TOP
TWEETS
SPIRITUAL SPEAK
Teach this triple truth to all: A
generous heart, kind speech, and a
life of service and compassion are
the things which renew humanity.
BUDDHA
IN-DEPTH
UK PM?s RWANDA
GAMBIT HITS YET
ANOTHER HURDLE
llegal migrants entering Britain in hordes is
causing disquiet in the ruling Conservative
Party. Britain?s former Home Minister Suella
Braverman, who was sacked last month, had warned
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak that it was ?now or never?
to check ?mass, uncontrolled, illegal immigration?. A
day after her statement her successor James Cleverly
signed a revised treaty with Rwanda where thousands
of illegal immigrants are planned to be deported to
ease pressure in the UK.
The treaty with Rwanda is causing all the trouble in
the Tory party. The former home minister, a hardliner
on immigration, called for tougher measures to pre-
vent the inflow of migrants. She was critical of the UN
Convention on Refugees and European human rights
legislation for thwarting her plans. The scheme has
also failed to stand legal scrutiny.
The Rwanda legislation has taken yet another toll.
The immigration minister Robert Jenrick in Rishi Su-
nak?s cabinet has resigned because the Rwanda legis-
lation ?does not go far enough?.
I
HOW TO MAKE NEWS:
LEARN FROM NETAS
MK MP Senthilkumar?s reference to Ra-
jasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh as
?gaumutra states? (cow belt) has drawn strong
reaction from the BJP. Another controversy erupted
over the Telangana Chief Minister-designate Revanth
Reddy snide remark describing Telangana?s DNA being
better than Bihar?s and the Kurmi caste to which Bihar
Chief Minister Nitish Kumar belongs. The casteist re-
mark with regional bias did not go down well with Ni-
tish Kumar?s party the Janata Dal (U). In his remark
made before the Assembly elections Revanth Reddy
said, ?BRS chief KCR?s DNA belongs to Bihar. KCR?s
caste is Kurmi. Kur-
mis are from Bihar.
They migrated from
Bihar to Vizianagar-
am, and from there to
Telangana.? This be-
littling was enough to
ignite a political fire
after the elections.
The BJP pounced
on the issue that has
the potential of INDIA
grouping?s unity. Al-
ready the coalition is
showing signs of
cracks with West Ben-
gal Chief Minister
Mamata Banerjee,
former UP Chief Min-
ister Akhilesh Yadav
and Nitish Kumar dis-
tancing from the group. While the remark jeopardizes
Congress? role in Opposition unity, it also shows that
the political leaders do not know how to make decent,
uncontroversial statements. Union Minister of State for
Home Nityanand Rai accused the Congress of stooping
to play divisive politics. Tactfully he said that the remark
came after Nitish Kumar agreed to support INDIA.
There?s no dearth of instances of political leaders
both puny and tall making condemnable remarks and
then attacking one another. Some of these leaders
ensure that politics cannot remain clean and others
sully it with their deeds. It?s politics after all.
D
There?s no dearth of
instances of political
leaders both puny
and tall making
condemnable
remarks and then
attacking one
another. Some of
these leaders ensure
that politics cannot
remain clean and
others sully it with
their deeds. It?s
politics after all
At the core of PM @narendramodi
Ji?s Viksit Bharat vision is people-
led development. https://
nm-4.com/ViksitBharatAmbassador. A
#ViksitBharatAmbassador is every Bhartiya
who seeks to express their pride and let the
voice of India?s growth be heard by one and
all. Take the 100-day challenge and
amplify India?s progress.
Jagat Prakash Nadda @JPNadda
My salute and heartfelt gratitude to our
brave armed forces on the occasion
of Armed Forces Flag Day. They are the
defenders of our nation and guardians of the
borders. Let?s all come forward and contribute
to the Armed Forces Flag Day fund and do our
FMXMRVIGSKRMXMSRSJXLIMVWIP?IWWWIVZMGIERH
for the welfare of their families.
