The purpose of
human birth
This is a lofty topic, on which we are only supposed to hear what
'seers' and 'sages' have said, as these great men are supposed to have 'seen'
and 'known' reality which is supposed to be revealed only to, perhaps,
one in one hundred million people, if not more.
We are not supposed to have our own opinions on such subjects. But we
are forgetting that what the seers and sages tell us are also their opinions.
If a man who is supposed to know something keeps it to himself, others would
not know about it, and knowledge does not spread.
As for the knowledge obtained by seers and sages, let us realise that
their knowledge did not drop into their heads in a ready-to-use form from
above, like manna from heaven, for retail distribution to the ignorant masses
around. With the greatest respect to these persons, we should understand that
they were also just thinkers. Even the highest concept of Advaita was,
according to Swami Vivekananda, the product of some thinkers. No concept is a
flash injected into somebody's brain by Divinity sitting above the clouds. Some
great nuggets of truth were conceived by these thinkers, and also a good deal
of trash. As hills look green from far away, so too old practices and sayings
become sanctified and sacred over time.
But respect alone cannot be a factor in valuing an opinion, but also
its truth content.
If some speculation is flaunted as a gospel truth in ancient books, by
expressing it in lofty words or in poetry, we need not necessarily adore it.
Where the poetry rocks, often the meaning mocks.
As someone said,
Great ideas are
said by small words,
Like life, love,
good and kind
When you dont know
what you mean
Use big words
They fool small
men.
Like the ancient
men, we too have a right to our thoughts. If not, our thinking capacity will
vanish by and by. The capacity to think is gifted by evolution to man out of
all creatures, and not to use it is unwise. Human brain thinks constantly even
during a man's sleep. To strive to reach a 'thoughtless' state, whatever it may
mean, is nothing but to throw away a valued tool.
We have a right to our opinions. Thinkers of yore expressed their
opinions. The lesson is that we should also express our opinions freely. We
better not avoid dealing with them as if they were some untouchables.
Ninetynine percent of the listeners may not agree with what we say, but there
is a chance that one person may like it and may even improve upon it.
Coming to the notion that one reaps what one sows, ie Karma theory, we
notice all around that this really is not the case in the actual world. Karma
theory is a beautiful theory, but unfortunately does not work fully in
practice.
This world is a multi-cause, multi-effect world. The actions of human
beings, other beings and things have their results affecting human beings,
other beings and things. No strict apportioning of causes or effects
exclusively among human beings alone, which is the basic thesis of the
Karma theory, is
possible.
Men are punished for sins not committed by them, and enjoy benefits not
earned by them. So, a concomitant theory has also been developed, that if
a man is suffering for no apparent reason, it is because of sins committed in a
previous birth (praarabda), and that his enjoyment now for no good done by him
is the result of some worthy deeds done by him in his previous birth. Similarly
if a man goes on a spree of misdeeds but is not punished, others are told that
he will be punished in the next birth. If a good man does not enjoy the benefit
of his goodness, he is assured that this will be taken care of in his next
birth, as some strict account is being maintained somewhere. So the concept of
Poorvajanma and Punarjanma is developed just in the interests of good
book-keeping and accounts, even though there is not an iota of evidence that a
rebirth actually takes place. Even if it takes places, there is no proof that a
given man is the successor of another identifiable dead man. We are told in
solemn words that death is like casting off one's shirt, and rebirth - which is
assured - is like wearing another shirt. What we see in front of our eyes is
that everything born must die. What we do not see is that everything dead is
born again: but here we have only a guarantee
from the highest authority. We are just asked to accept the guarantee
without questioning.
So far, not even one in a billion has seen a dead man being born again.
Some Babas and Swamijis, who also cannot escape death, have assured us during
their life that they will be born again. But after their death, their
whereabouts are not known even to their most ardent disciples.They just
vanished and are never heard from again.
Dead men, after dropping their bodies (or after being deprived of their
bodies by Mother Nature), are supposed to carry some 'Vasanas' in a fine form.
The vasanas are ready to enter into the body of some suitable baby about to be
born somewhere in this wide world. The baby is supposed to work off the
acquired vasanas. And with his death later, the story repeats, or so the story
goes.
To assure this continuity, each man is supposed to have a soul or self,
which 'never dies, never gets wet, never catches fire' and so on and so
forth.
