Davos World Economic Forum – the fixers ?

I cant help laughing. I see TV coverage of all the world’s bussiness, economic and political leaders gathering together to network and party over a weekend. And the world press says “they are discussing how to save the world from the current financial mess”
Hang on, are these not just the people that caused the mess in the first place ? Striving as they were towards more and more wealth in the name of entrepreneurship and progress ? How are they going save the world ? Assuming as they do, that the greater their own or their company’s market value, the better off the world was.
What is needed is a complete rethinking of the way wealth is distributed in this world. The people in Davos are too self centered to think that way. Maybe they should all buy little cottages in Davos and stay there for a year or so, while the world re-aligns itself economically.

71 thoughts on “Davos World Economic Forum – the fixers ?

  1. Dear Harb, #39
    I read your recommended threads.
    Please do not hold yourself based upon my comments. And we are otherwise also well acquainted. I think you have done fair amount of grounding on which you can say what is to be said and I do feel what you would write/explain will be one of its kind with the rare gift that you have of ‘being able to communicate that which is more or less non-communixable’. I eagerly await your promised explanation as its turning out to be happening at the right time.

  2. Here is an interesting article for learned people here by one, Mr Ariel:
    And here is my comment:
    Dear Ariel
    well said
    actually it is an old hat
    the Indian saying
    “you percieve only what you are”
    is as old as hills
    reconfirmed recently
    by Ramana in his famous words
    “where is the world except in your mind?”
    Your world is
    like your dream
    being the manifestation of
    you own hidden wishes
    desires and fears
    when ‘you’ are no longer
    you perceive ‘nothing’
    or Everything or One or God!
    or Everything as God!!
    Welcome to revisit Krishana’s Viraat Swarupa!

  3. Dear swaami, hari/God et al,
    I think I am only repeating what I have already thoroughly written on the threads
    So concurring with hari I would also like to stop the ongoing discussion here with the request that those who are further interested in reading about me and my views may refer to the threads above. But if they would have any specific questions/querries they will be welcome to ask to which of course I would gladly reply.
    However, I would write about how even the socalled non-living things (mud)are taking part in the evolutionary progress in the same way as all other socalled living things/species including us human beings as promised to swaami as my time/energy allows.
    For the time being, however, I would copy here a page from my past website (now not working as I no longer feel that interested in promoting it)which though is also there in one of the above threads, the last paragraph of which I think would initiate swaami well into what I am going to write later about non-living things.
    So here it is:
    Welcome to the Website of the book Self-Designed Universe
    At the most fundamental level all we need to explain the ‘evolution’ of the universe and of every system within including the system of species on earth is what the physicists call four basic forces or interactions of nature, i.e., gravitational, electromagnetic, strong and weak interactions. Call it design if you will. But Darwinism is definitely secondary. This is Self-Designed Universe in a nutshell.
    The universe gets wound up into and unwound from four basic forces on its eternal cycles of contraction and expansion or involution and evolution just as, to a certain extent, a tree gets wound up into and unwound from its seed to become the next tree.
    In getting unwound, which begins with and thanks to the big bang, the universe goes through four basic interactions in the order of gravitational, electromagnetic, strong and weak in its every minute space-time accretion as well as a whole.
    In the process the universe goes through mutations at all these levels, from which then Darwinian mechanisms of variations, selection and survival take over in the case of species on earth. Forget that chance causes mutations.
    So no more heated arguments on design and evolution or rather design and Darwinism! Both are two sides of the same coin of the universal scheme of evolution here on earth. The universe’s going through four basic interactions and consequent mutations provide it with basic and design part. Taking over from there by Darwinian mechanisms of variations, selection and survival in the case of species provides it with the secondary and evolution part.
    No more heated arguments on determinism and free will! The universe’s going through four basic interactions till it gets unwound from four basic forces completely provides it with purpose, determinism and arrow of time. While Darwinian mechanism of selection provides scope for the operation of the correspondingly gained free will on it in the case of species on earth.
    Sorry man, you are as much a product of the same simple laws of physics in the form of four basic interactions as minerals, plants, animals and in fact all the other entities in the universe are. All you did with your famous free will was just to play the reaction part to the action part of the interactions. Again, in fact, just as all the other entities unconsciously or subconsciously did at their own levels! Of course you need to re-apprise your understanding of the mere “matter” which you study with physics, for, at its ultimate level of Oneness, it has all the properties which you usually attribute to God.
    Sorry swaami ji for this indirect approach for a while.

  4. To the gods, and the swaamis and their garbs and harbs out here
    May your thoughts and intentions never come true, and may humans continue to evolve in understanding, rationality and intelligence to the detriment of heart-felt intuitions, gut-feelings, passions, emotions masquerading as thought, age-old “wisdom”, tribalism.
    May your neo-cortex value itself, instead of devaluing its difference (that of intellection and abstraction) from other animals.
    May you understand that talking to each other and thinking clearly, without being driven by the animal instincts or godly instincts, is the only way humans are going to solve the tremendous problems facing them and the world.
    May the dichotomy between the inner and the outer created by the illusion of a psychological “I” be obliterated, and not bridged via transcendence.
    May speakers cherishing “unspoken communication” remain unspoken, as when the speak they again bring back their narcissistic views what needs to be left behind.

