Friday, July 15, 2005

Death - An End of Existence ?

Now that several thoughts are going around in blogs about cultural identity, caste system, discrimination et al., I thought this would be the best time to raise this question. When we go through them, we see that they all point towards coming up with questions like "which is good ?", "what is the best thing to do ?". That is, the notion of relativeness is inherent among all the thoughts. Is this relativeness a part and parcel of our existence ? At any given moment, we never question our non-existence, which shows that there is something absolute and not relative. But, we 'artificially force' ourself to think that we cease to exist after we die. So, the notion of relativeness (or life-death) is just a superficial thought. Why we have to force such a contradiction that creates disharmony ? Why should we create a relative world for ourself that makes us to see only the difference ? Why such a negative outlook in life ? Why can't we think we'll live forever and its only that our body perishes ? Why can't we see everything from a higher perspective which will make us all better citizens ?

10 comments:

Arvind Srinivasan said...

We should we even think of 'end' of anything. Why do you think your body perishes. Our 'science' man Robbie can attest to the fact that everything changes from one-form to another - so there can never anything that perenially is destroyed or taken out from the earth ;) ?

Miya said...

We identify ourselves with the body and hence we think we cease to exist once we lose the body - our identity!

If somebody slaps you, would you retaliate or just walk away thinking, "Well I am not the body!"

Kasthuri said...

@ arvind : mmm...yeh...conservation of energy concept !

@ ramya : As long as we are happy in the world of receiving slaps and giving slaps, there is no harm in being body concious. But only that its going to hurt both. An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind !

Miya said...

When I used the example of a slap, I did not mean literally, Kasthuri.

To be alive in this world (I am going to disregard ghosts for this present argument), we need a body. And we 'love' this body (Sthula Shareera (I hope I am right)) too much. We bathe it, clothe it, and take great care of it.

And the day we stop identifying ourselves by this body, is the day that we can be 'completely free of our material commitments'. Such a day dawning (at least in my life) is a long way away =)

tt_giant said...

if all beings are fundamentally the same, then once the person dies, the soul should go and manifest itself in another body?.. is the math right?

Kasthuri said...

@tt_giant : According what I read, it need not necessarily manifest immidiately after one's death. It may take from tens to hundreds of years to remanifest again.

Anonymous said...

kasturi srinivasan

this is very interresting. let me make a few observartions
1. our consciousness is dependant on thought. thought is incapable of being at rest. it is incapable of being without another. thought needs fragmentation and breeds conflict in the process.
to prove this i give you the example of science which is primarily (with the exception of nonlinear science and complex systems), reductionistic and positivist in approach. science is the crowning glory of human thought but also a major source of fragmentation.
2. there is a strong likelihood that beings who operate in a body that is conditioned by the matrix of space-time can never conceive of the absolute because they accept the realiy of fleeting experiences which are what you might call projections on the substratum of the absolute. these projections serve to keep us in this state of intellectual admiration for the manifold wonders of reality and prevent us from seeing the real absolute which is devoid of flux. maybe this is the celebrated Indian Maya!

glad to participate in these debates.
thanks for your visit and comment. keep visitng!

TJ said...

The concept of maya, as proposed by adishankara would come handy to answer this question. Also, the Janaka's dream example.
Both of them say that this relative world with all differences is a false perception like a dream. The reality is that everything is one. Will come up with a post on Janaka's dream and maya.

Again, the conservation of energy as told by arvind and kasthuri, is not just conservation of energy, but energy and matter.[as both of them are interchangeable as per relativity theory.] My earlier post on 'God a perspective' talks abt the materialistic oneness that corresponding to philosophical advaita

Kasthuri said...

@ anand_ramamurthy : Glad to know your thoughts on this.
Two excellent observations. Your first point seems to suggest along the lines that as long as we are in thought process, we'll always have a split. Cessation of thought is the only means to acheive unity.

@tj : Thanks for visiting. I really enjoyed "God - A perspective". Looking forward for Janaka.

Ranj said...

Kasthuri: A late response for this post. But here are my thoughts..

We live in a world (for want of a better word) in many different planes. The one that you are talking about is the spiritual realm but we are as much a part of the physical one as the spiritual one. We have a body that is material, we need air and food (materials) to survive and money has become the means to get them. Ideally, if we were all more tuned into the spiritual plane it would do us all good. Harmony existed in the great old days of Gurukul system of education, of the Hindu caste system even.

Those divisions were not differences. But the moment physical world gained more importance (because of the lack of knowledge, and thinking) - through wars, colonization, ownership etc ... it becomes increasingly difficult for one to pursue the spiritual reality. As simple as that. Kali yugam pa :P Haha.