In life the innocent suffer and the wicked prospewr. Politicialns known for their corruption survive and amass wealth that will take care of generatins. The honest suffer and underfo agonising tortures. If God is there, why the vice prospers and the good suffers> There is no poetic justice in life.
-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
the innocent suffer
- Thread starter vasumathi
- Start date
- Status
C RAVI
0
Life is like that...If we believe in past karma, every one got to be destined to prosper or suffer in the present janma, irrespective of their good or wicked personality. And off course, the present janma karma does plays its role parallel y. So, its better for us to get close to God consciously and stay calm, cool, patient and hopeful to continue to be good to the best of the situations, without killing our own consciousness. Let us apologize to God sincerely, to spare us from any sin of our past and present janma, that we may have committed knowingly or unknowingly.
But, there is one question, the answer for which, am pondering over for many years. The question is - What was the beginning of the soul's characteristics, to start living on this Karma Bhoomi and keep paying off the karma in subsequent janmas? If we believe that, we are made to take birth on this Earth to live our life as per our karma to suffer or prosper. and accordingly the good and bad of the life are destined to happen, than, what was the purpose of the soul to be born in karma bhoomi initially? With out which a need for rebirth would not exist.
But, there is one question, the answer for which, am pondering over for many years. The question is - What was the beginning of the soul's characteristics, to start living on this Karma Bhoomi and keep paying off the karma in subsequent janmas? If we believe that, we are made to take birth on this Earth to live our life as per our karma to suffer or prosper. and accordingly the good and bad of the life are destined to happen, than, what was the purpose of the soul to be born in karma bhoomi initially? With out which a need for rebirth would not exist.
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Ravi,
Good thought..I guess the answer lies in Ekoham Bahushyam and why God wanted to start all this to begin with.
Its like whats the purpose to get tarnished or decorated when we started off as pure ones initially.
Its a very salient point you brought up for which I dont really know if we all know the answer.
Well may be the fact is we need to get pure again.
I like this question and thought and would love to have a nice exchange of thoughts some day but not right now as today i am missing Bhagawan Baba.
sravna
Well-known member
I would like to give my views on what suffering and happiness means in context to whom it happens. In the case of the wicked the nature and quality of happiness is far different from that of the good. It is not only transient and prone to vanish at any time but also the quality of the experience is no where near that experienced by the good. Also in the case of the good the happiness springs from within unlike in the case of the wicked the source being probably an external agent.
On the contrary the experience of suffering of the wicked is much more permanent and devastating than it is in the case of good. More often than not the suffering serves only tends to temper the mind of the good unlike in the case of the wicked where it ruins the person.
Thus it seems to me impact and result of the suffering and happiness works in different ways in the two cases. The only danger for the good being he should not start thinking that the wicked are enjoying a blissful life and the good miserable ones.
On the contrary the experience of suffering of the wicked is much more permanent and devastating than it is in the case of good. More often than not the suffering serves only tends to temper the mind of the good unlike in the case of the wicked where it ruins the person.
Thus it seems to me impact and result of the suffering and happiness works in different ways in the two cases. The only danger for the good being he should not start thinking that the wicked are enjoying a blissful life and the good miserable ones.
sangom
0
Dear Shri Ravi,
The religious orthodoxy will answer your doubt with "that is bhagavan's leelai", or, the more bombastic "बहुस्यां प्रजायेय इति । स तपो तप्यत । स तपस्तप्त्वा इदँ सर्वं अस्रूजद । तत्सृष्ट्वा तदेवानुप्राविशत् । तदनुप्रविश्य । सच्चत्यच्चाऽभवत् ।" (bahusyāṃ prajāyeya iti | sa tapo tapyata | sa tapastaptvā | idam̐ sarvaṃ asrūjada | tatsṛṣṭvā tadevānuprāviśat | tadanupraviśya saccatyaccā:'bhavat |), etc. This means, the One that was in the beginning thought "let me procreate many; That one did penance ; having done penance It created all this ; having created That itself entered into ; having entered the moving and unmoving came into being". This again confirms the "leelai" hypothesis. Beyond that the religion has no answer. Perhaps this is one reason why some children, fed on such "leelai" hypothesis, view god as the one who makes wounds so that he can apply salve. (see here.) In both cases, god comes out as a person who takes pleasure in loading the jivas initially itself with some karma and then watching them suffer and come to Him for succour.