  5. hari, I thought I will again reply to your post #33 because sometimes the printed word “leads one to where one will rather not” as English writer Sommerset Maugham put it with the result that some important points are left to be made/clarified. So here it goes again:
    [Harb, those are the kind of things where I disagree with you.]
    Welcome, disagreeing is your right, in fact it is only by disagreeing that the next generation will take the next step on the road of evolution.
    [No matter what I would never agree how you equate Mother Terressa and Hitler.]
    This is not the right words to begin a discussion with. If you have decided it beforehand with so strong “no matter what” then there is no point in further talking. No wonder I may sometimes ask for forgiveness and leave the rest to time as in fact I did at another message of yours.
    [You know what socratic truths lead to. ]
    Please banish your fear on this count. Mine and Socratic truths are poles apart.
    Socrate was held guilty on two counts.
    1.He spoke against democracy while the people of the timespace were fed up with dictatorship. And to compound the problem he ridiculed and messed up with one kind or the other of the rulers of the times. I, on the other hand, have full faith in democracy, and take it as a safety valve for loosening to some extent the pent up feelings of the people against rulers. Moreover I do not ridicule anybody because I know all are trying to do their best at their respective places given the difficult evolutionary scheme of things and will learn and unlearn what is required of them at their places anyway.
    2.He spoke against local gods and thus “corrupting the youth.” While I, again on the other hand, think that everything is as it should be, everybody is doing what is required of him or her at their respective timespaces, everybody will learn what is required and will move ahead in terms of evolution.
    Both politics and religion, and individual politics and local gods even more, are very cut-throat and sensitive affairs and one should not lightly poke one’s nose into them. Socrates poked his nose into them at the highest level. It is one thing to merely talk about governing or criticise politicians and quite an other to actually do so. You are simply wrong in comparing what I wrote and that too at a mere blog – describing just a vision from a certain spiritual state – with what Socrates spoke about in front of the general crowds in the streets and involving politics and religious faith of all.
    [The oneness of the Universe and its scheme of things don’t give a license to do as one pleases.]
    Only a fool would say that and only a greater fool would draw this conclusion from this. I would rather say that the oneness rather entraps one into doing various actions and getting freedom from these entrapments then becomes one’s final goal. This is what in fact French Nobel Philospher Jean Paul Sartre meant when he said his famous words “Man is condemned to be free.” This is also the main theme of my book: that we are bound into forces and our goal as soul/spirit is to gain freedom from them. This is what great German philosopher Goethe said in his famous words to the effect “The wise man is delivered from the forces which bind common man.”
    [A whole spectrum of religions have been founded to explain the very point that one will bear the fruits of ones actions.]
    I fully agree with what the religions say. In fact this is why I forgive Hitler because I know that in present life he is being forced to act in a certain way so as to make him to bear the fruits of his past actions and similarly in his past life he was forced to act in a certain way to bear the fruits of still past life and so on right up to his very beginning in whatever subtle form. I am certain though that in this way he is getting rid of past actions and gaining proportionate freedom from forces and actions explained above and consequently gaining proportionate free will with which someday he will reach a state of total freedom/free will.
    [Be it Gita or The Ten Commandments none of them says there’s no freewill. And what one sows with this freewill is what one reaps.]
    Please put the exact words from Gita and Ten Commandments which say this and then I will reply to this statement. Otherwise I have explained above that man is never free but freedom is rather his goal towards which he moves with suffering in terms of evolutionary scheme of things. In fact when one will reach a stage of total freedom one will have nothing to do, and would either sit still like Ramana or go into hiding like Lao Tze.
    If one is bearing the fruits of his past actions how he can be said to have free will? Isn’t he being forced to act in a certain way according to his past actions so that now he can be made to bear the fruits of them?
    As individuals are bearing the fruits of past actions, similarly, in fact, species and generations are bearing the fruits of actions of past species and generations. But these fruits have a silver lining to them as well.
    It is because of the past actions including sufferings of plants that we became animals, it is because of the past actions including sufferings of animals that we became homo sapiens, it is because of the past actions and sufferings of cave man that we became nomadic man, it is because of the past actions and sufferings of nomadic man that we became settled man and made all the present inventions and discoveries for good/enjoyable living.
    On a slight variation of the theme, likewise, it is because of the actions and sufferings of our past generations that we got physical freedom, it is because of the actions and sufferings of your past generation that your generation is no longer in that physical, emotional and mental state of deprivation and oppression in which the past generation was and against which it had to rebel so that your generation can now feel free to talk of free will and to choose your way in comparatively easy environment. Ask any person of the old generation like Shekhar here if he can dare to call his father by his name as some of your generation are doing even if his father had allowed him seeing his seething wish to do so. So we should rather be thankful to our past generation/s and concentrate on our future work than bark up the wrong direction by continuously advising/criticising/finding-faults/condemning them.
    If the past generation says that now we are physically free, that on the face of this freedom all are equal it does not mean that they are now giving license to all to kill/rape thanks to that freedom; it our generation says that now you are mentally/spiritually free, that on the face of that mental/spiritual freedom all are equal that does not mean that they are giving licence to all to kill/rape thanks to that freedom; only that now you are comparatively free physically, mentally and spiritually and so don’t do like slaves as we did on all these levels but use it to now run towards your final evolutionary goal rather than merely walk like us bound as we were with unseen ropes on all these counts. If anybody misuses this freedom obviously because he is as yet on the lower rung of evolutionary ladder we will need to punish him/her thanks to which though he too will move higher up on the ladder.
    If some of the freedom fighter generation had to kill to achieve that freedom it does not mean that they have made killing the norm, they killed so that now you will not have to kill because of similar reasons; if to remove body-killing poverty some overly energetic of the past generation from the back back lands for a while adopted some wrong means to earn money they did so so that you will now not have to soil your hands with those wrong means and will remain clean; if to get rid of soul-killing mental/spiritual restrictions some rarely energetic of past generation had to go all the way to experience the very place from where those restrictions originated but found that there were no such resctrictions there, that the soul in its original/pure form was totally free, but now to get rid of that pent up oppression did some supposedly wrong things on way back to the normal world and told you so that does not mean that you are now given the licence to do whatever you please, rather they have removed the reason for you to do so, that is the soul-killing restrictions with which the past generation had to come up in their formative years and which were really the cause of doing those wrong things in reaction.