Anurag Thakur
@ianuragthakur
PERSPECT VE 04
Jaipur, Friday | December 8, 2023 ZZZ?UVWLQGLDFRLQ?UVWLQGLDFRLQHSDSHUVMDLSXUWKH?UVWLQGLDWKH?UVWLQGLDWKH?UVWLQGLD
l Vol 5 l Issue No. 182 l RNI NO. RAJENG/2019/77764. Printed and published by Anita Hada Sangwan on behalf of First Express Publishers. Printed at Bhaskar Printing Press, D.B. Corp Limited, Shivdaspura, Tonk Road, Jaipur. Published at 304, 3rd Floor,
City Mall, Bhagwan Das Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302001, Rajasthan. Phone 0141-4920504. l Editor-In-Chief: Dr Jagdeesh Chandra l Managing Editor: Pawan Arora l Editor: Anita Hada Sangwan responsible for selection of news under the PRB Act
have noticed
a rise in the
number of
people who
say they take
it for granted that there is no
afterlife. As heavens and
hells fade from secular so-
ciety, the scientific world-
view offers no decisive
proof about what happens
when the physical body
dies. That should make the
afterlife an open question,
like speculating about
whether a plant orbiting
around a distant star might
have life on it. But some-
how the absence of proof
has made countless people
decide that death is final.
As sticky and complicat-
ed as this issue is, it can be
broken down into three per-
spectives that in themselves
are simple. The perspective
of a devout believer sup-
ports life after death; the
skeptical perspective denies
it; the undecideds stand in
the middle. The fundamen-
tal issue is whether the after-
life can be transformed into
a viable question.
I believe it can, once we
return to basics, including
the most boring basic,
which is to clearly define
our terms. That sounds
boring, but as it turns out,
defining our terms answers
the question.
The most basic term in
this case is consciousness,
because when arguing over
the possibility of an afterlife,
much confusion is caused by
asking the wrong questions.
If you don?t specify what
consciousness is, you wind
up worrying about the sur-
vival of the soul, or of ?me,?
the individual ego-personal-
ity. And if those pitfalls are
avoided, Eastern traditions
are filled with equally mis-
leading notions of Jiva, At-
man, and Brahman, or of
Nirvana and Satori.
If two people agree on
their definition of con-
sciousness, they will agree
on the existence or non-
existence of an afterlife.
For a skeptic whose core
belief is that all things can
be explained through mate-
rialism (data, experiments,
measurements, etc.), there
is no doubt that the afterlife
is spurious?not because it
actually is, but because a
skeptic?s worldview for-
bids it to exist. By the same
token, a devout believer
holds fast to a worldview
where the non-existence of
a personal God is imper-
missible, even unthinkable,
and therefore the afterlife
acquires its reality by as-
sociation with the deity.
Seeing this rigidity on
both sides, is there a defini-
tion of consciousness com-
pletely detached from all
belief systems, which means
the absence of bias, predis-
position, received wisdom,
rumor, myth, group pres-
sure, wishful thinking, fear,
and mental figments of
every sort? I believe so.
Every reasonable per-
son, I think, will accept that
consciousness, as experi-
enced by humans, is the
awareness of two things:
that we exist and that we
experience. By extension,
a reality that cannot be ex-
perienced is moot. By this
measure, UFOs, angels, the
afterlife, and the quantum
vacuum exist on the same
playing field. They are sup-
positions and inferences.
If we toss out supposi-
tions and inferences, what
can we truthfully say about
consciousness? By this I
mean what can we say that
no reasonable person will
disagree with? Here we
run into a complicated sit-
uation because certain as-
pects of consciousness re-
quire extended discussion
and a back-and-forth be-
tween people of good will.
Such a setup is rare, unfor-
tunately, but at least I can
relate a few things that I?ve
been able to convince peo-
ple of over the years.
