|
Pravin Kumar
Age: 64 Zodiac: 
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 5:32 am |
|
 |
|
|
|
So the king could not be saved because the man who was peaceful was not prosperous, and the ones who were prosperous did not have peace. In the same way, this world can't be saved because the cultures that have a legacy of peace don't have propserity, and the cultures that are prosperous don't even think about peace. The king died.
Mankind will also die. The treatment that mankind needs is the same as what the king needed. We need the coat and we also need peace. Until now, our ideology has been incomplete. Until now we have thought about man in a very incomplete way, and we habitually move to the extremes. The human mind's greatest disease is its tendency to go to the extremes.
Confucius was staying in a village when somebody said to him, "There is a very scholarly and thoughtful man, would you like to meet him?"
Confucius said, "First let me ask you why you call him very thoughtful, and then I will definitely come to meet him."
The people said, "He is thoughtful because before doing anything he thinks three times --- three times"
Confucius said, "This man is not thoughtful: three times is a bit too much. Once is too little, twice is enough. An intelligent man stops in the middle, an ignorant man goes to the extremes."
The first point of ignorance is if a person thinks himself to be only the body. The second point of ignorance, and to the same degree, is if a person thinks himself to be only the soul. The individuality of man is a synthesis: the culture of man will also be a synthesis.
And it is time we learned our lesson. India's historical poverty and defeat, and the dowtrodden state of all the Eastern countries are not without a reason, and the reason is extremism. And the fact that Western countries have become poor from within is also not without a reason: the reason is scientific extremism. The Future will be beautiful if science and religion and science, religion will be the center and science the circumference. It is cleaer that with the integration of science and religion, religion will necessarily be the intelligence and sience its follower. The body cannot be the master, science also cannot be the master. Religion will be the master. And then we will be able to create a better world.
So don't ask about the use of religion in the scientific age. Religion is of genuine use in the scientific age because science is an extreme, and it is a dangerous extreme. Religion will give it a balance, and it will be able to save man from the danger of that extreme.
This is why the moment of the resurrection of religion all over the world is very close at hand. It is very natural -- and it is absolutely certain. It is needed for there to be a resurrection of religion, otherwise science will only lead to death. So it is pointless to ask what need there is for religon in the scientific age: religion is most needed in this age of science.
Related to this, it has also been asked of what use is religion in national and social life.
I think that what I have just said might have answered this question as well, because something which is useful to the individual is most definitely going to be useful to the nation and society as a whole. After all, what is a nation and a society except a collection of individuals? So don't be under the illusion that a nation can live without religion.
This misfortune has happened in India. We misunderstood certain words; we started talking about a religionless state. We should have said a 'non-sectarian' state but we started talking about a religionless state. It is one thing to be a non--sectarian state, and a totally different thing to be a religionless state. Any intelligent person will be in favor of a non-sectarian state, but only a fool can be in favor of a religionless state.
To be non-sectarian means that we are not concerned with Jainism, Hinduism, Buddhism or with Mohammedanism. This is what it means to be a non-sectarian. But to be a religonless state means that we are not concerned with truth, with non-violence, with love or with compassion. No nation can be religionless in that sense. And if it is, then that is its misfortune. The nation must make religion its very life-energy, and not be religonless. But yes, it is absolutely necessary to be non-sectarian.
The atheists in the world have not harmed religion very much; the scientists in the world have not harmed religion very much. The people who have harmed religion most are the religious leaders. They are the people whose emphasis is less on religion than on being a Jaina, whose emphasis is less on religion than on being a Hindu, whose emphasis is less on religion than on being a Hindu, whose emphasis is less on religion than on being a Mohammedan. These are the people who have deprived the world of religion. Sects which should have been the body of religion have proved to be its murderers. Religion has great value, but sects have no value. The fewer sects and sectarians there are , the better.
It is impossible for any race, any nation or any society to continue without the foundation of religion. How is it possible? Can we continue without the foundation of love? How can a nation be a nation without the foundations of love or truth? Or can a nation be a nation without the foundation of unselfishness, of non-possessiveness, of non-violence and fearlessness? These are the basic qualities of the soul. In their absence there is no nation, no society, then anyone with even a little intelligence will see that it is a crowd of robots. It will be impossible to call it a nation.
A nation is formed through interrelationships -- my relationship with you, and the relationships you have with your neighbors. All these interrelationships together become a nation. The more these relationships become based on truth, on love, on non-violence and on religiousness, the more fragrance there will be in the life of the nation, the more light there will be in the life of the nation and the less darkness there will be in the life of the nation.
So I say, the life of a nation and a society can only exist if it is founded on religion. You should be careful how you use this concept of secularism; the whole nation should be careful. Under the cover of this word there is great danger. Under the cover of this word you may believe that there is no need for religion. But religion is the only thing a human being needs. Everything else is secondary and cannot be dropped.
I think this will help you in solving your question.
Another friend has asked: What should we meditate on?
In general, with all the ideas that are around about meditation, you uunderstand meditation to mean meditating upon something: you will meditate upon somebodyor upon something. So naturally the question arises, on what to meditate? -- who to pray to? who to offer your devotion to? who to love?
I toldyou this morning that there is one kind of love where I would ask you who you are in love with. And there is another kind of love where I would ask whether there is love inside you or not? It has nothing to do with the other.
There are two states of love: one in which love is a relationship, and the other in which love is a state. In the first love, if I tell you that I feel love you will ask, "For who?" And if I tell you that it is not a matter of someone, I just feel love, you will have trouble understanding. But it is this second state which has to be understood.
Only one who simply loves without the need for somebody to be there, really loves. What will someone who loves a particular person do about everyone else? -- he will be filled with hatred towards everyone else. And what will someone who mediates on a particular person do about everyone else? -- he will be filled with unconsciousness towards everyone else.
The meditation I am talking about is not a meditation on something: rather, it is a state where only consciousness remains, where only awareness remains.
If you light a lamp and remove all the objects surrounding it, the lamp will still go on giving light. In the same way, if you remove all objects from your consciousness, all thoughts, all imagination, what will happen? -- only consciousness will remain. That pure state of consciousness is meditation. You don't meditate on somebody. Meditation is a state where only consciousness remains.
When only consciousness remains without an object, that state is called meditation. I am using the word 'meditattion' in this sense.
What you practiceis not medittion in the real sense; it is only a concept. But meditation will happen on its own through this. Try to understand that what you are practicing at night, exercises involving the chakras, and in the morning, exercises involving the breath, is all a discipline, it is not meditation. Through this discipline a moment will come when the breath will seem to have disappeared. Through this discipline a moment will come when the body seems to have disappeared and thoughts have also disappeared. What will remain when everything has disappeared? That which remains is meditation. When everything has disappeared. What will remain when everything has disappeared? That which remains is meditation. When everything has disappointed, that which is left behind is called meditation. A discipline is on something; meditation is not on anything in particular. So what we are in fact doing is practicing the disciplines of the chakras and of the breath.
You will ask, "Wouldn't it be better if we practiced a discipline using the idea of God? Wouldn't it be better if we practiced a discipline with an idol?"
That would be dangerous. It is dangerous because while you practice a discipline with an idol, the state which I am calling meditation will not happen. Practicing a discipline with an idol, there will only be the idol, the more the idol will be there and nothing else.
It happened to Ramakrishna. He used to meditated on the mother goddes Kali; this was his discipline. Then slowly, slowly it happened that he started seeing Kali within himself. Closing his eyes, the idol became alive and he became very blissful, very joyous. But one day a sage came to see him. The sage said to him, "What you are doing is only imagination, it is not a meeting with God."
And Ramakrishna said, "It is not a meeting with God? But I see Kali alive"
The sage replied, "Seeing Kali alive is not a meeting with God."
Some see a Kali, some see a Jesus, some see a Krishna -- all these are fabrications of th emind. God does not have any visible form. The divine does not have a face, a manner, a shape. The moment consciousness enters the formless, it enters the divine.
You don't encounter the divine, you become one with it. There is no face-to-face encounter where you are standing on one side and God is standing on the other side. A moment comes when you merge with the infinite existence, just as a drop falls into the ocean. And the experience of that moment is the experience of the divine. You don't encounter or see God, you experience the merging with existence just as a drop feels when it falls into the ocean.
So the sage told him, "This is a mistake. It is only imagination." And he said to Ramakrishna, "Now, in the same way as you created this idol within you, cut it into two pieces. Raise an imaginary sword and smash the idol in two:
Ramakrishna said, "Sword? Where will I fid a sword?"
The sage said, "The way you create the idol is imagination. You can also imagine the sword and cut the idol with it. Let imagination destroy imagination. When the idol falls down nothing will be left behind. The world has already disappeared, and now only an idol remains -- let go of that too. And when there is only empty space you will encounter the divine. What you are thinking is the divine is not the divine. This is a last barrier to God. Destroy that too."
It was very difficult for Ramakrishna. He had meditated on this idol for years and nurtured it with so much love that it had started to appear to be alive. It was going to be very difficult to destroy it. He closed his eyes again and again but came back saying, "I cannot do this brutal act."
But the sage said, "If you cannot do it, you cannot become one with the divine. Then your love for the divine is less than your love for the idol. Are you not ready to destroy an idol for the sake of the divine? Your love for the divine is not sufficient -- you are not ready to get rid of an idol for it."
You also don't have much love for the divine. You are also keeping idols between you and the divine -- holding on to sects, holding on to religious scriptures -- and you are not ready to let go of them.
The sage said, "You sit in meditation, and I will cut your forehead with a piece of glass. And when you feel me cutting your forehead with the piece of glass, gather some courage and cut Kali in two."
Ramakrishna found the courage, and when he had done it the idol had been cut in two. When he came back he said, "Today, for the first time, I have attained to samadhi. Today, for the first time, I have come to know what truth is. For the first time I am free of imagination and I have entered truth.
So this is why I am not asking you to imagine anything. I am not asking you to imagine something which will be an obstacle because you don't become infatuated with them. You are not concerned with them: they are only devices through whch you can go within. They cannot become obstacles.
So I am only taking about using imagination in such a way that in the end it does not become a hindrance to your meditation. This is why I have not asked you to meditate on something. I have simply asked you to go into meditation..
You are not to meditate on something. You have to reach meditation within yourself. If you remember this, many things will become clear.
|
Welcome to Mystic Board - Free Astrology, Tarot to Psychic Discussion Board. New visitors: Register Now its FAST! Members, please Sign-In.
