free will is worthless

[suninmyeyes]

R. Balsekar talking about free will:

 

 

I got a book 'Your head in the tigers mouth' written by R. Balsekar(author unknown to me till then) some years ago from a friend . This proved to be a perfect combination of good timing and the content of the book. Something clicked into right place.

I watch him on the you tube sometimes.

 

 

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

[Informer]

What would be different in life for free will or a predetermined fate? Would anything be different?

[Lucky7Strikes]

R. Balsekar talking about free will:

 

 

I got a book 'Your head in the tigers mouth' written by R. Balsekar(author unknown to me till then) some years ago from a friend . This proved to be a perfect combination of good timing and the content of the book. Something clicked into right place.

I watch him on the you tube sometimes.

 

 

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

IMO,

 

R. Balsekar is an extreme advaita teacher, a foremost figure in the 'neo-advaita' movement whose teachings are border line nihilistic. The teaching against free will is impractical because whether you believe in it or not, choices are made everyday. Denying free will is an intellectual analysis gone awry because of viewing things in the dichotomies of "me" vs. "other," "doer" vs. "done." Anatta teachings of no-self taken to the extreme can result in a similar result.

 

I think it's much better to live with the understanding that life is a series of interconnected free wills, the extent of the web of connections is limitless, but it also does not make each of us mere victims. This to me is beneficial because it encourages cooperation among individuals. It also makes the most practical sense in that it is easily observable in day to day interactions among people.

 

Balsekar can babble about not having free will all he likes and the importance of no effort, but he will die like most of humanity in ignorance of how he has come to be and where he will go. Also he has numerous scandals involving female students and financial greed showing that his realization leads to nothing more than mere material pleasures. This is a good article on his limited realization:

 

http://www.enlightened-spirituality.org/ramesh_balsekar.html

Edited September 16, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes

[Lucky7Strikes]

What would be different in life for free will or a predetermined fate? Would anything be different?

Yes, there is a tremendous difference. One leads to passive acceptance. The other to active exploration.

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

R. Balsekar talking about free will:

 

 

I got a book 'Your head in the tigers mouth' written by R. Balsekar(author unknown to me till then) some years ago from a friend . This proved to be a perfect combination of good timing and the content of the book. Something clicked into right place.

I watch him on the you tube sometimes.

 

 

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

Given the options, people choose what they believe.. the abandonment of freewill is fine, it's a choice people make.. if one is sincere about resolving the issue of freewill or no freewill, it's a simple matter of looking without the expectations/conditioning of what to 'see'.. "I" see a dynamic interplay of options and choices.. i see people that believe there is no 'freewill', telling others they should believe this, too.. which, would make no sense if the others have no 'freewill' to change what they understand..

 

Be well..

[Informer]

Yes, there is a tremendous difference. One leads to passive acceptance. The other to active exploration.

 

Ah, but how can you know that? What if it was fate to explore?

[thelerner]

I'm looking for someone who doesn't believe in free will to become my slave. I'll tell'em what to do, when to do it and what to think. After a couple months of not being in control of their lives we'll see how they feel about free will.

[Lucky7Strikes]

Ah, but how can you know that? What if it was fate to explore?

You don't. That's the whole point, that you don't know. Hence we have a discussion here.

 

So we choose to believe in what our logic, circumstance, preference, agrees to. Both sides can construct sound logic based on presumptions, which will always be limited to a degree. And in this case believing in free will is much more beneficial to society and yourself than in determinism.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes

[konchog uma]

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

 

i look at it like sometimes we have free will (choice) and sometimes we have to follow the greater current (fate)

 

and life encompasses both at different times

 

but i know some people who look at life as "determinists" (no free will) and their lives are sloppy because they don't take responsibility for their actions. And they lean towards fatalistic thinking

 

its important to realize that life is huge and we are very tiny, but its dangerous to abandon free will.

