the monk and the butcher and the cow

[Guest guest]

Hi jayanti!

 

> I believe you know Mukti Chaitanya, from Sacramento.. Kindly give

> him my greetings.

 

yes i do ...infact i just saw him yesterday...and he will be going to

India for four months from Dec 2...i will convey your greetings to

him

 

> I hope I didn't cause problems by moving Mother's web site. I

tried

> to notify everyone on the in advance, but I forgot to write you

> directly. You can keep the links by replacing

> " www.scescape.com/saradama/mandir/... " ' with

> " www.srisarada.org/mandir/.... "

 

not at all... i have dismantled my website as well....

 

> Back to our problem:

>

> I'm curious that you assume that the monk tells the truth only to

> save his soul. For some this could be the case, but I suspect,

> frankly, such a motive negates the spiritual value of practicing

> truth.

>

> Sri Ramarishna held the practice of truth for truth's sake above all

> practices. He further claimed that one who practices absolute truth

> (unmotivated) for twelve years would have the power of truth in

> his/her words. The power of a holy person's blessings and curses lies

> in their spiritual practice of truth.

 

i agree with you wholeheartedly...your viewpoint is correct

 

> >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.

>

> How so? By lying he's not recognizing the butcher at all! He's

> deliberately MISLEADING the butcher.

 

but is he if he devotes time to taking care of the butcher's needs

through 'alternate ways' sacrificing his time..the Buddha who stopped

the sacrifice of a goat offered his own life in replacement..in the

same way if the monk satisfies the hunger of the butcher some other

way...even if at the offering of his own life how is he misleading

the butcher...?

 

> As with the first monk, if he is sincere in trying to save the cow

> with no thought of himself, this would be admirable. I also doubt

> his soul would be in jeopardy. But he could just as well be lying

> because it's easier than telling the truth and standing one's

> ground. This hardly seems admirable, nor helpful to his soul.

 

> The third alternative, the monk tells the butcher which way the

cow

> went because he feels compassion for the butcher, this too, would be

> admirable. But again, if he, as you say, merely tells the truth

> because he thinks he'll save his soul thereby...... poor fellow....

>

> Spiritual life isn't based on action. Each of the actions can be

> right, if one's motivation and understanding is sound, and one is

> willing to accept the consequences.

>

> What do you think?

 

i htink you are right ...it is just that as i said earlier...given

the choice between two monks who just says truth for truth's sake

(without taking into account the circs of each case or a monk who

lies for the sake of the cow and goes all out to make up for it by

satisfying the butcher's needs through some alternative needs...i

would choose the latter as my guru... ALWAYS!

 

 

 

pranaams to you Jayanti

jairam

 

> Jai Ma!

>

> Jayanti

>

> >

> >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

>

>