I have been writing blogs for more than six months now and just recently hit my 100th post…not that I am proud about it just mentioning it!
I have been posting many articles on humility, pridelessness etc etc that extol the qualities of pure devotion. Some people may have thought (especially to my two brothers) that I have become a saint!
Chill out guys…nothing has changed except for few grey hairs on my scalp. I am the same old idiosyncratic erratic person who you grew up with. I can join a college and then…as you may know will drop out of it just to drive my father crazy and burn his hard earned money. After all…what are sons for?
Anyways, writing the qualities of pure devotion is just a stark reminder to myself that I have tones of homework to do to please Guru and Krishna.
Now that my confession is over…my request to one and all (especially to Vaishnavas) to give me sincerity within my heart to serve Guru and Gauranga in a proper mood of service.
Hare Krishna
Friday, June 13, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Pizza Italiano
Last weekend, i made Pizza for Lord Jagannath. I topped the pizza with red pepper, green pepper, Kalamata olives and green chillies. The cheese toppings are shredded mozerella, Romano, and Paramesan cheese.
I followed Kurma Prabhu's recipe. You can find it here - http://food.krishna.com/node/372
It took me about 2 hours overall but was worth the work!
Hare Krishna
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Monday, June 9, 2008
Plato's Phaedo
Socrates (469BC – 399 BC) philosophized on many things including the immortality of the soul. He believed that the soul is eternal and survives physical death. Plato, his student, narrates the final days of Socrates in his famous dialogue called Plato’s Phaedo. The dialogue is told from the perspective of one of Socrates' students, Phaedo of Elis. Having been present at Socrates' death bed, Phaedo relates the dialogue to Echecrates, a fellow philosopher.
Below are some excerpts from the dialogue that describes Socrates philosophy on the immortality of the soul.
On the topic of suicide, his discussion with his disciple Cebes
While the philosopher seeks always to rid himself of the body, and to focus solely on things concerning the soul, to commit suicide is prohibited as man is not sole possessor of his body. For, as stated in the Phaedo: "the philosopher more than other men frees the soul from association with the body as much as possible" (64e-65a). Body and soul are separate, then. The philosopher frees himself from the body because the body is an impediment to the attainment of truth. The philosopher acts as such in order that the body will not distract the soul from attaining virtue and knowledge. For, while the body is incapable of distinctly perceiving truth about anything, the pursuit of truth is the philosopher's task. During the Apology, Socrates says of this task, "God orders me to fulfill the philosopher's mission of searching into myself and other men." (Apology, 28e-29a)
The philosopher, then, will accept that he can come closest to true knowledge in death for he will no longer be distracted by the body. As the philosopher seeks death his entire life, he should greet it amicably and not be discouraged upon its arrival. However, it is impossible to be alive without the existence of the body. Death, then, the separation of body and soul, is the philosopher's ideal. He will have lived his entire life preparing for and hoping for death. And, so, while, as Socrates best discusses in the Apology, no living man, be he a poet, sophist, or even Socrates himself, is capable of really knowing anything, the philosopher will see death as a haven for the soul. In death only, the soul may possibly come to actually gain true knowledge.
However, man should not kill himself. Socrates cites the traditional argument that man ought not to kill himself because he possesses no actual ownership of himself, as he is actually the property of the gods. He says, "I too believe that the gods are our guardians, and that we men are a chattel of theirs" (Phaedo, 62b). To this, Cebes assents. For, the body is the property of the gods, and man would be punished were he to destroy something that he does not truly own. Then, it may be concluded that man should not kill himself because he will be punished by the gods. The philosopher, then, will greet death, but not hasten to its arrival. For, while he has spent his life preparing for and awaiting its arrival, it is not virtuous to bring about its occurrence.
Cyclical argument
Socrates introduces his first argument for the immortality of the soul. This argument is called the cyclical argument. It supposes that the soul must be immortal since the living come from the dead. Socrates first lays out the argument. He says: "Now if it be true that the living come from the dead, then our souls must exist in the other world, for if not, how could they have been born again?" (Phaedo, 70c-d). Socrates then gets Cebes to conclude that the dead are generated from the living, through death, and that the living are generated from the dead, through birth. The souls of the dead must exist in some place, then, for them to be able to return into life.