However plausible it may appear that a newborn brings forward the
vasanas of some previous birth, all that happens, according to me, is only a
genetic inheritance from the father and mother. By going backwards, also the
genetic legacy from all the forefathers. I am of the opinion that the
characteristics of all the forebears of the baby are somehow coded into the genes
of the baby in a suitable combination. The baby's nature is determined by
its 'DNAture'.
Science is yet to establish how children born to the same parents may
have different characteristics. Nature seems to pick up different combinations
of features depending on so many factors. But the easy way for philosophers,
who are not scientists, seems to be to theorise that a baby's nature is
determined by its brought-forward 'vasanas'. This matter has been dealt with
incisively in the chapter titled 'Infirmities in Karma Theory' in the book
'Religion Demystified', written by Dr Vemuri Ramesam.
It is not that the characteristics of a man acquired at birth remain
constant throughout his life. If that were so, there would be no evolution. The
ways in which he is influenced during later life are by experience, observation
and instruction. That is, by going through all kinds of sensory experiences, by
his observing everything around him and absorbing the contents, and by hearing
what others say.
And he can do this from Conception to Death only. He constantly acts
on, and is acted upon by, HOT (Human beings, Other beings and Things).
In the chapter titled "What you think, that you will be", in
his book mentioned above, Dr Ramesam tells us that Dr Kandel, Nobel Laureate,
says that environmental stimuli turn the genes on and off. So the genes of a
man are affected by the way he interacts with HOT from his conception to death,
and is in a position to pass on the modified genes to his own offspring. There
is no way he can interact before his own conception or after his death. In
other words, his death is the final end of the man, and the only way of passing
on his characteristics is through his children, and the only way of his
influencing others during his life and after hiis own demise is by way of what
he leaves as a legacy ie his books, sayings and other recordings. There is no
way a dead man can influence others in any direct manner ie through spirit or
the like.
In the light of these observations, what can be the purpose of human
life? Let us keep in mind the constraints that a man's life is a limited,
once-and-for-all occurrence, and is available for any kind of direct
interaction only during the short span between his birth and death.
To quote Dr Ramesam again (p 124), to achieve "A Happy Individual
and a Harmonious Society" can be the purpose.
An individual can turn into a happy individual by conquering the
"Arishadvarga" as wisely propounded by our ancients. That is, by
doing his best to fight and vanquish Kama, Krodha, Lobha, Moha, Mada, Matsarya
in himself. These are the real foes of a man, of every man, and he can make
himself happy by getting rid of these undesirable and negative qualities, and
not wasting life by striving for some imaginary Moksha.
Just take the detrimental quality of 'envy'. Bertrand Russell, the
famous philosopher and Nobel Laureate, has this to say about 'envy': " The
ordinary beggar in the street envies the more successful beggar, the more
successful beggar envied the King of England, the King of England envied
Napoleon, Napoleon envied the Czar of Russia, the Czar envied Alexander the
Great, Alexander the Great envied Hercules who never existed!"
The other qualities in the Arishadvarga equally stand in the way of
happiness of the individual. If even one of these destructive qualities can be
eliminated in life, an individual can call himself successful. But this is the
task of a lifetime!
How can an individual contribute to a harmonious society? By
eliminating, each person from his side, the evils of dishonesty, intolerance,
violence and exploitation. (Let us leave the task of eliminating illiteracy,
poverty, disease, pestilence, etc to governments).
And how can he eliminate these interpersonal and social evils? By
realising that the Life Force which is working in him is the one and the same
Life Force which is also working in everyone else and making him tick, that his
own life and that of everyone else are a non-recurring, non-repeatable one-time
events in the history of the universe, that life is a beautiful experience
bestowed on everybody by Nature in the course of evolution, and that his
identification with all humanity of which he is but a part, and with animal and
plant life also where possible, is the real purpose of human birth. This is
Turiya.
Seeking Nirvana for oneself is a selfish act, apart from being an
impossible act. Trying to escape from another birth - which in any case does
not exist - is a purposeless activity. Persons who crave for Moksha for
themselves, under the misguided faith that they are uniting with God, bear no
concern for others. They do not understand true Advaita.(In fact, along with
Shri VV Raman, I have not really been able to understand what Moksha means).
Comparing various ancient writings, giving different interpretations,
and commentaries on commentaries, is a kind of
"text-torturing". It is an intellectual pastime, not a spiritual
effort.
To repeat, the purpose of human life is self-advancement and societal
betterment, and leaving a legacy with the help of which future generations can
achieve their own self-advancement and societal betterment.
- Dr K Srinivasa Rao, from Fremont, California.
No comments:
Post a Comment