Dusk time is always a good time – to be with yourself. In the stillness between the day and night, is an inviting and haunting energy; a radiance that speaks of the reality of life – neither day nor night. As in Hindi, “na to Prakash aur na hi Tamas.” (न तो प्रकाश और न ही तामस). It occurred to me that I could do with some writing. A few thoughts I pen down – from my journal (this morning), with whatever changes of this moment.
{After writing half of the stuff below, I got back up again – since I am mailing this to many, the “structure” freak in me wants to put a few words: These are my thoughts as they come in the moment. And most of them will be questions. I like to meditate on them and at the right moment, I will understand it. I have slowly moved to a view in life that asking the right question is most important. And at this phase of life, I am see myself preparing to ask the right questions. I do not look forward to any appreciation (and equally disgust) – but I do look forward to your sharing which can help me enrich not just my own understanding of an issue, but also myself and the you with me. These then are what I can say, “Experiences of myself”.}
I have a lovely mind. A beautiful instrument – that I am slowly learning to respect and understand. As if through a key hole, I have got a preview. The word that came up this morning during prayers was “addiction.” So what is addiction? Remembered what I’d read what JK had to say somewhere on a related issue. So what is my addiction? And in that what is my “avoidance?” The solitude and quiet, the “pranayam” and prayers, the peace of silence and stillness – all are the desires. And anything that disturbs it is to be shunned – be they people, events, objects and life. Life – but what is life? Is it not about people and events and the meanings they make out of it, the causality they ascribe, the web of relationships they make and relate? Is it not so?
But talking of addiction… So is addiction to desire for “peaceful mind” better than say an addiction to desire for alcohol”? Addiction remains. Save that in one case it is “socially desirable” (as also “personally desired” and in the “laukik” (behavioural world – la vie quotidian) does not cause stress, tension and disharmony while in the latter it perhaps does (if left unchallenged and unbridled). But if I study Yudhishthira’s life, then even unbridled “dharma” (धर्मं) lead to “anarth” (moral destruction) अनर्थ. Coming back – if both are addicted, is there any true “liberation”? Big words – liberation…
So is that why Maharaji (my Guruji) and all say Vedantins that first we have to conquer inner evil by goodness (let the latter replace the former) and then later on let go of goodness also? Ah, the desire for merit and the feeling of, “I – a big I am worthy of merit!” How we fool ourselves in the name of outer world, whereas it serves my own inner function and need. Does that mean that I let go of goodness and all prayers and meditations? Well, depends on the stage of life I am in. And each individual (each one of us) knows where we are. Till the fruit is ripe, it needs all nurture and care and once ready, the gardener lets go – the fruit drops on its own. So is the case with our own selves I suppose. Till such time, I feel the need, I have to tend to it – with goodness, working on my inferior and taking inspiration from my own superior. And the day, I am ready, I will get the inner calling – to drop that.
Perhaps this is why “dharma” is the most difficult subject in Indian Philosophy and all treatises go into it. For it is neither collective (in a legal – jurisprudence manner) nor is it personal (in a strict Judeo-Christian tradition); yet is both at the same time. I guess a discussion on that is for another day and moment.
It is an odd feeling to feel as if there is someone (who is you only) watching over your head as you write – I feel it right now. As if I’m being watched by myself? Is that what is called the “saakshi” साक्षी (witness) self?
I am also learning that perhaps there are no “answers” at all. PERHAPS being the operative word. I am not sure yet. For the more I ask, the more questions come – one after the other in their own fashion. And if I look at it, in most cases, I don’t get / have an answer. Meditation / Contemplation on the question stills it. And there is no further need for asking that question. Some quiet comes – I don’t know what as yet. A potential area for research! For if these are experiences of many, then the whole education should be about developing the faculty to think, ask and ponder. Are there ever really any answers – and I ask this in the context of the fundamental “issues” in life? Then I appreciate better what Swami Vivekananda said about the purpose of education viz. ‘to help manifest the knowledge already inherent in man’. Is it that while all thoughts are there, they strike you and become pertinent to you (and therefore you appreciate it) only when you are ready, as in, “when the disciple is ready, the Buddha appears?” Coming back to questions and answers, is it that we are afraid of asking the real questions? For it might expose to us the vulnerability of “no answer.” And left floundering – coz there will be no closure (aha – the desire for an INTJ like me).
