Secret of Consciousness!
If you study the Upanishads and such mystical text of high spiritual significance, you will realize that the Supreme Being, the Absolute, is designated in its primordial condition as a Supreme Darkness due to excess of light. This adjective or qualification ‘due to excess of light’ must be added. It is darkness because of the excess of light. When you look at the sun directly for a few minutes and then look elsewhere, you will see only darkness. The sun has dazzled you to such an extent that all else appears as darkness. The intensity of light is such that it looks like darkness to the eyes of man. There is the hymn of the Rigveda called 'Nasadiya Sukta', regarding the original condition of creation, wherein it is said, “Tama asit tamasa gudhamagre”; Darkness there was; at first concealed in darkness.
Generally, to know is to know an object; and if it is not to know an object, it is not to know anything at all. Do you know the reason, what is the necessity to fall asleep every night? The necessity is psychological and, to some extent, highly metaphysical. The whole body, the whole nervous system, the entire psychological apparatus becomes active in the process of the perception of objects. And without our knowing what is happening, the senses get tired. The reason is that perception is an unnatural process from the point of view of consciousness as such. Perception of an object is the alienation of an aspect of our personality through the avenue of a particular sense in respect of its object. All this is difficult for many to grasp. This is a highly psychological secret. Consciousness is indivisible. Consciousness is undivided; it is incapable of division into two sections – subject and object. On the basis of this fact there cannot be a division between the seer and the seen in the process of perception.
In dream what do you see when things are not there? What happens in dream is that there is an alienation of the mind into the objects of perception; and the mind itself becomes the objects seen there. There is tension created due to the separation of a part of the mind into the object and a part of it existing as the perceiving subject. That is why we are restless in dream. We cannot be happy. It is neither waking nor it is sleep. It is very difficult to be happy in this condition because a tense situation of consciousness is created. What happened in dream, the same happens to us in the waking condition also. Just as the mind in dream divided itself into two sections i.e. the perceiving subject and the object that was seen; in the waking state also, it divides itself into the subject and object. It is like a divided personality. It is as if your own personality has been cut into two halves. Just as in dream you did not know that you were dreaming, in this waking also you do not know that you are in a state similar to dream. In deep sleep the senses and the intellect withdraw themselves into their source. There is no perceptional activity, and so the absence of perception is equated to the presence of darkness; the cosmic Primeval condition of the creative Will of God, before creation, a state appearing like darkness, or night – the night of the birth of Krishna and Jesus and the night of Siva. ………..OM SHANTI!
Friday, August 5, 2011
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Between heaven and hell!
The idea of a heaven and hell is central to and so ingrained in all major religions of the world that it seems almost instinctive to mankind’s spiritual evolution. Almost all the spiritual gurus, prophets and messiahs preach nobility of thought and action, founded on the premise of a benevolent ‘Heaven’, where one gets rewarded for the good deeds, and a malevolent ‘Hell’ where punishment is meted out as divine retribution for ignoble deeds. Most people who believe in God, also believe in this reward and punishment system of the after-life where one gets entry into one or the other House of Judgement depending on which way the scales of their deeds dip. This belief is as prevalent as it is compelling and most people choose to lead a ‘good’ life through this belief. We uphold good deeds like caring for the old and infirm and decry foul ones primarily because on our moment of final departure, we would be answerable for our actions.
At the heart of the whole heaven and hell belief lies a deep rooted fear – the fear of judgement on our last day on earth and it is instilled in us from early days by well meaning parents or grandparents. Had this fear not existed, there would not have been any need to control our dark impulses. There cannot be any law without the psyche of fear governing our better judgement. However, a more subtle feeling that perpetuates this belief is the insecurity that permeates each moment of our ephemeral lives on earth. That, as mortals, we live in a less-than-perfect world. That despite being filled with all earthly comforts and pleasures, our world is subject to a lot of ugliness and negativity, which is why the ultimate goal of human existence is stated to be a union with the ‘perfect’ Being that is, God. All spiritual texts and religious leaders preach that. That our world is impermanent and imperfect and ultimately, we have to get out of it and continue the journey of our soul towards salvation. That perfection, in any pursuit, is the final destination and so, this world must be given up in the final pursuit of the soul.
The other aspect of this philosophy is the emphasis it places on the value of individual action, as against what is pre-ordained by divinity. Thus all spiritual teachers and prophets, whether it is Jesus or Krishna or Mohammad, exhort their followers to follow a path of good deeds and refrain from foul ones in their pursuit of salvation. However, having obtained enlightenment for themselves, they cannot grant enlightenment to their followers or make the world a better place. They can only direct us, lead us on the path to attain salvation, but cannot actually do it on our behalf. The action has to come from the individual alone and that is where the buck stops. So Krishna exhorted Arjun to pick up the bow and shoot, though he could end the battle right there. And Jesus went through the crucifixion and bled, though he could heal the wounds of others. But they chose to act within the bounds of grand scheme of human existence and to fulfill its divine predicament, Action is indispensable. Because Action is, truly, the only path to salvation. Act one must, good or bad, given the situation and our role in it, and for that we must get evaluated. This is a test of life in which one cannot be marked absent. One has to appear, and one has to go through the assessment. The cumulative effect of our deeds, big and small, that would determine the next course of journey for our souls, whether the road ahead would be strewn with boulders or laid out in red carpet. To act, therefore, is imperative. To act, in accordance with the natural order of justice is our true objective. And to experience the repercussions of our actions, our destiny. Into these basic tenets, all religions finally unfold their substance.
The intention of the originators of the great thoughts and the sages of divine experience were all wonderful. But, time has its own say in every matter and things slowly get diluted as time passes on. The pure gets adulterated until it loses all content, meaning and reality. The worst mistake that we can do in anything is to go to the extreme in it. Even truth can become untruth, when it is taken to the extreme.
The idea of a heaven and hell is central to and so ingrained in all major religions of the world that it seems almost instinctive to mankind’s spiritual evolution. Almost all the spiritual gurus, prophets and messiahs preach nobility of thought and action, founded on the premise of a benevolent ‘Heaven’, where one gets rewarded for the good deeds, and a malevolent ‘Hell’ where punishment is meted out as divine retribution for ignoble deeds. Most people who believe in God, also believe in this reward and punishment system of the after-life where one gets entry into one or the other House of Judgement depending on which way the scales of their deeds dip. This belief is as prevalent as it is compelling and most people choose to lead a ‘good’ life through this belief. We uphold good deeds like caring for the old and infirm and decry foul ones primarily because on our moment of final departure, we would be answerable for our actions.
At the heart of the whole heaven and hell belief lies a deep rooted fear – the fear of judgement on our last day on earth and it is instilled in us from early days by well meaning parents or grandparents. Had this fear not existed, there would not have been any need to control our dark impulses. There cannot be any law without the psyche of fear governing our better judgement. However, a more subtle feeling that perpetuates this belief is the insecurity that permeates each moment of our ephemeral lives on earth. That, as mortals, we live in a less-than-perfect world. That despite being filled with all earthly comforts and pleasures, our world is subject to a lot of ugliness and negativity, which is why the ultimate goal of human existence is stated to be a union with the ‘perfect’ Being that is, God. All spiritual texts and religious leaders preach that. That our world is impermanent and imperfect and ultimately, we have to get out of it and continue the journey of our soul towards salvation. That perfection, in any pursuit, is the final destination and so, this world must be given up in the final pursuit of the soul.
The other aspect of this philosophy is the emphasis it places on the value of individual action, as against what is pre-ordained by divinity. Thus all spiritual teachers and prophets, whether it is Jesus or Krishna or Mohammad, exhort their followers to follow a path of good deeds and refrain from foul ones in their pursuit of salvation. However, having obtained enlightenment for themselves, they cannot grant enlightenment to their followers or make the world a better place. They can only direct us, lead us on the path to attain salvation, but cannot actually do it on our behalf. The action has to come from the individual alone and that is where the buck stops. So Krishna exhorted Arjun to pick up the bow and shoot, though he could end the battle right there. And Jesus went through the crucifixion and bled, though he could heal the wounds of others. But they chose to act within the bounds of grand scheme of human existence and to fulfill its divine predicament, Action is indispensable. Because Action is, truly, the only path to salvation. Act one must, good or bad, given the situation and our role in it, and for that we must get evaluated. This is a test of life in which one cannot be marked absent. One has to appear, and one has to go through the assessment. The cumulative effect of our deeds, big and small, that would determine the next course of journey for our souls, whether the road ahead would be strewn with boulders or laid out in red carpet. To act, therefore, is imperative. To act, in accordance with the natural order of justice is our true objective. And to experience the repercussions of our actions, our destiny. Into these basic tenets, all religions finally unfold their substance.
The intention of the originators of the great thoughts and the sages of divine experience were all wonderful. But, time has its own say in every matter and things slowly get diluted as time passes on. The pure gets adulterated until it loses all content, meaning and reality. The worst mistake that we can do in anything is to go to the extreme in it. Even truth can become untruth, when it is taken to the extreme.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Towards the end of the Seventeenth Chapter we are given the cryptic message of “ Om-Tat-Sat”, a term with which we are all familiar, but the meaning of which is not always so clear. It is said that this is a very holy expression and it has to be employed in every religious performance. We conclude all pious acts with the utterance, Om-Tat-Sat, which appears to be an invocation of God at the end of a performance. The meaning of these words is not clear, and no commentary on the Gita will perhaps be an aid to us in understanding what these three terms actually signify. We merely say, Om-Tat-Sat. We do not know what it means. Well, we may go a little deep into its significance from the point of view of the Bhagavadgita itself, in the light of the great message that has been given to us through its various Chapters. And in this light if we look at these terms, it would appear that the three seeds, Om, Tat, Sat signify the total comprehensiveness of the nature of Brahman ranging beyond the concepts of Reality in the form of transcendence and immanence. Generally, a remote thing is referred to as Tat, in the Sanskrit language. ‘That’ is Tat. We refer to God as Tat, It, etc. as a super transcendent inaccessible something. Sat is the very same transcendent Reality is hidden and present as the Divine immanence in all things. God is transcendent and also immanent. He is above us; he is inside. Now, these ideas of transcendence and immanence, - Tat-Sat,- the notions of God being outside as well as inside, are also to be transcended in a larger grasp, which is Om. Here, in this mystical significance of the well-known symbol of Om, we are given a further transcendence of both the transcendent aspect and the immanent aspect of the Absolute. It is, in the language of the Upanishad, the Bhuma, or the Plenum, the completeness whereby we cannot look upon it either as something above us or as something within us. To that supreme completeness, there are no outward and inward differences. There is no such thing as going above and being within, because it is everywhere, at all times, without the limitations of space, time and objectivity. Such an incomprehensible significance is embedded in this mystical formula of Om. Naturally, it is a holy expression, which is unutterable, beyond understanding but signifying everything that is blessed and supreme. Such is Om, which grasps within itself all that is real everywhere, the transcendent and the immanent. So, God is all, the Absolute is everything. The invocation of this Symbol in our experience, in our own consciousness, a remembrance of it at the sacred conclusion of any kind of performance, religious or otherwise, is regarded as a completion of that performance. God completes everything, and everything is incomplete where God is absent. The only thing that is full is God. And so He has to be invoked always. ~~ “ The Philosophy of the Bhagavadgita by Rev. Swami Krishnananda.”
OM
“By pronouncing OM properly, the heart and the mind are filled with peace, tranquility and bliss. You can feel the limitless ocean of power and energy within you. In order to acquire and possess this invaluable treasure of Nature, the Bliss and Peace, OM works as a key to unlock the coffer. The sound of OM, filling the entire atmosphere, gives immediate relief to humanity. At the end of the prayers in Jewish, English or Arabian languages, the word Amen, or Aamin, is nothing but the changed form of OM. The last word of the Greek language is Omegh which has the prominence of OM. Also, in the English words, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient, the eminence of OM is distinct. The presence of OM in these words is not just by chance. It is on account of the word Om that these words give the indication of universalism. Om is like a huge tree, casting its cool shadow all around and providing peaceful and refreshing relief and energy to all those suffering from the scorching heat of pain, affliction, worry, anxiety, etc.
In every beginning of Koran, at the top, there are three letters, Alif (A ) Lam ( l ) and Mim (m ). Lam (L ) can be pronounced as Wao ( O ), according to Arabic grammar, under certain circumstances. In Arabic Shamsaldin is read as Samsuddin. Nizamaldin is read as Nizamuddin. According to Arabic grammar, when Lam (L ) comes between a vowel and a consonant, it becomes silent and gives the sound of Arabic Pesh (O or U ). Similar is the case here with Alif (A) , Lam (L ) and Mim (M). Here Lam (L ) is in between the vowel Alif (A ) and the consonant Mim (M) and, therefore, it becomes silent and gives the sound of O or U. Accordingly, Alif, Lam and Mim give the sound of Alif(A) Wao (O or U) and Mim(M) i.e. AOM oa AUM. This is nothing but Om. This is no secret of God, as it is said.
The conch shell, when blown, gives out the sound of Om which diverges in the space to spread peace, concentration and self-confidence in the atmosphere. This stimulates the heart to be merged in Godhood. It has been since birth. When a child is born, he cries with the sound of Om. When the children play and their minds are saturated with happiness, they produce a noise which resembles that of Om. When people fall sick or are afflicted with some unbearable pain, they invariably groan which produces the sound resembling Om. This gives them relief from their agonizing pain.” ~ Excerpt from the work of Rev. Swami Ramtirth.
“The vowel sounds produced by the voice are due to the vibrations of two cartilaginous plates, the "vocal chords" placed at the top of wind pipe, edge to edge with a narrow slit between them; air blown through this slit from the lungs keeps the plate vibrating. The apparatus is really a free reed, the vocal chords have muscles attached to them which can vary the frequency of the vibration and the pitch of the sound produced. The vowel are continuous sounds formed by varying the size and shape of mouth cavity. The consonants are particular interruptions of these sounds. They cut short the vowel sound but cannot themselves be sounded without vowels. And for this reason, the vowels are known as 'Shaktis'.” ~ Excerpt from Sir John Woodroffe
AUM contains three letters; A starts from the initial manifestation with throat, U comes to the mouth and M ceases with closing of lips. These cover the entire vocal phenomenon.....all words, languages are enshrined within these three...A,U,M.
“By pronouncing OM properly, the heart and the mind are filled with peace, tranquility and bliss. You can feel the limitless ocean of power and energy within you. In order to acquire and possess this invaluable treasure of Nature, the Bliss and Peace, OM works as a key to unlock the coffer. The sound of OM, filling the entire atmosphere, gives immediate relief to humanity. At the end of the prayers in Jewish, English or Arabian languages, the word Amen, or Aamin, is nothing but the changed form of OM. The last word of the Greek language is Omegh which has the prominence of OM. Also, in the English words, omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient, the eminence of OM is distinct. The presence of OM in these words is not just by chance. It is on account of the word Om that these words give the indication of universalism. Om is like a huge tree, casting its cool shadow all around and providing peaceful and refreshing relief and energy to all those suffering from the scorching heat of pain, affliction, worry, anxiety, etc.
In every beginning of Koran, at the top, there are three letters, Alif (A ) Lam ( l ) and Mim (m ). Lam (L ) can be pronounced as Wao ( O ), according to Arabic grammar, under certain circumstances. In Arabic Shamsaldin is read as Samsuddin. Nizamaldin is read as Nizamuddin. According to Arabic grammar, when Lam (L ) comes between a vowel and a consonant, it becomes silent and gives the sound of Arabic Pesh (O or U ). Similar is the case here with Alif (A) , Lam (L ) and Mim (M). Here Lam (L ) is in between the vowel Alif (A ) and the consonant Mim (M) and, therefore, it becomes silent and gives the sound of O or U. Accordingly, Alif, Lam and Mim give the sound of Alif(A) Wao (O or U) and Mim(M) i.e. AOM oa AUM. This is nothing but Om. This is no secret of God, as it is said.
The conch shell, when blown, gives out the sound of Om which diverges in the space to spread peace, concentration and self-confidence in the atmosphere. This stimulates the heart to be merged in Godhood. It has been since birth. When a child is born, he cries with the sound of Om. When the children play and their minds are saturated with happiness, they produce a noise which resembles that of Om. When people fall sick or are afflicted with some unbearable pain, they invariably groan which produces the sound resembling Om. This gives them relief from their agonizing pain.” ~ Excerpt from the work of Rev. Swami Ramtirth.
“The vowel sounds produced by the voice are due to the vibrations of two cartilaginous plates, the "vocal chords" placed at the top of wind pipe, edge to edge with a narrow slit between them; air blown through this slit from the lungs keeps the plate vibrating. The apparatus is really a free reed, the vocal chords have muscles attached to them which can vary the frequency of the vibration and the pitch of the sound produced. The vowel are continuous sounds formed by varying the size and shape of mouth cavity. The consonants are particular interruptions of these sounds. They cut short the vowel sound but cannot themselves be sounded without vowels. And for this reason, the vowels are known as 'Shaktis'.” ~ Excerpt from Sir John Woodroffe
AUM contains three letters; A starts from the initial manifestation with throat, U comes to the mouth and M ceases with closing of lips. These cover the entire vocal phenomenon.....all words, languages are enshrined within these three...A,U,M.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Failures Are Good
It pains me to hear about a 8th standard student ending her life because of failure in her annual exams. Or a promising medical graduate hanging from his ceiling fan because he could not make it through the MD exam. Ending life because of rejection by girlfriend or boyfriend make up most other headlines. It makes me wonder how ill equipped our children are to face failures and setbacks in life. And what is life without failures and setbacks? Perhaps it the mindset we are inculcating in our children. That success is about never failing, never having to face tough situations, never going through lean periods. Unnatural, isn’t it, when everything in life is so ephemeral. Seasons change, geographies change, people change. And yet, we perpetuate the belief that a change from good to bad is not acceptable. Reading about suicides makes me sick when I think of how excruciatingly painful it is for a mother to accept, that the miracle which took her 9 months to bring forth, has been destroyed in an instant. Ending a life is no man’s privilege. It is not ours to take as it is not ours to build. But that would start a separate thread and is not part of this discourse. Today, I am just wondering if our bringing-up has anything to do with our children being more prone to taking their own life, when it does not seem to go in the direction they intended.
As parents, we express our disapproval for anything that is not quite up to the mark. Falling down is bad, that is why we console our kids when they fall down and hurt themselves. We do not celebrate it or even welcome it as something which is essential to their growth. It should be easy to gauge the effect of failure on a child who has never hurt herself in life, who has never experienced hurt. Well-meaning but over protective parents, by never letting their children experience the pain and hurt in life, give them a subtle yet strong message. A two-fold message in fact. One, that failure is not a natural process which is to be experienced; and two, that failure is not their responsibility but someone else’s fault. When we smack the floor after a toddler falls down, we give him/her to understand that it is the floor’s fault. The child need not do anything different, we will hit the floor and he/she will be alright. Shouldn’t we be telling the kid to walk carefully and that if we do something in a certain way, we get a certain consequence? That, whatever we do, is a consequence of our actions and not someone’s fault. Even toddlers can understand the simple cause and effect theory.
We need to remember that children are deeply affected by our reactions and responses, much more than we ever care about. They carry our responses with them for life. How we respond to them, their actions, good or bad, has the potential to determine and significantly define their lives. Little Tommy, in kindergarten, gets 4 out of 10 in English test and his mom says, the teacher is not good enough. Either she didn’t teach him well or she didn’t judge his performance well. In short, teacher’s fault. His essay looked perfect to his parents. So, little Tommy has little motivation to do better next time. Sunny’s mom, on the other hand, tells him to work harder and score better and that is what he is encouraged to do. Sunny’s mom is, in fact, happy to know that her kid has not scored too much. She is happy that Sunny has something to learn and improve upon and that is the message she gives out to him. Sunny will learn from his failure, little Tommy will learn to blame his teacher every time he scores less. We see these kids later in college and it’s the same response. Little Tommy, now Big Tommy, does not do well in the final semester as his professor didn’t give him good marks in the practical exam. Big Sunny, if he does not do well, tries to find out where he went wrong and puts in effort to improve. A few more years, and the two are working for an organization. Tommy, when he does not get a promotion and gets a bad feedback from his supervisor, blames it on the latter. His supervisor is not a good mentor, not good at his job and favors some select people. He never once looks at his own performance as something that could be worked upon. Sunny, when he gets a feedback, tries to analyze ways to improve his performance. In fact, he always seeks feedback from his supervisors and peers and tries to improve on his skills. The feedbacks, even the bad ones, propel him to positive action without undermining his confidence in his abilities.
Since the time he scored a 4 out of 10 in English, in kindergarten, Tommy has learnt from his mother, to direct the responsibility of failure on someone else and not do anything about it. Sunny has been taught to learn from his mistake and do better next time. Failure for one, is an excuse for working less next time while for one it is an opportunity to do better. If, at some point of time, Tommy does not find anyone to blame, he would not know what to do with his life. Passing the buck is how he deals with setbacks. Since he has never learnt to take charge of his own life, he will get stuck and never have any motivation to get past the point of failure and take his life forward. It is in this stage that most suicidal tendencies surface. Because we can see no future beyond it, because life seems to have come to a dead end and we don’t know where to go from here, how to go ahead, we can only think of ending the misery right then and there. And it does end, right then and there – a promising life cut short only because we didn’t know how to deal with failure.
As parents, the most important thing we can do for the child is to let him/her develop a mindset that is growth and learning oriented and perceives failures as just another chance to learn something. This is all that a failure, setback or mistake really means. Another chance to learn, another opportunity to add to your reservoir of experiences and an inspiration to do it better the next time. Continuous Improvement should be a way of life. Mistakes and failures are not the end; they are the beginning of a wiser, more enriching life we can lead, now that we know better. You need not end your life or stop trying something if you encounter failure; you can build a new castle again, the way a spider or a bird would do. Rebuild it again. And again. And yet again. As long as there is life in you, castles can be built again, no matter how many times they break down. The most unfortunate thing for a heart is not cardiac arrest; it is the loss of hope. The most unfortunate thing for a mind is not the loss of memory; it is the loss of learning. Where hope abounds and continuous learning is the goal, life will have a purpose and meaning till the very end. A meaningless existence is forced upon us, not by destiny but by our own choices. It is our choices that make us who we are. Let us enable and empower our kids today to make better choices for themselves tomorrow. Let us inculcate hope and a love of learning, before we teach them anything else. For the rest, life is the best teacher……………..Aum Shanti!
It pains me to hear about a 8th standard student ending her life because of failure in her annual exams. Or a promising medical graduate hanging from his ceiling fan because he could not make it through the MD exam. Ending life because of rejection by girlfriend or boyfriend make up most other headlines. It makes me wonder how ill equipped our children are to face failures and setbacks in life. And what is life without failures and setbacks? Perhaps it the mindset we are inculcating in our children. That success is about never failing, never having to face tough situations, never going through lean periods. Unnatural, isn’t it, when everything in life is so ephemeral. Seasons change, geographies change, people change. And yet, we perpetuate the belief that a change from good to bad is not acceptable. Reading about suicides makes me sick when I think of how excruciatingly painful it is for a mother to accept, that the miracle which took her 9 months to bring forth, has been destroyed in an instant. Ending a life is no man’s privilege. It is not ours to take as it is not ours to build. But that would start a separate thread and is not part of this discourse. Today, I am just wondering if our bringing-up has anything to do with our children being more prone to taking their own life, when it does not seem to go in the direction they intended.
