Emptiness Speaking

[Guest guest]

Dear Advaintins,

 

Namaste,

 

Here is an article on the teachings of Tao.

 

Hope it will of some interest.

 

Commentary on the Tao Teh King–by Swami Nirmalananda Giri

(Atmajyoti.org)

 

 

Emptiness Speaking

"May not the space between heaven and earth be compared to a

bellows? 'Tis emptied, yet it loses not its power; 'tis moved again,

and sends forth air the more. Much speech to swift exhaustion leads,

we see; your inner being guard, and keep it free."1

 

Emptiness

 

Before we start looking at this passage, it is really necessary for

us to consider the concept of Emptiness. Unfortunately we (naturally)

impose the standard English meaning on this term, thinking that

emptiness is both nothing and a state that abrogates "thingness." To

ascertain the correct meaning we can be greatly assisted by modern

science. We now know that there is no such thing as gold, or wood, or

water in themselves, but rather that they are simply differing

arrangements of atomic particles forming gold, wood, and water

molecules. The molecules can be broken down, the atomic particles

rearranged and we have "something" utterly different. Therefore, at

no time do gold, wood, or water really exist as self-existent,

permanent "things." There is only a great field of basic energy from

which they emerge and into which they resolve. Therefore at all times

they are "empty" of goldness, woodness, or waterness. That is,

no "thing" is a permanent entity, "just itself" without mutability or

dissolution. Rather, every "thing" is nothing but mutability moving

toward inevitable dissolution. So nothing ever really "is"–it only

appears to "be." Thus all relative existence is Emptiness, a Thing

that contains no "thing" whatsoever. The same understanding applies

to the concept of Void (Shunya). It is No Thing, but it is not

Nothing. It is actually the only Existent. All "things" draw their

momentary existence from It. Emptiness is true Fulness (Purna) and

the Source of All. It is also known as the Chidakasha, Conscious

Space.

 

"Empty" Space

 

Space then, including "the space between heaven and earth," is that

from which all things arise and into which they subside. It possesses

an infinite capacity for an infinite variety of manifestations. None

of which are "things" in themselves, but all of which are The Thing

essentially. Therefore "empty space" is creative fulness. Lao Tzu

asks if we cannot think of it as a bellows. No matter how much

streams forth from it, it draws it all back in and projects it,

maintaining a perpetual cycle of projection and absorption. In the

human being this is especially manifested in the lungs and the breath

as the basis of "life." Space (akasha) can never be exhausted, for it

perpetually renews itself.

 

Speech

 

This is not true of ordinary human speech, however, which is a

projection that does not renew or receive back into itself. The

spoken word and the energy, physical and mental, that produced it,

are lost to us forever when we speak. Speech, then, is seen to be a

depletion. In the most ancient philosophical writings of India, sages

are habitually referred to as "munis"–those who do not speak.2

 

In the Bhagavad Gita we find an interesting concept of action that is

inaction. "The real nature of action is hard to understand,"3 Krishna

tells us, then continues: "He who sees the inaction that is in

action, and the action that is in inaction, is wise indeed. Even when

he is engaged in action he remains poised in the tranquility of the

Atman."4 The wise know how to act–and yet not be acting.

 

In the same way the yogi knows how to speak without expending his

internal energies. Lao Tzu is exhorting us to this when he

concludes: "Your inner being guard, and keep it free." That is,

through keeping our awareness centered in our true Self we shall be

free from the exhaustion or depletion of our subtle life forces that

are usually lost through speaking. For this reason Sanderson Beck

renders this phrase: "Much talk brings exhaustion. It is better to

keep to the center." And Lin Yutang: "By many words is wit

exhausted. Rather, therefore, hold to the core."

 

JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA

 

Yours in the lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

Vinayaka <vinayaka_ns wrote:

 

Dear Advaintins,

 

Namaste,

 

Here is an article on the teachings of Tao.

 

Hope it will of some interest.

 

Dear sir,

According to Buddhism, all the four schools of

presentationist, the representionist, the yogachara idealistic, and the

madhyamika emptiness, all phenomena are devoid of a self-being, impermanent,

sorrowful. This idea is radically different from the Atman theory of Hinduism.