    Here I am reminded of a couple of lines under the chapter “For Want of Happiness” from Punjabi writer Gurbakhash Singh Preetlari’s book “Bhakhdi Jeevan Chingiari” which I translated in English a few years back under the title of “The Spark of Life”, which amply demonstrate the atmosphere of restrictions of those times:
    “…All dying of the same disease, which, in fact, is taking epidemic proportions all over our country: the worm of doubts, denials, unnecessary restrictions is eating into their very souls with the result that almost all the youth of our country is getting prematurely old for want of happiness.”
    Mind you he wrote these lines around the time I had begun to enter my youth extraordinarily charged with energy, lot of only rare people. Obviously I would rather explode against restrictions sooner or later than get prematurely old.
    [I don’t subscribe to “Good intentions paving way to hell either” similarly as I don’t subscribe to “Survival of the fittest”or “We’ll all be dead in the long term” and thus may do whatever we like in the short term.]
    As we all have begun from and made by God/One why we will have bad intentions at the very beginning at all? The fact is that we all begin with good intentions but still thanks to the specific needs of the evolutionary scheme of things (or thanks to Krishana who will not give results according to our actions lol) the results often lead to the opposite of what we worked for. This is because after due time any new paradigm must get old and destroyed to pave way for the new one. All the economic progress of US was achieved through capitalism, which means inventors of capitalism had all the good intentions at their heart when they began but vow be to the scheme of things eventually the same capitalism/good intentions have brought US to the present sorry state/hell.
    I myself do not subscribe to the survival of the fittest theory. It has come out of partial knowledge of the evolutionary scheme of things, or of its what may be called Darwinian part while the whole scheme comprises this part as well as what these days is being called Intelligent Design in US and is described in terms of initial action and reaction and subsequent four basic forces or interactions in my book.
    Regarding “We all are dead in the long run”, one cannot have any objection to the way of living of anybody who is of adult age and subscribes to this existentialist truth so long as his way does not harm any other. If he does so he will have to be made answerable, or punished as already described.
    [This is exactly the problem why Socrates was put to death and its not as if people generally do not live after telling the truth.The truth has to be conducive to well being of the Society of the present times as well as eternity.Bargaining one for the other could be catastrophic.]
    Socrate’s was not this problem as I explained above yet your basic premise is true. But for one, as I have already explained both (eternal truth and present truth) are not separate but complementary. With eternal truth we keep the general situation/direction/balance in focus so that we are not overly lost in the mental mechinations of the present truth while with the help of the present truth we run the affairs of the society and punish the guilty where needed as I have explained above.
    Anyway coming again to Socrates, for another, we should not overly fear by taking examples from the men of the West. The basic Truth of spiritual equality of all is inherently ingrained in the very fabric of the people of the East in general and India in particular which is why here you will not find many examples of the kinds of Socrates/Jesus etc. In fact religious texts of the East are full of what I have merely written a line about. Swaami, gave example of Adhyatma Ramayana. Krishana’s meant the same when He showed His Viraat Swarupa, in which he Himself is Hitler, Himself Teressa). Somebody here told me that Tulsi of Ramayana fame even worshipped more the socalled bad characters because according to him they too were acting out their characters at God’s orders but while those who were sent to act out good characters were getting worshipped these former were getting abused and punished serving that very God.
    In fact this is the basis of saying “To forgive is divine” because when one reaches the state of divinity he sees all as one, all doing as forced by the scheme of things, to serve the divine scheme of things and so feels like forgiving them all.
    Ramana often said “Where is the world except in your mind?” And if someone would have replied “Bhagwan, don’t you see killers and rapists in the world,” he would have retorted, “Banish the killers and rapists from your own mind and you too would not see them anywhere.” We see them because they are actually in our own minds either because we are mortally afraid of death from which scheme of things wants us to break free or killer and rapist is there as a part of our own mental make-up in which case again the scheme of things wants us to get rid of them from there. If there is no killer in our own mind killers will see us even though we will be moving before their very eyes. It is the law of nature and I have experienced it myself. It may be like if you are man, animals will not see you provided you do not act like an animal yourself or you are merely alert but do not show any fear of them. Ramana would make snakes and lions recoil from him in this way, that is, by looking into their eyes with his own fearless eyes. If you would like to say that we are not Ramana, we should at least know the way on which we will have to progress to reach his stage which is really our evolutionary goal.
    Again, you will understand though as I have already explained above that by explaining all this I am not giving any people the license to kill and rape. If anybody does so he should be punished. If such words as mine could prompt people then by now all would have become killers since Ved Vyasa has made known such words in writing to all since long according to God ji. As also that all other religious texts too are full of such words, manas ki jaat sabhe ek hi pehchaanbo-wise lol.
    You call a thief a thief and try to prevent him from doing chori you will definitely not succeed. You tell him that whatever, you too are dear to God and the very moment something will begin to stir in him which will eventually take him to shun chori.
    [And such shocking gimmicks may attract attention to whatever we may subconsciously want but will cause bigger troubles generally.]
    I have already gone beyond any subconscious states of mine thanks to what I call my first experience of oneness and know for sure that I only want to reach that state again now in a conscious step-by-step way and nothing else. Which I am sure to reach because it is as per the scheme of things or of its law which states that spirituality intuites rationality takes us there consciously, step-by-step.
    [This way you are giving a Universal license to every criminal and rapist in the world and puting law and order in jeopardy.]
    Have I become that known by just writing a line on a blog or it is just your fear of some kind speaking? Please explore within.
    [The self-proclaimed custodians of the Universe should be very careful about what they say or write.]
    Only the person who thinks himself God can be called the self-proclaimed custodian of the universe and not the one who merely had an insight into its working and wrote an unreadable, obscure book about it and otherwise says he is nobody nor anybody knows him.
    [Or else people will eventually stop listning and the proverbial baby will be thrown out from the bathtub with the water.]
    I have no agenda/interest to make people listen, nor overly worry about baby because I already know baby is not mine but One’s and it is up to ‘Him’ to do whatever he deems fit to do with it.
    [Sorry for being a bit too direct but I couldn’t help it.We’ve had our differences before on such issues.]
    No need to feel sorry, but a lesson can be learnt from “I couldn’t help it” as to how much free will we really have when it comes to walking the talk.
    Anyway, all said and done, no hard feelings as ever.