In the above argument, Socrates does not explicitly talk about the transmigration of the soul from one body to another, but rather assumes that the soul exists somewhere and takes a physical body at birth. This argument does not necessarily show that the soul continues to exist once a man has died.
Theory of Recollection
Regarding this theory, Cebes states"...your favorite doctrine, Socrates, that our learning is simply recollection, if true, also necessarily implies a previous time in which we have learned that which we now recollect. But this would be impossible unless our soul had been somewhere before existing in this form of man; here then is another proof of the soul's immortality." (Phaedo, 72e-73a)
The theory of recollection runs basically that as it has been shown that it is possible to draw a true answer out of a person who seems to not have any knowledge of the subject prior to his questioning, this person must have gained this knowledge in a prior life, and now merely recalls it. Indeed, as he has now been able to answer correctly, it must be the case that his answer arose from recollection of knowledge gained during a previous life. Socrates presents this argument to Meno in the Platonic dialogue of the same name. In it, he concludes, "The soul, then, as being immortal and having been born again many times and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world or in the world below, has knowledge of them all." He continues to state emphatically that "all inquiry and all learning is but recollection" (Meno, 81d).
In this theory, Socrates clearly states that the soul must have had previous lives to have gotten prior knowledge thus implying that the soul transmigrates from one body to another. However, his disciple Cebes puts forth his doubt that the soul may have lived any number of lives prior to the one in question that does not necessarily mean that it will continue to exist following its subsequent death(s). And so, Socrates presents his third argument for the immortality of the soul.
Affinity argument
Socrates shows that the soul most resembles that which is invisible and divine, and the body that which is visible and mortal. From this, it is concluded that while the body may be seen to exist after death in the form of a corpse, as the body is the mortal of the two and the soul is the more divine, the soul must outlast the body.
This argument, while explaining the properties of the soul does not, however, explain clearly the immortality of the soul. Cebes continues that though the soul may outlast certain bodies, and so continue to exist after certain deaths, it may eventually grow so weak as to dissolve entirely at some point. From here, Socrates continues to give his final proof of the immortality of the soul.
Argument from Form of Life
Socrates shows that the soul is immortal as it is the cause of life. He begins by showing that "if there be anything beautiful other than absolute beauty it is beautiful only insofar as it partakes of absolute beauty" (Phaedo, 100c). Consequently, as absolute beauty is a Form, and so is the soul, then anything which has the property of being infused with a soul is so infused with the Form of soul. "Will not the number three endure annihilation or anything sooner than be converted into an even number, while remaining three?" (Phaedo, 104c). Forms, then, will never become their opposite. As the soul is that which renders the body living, and that the opposite of life is death, it so follows that, "...the soul will never admit the opposite of what she always brings." (Phaedo, 105d) That which does not admit death is said to be immortal. The soul does not become dead as the even does not become odd. Therefore, the soul is immortal. For, it is exactly that which does not die. Socrates thus concludes, "Then, Cebes, beyond question, the soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls will truly exist in another world." (Phaedo, 106d-107a)
Below are some excerpts from the dialogue that describes Socrates philosophy on the immortality of the soul.
On the topic of suicide, his discussion with his disciple Cebes
While the philosopher seeks always to rid himself of the body, and to focus solely on things concerning the soul, to commit suicide is prohibited as man is not sole possessor of his body. For, as stated in the Phaedo: "the philosopher more than other men frees the soul from association with the body as much as possible" (64e-65a). Body and soul are separate, then. The philosopher frees himself from the body because the body is an impediment to the attainment of truth. The philosopher acts as such in order that the body will not distract the soul from attaining virtue and knowledge. For, while the body is incapable of distinctly perceiving truth about anything, the pursuit of truth is the philosopher's task. During the Apology, Socrates says of this task, "God orders me to fulfill the philosopher's mission of searching into myself and other men." (Apology, 28e-29a)
The philosopher, then, will accept that he can come closest to true knowledge in death for he will no longer be distracted by the body. As the philosopher seeks death his entire life, he should greet it amicably and not be discouraged upon its arrival. However, it is impossible to be alive without the existence of the body. Death, then, the separation of body and soul, is the philosopher's ideal. He will have lived his entire life preparing for and hoping for death. And, so, while, as Socrates best discusses in the Apology, no living man, be he a poet, sophist, or even Socrates himself, is capable of really knowing anything, the philosopher will see death as a haven for the soul. In death only, the soul may possibly come to actually gain true knowledge.
