Guest guest Posted October 30, 1999 Report Share Posted October 30, 1999 Namaste Jayanti: yes it has been a long time...since we last communicated i have heard so much about you from other members of the Ramakrishna family of the courage you display on a daily basis... and i am always truly inspired when i remember you... regarding your response to the monk and the butcher...i agree with all you say..but i am, i suppose looking at it from a diferent perspective..that is all.. please let me share that perspective with you in light of all that you say,... > Firstly, because no monk need be present for the butcher to guess > which way the cow went, I do not believe that the monk is involved in > the butcher's guessing correctly. i agree and i did not mean that the monk would be responsible if he were to keep quiet...all i meant was, if the monk remained silent and the butcher did guess correctly, the monk would lament the killing, yet feel " secure " that he had stuck to the path of righteousness...and so ensure his journey to heaven. The motive behind his keeping quiet would be to ensure that he does not stray from the path of dharma ...a self-centered motive... as it ensures that he attains salvation...all self-centered directives... > Secondly, you present three potentially contradictory situations: > 1. The monk's commitment to truth > 2. The value of protecting the cow > 3. The butcher's need to make a living. > > Has not the monk reconciled all of these by the twin action of > acknowledging to the butcher that he knows which way the cow went, > but refuses to tell him? > > Simple truth would say, " Yes, the cow went that way. " The monk does > not lie, nor does he simply tell the truth. Rather he takes the > action to protect the cow which is within his power. He does this > boldly by stating that he knows, but will not tell! We are seldom so > brave or bold! > > At the same time, the future is free to play out as it is meant to. > The monk has taking a firm stand in principle without the folly of > trying to control the outcome. Should the butcher become angry and > beat him, the monk will stand firm accepting the beating as God's > will.. Likewise, should the butcher run off after the cow, this too > is God's will. > > Is this sitting on the fence? I think we let our attachment to > outcome blind us to effective action. We decide HOW a situation MUST > play out, and become determined to MAKE this happen whether we have > the ability to do so or not. As a result we often sacrifice our > principles and integrity in the process. We become weak and > ineffective by not recognizing the source of the power within our > reach. And we bring in awareness of conflict, rather than > leaving/trusting the outcome to unfold as the Divine or Nature wills. > > If by chance the monk IS to save the cow, what is more be powerful > than to stand before the butcher and declare, " Yes, I know where the > cow is, but I will tell you. " > > Sincerely, > Jayanti again i agree with all that you say...but if i were given the CHOICE of worshipping a monk as an IDEAL between a monk who chooses your suggested course of action or a monk who LIES knowing that he lies only to save the cow and at the same time helps the butcher get an alternative repast and means of livelihood, even if it be at the expense of the monk arranging to do so through the sacrifice of his own time and maybe even life, i would ALWAYS, choose the latter monk as my IDEAL and GURU...for the latter monk who lied, is not only making the ultimate sacrifice of foregoing his most cherished goal of salvation in the 'next world' but also paying it for in this life by devoting his life to meet the butcher's needs. For deep down although he may recognize the cruelty of killing an innocent cow he also recognizes the butcher's legitimate needs... as i said, i agree with you fully, only that i see it in a different perspective. namaskar to you Jayanti... by the way...did i ever thank you enough for allowing me to use the sacred pictures of the Master, Swamiji and The Holy Mother that you had for your web based shrines...for the Sangam? i dont think i did adequately...i know that was a tough decision for you and i did appreciate it immeasurably. pranaams jairam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 30, 1999 Report Share Posted October 30, 1999 Dear Friends, Just look at the dilemma this small story is posing for us all. And think of the problem Sri Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madhva must have had faced to decipher and interpret the meanings of Brahma Sutras, The Gita, and the Upanishads. Moreover, with a slight change in emphasis and priority in their analysis and interpretation (perspective) it is no wonder many sects are formed after them. Who knows with passage of time, the Ramakrishna movement would also be divided in sects depending upon the slight change in perspective!!! " i agree with you fully, only that i see it in a different perspective " In my opinion sects are welcome, for there is no control of anyone over their origin or formation. dr c s s *** JAIRAM SESHADRI wrote: > Namaste Jayanti: > regarding your response to the monk and the butcher...i agree with > all you say..but i am, i suppose looking at it from a diferent > perspective..that is all.. please let me share that perspective with > you in light of all that you say,... > Firstly, because no monk need be present for the butcher to guess... ==================================== E-magazine on science and spirituality. Visit: http://members.xoom.com/drcsshah/neovedanta/index.html ==================================== 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.