The word nothingness denotes absence of a thing, a stabilized, concrete form;

everything is only in a state of flux. There are no substances, but only

qualities, momentary. We cannot understand this concept of void from a

scientific analysis which is limited, confined to studying the objectified

phenomena failing to understand the truth that the observer who analysis

everything is only part of the stream. Buddhistic psychology attributes

creation only to only dependent, contingent elements, each element dying and

giving birth to a subsequent one, this being a momentary phenomenon. We can

understand all these deep thoughts only through meditation, as all Buddhistic

metaphysics is

incompatible with rational intellect admitting of a separate soul

reincarnating, this theory apparently giving rise to many questions raised by

the unreal individual. As far speech Bhaghavan Ramana says Silence is the true

speech unbroken as against vocal speech or thought, which are limited.

With kind regards,

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover

Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

 

"We cannot understand this concept of void from a scientific analysis

which is limited, confined to studying the objectified phenomena

failing to understand the truth that the observer who analysis

everything is only part of the stream.....We can understand all these

deep thoughts only through meditation...."

 

 

We must therefore avoid Empty Talk. :-)

 

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

> > "We cannot understand this concept of void from a

> > scientific analysis which is limited, confined to

> > studying the objectified phenomena failing to

> > understand the truth that the observer who analysis

> > everything is only part of the stream.....We can

> > understand all these deep thoughts only through

> > meditation...."

>

> We must therefore avoid Empty Talk. :-)

 

I hope you didn't take this remark personally, and if you did then

please accept my apologies for causing it. The inspiration for the

remark came from the title of the post and was not meant to point to

your words which (despite being full of the kind of dialectics that

Nagarjuna engaged and disengaged in) continues to have as its locus

the self that Sri Ramani Maharshi turned all questioners to seek out

and be. It is just that i was feeling a bit light (hearted) and

therefore couldn't resist the temptation to have a bit of pun.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Namasthey Sankaraman-ji:

 

Sir, you state”The word nothingness denotes absence of a thing, a

stabilized, concrete form; everything is only in a state of flux.”

 

How can something which is ‘nothing’ be in a constant state of flux? Flux

requires something which means that ‘nothing’ you state is not the absence of

something.

 

You also state” There are no substances, but only qualities, momentary.”

 

There is some incoherence in the statement above. Qualities are an

attribution to something that is still gross and cannot be not anything or

nothing or shunya. Is it not better to say that it is attributable owing to

limitations of comprehension in a physical sense? If we agree to that then it

cannot be nothing but only unknowable in phenomenon world. If so then our

reasoning is in tune with Advaita and we are better of by being agnostic to

Buddhist metaphysics.

 

You further state that”Buddhistic psychology attributes creation only to

only dependent, contingent elements, each element dying and giving birth to a

subsequent one, this being a momentary phenomenon.”

 

Sir, this is again a phenomenal observation by negating the fact that

there is continuity while in the transformation of elements. The death and

birth of elements you mention are synonymous to cause and effect being distinct

as stated in Buddhist philosophy. Advaita recognizes that the effect is already

in the cause and only being manifested in time. For the effect to be distinct

from the causes we need another cause that connects the original cause with the

effect. The connecting cause in turn must be relatable to the effect and

therein needing to bring another connectable cause to the first connectable

cause and the effect. This will lead to unsolvable infinite regression and

surmounting it will only bring us to conclusion that effect is already in the

cause and is only manifested in time. Needless to say the causation theory of

Buddhism has already been rejected by Adi Shankara.

 

You further state “We can understand all these deep thoughts only

through meditation, as all Buddhistic metaphysics is incompatible with

rational intellect admitting of a separate soul reincarnating, this theory

apparently giving rise to many questions raised by the unreal individual.”

 

I would argue that meditation must lead to cessation of all thoughts and

not indulge in deep thoughts. If we need a deep thought to understand Buddhist

metaphysics then we are better of meditating before applying the deep thought

rather than having the thought while in deep meditation. Why are we to be

confined only by so called rational thoughts alone? Is use of our free

intellect a bane? Removing constraints and notions that are sometimes

incorrectly impinged on us in the name of western scientific rationality serves

as deterrents that one must overcome using free intellect. Otherwise the

resultant of all the so called rational analysis will serve to lead towards

intellectual emptiness.

Sincerely,

RR

 

 

 

 

Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover

Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

>

> Dear sir,

> According to Buddhism, all the four schools

of presentationist, the representionist, the yogachara idealistic,

and the madhyamika emptiness, all phenomena are devoid of a self-

being, impermanent, sorrowful. This idea is radically different from

the Atman theory of Hinduism.

