You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

What did you say? And what did you mean by it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
dattaswami
Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by dattaswami »

ANALYSIS OF GOD IS SUPREME

[Shri Ajay asked: “It is very painful to observe the extent of injustice and corruption taking place even in the case of rulers and due to this, the country is going to dogs. A new leader must come to repair this situation. God must do something”. Shri Ajay posed this question in the context of the depression of Shri Phani for the political failure of the issue of the state. In fact, Shri Swami replied that this issue would be settled in this way only as it happened now. Given below is the detailed reply.]

It is good that you have responded against the injustice and for the justice. If possible, you should also think the best that can be done by you either by taking up some practical step or by taking up some theoretical step through suggestions and propagation of right concepts. You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice whether it is the case of an individual or a community. Such reaction is very important part of your worship to God. God will be highly pleased by such effort from your side involving in the establishment of justice and destruction of injustice since God feels that this is His primary responsibility towards His creation.

Your practical participation in trying to help the primary duty of God is highly appreciated always by God. If one fails in this aspect, any quantity of personal worship of God is useless. God says that He incarnates on this earth mainly to protect the justice and suppress the injustice. This is very important divine quality and contributes mainly to your achievement of divine nature. Therefore, you must develop this attitude within the limits of your capacity, knowledge and analysis. You must live always maintaining this divine nature irrespective of the defeat and success of your trials in establishing the justice against the injustice.

All of the above concept is one side of the coin only. The other side is regarding the actual mechanism of the system arranged by God that involves the history of the case related to the future birth and previous birth. It is also related to the nature of the judgment of God based on several special and specific points of each individual case. The actual proceedings of the system run by the constitution created by God may sometimes differ from your analysis based on limited knowledge. You are not aware of previous and future births (Natvam vettha… Gita). The actual direction of the running of the case depends on the previous and future births known to God alone.

The analysis of the Almighty is also far superior to your limited and inefficient logic. However, you should not be discouraged by the actual proceedings of the case. You are totally justified within your limits. In fact, the proceedings of this entire Universe are beyond your capacity and about which you need not be worried. When the contradiction arises between your effort and the actual direction of a case, do not become emotional to find fault with the proceedings of the Universe, which are based on the direction given by God only. Thus, by criticizing the administration of Universe, you are criticizing only God, Who is the Universal Administrator.

In case of the contradiction between your effort and the path of the world, God is not blaming you since you are putting sincere effort within the restricted limits of your knowledge and capacity. On the other hand, God appreciates the behavior of your good psychology as per the divine expectation. In the case of such contradiction, you are only blaming God by condemning the universal direction and you are not realizing that this is the result of your incomplete knowledge. Therefore, your duty is to support the justice and oppose the injustice within the limits of your knowledge and not to blame God directly or indirectly in case of the failure of your effort due to contradiction by the universal tendency directed by God.

The Gita says that the practical nature of the activities in the Universe is very much complicated and every case is highly specific like the thumb impression. If Prakash is beaten by Manohar, the punishment given to Manohar differs in several ways depending on very minute details of the case and the possibility of psychological transformation of the sinner. For this sin, Manohar may be beaten here itself in this very birth by somebody or may be beaten by Prakash here itself in this very birth or may be beaten by the servants of the Hell in the upper world or may not be beaten by any one at any time since it is the reaction-punishment as Manohar was beaten by Prakash in the previous birth.

When the fact is the last option, people misunderstand that good Prakash was beaten by bad Manohar and nothing happened to Manohar. Your effort to beat Manohar fails if it is the last option. Now, you will start blaming the universal tendency and thereby blaming God indirectly since the direction of motion of any activity in the Universe is totally under the control of God only. Due to the existence of so many complicated options of the deeds of the souls, the Lord said that the analysis of the three dimensional network of the deeds and fruits is very much complicated (Gahanaa Karmano Gatih).

The essence of this message is that you should try to uplift justice and reject injustice within the limits of your knowledge and analysis. But at the same time, when your such good wish and effort are repelled by the forcible universal direction controlled by the divine system, you should not be emotional and should not get any pain or depression. You will be appreciated by God for your behavior within the possible limits since the change of the attitude of the soul towards the right direction is the main aim of God since He does not require even a trace of the contribution of your effort as help or assistance in His administration.

The Lord said in the court of king of Kauravaas like this “If certain people (like Bhishma, Drona etc.,) here have neglected the justice allowing the injustice to win, this does not mean that justice will be defeated and injustice will win. Anyway, I am always there to protect the justice and destroy the injustice. Moreover, such people shall also be punished by Me”. In fact, Bhishma suffered by lying on the bed of arrows and Drona suffered while his head was cut.

In the above given options, the selection of the choice is mainly based on the nature of the psychology of the human being to be changed. According to the suitability, the option is selected by God since the main aim is only to transform the soul and not for revenge through the punishment. The punishment gives only temporary suppression and the permanent transformation can be brought only by the powerful knowledge. Once the human being is convinced through the logical steps of the analytical knowledge, the practice will be spontaneously affected.

For this purpose, God comes down in the human form again and again. Of course, God is engaged always through such activity and this aspect is totally different and should not be linked in the context of the present level. The human incarnation is such Leader as expected by you and such divine program is already going on and you are the best witness of that.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by henry quirk »

dattaswami,

check your private messages
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Iwannaplato »

dattaswami wrote:
I have the courage to ......
I have the broad mind to...
Do you have the courage to consider that the way you are approaching people here is disrespectful?
To wonder if perhaps lecturing people and starting dozens of threads, often in subforums where they do not belong, might be rude and even counterproductive for your own goals?
Do you have a broad enough mind to consider that your own psychological needs might be determining how you approach people and even seem to not really care about their reactions and interests?
Do you have the courage to focus on discussing your ideas rather than vomiting them out, especially given that this is a discussion forum and not a blog?
How did you decide you had courage?
How did you decide you have a broad mind?
Have you decided that you have courage and a broad mind and will never reevaluate?
Can you take feedback and criticism into account and perhaps adjust or even more deeply change your approach to other people?
Is it possible that you think you are sharing good and lovely truths, but actually for you psychologically it is a way for you to feel special and even dominate others?
Could both be true?
What might be a better way to interact with people, one that would show them that you consider them at least potential equals not just receipients of your knowledge?
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Advocate »

The idea of god and the idea of justice are incompatible because god is imaginary and justice is real.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Iwannaplato »

Advocate wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 2:42 pm The idea of god and the idea of justice are incompatible because god is imaginary and justice is real.
What's justice made out of?
And if we apply occam's razor to wherever you find justice, can we not explain everything present there without referring to this imagined entity 'justice'.
Walker
Posts: 14245
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Walker »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Dec 29, 2022 8:25 am
Advocate wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 2:42 pm The idea of god and the idea of justice are incompatible because god is imaginary and justice is real.
What's justice made out of?
And if we apply occam's razor to wherever you find justice, can we not explain everything present there without referring to this imagined entity 'justice'.
What do you think it's made out of, Iwannaplato?
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=616268 time=1672298738 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=616078 time=1672234979 user_id=15238]
The idea of god and the idea of justice are incompatible because god is imaginary and justice is real.
[/quote]What's justice made out of?
And if we apply occam's razor to wherever you find justice, can we not explain everything present there without referring to this imagined entity 'justice'.
[/quote]

Justice isn't material, but you already know that and are being an ass. Something doesn't have to be material to be real. That doesn't mean that it's on equal footing with god, which has no material Or physical being. Justice is a set of circumstances which can be validated as proper. God admits if no validation of any kind. You cannot understand god sufficiencies to develop a test, You cannot develop the test, and you cannot carry out the test.

I refuse to defend justice, which is missing the point that god isn't real.
Advocate
Posts: 3467
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Advocate post_id=616348 time=1672319882 user_id=15238]
[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=616268 time=1672298738 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=616078 time=1672234979 user_id=15238]
The idea of god and the idea of justice are incompatible because god is imaginary and justice is real.
[/quote]What's justice made out of?
And if we apply occam's razor to wherever you find justice, can we not explain everything present there without referring to this imagined entity 'justice'.
[/quote]

Justice isn't material, but you already know that and are being an ass. Something doesn't have to be material to be real. That doesn't mean that it's on equal footing with god, which has no material Or physical being. Justice is a set of circumstances which can be validated as proper. God admits if no validation of any kind. You cannot understand god sufficiencies to develop a test, You cannot develop the test, and you cannot carry out the test.

I refuse to defend the reality of justice, which is missing the point that god isn't real. If you want a discussion about justice, that can be had, but you've got to leave god out of it, because That discussion has gone nowhere for all of history, and it literally cannot.
[/quote]
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Iwannaplato »

double post
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You should always try to support the justice and condemn the injustice

Post by Iwannaplato »

Advocate wrote: Thu Dec 29, 2022 2:20 pm Justice isn't material, but you already know that and are being an ass.
I was asking about your beliefs. I read what you wrote and had questions about your assertions and probably metaphysics. I also mentioned occam's razor to try to make the discussion more efficient.
Something doesn't have to be material to be real
. Great. This separates you out from most scientists. Despite what you think I am doing, I actually don't know how you are going to answer. Now you have, and we can see what happens next. But you are taking a stand on ontology and it seems you are not a monist. It doesn't have to be material to be real. This implies that some things that are real are material, and states openl
That doesn't mean that it's on equal footing with god, which has no material Or physical being.
So, it seems when I read this, that justice is partially material/physical in your system. I am not asking about God. I asked about justice, the thread topic. So...God has no material or physical being. It seems like you are saying that justice has some material or physical being. Is that true?
Justice is a set of circumstances which can be validated as proper.
And those circumstances are not material or are they partially material?

Could someone say that what you are calling the physical part of justice is actually the only part? (this is where occam's razor comes in). And that we are adding an abstract, non-existant entity to our explanation of physical circumstances? And, again, what is the non-physical part of justice? What substance?
God admits if no validation of any kind. You cannot understand god sufficiencies to develop a test, You cannot develop the test, and you cannot carry out the test.
So, what is the test for justice? And if we have two versions of justice, how do we test which is correct or which not correct? hat are the real things that are not material made of? You said someting did not have to be material to be real. Could you give an example of this and say what the substance is?
I refuse to defend the reality of justice, which is missing the point that god isn't real.
I don't think I said anything about god. I asked about jusitice. It seemed implicit in your earlier post that justice could be demonstrated (tested) to be real. I am asking about that in a thread about justice.

And please consider what I wrote about occam's razor in your answer. That really was meant as a time saver if it fit some possible responses I could imagine. Since you said that something does not have to be material to be real AND you said that justice has to do with circumstances, what part of those circumstances cannot be described without using the word justice (or injustice)? Why wouldn't it be more parsimonious to leave out those words when describing those circumstances? And concrete circumstances would likely aid the discussion.
Post Reply