[suninmyeyes]

IMO,

 

R. Balsekar is an extreme advaita teacher, a foremost figure in the 'neo-advaita' movement whose teachings are border line nihilistic. y. The teaching against free will is impractical because whether you believe in it or not, choices are made everyda Denying free will is an intellectual analysis gone awry because of viewing things in the dichotomies of "me" vs. "other," "doer" vs. "done." Anatta teachings of no-self taken to the extreme can result in a similar result.

I think it's much better to live with the understanding that life is a series of interconnected free wills, the extent of the web of connections is limitless, but it also does not make each of us mere victims. This to me is beneficial because it encourages cooperation among individuals. It also makes the most practical sense in that it is easily observable in day to day interactions among people.

 

Balsekar can babble about not having free will all he likes and the importance of no effort, but he will die like most of humanity in ignorance of how he has come to be and where he will go. Also he has numerous scandals involving female students and financial greed showing that his realization leads to nothing more than mere material pleasures. This is a good article on his limited realization:

 

http://www.enlighten...h_balsekar.html

Thanks for the link Lucky. It seems that he has some adultery charges too after him. Another one. Oh well..

Just to clarify I am not his follower, just agree with some of the things he says and thought this could be provoking enough topic to hear some interesting opinions.

What I underlined. He is not denying free will ,he is saying it is there but it is worthless. There is a difference.

For me free will is worthless in larger symphony of life, on a different note free will is da king.Queen that is.

All notes are important and if they are not there the symphony wouldnt be a symphony as there would be a note missing. Dont know if this analogy makes any sense to anyone.

[zanshin]

It's worth something to have hope that we can change our circumstances by doing something. Hope is worth a lot, sometimes it really is all that's left.

[doc benway]

 

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

I'm not familiar with the author but I'll check out the video. Before I do that, I'll share a few thoughts about free will.

I'm not sure it exists.

 

There is a thought that holds itself aside and claims the title of "thinker" and by default it also considers itself the "doer."

But what is this other than just another thought? So things happen, things are done, and there is a thought that says to us, "I did that" or "I would like to.." or "I am going to...", and so forth.

 

But what is really happening there?

There is the thought but does this really "do" anything? There is meaningful neurophysiological research that demonstrates the following. When we "decide" to act, it can be shown that our nerves and muscles begin a preparatory activity before there is any conscious "decision" made.

 

The other way to look at it is to try and understand how you actually "do" things. How do you make things happen?

So, for example, how do you scratch your nose? Well, I reach up and scratch. What does that mean? How do you cause your hand to rise? I contract my shoulder muscles. How do you do that? Well, I decide to do it and it happens....

Same thing for breathing and beating your heart (and shining the sun for that matter).

We consider certain things voluntary and certain things involuntary but I think it's a trick of the mind.

 

So I think we go through life and there is this big happening, lots of stuff going on, and certain activities are associated with the thought "I did that" or "I'm going to do this" and we feel like "we" are the doers. But who are the doers and are they really different from what's being done? I guess the Vedanta thread may be a good place to take that discussion.

And I think that this is a critical point in Daoist philosophy. Wu Wei is when the doer and what's being done are indistinguishable. There is just doing and who is doing?

Dao

 

Or maybe not... just a thought, I think I'll go take my medicine now...

[dwai]

R. Balsekar talking about free will:

 

 

I got a book 'Your head in the tigers mouth' written by R. Balsekar(author unknown to me till then) some years ago from a friend . This proved to be a perfect combination of good timing and the content of the book. Something clicked into right place.

I watch him on the you tube sometimes.

 

 

So how usefull is free will? How free is free will? Does it depend where one is looking from or not? What is your understanding?

 

without free will the structure of Karma does not make sense. If everything is pre-determined, then life in general would be deterministic. However, it is not (at least not compellingly so)...that gives credence to the fact that there is an element of the stochastic about life, which in turn would support that Free Will exists and is exercised.