 

Dear Sir,

 

While pondering over the subject i recalled the talk given by Revered

Ranganathanandaji in chennai which is published in a booklet form

whoose title is Bhagavan Buddha and our Heritage. I hope the

follwoing excerpt will be of some interest which is as under.....

 

Coming close upon the age of the Upanishads, wherein the foundations

of the subsequent developments of culture and religion in India had

been laid, Buddha stands closest to the spirit of the Upanishads. In

fact, it is not possible to appreciate the life and teachings of

Buddha adequately without understanding the spirit of the upanishads.

There are at least a few western scholars who appreciate this fact. A

large number of western scholars who have written books on Buddha

have been unduly harsh on the prevailing Vedic religion, often

confusing their estimates of it with post Buddhistic developments. It

looks as if they sought the growth of the plant of the Buddha

movement at the cost of the soil in which it was raised and reared,

to trace its life development outside that soil and climate. But

there have been , as I said, a few western scholars who have realised

that Buddha could not be understood except in the context of the

spiritual soil and philosophical climate provided by the sages of the

Upanishads.

 

One such author whom i would like to quote, one who has made a

sympatetic study of Buddha, is Edmund Holmes. In his book, The Creed

of Buddha without understanding the Upanishads is absolutely

essential, for it is against that Himalayan thought background that

we can realise the significance of the new advances that Buddha made

in the thought and practice of that great philosophy. Writes Edmund

Holmes at the commencement of his fifth chapter entitled 'A

Misreading of Buddha' page no 98

 

' Thoose who have followed me thus far will, i think, admit that

Buddha's scheme of life coincides, at all its vital points, with the

scheme that i worked out by drawing practical deductions from the

master ideas of that deeply spiritual philosophy which found its

highest expression in the upanishads'

 

Again page no 102-103..

 

'The cumulative evidence afforded by these facts, added to the

internal evidence which has already been set forth in detail, seems

to point with irresitible force to one conclusion, namely, that

Buddha accepted the idealistic teaching of the upanisads-accepted it

at its highest level and in its purest form and took upon himself as

his life's mission to fill the obvious gap in it. In other words, to

make the spiritual ideas, which had hitherto been the exclusive

possession of mankind. If this conclusion is correct, we shall see in

Buddhism, not a revolt against the "Brahminic" philosophy as such,

but an ethical interpretation of the leading ideas of that philosophy-

a follwoing out of those ideas, not into the word-built systems of

(so called) thought which the metaphysicians of the day were

constructing with fatal facility, but into their practical

consequences in the inner life of man.'

 

There are few points in the teachins of Buddha which have always been

points of controversy, wherein great interpreters have differed from

one another. The most important of these are two: first, the wll-

known anatta doctrine, hte teaching that there is no permant soul;

this teaching is so pervassive of Buddhism that we can taken it as

part and parcel of the original Buddhism. In the second discourse

delivered by Buddha at the very beginning of his public ministration

at sarnath, entitled the anattalakkhana sutta, we have an exposition

of this anatta doctrine; so that it is necessary for us to understand

what Buddha meant by this anatta or Anatma doctrine, which apparently

represents a fundamental point of departure from the great teachings

of the Upanishads on the subject of the true nature of individuality.

The second is with regard to the nature of the ultimate reality. When

man attains nirvana, what does he realise and what happens to him?

Does he attain something positive or something negative? On this

subject the launguage of the Upanishads is clear, in spite of all the

prefaces with which they have expounded it, stating that the ultimate

truth is that from which speech and thought recoil, that it

transcends all specification. In spite of this kind of reservation,

the upanishads leave us in no doubt that the ultimate truth is 'yes'

and not 'no'. It is a positive something and not a negative nothing;

the upanisads speak of it as brahman, the one without a second, the

self of all, beyond sense and thought, the Impersonal, the

Transcendent as well as the immanent. Even though it transcends

specifications by speech and thought, yet it is a positive reality.

The katha Upanishad Says

 

Naiva vaca na manasa praptum sakyo na caksusa

Astiti bruvatonyatra katham tad upalabhyate

 

The self cannot be reached through the organs of speech or thought or

sight. How can it be realised except through one who says "It is"

 

Asti ityeva upalabhavyah

 

It must be comprehended as "is"( and not as "is not").