There is another puranic (I think) story. Brahma created seven times and sent his "maanasaputras" down into this world. In all the first six attempts his creations refused to live here and returned to him. Then Brahma created man, woman and sex and sent some men and women down here; and ever since none has gone back to him, it says! (Ladies please do not get angry with me; this is the story as I have read.) Since we are the seventh round of creation we have seven layers in the skin, this legendary account further says.
IMHO we cannot ever get any logically convincing answer to your doubt from religion. Of course, there may be other answers which some members may give. But given the basic data that nothing is known about creation and whatever is told to us is pure flights of imagination, we cannot have any more convincing answer. That is perhaps why Buddha is stated to have consistently refused to be drawn into discussion of this problem, and instead, advised his disciples to improve their "karma" (behaviour) during this life and forget enquiring.
It appears to me that the individual "life" or jiva as it is ordinarily called, has nothing to do directly with the sufferings and misfortunes it experiences in this world. May be (and this is only a proposition of mine) it is the cumulative result of the collective actions (karma) of a group of people. But if we take this basis we will be shifting the blame - and hence the remorse, and impetus, if any, to correct - from the individual away to the group; and among humans this will perhaps be sufficient to remove even the little bit of tendency remaining, to correct one's behaviour, thinking and actions.
Last edited:
you are correct it is a sin to entertain hopes in this land honesty leaves us bitter at the end poetic justice in life is a pigment of imagination oh God pl wake up
C RAVI
0
Sri Sangom ji,
Thank you very much for your contribution to my queries..
Karma seem to be the only reason of human survival. May be the creator wants both good and wicked quality people, relate them in their lives some way and such a way that, the karma process and human survival ever continuous to exist. May be that's the reason that, for him, all are equal and any one who do penance consciously and fall to his feet, can be expected to get spared either in present janma itself or in next janma.
Thank you very much for your contribution to my queries..
Karma seem to be the only reason of human survival. May be the creator wants both good and wicked quality people, relate them in their lives some way and such a way that, the karma process and human survival ever continuous to exist. May be that's the reason that, for him, all are equal and any one who do penance consciously and fall to his feet, can be expected to get spared either in present janma itself or in next janma.
sangom
0
Dear Shri Ravi,
My doubt is, is this "Karma theory" true or is it just a device to explain away the contradiction between a loving, affectionate, god on the one hand - which is a concept brought into hinduism essentially by the bhakti movement, I believe - and the enormous sufferings, inequalities and cruelties witnessed in this world on the other hand. I am saying this because, if we study the rigvedic ideas, belief in rebirth was not there (though attempts are being still made to pick and choose some verse or part thereof from here and there and build up a thesis that the notion of transmigration, rebirth, etc., are there in the rigveda itself in order to justify the later Karma theory) and that was why the idea of pitrus (Manes) and a pitruloka ruled by Yama (no heaven and hell theory was there IMHO) where the deceased persons lived for ever, as believed by the rigvedic people, could be understood as logical.
The gods of the rigveda (the devas) were essentially more like authorities who had to be always kept pleased and satisfied by means of yajnas, than loving godheads who would be ready to give succour to them if the devotees are steadfast in their "bhakti" or devotion to them (the gods) and are prepared to undergo all the trials and tribulations which may befall them in their life, in return for an eventual heaven in afterlife or even "mukti" or liberation, as seen in the latter-day biographies of bhaktas. For example Dhruva was not given "liberation" but only blessed to eternal existence and glory. (This is my understanding; more knowledgeable members may correct me if this is wrong.) Prahlada also was only saved from Hiranyakasipu by killing the latter. There is no clear mention of Prahlada being given liberation ultimately. The interesting point is Hiranyakasipu is the son of Vishnu's great grandson ! The lineage as per Vishnupurana is as under:
Vishnu —> Brahma —> Mareeci —> Kasyapa —> Hiranyakasipu
(The Prahlada story is interesting and I will post it in a separate thread in due course.)
