LIMITATIONS OF FREEDOM IS ESSENTIAL

The idea that limitations on freedom are essential is a nuanced and often
controversial perspective, but it's one that has deep philosophical roots.
It hinges on the balance between individual autonomy and collective
responsibility, the tension between personal desires and the greater good.
Here are some key ways in which limitations on freedom can be seen as
necessary:

1. One of the oldest ideas comes from philosophers like Jean-Jacques
Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes. They argued that in any society, individuals
agree—whether implicitly or explicitly—to give up some of their absolute
freedoms in exchange for security, stability, and the protection of their
rights. The classic example is the idea that one does not have the freedom
to harm others. If everyone were free to act however they wished,
regardless of the consequences to others, society would descend into chaos.
Thus, limitations on freedom are seen as necessary to maintain order and
ensure that no one's rights are infringed upon.

2. True freedom isn't just about doing whatever one wants. Freedom without
responsibility can lead to harm, both to oneself and others. For instance,
a person may feel "free" to drive recklessly, but this threatens the safety
of other people on the road. In this way, freedom and responsibility are
interconnected, and restrictions are required to ensure that people do not
abuse their freedoms to the detriment of others.

3. In a society, the greater good sometimes requires sacrificing individual
freedoms. The example of public health is a powerful one: during a
pandemic, for instance, certain freedoms may need to be limited (like
freedom of movement or the choice not to wear a mask) to protect the health
of the broader population. The tension here is between individual liberty
and the responsibility we all have to others. If every individual were free
to act only according to their desires, the outcome could be disastrous for
society at large.

4. One of the most frequently cited arguments for limiting freedom is the
harm principle, articulated by John Stuart Mill. In his work On Liberty,
Mill argued that individuals are free to do anything they wish, as long as
their actions do not harm others. If one's freedom causes harm—whether
physical, emotional, or psychological—to another person, then society has
the right to step in and impose limits. This framework allows freedom to
flourish, but with boundaries that protect others from harm.

5. Interestingly, limitations on freedom can sometimes be necessary for
true freedom. In oppressive regimes, the restrictions placed on people's
lives are, of course, meant to subjugate them, but in democratic societies,
laws and regulations exist to prevent oppression. Take civil rights
movements as an example: the history of fighting for freedom is, in some
sense, a struggle to remove the limitations on one's ability to live
freely. The limitations in this case aren't about curbing freedom, but
ensuring it for all people.

6. Sometimes, the most profound limitations on freedom are not external but
internal. Human beings often limit themselves by their own values,
priorities, and ethical frameworks. A person who values honesty, for
example, may limit their freedom to deceive others, or someone who is
committed to environmental sustainability may restrict their own
consumption or waste. These self-imposed limitations are, paradoxically, a
form of freedom—they are part of a greater exercise of autonomy, where one
freely chooses to constrain themselves in pursuit of a higher goal.

7. Without legal limitations on freedom, it's difficult to imagine how a
society could function without sliding into lawlessness. Laws provide a
framework that defines the boundaries of acceptable behavior. However, laws
are not only legal constructs but are also moral constructs that reflect
the values of the society that creates them. Sometimes, the most pressing
need for limitations comes from the shared moral belief that certain
actions—such as theft, violence, or discrimination—are not acceptable.

8. Another way to think about limitations on freedom is through the lens of
psychological freedom. For example, addiction can severely limit a person’s
actual freedom, even if they still technically have the freedom to make
choices. Likewise, psychological pressures like anxiety, fear, or societal
expectations can restrict a person’s freedom to express their true self. In
this way, freedom isn’t just about the absence of external limitations, but
about the inner capacities to choose and act authentically.