 

The last category of thought can only be a position and not a

negation according to the upanishadic thought. On this basis when we

proceed, we do not see in the teachins of Budddha any clear reference

to the reality of a changeless being behind the fluctuations of

becoming. As in the case of the soul, it is something composite,

impermanent, and ultimately substantial, so in the case of the world,

it is also impermanent and insubstantial; but with regard to the

ultimate reality realised in nirvana, Buddha did not say that it also

is impermanent and insubstantial. He did not say anything about it at

all. He was silent about it, as he was also silent about the nature

of the individual in the state of nirvana, and evaded giving direct

answeres to questions relating to them. That is a point which we shll

have to discuss, the meaning of this silence of his on the subjcet of

the ultimate reality in man and in the universe, and to determine his

position in the great philosophical tradition of the

upanishads.........

 

 

 

He met atleast two great buddistic personalities. One is D.T. Suzuki

an accomplished and popular Zen master. Who opined that Buddism

should be seen in the light of vedanta to get the real understanding.

Another is simhalese monk whoose name i cannot recall who upheld the

same vies.

 

Revered Ranganathanandaji defines nothingness as devoid of name and

form and it should not be taken as void which annuls even

consiousness. As far as my understanding goes in consciousness lies

the latent potentiality of everthing manifested. It is the great

cause of this cosmos. We can say something has come out from

something and cannot say something has come out from nothing. The

cause is a prerequisite for an effect.

 

JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA

 

Yours in the lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

[Guest guest]

Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik wrote: Dear Sri

Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

 

From

Sankarraman

May I state with politeness that I did not

mean to suggest that anybody writing in these lines was devoid of meditation. I

cannot compete with a professional scholar like you. I am only at the receiving

end. I am endeavoring to accept honour and calumny with equanimity, which does

not mean that you have indulged in insinuation against me. I have great

respects for you as a scholar in Vedanta, and it behooves me to learn from you

even though I might not be able to accept hundred percent of what you say,

which you surely have the generosity to accept. After all, even a great man

like Kumarila Bhatta had to resort to a rather tricky method of pretending to

be the disciple of the Buddha school to enable him to learn the Buddhistic

dialectics. Kumaralia Bhatta submitted himself to self-immolation as an act of

expiation for his betrayal. What to speak of ordinary mundane individuals like

me with a very many distracting thoughts and goals

and wayward thinking.

with kind regards,

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover

Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

Refer you post 29900

 

I do not qualify to be called a professional scholar (in the context

of these discussions) because i am neither a professional nor a

scholar in matters relating to the scriptures. I try to speak merely

from the reflected light of a fountain that once burst, but i must

admit that this light is sometimes made dim by the impurities of my

mind leading to erroneous things being said. It might suprise many

people on this list to learn that i have not read Sri

Shankarachraya's bhashyas on the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita

except for only a few parts here and there. The only bhashya of the

Acharya that i have read in its entirety is the Brahma Sutra Bhashya.

Other than this, i may claim to have read a few of the prakarana

granthas written by Sri Shankaracharya.

 

At this point i would also like to express my agreement with you in

regards of the truth that a jnani speaks. This truth, as you say, is

the Truth and comes from the spontaneity of the jnani's words and

actions (which in reality are no actions at all). However, in the

context of 'truths and lies' as applicable to the actions of non-

jnanis, which has been a topic of much discussion recently, I would

like to reproduce below an excerpt from an unfinished noting that i

had once noted in a notebook. I pray to you to excuse me for the

immaturity of the writing as i had at that time not matured as much

in stupidity as i now have. The incident happened in the year 1991 at

Badrinath in the Himalayas.

 

 

NOTINGS FROM AN UNWRITTEN DIARY

 

We walk around the temple, lazily taking in the sight of the devotees

and priests walking about in the open quadrangle. In in a sheltered

area in a corner of the yard, there is a large painting of Adi

Shankaracharya, showing him in the classic pose surrounded by his

four disciples. The painting is a fairly striking piece of work and

we sit down quietly in front of the image. We gaze at the serene face

of the Jagadguru and sit before it in silent meditation. After a

while, I notice a man walking around in the open area of the shrine.

He wears a garland of tulsi leaves around his head and moves around

gaily, talking to the people around him, and every now and then there

is a beautiful smile lighting up his countenance. All of a sudden, he

comes near us and proclaims : "Search, search, my friends, where do

you think you will find what you serach for - what you seek is not

without, but within". Having made this pronouncement, he walks away

from us to continue his wanderings about the premises of the shrine.

I am somewhat taken by surprise by the suddenness of the event and

become curious to know more about this strange man who had made such

a profound proclamation. After perambulating the central shrine, he

walks out of a gate into a small lane leading away from the temple.

Curious, I walk to the gate and gaze after him. He stops at a shop,

laughing and conversing with the vendor, and then proceeds down the

lane till I lose sight of him. I stand at the gate for a while,

staring at the trail of this tulsi-adorned person and wonder what

might have prompted him to make such a remark to us.

 

Lele and others come up beside me. We walk to a nearby shop vending

flowers and other articles of worship. We enquire from the shopkeeper

whether there are any saints and holy persons residing nearby. The

vendor tells us about one sage who lives further up the mountains,

but admits ignorance of his exact whereabouts. Then he tells us about

another saint residing nearby known as the Avadhuta Baba. Avadhuta,

in Sanskrit, means one who is unattached and free from all fetters,

as depicted in that wonderful song of Dattatreya called the Avadhuta

Gita. We decide to visit this person.

 

The roads of Badrinath are lined with a motley assortment of shops

selling beads and various objects of religious significance. After

aimlessly wandering around the place for about an hour, we head in

the direction of the Avadhuta Baba's abode as indicated to us by the

shopkeeper. A short walk past the temple and along the Alakananda

river brings us to a group of low-roofed tiled buildings. We are told

that a small brick structure nearby is the dwelling place of the

sage. The door is closed. We confirm from a passer-by that this is

indeed the place of the holy person. Lele draws himself up to the

door and shouts : "Swamiji, may we come in"? We hear a voice inviting

us inside.

 

We enter the simple quarters. A bare room presents itself to us. At

one end of the room is a sunken bed covered with a coarse woollen rug

and on it sits a dark person with a flowing beard. A shawl is draped

around his bare shoulders. Behind him on the naked wall hangs a

solitary bag. The Avadhuta Baba looks at us briefly as we enter the

room and nods to us. We bow to him and sit down on the floor. After

the momentary glance at us, the sage turns his eyes from us and sits

with a fixed gaze. We sit quietly. There is nothing spoken and

silence prevails. The seconds tick by and turn into a full minute and

then into five minutes and then into ten. Still no word is spoken.

The sage continues to gaze peacefully. It appears to me that he could

go on gazing the whole day, perfectly at ease with himself, with no

concern about anything whatsoever. His poise and posture does not

match the descriptions of sages in samadhi, yet his poise is

perfectly still and his eyes gaze on eternally. After some ten

minutes have passed this way, Oke, perhaps to relieve the unease felt

by this absolute silence, puts a question :

 

"Will the Swamiji give us some words of upadesha".

 

The eyes of the sage turn towards us. "There has been so much of

upadesha already. If you follow these, it is sufficient, what need is

there for new."

 

"If we hear upadesha from wise persons, it will create a greater

impression", says Oke.

 

"Our concern is with the ware, what have we to do with the

shopkeeper", comes the reply.

 

There is another period of silence. The sage turns his eyes from us

and gazes into a distant infinity. As his glance draws away, I feel

that we have been peremptorily dismissed from the field of his

vision. The sage is completely and absolutely peaceful and appears in

the least concerned by our presence. I recall the words of Paul

Brunton. There is a similarity in the demeanour of this Avadhuta who

is now before us and the sage of Arunachala, Ramana Maharishi, that

Brunton describes. It occurs to me that no ordinary being can be at

poise in such silence and so utterly indifferent to the world. It

slowly begins to dawn on me that we are in the presence of a living

sage. It is one thing to read about hoary sages in the pages of books

another to experience this supreme indifference to mundane existence

as portrayed by the vision that is now in front of me. I can sense

that nothing can disturb this sage - he appears to have conquered the

vagaries of the restless mind. All the cravings and thirsts of mortal

existence seem to have come to rest in a quiescence that has come

effortlessly and naturally.

 

I want to ask him some questions about sadhana, but feel inhibited to

do so in front of the others. Eventually, I ask about a matter that

concerns our professional lives. In the daily discharge of our works

in the office, we seem to lie so often that the act seems to have

become a natural part of our behaviour, often brought on by petty

desires.

 

I ask : "Swamiji, in the places where we work nowadays, we are

sometimes required to do what is not right. This has become part and

parcel of our procedures. What should we do in such cases?"

