Perceive the Supreme Lord by reason and perception.
Philosophy · asked by user [] · 2007-07-26 · 1 answers
For the purpose of this forum I am not reproducing the whole purport here, but please read it before commenting on this question.
In SB 2.2.35 Shrila Prabhupada writes "The presence of Param'e4tm'e4 in everyones company is not very difficult to realize, even for the common man. The procedure is as follows."
Prabhupada then writes the procedure we are familiar with "This is my hand, I am not my hand." and ends here: "So there is a difference between the seer and the seen."
Then there is a large jump in the logic which is difficult for someone who does not have faith to follow: "Now, by a little use of intelligence we can also readily agree that the living being who sees the things beyond himself by ordinary vision has no power to see or to move independently. "
This sentence is the key. That "little use of intelligence" cannot be taken for granted. Common people will argue that I am doing everything myself. I want to walk and therefore I can walk by using my own power. How can we say that we cannot see or move independently based on logic and not a scriptural quote? In this verse Shukadeva Goswami says that the Supreme Lord can be perceived by the "lakshanai" and by hypothesis.
Is our suffering when we dont want to a manifestation of a requirement of intelligent direction from another source? The non-devotee world has no idea about what is "instinct." Why does a baby cry for its mothers milk? We must say there is no such thing as instinct or apriori knowledge (they use that word because they cant figure out where it comes from) by which the baby knows where milk is or even what to do to get milk. The crying is just the manifestation of the childs desire & ignorance. Every prompt comes from the Supersoul. So a baby needs milk and an adult suffers for a lack of knowledge. The desire or wanting exists because he is lacking in knowledge. Suffering is our desiring something and not being able to do it, but hoping for the Supersouls sanction.
If we want to walk and talk, can we do so independently? Or do we need the Supersouls sanction? We may say that if the baby knew where to get milk or how to get milk the baby would not have to cry. So if we are not the hand and we want to lift the hand do we have the power to lift it? This is where it gets complicated. One could say that the soul is not the body but he has the power to control the body and then where is there a need for the Supersoul? We are non-physical controlling the physical.
If I want to lift my hand I do not have to suffer to do so. There was a time where my body did not have strength to lift on its own, but since the body has strength I can do it now. But actually we are suffering almost indistinctly anytime we want to do something material because we need superiour intelligence on how to do it which can only be given by a higher authority. Sometimes the Supersoul may give otherwise another authority may give intelligence, but anything we do in life is done through another intelligence.
In SB 2.2.35 Shrila Prabhupada writes "The presence of Param'e4tm'e4 in everyones company is not very difficult to realize, even for the common man. The procedure is as follows."
Prabhupada then writes the procedure we are familiar with "This is my hand, I am not my hand." and ends here: "So there is a difference between the seer and the seen."
Then there is a large jump in the logic which is difficult for someone who does not have faith to follow: "Now, by a little use of intelligence we can also readily agree that the living being who sees the things beyond himself by ordinary vision has no power to see or to move independently. "
This sentence is the key. That "little use of intelligence" cannot be taken for granted. Common people will argue that I am doing everything myself. I want to walk and therefore I can walk by using my own power. How can we say that we cannot see or move independently based on logic and not a scriptural quote? In this verse Shukadeva Goswami says that the Supreme Lord can be perceived by the "lakshanai" and by hypothesis.
Is our suffering when we dont want to a manifestation of a requirement of intelligent direction from another source? The non-devotee world has no idea about what is "instinct." Why does a baby cry for its mothers milk? We must say there is no such thing as instinct or apriori knowledge (they use that word because they cant figure out where it comes from) by which the baby knows where milk is or even what to do to get milk. The crying is just the manifestation of the childs desire & ignorance. Every prompt comes from the Supersoul. So a baby needs milk and an adult suffers for a lack of knowledge. The desire or wanting exists because he is lacking in knowledge. Suffering is our desiring something and not being able to do it, but hoping for the Supersouls sanction.
If we want to walk and talk, can we do so independently? Or do we need the Supersouls sanction? We may say that if the baby knew where to get milk or how to get milk the baby would not have to cry. So if we are not the hand and we want to lift the hand do we have the power to lift it? This is where it gets complicated. One could say that the soul is not the body but he has the power to control the body and then where is there a need for the Supersoul? We are non-physical controlling the physical.
If I want to lift my hand I do not have to suffer to do so. There was a time where my body did not have strength to lift on its own, but since the body has strength I can do it now. But actually we are suffering almost indistinctly anytime we want to do something material because we need superiour intelligence on how to do it which can only be given by a higher authority. Sometimes the Supersoul may give otherwise another authority may give intelligence, but anything we do in life is done through another intelligence.
user [38] · 2007-07-27
Check out the model described here: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/tattvas1.htm#2