9. There's also an existential paradox in the notion of unlimited freedom.
If freedom were boundless, it could lead to overwhelming choice paralysis
or nihilism, where individuals cannot decide how to live or what matters,
because there are no limits on their actions. In a world where there are no
limits, there's also no meaning to the choices people make. Limits, then,
may be seen as the very thing that makes freedom meaningful—because without
them, there’s no direction, no purpose, and no real capacity for personal
growth or societal progress.  In sum, limitations on freedom aren't
necessarily contradictory to freedom itself; rather, they are often the
structures within which freedom can thrive, particularly when considering
the needs of others and the importance of living in a cooperative,
functioning society. The balance between individual liberty and social
responsibility is one of the fundamental challenges of human existence.
 [THE PARADOX OF FREEDOM]



10   Yes, the Vedas do speak about the limitations of freedom, though in a
way that’s often more metaphysical, ethical, and spiritual rather than
legalistic or political, as in Western philosophical traditions. In Vedic
thought, freedom is closely tied to Dharma (righteousness, moral law, or
cosmic order) and Karma (the law of cause and effect), which implicitly
provide limitations to individual actions in the interest of spiritual and
societal harmony.

Here are some key ideas from the Vedas that touch upon the limitations of
freedom:

11. Dharma (Cosmic Order and Righteousness):  Dharma is perhaps the most
central concept in Vedic thought, and it provides the framework within
which freedom can exist. Freedom, in this sense, isn’t about absolute
liberty to act as one pleases, but about acting in accordance with the
natural order and moral law. Dharma places limits on freedom because it’s
believed that individual actions must align with what is right, just, and
in harmony with the cosmos. The Vedas describe a world where each person
has a specific duty (Svadharma), and when one acts outside of their dharma,
it leads to imbalance, chaos, or suffering. For example, in the Rig Veda,
it is said that the universe itself functions according to a divine law
(Rita), and human beings must align with this cosmic law to maintain
harmony. Actions that violate this order (even if they are done in the name
of personal freedom) ultimately lead to Adharma (wrongful or unethical
actions) and consequences that may undermine one's true freedom or
spiritual well-being.

12. Karma (Law of Cause and Effect):    The Vedic texts make it clear that
Karma restricts freedom in the sense that all actions have consequences.
You are free to act as you wish, but every action will create either
positive or negative consequences for yourself and others, both in this
life and in future lifetimes.  In the Upanishads and other Vedic
literature, there is an understanding that individuals are free to pursue
their desires (Artha and Kama), but they are not free from the results of
their actions. Therefore, true freedom isn’t about acting impulsively
without regard for consequences but understanding and accepting the moral
and spiritual limitations of one’s actions.  This principle is very much in
line with the idea that unlimited freedom can lead to suffering if it is
not tempered with wisdom, mindfulness, and moral responsibility.

13. SOLE (SOUL)  Freedom from the Cycle of Rebirth (Moksha):   ltimately,
the Vedas focus on the idea of Moksha, or liberation from the cycle of
birth, death, and rebirth (Samsara). In this context, freedom is understood
not as the freedom to act arbitrarily, but as liberation from the
limitations imposed by Karma and ignorance. The freedom described in the
Vedas is about transcending the illusion of self-centered desires and
achieving union with the divine, where one is free from the constraints of
worldly attachments and desires. In the Bhagavad Gita, for example, Lord
Krishna speaks of acting selflessly, in accordance with one’s dharma,
without attachment to the fruits of actions, which leads to true freedom.
To achieve this state of spiritual freedom, a person must discipline their
mind and actions—self-control and renunciation (tapas and vairagya) are
seen as necessary limitations in order to realize ultimate freedom.

14. Ethics and Social Duties (Sadharana Dharma):   While individual freedom
is important, the Vedas emphasize collective harmony and social
responsibility. In the Manusmriti, a text that’s associated with later
Vedic thought, there is a focus on the importance of social duties and the
limitations of individual actions for the greater good. For example,
individuals have specific roles within society—whether as students,
teachers, warriors, or merchants—each of which comes with responsibilities
that limit personal freedom. These roles ensure the smooth functioning of
society and uphold justice and righteousness. Acting outside of one’s
prescribed role or dharma is seen as a violation of both individual and
societal harmony.

1 5. Self-Discipline (Yamas and Niyamas):  In the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali
(which are rooted in the Vedic tradition), the first two limbs of Ashtanga
Yoga—Yamas (moral restraints) and Niyamas (observances)—directly address
the limitations on freedom that a person must voluntarily take on to attain
spiritual freedom. Yamas include ethical limitations like Ahimsa
(non-violence), Satya (truthfulness), Asteya (non-stealing), and so on,
which limit freedom in order to prevent harm to others and to cultivate
purity in one’s actions. Niyamas include practices like Santosha
(contentment), Tapas (discipline), and Svadhyaya (self-study), which
restrict personal indulgence and promote self-improvement. These
limitations are not seen as restrictions but as tools to help achieve
greater freedom in the spiritual sense: freedom from ignorance, ego, and
attachment.