After that bit of rambling, let me come back to the point. Karma theory is a theory. Nothing more to it. But it suits the purpose of explaining all sufferings and inequalities in this world, eminently. One very important area in which it did yeoman service in the past was in justifying the caste-system. Its by-products like astrological advice, performances of some of the plethora of religious rites by way of "parihaarams", etc., also serve as means of livelihood for many sections of the society. This jigsaw puzzle, centered on the Karma theory, has fitted so well and served the Hindu society for centuries that disassembling it may be fraught with risk, IMO.
Last edited:
Sowbagyavathy Vasumathi,
Greetings. You asked a question and you suggested the answer too. If God is there, you seem to think, vice should not prosper and good should not suffer; but the world does not seem work in that way; it works just in the opposite way.
God has nothing to do with this. Everybody is guilty of some wrong doing. When we make a mistake, we want God to look the other way; when someone else benefits from a wrong doing, we shout 'foul'.
How many times did we stand against injustice? We talk somuch about politicians corruptions....happening for years....where is the revelution from the affected public? If we look closely, majority of the population is corrupted; the rest of the population are spineless.
How long this Karma theory is going to go around? As Chi.Ravi rightly asked, what about the first human being? Where is the 'poorva janma karma' for that person? I asked that question too. I was told.. the first human being commited enough bad karmas in the first birth, which was enough to provide miseries for many janmas. Why? This world is full of vices, it is very hard not to make mistakes, I was told.
If I want to live as a teetotaller and a bramachari, I will not rent a room in a whore house situated above a pub. If this world is full of vices, why come here in the first place?
I have a very simple theory - Vice prospers because 'good' does not stop it. Since 'Good' does nothing, 'Vice' gets bolder and bolder. The situation becomes so bad, more 'good' begins to follow 'vice'...'vice' becomes the norm.
What God can do in this situation?
Cheers!
sangom
0
Raghy,
A very brilliant analysis. But I have one doubt - did not Krishna assure "yadaa yadaa hi dharmasya..." etc.? Of course He will come at His own time, not when each human being thinks it is already too late, according to the orthodox beliefs. So, Smt. Vasumati should, IMHO, remain patient for the day of arrival of the next incarnation.
Krishna also said 'see karma in akarma', and good in bad and bad in good. Say, Ravana gave Ramayana to us. Kauravaas made us to understand what the world is. To be frank the world will go on like this as it has always been. Even the 9 Avatars have not been able to do any good.
sravna
Well-known member
A person's behavior is influenced by two factors being his nature and his environment. The nature represents his inner self and the environment representing the external. There is an external factor because his mind supposed to evolve and overcome it in his journey towards enlightenment.
Also since the spiritual reality is timeless and the only reality, I would only take the physical reality as something that is spiritual reality minus the perception of the interconnectedness of the spiritual reality. This holistic perception of reality is blocked by maya. According to hinduism everyone eventually becomes enlightened.
Thus we can understand physical reality as something which shows the process that goes into the making of the timeless spiritual reality.
Also since the spiritual reality is timeless and the only reality, I would only take the physical reality as something that is spiritual reality minus the perception of the interconnectedness of the spiritual reality. This holistic perception of reality is blocked by maya. According to hinduism everyone eventually becomes enlightened.
Thus we can understand physical reality as something which shows the process that goes into the making of the timeless spiritual reality.
Sri.Sangom, Greetings.
It is an interesting thought. Let us say, Sri.Krishna really comes back and leads the life just like he did before.
