Enough of shooing
off primates, let’s get back to civilized discourse again. The sewer stinks:
not good to stay in it for too long…
This post
is inspired by the latest thing, Ashtavakra’s story, that Sayan and Rashmi have jointly written on their blog. It is one
of the innumerable little anecdotes in the Mahabharata,
and epitomizes what has traditionally been respected – and enormously devalued
without understanding of late – as wisdom
in this country, wisdom itself being considered as the highest desideratum of
being born human. By the way, the best definition of wisdom, to my mind, was
given by Bertrand Russell: ‘desires coordinated in the light of knowledge’. It
takes half a lifetime of reflection to understand fully just what that means and
why it is supremely important – for most people, alas, it is by then far too
late!
Three
things to be noted about Ashtavakra’s story: a) India has always known that
wisdom can come even from the very young, and being physically handicapped does
not prevent anyone from acquiring it; it is only recently that we have started
forgetting such basic stuff b) gunagraahita
– appreciation of merit – is itself a great and rare virtue; the king in
the story exalts and not demeans himself by bowing before the young sage. It is
a rare parent or teacher who passes this realization on to children these days;
‘boroder shroddha korte hoy’ – respect your elders – is right, but ‘boro’ is to
be measured by wisdom, not by bloodline and physical age! c) my own views on
the subject of what is happening now that the country’s idea of education has
lost sight of the pursuit of wisdom has been adequately adumbrated elsewhere on
this blog (see, for example, the posts titled Ministers flying cattle class, Counterculture, Counterculture
postscript, Juvenilia, Living Selfishly parts one and two, Look, for heaven’s sake look, The Sense of
Wonder, What is eternal… besides the several musings on education itself),
so I shall not repeat myself here, but this much I shall underscore – this
search for wisdom is what I have found to be the work of my life, and the fact
that society has allowed me a comfortable living pursuing this ideal
singlemindedly means, I think, that there is some appreciation and even demand
for it, even in this demented and deluded age. Therein lies some hope…
Of course,
the greatest minds have not always agreed over what constitutes wisdom.
Ashtavakra himself is pushing towards one idealistic extreme, namely that the
phenomenal and material world is a distracting and harmful illusion (brahma satya, jagat mithya, ‘This world
is not my home, I’m just passing through/ the treasures are laid up somewhere
beyond the blue’) – the sooner and the more people realize this and concentrate
on what lasts and what matters, to wit the powers of the mind and the longings
of the soul, the better it will be for everybody. Personally, I have some
problems with this philosophy. To put them categorically,
1)
Either
because I have not personally attained such spiritual heights or met too
many men who can talk of spiritual stuff when they are suffering from acute toothache
or an inflamed appendix about to burst, I cannot entirely and honestly endorse
the view that ‘everything happens in the mind’, and that all things external
and material in this world are illusory. Also, no one has yet convinced me of
what if anything lies beyond this life and this world, though I have read
aplenty about such things. Besides, if life is wisely controlled, the material and
phenomenal world accessible to the five senses can and does indeed offer myriad
pleasures to be savoured while we last in good health, that is as undeniable a
fact as that nothing lasts forever (would it be a good thing anyway if
anything, including ourselves, lasted forever? A horrid thought – look up the
poem Tithonus by Tennyson if you are
interested), so it’s only a very dyspeptic and disgruntled philosopher who
finds nothing in this world that does not deserve to be rejected outright as
undesirable and silly. The same Tagore who has so often and so eloquently sung
paeans to the highest spiritual yearnings of Man has also spoken again and
again, in equally joyous and reverential tones, of the wonders of this world of
here and now.
2)
It follows that the scientific-technological
mindset that has worked so tirelessly and so fruitfully over the last few
centuries to make men’s lives more colourful, more enjoyable, longer, safer and
easier in a million different materialistic ways is not, I insist again and
again, something to be disparaged and condemned wholesale. There is much that
is wrong with the way most people are living their lives today, and an
obsession with finding technical fixes and indulging non-stop in all kinds of
brute pleasures aided by ever more powerful technology has certainly much to be
blamed for, but to put the whole blame for all the sickness of contemporary
life at the door of science and urge a return to some form of atavistic back-to-basics
mysticism would be to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The vast mass of
mankind, used to all the ease and fun of life as they have known it lately
would never endorse such a turnaround anyway…
Therefore
what I would suggest is that we should not, driven by exasperation, hurry and
ennui, be tempted to call for one kind of extremism to replace another. It shouldn’t
be that children of the next generation should be taught to despise money, or
avoid a scientific education, or forget all the forms of rational socio-political organization
and legal frameworks we have set up painstakingly over the centuries to make
the world as it is today – the most civilized parts of it at least. What I
would urge, instead, is that we think of making parenting and education a
fuller, more well-rounded, more adequate effort to make wiser individual citizens
of the future; people who will not only have the technical wherewithal to make
a living (as I said, that can include everything from carpentry to writing
software to surgery), but people who have been taught to be more observant,
more logical, more critical, more independent minded, more sensitive, more
balanced, and more capable of deciding and choosing what is really essential to
live a good life. They will be people who will know technology but not be
overawed and enthralled by it; they will make money but only to live safely and
comfortably, not to show off; they will understand that life is to be enjoyed,
and enjoyment comes from many things, but we can actually reduce our enjoyment
foolishly and unnecessarily in many ways also – by never doing charity, by comparing
our own situations with others’ in a way that merely increases our frustration
with ourselves and our dislike of others, by forgetting that one’s enjoyment of
good music or good cinema does not really depend on how big and expensive and
up-to-date one’s computer is, by imagining that more marks in exams or more
money at the workplace or more cosmetics and jewellery and fancy clothes is the
sine qua non for happiness, by eating so much that we make ourselves ill, by
partying night and day to dull the aching tooth of boredom and loneliness
within simply because one has never learnt to cultivate quiet private pleasures…
the list could go on and on.
And I think
that the likes of Sayan and Rashmi are right in saying that a renewed respect
for, and a good grounding in the best of our ancient texts and traditions can
go a long way to fill in the yawning deficiencies of modern parenting and
schooling. So I find it cheery news that a lot of things are actually happening
to nudge us in that direction, right from TV cartoon channels ‘rediscovering’
our mythological treasures to writers and directors dealing with older
audiences turning more and more often to the past for inspiration to create a
better future. I do not want to make this too long a post, so I shall instead
look forward to questions and suggestions from my readers which can trigger off
an interesting discussion. I hope sympathetic readers will be as eager to join
the debate here as they were to show solidarity with me in response to the
previous post.
23 comments:
Dear Sir,
Coincidence: I was reading about Samkhya on wikipedia yesterday and today I see this post. Everytime I read anything about ancient Hinduism, I get amazed by all the paradoxes. There's dualism and non-dualism, polytheism and atheism (the only ones I remember right now). I was wondering if you might be able to recommend a book on Samkhya. On the wikipedia page, there's a section titled "Arguments against God's existence", and it's so logically put that I am curious about the entire philosophy. The other thing is: many philosophers and poets, as you mentioned, say that there is a lot to be enjoyed in this world, but then there are also those who say that we shouldn't get attached to the material world. How can anyone do it? Seems almost impossible to achieve.
Sincerely
Nishant.
For some of the questions and thoughts, here goes:
1. I don’t think ‘we’ can bear the same ‘ourselves’ forever but there is probably something to be said about the ‘ourselves’ changing, but maybe that is what keeps the strange journey an ongoing one? For some reason I’m reminded of that ABBA song (‘Voulez Vous’) while thinking of this question.
I don’t know either what lies beyond even though I’ve thought about it a lot but there is something and it can’t be just ‘eternal silence’.
2. Thank you for the poem suggestion ‘Tithonus’…but then the horrible thing about that one is that he grows old and is still immortal and stuck on this planet. And I also wonder, within the context of ‘immortality’ – what does that line mean really – ‘mrityormamritangomay’? – ‘from death to immortality’ – but what does immortality mean in this context? For the other two parts I can feel it’s an ongoing thing of spiral clearing out of the mist but for this one I’m still in the befuddled zone. And then if ‘immortality’ is a real quest then where does ‘moksha’ fit into the picture?
