Guest guest Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 Namaste. Shankar-Ji says : "If acquiring a particular object of pleasure can give uniform satisfaction across all people, irrepective of their preferences is only happiness.". Isn't there an obvious error in this conclusion? My wife loves jewellery as it gives her immense pleasure to possess the same. My daughter, with a liberated view, scorns at such possessions. She, nevertheless, loves certain other possessions. I scorn at both of them. However, I am ready to accept jewellery as a form of security like the bank balance and that feeling gives me a certain amount of happiness, which I know would vanish in due course. Where is uniform satisfaction among us with reference to the same objects, i.e. jewellery? We don't need vedanta to appreciate this truth. Commonsense reveals it. We also see that our urge for possessions is unending. A 2003 model luxury car gives happiness to its owner. But, for how long? Only till the neighbour buys a better model and shows it off. Then the urge would be to get rid of the coveted possession and acquire a better model than the neighbour's. So, all the so-called happiness that results from material acquisitions is impermanent and transient. Thus, the quest for "permanent happiness" begins. Logically, if there is "impermanent happiness", there should naturally be "permanent happiness" too somewhere out there. That should be the substratum against which "impermanent happiness" is experienced and enjoyed. The quest ends when one realises that that "permanent happiness" is the seeker himself. Then, there is no further seeking because the seeker has become a true advaitin. Pranams. Madathil Nair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.