Initially, most if not all pious persons will call him 'a sthree lolan'; will not hesiatate to brand him a 'fraud'; will call him 'reckless'. If Sri.Krishna happens to be the advisor of a political figures (like pandavas were political figures), the political figures ill-fates would be blamed on Sri.Krishna. When Sri. Krishna advises the Pandavas to fight, he would be branded as a 'war monger'. When Sri.Krishna preach 'Srimad Baghavat Gita' to Arjuna followed by the 'pep talk', Sri.Krishna would be branded as 'a manipulator'; after 'Asvathama Hata Gunjaraha', after the fake sun-set, after Beeshma's fall, after Karna's fall, this world would call Sri.Krishna a liar.....and the whole world would join Druyodhana against Sri.Krishna and Pandavas.
I am really interested in hearing from members who think differently, please.
This world which wishes for Sri.Krishna to come back do not know the difference between right and wrong. Most of them are wrong doers anyway. If Sri.Krishna really comes back and do away all the wrong doers in India, quite possibly Indian population would be halved. Mostly the children and really poor vulnerables only would be spared.
Cheers!
It is an interesting thought. Let us say, Sri.Krishna really comes back and leads the life just like he did before.
Initially, most if not all pious persons will call him 'a sthree lolan'; will not hesiatate to brand him a 'fraud'; will call him 'reckless'. If Sri.Krishna happens to be the advisor of a political figures (like pandavas were political figures), the political figures ill-fates would be blamed on Sri.Krishna. When Sri. Krishna advises the Pandavas to fight, he would be branded as a 'war monger'. When Sri.Krishna preach 'Srimad Baghavat Gita' to Arjuna followed by the 'pep talk', Sri.Krishna would be branded as 'a manipulator'; after 'Asvathama Hata Gunjaraha', after the fake sun-set, after Beeshma's fall, after Karna's fall, this world would call Sri.Krishna a liar.....and the whole world would join Druyodhana against Sri.Krishna and Pandavas.
I am really interested in hearing from members who think differently, please.
This world which wishes for Sri.Krishna to come back do not know the difference between right and wrong. Most of them are wrong doers anyway. If Sri.Krishna really comes back and do away all the wrong doers in India, quite possibly Indian population would be halved. Mostly the children and really poor vulnerables only would be spared.
Cheers!
sangom
0
Dear Shri Raghy,
I would disagree. To any person who studies Mahabharata without the coloured glasses of unquestioning religious faith, Krishna will be yet another character in the mega drama that is Mahabharata. Krishna makes his appearance along with Balabhadra in the draupadeeswayamvara scene. There is no mention in MBh about Krishna's miraculous birth, his childhood "leelas", his dalliance with the gopikas etc. He is a very shrewd king or prince (since Balabhadra was elder and the son-in-law of Revatha, the ruler of Dwaraka, I presume he would have been the titular Vrishni ruler there) who would more than match any of our present day politicians. If hindus were to stick to MBh only and Sreemad Bhagavatam, Harivamsam and Brahmavaivarta puranam were not to be written up later, and the original Gita were not to be expanded, Krishna would not have been an avatar raised to supreme godhead subsequently, whose authority for creation of this universe was shared 50% by Radha still later.
Hence if Krishna as originally depicted in the MBh were to come here again, I am sure he would have given our politicians a run for their money, as they say; but the difficulty for him will be that he will have to perform his various acts of liquidating the opponents without the supporting stories of one curse or another, to justify his machinations, if he comes again.
Of the many incidents in MBh, two are worth recounting here IMO.
1. This I have said before also. After Krishna's mediatory effort failed, he discussed with Pandavas. Arjuna was against a war with his brethren, Guru, Pitamaha etc. Krishna advocated war with such zeal that Arjuna suspected his motive itself; Arjuna felt probably Krishna was trying to make the great Kurus to fight a fratricidal war and perish so that he as ruler of Mathura can take control of the Kuru country also. Thus thinking and voicing his thoughts Arjuna draws his sword to kill Krishna when Yudhisthira passifies him.
2. Balabhadra calls Bhima's killing of Duryodhana by hitting him in the thigh as unethical. Though Krishna tries to justify that on the basis of Bhima's promise to Draupadi, Balabhadra is not satisfied and leaves the battle field (according to some versions of MBh).
- Status
Share this page
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