 

"Performance of all work must be done as a duty. There must not be

thought of personal benefit in carrying out one's duty. People who

work in offices and government departments sometimes get tempted to

making illegitimate money. This leads to ever increasing greed

followed by more wrong deeds. The proper way to work is to consider

all jobs as duties to be done and not from the fruits that we may

obtain from them."

 

"Swamiji", interrupts Lele, "That is not exactly what he meant. I

think he was talking of certain procedures in our company which force

us to lie. For example, we get canteen-allowance. As part of the

procedure we are required to sign a form stating that we have

actually incurred this expenditure on canteen expenses. This is

obligatory as per the procedure. What do we do then?"

 

"It is improper to lie under any circumstance", replies the sage, "If

you have to sign the form, then do eat for that amount. That way you

will not be lying. The gains which we think we make by lying slip

away in course of time. We fall ill and spend so much money on the

cure. Why does sickness come? Ill earned money goes away one way or

the other. We have to pay for all our misdeeds."

 

There is another brief silence and the incomprehensible eyes of the

sage gaze on.

 

We again drift into silence. The tranquil eyes of the sage is lost in

the characteristic gaze of quiescence which I have now become used

to. There is no expression in those eyes, but the eyes are not empty -

they are simply inscrutable. The sage does not appear to have any

disciples or following : he is content as he is, where he is - an

Avadhuta in truth.

 

 

Later in a room in a mountain-lodge, this happened:

 

We come back to our room in the lodge. It is an hour past noon. We

relax on the cot and converse lazily. A blissful stillness takes over

my being. I feel a quietude in which the mind seems to have taken

rest from its unending activity. But strangely the activities of mind

are not absent. Only the stillness pervades everything - even my own

thoughts and the events happening around me. Everything drifts in an

ineffable state of bliss and restfulness. Lele and Oke and Limaye are

talking. The tranquillity is not disturbed even when I speak. There

is the feeling of the stillness being fixed, as it were, like the

fixity of the all pervading space. Oke sings a song - the Mahishasura

Mardini - and the rising and falling rhythm of the song moves in the

ocean of stillness. After a while, the feeling begins to slip away

and I feel the fever of possessive thought taking hold of my being.

 

Today, I have beheld a living sage. Badrikashrama has been from times

immemorial the home of innumerable sages. In the lap of this ancient

place, I have had the good opportunity to come across a person who

has achieved the pinnacle of the human goal. For I can say that of

all the living persons I have come across, the Avadhuta Baba is the

one who has undoubtedly thrown off the shackles of this world.

END OF NARRATION

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

>

>

> Dear Sir,

>

> Refer you post 29904

>

> Very kind of you to have shared your experience of encounter with a

great sage who has given you a wonderful advise as to how one should

guard against lies. I don't want to go into this matter further as

what right do I have to talk on this subject, when I find that my life

is full of lies, my feeling, too, not being one of choiceless

awareness, but a guilt complex hankering for an image of truth, inside

the skin, as it were, there being a hell of a contradiction. But let

us not despair; at least we have been vouchsafed an intellectual

knowledge of what is truth. Somewhere in the Chapter Divine and

Undivine in Life Divine Sri Aurobindo approaches everything from a

transcendental viewpoint. There is a great sage in Arunachala sitting

on the top of the hill where the holy lamp is lit, having been

stationed there for the last fifteen years, having no shelter rain or

shine, remaining still as though he were one with nature giving no

upadesa, living on only milk that too having been arranged by a

devoted executive officer of the temple to send milk to him. There was

another known as, 'Thinnai Swami,'( the one seated in the pyole), who

though a scholar of great heights, was totally silenced by Bhaghavan

Ramana, who told him, when the Swamy asked where he should proceed,

"Go back whence you came", instructing him in the vichara marga.

Nisargdatta Maharaj was silenced by his guru by the upadesa, "You are

That". Even though the jnanis differ in their expression, their truth

should be only the unreality of individuality, which must, surely, be

the consummation of all meditation, intellectual cogitation. There is

a beautiful Tamil verse by a devotee of Siva:'Only those who are

totally oblivious to wealth, home, pleasures of the senses, the very

inner instruments of the mind, intellect, egoity, time, fine arts, the

feeling one is meditating, even the great law of truth- only such are

vouchsafed the Grace of the Lord; the rest are running amuck in the

painful, sweltering heat of samsara.

With kind regards,

Sankarraman