned by antiquity. The women of all orders in this world are free, O son; men in this matter, as regards their respective orders, act as kine.' The Rishi's son, Swetaketu, however, disapproved of the usage and established in the world the present practice as regards men and women." "

According to the above, possibly in the BS era (Before Swetaketu era), possibly the Dharmic way would have been ??? (you may yourself)

 

[Yamaka]

"So belief in God:

1) Enhances your quality of life manifold than when without that belief. The absence of ego makes possible peace even under most trying situations. You can never get that otherwise
2) Makes you a loving and loveable human
3) In doing the above it makes your life very fulfilling one

So belief in God even though not necessary to lead a materially successful life at least, is invaluable for the above reasons." -post 124

Dear Sravna:

Item 1: I maintain that being egoistic is not necessarily bad or evil. The key is what do you do with that ego.. which can help you to grow stronger mentally by working harder for what you want to achieve.

Item 2: I believe that I am already loving and loveable human being to my family, neighbors and co-workers etc. I am called as "A Good Samaritan. already"

Item 3: I feel my life is already fulfilling one.

You see, dear Sravna, the difference I see is how YOU FEEL about yourself...

If Athiests like myself FEEL good about themselves already - that their physical and emotional needs are already met without God, Religion, prayers, poojas and bhajans - where's is the need to believe in a Super Natural Force and the Janma Poorva Karma?

That's why I say it is totally Unnecessary to the Atheists!

That's the Message I convey to all the Younger People who are following this debate:

GOD and Religions need not necessarily give you peace, happiness and a comfortable life.

However, Atheists CAN get a peaceful, moral and ethical life, if you work towards it.

Peace.

 

[Yamaka]

On the same note, can it be said that those who have renounced their religion and stopped being hindu or brahmin but also claim that they are well wishers of hindus and/or brahmins be considered frauds and hypocrites?!!!

Why should a separate rule apply to HM and poorvashrama hindus?!

To me what Hema has done is more than "well wishers of Hindus....".

She is a FRAUD and a Hypocrite because

1. Just to marry an already married man, she made a phony conversion to Islam... remaining still a practicing Hindu.

She has violated the letter and spirit of the law... This is FRAUD.

2. She is a family wrecker - think of the emotional well being of Dharm's FIRST wife and their children, if any, for a minute.

She talks about the values of Hinduism etc... this is HYPOCRISY...

Therefore, there is a big difference between Hema and all others you are talking about.

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Yamaka,

Your post #102:



Your message gives an impression that you think (1)marrying a TB an agno-theist (2)raising two excellent kids and (3) achieving social, political and financial freedoms forms part of your so called 'success' story. Please confirm if my conclusion is correct.

I need this confirmation before replying further.

Cheers.

Dear Ravi:

I urge you to read the ENTIRE post - more importantly the first half... that will give you everything you need about my POV.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

She has violated the letter and spirit of the law... This is FRAUD.

Yamaka is writing as if the law under concern and that which is broken is a noble law. What is so noble in allowing a man to have multiple wives just because the man happens to be a muslim?

She is a family wrecker - think of the emotional well being of Dharm's FIRST wife and their children, if any, for a minute.

This is the most reasonable of all the charges made against her. And this happened because of the stupid laws of this country that allows such home wrecking!

Yamaka talks about hypocrisy. To write in support of Dharmendra, who is the main culprit, (it is he who was already married) is hypocritical, which is what Yamaka did:

If Y is already married, he would have said to Hema at the very earliest opportunity, "I am happily married; don't follow me - please look elsewhere".
Maybe, Dharm said it; but Hema did not listen... she had a Fatal Attraction towards Dharm, and he finally succumbed to her charms, wrecking his family!

Yamaka writes here as if Dharm is an innocent man bewitched by Hema.

Blatant prejudice is on display here and not to mention male chauvinism!

 

[Yamaka]

EGOISM, EGOTISM, ALTRUISM and Myself:

Many Theists say that God and Religion will give people NO Ego..which is good.

Let's see what exactly this EGO means -

My dictionary says that being self-centered or selfish is ego. Egoism and Egotism are one and the same. Altruism is the opposite of egoism being thinking always about others and their needs.