1
There is only one con-
sciousness. To subdivide it
makes no sense. This point
is lifted almost verbatim
from Erwin Schr?dinger,
the eminent quantum pio-
neer. Philosophically, the
?one consciousness? posi-
tion is common to monistic
schools, because they repu-
diate any true difference,
ontologically, between the
one and the many. Yet when
dealing with everyday peo-
ple, it?s obvious that we all
cling fervently to being in-
dividuals, outfitted with
?my? family, house, body,
mind, and soul. To crack
this allegiance requires ar-
guments like the following:
l When you get wet, do you
call it ?my? wet? Some things
happen to us personally but turn
out to have a general existence.
l If you sing ?The Star-
Spangled Banner? as you walk
down the street, did the song
walk down the street with you?
l If you imagine your
mother?s face, where is that
mental image located? The
brain has no pictures in
it, and no light. When you
imagine your mother?s face,
you don?t consult a directory
of facial characteristics the
way computer recognition
software does--you simply
call up what you wish to see.
l Where is your self located?
There is no neurological evi-
dence of a region of the brain
that contains the self, and
even if researchers claimed
such a region existed, it would
have to contain everything
attached to you as a self,
including your life history.
2
Assuming that the dis-
cussion can crack open the
presumption of isolated, lo-
cal consciousness--there are
many ways to get at this, not
just the few questions listed
above--the second point is
that this ?one conscious-
ness? cannot be located. It
is everywhere, all at once.
This point sounds like a
hard sell, as it would be if
everyone held an advanced
degree in philosophy, I im-
agine. But in everyday life,
the argument is fairly easily
based on physics.
l Cosmologists and quantum
physicists agree that space-
time originated in a domain
(referred to as the zero point,
quantum vacuum state, or the
realm of pure mathematics)
that isn?t in time and space.
l The entire universe, as well
as individual subatomic parti-
cles, emerged from this pre-
created state, which has no
qualities we would recognize
such as linear time, dimen-
sionality, solidity, energy, etc.
l At the very least, all
FUHDWLRQVWRULHVVFLHQWLnFRU
not, converge on creation
of something out of nothing.
Beyond our experience of
reality in spacetime, there is
DnHOGRILQnQLWHSRWHQWLDODQG
unbounded possibilities.
l As reality of space, time,
matter, and energy appeared
and continues to appear,
existence of consciousness
must be accounted for. There
are only 2 viable possibilities
that are taken seriously.
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY
THE AUTHOR ARE PERSONAL
KNOW ABOUT
Consciousness
Having laid out,
in truncated form,
the argument for
consciousness as the
basis of reality, not
everyone may be willing to
follow the clues that lead
to an afterlife. But that isn?t
as important as realizing
that we have tended to ask
the wrong questions.
One can devote a
book to untangling the
various possibilities for
consciousness to persist
after the end of the
body (I wrote one, Life
After Death). In the end,
however, the stubborn way
that old stories cling to us,
and we to them, muddies
the issue and opens
the way for vehement
partisans who refuse to
VHHWKDWWKH\DUHoRJJLQJ
second-hand opinions.
Until we all are willing
to think fresh thoughts
about a worn-out question,
consciousness will
remain constricted. If
consciousness begins to
expand on an individual
basis, there is hope for
clarity. More importantly,
we can begin to bring
centuries of baseless fear
and superstition to an end.
I?d suggest that ending the
superstition of materialism
would be a good start.
SHOULD WE WORRY
ABOUT THE AFTERLIFE?
The most basic term in this case is consciousness,
because when arguing over the possibility of an
afterlife, much confusion is caused by asking the
wrong questions. If you don?t specify what
consciousness is, you wind up worrying about the
survival of the soul, or of ?me,? the individual ego-
personality. And if those pitfalls are avoided, Eastern
traditions are filled with equally misleading notions
of Jiva, Atman, and Brahman, or of Nirvana and Satori
I
DEEPAK
CHOPRA
The writer is MD,
FACP, FRCP founder of the
Chopra Foundation,
a non-profit entity for
research on well-being
and humanitarianism,
and Chopra Global