  6. Dear swaami,
    Refer your #50 [we can see differences amongst sages/realized ones of all times(including present times) though they all have been connected with the same Source. Why so? Some more directional/direct insights to it Harb, that will be welcomed.]
    Just as we individully grow/evolve from childhood to youth to middle age to old age, similarly, cultures grow and similarly the global culture which began with AD era grew – a point proved by the coming of various Ages such as the Dark to Middle Ages to the Age of Romanticism to the Age of Reason etc…
    And just as we see and explain our same one earthly father differently in our different phases, similarly, we see and explain our same One Heavenly Father (God or Eternal Truth and all things connected with It)differntly in different cultural phases.
    This is the reason we or realised ones have differences even though we have seen the same one Eternal Truth or Source.
    PS: Cycles-within-cycles and so cultures-within-cultures further complicate the problem.

  7. Dear Harb, It seems the energies have depleted for the time being to take us further on some of the interesting threads we have been interacting about in the last few days.
    Still I await your direct approach in the promised direction,
    if et all the spirit in/of it still accedes.
    Maybe we will take up the other threads and sub-threads sometime later.

  8. I’m coming swaami, was just waiting for your hungara lol, to make sure you were still there to read it. You will see my explanation here by tomorrow.
    I hope you have found some truth in my post 56 above.
    I had to publish the long post #55 even after saying that I dont want to write more because most of it was completed already so I thought why leave it after spening so much energy, some line of it may serve some purpose somewhere.

  9. Thanks for allaying some of my concerns there @55.
    Although personal communication is welcome if needbe through email,wouldn’t it be better to keep this impersonal here as its a very important general discussion on the major issues that humankind has ever faced regarding humankind and its place in the world and the universe.
    Saying “you wouldn’t understand because of your phase, cycle,etc etc” won’t do.Lets assume that if a person is in discussion here he is in the relevant phase/cycle/culture etc.
    I’ve already acknowledged your theses here but even newtons and einsteins have been proven wrong in many areas.So open discussions might help all of us and the idea itself to evolve as well.No one is really a custodian of the One here but yes if God’s name is used(even in a story here and there),He could come visit again to give His kind viewpoint.
    Regarding quotes about freewill from Gita and Ten commandments etc:
    If there’s no free will why stress on Karma at all.Why would Krishna say”I bring forth future worlds as per one’s Karma of which I take no part.Bad karma results in bad consequences not immediately but when ripe and vice versa for Good karma.” Then He goes on to say that “only for those who constantly remember Me and with supreme Faith fix there minds in Me(freeing them from their sense and ego perceptions) and surrender all their action to Me do I take them out of these circles of good and bad ,of death and rebirth etc.–This is the main message of Gita.Freewill is quite evident with which to either allow oneself to get into the clutches of one’s sense and ego perceptions and do bad, or control them altogather to do good, or the most highest finally to control them to just live in yoga(constant fixation of the mind in God or supreme consciousness) doing neither good consciously nor getting sucked in by forces to do bad helplessly.
    The ten commandments are all about”…Thou shall not do this…thou shall not do that”.If there’s no freewill why ask somebody to do this not that-what has to happen will happen as determined by the four forces.There again freewill is clearly evident.
    Old stories and religions apart.Laws are made and updated both locally and internaionally.If one going with the flow of scheme of things breaks the law he might not be able to explain that in court that he/she was just following entanglement and disentanglement from four forces as laid down by the Universe.
    Yes I agree you have a point there which is that there is this consciousness one thing, and then there are four forces ever ready to entangle or entrap this consciousness.Probably Krishna’s yoga is a practice by freewill to keep consciousness unfettered from these forces.Or even more enjoy them without getting smeared in them within the sociable lawful limits.
    Or as you say in your theory to exhaust each force’s effect on consciousness and evolve into the next phase in the process.But then its not as if gravity leaves one till old age or the desire for opposite sex or desire for genuine respect and recognition for that matter.And does that mean that we have individual consciousnesses which are ever evolving themselves to reach the supreme consciousness?And is this supreme consciousness itself evolving?
    If this theory is really scientific and follows patterns will it in future be able to be put into mathematics or physics by recognising a symbol for individual consciousness or a constant for supreme/collective consciousness?
    If so then what does Krishna(supreme consciousness) mean by “Whenever there is decline in righteousness or unrighteousness is on the ascendent I shall come forth in flesh and blood to relieve the righteous of their woes.” Shouldn’t just there be a natural phase shift with evolution in the individual consciousness of the unrighteous also or do they necessarily have to be put to rest physically.
    Can supreme consciousness by itself take sides as above?
    I might have my answers but would like to know yours?
    Regading my writing “Sorry for being too direct,I couldn’t help it” and lesson to be learned thereof: I see it as a momentary lapse on my part that I too momentarily gave in to one of those powerful forces. Doesn’t mean it had to be that way it just means I need to evolve further with greater vigilance on these forces.
    I could have helped it but I failed for which then I will not blame any destiny or scheme of things but my own lapse of letting myself being carried away.
    Not that the forces will stop making themselves evident they will keep up there work and I’ll keep up mine while enjoying them within my limits as you said “without harming others”etc.