To some extent, I prefer EGOISM over ALTRUISM... my ego will drive me to achieve what I want... if everyone follows this then the Society will be Self Sufficient. (I hate Egomaniacs - extremely egoistic personality, to the point of self destruction)

Instead of others worrying and doing things for me, and I always thinking about them, which is very inefficient operationally. This is what Altruism does, IMO.

In short, I am an egoistic or egotistical person... I like it.. because I kick myself constantly to get what I want, what my family wants and WHEN I want etc etc...

but, whenever possible I am eager to give a helping hand to others who seek it. In a broader sense I am in Pragmatic Solidarity with the Poor and Voiceless People, as my son does.

That's my Enlightened Self Interest... and I love it. I don't need Gods and Religions that would remove my EGO! Lol

More later....

 

[Yamaka]

Yamaka is writing as if the law under concern and that which is broken is a noble law. What is so noble in allowing a man to have multiple wives just because the man happens to be a muslim?



This is the most reasonable of all the charges made against her. And this happened because of the stupid laws of this country that allows such home wrecking!

Yamaka talks about hypocrisy. To write in support of Dharmendra, who is the main culprit, (it is he who was already married) is hypocritical, which is what Yamaka did:



Yamaka writes here as if Dharm is an innocent man bewitched by Hema.

Blatant prejudice is on display here and not to mention male chauvinism!

1. Indian law (Hindu law) does not allow more than one wife at a time, whereas Muslim law, under certain conditions, allows a Muslim to marry more than one wife. This is not the right time to debate why such difference exists between the Hindu and Muslim laws... Hindu culture and philosophy is quite different from that of Muslims. Let's leave it there.

It's clear that Hema and Dharm made a phony conversion to Islam just to skirt this law, while maintaining their religious belief as Hindus. This I consider as FRAUD.

2. Law is good and right.. only a few citizens - Hema & Dharm- circumvented the law, and knowingly wrecked another family. This is patently immoral and unethical.

3. I said "Maybe, Dharm said it"... May be not...but it was a common knowledge that Dharm was married at the time Sholay was produced... and the public information is Hema had a romantic relationship with Dharm from the start of the production of Sholay...

Clearly, there is no prejudice or chauvinism here in my part.

I am appalled that KB & Co support Hema for what she has done so publicly...

We will not be talking about Hema, if she had not been a public figure - an MP of a Political Party, BJP..

Is this a prejudice against her ?... No.. such criticism is well supported, and warranted.

 

[nachi naga]

5 Hindu Prayers for All Occasions Videoice

 

[கால பைரவன்]

It's clear that Hema and Dharm made a phony conversion to Islam just to skirt this law, while maintaining their religious belief as Hindus. This I consider as FRAUD

First, writing in capital or bold letters does not make anyone's point stronger. If anything it implies a weaker argument that all these superficialities are needed to strengthen them!

Second, Yamaka's whole argument revolves around this phony conversion. Why should it be considered a phony one is not clear!

Throwing in words such as phony conversion or pretend muslim does not prove anything.

No religious group in India can be considered a homogenous group - not based on beliefs/practices/culture. One cannot recite something from quran to prove that somebody is not a muslim. Perhaps Yamaka considers only those who wage a holy war against the kaffirs as true muslims.

So these accusations of hypocrisy and fraud are bogus.

The only thing that can stick is home wrecking! And both Dharm and Hema are at fault here!

 

[கால பைரவன்]

I am appalled that KB & Co support Hema for what she has done so publicly...

I think Hema is being criticized only because she happens to be BJP member, hindu, and was born in a brahmin family. As I said, laws are misused not only regarding marital issues but also on issues such as reservation, running a educational institution etc. The very same members who criticize Hema in this issue would have no problems when others do it. Hence, I have no qualms in arguing against these members.

Yamaka may consider it appalling, but writing in support of scamsters of lakhs of crores is much more appalling, IMO!

 

[Yamaka]

I think Hema is being criticized only because she happens to be BJP member, hindu, and was born in a brahmin family. As I said, laws are misused not only regarding marital issues but also on issues such as reservation, running a educational institution etc. The very same members who criticize Hema in this issue would have no problems when others do it. Hence, I have no qualms in arguing against these members.

Yamaka may consider it appalling, but writing in support of scamsters of lakhs of crores is much more appalling, IMO!

KB agreed at least that Hema & Dharm wrecked the former family (and children are hurt seriously)... but he never condemned them FOR THAT... perhaps because she is the MP of the BJP!!!

On the 2G "scam", Yamaka's position is clear:

Unless the Prosecutor (here the Attorney General or his/her Representative) proves beyond a reasonable doubt in the Trial Court that

1. A LOSS has indeed occurred to the Exchequer
2. The culprit is the Defendant beyond any reasonable doubt,

ALL are innocent by both Indian Criminal law and American Criminal law.

Media spins and gossips will not cut it...

Wait & watch.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Yamaka,

Ego is in a way a bias, a bias towards self. Some bias towards self or selfishness is required but when that crosses the balance between self interest and interests of others, it is in excess and is called ego.

Any bias obscures your vision. The more the bias the more it obscures. Since ego is in general the result of intelligence, the worldly success that this intelligence can bring blinds you to the fact that your vision is obscured. It is a vicious circle with the success feeding the ego and the ego wanting more success.

I believe that selfish interests need to be in balance with the concern for others. When that balance is right I believe you have the right vision. To me and in my understanding of hinduism moving away from ego is moving towards God. I think it is this overcoming of ego that can give you real and irreversible success.

Shri Yamaka, with all your success in life can you succeed in overcoming your ego? Think about it.

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Shri Yamaka,

Ego is in a way a bias, a bias towards self. Some bias towards self or selfishness is required but when that crosses the balance between self interest and interests of others, it is in excess and is called ego.

Any bias obscures your vision. The more the bias the more it obscures. Since ego is in general the result of intelligence, the worldly success that this intelligence can bring blinds you to the fact that your vision is obscured. It is a vicious circle with the success feeding the ego and the ego wanting more success.

I believe that selfish interests need to be in balance with the concern for others. When that balance is right I believe you have the right vision. To me and in my understanding of hinduism moving away from ego is moving towards God. I think it is this overcoming of ego that can give you real and irreversible success.

Shri Yamaka, with all your success in life can you succeed in overcoming your ego? Think about it.

Dear Sravna:

As I said before, I am not a Egomaniac (man with excessive, destructive ego!)

But I have had EGO to propel me to where I wanted to go...to go to the Promised Land of Freedom & Security.

Still I have some EGO to discover things that others have not done in my profession...that fosters growth in me.

I will not work towards overcoming this ego..for this ego is the engine of progress for me.


====================================

My dear Younger Generation: Have ego that drives you to your Promised Land whatever that may be...shunning ego means you give up on yourself, your motivation and drive...

Some ego is always necessary. In that sense at least, Atheism is good for the Society.

More later...

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Sravna:

As I said before, I am not a Egomaniac (man with excessive, destructive ego!)

But I have had EGO to propel me to where I wanted to go...to go to the Promised Land of Freedom & Security.

Still I have some EGO to discover things that others have not done in my profession...that fosters growth in me.

I will not work towards overcoming this ego..for this ego is the engine of progress for me.


====================================

My dear Younger Generation: Have ego that drives you to your Promised Land whatever that may be...shunning ego means you give up on yourself, your motivation and drive...

Some ego is always necessary. In that sense at least, Atheism is good for the Society.

More later...

Yes, Shri Yamaka...Ego alone can help a person to keep up his ethical thoughts and actions working towards hardwork and success ethically. The only problem is when Ego of different sort (unreasonably selfish, inconsiderate to others reasonable requirements, blind folded stubbornly ruining onself and others) spoils onself and others who all got caught with him/her.

The former is Postive Ego and the later is Negative Ego. You see, there are positive and negative in all human feelings and emotions.


That's what I remember discussing on human psychology with my dearest and close friend, long ago, as per my understanding.


Many Theists believe and have experienced that resorting to true and honest Spirituality to shun ego of later types, indeed makes true sense. You see, because they could rekon their inner spiritual self in demanding situation and succeed in overcoming the negative ego.


The good and bad are inbuild within us to live this physical world under trial. With true and honest spirituality one can follow the goodness existing within oneself, to the best possible level.


True Spirituality helps people overrule their negative feelings, emotions and thoughts of different colors.


Atheist who could truly achieve this and many fine qualities (like yourself) without spirituality are the exceptions and would just reflect purified souls in the process and are progressing towards liberation. Provided, they don't yearn for another life/janma, as a human wish, to ahieve further, IMO.