Just like I am right now with a thought, “If I ‘get’ liberated (an oxymoron), then what will life be; what will I have to do and not do?” Nothing and yet everything…
So its of a question of what changes? Does the world – the people and events – change? Or only I change? If we accept that the world changes, then the whole concept of inner divinity falls flat on its face and goes contrary to the experience of the self truth of “I”. However, a greater problem arises if I say that “I” change – for if I can change now, I can change later too. And if I change, then the truth of the unchangeable “I” is contradictory. Or is it that we do our roles and pay out our karmas with that understanding (of our roles and self identity – as defined in a Ericksonian way)?
I am aware that some Indian philosophical schools have reconciled this issue by giving talking of the “witness I” and the “ego I”. But I will have to find out more about this – another area open for enquiry for me. Epistemology has its own challenges; and I suspect the biggest challenge is to find logic and rationale for the experience. The biggest and the most undeniable truth is of experience. But all metaphysical experiences may not give a logical rationale answer (which the system of epistemology) demands – for its own sake and for its propagation.
The next topic is “Mine vs. Not Mine”. Actually, I am a shifty writer – moving from an issue to another and then linking them (and many a time not). I write for me and not for you, so coming back to this topic, the question is, “what is ‘mine’?” Where does this question come from? Well, from the recent robbery attempt and the break-in at my house. Eventually, the guys got nothing of what they wanted and left {I’ve written elsewhere on the word ‘valuable’ – in my previous musing – will forward if you express interest}. While they have gone, I am left with a realization of my attachments and my questions. I am glad to be able to see my attachments – and more importantly, not condemn them. For in condemnation and the “shoulds” of life I invalidate the truth of the moment and of the experience – in that I superficially gloss over it, digging the attachment even deeper (as if pushing it into the recess of the unconscious and making it stronger).
None of the stuff I have in my house was mine at some point of time in the past – nor will it be with me for ever in the future. Each item has its own life. Now all this bit – I’m aware of at a logical level? At another level, the question is, ‘then what is mine?’ Asked differently, “am I actually the owner?” Or is it that I am a custodian (like Gandhi used to say)? If so, then the question is, “of and for whom?” Where does this attachment come from? And the feeling of possessiveness that comes with the attachment? Yes, at one level it all is mine – at another, nothing is. I could not prevent the break-in, but nothing was taken away. So who saved it? Questions that deserve an answer; or should I say, “issues” that deserve a “question”? :-) :-) :-)
{After writing half of the stuff below, I got back up again – since I am mailing this to many, the “structure” freak in me wants to put a few words: These are my thoughts as they come in the moment. And most of them will be questions. I like to meditate on them and at the right moment, I will understand it. I have slowly moved to a view in life that asking the right question is most important. And at this phase of life, I am see myself preparing to ask the right questions. I do not look forward to any appreciation (and equally disgust) – but I do look forward to your sharing which can help me enrich not just my own understanding of an issue, but also myself and the you with me. These then are what I can say, “Experiences of myself”.}
I have a lovely mind. A beautiful instrument – that I am slowly learning to respect and understand. As if through a key hole, I have got a preview. The word that came up this morning during prayers was “addiction.” So what is addiction? Remembered what I’d read what JK had to say somewhere on a related issue. So what is my addiction? And in that what is my “avoidance?” The solitude and quiet, the “pranayam” and prayers, the peace of silence and stillness – all are the desires. And anything that disturbs it is to be shunned – be they people, events, objects and life. Life – but what is life? Is it not about people and events and the meanings they make out of it, the causality they ascribe, the web of relationships they make and relate? Is it not so?
But talking of addiction… So is addiction to desire for “peaceful mind” better than say an addiction to desire for alcohol”? Addiction remains. Save that in one case it is “socially desirable” (as also “personally desired” and in the “laukik” (behavioural world – la vie quotidian) does not cause stress, tension and disharmony while in the latter it perhaps does (if left unchallenged and unbridled). But if I study Yudhishthira’s life, then even unbridled “dharma” (धर्मं) lead to “anarth” (moral destruction) अनर्थ. Coming back – if both are addicted, is there any true “liberation”? Big words – liberation…
So is that why Maharaji (my Guruji) and all say Vedantins that first we have to conquer inner evil by goodness (let the latter replace the former) and then later on let go of goodness also? Ah, the desire for merit and the feeling of, “I – a big I am worthy of merit!” How we fool ourselves in the name of outer world, whereas it serves my own inner function and need. Does that mean that I let go of goodness and all prayers and meditations? Well, depends on the stage of life I am in. And each individual (each one of us) knows where we are. Till the fruit is ripe, it needs all nurture and care and once ready, the gardener lets go – the fruit drops on its own. So is the case with our own selves I suppose. Till such time, I feel the need, I have to tend to it – with goodness, working on my inferior and taking inspiration from my own superior. And the day, I am ready, I will get the inner calling – to drop that.
