『Let's think : By Dr.King, Swami Satyapriya』のカバーアート

Let's think : By Dr.King, Swami Satyapriya

Let's think : By Dr.King, Swami Satyapriya

著者： Dr.King Swami Satyapriya
無料で聴く

Explore science, philosophy, and spirituality for a deeper life. Get motivational insights and healthy thoughts for purposeful, better living.(C) Dr. King スピリチュアリティ ヒンズー教 哲学 社会科学 衛生・健康的な生活
エピソード
  • [English] Do not Miss This Golden Opportunity!

    [English] Do not Miss This Golden Opportunity!
    2026/08/15
    [Preview books] [Borrow books] [Pause] In the previous episode, we discussed that the ancient Indians were not completely opposed to the enjoyment of pleasures. What they said was only that pleasures should be enjoyed with restraint. What they prohibited was licentiousness that could harm the individual as well as cause problems for society.So, couldn't a person simply keep taking one birth after another? One could go on experiencing the world and living one's life, and that too in a good, disciplined manner. If that is so, why should one worry about the realization of the ultimate truth and liberation?Yes, at least in theory, this is possible. But does everything really happen that way? Rebirth is a strong belief found in most religions of the East. Today, the major religions of the world, Christianity and Islam, do not accept rebirth. But it is probably true that, in the ancient world, almost all religions widely accepted the idea of rebirth.Who could have greater authority to speak about rebirth than the Lord of Death himself? In an ancient Indian text, the Katha Upanishad, the Lord of Death himself speaks extensively about this subject.Today's talk is based on this Upanishad.The Upanishad says that when you become engrossed in sensual pleasures, there is a possibility that you may fall into an inescapable trap. You may not always be able to protect yourself from it. You may get caught in a whirlpool of uncontrolled enjoyment and completely lose your way.So what if one has lost one's way? There will always be another birth in which one can correct one's mistakes, won't there?Unfortunately, it is not that simple.There is no guarantee that you will be born as a human being again. For example, if you are reborn as an animal, an insect, or a plant, you may not have the intellectual maturity in that birth to correct your mistakes. In such forms, you are driven merely by instincts. Those instincts ensure your survival, but not your further evolution.Can't one be reborn as an even higher form of life?That is possible too. Depending on your accumulated karma, you may be reborn as a being in the realm of the ancestors, as a deity in heaven, or even as a fully evolved being in Brahmaloka.But the Upanishad makes some interesting observations here. It says:If you are born in the realm of the ancestors, you get only a vague glimpse of the ultimate truth. It is like seeing something in a dream. The reason is that these departed beings have such a deep attachment to their previous life that they are unable to free themselves completely.Even if you are born as a deity, your vision of the ultimate truth is like seeing your reflection in water. You get a glimpse of it. But the reflection lacks clarity because of impurities in the water and because of the ripples that may arise in the water. The reason is that deities generally have a greater inclination toward sensual pleasures and lack self-control.Fortunately, if you are born as a fully evolved being in Brahmaloka, you can certainly obtain the clearest vision of the ultimate truth, as clearly as you see light and shadow. But how many people can ever reach that level all at once?Only while existing as a human being can you see the ultimate truth reflected in your own intellect. It is like looking at your own reflection in a mirror.Yathā ādarśe tathā ātmani,Yathā svapne tathā pitṛloke,Yathā apsu pari iva dadṛśe tathā gandharvaloke,Chāyā ātapayoḥ iva Brahmaloke.— Katha Upanishad 2.3.5.You Can Achieve It in This Very Life!Many religions promise you that you will have a better life after you die. But this Upanishad says that it is possible to realize the ultimate truth in this very life!Interestingly, the Upanishad says that there is something which neither the ancestors nor the deities can accomplish, but which you, and you alone, can accomplish while you are born as a human being. Therefore, it advises you not to miss this great opportunity.It says that the ultimate truth can be reflected in your own intellect; you can see it as though you were looking at it in a mirror.When that happens, you do not transform into something new. Instead, you merely move aside the false veil that conceals reality. Once that veil is removed, reality reveals itself on its own.When you stand before a mirror, you see yourself as you really are. There is no easier way to see yourself than that. What you see may not actually be you; but it is the reflection that comes closest to being you.But, have you noticed one thing?If you want to see your own reflection in a mirror, the mirror must be clean, without any stains or dirt. A dirty mirror can show you only a distorted reflection of yourself.Therefore, your first step is to clean the mirror. And you must continue to keep it clean at all times. That is the process of yoga or meditation.You, who have been born as a human being, have now received a great opportunity. Don't miss it. Strive for ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • [English] Beyond Linear Pooling: Building a Healthier Subscription Model