As parents, we express our disapproval for anything that is not quite up to the mark. Falling down is bad, that is why we console our kids when they fall down and hurt themselves. We do not celebrate it or even welcome it as something which is essential to their growth. It should be easy to gauge the effect of failure on a child who has never hurt herself in life, who has never experienced hurt. Well-meaning but over protective parents, by never letting their children experience the pain and hurt in life, give them a subtle yet strong message. A two-fold message in fact. One, that failure is not a natural process which is to be experienced; and two, that failure is not their responsibility but someone else’s fault. When we smack the floor after a toddler falls down, we give him/her to understand that it is the floor’s fault. The child need not do anything different, we will hit the floor and he/she will be alright. Shouldn’t we be telling the kid to walk carefully and that if we do something in a certain way, we get a certain consequence? That, whatever we do, is a consequence of our actions and not someone’s fault. Even toddlers can understand the simple cause and effect theory.
We need to remember that children are deeply affected by our reactions and responses, much more than we ever care about. They carry our responses with them for life. How we respond to them, their actions, good or bad, has the potential to determine and significantly define their lives. Little Tommy, in kindergarten, gets 4 out of 10 in English test and his mom says, the teacher is not good enough. Either she didn’t teach him well or she didn’t judge his performance well. In short, teacher’s fault. His essay looked perfect to his parents. So, little Tommy has little motivation to do better next time. Sunny’s mom, on the other hand, tells him to work harder and score better and that is what he is encouraged to do. Sunny’s mom is, in fact, happy to know that her kid has not scored too much. She is happy that Sunny has something to learn and improve upon and that is the message she gives out to him. Sunny will learn from his failure, little Tommy will learn to blame his teacher every time he scores less. We see these kids later in college and it’s the same response. Little Tommy, now Big Tommy, does not do well in the final semester as his professor didn’t give him good marks in the practical exam. Big Sunny, if he does not do well, tries to find out where he went wrong and puts in effort to improve. A few more years, and the two are working for an organization. Tommy, when he does not get a promotion and gets a bad feedback from his supervisor, blames it on the latter. His supervisor is not a good mentor, not good at his job and favors some select people. He never once looks at his own performance as something that could be worked upon. Sunny, when he gets a feedback, tries to analyze ways to improve his performance. In fact, he always seeks feedback from his supervisors and peers and tries to improve on his skills. The feedbacks, even the bad ones, propel him to positive action without undermining his confidence in his abilities.
Since the time he scored a 4 out of 10 in English, in kindergarten, Tommy has learnt from his mother, to direct the responsibility of failure on someone else and not do anything about it. Sunny has been taught to learn from his mistake and do better next time. Failure for one, is an excuse for working less next time while for one it is an opportunity to do better. If, at some point of time, Tommy does not find anyone to blame, he would not know what to do with his life. Passing the buck is how he deals with setbacks. Since he has never learnt to take charge of his own life, he will get stuck and never have any motivation to get past the point of failure and take his life forward. It is in this stage that most suicidal tendencies surface. Because we can see no future beyond it, because life seems to have come to a dead end and we don’t know where to go from here, how to go ahead, we can only think of ending the misery right then and there. And it does end, right then and there – a promising life cut short only because we didn’t know how to deal with failure.
As parents, the most important thing we can do for the child is to let him/her develop a mindset that is growth and learning oriented and perceives failures as just another chance to learn something. This is all that a failure, setback or mistake really means. Another chance to learn, another opportunity to add to your reservoir of experiences and an inspiration to do it better the next time. Continuous Improvement should be a way of life. Mistakes and failures are not the end; they are the beginning of a wiser, more enriching life we can lead, now that we know better. You need not end your life or stop trying something if you encounter failure; you can build a new castle again, the way a spider or a bird would do. Rebuild it again. And again. And yet again. As long as there is life in you, castles can be built again, no matter how many times they break down. The most unfortunate thing for a heart is not cardiac arrest; it is the loss of hope. The most unfortunate thing for a mind is not the loss of memory; it is the loss of learning. Where hope abounds and continuous learning is the goal, life will have a purpose and meaning till the very end. A meaningless existence is forced upon us, not by destiny but by our own choices. It is our choices that make us who we are. Let us enable and empower our kids today to make better choices for themselves tomorrow. Let us inculcate hope and a love of learning, before we teach them anything else. For the rest, life is the best teacher……………..Aum Shanti!
Friday, January 28, 2011
Well, the point it that we become aware of ourselves first, only later we know things outside. After we become aware that things are outside, we become also aware as to what those things are. From a general knowledge of things, we reach to the specific knowledge of things. “It is not merely something in a featureless bareness that are in front of me, but this is a chair, this is a table, this is a wall clock, this is a person”. Then, the awareness becomes more specified. “This is my son, this is my daughter, this is my friend, this is so-and-so”, etc. Then it becomes further more expresses in the form of an impulse to action with regard to the things seen. This is also, in a way, the process of the creation of the world.
What happened cosmically must have been something like this individual phenomenon that we pass through every day after we wake up from sleep. The point at issue is, how do we become conscious of the world? We become conscious of the world by an expansion of our consciousness gradually from our selves outside. What is this ‘outside’? The so called ‘outside’ is the world, really speaking. The world is not constituted of mountains and trees, human beings, cows and asses.
These are not the world. The world is an ‘outside-ness’ of things, the externality, the so-called ‘thingness’ in all things, a peculiar separation of one thing from another, and this feature becoming a content of our consciousness. The consciousness of externality is the world. If this externality were not to be there, there would be no world
If there is no space between you and me, we would not see each other, and space and time go together. If the one is, the other is also there. So, the space-time structure is the world. What we call the world is nothing but space-time. If this were not to be there, there would be no externality of perception, and if the externality were not to be there, there would be no world-experience. World-experience is nothing but externality of experience. If we are to somehow divest ourselves of the consciousness of externality of every kind, we will ‘enter’ into the world at once, and the world will ‘enter’ into us. The whole problem is of the externality of space-time, and we are given here a lot of information in the theories of knowledge of the various schools of philosophy, as to how we become aware of things outside. The things are not really outside, that is the point. That they are not outside should be clear from the analysis of Nature itself. Things form one organic whole. We cannot say that our leg is outside our body, notwithstanding the fact that we are seeing it. Merely looking at things cannot be regarded as a proof of their externality, because I see even my fingers, but I do not say that they are outside me.
The outsideness of a thing arises on account of a distinction between the consciousness of the seer and the existence of the seen. We begin to feel that our consciousness is different from others’ being. When we speak of the distinction between the seer and the seen, we actually mean a distinction between beings in their essentiality. But, how does one know that another being exists? The space or the time content between us cannot be the cause of this perception. An undercurrent of consciousness is necessary. If there is not going to be a secret connection of consciousness between me and you, I cannot know that you are sitting in front of me. The wind that is blowing on my face through the fan that is moving cannot be regarded as the cause of my awareness that you exist. The wind has no consciousness, it cannot make me know that you are. Nothing that is visible to our eyes, as that which exists between me and you, can be considered a cause of my knowledge that you are. There is nothing, practically, between you and me, there is only empty space. How do I know that you are there? This is a strange phenomenon. My eyes, physically constituted as they are, are spatially cut off from your physical existence; you are not sitting inside my eyes. How do I know that you are and how do you know that I am here? Nothing that is visible to the eyes can be regarded as a cause of the perception of an object.
We may say, there is the mind, and we have finally to bank upon this aspect of our being. The mind is thinking that you are. But, then, where is the mind? Where is it situated? Mostly, we think that it is inside our body. My mind is inside my brain or at least within my body, it cannot be outside. Now, if my mind is inside my body, naturally it cannot be of any help to me in my knowing that you exist; because, you are outside me, at least a few yards away from me, and the mind is inside my body, it has not gone out. But if you say, that, perhaps the mind is going out and is touching the bodies of others, and then it becomes aware, it would be curious that the mind cannot exceed the border of the body. Why speak of people before me, I know even that there is a sun shining in the sky, 93 million miles away from me. Does it mean that the mind is extending 93 million miles outside my body? If we accept this doctrine that the perception of the object is due to the operation of mind and the mind has to touch that object in order that one may become aware of the object, then the mind should reach the stars, which are several light-years away. This is a revelation, indeed,
If this is a fact, the mind is not our mind merely, it is a mind that reaches upto the distant space, the stars, or whatever it is; if we do not accept this theory, we cannot explain how we are aware that the stars are shining in the sky. This is a tentative answer to this pressing pragmatic question. But more important than this issue is the thing that follows. What is mind? Is the mind capable of knowing that things exist outside? We have said so much about the mind, but what is mind? What is it made of? Provisionally accepting the position that the mind knows objects, we have to attribute the mind with some sort of consciousness; because knowing an object is the same as being aware of the object, and if the mind is aware of the object, it is conscious. It cannot be an inert substance.
The mind has to be charged with some kind of consciousness, in the same way, perhaps,-to give a prosaic example,-as a copper wire may be charged with electricity. We need not say that the wire is the same as electricity; the two are quite different things. But the wire is filled with the flow of electricity, on account of which we call it a live wire. If the electricity were not to be there, it becomes an ordinary wire; on which we can hang a wet cloth for drying. It is to be accepted that the mind has to be endowed with some consciousness. If that also is not conceded, the chance of knowing anything does not arise. It should follow that the mind is inseparably connected with consciousness. It has to be pervaded by consciousness, and, so, my being aware that you are in front of me is due to the movement of consciousness towards you, even in the intermediary space between you and me.
This conclusion that consciousness is not limited to the body but is also outside the body follows from another interesting analysis that we can make. We cannot set a limit to consciousness. We cannot say that consciousness is here and not there. Because, to be conscious that consciousness is limited, consciousness has to be outside the limit at the same time. Who is to know that consciousness is limited? It is consciousness itself that knows. The awareness of the limitation of awareness is also a function of awareness. So, the boundary that is tentatively set to a state of awareness is also a content awareness. One cannot be conscious that there is a limit to consciousness, unless consciousness has exceeded that limit. To imagine that there is division between two parts of consciousness would be to assume that there is consciousness even midway between the two assumed parts of consciousness. Otherwise, who is to be aware that there is a gap between two parts of consciousness? The awareness of a gap between two parts of consciousness is also awareness and, therefore, there cannot be a gap in consciousness, which means that consciousness is indivisible.
If consciousness has no parts, it is indivisible, and so all-pervading. It is infinite in its nature. The presence of the infinitude of consciousness is the reason behind the mind being aware that there are objects. But where comes the question of an outside if there is a pervasion of all things by consciousness? There is an error in the perception of externality in things. If the consciousness that knows things is indivisible, and exists everywhere as subject and object, there must be definitely some mistake in our seeing or apprehending things as if they are outside us. This mistake is introduced into our perception by the operation of space and time.
Meditation is the art of transcending space and time. The moment this is effected, we enter into an infinitude of consciousness. By the various techniques of meditation, we overcome the barrier that is created between us and the objects by the action of space-time. The moment we think of an object, we think of it as it is existent in space and in time. The methods of Yoga are the ways of defying the operation of space-time and effecting a union between the subject and the object, the seer and the seen, in their essentiality. In their outward forms, they are distinct, names and forms differ, but the essentiality of the things does not so differ. The content does not vary, only the shape differs. Thus in all processes of the practice of Yoga, one thing alone is aimed at, viz. the union of consciousness with being.
~ Excerpts from “AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF YOGA” ~ By ‘Rev. SWAMI KRISHNANANDA’
What happened cosmically must have been something like this individual phenomenon that we pass through every day after we wake up from sleep. The point at issue is, how do we become conscious of the world? We become conscious of the world by an expansion of our consciousness gradually from our selves outside. What is this ‘outside’? The so called ‘outside’ is the world, really speaking. The world is not constituted of mountains and trees, human beings, cows and asses.
These are not the world. The world is an ‘outside-ness’ of things, the externality, the so-called ‘thingness’ in all things, a peculiar separation of one thing from another, and this feature becoming a content of our consciousness. The consciousness of externality is the world. If this externality were not to be there, there would be no world
If there is no space between you and me, we would not see each other, and space and time go together. If the one is, the other is also there. So, the space-time structure is the world. What we call the world is nothing but space-time. If this were not to be there, there would be no externality of perception, and if the externality were not to be there, there would be no world-experience. World-experience is nothing but externality of experience. If we are to somehow divest ourselves of the consciousness of externality of every kind, we will ‘enter’ into the world at once, and the world will ‘enter’ into us. The whole problem is of the externality of space-time, and we are given here a lot of information in the theories of knowledge of the various schools of philosophy, as to how we become aware of things outside. The things are not really outside, that is the point. That they are not outside should be clear from the analysis of Nature itself. Things form one organic whole. We cannot say that our leg is outside our body, notwithstanding the fact that we are seeing it. Merely looking at things cannot be regarded as a proof of their externality, because I see even my fingers, but I do not say that they are outside me.
The outsideness of a thing arises on account of a distinction between the consciousness of the seer and the existence of the seen. We begin to feel that our consciousness is different from others’ being. When we speak of the distinction between the seer and the seen, we actually mean a distinction between beings in their essentiality. But, how does one know that another being exists? The space or the time content between us cannot be the cause of this perception. An undercurrent of consciousness is necessary. If there is not going to be a secret connection of consciousness between me and you, I cannot know that you are sitting in front of me. The wind that is blowing on my face through the fan that is moving cannot be regarded as the cause of my awareness that you exist. The wind has no consciousness, it cannot make me know that you are. Nothing that is visible to our eyes, as that which exists between me and you, can be considered a cause of my knowledge that you are. There is nothing, practically, between you and me, there is only empty space. How do I know that you are there? This is a strange phenomenon. My eyes, physically constituted as they are, are spatially cut off from your physical existence; you are not sitting inside my eyes. How do I know that you are and how do you know that I am here? Nothing that is visible to the eyes can be regarded as a cause of the perception of an object.
We may say, there is the mind, and we have finally to bank upon this aspect of our being. The mind is thinking that you are. But, then, where is the mind? Where is it situated? Mostly, we think that it is inside our body. My mind is inside my brain or at least within my body, it cannot be outside. Now, if my mind is inside my body, naturally it cannot be of any help to me in my knowing that you exist; because, you are outside me, at least a few yards away from me, and the mind is inside my body, it has not gone out. But if you say, that, perhaps the mind is going out and is touching the bodies of others, and then it becomes aware, it would be curious that the mind cannot exceed the border of the body. Why speak of people before me, I know even that there is a sun shining in the sky, 93 million miles away from me. Does it mean that the mind is extending 93 million miles outside my body? If we accept this doctrine that the perception of the object is due to the operation of mind and the mind has to touch that object in order that one may become aware of the object, then the mind should reach the stars, which are several light-years away. This is a revelation, indeed,
If this is a fact, the mind is not our mind merely, it is a mind that reaches upto the distant space, the stars, or whatever it is; if we do not accept this theory, we cannot explain how we are aware that the stars are shining in the sky. This is a tentative answer to this pressing pragmatic question. But more important than this issue is the thing that follows. What is mind? Is the mind capable of knowing that things exist outside? We have said so much about the mind, but what is mind? What is it made of? Provisionally accepting the position that the mind knows objects, we have to attribute the mind with some sort of consciousness; because knowing an object is the same as being aware of the object, and if the mind is aware of the object, it is conscious. It cannot be an inert substance.
The mind has to be charged with some kind of consciousness, in the same way, perhaps,-to give a prosaic example,-as a copper wire may be charged with electricity. We need not say that the wire is the same as electricity; the two are quite different things. But the wire is filled with the flow of electricity, on account of which we call it a live wire. If the electricity were not to be there, it becomes an ordinary wire; on which we can hang a wet cloth for drying. It is to be accepted that the mind has to be endowed with some consciousness. If that also is not conceded, the chance of knowing anything does not arise. It should follow that the mind is inseparably connected with consciousness. It has to be pervaded by consciousness, and, so, my being aware that you are in front of me is due to the movement of consciousness towards you, even in the intermediary space between you and me.
This conclusion that consciousness is not limited to the body but is also outside the body follows from another interesting analysis that we can make. We cannot set a limit to consciousness. We cannot say that consciousness is here and not there. Because, to be conscious that consciousness is limited, consciousness has to be outside the limit at the same time. Who is to know that consciousness is limited? It is consciousness itself that knows. The awareness of the limitation of awareness is also a function of awareness. So, the boundary that is tentatively set to a state of awareness is also a content awareness. One cannot be conscious that there is a limit to consciousness, unless consciousness has exceeded that limit. To imagine that there is division between two parts of consciousness would be to assume that there is consciousness even midway between the two assumed parts of consciousness. Otherwise, who is to be aware that there is a gap between two parts of consciousness? The awareness of a gap between two parts of consciousness is also awareness and, therefore, there cannot be a gap in consciousness, which means that consciousness is indivisible.
If consciousness has no parts, it is indivisible, and so all-pervading. It is infinite in its nature. The presence of the infinitude of consciousness is the reason behind the mind being aware that there are objects. But where comes the question of an outside if there is a pervasion of all things by consciousness? There is an error in the perception of externality in things. If the consciousness that knows things is indivisible, and exists everywhere as subject and object, there must be definitely some mistake in our seeing or apprehending things as if they are outside us. This mistake is introduced into our perception by the operation of space and time.
Meditation is the art of transcending space and time. The moment this is effected, we enter into an infinitude of consciousness. By the various techniques of meditation, we overcome the barrier that is created between us and the objects by the action of space-time. The moment we think of an object, we think of it as it is existent in space and in time. The methods of Yoga are the ways of defying the operation of space-time and effecting a union between the subject and the object, the seer and the seen, in their essentiality. In their outward forms, they are distinct, names and forms differ, but the essentiality of the things does not so differ. The content does not vary, only the shape differs. Thus in all processes of the practice of Yoga, one thing alone is aimed at, viz. the union of consciousness with being.
~ Excerpts from “AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF YOGA” ~ By ‘Rev. SWAMI KRISHNANANDA’
Monday, January 10, 2011
It is intruiging to note how human beings, when placed in diverse surroundings,will grow a strong sense of good and bad based entirely upon their experiences without regard to the existence of the world that lies beyond their immediate lives.
Where diversity extends to narrower divisions of region, class and caste, this sensibility is much more pronounced, with bigotry and rigidity of belief taking the place of tolerant understanding. So a person from a certain region in the North can revere the customs and traditions of his native while despising the culture of say, a region in the West or South. And of course the vice versa would follow. The prejudice can encompass differences in rituals, dressing style, food, language, behaviour among others.In India, where states, regions, castes and classes abound, this strong attachment to one's native culture often exhibits as derision of the other, 'different' community.In Hinduism for instance, a woman in white is associated with widowhood; in Christianity, a woman is married in white. The color white does not proclaim its status to Hindus and Christains differently, it's how the two communities look at it. Their perception guided (or clouded?) by a belief handed down through years of customary practice. Appriciation or criticism would then be based upon this belief. The less tolerant of us would probably develop a deep dislike of this basically irrrelevant 'difference' of belief. The dislike would not be restricted to the single object that caused it but extend to the whole community practicing it. Thus deepening the divide further. The other community would be doing the same.If we try to make an effort to overcome that initial prejudice to anything 'different', we would probably realize that beyond the trivial and inconsequential ways of doing little things, there really is nothing different from what we are accustomed to. People in all societies will practice what they have been practising for years. It is nothing more than habit to them. But a habit to which they attach undue significance and look up to as the only good 'way'of living. Another 'way’ of living they know not and cannot understand. Fundamentally, however, their feelings, emotions, fears and aspirations remain the same. Only, the stage, the costumes, the 'settings' change. In that sense, that old cliche will hold good : All human beings are essentially the same.But to arrive at that thought the first step is to know, to understand and to accept with the knowledge that ultimately all things, good or bad, derive from the One Creator. And His creation can never be less worthy of our respect. He created the Jungle, with different species of creatures big and small, diverse flora and intended it to flourish as a whole,in complete harmony. That’s what it does, when left to itself. The animals do not make beliefs, they do not question why the lion should always kill the deer and not vice versa. They do not question God’s original design but simply adhere to His code. It is we humans who, in our eagerness to ‘improve’ upon nature, end up doing more harm than good. We begin to tamper with the forest, cut down some trees, kill some animals, destroying the ecological balance that was so intricately but delicately established by nature.
When we learn to truly attribute everyone and everything to His grand design, understanding and acceptance will flow through naturally, just like a river flows into the sea. With the broad outlook, that all differences are ultimately projections of our basic similarity, we would truly see the world as one big family. And feel like home in any place untravelled before…
Where diversity extends to narrower divisions of region, class and caste, this sensibility is much more pronounced, with bigotry and rigidity of belief taking the place of tolerant understanding. So a person from a certain region in the North can revere the customs and traditions of his native while despising the culture of say, a region in the West or South. And of course the vice versa would follow. The prejudice can encompass differences in rituals, dressing style, food, language, behaviour among others.In India, where states, regions, castes and classes abound, this strong attachment to one's native culture often exhibits as derision of the other, 'different' community.In Hinduism for instance, a woman in white is associated with widowhood; in Christianity, a woman is married in white. The color white does not proclaim its status to Hindus and Christains differently, it's how the two communities look at it. Their perception guided (or clouded?) by a belief handed down through years of customary practice. Appriciation or criticism would then be based upon this belief. The less tolerant of us would probably develop a deep dislike of this basically irrrelevant 'difference' of belief. The dislike would not be restricted to the single object that caused it but extend to the whole community practicing it. Thus deepening the divide further. The other community would be doing the same.If we try to make an effort to overcome that initial prejudice to anything 'different', we would probably realize that beyond the trivial and inconsequential ways of doing little things, there really is nothing different from what we are accustomed to. People in all societies will practice what they have been practising for years. It is nothing more than habit to them. But a habit to which they attach undue significance and look up to as the only good 'way'of living. Another 'way’ of living they know not and cannot understand. Fundamentally, however, their feelings, emotions, fears and aspirations remain the same. Only, the stage, the costumes, the 'settings' change. In that sense, that old cliche will hold good : All human beings are essentially the same.But to arrive at that thought the first step is to know, to understand and to accept with the knowledge that ultimately all things, good or bad, derive from the One Creator. And His creation can never be less worthy of our respect. He created the Jungle, with different species of creatures big and small, diverse flora and intended it to flourish as a whole,in complete harmony. That’s what it does, when left to itself. The animals do not make beliefs, they do not question why the lion should always kill the deer and not vice versa. They do not question God’s original design but simply adhere to His code. It is we humans who, in our eagerness to ‘improve’ upon nature, end up doing more harm than good. We begin to tamper with the forest, cut down some trees, kill some animals, destroying the ecological balance that was so intricately but delicately established by nature.
When we learn to truly attribute everyone and everything to His grand design, understanding and acceptance will flow through naturally, just like a river flows into the sea. With the broad outlook, that all differences are ultimately projections of our basic similarity, we would truly see the world as one big family. And feel like home in any place untravelled before…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