16. The Role of the Guru (Spiritual Guide):   The Vedic tradition often
emphasizes the importance of a Guru, or spiritual teacher, who can help
guide an individual on the path to spiritual freedom. The limitations
imposed by the Guru are seen not as repressive but as necessary for guiding
the student toward higher truths.  In many Vedic stories and teachings,
individuals must surrender their own personal desires and ego in order to
gain true freedom. This idea is similar to the spiritual concept of
renunciation, where freedom comes not through indulgence in desires, but
through transcending them.

17. Vedic Meditation and Mind Control:    In Vedic philosophy, true freedom
is also about mastering the mind. The Brahman or supreme reality is often
understood as beyond the limitations of the material world, but to realize
this, one must transcend the limitations imposed by mental distractions,
emotions, and attachments. Meditation, ascetic practices, and self-control
are ways to limit the ego and mind’s freedom to wander aimlessly.  The
Chāndogya Upanishad, for example, speaks of the importance of controlling
the mind in order to access higher states of consciousness, which leads to
freedom from the cycle of birth and rebirth.  In conclusion, the Vedic view
of freedom is not about unrestricted individualism or unrestrained desire.
Instead, it is about acting within the boundaries of Dharma, Karma, and
self-discipline in order to attain spiritual freedom and ultimately
Moksha—liberation from the cycles of suffering and rebirth. Freedom is seen
as something that comes not through indulgence or the removal of all
limits, but through aligning oneself with universal law, ethical behavior,
and spiritual discipline.  (PHILOASOPHY OF DHARMA KARMA MOKSHAA FREEDOM)

18       Freedom has limitations    K Rajaram IRS  18925

On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 07:03, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> --
> *Mar*Free Nature-Vs-Captive Nature
>
>
>
> In the totally free and healthy nature, every organism experiences
> continuous discoveries, revelations and enlightenments, with no time for
> questions. Actually questions could not be even conceptualized. Total
> concentration in rapture, creates the Heaven, where answers flow without
> the need for questions. The flow of answers is as continuous revelations,
> creating macro identity, in every organism. Life takes to collegiality.
> Education does not need any training. It flows on its own. The environment
> teaches as experiencing.
>
> In that free nature, the mind becomes blank because of the enchanting
> rapture. Actually even today, if you just pay attention to an area thick
> with grasses, plants, trees, and diverse flora and fauna, experience takes
> over without scope for questions.
>
> The Universities need nature under captivity. In the totally free nature,
> no university can function with its drill of questions, answers and debates
> about questions and answers. When an idea occurs in the free nature,
> automatically answers happen. But in a University today, no question gets
> complete answer and no answer, answers completely. Every answer creates
> many more questions, on and on. The captive nature creates the sickness
> -‘Question-Answers-New Questions Restlessness’. As a result one sits
> separately from nature, becoming the outside spectator of nature, fretting
> with unending questions and answers which create more questions, instead of
> being a limb of nature, participating in nature. One becomes the scientist
> or the severed limb.
>
> Look at a three month old baby in sleep. Often you find it smiling in
> sleep. Because it is re-experiencing its life in its tiny macro world
> before birth, its mother’s womb. The free nature actually is a very big
> womb, which continuously enlightens without any scope, possibility or even
> the conceptualizations of questions.
>
> Today we simply cannot accept freedom to nature. Actually we feel terror
> stricken about the totally free nature, as we cannot do economics or
> science and inflict technology. At the most fundamental level means, the
> substitution of nature with machines after disabling nature.
>
> The basic paradigm from where you have to start living is answering this
> question, are you part of nature, part of the planet earth or are you the
> outside observer of nature, with no need for any emotional bond to nature,
> to enable your sciencing and living the economic life of industrialization
> etc?
>
> Next do you want to live experiencing discoveries, revelations and the
> resulting rapture, or live with questions whose answers create more
> questions, as you destroy nature, removing the flow of answers without the
> need for questions?
>
> If you accept that you are a limb of nature, then nature becomes God, and
> the air, water,land,sky,space , every activity of nature becomes the flow
> of Theism, where one experiences the God that grants and answers.
>
> Free nature and Theism go together; there is simply no scope for Atheism.
> On the other hand Modern Economics and Atheism go together.
>
> Every University must have a ‘Free Nature Park’ without human Tampering So
> that the students’ experience the flow of answers without even the need for
> questions.
>
> YM Sarma
>
> Chat gpt
>
> This thought piece by YM Sarma draws a deep and poetic contrast between *“free
> nature”* and *“captive nature,”* using them as metaphors for two distinct
> ways of knowing, experiencing, and living.
>
> Here's a summary and brief reflection to help you digest and interpret the
> message:
> ------------------------------
>
> *🌿 Core Ideas*
>
>    1. *Free Nature = Rapture + Revelation + Oneness*
>       - In truly free nature, beings don't ask questions — they
>       experience *direct knowing*.
>       - Revelation is continuous; learning is automatic and intrinsic,
>       not taught.
>       - Nature is like a living womb, constantly birthing awareness
>       without conceptual mediation.
>    2. *Captive Nature = University + Inquiry + Separation*
>       - Modern education, science, and economics “capture” nature to
>       study and exploit it.
>       - In this model, learning is disjointed: answers raise more
>       questions, creating restlessness.
>       - Humans become observers, not participants — like “severed limbs”
>       of nature.
>    3. *Child Metaphor and Theistic Outlook*
>       - The smiling baby is an image of pure, pre-conceptual experience —
>       untainted by questions.
>       - Theism is described not as belief, but as experiential unity with
>       living nature.
>       - Atheism and economics, in contrast, are seen as arising from the
>       severing of this bond.
>    4. *A Call to Action*
>       - We must choose: remain observers caught in endless questioning,
>       or return to being participants.
>       - Universities should include untouched “Free Nature Parks” where
>       students can experience rapture and intuitive understanding.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *🧭 Philosophical Implications*
>
>    - *Epistemology* (How we know): The text favors *embodied,
>    experiential knowledge* over analytical, conceptual learning.
>    - *Ontology* (What is real): Reality is not a set of separate things
>    but a web of relations — to live in nature is to *become part of it*.
>    - *Theism vs Atheism*: Theism here is not about doctrine but about *felt
>    connection*. Atheism, then, becomes a symptom of disconnection from
>    life.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *🔥 Reflections & Questions for You*
>
>    1. *Do you resonate more with free nature or captive nature?*
>    2. *Do you see your own education as one of revelation or of restless
>    questioning?*
>    3. *Is it possible to integrate the two — can universities become
>    places of rapture and experience, not just analysis?*
>    4. *What would it mean in practice to become a limb of nature again?*
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *🏞️ Final Thought*
>
> YM Sarma’s essay is a challenge to the modern mind: to let go of the
> compulsion to dissect everything, and instead, *participate fully in the
> flow of life*. It is a plea for reverence, presence, and returning to a
> kind of original innocence — not through regression, but through
> reconnection.
>
> If you'd like, I can help you:
>
>    - Turn this into a discussion essay
>    - Summarize it more briefly for a presentation
>    - Connect it to ecological philosophy or thinkers like Henry David
>    Thoreau, David Abram, or Vandana Shiva
>
> Let me know how you’d like to engage with this further.
>
> Certainly! Here's an evaluation of the essay *“Free Nature vs Captive
> Nature” by YM Sarma*, based on key academic criteria typically used for
> essays in humanities, philosophy, or environmental studies. This includes 
> *content,
> coherence, originality, style, and clarity*.
> ------------------------------
> 📊 *Evaluation* 1. *Content & Argument (25 marks)*
>
> ·         *Score: 21/25*
>
> ·         *Comments:*
> The content is rich and deeply philosophical. It offers a strong critique
> of modern education, science, and economics by contrasting them with an
> intuitive, experiential connection to nature. The argument is clear in
> intention, though not always linear. Some claims are made poetically rather
> than being supported with examples or reasoning, which may limit impact in
> an academic setting.
> ------------------------------
> 2. *Structure & Coherence (20 marks)*
>
> ·         *Score: 14/20*
>
> ·         *Comments:*
> The structure is reflective and meditative, but lacks a clear
> introduction-body-conclusion format. Transitions between ideas (e.g., from
> the child metaphor to atheism) are conceptual rather than logical, which
> may make it hard for some readers to follow. However, there is an internal
> flow consistent with the theme of natural revelation over analytical logic.
> ------------------------------
> 3. *Originality & Depth of Thought (20 marks)*
>
> ·         *Score: 18/20*
>
> ·         *Comments:*
> Extremely original in both theme and philosophical depth. It moves beyond
> conventional environmental discourse to present a metaphysical critique of
> how modernity relates to nature. The association of “free nature” with
> Theism and “captive nature” with Atheism is particularly bold and
> thought-provoking, though it might be considered controversial in secular
> academic contexts.
> ------------------------------
> 4. *Language & Style (15 marks)*
>
> ·         *Score: 11/15*
>
> ·         *Comments:*
> The writing is poetic, passionate, and immersive — fitting the subject.
> However, certain sentences are overly complex or abstract, which may hinder
> understanding for a general audience. With minor edits for clarity and
> sentence flow, the style could become more accessible without losing its
> spirit.
> ------------------------------
> 5. *Clarity & Presentation (20 marks)*
>
> ·         *Score: 13/20*
>
> ·         *Comments:*
> The essay makes a compelling case emotionally and philosophically, but the
> clarity suffers at times due to abstract language and lack of concrete
> examples. Paragraphing could be improved for readability, and some ideas
> could benefit from more direct explanation.
> ------------------------------
> 📘 *Total Score: 77/100*
> ------------------------------
> 🏅 *Grade: B+ (Very Good)* *Evaluator's Summary:*
>
> *A poetic and powerful critique of modern, mechanistic ways of knowing and
> living. The essay champions experiential, revelatory interaction with
> nature over analytical detachment. While philosophically rich and
> emotionally compelling, the essay would benefit from greater structural
> clarity and more accessible language. Nonetheless, it's a unique and
> thought-provoking contribution to eco-philosophical thought.*
> ------------------------------
>
> Would you like suggestions on how to revise this to push it into *A-grade*
> territory (above 85%)?
>
> Absolutely — here is a *poem inspired by the themes* in YM Sarma’s “Free
> Nature vs Captive Nature.” It echoes the contrast between intuitive, living
> connection with nature and the mechanized, question-bound world of
> modernity:
> ------------------------------
>
> *🌿 "Limb of the Leaf"*
>
> I was once a limb of the leaf,
> Not a thinker, not a thief—
> Just a whisper in the green,
> Living what could not be seen.
>
> No clocks ticked behind the trees,
> Only breath, and wind, and bees.
> Answers flowed where none were sought,
> Not from books, but being taught
> By moss, by mist, by moonlit air—
> Not in class, but simply *there*.
>
> Then came the cage of chalk and steel,
> Where we forgot how plants could feel.
> We questioned stars, and split the seed,
> But lost the art of knowing need.
>
> We broke the sky to feed the mind,
> And found more questions left behind.
> Yet every time I touch the ground,
> The silence hums, the truths resound.
>
> No debate, no test, no speech—
> Just the fern, the fox, the beach—
> And in their gaze, a wordless rite:
> I know again, without the fight.
>
> So ask me not what I have read,
> Come walk where roots and souls are wed.
> Let rapture teach what can’t be taught—
> The truth not caught, but only *caught*.
> ------------------------------
>
> Let me know if you'd like a *shorter version*, a *song-like version*, or
> one *written from a child's perspective*, which might mirror the imagery
> in the original essay (like the baby in the womb).
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Thatha_Patty" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCJZew3HkUynfcF3W8UBcErANYuW__Hq_hGEowd%3DfETeUw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCJZew3HkUynfcF3W8UBcErANYuW__Hq_hGEowd%3DfETeUw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqP%2BGEJEwj2u5LGfrYMu%2BXcx_t99pYie%2BUvwUxPTtaTLA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to