Perhaps this is why “dharma” is the most difficult subject in Indian Philosophy and all treatises go into it. For it is neither collective (in a legal – jurisprudence manner) nor is it personal (in a strict Judeo-Christian tradition); yet is both at the same time. I guess a discussion on that is for another day and moment.
It is an odd feeling to feel as if there is someone (who is you only) watching over your head as you write – I feel it right now. As if I’m being watched by myself? Is that what is called the “saakshi” साक्षी (witness) self?
I am also learning that perhaps there are no “answers” at all. PERHAPS being the operative word. I am not sure yet. For the more I ask, the more questions come – one after the other in their own fashion. And if I look at it, in most cases, I don’t get / have an answer. Meditation / Contemplation on the question stills it. And there is no further need for asking that question. Some quiet comes – I don’t know what as yet. A potential area for research! For if these are experiences of many, then the whole education should be about developing the faculty to think, ask and ponder. Are there ever really any answers – and I ask this in the context of the fundamental “issues” in life? Then I appreciate better what Swami Vivekananda said about the purpose of education viz. ‘to help manifest the knowledge already inherent in man’. Is it that while all thoughts are there, they strike you and become pertinent to you (and therefore you appreciate it) only when you are ready, as in, “when the disciple is ready, the Buddha appears?” Coming back to questions and answers, is it that we are afraid of asking the real questions? For it might expose to us the vulnerability of “no answer.” And left floundering – coz there will be no closure (aha – the desire for an INTJ like me).
Just like I am right now with a thought, “If I ‘get’ liberated (an oxymoron), then what will life be; what will I have to do and not do?” Nothing and yet everything…
So its of a question of what changes? Does the world – the people and events – change? Or only I change? If we accept that the world changes, then the whole concept of inner divinity falls flat on its face and goes contrary to the experience of the self truth of “I”. However, a greater problem arises if I say that “I” change – for if I can change now, I can change later too. And if I change, then the truth of the unchangeable “I” is contradictory. Or is it that we do our roles and pay out our karmas with that understanding (of our roles and self identity – as defined in a Ericksonian way)?
I am aware that some Indian philosophical schools have reconciled this issue by giving talking of the “witness I” and the “ego I”. But I will have to find out more about this – another area open for enquiry for me. Epistemology has its own challenges; and I suspect the biggest challenge is to find logic and rationale for the experience. The biggest and the most undeniable truth is of experience. But all metaphysical experiences may not give a logical rationale answer (which the system of epistemology) demands – for its own sake and for its propagation.
The next topic is “Mine vs. Not Mine”. Actually, I am a shifty writer – moving from an issue to another and then linking them (and many a time not). I write for me and not for you, so coming back to this topic, the question is, “what is ‘mine’?” Where does this question come from? Well, from the recent robbery attempt and the break-in at my house. Eventually, the guys got nothing of what they wanted and left {I’ve written elsewhere on the word ‘valuable’ – in my previous musing – will forward if you express interest}. While they have gone, I am left with a realization of my attachments and my questions. I am glad to be able to see my attachments – and more importantly, not condemn them. For in condemnation and the “shoulds” of life I invalidate the truth of the moment and of the experience – in that I superficially gloss over it, digging the attachment even deeper (as if pushing it into the recess of the unconscious and making it stronger).
None of the stuff I have in my house was mine at some point of time in the past – nor will it be with me for ever in the future. Each item has its own life. Now all this bit – I’m aware of at a logical level? At another level, the question is, ‘then what is mine?’ Asked differently, “am I actually the owner?” Or is it that I am a custodian (like Gandhi used to say)? If so, then the question is, “of and for whom?” Where does this attachment come from? And the feeling of possessiveness that comes with the attachment? Yes, at one level it all is mine – at another, nothing is. I could not prevent the break-in, but nothing was taken away. So who saved it? Questions that deserve an answer; or should I say, “issues” that deserve a “question”? :-) :-) :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment