Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Salvation or Deliverance

Expand Messages
  • devindersingh
    In short, Yoga is an attempt at discovering a new Law of Life , and after that discovery one has to mould and regulate one s life in accordance with it. This
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 12, 2013
      In short, Yoga is an attempt at discovering a new 'Law of Life', and after that discovery one has to mould and regulate one's life in accordance with it. This Law of Life is nothing other than the Law of Divine Life. What does it mean? It means that in a human being there are two planes, two kinds of nature and two laws of life – one belongs to the lower region, the other to the higher, one belongs to the terrestrial, the other to the supraterrestrial. This earth of clay or the lower region possesses body; life and mind. Man moves about according to the laws and customs, bondages and limitations of body, life and mind. But there exists a world, a plane above these three; and there the; knowledge of man does not depend on gross physical sensations or on syllogistic reasonings. There the knowledge is self-revealing, undeformed and infallible. It is called Intuition, Revelation. There the restless wild urge of action or blind agitations of numberless sensations have turned into a calm spiritual power and an unalloyed delight. And that plane too has a body of its own. But it is absolutely free from disease, decay and death that we find in the physical being. To leave aside the laws of body, life and mind and rise into the highest spiritual nature is called Yoga. But don't think, in doing Yoga you shall have to do away with this body, life and mind and keep aloof from the world and the earthly concerns. This theory is an absurdity on the face of it. The higher world can be contacted even while remaining in the body, life and mind, and it can also be infused into these three. The lower nature can be moulded by the infusion and the law of the higher. While residing in the world all earthly activities can be directed by the drive of that higher world.
      It is a difficult task, but not impossible. It seems to be an impossibility or a mere ideal only, when I look upon myself alone, and think that I am a little, insignificant creature – how can I have the power to change the process of Nature that has been active from time immemorial? Will it be possible to do so even in hundreds of lives? But is it not that a ray of hope peeps into me the moment I cast a glance at the universe without taking me into account? We admit nowadays the law of evolution preached by the West. According to that law of evolution there existed Matter first in the creation, and then appeared the animal, finally the human being. That is to say, the Western science has recognised, in the first instance, evolution on lower planes of Nature. First body, then life and then mind. But nothing can be as absurd and illogical as to say that the evolution of Nature has stopped after reaching the mental level. In fact, Yoga tells us that above the mental level there is a plane called Supermind and above man there is Superman.
      [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-44_A%20Letter.htm]
      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      >
      > [Orthodox science itself is taking greater and greater cognisance today of
      > the irrational move­ments of nature, even of physical nature. Intuition and
      > instinct are now welcomed as surer and truer instruments of knowledge and
      > action than reason.]
      >
      > What is your reference?? What scientist or group of scientists is saying
      > that intuition is a "truer instrument of knowledge"??
      >
      > Is the rover Curiosity digging around Mars for intuition??
      >
      > eduard
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: devindersingh
      > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 6:24 AM
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance
      >
      > Every age has claimed to be modern and sought to establish its
      > characteristic newness, the hall-mark that separates it from the preceding
      > age.
      >
      > The scientific spirit, in one word, is rationalisation â€" rationalisation of
      > Mind as well as of Life. With regard to Mind, rationalisation means to get
      > knowledge exclusively on the data of the senses; it is the formulation, in
      > laws and principles, of facts observed by the physical organs, these laws
      > and principles being the categories of the arranging, classifying,
      > generalising faculty, called reason; its methodology also demands that the
      > laws are to be as few as possible embracing as many facts as possible.
      > Rationalisation of life means the government of life in accordance with
      > these laws, so that the wastage in natural life due to the diversity and
      > disparity off acts may be eliminated, at least minimised, and all movements
      > of life ordered and organised in view of a single and constant purpose
      > (which is perhaps the enhancement of the value of life). This
      > rationalisa­tion means further, in effect, mechanisation or efficiency, as
      > its protagonists would prefer to call it. However, mechanistic efficiency,
      > whether in the matter of knowledge or of life-of mind or of morals was the
      > motto of the early period of the gospel of science, the age of Huxley and
      > Haeckel, of Bentham and the Mills. The formula no longer holds good either
      > in the field of pure knowledge or in its application to life; it does not
      > embody the aspiration and outlook of the contemporary mind, in spite of such
      > inveterate rationalists as Russell and Wells or even Shaw (in Back to
      > Methuselah, for example), who seem to be already becoming an anachronism in
      > the present age.
      >
      > The contemporary urge is not towards rationalisation, but rather towards
      > irrationalisation. Orthodox science itself is taking greater and greater
      > cognisance today of the irrational move­ments of nature, even of physical
      > nature. Intuition and instinct are now welcomed as surer and truer
      > instruments of knowledge and action than reason.
      > Another special feature of the modern consciousness is its "multiple
      > sightedness". The world, as it is presented to us, is no more than an
      > assemblage of view-points; and each point of observation forms its own
      > world-system. There is no one single ultimate truth; if there is any, there
      > is no possibility of its being known or perceived by the mind or the senses.
      > Things exist in relation to one another and for us they have no intrinsic
      > existence apart from the relations. The instrument itself that perceives is
      > the resultant of a system of relations. A truth is only a view-point; and as
      > the view-point shifts, the truth also varies accordingly. The cult of
      > Relativity is a significant expression of the modern consciousness.
      >
      > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-1/-29_Aspects%20of%20Modernism.html]
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" wrote:
      > >
      > > The past ages of society were characterised more or less by a severe
      > > collectivism. In ancient Greece, more so in Sparta and in Rome, the
      > > individual had, properly speaking, no separate existence of his own; he
      > > was merged in the State or Nation. The individual was considered only as a
      > > limb of the collective being, had to live and labour for the common weal.
      > > The value attached to each person was strictly in reference to the output
      > > that the group to which he belonged received from him. Apart from this
      > > service for the general unit-the body politic-any personal endeavour and
      > > achievement, if not absolutely discouraged and repressed, was given a very
      > > secondary place of merit.
      > > The individual has his own law and urge of being and his own secret
      > > godhead. The collective godhead derides the individual godhead at its
      > > peril. The first movement of the reaction, how­ever, was a run to the
      > > other extremity; a stern collectivism gave birth to an intransigent
      > > individualism. The individual is sacred and inviolable, cost what it may.
      > > It does not matter what sort of individuality one seeks, it is enough if
      > > the thing is there. So the doctrine of individualism has come to set a
      > > premium on egoism and on forces that are disruptive of all social bonds.
      > > Each and every individual has the inherent right, which is also a duty, to
      > > follow his own impetus and impulse. Society is nothing but the battle
      > > ground for competing indi­vidualities â€" the strongest survive and the
      > > weakest go to the wall. Association and co-operation are instruments that
      > > the individual may use and utilise for his own growth and development but
      > > in the main they act as deterrents rather than as aids to the expression
      > > and expansion of his characteristic being. In reality, however, if we
      > > probe sufficiently deep into the matter we find that there is no such
      > > thing as corporate life and activity; what appears as such is only a
      > > camouflage for rigorous competition; at the best, there maybe only an
      > > offensive and defensive alliance-humanity fights against nature, and
      > > within humanity itself group fights against group and in the last
      > > analysis, within the group, the individual fights against the individual.
      > > This is the ultimate Law-the Dharma of creation.
      > > Now, what such an uncompromising individualism fails to recognise is that
      > > individuality and ego are not the same thing, that the individual may have
      > > his individuality intact and entire and yet sacrifice his ego, that the
      > > soul of man is a much greater thing than his vital being. It is simply
      > > ignoring the fact and denying the truth to say that man is only a fighting
      > > animal and not a loving god, that the self within the individual realises
      > > itself only through competition and not co-operation. It is an error to
      > > conceive of society as a mere parallelogram of forces, to suppose that it
      > > has risen simply out of the struggle of individual interests and continues
      > > to remain by that struggle. Struggle is only one aspect of the thing, a
      > > particular form at a particular stage, a temporary manifestation due to a
      > > particular system and a particular habit and training. It would be nearer
      > > the truth to say that society came into being with the demand of the
      > > individual soul to unite with the individual soul, with the stress of an
      > > Over-soul to express itself in a multitude of forms, diverse yet linked
      > > together and organised in perfect harmony. Only, the stress for union
      > > manifested itself first on the material plane as struggle: but this is
      > > meant to be corrected and transcended and is being continually corrected
      > > and transcended by a secret harmony, a real commonality and brotherhood
      > > and unity. The individual is not so self-centred as the individualists
      > > make him to be, his individuality has a much vaster orbit and fulfils
      > > itself only by fulfilling others. The scientists have begun to discover
      > > other instincts in man than those of struggle and competition; they now
      > > place at the origin of social grouping an instinct which they name the
      > > herd-instinct: but this is only a formulation in lower terms, a
      > > translation on the vital plane of a higher truth and reality-the
      > > fundamental oneness and accord of individuals and their spiritual
      > > impulsion to unite.
      > > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-1/-06_On%20Communism.html]
      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Eduard,
      > > > In India we live with this knowledge...The water Buffalo loves to wallow
      > > > in the mud. We let it revel.
      > > >
      > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" wrote:
      > > >
      > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Say, what???
      > > > > >Eduard, this the sort of gibberish that we will get from this guy. It
      > > > > >ia about as relevant to modernism as is the news about the pope.
      > > > > >These throwbacks to religion will just fade. Now most of the
      > > > > >catholics are in the poor ,southern hemisphere. I think the buddists
      > > > > >will be run over by the more agressive Islamists or the Chinese
      > > > > >Communists. At any rate it will take centuries and we would do
      > > > > >better to ignore them and tend to the business of northern man.
      > > > > >Ignore is the operant word as trying to deal with religous fanatics
      > > > > >just does not pay off. Set them against themselves and go about
      > > > > >building a better world here in our homes. The islamists Hindus and
      > > > > >Chinese are wildly over breed and will kill each other for food and
      > > > > >fuel. Our populations are under control and our food and energy needs
      > > > > >are being met. Let them deal with each other and we will deal with
      > > > > >them only at a profit. Listening to their ancient and losing ideas
      > > > > >is only a waste of time. Bill

      > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
    • eduardathome
      I understand that it is desirable to have self-control instead of just following wherever our gratification of the sensory may lead us. I also understand that
      Message 2 of 19 , Feb 13, 2013
        I understand that it is desirable to have self-control instead of just
        following wherever our gratification of the sensory may lead us. I also
        understand that with self-control comes a certain peace for reason that one
        can, or thinks they are able, to see the bigger picture.

        What is not understandable is the idea of an evolution to the divine. Or as
        you have it here as a movement beyond life to a heaven, to Nirvana, and then
        merging in the Brahman. Why?? Why should such a process exist?? As
        opposed to humans just dying and their bodies melting back into the
        biosphere.

        I can, however, appreciate the idea. It has a similarity to the Kingdom of
        Heaven in Christianity.

        If one is to assume that this universe arose out of the Big Bang and will
        eventually return in the Big Crunch or the Big Slap [depending what
        cosmology one believes in], why should there also arise this process that
        takes humans beyond the wall of death?? Why should there be a Brahman??
        What does the Brahman do to justify its existence in the universe besides
        collecting dead humans?? I could ask the same of Christians as to why there
        should be a heaven in which the souls of dead humans are stored?

        eduard

        -----Original Message-----
        From: devindersingh
        Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 9:05 PM
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance

        THERE is no doubt that Europe knows very well the art of life which in our
        country is totally lacking. In the East it is only Japan that knows it and
        knows it well enough. Our country on the whole and most of the East is at
        present steeped in inertia.
        You have asked me the exact meaning of control of the senses and what is its
        necessity in life. For, in India we have held up this ideal on an elaborate
        scale, but to what effect? Europe cares little for it, yet she rules the
        world.
        Firstly, whether self-control is necessary or not depends on the nature of
        our ideal. Self-control is only a particular means to a particular end. If
        the meaning of life is to live the life of nature, to possess power and
        influence – if the aim of life is to live in accordance with its impulses,
        then the question of self-control can never arise. In such a case the
        indulgence of the senses is the motive force.
        There are two approaches to life: one is to follow the lead of the senses,
        to enrich life as much as possible by giving them full play and acquiring
        means for their satisfaction; the other is to move away from their range to
        a region inward or upward. Those who have taken to this path are unanimous
        that this path leads to the realm of supreme Peace, Light and Truth and that
        in fact the real character of life, its true fulfilment lie in this realm.
        In their view the sense-world is a world of deformations, narrow and full of
        impurities. Its material resources, however rich and vast, are really worth
        little. But man has also his inner senses which can help him to return to
        his home in the infinite Vast as a child of Immortality. This is the real
        sense of self-mastery: instead of swimming down the sense-current, one must
        swim back in the opposite direction. Instead of slipping down from the
        source of life one has to climb up into it.
        You may ask: to what good? Suppose, one goes beyond the sphere of life to
        Vaikuntha, to Heaven, attains Nirvana and gets merged in the Brahman; in
        that case life is lost. And it is really what has happened in India. There
        has been no dearth of saints, seers and Avatars. But they live in their own
        worlds. The dwellers on our realistic plane are poor, distressed and
        miserable. True, there is a class of men who are not in the least perturbed
        at this state of things. Time was when from the mouth of a daughter of India
        rose the ringing voice:

        "Of what use to me are the things that cannot make me immortal?"

        Of course, there is no hard arid fast rule that there must be a barrier
        between life and beyond-life, between self-restraint and self-indulgence. A
        synthesis between the two may be difficult, but not impossible. Indeed, it
        was in India again that there developed such lines of synthetic sadhana.
        Rather it was Europe that gave evidence of this conflict and duality much
        more than India. We may remember the motto: "Render unto Caesar what is
        Caesar's, etc." By pointing to the path of self-restraint Christianity holds
        that it leads to the Kingdom of Christ and those who would remain chained
        down to their senses will remain in their low, unrefined state of nature. In
        Europe this conflict has led to two extremes. Self-restraint in Christianity
        has become self-mortification: but, on the other hand, when Europeans do not
        think it harmful to give a long rope to the senses, they have gone to the
        excess of unbridled license. In India there has been an attempt at a
        synthesis of these two aspects of life. Worldly life was taken as a
        preparation for or as a stepping-stone to the world beyond. So
        self-restraint was given a place not only in the sphere of sadhana for
        liberation, but also in the field of enjoyment. Hence we see in India as
        much preponderance of sattwic qualities as we see in Europe preponderance of
        rajasic dynamism. No doubt, the sattwic state easily lapses into the inertia
        of tamas. As a matter of fact, such has been the case in India. But rajas
        also meets the same end. The one slowly slides to extinction; the other
        shoots up like a rocket and falls like a burnt stick. Thus both suffer the
        same fate.
        In general, life is the play-field of the senses. If self-control implies
        moving away from the senses, then it is not possible for it to have a place
        in life. But self-control may mean keeping the senses under control, under a
        system of rule and discipline. This is the popular sense of self-control: it
        is a graded withdrawal, a first step towards detachment. This is also how it
        developed in India. But, as a matter of fact, this popular approach to
        self-control is not India's speciality alone. Europe has given it a
        recognised place, not only in the Christian religious life but in her
        worldly life too. But it will not do to forget that the untrammelled freedom
        of the senses and their unbridled license have been accepted as an ideal
        specially in modern times, and it is confined to a particular community.
        What they are now attempting to reject as a bourgeois trait was one day an
        aid in the building up of the Euorpean society. To be sure, Europe was not
        so inclined towards detachment as India. Europe has gone in for the
        cultivation of the senses, but that does not mean that she has been sticking
        to an excessive and disorderly play of the senses. Neither Byron nor Oscar
        Wilde is the ultimate ideal of Europe. When the famous novelist Balzac used
        to sit down to write he would do so in a lonely place in a monk's tunic in
        order to help his one-pointed concentration. Napoleon, Caesar and Alexander
        were no helpless slaves of their senses. In fact, no country or race can
        build its greatness except on the foundation of self-control. It is not that
        self-control must necessarily be self-mortification. There can be a via
        media, and in ordinary life this is a necessity. Self-indulgence is the
        debit side. True, this side of Europe is much to the fore, but that leads
        one to think that she is living on her old capital, and it is not long
        before her capital runs short. The root of the capital is self-restraint,
        and it is the credit side, the side of accumulated power.
        It may certainly be that the social, moral and other kinds of injunctions
        regarding control of the senses do not strictly apply any more to our modern
        life. Man's consciousness demands a wider and more liberal existence. Not a
        religion of mental conventions but a universal one founded on truth is what
        he wants. But that is altogether another matter. This problem and its
        solution will lead us into deeper waters. Hence we have to stop here.
        [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-45_Life%20and%20Self%20Control.htm]
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        >
        > Yep ... and in India you have gang rapes in late night buses. The whole
        > country had to be divided because you could not live with each other. You
        > have a segment of society that are designated as untouchable, albeit you
        > are
        > trying to change that. I don't think that India has anything to teach the
        > West. Which isn't to suggest that the West is in much good shape either
        > with morality and such. But if you want to get some message out, it would
        > be nice if you could put it in a context and with phrasing that is
        > understandable, regardless of the fact that you "live" with this
        > knowledge.
        >
        > eduard
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: devindersingh
        > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:56 AM
        > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance
        >
        > Eduard,
        > In India we live with this knowledge...The water Buffalo loves to wallow
        > in
        > the mud. We let it revel.
        >
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" wrote:
        >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Say, what???
        > > >Eduard, this the sort of gibberish that we will get from this guy. It
        > > >ia
        > > >about as relevant to modernism as is the news about the pope. These
        > > >throwbacks to religion will just fade. Now most of the catholics are
        > > >in
        > > >the poor ,southern hemisphere. I think the buddists will be run over by
        > > >the more agressive Islamists or the Chinese Communists. At any rate it
        > > >will take centuries and we would do better to ignore them and tend to
        > > >the business of northern man. Ignore is the operant word as trying to
        > > >deal with religous fanatics just does not pay off. Set them against
        > > >themselves and go about building a better world here in our homes.
        > > >The
        > > >islamists Hindus and Chinese are wildly over breed and will kill each
        > > >other for food and fuel. Our populations are under control and our food
        > > >and energy needs are being met. Let them deal with each other and we
        > > >will
        > > >deal with them only at a profit. Listening to their ancient and losing
        > > >ideas is only a waste of time. Bill




        ------------------------------------

        Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

        Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      • eduardathome
        In your copy/paste you omitted the important starting sentence of .... ONE has forgotten. From the fact of separation from Sat-Chit-Ananda comes forgetfulness
        Message 3 of 19 , Feb 13, 2013
          In your copy/paste you omitted the important starting sentence of ....

          "ONE has forgotten. From the fact of separation from Sat-Chit-Ananda comes
          forgetfulness of what one is. "

          Actually, this whole exercise is pointless. All you are doing is to do a
          search on the Sri Aurobindo Ashram site and the pasting the answer on
          Existlist. It's pointless, since I could do the same. You are not
          answering my questions. There is no discussion here.

          eduard

          -----Original Message-----
          From: devindersingh
          Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:04 PM
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance

          You believe you are, does not matter what, a boy, a girl, a man, a woman, a
          dog, a horse, anything: a stone, the sea or the sun. You think you are all
          that, instead of thinking that you are the One Divine. Indeed, if you had
          continued to think that you are the One Divine, there would have been no
          universe at all. The phenomenon of separation seems to have been
          indispensable, otherwise it would have remained always as it was.
          But once the curve has been followed up and the Unity re-established, having
          profited by the multiplicity and division, the Unity found is of a higher
          quality: a Unity that knows itself, instead of a unity that does not know
          itself, for there is nothing else there which knows the other. Where the
          Unity is absolute, who or what can know the Unity? Hence the need of the
          appearance of something which is not that, in order to know what it is.
          The original Will was towards forming individual beings that would be
          capable of becoming conscious again of their origin, although the procedure
          of individualisation compelled the individual to feel itself separate in
          order to be an individual. And the very moment it is separated, it is cut
          off from the original Consciousness, at least apparently, and falls into
          inconscience, for the only thing that is the Life of life is the Origin.
          It is this inconscience that brings it about that you are not aware any
          longer of the Truth of your being. The secret of all deformation in the
          world is this inconscience which has been produced by the fact of separation
          from the Origin. And that explains why there are ugliness, wickedness,
          illness, suffering and death. It is because of this inconscience that
          although the Origin is there, it cannot manifest itself. It is there, that
          is why the world exists, but it is deformed in its expression, because it
          manifests itself through inconscience, ignorance and obscurity.
          The only way to set everything right is to be conscious again and it is very
          simple.
          You are That, you are in That.
          To make you understand more easily, I may say, That is within us, That is
          part of our consciousness somewhere. Otherwise we would never be able to be
          conscious of it. If we did not carry the Divine within ourselves, in the
          essence of our being, we would never be aware of Him, it would be an
          impossible task.
          There is only one thing to be found, not two.
          If one goes round long enough one must come back to the same point. And once
          you come back, you have the impression that there was never anything to find
          outside. Yes, it is like that, there is nothing to find outside yourself.
          [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-4/-047_The%20Origin.htm]
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
          >
          > Your statements here are most difficult to follow.
          >
          > First you say that there is "severe collectivism", then the birth of
          > intransigent individualism. The pendulum swings. So you end up with the
          > "herd instinct" which I suppose is back to "severe collectivism".
          >
          > Human society is not that simplistic. You would have to ignore some
          > historical figures [depending upon what you mean by "past ages] who were
          > individualists. You would also have to ignore religions which are
          > collective and continue to be.
          >
          > Then you totally lost me with, "... the demand of the individual soul to
          > unite with the individual soul, ...". How can a soul [assuming that such
          > actually exists] demand to be united with itself?? Why should it make
          > such
          > a demand??
          >
          > eduard

          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: devindersingh
          > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 6:15 AM
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance
          >
          > The past ages of society were characterised more or less by a severe
          > collectivism. In ancient Greece, more so in Sparta and in Rome, the
          > individual had, properly speaking, no separate existence of his own; he
          > was
          > merged in the State or Nation. The individual was considered only as a
          > limb
          > of the collective being, had to live and labour for the common weal. The
          > value attached to each person was strictly in reference to the output that
          > the group to which he belonged received from him. Apart from this service
          > for the general unit-the body politic-any personal endeavour and
          > achievement, if not absolutely discouraged and repressed, was given a very
          > secondary place of merit.
          > The individual has his own law and urge of being and his own secret
          > godhead.
          > The collective godhead derides the individual godhead at its peril. The
          > first movement of the reaction, how­ever, was a run to the other
          > extremity;
          > a stern collectivism gave birth to an intransigent individualism. The
          > individual is sacred and inviolable, cost what it may. It does not matter
          > what sort of individuality one seeks, it is enough if the thing is there.
          > So
          > the doctrine of individualism has come to set a premium on egoism and on
          > forces that are disruptive of all social bonds. Each and every individual
          > has the inherent right, which is also a duty, to follow his own impetus
          > and
          > impulse. Society is nothing but the battle ground for competing
          > indi­vidualities â€" the strongest survive and the weakest go to the
          > wall.
          > Association and co-operation are instruments that the individual may use
          > and
          > utilise for his own growth and development but in the main they act as
          > deterrents rather than as aids to the expression and expansion of his
          > characteristic being. In reality, however, if we probe sufficiently deep
          > into the matter we find that there is no such thing as corporate life and
          > activity; what appears as such is only a camouflage for rigorous
          > competition; at the best, there maybe only an offensive and defensive
          > alliance-humanity fights against nature, and within humanity itself group
          > fights against group and in the last analysis, within the group, the
          > individual fights against the individual. This is the ultimate Law-the
          > Dharma of creation.
          > Now, what such an uncompromising individualism fails to recognise is that
          > individuality and ego are not the same thing, that the individual may have
          > his individuality intact and entire and yet sacrifice his ego, that the
          > soul
          > of man is a much greater thing than his vital being. It is simply ignoring
          > the fact and denying the truth to say that man is only a fighting animal
          > and
          > not a loving god, that the self within the individual realises itself only
          > through competition and not co-operation. It is an error to conceive of
          > society as a mere parallelogram of forces, to suppose that it has risen
          > simply out of the struggle of individual interests and continues to remain
          > by that struggle. Struggle is only one aspect of the thing, a particular
          > form at a particular stage, a temporary manifestation due to a particular
          > system and a particular habit and training. It would be nearer the truth
          > to
          > say that society came into being with the demand of the individual soul to
          > unite with the individual soul, with the stress of an Over-soul to express
          > itself in a multitude of forms, diverse yet linked together and organised
          > in
          > perfect harmony. Only, the stress for union manifested itself first on the
          > material plane as struggle: but this is meant to be corrected and
          > transcended and is being continually corrected and transcended by a secret
          > harmony, a real commonality and brotherhood and unity. The individual is
          > not
          > so self-centred as the individualists make him to be, his individuality
          > has
          > a much vaster orbit and fulfils itself only by fulfilling others. The
          > scientists have begun to discover other instincts in man than those of
          > struggle and competition; they now place at the origin of social grouping
          > an
          > instinct which they name the herd-instinct: but this is only a formulation
          > in lower terms, a translation on the vital plane of a higher truth and
          > reality-the fundamental oneness and accord of individuals and their
          > spiritual impulsion to unite.
          > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-1/-06_On%20Communism.html]
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" wrote:
          > >
          > > Eduard,
          > > In India we live with this knowledge...The water Buffalo loves to wallow
          > > in the mud. We let it revel.
          > >
          > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" wrote:
          > >
          > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > Say, what???
          > > > >Eduard, this the sort of gibberish that we will get from this guy. It
          > > > >ia about as relevant to modernism as is the news about the pope.
          > > > >These
          > > > >throwbacks to religion will just fade. Now most of the catholics are
          > > > >in the poor ,southern hemisphere. I think the buddists will be run
          > > > >over
          > > > >by the more agressive Islamists or the Chinese Communists. At any
          > > > >rate
          > > > >it will take centuries and we would do better to ignore them and
          > > > >tend
          > > > >to the business of northern man. Ignore is the operant word as
          > > > >trying
          > > > >to deal with religous fanatics just does not pay off. Set them
          > > > >against
          > > > >themselves and go about building a better world here in our homes.
          > > > >The islamists Hindus and Chinese are wildly over breed and will
          > > > >kill
          > > > >each other for food and fuel. Our populations are under control and
          > > > >our
          > > > >food and energy needs are being met. Let them deal with each other
          > > > >and
          > > > >we will deal with them only at a profit. Listening to their ancient
          > > > >and losing ideas is only a waste of time. Bill



          ------------------------------------

          Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

          Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
        • devindersingh
          Oh! civilisation. Polite conversations, Following gang-bangs!
          Message 4 of 19 , Feb 13, 2013
            Oh! civilisation.
            Polite conversations,
            Following gang-bangs!

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
            >
            > In your copy/paste you omitted the important starting sentence of ....
            >
            > "ONE has forgotten. From the fact of separation from Sat-Chit-Ananda comes
            > forgetfulness of what one is. "
            >
            > Actually, this whole exercise is pointless. All you are doing is to do a
            > search on the Sri Aurobindo Ashram site and the pasting the answer on
            > Existlist. It's pointless, since I could do the same. You are not
            > answering my questions. There is no discussion here.
            >
            > eduard
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: devindersingh
            > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:04 PM
            > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance
            >
            > You believe you are, does not matter what, a boy, a girl, a man, a woman, a
            > dog, a horse, anything: a stone, the sea or the sun. You think you are all
            > that, instead of thinking that you are the One Divine. Indeed, if you had
            > continued to think that you are the One Divine, there would have been no
            > universe at all. The phenomenon of separation seems to have been
            > indispensable, otherwise it would have remained always as it was.
            > But once the curve has been followed up and the Unity re-established, having
            > profited by the multiplicity and division, the Unity found is of a higher
            > quality: a Unity that knows itself, instead of a unity that does not know
            > itself, for there is nothing else there which knows the other. Where the
            > Unity is absolute, who or what can know the Unity? Hence the need of the
            > appearance of something which is not that, in order to know what it is.
            > The original Will was towards forming individual beings that would be
            > capable of becoming conscious again of their origin, although the procedure
            > of individualisation compelled the individual to feel itself separate in
            > order to be an individual. And the very moment it is separated, it is cut
            > off from the original Consciousness, at least apparently, and falls into
            > inconscience, for the only thing that is the Life of life is the Origin.
            > It is this inconscience that brings it about that you are not aware any
            > longer of the Truth of your being. The secret of all deformation in the
            > world is this inconscience which has been produced by the fact of separation
            > from the Origin. And that explains why there are ugliness, wickedness,
            > illness, suffering and death. It is because of this inconscience that
            > although the Origin is there, it cannot manifest itself. It is there, that
            > is why the world exists, but it is deformed in its expression, because it
            > manifests itself through inconscience, ignorance and obscurity.
            > The only way to set everything right is to be conscious again and it is very
            > simple.
            > You are That, you are in That.
            > To make you understand more easily, I may say, That is within us, That is
            > part of our consciousness somewhere. Otherwise we would never be able to be
            > conscious of it. If we did not carry the Divine within ourselves, in the
            > essence of our being, we would never be aware of Him, it would be an
            > impossible task.
            > There is only one thing to be found, not two.
            > If one goes round long enough one must come back to the same point. And once
            > you come back, you have the impression that there was never anything to find
            > outside. Yes, it is like that, there is nothing to find outside yourself.
            > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-4/-047_The%20Origin.htm]
            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
            > >
            > > Your statements here are most difficult to follow.
            > >
            > > First you say that there is "severe collectivism", then the birth of
            > > intransigent individualism. The pendulum swings. So you end up with the
            > > "herd instinct" which I suppose is back to "severe collectivism".
            > >
            > > Human society is not that simplistic. You would have to ignore some
            > > historical figures [depending upon what you mean by "past ages] who were
            > > individualists. You would also have to ignore religions which are
            > > collective and continue to be.
            > >
            > > Then you totally lost me with, "... the demand of the individual soul to
            > > unite with the individual soul, ...". How can a soul [assuming that such
            > > actually exists] demand to be united with itself?? Why should it make
            > > such
            > > a demand??
            > >
            > > eduard
            >
            > > -----Original Message-----
            > > From: devindersingh
            > > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 6:15 AM
            > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            > > Subject: [existlist] Re: Salvation or Deliverance
            > >
            > > The past ages of society were characterised more or less by a severe
            > > collectivism. In ancient Greece, more so in Sparta and in Rome, the
            > > individual had, properly speaking, no separate existence of his own; he
            > > was
            > > merged in the State or Nation. The individual was considered only as a
            > > limb
            > > of the collective being, had to live and labour for the common weal. The
            > > value attached to each person was strictly in reference to the output that
            > > the group to which he belonged received from him. Apart from this service
            > > for the general unit-the body politic-any personal endeavour and
            > > achievement, if not absolutely discouraged and repressed, was given a very
            > > secondary place of merit.
            > > The individual has his own law and urge of being and his own secret
            > > godhead.
            > > The collective godhead derides the individual godhead at its peril. The
            > > first movement of the reaction, how­ever, was a run to the other
            > > extremity;
            > > a stern collectivism gave birth to an intransigent individualism. The
            > > individual is sacred and inviolable, cost what it may. It does not matter
            > > what sort of individuality one seeks, it is enough if the thing is there.
            > > So
            > > the doctrine of individualism has come to set a premium on egoism and on
            > > forces that are disruptive of all social bonds. Each and every individual
            > > has the inherent right, which is also a duty, to follow his own impetus
            > > and
            > > impulse. Society is nothing but the battle ground for competing
            > > indi­vidualities â€" the strongest survive and the weakest go to the
            > > wall.
            > > Association and co-operation are instruments that the individual may use
            > > and
            > > utilise for his own growth and development but in the main they act as
            > > deterrents rather than as aids to the expression and expansion of his
            > > characteristic being. In reality, however, if we probe sufficiently deep
            > > into the matter we find that there is no such thing as corporate life and
            > > activity; what appears as such is only a camouflage for rigorous
            > > competition; at the best, there maybe only an offensive and defensive
            > > alliance-humanity fights against nature, and within humanity itself group
            > > fights against group and in the last analysis, within the group, the
            > > individual fights against the individual. This is the ultimate Law-the
            > > Dharma of creation.
            > > Now, what such an uncompromising individualism fails to recognise is that
            > > individuality and ego are not the same thing, that the individual may have
            > > his individuality intact and entire and yet sacrifice his ego, that the
            > > soul
            > > of man is a much greater thing than his vital being. It is simply ignoring
            > > the fact and denying the truth to say that man is only a fighting animal
            > > and
            > > not a loving god, that the self within the individual realises itself only
            > > through competition and not co-operation. It is an error to conceive of
            > > society as a mere parallelogram of forces, to suppose that it has risen
            > > simply out of the struggle of individual interests and continues to remain
            > > by that struggle. Struggle is only one aspect of the thing, a particular
            > > form at a particular stage, a temporary manifestation due to a particular
            > > system and a particular habit and training. It would be nearer the truth
            > > to
            > > say that society came into being with the demand of the individual soul to
            > > unite with the individual soul, with the stress of an Over-soul to express
            > > itself in a multitude of forms, diverse yet linked together and organised
            > > in
            > > perfect harmony. Only, the stress for union manifested itself first on the
            > > material plane as struggle: but this is meant to be corrected and
            > > transcended and is being continually corrected and transcended by a secret
            > > harmony, a real commonality and brotherhood and unity. The individual is
            > > not
            > > so self-centred as the individualists make him to be, his individuality
            > > has
            > > a much vaster orbit and fulfils itself only by fulfilling others. The
            > > scientists have begun to discover other instincts in man than those of
            > > struggle and competition; they now place at the origin of social grouping
            > > an
            > > instinct which they name the herd-instinct: but this is only a formulation
            > > in lower terms, a translation on the vital plane of a higher truth and
            > > reality-the fundamental oneness and accord of individuals and their
            > > spiritual impulsion to unite.
            > > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-1/-06_On%20Communism.html]
            > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "devindersingh" wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Eduard,
            > > > In India we live with this knowledge...The water Buffalo loves to wallow
            > > > in the mud. We let it revel.
            > > >
            > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" wrote:
            > > >
            > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Say, what???
            > > > > >Eduard, this the sort of gibberish that we will get from this guy. It
            > > > > >ia about as relevant to modernism as is the news about the pope.
            > > > > >These
            > > > > >throwbacks to religion will just fade. Now most of the catholics are
            > > > > >in the poor ,southern hemisphere. I think the buddists will be run
            > > > > >over
            > > > > >by the more agressive Islamists or the Chinese Communists. At any
            > > > > >rate
            > > > > >it will take centuries and we would do better to ignore them and
            > > > > >tend
            > > > > >to the business of northern man. Ignore is the operant word as
            > > > > >trying
            > > > > >to deal with religous fanatics just does not pay off. Set them
            > > > > >against
            > > > > >themselves and go about building a better world here in our homes.
            > > > > >The islamists Hindus and Chinese are wildly over breed and will
            > > > > >kill
            > > > > >each other for food and fuel. Our populations are under control and
            > > > > >our
            > > > > >food and energy needs are being met. Let them deal with each other
            > > > > >and
            > > > > >we will deal with them only at a profit. Listening to their ancient
            > > > > >and losing ideas is only a waste of time. Bill
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
            >
            > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.