Meaning of Happiness'Why?'

[Guest guest]

Namaste Kenji,

 

These are difficult questions. Maybe you are right. I am of the

opinion that it is not the question but the attitude of questioning

that leads to ahamkara. But I also realise that this amounts to a

tautology in so far as the attitude is itself the working of

ahamkara. Maybe ahamkara is ahamkara and question is question and

avidya mixes it all up.

 

I had once pondered over the nature of questions, and on what it is

that questions question when we ask them. It seemed to me that

ultimately the resolution of a question is the seeking out from

within me of what I am questioning when I question. And the meaning

that I seek must be within myself, else I would not even feel its

privation. Thus every seeking is generated by a presence that is

hidden, and the seeking is the journey back to that within to break

the crust of darkness that hides it.

 

What leads to the undesirable growth of ahamkara is surely avidya.

Whether avidya colours the question "why" is the question? In a

certain sense I would agree that the question "why" has a greater

tendency to be coloured by avidya than the question "what" or "who".

In so far as I find sophistical causes, the question "why" feeds my

ego with the sense of achievement. But if I ask the question with

humility, then I dissolve the question "why" by realising that it is

maya -- because the question assumes causality and entraps itself

into the unending chain of the seed and the plant. Then maybe I

ask "what" instead and seek to know what the seed and the tree are,

and I find the answer of the seed and the tree within the meanings

conferred to them by my self, and in these meanings lie the answer to

the question "why" because I realise that the seed is not the cause

of the tree and neither is the tree the cause of the seed; that they

are both in the self and shown forth within the play of Maya as a

causal chain.

 

But most importantly for an enquiring sadhaka, a question must not be

avoided, it must be dissolved.

 

Just some thoughts...

 

With regards,

Chittaranjan

 

 

advaitin, ken knight <anirvacaniya> wrote:

>

> --- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik>

> wrote:

> >> But Kenji, I don't believe that the question "why"

> > leads to ahamkara.

> > The question "why" is the other side of avidya.

> > Ahamkara is not the

> > same as avidya, though avidya leads to ahamkara

> > sending out its

> > armies on wild conquests to build its vain empires.

>

> Namaste Chittaranji,

> About three years ago I was having an e-mail

> conversation with Swami Bodhananda on the Kena

> Upanishad. One of his early points was the following

> which I am 'pasting' from our discourse:

> 'Dear Ken,

> I think there are three ideas that the first question

> [keneshitam

> Preshitam etc.] throws up:- that the rishi is more

> concerned with the 'who' question than with the 'why'

> 'what' or 'how' question. I think the why question

> leads you to the ego, the what question to inert

> matter, the how question to mechanical processes.'

>

> As a child I was always told that the 'Why' question

> was the devil's question which, if 'devil' comes from

> 'dva' then the implied duality fits with Swamiji's

> comments above. Although I think that my parents'

> answer had more to do with disciplining a rebellious

> child.

>

> I have been thinking about your challenge above in

> order to change my own opinion but still think that

> Swamiji is correct. So a thought occurs:

> 'Can I find any use of 'Why?' in shruti?'

> If a chance arises I will search the texts and report

> back.

>

> Thanks for reply,

>

> Ken Knight

>

>

>

>

>

>

> New Photos - easier uploading and sharing.

>