[suninmyeyes]

I'm looking for someone who doesn't believe in free will to become my slave. I'll tell'em what to do, when to do it and what to think. After a couple months of not being in control of there lives we'll see how they feel about free will.

You are on the wrong web site lerner.

Try some of the SM ones might have better rate of succes.

[suninmyeyes]

It's worth something to have hope that we can change our circumstances by doing something. Hope is worth a lot, sometimes it really is all that's left.

Hi zanshin,

In my life hope has proven to be the devil himself. I dont want to hold anything.

[zanshin]

 

then don't hope. Keep your expectations really low, you won't be disappointed and occasionally might be pleasantly surprised.

[suninmyeyes]

without free will the structure of Karma does not make sense. If everything is pre-determined, then life in general would be deterministic. However, it is not (at least not compellingly so)...that gives credence to the fact that there is an element of the stochastic about life, which in turn would support that Free Will exists and is exercised.

Ramesh says in the video is that the free will exists but the results of the outcome of the actions undertaken due to free will are beyond our control -therefore free will is worthless.

 

Here is what Huang Po ( Chinese sage)says in similar tone:

'If you would allow all matters to take their own course throughout the day as if you were to ill to bother, without specified desire to be known or unknown to others, with your mind like a block of stone that mends no holes, then the Universal Law would deeply impregnate your understanding.'

 

Personally I like this type of passive approach, even while leading an active lifestyle .

Edited September 16, 2011 by suninmyeyes

[Marblehead]

"I" see a dynamic interplay of options and choices.. i see people that believe there is no 'freewill', telling others they should believe this, too.. which, would make no sense if the others have no 'freewill' to change what they understand..

 

Be well..

 

I like that so much I am repeating it.

 

I still love my free will.

[Marblehead]

but i know some people who look at life as "determinists" (no free will) and their lives are sloppy because they don't take responsibility for their actions. And they lean towards fatalistic thinking

 

I generally speak to this issue when speaking on this topic. You did well, I think.

[Marblehead]

without free will the structure of Karma does not make sense. If everything is pre-determined, then life in general would be deterministic.

 

What a wonderful observation!!!!

[Marblehead]

Hi zanshin,

In my life hope has proven to be the devil himself. I dont want to hold anything.

 

I just knew that word "hope" was going to rub someone the wrong way. Hehehe.

[strawdog65]

To me, Free will as a concept, is believing the illusion that we have

more control than not, of what we may become, given the confines of the

society within which we live.

 

If the concept of Free will allows a person to feel unshackled

by those confines, then the worth is in the mind of the individual.

 

And just as reality is purely subjective at its most basic level,

then so to is the worth of this concept.

[Marblehead]

To me, Free will as a concept, is believing the illusion that we have

more control than not, of what we may become, given the confines of the

society within which we live.

 

If the concept of Free will allows a person to feel unshackled

by those confines, then the worth is in the mind of the individual.

 

And just as reality is purely subjective at its most basic level,

then so to is the worth of this concept.

 

WoW! You hit both sides of it there, didn't you?

 

But,

 

Boo! Reality is purely objective at its most basic level. Hehehe. Free will is subjective though.

[strawdog65]

WoW! You hit both sides of it there, didn't you?

 

But,

 

Boo! Reality is purely objective at its most basic level. Hehehe. Free will is subjective though.

 

 

True... the Idea of having or what may be considered, Free Will, is entirely subjective.

Since I believe that reality can and ultimately will contain everything that is and can be, no matter how plausible, if possible...then its just a matter of time till the manifestation of any event can and will occur. Just my view.

[Marblehead]

 

Since I believe that reality can and ultimately will contain everything that is and can be, no matter how plausible, if possible...then its just a matter of time till the manifestation of any event can and will occur. Just my view.

 

Agree. Just because something is impossible today doesn't mean that it will continue to be impossible forever. Things change, parameters change. Today's impossibilities may be tomorrow's possibilities.

 

And yes, if an event can happen it is likely to happen some time in the future. Or not.