    [English] Beyond Linear Pooling: Building a Healthier Subscription Model
    2026/08/10
    [Preview books] [Borrow books] [Pause] Subscription platforms have transformed the way we consume books, music, audiobooks, and other digital content. For a single monthly fee, subscribers gain access to vast libraries, while creators share a common revenue pool based on how much their work is consumed.The subscription model has been a remarkable success. Yet one important part of it has remained almost unchanged: the mathematics used to divide that common pool. Most platforms still use a simple linear model. Every additional page read or minute-listened, carries exactly the same value, no matter how dominant a creator has already become. At first glance this appears perfectly fair. In reality, it steadily shapes the behaviour of the entire system.When rewards continue to grow indefinitely in direct proportion to volume, a finite revenue pool naturally becomes increasingly concentrated. Content designed for rapid production or maximum engagement gains an ever-growing advantage, while creators producing labour-intensive works find it progressively harder to compete. Readers, in turn, may gradually discover that the diversity which originally attracted them to the platform is becoming narrower.The problem is not the subscription model itself.The problem is assuming that rewards must always grow in a perfectly straight line.That assumption is simply a design choice.A Different Mathematical Approach.Instead of assigning every read exactly the same weight forever, imagine applying a smooth nonlinear curve before calculating each creator's share of the subscription pool.Under this approach, additional readership still increases an author's earnings, but each successive increase contributes slightly less than the previous one. Popular creators continue to earn the most because they still attract the largest audiences. The difference is that extreme dominance no longer expands indefinitely within a fixed revenue pool.The proposal does not increase or decrease the size of the subscription pool. It changes only the way that fixed pool is divided.Nor does it depend on any particular mathematical function. A logarithmic curve is one possible illustration. A power function or many other nonlinear curves could achieve the same objective with different degrees of redistribution. The exact curve can be chosen to suit the goals of the platform.The sharing curve need not be fixed permanently either. If several curves are available, the platform could select an appropriate curve according to the variability of payouts in recent quarters, for example using the standard deviation of the payout distribution. This would allow the system to adapt to changing characteristics of the subscription pool without requiring a history to be maintained for individual authors.The curve could also have a defined knee. Up to that point, the relationship between readership and payout could remain linear, while beyond it the curve could become nonlinear. This would preserve the simplicity and predictability of linear sharing for the normal range while preventing extreme concentrations of consumption from producing disproportionately large payouts.Why does it matter?A nonlinear model changes incentives without changing the subscription business itself.It continues to reward success while allowing a broader range of creators to participate meaningfully in the shared pool. It encourages catalogue diversity without penalizing popularity. It also reduces the economic incentive for extreme concentration because each additional unit of consumption contributes a little less than the one before it.Most importantly, the platform still distributes exactly the same total amount of subscription revenue. Only the proportions change.The Mathematics.The implementation is surprisingly simple.First, transform each creator's total readership using a chosen nonlinear function. Then add those transformed values together to obtain a new adjusted total.Each creator's payout is then calculated as:Author Payout = Total Subscription Pool × (Author's Curved Score ÷ Total Curved Score of All Authors).This normalization step ensures that the entire subscription fund is distributed exactly as before. Only the shares are recalculated.The additional refinements described above need not require major changes to the platform's bookkeeping. The curve selection and the knee can be implemented as mathematical parameters using aggregate pool data; there is no need to maintain an elaborate historical record for every individual author.A Simple Illustration.Suppose a platform has a subscription pool of $1,000 shared among three creators.- Author A: 1,000,000 reads.- Author B: 1,000 reads.- Author C: 100 reads.Under today's linear model, Author A, receives almost the entire pool while the remaining creators receive only a tiny fraction.Now apply a logarithmic curve—not because it is necessarily the best choice, but simply to illustrate the principle.Author...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • [English] There Is Nothing Wrong with Enjoying Pleasure. Don't Feel Guilty About It.