However, man should not kill himself. Socrates cites the traditional argument that man ought not to kill himself because he possesses no actual ownership of himself, as he is actually the property of the gods. He says, "I too believe that the gods are our guardians, and that we men are a chattel of theirs" (Phaedo, 62b). To this, Cebes assents. For, the body is the property of the gods, and man would be punished were he to destroy something that he does not truly own. Then, it may be concluded that man should not kill himself because he will be punished by the gods. The philosopher, then, will greet death, but not hasten to its arrival. For, while he has spent his life preparing for and awaiting its arrival, it is not virtuous to bring about its occurrence.
Cyclical argument
Socrates introduces his first argument for the immortality of the soul. This argument is called the cyclical argument. It supposes that the soul must be immortal since the living come from the dead. Socrates first lays out the argument. He says: "Now if it be true that the living come from the dead, then our souls must exist in the other world, for if not, how could they have been born again?" (Phaedo, 70c-d). Socrates then gets Cebes to conclude that the dead are generated from the living, through death, and that the living are generated from the dead, through birth. The souls of the dead must exist in some place, then, for them to be able to return into life.
In the above argument, Socrates does not explicitly talk about the transmigration of the soul from one body to another, but rather assumes that the soul exists somewhere and takes a physical body at birth. This argument does not necessarily show that the soul continues to exist once a man has died.
Theory of Recollection
Regarding this theory, Cebes states"...your favorite doctrine, Socrates, that our learning is simply recollection, if true, also necessarily implies a previous time in which we have learned that which we now recollect. But this would be impossible unless our soul had been somewhere before existing in this form of man; here then is another proof of the soul's immortality." (Phaedo, 72e-73a)
The theory of recollection runs basically that as it has been shown that it is possible to draw a true answer out of a person who seems to not have any knowledge of the subject prior to his questioning, this person must have gained this knowledge in a prior life, and now merely recalls it. Indeed, as he has now been able to answer correctly, it must be the case that his answer arose from recollection of knowledge gained during a previous life. Socrates presents this argument to Meno in the Platonic dialogue of the same name. In it, he concludes, "The soul, then, as being immortal and having been born again many times and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world or in the world below, has knowledge of them all." He continues to state emphatically that "all inquiry and all learning is but recollection" (Meno, 81d).
In this theory, Socrates clearly states that the soul must have had previous lives to have gotten prior knowledge thus implying that the soul transmigrates from one body to another. However, his disciple Cebes puts forth his doubt that the soul may have lived any number of lives prior to the one in question that does not necessarily mean that it will continue to exist following its subsequent death(s). And so, Socrates presents his third argument for the immortality of the soul.
Affinity argument
Socrates shows that the soul most resembles that which is invisible and divine, and the body that which is visible and mortal. From this, it is concluded that while the body may be seen to exist after death in the form of a corpse, as the body is the mortal of the two and the soul is the more divine, the soul must outlast the body.
This argument, while explaining the properties of the soul does not, however, explain clearly the immortality of the soul. Cebes continues that though the soul may outlast certain bodies, and so continue to exist after certain deaths, it may eventually grow so weak as to dissolve entirely at some point. From here, Socrates continues to give his final proof of the immortality of the soul.
Argument from Form of Life
Socrates shows that the soul is immortal as it is the cause of life. He begins by showing that "if there be anything beautiful other than absolute beauty it is beautiful only insofar as it partakes of absolute beauty" (Phaedo, 100c). Consequently, as absolute beauty is a Form, and so is the soul, then anything which has the property of being infused with a soul is so infused with the Form of soul. "Will not the number three endure annihilation or anything sooner than be converted into an even number, while remaining three?" (Phaedo, 104c). Forms, then, will never become their opposite. As the soul is that which renders the body living, and that the opposite of life is death, it so follows that, "...the soul will never admit the opposite of what she always brings." (Phaedo, 105d) That which does not admit death is said to be immortal. The soul does not become dead as the even does not become odd. Therefore, the soul is immortal. For, it is exactly that which does not die. Socrates thus concludes, "Then, Cebes, beyond question, the soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls will truly exist in another world." (Phaedo, 106d-107a)
In plain terms, the soul is the cause of life. The soul when enters dead matter animates and brings life to matter. Since the soul is the cause of life, therefore, by nature it is opposite to non-life or death, hence has to be immortal.
We have seen that Socrates has no doubt that the soul is immortal. The following are some of his thoughts on afterlife
Socrates' idea that those who are truly virtuous during life will be eternally free from the body. As to be truly virtuous during life is the quality of a great man, then each of the men mentioned above, insofar as they are great, will perpetually dwell as souls in the underworld. However, regarding those who were not virtuous during life, and so favored the body and pleasures pertaining exclusively to it, Socrates also speaks. For those that were not great during life, however, once dead, the swift return to the world of the living is assured. For, these people will not have succeeded in freeing their soul from their body while alive. Of those souls that are not free, Socrates speaks. He says that such a one as this is:
"...polluted, is impure at the time of her departure, and is the companion and servant of the body always and is in love with and bewitched by the body and by the desires and pleasures of the body, until she is led to believe that the truth only exists in a bodily form, which a man may touch and see, and drink and eat, and use for the purposes of his lusts, the soul, I mean, accustomed to hate and fear and avoid that which to the bodily eye is dark and invisible, but is the object of mind and can be attained by philosophy; do you suppose that such a soul will depart pure and unalloyed?" (Phaedo, 81b)
Persons of such a constitution will be dragged back into corporeal life, according to Socrates. These persons will even be punished while in Hades. Their punishment will be their own doing, as they will be unable to enjoy the singular existence of the soul in death because of their constant craving for life. For, these are the souls "...of the evil, which are compelled to -- in payment of the penalty of their former evil way of life...until...they are imprisoned finally in another body" (Phaedo, 81d-e). The soul is immortal and the course of its passing into the underworld is determined by the way in which it last behaved while alive. The philosopher then, and indeed any man similarly virtuous, in neither fearing death, nor cherishing corporeal life as something idyllic, will be eternally unperturbed in death, and his afterlife will be perfect. For this reason, the philosopher practices the disengagement from the soul during life, in order to attain the virtue that will provide him with eternal reward, while not committing suicide, as argued above. Such is the nature of the afterlife as espoused by Socrates in Plato's Phaedo.
Socrates was a great thinker and philosopher of his times and after. His thoughts and words have influenced time and people. However, from the vantage point of Vedic thinkers, Socrates’s philosophy is at best introductory. In other words, the Vedanta sutras start with “aham brahmasmi” while Socrates had this dialogue with his disciples in his final days. Socrates has just discussed chapter two of the Bhagavad Gita with his disciples. However, Socrates thought nothing great of himself. He believes he possessed no wisdom.
Below are some excerpts on his humility and fearlessness at the time of death that is an indication of a sadhu (or shall we say philosopher according to Socrates).
According to Plato's Apology, Socrates' life as the "gadfly" (as the gadfly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung Athens), of Athens began when his friend Chaerephon asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone was wiser than Socrates; the Oracle responded that none was wiser. Socrates believed that what the Oracle had said was a riddle, because he believed that he possessed no wisdom whatsoever. He proceeded to test the riddle through approaching men who were considered to be wise by the people of Athens, such as statesmen, poets, and artisans, in order to refute the pronouncement of the Oracle. But questioning them, Socrates came to the conclusion that while each man thought he knew a great deal and was very wise, they in fact knew very little and were not really wise at all. Socrates realized that the Oracle was correct in that while so-called wise men thought themselves wise and yet were not, he himself knew he was not wise at all which, paradoxically, made him the wiser one since he was the only person aware of his own ignorance.
Socrates' death is described at the end of Plato's Phaedo. Socrates turned down the pleas of Crito to attempt an escape from prison. After drinking the poison, he was instructed to walk around until his limbs felt heavy. After he lay down, the man who administered the poison pinched his foot. Socrates could no longer feel his legs. The numbness slowly crept up his body until it reached his heart. Shortly before his death, Socrates speaks his last words to Crito: "Crito, we owe a cock to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt." Asclepius was the Greek god for curing illness, and it is likely that Socrates' last words were implied to mean that death is the cure, and freedom, of the soul from the body.
Although from a different time, and place, Socrates preached the fundamental principles of spiritual life that we are not body but soul and that one should live a virtuous life to let go of the body - fundamental teaching in Vedic literatures. He was ready to face death to uphold these values- a true philosopher and preacher of spiritual values.
Hare Krishna
courtesy: wikipedia
Sunday, June 8, 2008
The enemy within
My mind is very stubborn and wandering. It is very difficult for me to constantly engage in one of the nine forms of devotional service. Krishna Consciousness is a constant struggle for me. In other words, I am fighting my own self, that’s right my mind and senses are my own enemies. When the enemy is within, then it disguises itself to help you and you trust your enemy only later to be deceived, left alone and cheated. It is frustrating…so our only hope is we somehow depend on Krishna’s mercy through Guru and Vaishnavas.
The more we associate with the instructions of Guru through Vani, then our stubborn mind will slowly deprogram itself and start to reprogram itself to the tune of the divine instructions of Guru ultimately awakening the sleeping soul. Therefore through the medium of sound, we can control our stubborn mind and awaken our soul and attain our pure original consciousness – that is Krishna Consciousness.
A prayer I like to meditate on,
Pratijna tava Govinda na me bhaktah pranasyati
Iti samsmrtya samsrtya pranan sandharyamy aham
O Govinda, Your promise is that your devotee will never perish. By remembering this over and over again, I am able to retain my life-airs.
Hare Krishna
The more we associate with the instructions of Guru through Vani, then our stubborn mind will slowly deprogram itself and start to reprogram itself to the tune of the divine instructions of Guru ultimately awakening the sleeping soul. Therefore through the medium of sound, we can control our stubborn mind and awaken our soul and attain our pure original consciousness – that is Krishna Consciousness.
A prayer I like to meditate on,
Pratijna tava Govinda na me bhaktah pranasyati
Iti samsmrtya samsrtya pranan sandharyamy aham
O Govinda, Your promise is that your devotee will never perish. By remembering this over and over again, I am able to retain my life-airs.
Hare Krishna
Saturday, June 7, 2008
budding Vaishnava
This is my brother's son and is a video showing his skills in playing the mrdanga. My request to all Vaishnavas is to please bless this soul to become a pure devotee of the Lord and spread the glories of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu!
Hare Krishna
Thursday, June 5, 2008
unscientific science
Argument
Irreducible complexity (IC) is an argument made by proponents of intelligent design that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simpler, or "less complete" predecessors, through natural selection acting upon a series of advantageous naturally occurring chance mutations. It is one of two main arguments intended to support intelligent design, the other being specified complexityThe eye is a famous example of a supposedly irreducibly complex structure, due to its many elaborate and interlocking parts, seemingly all dependent upon one another. It is frequently cited by intelligent design and creationism advocates as an example of irreducible complexity.
Counter argument
There has also been a theory that challenges irreducible complexity called facilitated variation. The theory has been presented in 2005 by Marc W. Kirschner, a professor and chair of Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School, and John C. Gerhart, a professor in Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley. In their theory, they describe how certain mutation and changes can cause apparent irreducible complexity. Thus, seemingly irreducibly complex structures are merely "very complex", or they are simply misunderstood or misrepresented. - wikipedia
The above is an example of how scientists argue and counter argue on evolution. “Natural selection among species” can be accepted as an undeniable fact only if there is direct evidence through direct observation or fossil records.
Scientists counter argue against intelligent design by conducting mutations inside their own labs (controlled environments). In other words, they replicate nature by intervening at the genetic level. So what then is so natural about this process? It is artificial selection of the gene pool in a controlled environment that requires higher intelligence. So no matter how valid evidences they collect, it is all artificial.
The scientists, then, make a huge leap of faith by saying this occurs randomly in nature naturally over millions of years and with this narrow frame of mind go out in the fields to collect fossil records (neglecting other types of evidences they actually find which are diametrically opposite to their hypothesis).
This is neither scientific nor common sensical…now if this is not blind faith, then what is? and this is being taught to children in school as fact?
Hare Krishna
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)