  10. Dear swaami,
    According to my insight all evolution can be explained in terms of four basic forces or interactions with which you may have already become familiar by reading my threads.
    The first of them is gravity. I will explain how living and non-living systems both behave in the same way to handle it, and then from there one can surmise that more or less a similar process goes on for all the subsequent forces though I may also make some comments on them as well.
    Take a lifeless glass of steel and place it on the table (you may take a piece of mud but example of glass will be simple to understand). Now tilt it to a side and leave it, you will notice that it AUTOMATICALLY tilts back towards its center of gravity.
    Now watch a baby who is trying to get up. The force from within* acting as what in Yogic philosophy is called Kundlini Shakti prompts him to get up, but when in the process he seems to tilt/fall to a side his body AUTOMATICALLY reacts to try to bring him into his center of gravity. There is nothing really of his own will/intellect involved here. This basic process goes like this all through his childhood.
    Now the second force in simple is the force of attractions and repulsions. Again take a piece of mud or a boulder of stone or anything socalled lifeless. And try to break it. Why you have to apply force to do it? Because now in reaction to the force which tries to break it its body AUTOMATICALLY tries to remain united, or keep the status quo, or all the different constituents of the body try to remain attracted and united to each other.
    Now after childhood this very force push-evolves the baby now to his youth and further pushes him to fall into attractions and repulsions – mostly attractions towards the opposite sex, repulsions towards the same. And it is not very uncommon to find many youth in this phase tilt out of their emotional centers in this phase. In fact it is what actually the phrase “falling-in-love” involves. Then what happens. Slowly he again comes back to his senses/center, not with his intellect or wisdom but with the passage of time actually because even unknown to him now his emotional body has reacted to the tilt and AUTOMATICALLY tried to bring him back to his emotional center. Actually on an other level the same process happens on family-body level. You have to apply force to break it.
    The third force is the force of confinement and is actually the cause of first our entanglement into various intellectual concepts and then efforts including acquiring of socalled knowledge to get out. In fact on a greater level this forces is the casue of the creation of the species Homo Sapeins – Homo means home or being homed-in in any entanglement and sapien means knowledge which we then acquire to get out of that entanglement.
    And here too our intellectual or causal body then automatically reacts to bring us back to our now third or intellectual center or chakra as people in Yogc philosophy call it. No doubt we try various mediatations to bring our dhyana/mind/intellect back to our center but these are at the most aids to the automatic process and actually with the passage of time we will AUTOMATICALLY come back to our intellectual centers. Which is in fact why sometimes Zen masters seem to say to us to not to make any effort for such things, or for enlightenment, which is really evolution to a certain destination. Of course here we use our intellect according to Darwinian theories to keep us surviving and all that but actually ultimately our body’s automatic reaction brings us back to our center and prepares us to jump ahead on our evolutioary journey because here Darwinism has no say. It is the work of what now-a-days has begun to be called/sensed as design or intelligent design in the US.
    It will be difficult to explain the above force’s behaviour in the case of lifeless mud because here the things have actually gone too deep, to the level of what science calls virtual particles but yet I have no doubt that there too the process is the same becasue if it was not we would not have evolved as alive human beings from non-alive clay, minerals or right from big bang.
    Someday I may put my dhyana to it as well and I am sure I will find the explanation. But as of now please suffice and I am sure you must have got the general drift of the argument.
    Anyways, likewise the last force takes us to our death despite all our efforts to remain alive lol.

  11. And swaami, an other interesting something:
    Thanks to The Perfect One or Perfect One’s Perfect Scheme of Things, right from the past times of my life I can remember and with no knowledge of the forces, chakras or centers, I just took one line from the holy book Guru Granth Sahib to my heart and never forgot that and that was “He mana meria tu sada raho har naale” ( Oh my mind, always abide with Him) and while saying or remembering so I always imagined Him to be one with the center of my being of the times (that is, where my inner dhyana must be at the times, navel, heart, head, spiritual heart) and now I wonder how fitting it was to help me come back to the center of all the forces at all the right even difficult times. And it indeed was and is even to this day. Now I imagine that center sometimes in my head and sometimes one with my spiritual heart – which is supposed to be two digits to the right of our physical heart and where Christians make center while drawing their cross on their chest, or all other religions point towards in one way or the other. I feel someday I may move wholly beyond the head to the heart.
    How at the deeper or deepest level science and spirituality is just One!

  12. If I can recollect correctly the consciousness in the mud just has gravity acting on it so it evolves in ages to plants in the process of getting over gravitation.
    Then while being plants the same consciousness having won over gravity would get entangled into electromagnetic interactions. Thus entangled in the forces of lateral movement that is attractions or repultions the plants would again through ages evolve into animals thus moving hither and thither(animated thus animals).
    Then next the same consciousness would again struggle to get out of the clutches of e/m forces thus evolving into a thinking homo-sapien. Here consciousness would be relatively free from physical attractions and repulsions than animals but would get wound up in the force of thought itself-the strong nucleic force. More and more entanglement in this strong force would cause development of individuation,ego,personal property,social status,family,state ,nation finally leading to greatest products of science to serve the homosapien to the atom bomb to fetch him maximum security as per his mind extremely entangled in this force as was evident in the cold war.
    As in the 40 year cold war this consciousness in the form of man would be entrapped in the biggest scare of his evolutinary history- MAD(Mutually Assured Destruction) and WOMD(Weapons of Mass Destruction). While entangled immensly and stressed out he would not be able to find another solution through the mind which is a representative of the ego.Ego says bomb the other but then the consciousness evolves further getting disentangled from the ego trip knowing fully well somewhere within that bombing the other is not the solution.Thus to disentangle from the strong force he will search within, ask existential questions turning first into a philosopher trying to understand the meaning of life itself.Then learning that there is nothing to understand but rather surrender the mind itself to the the very consciousness it originally was he turns into a poet,a spiritualist, a mystic, a nature lover, a Universal wanderer(not seperate from the Universe but very much the quintessential part of it).Thus hereby the consciousness would get entangled into this weak force of self-realisation, the neutronic force of Oneness with everything.
    Completing the journey from entering the mud during the big bang to realising its supreme self through the topsy turvy journey through the four fundamental forces, Consciousness thus creats whole of the visible matter of nature in the process.
    Swaami,thanks to Harb, I hope I’ve been able to explain how what is going on within us is also going on in the mud at its own level while ultimately serving the same big picture.
    And hope this answers the quest of parallelisms in the universe that engulf you at the moment.
    (Communication of this kind itself is a process being used by the supreme consciousness to help individual consciousnesses reach the final realisation of Oneness)…where words remain no more but only a deep understanding.”Where there is no prejudice by the past and no fear of the future…the moment, only the moment.”