    [English] There Is Nothing Wrong with Enjoying Pleasure. Don't Feel Guilty About It.
    2026/08/08
    [Preview books] [Borrow books] [Pause] This statement may sound like music to many of us. In fact, many people do not even experience such guilt.Yet most religions teach self-restraint. The Bible says so. The Qur'an emphasizes it. Most Indian religions also recommend moderation in enjoyment.So, are all these religions that warn us against excessive indulgence wrong? Even if you do not believe in any religion at all, there is some truth in being cautious about excessive indulgence in pleasures. Becoming too deeply immersed in sensory pleasures has certain drawbacks.- No pleasure lasts forever. Your body soon reaches a point where it can no longer enjoy any more. If you overeat, no matter how delicious the food is, your body will not enjoy it beyond a certain limit.- Sometimes the desire to enjoy may still remain. But the object that gives pleasure may already be gone. Since no material object lasts forever, this happens quite often.- The more you indulge in pleasures, the stronger your craving for them becomes. This may happen even after your body has already reached the point of satisfaction. At that stage, it is entirely the mind that keeps craving. The feeling, "Enough, I am completely satisfied," may never actually come. This endless craving makes you restless. You keep chasing that pleasure, but it keeps moving farther away from your reach.In this context, the ancient Indian scripture, the Bhagavad Gita, presents a profound picture. It says:"When a person continually dwells on sense objects, attachment to them develops. From attachment arises desire. When desire is not fulfilled, anger arises. Anger leads to delusion. Delusion causes confusion. Confusion destroys discrimination. When discrimination is lost, the person is completely ruined."Dhyāyato viṣayān puṁsaḥ saṅgas teṣūpajāyate।Saṅgāt sañjāyate kāmaḥ kāmāt krodho'bhijāyate॥Krodhād bhavati sammohaḥ sammohāt smṛtivibhramaḥ।Smṛtibhraṁśād buddhināśo buddhināśāt praṇaśyati॥— Bhagavad Gita 2.62–63.- In our world of limited resources, excessive use of any resource depletes it. As a result, someone else may be deprived of their rightful share. Eventually, this widens the gap between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots.' Such inequality can lead to social unrest. In the end, its harmful consequences may indirectly affect you as well.Indian religions such as Buddhism took a very uncompromising position on this issue. The Buddha taught, "Give up all desires." For "Desire is the root cause of all suffering."But is this practical?The Indian sage Manu says:"No one can perform any action without desire. Behind every achievement of a person, there is always some desire."Akāmasya kriyā kācid dṛśyate neha karhicit।Yadyaddhi kurute kiñcit tat tat kāmasya ceṣṭitam॥— Manusmriti 2.4How true it is!If human beings had no desires at all, could humanity have achieved so much progress?It is true that desires also have harmful consequences. But that does not mean they should be completely abandoned. Such a course is neither practical nor desirable.So, how do we strike a balance between these two opposing viewpoints?The Vedic Indians had a remarkably balanced perspective on this issue. They understood the role of desire as the driving force behind all human progress. At the same time, they were fully aware of its inevitable harmful consequences. They also accepted that completely giving up desires is, in reality, impossible.What the Buddha taught may be natural for monks and renunciates. But, for the vast majority of people living in the world, it is simply not possible.On this issue, the ancient Upanishads adopt a highly practical approach. They strike a beautiful balance between excessive indulgence and complete self-denial.This realistic outlook is found in almost all the Upanishads. They do not encourage complete immersion in worldly pleasures. At the same time, they do not ask us to renounce all pleasures altogether.The Isha Upanishad expresses this balance most beautifully. It says:"This entire universe, with everything moving and unmoving, belongs to the Lord of the universe. It is not the private property of any individual. Therefore, do not cultivate an excessive sense of ownership. Enjoy it with restraint. Do not take away another person's rightful share."Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvaṁ yat kiñca jagatyāṁ jagat।Tena tyaktena bhuñjīthā mā gṛdhaḥ kasyasvid dhanam॥— Isha Upanishad — Mantra 1.But merely enjoying pleasure is not enough; responsibility must accompany it. We must also perform our duties. If we live in this manner, then even if we live for a hundred years, pleasures will not bind us."Therefore, while enjoying life's pleasures with restraint and continuously performing your duties, aspire to live a full life. There is no better way of living than this."So says the same Upanishad.Kurvanneveha karmāṇi...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません