| |
|
|
|
|
Articles |
Glossary |
Questions |
Home |
by
Sri Bimal Mohanty
VOL
No.100
June: 2009
OUR LIFE AND OUR DREAMS
QUESTIONS FROM READERS
QUESTION 1 FROM PROF MRIGANK SENGUPTA
Sir, As you say, according to Sanatan philosophy all souls are essentially same as Brahman and no different from it. Whereas most other religions do not subscribe to this. Admittedly it is a significant idea. But what is its practical advantage?
ANSWER: It is a great question coming from a learned professor. I also had the same question from a young philosopher friend.
Apart from the profound advantages of ‘oneness concept’, ‘universal harmony in existence’ etc which we have discussed in various articles of AHWAN, following perhaps is a great practical advantage.
All souls are mere extensions of that Supreme Soul- Brahman the God. We are all limbs of that single universal body. When different limbs of the body, say the hands and the legs, know that they belong to the same body, do they harm each other? They learn to exist in peaceful harmony each helping the other when needed. Bringing harm in any manner to the other is so illogical.
The concept that we all belong to the same single entity, brings home this very point of eschewing harm and peaceful co-existence. Harming another soul is not only illogical but also self destructive.
There is another point. When we are all Brahman then when we hate or harm another soul – be it plant, animal or human – we in effect endevour to hate and harm Brahman himself. We all seek God’s help for all that we need. When we pray Him to save us, how can we be vengeful to a part of His? Can anyone harbour grudge to some one and simultaneously seek his benevolence?
The world seeks a solution to peace and harmonious co-existence. The Sanatan philosophy provides the solution. See everything as part of a single entity. See yourself inseparable with that entity as everybody else is. The pain and pleasure of one becomes then the pain and pleasure of the other. What better practical wisdom there is?
Does it sound too utopian, too unachievable?
Sanatan philosophy also has an answer. ‘Svalpasya api dharmasya trayate mahato bhayat’ . Even partial practice of the concept goes on to ward off great calamities.
QUESTION 2 FROM SRI RABINDER KOUL
Bimal Ji:
….what is the Hindu word for Spiritual? Is there correspondence between the notion of GOD and BRAHMAN/SHiVA etc.. why does Hindu tradition differentiate between the Para-Shiva with Sadashiva, Ishvara etc.
ANSWER:I am not sure if I have clearly understood your question/ comments. However after some thoughts I reproduce some of my comments in the context of another query and hope you will find them relevant.
To begin with, in sanatan philosophy by the word ‘spiritual’ we recognize everything that concerns Brahman only. Brahman is the one and only spirit.That is adhyatma jnana. Controversies may arise due to incompatibility between two languages but that is not of consequence.
The acceptance of various gods and goddesses conceptualized in the back ground of one and only Brahman arises from a very matured state of mind. It is the foundation of sanatan philosophy’s adveitavad that explains the idea behind ‘the one manifested as many’. The Vedas (Upanishads) and Brahmasutras etc have amply clarified this.
If you have been regularly following the articles in AHWAN it has been expounded often. I specifically recommend ‘One God, Many Gods’ Parts 1 and 2 in May and June 2006 issues.
A clouded mind fails to see this and dwells in the differences seen in various manifestations of that one and only Brahman.
Even many so called learned pundits are victims of this ignorance. Worshipping a particular Ishta is important to begin with. Its power over the mind should not be underestimated. But many of our educated people today spend all their time remaining trapped in a particular form and seldom transcend into the esoteric concept as envisaged in our scriptures. Most do not even try. Studying of our scriptures, once considered essential for all – the swadhyayana- has gone out of fashion so to say.
It was never so in our ancient tradition. Every sadhaka was encouraged to raise constantly his mental perception above the mundane worshipping and rituals to ask ‘athato brahma jijnasa’.- now we shall enquire of Brahman only.
Until that stage is reached, one remains half educated, confused and deluded. Under a surface layer of spirituality (or sanatandharma, or hindudharma as it is known) a confused mind is intolerant, over-reacting and violent. This is a degeneration of our nature, far removed from the original thought process.
QUESTION 3 FROM Mr DAVID OSBORN
Don’t, all followers of a religion think in a groove? Is it not against real freedom of thought?
ANSWER: What you think as a groove constitutes a basic foundation, discipline and basic principles. These also represent the achievement the human mind has made so far so that it does not begin all the time from the beginning again. Contemplating on them may bring refinement but seldom any radical change.
No forward movement is possible unless human thinking follows discipline and principles. Look around at the nature of things. All movements follow established principles to go forward. A river follows the banks, slope, laws of gravity etc to move forward. Likewise disciplined thoughts only take one forward.
This need not curtail the freedom of thought. Thought is limited when its goal is limited. Amongst religious philosophies, especially sanatana philosophy, all thoughts eventually focus on Brahman, directly or indirectly. Brahman by definition is unlimited and all encompassing. Therefore ‘thinking’ can never be limited. Religion does not limit thinking. Egoistic desire, material objectives are what restrict the freedom of mind.
QUESTION 4 FROM Sri BISHNU PRASADA ADHIKARY
Swamiji, One school says to work your spiritual way through, without running away from the world. The Bhagavad Gita says sages prefer to be left alone away from the society in lonely places. It confuses me.
ANSWER::The problem is in picking up an idea out of context without reference to the overall context.
Explaining about the kshetra and kshetrajna to Arjuna, Lord Krishna talks of the characteristic of a self-culture to arrive at the knowledge – His knowledge or the knowledge of supreme Brahman, to whom one must be devoted without any distraction whatsoever. It demands ananya yoga – single minded concentration and avyabhicArini bhakti- unswerving devotion. This has to be practiced.
The reason for which we can not maintain a single pointed concentration, is the worldly affairs around us. In our physical state, the forces around us are too powerful and too many, demanding our attention. Even to understand them requires great self determination.
But to remain engrossed in their trap twenty-four-seven is an inferior life. You become subjected to them and can not think of them objectively in a dispassionate way unless for some time you distance yourself from them. Unless you see them objectively, no lesson is learnt. There is no spiritual development. No single channeling of thoughts.
The sadhaka knows this and needs to withdraw himself away from the distractions time and again to contemplate. He withdraws to a lonely place away from the demands of the world to collect one-self inwardly.
That is the importance of Vivikta sthana or seeking to be alone. But that single pointed concentration can also be achieved when the knowledge has reached such a stage that you can easily co-relate the entire happenings and conditions around you with that central concept of Brahman.
The withdrawal of a sadhaka is never permanent. He returns to his work field (karma bhumi) again and again to work his way through. He seeks Brahman in all His aspects and every where.
QUESTION 5 FROM SRI RAVI JOSHI
How can one remain equipoised when you see the sadness and arrogance of ones dear and near ones?
ANSWER:: The question that you have raised is indeed one of the most difficult conditions of life to deal with – so difficult that it is perhaps the most difficult test that differentiates a worldly person from a truly enlightened one.
But a spiritual approach to life holds the key to the solution.
In the absence of any specific situation to comment upon I can best give the following general guidelines.
Composure or equipoise does not mean unconcernedness. To be concerned is natural. Otherwise all relationships would be so meaningless. But spiritualism calls for clearheadedness in midst of concern – what is described as sthitapranjnA.
Looking at the difficult condition of someone close to you, one must contemplate over two important aspects.
Firstly all situations in life and how one behaves under their influence, result from acts of omissions and commissions by the concerned person himself in the past. All effects have causes behind them created by us only. One has to reap what one has sown. Everyone has to go through all predicaments resulting from one’s own acts. It is so inevitable that simply feeling miserable does no good whatsoever.
It is a divine process, meant to teach the lessons to the concerned persons- the lessons of dharma and thereby to improve life. Once understood and accepted, the mind is so programmed that it discovers the right path to follow.
Secondly, as a close relative, you must understand what should be your role here. For no superficial reasons two jivas are juxtaposed close to each other, bound by blood relationship or friendship. It is a Divine decision again of great profundity. Two souls happen to be close to each other in life because, each is ideally suitable to assist and support the other in life and none else can take their places. That is the great truth about all relationships. (suggested further reading “Relationships in the context of spiritual growth” in the January 2003 issue of www.ahwan.org).
How can one support and help? It is by making the other person see the inevitability of the bad situation resulting from one’s past karma and look at it positively that it now calls for a reorientation of thinking. The divine message that some corrective steps are called for, has to be understood.
A truly well-meaning relative does really that – helps to usher the wisdom to change for both. You can not do that if both get swayed by the situation and stop thinking clearly in a detached way. A good relative or friend is indeed a good guru who provides the direction for the other to find the way.
And how is the way revealed? It is the miracles of lives that once the mind is determined, it starts moving in the right direction, starts reconstructing life – always.
To crown it all, if the determination takes to spiritualism, surrendering and seeking out the grace of Brahman, the solutions come faster. Everything changes. That indeed is yoga in practice.
A relationship helps to find the light amidst darkness. This may be a slow process without quick results. What is more, the other person may be very non-responsive to start with. But dharma says that that should not perturb you.
Keep throwing your positive vibrations and unselfish compassion. The ice will eventually melt.
One must never allow the predicament to overtake one’s equanimity and mental balance (sthitaprajnA). The Lord always stands by and acts at the right time.
As a relative or a friend, become an accessory (nimitta) in this divine process and see the Divine work its way.