  13. Good explanation of parallelism! You have understood the theory of forces well now.
    Shall revert to your #59 tomorrow as and when my energy allows…

  14. For the time being I may only add:
    There are two ways to realise God
    one is to surrender
    and the other is to inquire
    Who am I?
    In both the cases
    you come out of your
    self-created whirlpool
    within the natural flow
    I have already described
    under “the purpose of life’
    and begin flowing with the flow*
    (read yours words of Krishana
    where He speaks of surrender and
    of “constantly remembering him”
    and then my words given below in which
    I have describe that when you are
    flowing with the flow your very living
    is constantly remembering Krishana)
    Anyway, now the question arises
    do you still have free will
    after the surrender
    or, after receiving the answer
    to the all-important question?
    And then an other question
    can anybody who has thus
    or found answer to the above inquiry
    still harm others
    not to talk of kill and rape?
    And still an other question
    can one
    hearing/reading about surrender etc
    from such lofty discussions/books
    as here, as from Gita will be
    prevented to some extent
    from killing or harming others
    or prompted??
    *This is the very way we progress on our search for God/One. First we take Him as separate from us and so remember Him again and again and find solace and happiness in it (this is surrendering). Then we go beyond it and find Him in ourselves, as one with us (this is when you find answer to the question Who am I?). Then we simply live and in our very living is hidden His rememberance/presence. Then we just act spontaneously, without the thought for whose stake our actions are, that is, whether for us as individuals or for the scoiety as a whole, and take whatever comes in our wake and remain satisfied with it. This is flowing with the flow as I often say.

  15. hari,
    Regarding explaining in the courts I am sure you have not completely understood my scheme of things through entanglements and disentanglements or its phrase “going with its flow.” It is all-inclusive or involves everything as I will explain below. (Sign > in the below given paragraphs means ‘leads to’.)
    Entanglement (like falling into loves, hates, into emotional entanglements)
    > action with up-to-date gained FREE WILL (like resisting so far as possible to disprove the saying that love is blind, like avoiding jealousies, hates with others who also fall for the same person
    > yet finding later that because of lack of enough free will on the face of the emotional entanglement, because of “momentary lapse” because of the same one nevertheless fell into love and that too blindly or with wrong person, also that one nevertheless fell into hates
    > ultimately to courts > punishment > rethinking things in isolation, in the process finding where one went wrong under the influence of emotional entanglements > moving ahead on the evolutionary ladder as well on the ladder of gained free will > leading to the non-repitition of similar entanglements, similar action, and so on.
    An imaginary scene/dialogue in the courts were one to mention my theory of entangelement to the judge would be:
    Accused: Sir, I did wrong because according to Harb’s theory of evolution I was entangled into emotional attractions and repulsions. I tried to resist myself with all the available free will at my command at the time but yet it did not prove sufficient to resist the pressure of entanglements. So I should be excused.
    Judge: But my dear fellow, I too have read Harb’s theory of evolution. It also says that one will also have to disentangle from the entanglements to move ahead on the ladder of evolution and this is possible only if one gets punishment for his ‘wrong’ doings even though under the influence of entanglements. Because it is only through punishment and suffering that one can move ahead. So I send you to solitary confinement for two years so that you will cooly think why and where you went wrong and in the process evolve from an emotional youth to a reasonable adult.
    And so on which you, hari/jim can yourself write.
    I may also add here that flowing with the scheme of things is not the same as flowing with the flow which we usually use here too often, though their obvious meaning seems identical. Here the difference is under what circumstances or for whom we use them.
    In flowing with the flow a sage (Note, NOT ME, I dont think my self as one, I am better as ‘me’ whatever I am) has achieved almost total free will possible for human beings through already having gone beyond all effective entanglements in the process. He now has no longer any situation to use his free will though, for, the element of ego on which this free will thing actually hinges has already gone letting the free will thing also fall flat in the absense of that hing. All he has to do is to arrange for a little food, little water, little wood, little air and shunshine and little pleasures and he can arrange all these like a child unmindful of his free will.
    An other way of describing the difference may be that a normal person is forced to flow with the scheme of things while a sage does so on his own even unmindful that he is doing any such thing.
    Hope it makes things a bit clearer.

  16. Dear harijim, I wrote this response sometime back but dd not publish thinking that I may not be misunderstood in some way even though I have written it in all sincerity. But now on second thoughts I have decided to publish it because I think that no doubt it may contain some lines which can be misunderstood yet it may also contain even more lines which may have some sparks of truth in them to add to anybody’s knowledge here. So here it goes, excuse for the first and welcome if you have something good to say for the second.
    Honestly if I were to keep it purely impersonal I would not respond to anyone who would say that “I might have my answers but would like to know yours…”
    To me it shows some subtle intention to play down the other person. As if the questioner knows all but wants the questioned to put to some test obviously to find fault with his answers and thus play him down.
    I would simply have said to such a questioner, please if you have answers and they satisfy you I am ready to concede that they must be right and am not amenable to waste more energy on them. For, I am satisfied with mine and according to me one argues only when one has any doubts about his answers and wants to get the support of any other body. I dont want to get the support of any other body, in fact for anyone who has seen certain things directly “all is clear” as per an already given poem here and he can then only respond to people’s querries who genuinely want to ask his views to benefit from them and not argue or discuss. They may raise more questions later, raise doubts, ask for clarifications, but they cannot begin in the way that they have the answers. Yes, if they had said that they have the answers but they do not feel fully satisfied with them and want my input then that is something else. I don’t think it is so in your case here.
    But as I have been in your boots myself in my youth (and may have shadows of that even now), and so know that you cannot for the time being understand this, this effort at ‘playing down the other’, including having the added haughtiness of being or masquerading as God whenever you feel like I will set this problem aside and continue with my response.
    Moreover, though I will respond I cannot agree with you that with our socalled discussion I am helping humankind solve any of its issues. Once when I was around my mid-twenties I did spend enough time and energy to think about humankind, to think why there was so much suffering, why there were murders of innocents and so on but then a certain voice from within told me to not to think like a “tatihri” that only you are supporting the sky of humankind on your legs. And I at once understood: You did not make this world, whosoever made it must know the how and why of everything, must know how and when to set it right, why are you assuming ‘His’ role, why are you bothering for the whole humankind, why not limit yourself to your own small kind, family or whosoever? So I am making this discussion here in the later spirit, that it will clear something between us or at the most give a beneficial line here and there to anyone who will also happen to read, beyond it I cannot assume anything.
    I will concede though that like Alexander it may be in your youthfulness that you want to win/help the whole world/humankind but certainly it can not be the same for old Diogenes. For him only a little local sunshine was enough and so it is for me. Only a little sunshine/local discussion to clear some doubts of some of us here or giving us some ray of wisdom there.
    No problem discussing my four forces based evolutionary theory though or rather its details, even though I can in no way compare it with the works of hard scientists like Newton and Einsten. Mine is of a different nature. It is the next version of a mystics experiencde of oneness – where after having experienced oneness and after having again realised it sort of consciously he puts himself a question and directly sees the answer. So like their experience of oneness it cannot be discussed as to its overall direct vision but yes certainly as to knowing more and more of its details or to clear certain points or to tie some loose ends on details side. Which I am sure you are most fit to help me do though or are even able to do yourself. Given your #62, I wonder if it ISN’T really your life’s work.
    Regarding quotes about freewill from Gita:
    Here I wonder if bowing to your or God Ji’s advice I should really not go silent (I am going silent shortly anyway). Just as Veds are for general people, Upanishads for literati, the likes of Ashtavakra Gita for rare, similarly there is some knowledge which is
    even beyond, for the rarest. For it can only be understood by rising above even being human beings. It is sort of “It is what it is, it is the way it is, irrespective of whomsoever, living or non-living, it involves.” But since I have also already explained in the previous thread that yet it will include giving punishment to so-percieved wrong-doers in the human context I feel there should be no harm in giving it here for now it is more likely to add to anybody’s understanding here than do him harm.
    As I have already written somewhere “if chairs were to find God they will find Him four-legged.” And then the most advanced of them will put the words in their God’s mouth AS IF ‘he’ is a chair, and those too to be understood by other chairs. Similarly, human beings have imagined God to be in their image, that is, as some superhumanbeing and then have put words in ‘His’ mouth as if he really acts LIKE US human beings. But that was some 3000 years ago if not more. Now when we/science has advanced far ahead it is time we understand those words in the light of our
    present knowledge and experiences. And that means among other things in the light of my theory.
    Now, to me, the world (and within that the worlds of all individual entities including human beings) come and go in eternal cycles and is not created by any Lord at his own sweet whim. What is beyond – which does not take part as per Krishana words, is indescribable What Is, which includes the world in it though, and again is certainly not humanlike.
    Next, karma for the universe is what was there in the singularity at the very beginning of the universe, like karma for a tree at a certain timespace within is what is there in the seed in the very beginning of the tree, karma for a
    man is what is there in his mind at the very beginning of his life and so on, but all these later karma must be understood in the light of the Karma of the universe, as carriers of the karma of the universe further and will
    SIMPLY UNWIND THEMSELVES COME WHAT MAY for the above purpose at due timespaces.
    The universal scheme of things certainly is the game of duality, that is, it just could not move forth without right having left joining it, up having down, good having bad, with one just to create/define/make work the other and finally it is to be understood as such. Good karma creating good consequences etc just means that in the
    universal scheme of things one type of karma will create one REQUIRED side of the scheme of things and the other will create the other REQUIRED SIDE of the scheme of things.
    Just as Krishana’s words that “when things go to one extreme I come forth in flesh and blood to set them right or move them the other way” simply mean that it is in the very scheme of things, comprising of matter and energy thanks to their what science calls fine-tuning properties, that when things move to one extreme from within the scheme itself comes the seed of moving them to the other side/extreme. Just like out of order comes chaos and out of chaos comes order.
    Regarding surrendering to Krishana’ etc, Ved Vyasa knew that in the scheme of things there will come certain phases {one sort of youth phase and the other sort of old age phase, one where surrender will solve the problem and the other where inquiry as to who am I will solve it) where human mind, itself the product of duality, will not be able to solve the question of good and bad analytically enough to carry on normal living, hence he devised a way to help them go through these phases by simply sort of bypassing them in one way or the other. Surrendering to “Krishana” and thus going beyond the thought of good and evil was one such way. Non-believers simply solved this very question by devising a saying “Everything is fair in love and war.” Anyway, and the other is to enquire, by which the ripe ones come out of the whirlpool
    like situation in which they are and find themselves again flowing with the flow like a child and that means unmindful of good and evil. So, whether you like it to be said through a human-like God if you are one of the common
    folks or like to understand it as it really is the idea is to pass through those phases by shutting your dividing mind for a while. More on flowing with the flow and free will you can read in the previous thread.
    Regarding your saying that one will not be able to say in court etc I have already explained in the previous thread which was actually copied from this writing because then I thought perhaps I should not publish the whole answer.
    [Yes I agree you have a point there which is that there is this consciousness one thing, and then there are four forces ever ready to entangle or entrap this consciousness.Probably Krishna’s yoga is a practice by freewill to keep consciousness unfettered from these forces.Or even more enjoy them without getting smeared in them within the
    sociable lawful limits.]
    In the light of our present knowledge I will prefer to call it our efforts as physical/emotional/intellectual
    mind/bodies to come to our respective centers of forces and then practise staying there as far as possible with our gained free will. Enjoying within sociable lawful limits will depend upon how far we have broken free from the
    entanglements relevant to that particular force or center.
    [Or as you say in your theory to exhaust each force’s effect on consciousness and evolve into the next phase in the process.But then its not as if gravity leaves one till old age or the desire for opposite sex or desire for genuine respect and recognition for that matter.And does that mean that we have individual consciousnesses which are ever evolving themselves to reach the supreme consciousness?And is this supreme consciousness itself evolving?]
    Not ever evolving but yes evolving through cycles so that at every next cycle the effect of entanglement is getting less and less or becoming subtle and subtle. On a greater scale we are evolving as a part of the universe to eventually reach via angels, stars what you call Supreme Consciousness and I call What Is Is. It is like a blood cell of my body may evolve fully as a blood cell but then may jump over (with its consciousness havng gotten refined to that level)to become a nerve cell and undergo the similar cyclical process from there and so on.
    ON the universal level we are evolving till acquiring various bodies on higher and higher planets (you can see the details in the book)we finally become stars and explode/merge into indescribable dust or nothingness or what you
    have. The phrase Supreme Consciousness is a creation of human mind applicable up to the end of human level but as I explained above, things go beyond and at the end we merge into the indescribable Void or What Is as sort of stardust.
    [If this theory is really scientific and follows patterns will it in future be able to be put into mathematics or physics by recognising a symbol for individual consciousness or a constant for supreme/collective consciousness?]
    Scientists have already tried to formulate such a theory in mathematics but in the process found that there come zeros and infinities in those formulations or equations which to me really represent that “Consciousness”. They even found a way to go around them by a process they call re-normalization (I have described a bit of it in the book)yet they could not find it fully satisfying theory because such a theory will need the grandunification of not only of all objective world but of subjective world alongwith it as well and that means the person whosoever will
    try to find such a theory himself. No wonder then science cannot go there and that point can only be self experienced as mystics do. But the problem with mystics is that they then no longer can couple that to the objective world in the same way science could not couple thier theory to the subjective world. I was fortunate to first know about science’s latest developments and then go far the other side, and yet have the sense left to ask myself a question belonging to the hard objective world, yet in all truthfulnes I too cannot bring my theory to join to objective world in the strickly hard-science way. Even going beyond, it is a fact that from the standpoint of what you call Supreme Consciousness there is really no world to describe. But then there will also be no world to describe to. Or the world is there but just for lving like sort of a child but not for describing.
    [If so then what does Krishna(supreme consciousness) mean by “Whenever there is decline in righteousness or unrighteousness is on the ascendent I shall come forth in flesh and blood to relieve the righteous of their woes.” Shouldn’t just there be a natural phase shift with evolution in the individual consciousness of the unrighteous also or do they necessarily have to be put to rest physically.Can supreme consciousness by itself take sides as above?
    Already explained, it is just in the scheme of things that when things go to one extreme they already carry the seeds of moving to the opposite direction/extreme. It is just as the universe begins from big bang: Taking that it is a game of matter and energy, matter compressed beyond a certain point explodes and exploded beyond a
    certain point compresses.
    [Regading my writing “Sorry for being too direct,I couldn’t help it” and lesson to be learned thereof: I see it as a momentary lapse on my part that I too momentarily gave in to one of those powerful forces. Doesn’t mean it had to
    be that way it just means I need to evolve further with greater vigilance on these forces.]
    Yes, some lapses are momentary, we or somebody else brought it to our notice, some more may be longer, we may not be even aware of them or not allow others to being them to our notice as of now because of one reason or the other, but anyway, the point is that we need to be vigilant and evolve further till the time we suffer in WHATEVER way and that means till then we have no complete free will.
    [I could have helped it but I failed for which then I will not blame any destiny or scheme of things but my own lapse of letting myself being carried away.]
    Destiny or SOT is for understanding, we or our limited free will for blaming, till the time we achieve total free will, for, then having served its purpose there will remain neither more destiny nor though free will for that matter. Becoming would have reached its evolutionary goal of Being. Though only to begin again.
    Wish you all the best!

  17. On reading the above post an immediate question may arise that if all karma are to automatically unwind themselves come what may then do the bad people have no chance of correction?
    The answer is that for one, the scheme of things is such that from one extreme one goes to the other and from the other to the one, and in the process goes on gaining free will and hence reforming. (like good intentions eventually proving bad and bad – which puncture the equilibrium of the present setup to eventually make way for the next – good lol).
    And for an other, all will be gaining more and more free will on whatever side they may be at any given phase so that finally all will merge into Superconsciousness or What Is or what you have. So really there is nothing amiss.
    However, it is true that finally one will have to get disentangled from good karma as well. I think it is written in some religious text already, which now I cannot remember. (Perhaps it is also written in Gita?)

  18. I may also add that uptill now I have found only one person who has seen the scheme of things as from beyond humans, that is, 18th century muslim poet Rumi. There may be a few more but his is the most direct mention of this fact as is clear from his following poem “I Died as Mineral”:
    I died as a mineral and became a plant,
    I died as plant and rose to animal,
    I died as animal and I was Man.
    Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
    Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar
    With angels blest; but even from angelhood
    I must pass on: all except God doth perish.
    When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,
    I shall become what no mind ever conceived.
    Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence
    Proclaims in organ tones, ‘To Him we shall return.’

  19. Compare the above words of Rumi with what I wrote in my book guided by my theory of evolution
    through four basic forces or interactions(Take Mosc to represent God):
    “Yesterday we were animals; a day before, plants; a couple of days before, minerals; prior to that, Mosc. Tomorrow we shall be supermen; a day after, almost unrecognizable but as superior to man as man is now superior to animals; and then, after a long time, first constantly decreasing corporally but increasing cerebrally, then even decreasing cerebrally and changing perhaps to lumps of pure light or intelligence, we shall merge indistinguishably again into Mosc…”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.