3. Is ‘This world is not my home…’ as extreme as ‘jagat mithya…’ though?
It would seem if one is passing through the world one can realize the treasures that one does as a human being and leave behind in the dust what belongs in the dust (courtesy a la Tagore from your ‘Ah, Music’) knowing that one is passing through it. As for the ‘jagat mithya’ bit – why would we be here if this were an absolute illusion or a delusion or being in the world didn’t matter any? If this world doesn’t matter at all – then one can argue that what I do or think or say among very many other things don’t matter – but these do.
4. One of the reasons that ‘only’ the mind doesn’t hold good for me – and you say it perfectly in your incomparable style is also the very clear question that came to my head about a decade ago: why then do we have bodies? and pain is real and so are different sensations of pleasure and bliss that we experience of the body-mind variety. And yet I can see in sudden ways and in very real ways that sometimes the thoughts that rise in the mind/within don’t just remain limited in their consequences within the mind. I’m not sure whether anyone can change the world with his/her thoughts (and I’m rather relieved that I cannot remould the world) but I wonder how far our lives can be influenced deeply by the workings of the mind and what you call the Real Self and/or Holy Spirit to make a difference in other human lives…and in our day-to-day living too so that life doesn’t remain just a matter of making do.
5. As for the soul – I wonder, what is it really? The Soul isn’t the same as the ‘Spirit’, is it? and in this context what constitutes ‘spirituality’ according to you? And what constitutes as the spiritual quest? And this reminds me of the other statement which you quote which I’ve been wondering about for over a decade now, ‘tat tvam asi’ – how does this connect within the matter of wisdom, balance, spirituality, love, and real living?
6. I sometimes feel I have a better handle on the matter of the ‘Soul’ but then it becomes misty. And the longings of the Soul aren't always detached from the concretes part of existence, are they...if one goes with the dharma, artha, kaama parts that you bring up in a recent post? (and ponders in the meanwhile upon the bizarre bit of moksha and immortality).
5. The five senses are there, but what about the sixth one? Doesn’t the sixth one make life interesting and mysterious and sort of more like a bit of an adventure? It is a problematic piece of the puzzle too because one doesn’t have any set blueprint to see how it works or really understand the why of it, and one makes horrible errors too and yet it keeps laughing away... It’s there for sure but how does one manage it better? - is a question that I’ve not any permanent key. Is it connected to one's 'Higher Self'? Sometimes it seems to be. And don’t some people argue that there are more than six senses which humans simply don’t use?
Nishant, I was feeling almost perky after reading your comment thinking I remembered what I’d read about samkhya last year – but about that I won’t comment. For the other part of your question – it brings to mind and from experience of what Suvro da told me about the matter of attachment and detachment: I think it depends upon what you as an individual cannot remain detached from or what profoundly and in different ways captures all your senses. This is why the best of the philosophers/poets/teachers maintain that middle path of balance of attachment and detachment in the world. I can recall lots of other examples but to share one funny/quirky example with this essay of Suvro da’s – Tagore was other-worldly, yes, but he loved his strawberries with Devonshire cream much like an excited child even in his 70s….
Suvro da, I’ll save the other three hundred questions for other conversations. I’ll have to ponder more over that quote from Russell. But where would realization fit within this picture of desires, light of knowledge, and wisdom? but I have felt very strongly that good teachers and parents are terribly necessary for any child/person to become wiser although in the practice of ‘balance’ I don’t think I’ve become wiser. I’m enormously glad that Sayan and Rashmi wrote their nugget and that got you writing this inspired, dashing piece of yours. Your whole essay brings to mind the question of ‘purpose’ and ‘meaning’ in life and what makes living life a worthy enterprise, and I am terribly glad that you have been able to pursue the ideal of the search for wisdom singlemindedly…and after the very atavistic delight of ‘shooting off primates and blasting in the sewers’, this is a perfect essay for the return to civilization.
Dear Sir,
None could have used better words to explain the Buddha image you have on your blog: supreme wisdom and infinite compassion.
I remember the time you brought up a similar discussion in class while reading aloud Browning's 'Prospice' for elocution practice. As an aside you had asked us to imagine the Pandavas trudging up the slope, lead by Sarama. In an instant the poem seemed to send a chill down my spine, and climb the sublime heights of poetry in the next.
Russel's definition of wisdom reminded me of Blake, his Poems of Innocence and Experience, the meekness of the lamb offset by the fearful symmetry of the Tyger--the latter on a higher plane of existence, its 'innocence' mediated by experience.
As far as myths go, I think we must also explore other mythologies like the ones from the North-east, and from the different tribal communities. I have often thought that myths have presented the history of a different kind.Stories of civilizations have been built around them. Within them are long-forgotten sorrows, fears, and celebrations of community.
This is indeed beyond the 'top dogs' and the 'sharks' who seem to populate our world.
With regards,
Aakash
Dear Suvro Sir,
A most perplexing dichotomy. I for one cannot bring myself to believe that all that Man has done and achieved through the countess millennia stand for nothing. The idea that the form of reality we inhabit, rather Life itself is "unreal" is disconcerting to say the least. In that sense at least I am on the same boat as others. I find myself more comfortable and at-ease with the idea that the present reality is some sort of an infinitesimally small manifestation of the 'ultimate reality', just one reflection of the innumerable reflections of the sun on the river, a reality we ourselves project and then step into. But a small part is not to mean non-existent. ‘Reality’- that part which we know it through the senses, must be real, however small a part of the 'ultimate' truth it may be...how can something real be "unreal"? A part is not a whole for sure, but then it isn't false either. I am reminded of that line from the Potter series – “Yes it’s all happening in the mind, but why shouldn’t that be real?”
But then again I am not sure philosophers like Ashtavakra meant exactly that when they stressed on that extreme form of ‘advaita’ philosophy. What exactly did they mean about the world being unreal, I do not know. Maybe all of Man's achievements can be explained by saying that they are all results of trying to the grasp the 'ungraspable', all by-products of Man's attempts to reach the ultimate goal, where He will eventually reach but pave a wondrous route full of marvels of all kinds on either side along the way...would that be a valid explanation?
Though I am susceptible to that sense of “ennui” (and I have to jerk myself back to the here and now at these moments) I don’t see why technology can’t coexist with a spiritual quest. To forego of the former would be to relinquish that which Man has built through toil and sweat and blood over hundreds of years – nothing could be more foolish. In this connection I am reminded of a movie called ‘Contact’ based on a book of the same name by Carl Sagan where the protagonist has experiences bordering on the spiritual while passing through a series of wormholes; and another one titled ‘Bee season’ where a child has very similar experiences but through the recitation of a particular section of the Kabbalah - a set of esoteric teachings meant to explain the relationship between an unchanging, eternal and mysterious ‘no end’ with the finite universe.
A lot of questions remain though, as they will for eons to come. For one, I cannot find a place for God – the one source, personal or impersonal, in all of this. And the biggest question of all remains – Why are things (however they are) the way they are? Perhaps after billions of millennia my soul will hit upon the overwhelming tide of the answer and think – how could things have been otherwise!?
Thanks a million for the post, Sir.
Dear Sir,
I think for a man endowed with normal faculties of consciousness, it will be very difficult - if not impossible - to understand the presence (or absence) of the dichotomies which other commentators have talked here. As you may recall, I had tried to pen some of my thoughts on the subject in a blogpost sometime back. So, for this comment, I shall move on to the roadmap proposed by you for the quest of wisdom.
I concur with you about the need to balance mankind's achievements in material realm by his quest for spirituality. However, the problem with this quest is that the 'realization' of its goal is beyond the realm of conscious experience for most lay people. In absence of a tangible goal/outcome, they find it easier not to embark on the journey at all and keep themselves engaged with more tangible things. This quest is more like 'journey is the reward'. Some people may spend their entire lives in this quest without attaining that elusive pot of gold.
The problem is with the masses, who otherwise can't be enticed to embark on such a journey without some deterrence-reward mechanism. This is where religion comes into picture and prevents a situation where masses are not subsumed by the need to be in here and now (something which is a direct result of the conscious world around them). The need for a holistic education system, whose broad contours have been called out by you, is imperative. I am not suggesting a religious education here because to me wisdom is not limited to spiritual wisdom. We also need 'worldly wise' people. Object of such an education should be to bring up well-rounded individuals. They need not to unravel the mysteries of man's existence or comprehend the philosophies of Advaita. They can be involved in more pedestrian things but still contribute to make this world a better place by doing their bit. To me, that will be infinitely better than the devil-may-care attitude which the mankind is exhibiting today. Now, how do we design and build such a system is something to ponder over and your thoughts on modern education on your numerous blogposts are definitely relevant here.
A coincidence is that I am currently reading Victor Frankl's 'Man's Search for Meaning'. The essence of the author's experience in surviving Auschwitz and Dachau is that man must find some meaning in his existence. Some people find that meaning in work, some find that in love, some find that in God, some find that in quest of that elusive wisdom. But the meaning in important. So, in essence human life is a quest for that 'meaning'.
A note to Sayan (I hope you won't take umbrage at my addressing you by first name :)):
On the subject of 'reality' or whether what we see around us is indeed the reality and if not, what it is, there is a small film titled 'What the Bleep do we Know'. They also have a website. I had seen the film sometime back and I guess it is there on Youtube. While definitely not the last word on the subject, this film provides some interesting perspectives. There are also some very persuasive arguments on internet to negate the points made in the film. You may like to watch this film, if you haven't.
With Best Wishes,
Rajarshi
Dear Sir,
This post has struck a strong chord deep in my heart. This also reminds me of your answer to the question ‘What is human worth?’ in a comment on your post ‘A human heart’ on this blog.
I was introduced to the philosophy of ‘everything in the material and phenomenal world is a distracting and harmful illusion’ when I was fifteen by a friend of mine. She was the follower of a certain ‘religious and spiritual guide’ who drilled this philosophy into the minds of all his disciples. Her guide’s ideas seemed so convincing to me at that time, naïve and inexperienced as I was, that I had foolishly accepted that philosophy as the supreme and absolute truth. For many years, I was tormented with self-doubt, confusion and frustration believing all the while that I am by nature incapable of loving anyone or anything – even my work or my family. The philosophy was fraught with contradictions and ambiguities and I searched in vain for a person who could give me convincing answers. It was only because of your posts like ‘Living Selfishly’ and ‘What is eternal?’ and Sayan’s patient and relentless explanations that I had started living again in the right sense of the word and my faith in human worth was renewed. Thank you for starting this blog in the first place Sir and reaching out to many like me. That friend of mine used to go everywhere with a yellow shawl printed with the name of a certain Goddess and used to listen to and sing ‘bhajans’ whenever she didn’t study her school lessons saying that she was trying to avoid all the distractions of the material world. Even the very thought of those times runs a chill down my spine – how narrowly had I avoided becoming a living zombie!
The most dangerous aspect of that particular philosophy is its extremity. If one believes that every single thing in this world is a distraction only fit for avoiding, living itself becomes not only meaningless but also painfully drab and dull. Nothing can be devalued just because it is perishable. The happiness and joy that the many wonders of this world provide are no illusion – that much I am sure. The awe-inspiring virtues of Man like courage in the face of adversity, kindness, truthfulness and resourcefulness are worth worshipping and cultivating. One makes a grave mistake to say the least when one decides to completely ignore them when one describes Man.
As you have said, it is mostly out of exasperation, hurry and ennui that people get convinced by such extreme ideas making it easy for many clever people to manipulate men, women and in some cases even children in thousands. I now understand even better why you have always stressed so much on an all-round wide education and the power of discretion. I have learnt to appreciate the undeniable importance of following the middle path.
But then Sir, is life a mere accident? Do you think that there is life after death?
What is the other worldliness that is often referred to all about? Is it entirely a myth?
While I wait for your answers to the questions posted by everyone on this post, I share a certain question asked by Shilpidi in particular- What is meaning of ‘Tat tvam asi’?
Thank you for this post, Sir.
Warm regards
Rashmi
Right now, I shall simply say a thank you to those who have already written in with queries, doubts and speculations. They all deserve personalized replies, within the limits of my - strictly modest - capacities. But I am waiting for a few more people to write in, if only with questions that exercise the brain cells, before I write back in detail. So please bear with me for a little while. It is heartening to see that there have been nearly 250 visits in just two days...
Sir, just one more point. If it is indeed the case that the philosophy which insists “all physical manifestations are unreal” requires a very advanced state of spiritual attainment to even comprehend, then these are areas one should tread very carefully and cautiously. It does much more harm than good to present someone with a philosophy that one is not intellectually or spiritually ready for or capable of. It wasn't for nothing that Vivekananda insisted that youngsters should devote more of their time to playing football than studying the scriptures. I am also reminded of how 'Jatin' would fall unconscious upon travelling to other higher planes of existence in 'Debjaan'. All the more reason why critical thinking, and that idea of balance that you so strongly assert in your peerless, consummate and inimitable manner (a strong undercurrent of which is visible in almost all your posts) are the most pressing needs of the hour.
Rajarshi da, no offence taken. Thanks a lot for your recommendation. From what I have checked out about that documentary on the net, I will most certainly enjoy watching it.
I may be intruding here but I am tempted to put forward my thoughts on some points raised in the above comments:
1) Mrityoma Amritam Gamaya (May I be led from death to immortality) refers a certain state of being where one attains a supreme bliss. To me, this immortality is not immortality of physical body or that of the tangible things around us or immortality one attains in myths by consuming some kind of elixir produced as a result of churning of seas. I think immortality here is precisely what Moksha stands for - a state of enlightenment where distinctions like truth-falsehood, joy-sorrow, life-death become meaningless.
2) Whether the world around us is indeed an illusion - I think the whole concept of 'jagat mithya' or the world around us being a 'maya' has an underlying purpose, at least in the way Hinduism & Buddhism teaches it. The purpose is to cultivate a certain detachment from your material surroundings. Sri Ramakrishna had said that one should live through this world as if s/he is a servant working in wealthy household. The servant is surrounded by luxuries and has a reasonably comfortable existence but still knows that none of these belong to him. Such an attitude towards the 'nashvar' world makes sure that we don't oscillate between extremities of joy (when something good happens) and sorrow (when something terrible happens). Such a sense of detachment has given inner peace at many trying times in my own life. I think so is the case with many people.
3) Tat Tvam Asi (Thou art That) is one of the 4 maha-vakyas of the Upanishads (one from each Veda). There are some interesting resources on net for those who are curious. These maha-vakyas primarily refer to 3 entities - Atman (Self/Soul), Brahman (the Supreme) and Consciousness. Another one of them says 'Aham Brahmasmi' (I am Brahman).
While the maha-vakyas and their meanings are profound and probably cannot be understood completely without a deeper study of Vedanta, to me all these statements refer to a certain oneness of everything and everyone around us with a Supreme Being. The soul is not different from the Supreme. Thou art That also probably means the same - You are He. This is probably an over-simplification but to me this much is relatively intuitive, though very difficult to visualise. However, again to me, this explanation doesn't fit in with the need for duality - a philosophy which finds repeated mentions in most of the Eastern religions.
Sir,
Please feel free to moderate this comment in case you think that there is potential of your readers getting further confused by such over-simplifications.
With Best Regards,
Rajarshi
Of course you are not intruding, Rajarshi: you are the sort of comment writer that I long for. And thanks for the suggestions offered - I hope they will go some way to answering the queries raised earlier, or give rise to more doubts and questions...
Dear Sir,
Let me start by thanking you and all the other readers for their comments. I feel so humbled by the limitations of my knowledge and I ought to know more about Advaita philosophy and our holy scriptures before I can fully comprehend what you have tried to say. Yet, I would like to share some of my thoughts and doubts.
I read ‘Tithonus’ this morning followed by ‘Ulysses’ and it seems confusing. While one who has achieved immortality laments at the futility of living eternally devoid of youthful vigour, the other still believes that “Tis not too late to seek a newer world” although he is “Made weak by time and fate”. Wasn’t Tithonus merely overwhelmed by the memories of his youth instead of growing with time? Would eternal life be so horrible if we can mould ourselves in response to constraints of time and fate?
Sir, you have repeatedly stressed upon the necessity to strike a harmony between attachment and detachment; yet it is so hard to draw the fine line between the two. I desperately try to cling on to some illusions knowing very well that they will be shattered with time. How shall I overcome the fear to acknowledge them now before such illusions eventually take its toll on me with time? However, when I read this blog or books like ‘Debjaan’, it surely allays much of my apprehensions and gives me a sense of peace.
It is true that we should not disparage all that science and technology has offered to us. But the outlook of present day scientists is similar to those of medieval, dogmatic priests who treat all others as ignorant. Are we all destined to revert into some form or dogmatism or the other?
I do not know whether I have been able to compose my thoughts coherently. I need to reflect deeper into many of the issues raised in this post. Do excuse my ignorance if I have digressed from the main discussion.
With regards,
Saikat.
I can’t help comment again Suvro da (while you wait for others to comment) since this topic stirs and shakes the grey cells. After this I shall try to be a clam here and wait patiently.
Jatin didn't always fall unconscious, Sayan. Jatin didn’t get the ‘bhakti’ worlds too well but he observed and with a very steady mind and unfazed spirit while seeing the terrible manifestations of exploding stars, the death and birth of stars and almost endless oceans of fire while Pushpo, who could travel to 'higher realms' effortlessly fell unconscious...I think it was while travelling with the jnyana yogi who could travel at the speed of light.
And why would it be harmful to present one with some philosophy or any ancient scripture for that matter? Either one gets interested or one doesn't or one understands in a particular way or not at all. It might not do any good but why on earth should it be harmful? And as far as I know, experiencing the overwhelming need to see what is real in this shifting illusory dreamlike world can happen without reading any scripture. It is certainly not something that can be 'prevented'. And the best of the teachers always say that engaging in sports and suchlike and being fit and doing physical chores is important even if one is interested in other worldly matters. The most important bit, I feel, is to have a genuinely loving, laughing wise-guy/guru who knows and can see the different abilities which human beings have, and can see both the individual and the general effortlessly.
And in the matter of reality-unreality - the senses, so to speak, can sense many things and our perceptions of the world and our lives through our senses may even say dramatically different things and opposed things and plain muddled things and yet to sift through what we sense and through the apparently real, surreal, unreal, and then the sharp points of the hyper-real is that there is a fundamental part of what we sense which simply cannot be dislodged. That is, I know one manner in which how one gets to what is real, meaningful, and incommensurable in connection to life and the world….the rest remains what it is and one shifts in how one sees and feels what one does – in one’s own life and in how one sees the world - but there are points which make one see and sense that the world is not entirely unreal or meaningless, and a link is formed between one’s inner world and outer world which finally feels real even if one is not always sure of what is to be. I don’t know whether this sounds bizarre but given that Rajarshi mentioned that book by Frankl, I remember one instance when Frankl experiences a bit of hyper-reality: a sudden felt and deeply sensed love from his wife, and this when his wife is physically nowhere near him and he doesn’t even know whether she is dead or alive – and it keeps him walking because he knows that that his wife loves him is real in spite of the horrifying nightmarish quality of the world around him at that point in time.
Unlike you Sayan – I’ve never really felt that I have projected reality and then stepped into it. As for Dumbledore’s line – even though Suvro da has explained it to me patiently not a few times…my grouch with that line of Dumbledore’s for years has been this: if it’s happening only within Harry’s mind and Dumbledore is utterly unaware of the same and doesn’t share the experience or emotion – because it’s Harry’s head – then that would mean Harry is just a lonely loon, which I felt and thought is a frightful and the most horrid proposition possible in any world...
Rajarshi your comment reminded me what Suvro da said a few weeks ago – that there are more and less ‘evolved’ human beings who need to share planetary space. But then I also believe and know that it’s possible that work, wisdom, love, God can together be the quest of human life but I’ll leave this bit for Suvro da to answer because I was going to ask him another question in connection to wisdom – aren’t jgnaya, bhakti, karma, yoga connected variously to the matter of wisdom? And the ‘jagat mithya…’ makes better sense if seen as the ‘world is unreal..’ rather than ‘false’…It would then seem to make sense in connection to what follows ‘Brahma satya…” because that would mean one would try to and then eliminate what one merely employs to still the nibbling tooth of both boredom and the haunting loneliness at any rate.
I didn’t think that ‘mrityormamritangomay’ meant there was some elixir or some potion – but it does stand in stark contrast to how ‘moksha’ is described/defined. Moksha implies a permanent and peaceful ‘extinction’ whereas the former (‘Lead me from death to immortality’) seems and feels much more like a line from a poem Suvro da told me to read, ‘I hope to meet my pilot face to face when I have crossed the bar’ or the line which Suvro da translated, ‘it is only by directly knowing the effulgent Being who stands beyond the darkness and the void that you can overcome Death..’ (appears on Suvro da’s review of Debjaan).
Rashmi, your comment made me feel relieved that you found your way out but it also reminded me of a couple of Suvro da’s essays from last year on ‘Superheroes’ and ‘Idealistic horrors’, among others. I think too that in some ways it’s a matter of finding out what one cannot do without or what gives one’s own life meaning…, and as Suvro da, pointed it out to me once, to take joy in it. In this sense it’s almost like saying that what worked for Meerabai or Joan of Arc or Madame Curie or Camille Claudel wouldn’t work for me no matter how furiously I desired the same. In some unavoidable way it’s the point that Suvro da brings up in this essay regarding wisdom itself.
Saikat, I should have mentioned the ‘eternal silence’ bit is what Suvro da reminded me from ‘Ulysses’ earlier this year (I didn’t remember that it was from that poem) and I can’t forget it anymore. But Tithonus’ plight is bloody awful – about this I have no doubts. Just imagine growing older and older and still having to stick around on the planet…
I do hope more people comment for this essay…and I shall wait for Suvro da to write his comments and answer the questions....
Shilpi-di, I am afraid I just don't get your "grouch" with Dumbledore's line. The line says, "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean it is not real?" Dumbledore, in other words, makes it explicitly clear that: (i) what Harry is seeing, hearing and feeling is in his head, and (ii) all of it is real nevertheless. I also don't understand why you should suspect Dumbledore is "utterly unaware" of what is happening in Harry's head. Read that chapter closely: Harry and Dumbledore are EQUAL participants in that scene. Dumbledore actually breaks down and weeps in the scene in response to what Harry says and asks. Isn't that prove enough that he shares the "experience" and the "emotion"? Dumbledore, we must remember, is a highly skilled legilimens, capable of penetrating others' thoughts. And since he is dead, he can, in his present form as a spirit, access any part of the world, including the world inside a person's head (in this case, Harry's head). So, what he does is this: he enters Harry head (or Harry's mind; or Harry's consciousness; take your pick) as Harry lies in a limbo between life and death, and answers the boy's questions, clears his doubts, tells him options (that he can stay back in the world of the dead or return to the world of the living and finish off Lord Voldemort), and gives him his best wishes. In other words, he fulfills his duties as a mentor, and then takes his leave with that line you mentioned.
To sum up, then, what we see happening in that scene is in Harry's head. It is also real. Dumbledore is very much aware of it all. And Harry, thus, is no "lonely loon."
I hope I have been helpful.
With regards,
Abhirup Mascharak.
my grouch with that line of Dumbledore’s for years has been this: if it’s happening only within Harry’s mind and Dumbledore is utterly unaware of the same and doesn’t share the experience or emotion – because it’s Harry’s head – then that would mean Harry is just a lonely loon, which I felt and thought is a frightful and the most horrid proposition possible in any world...
Shilpi di, the following sentences from the fourth paragraph of your last comment totally went over my head. -
"And in the matter of reality-unreality.....even if one is not always sure of what is to be."
It will be nice if you kindly take the trouble to make it simpler for me. Many thanks for your time and consideration.
Dear Shilpidi,
Of course I have never "felt" that. I wish I could, or anything that would give me a glimpse into the nature of 'reality', so to speak. What I tried to do in my first comment was to try and list the different lines of thought I had come across at different points in time, those that I could remember and am comfortable with.
My second comment was in conjunction with Rashmi's. That girl in question lives an intellectually barren life only because she doesn't have the acumen of thinking things out for herself – and even that would be putting things lightly. Critical thinking is a virtue was the message I tried to convey through my second comment. That simultaneously developed/ cultivated with a healthy involvement in the spiritual, or a study of the different lines of thoughts/ philosophies, critically analyzing/ examining both oneself and the philosophies, imbibing whatever appeals to the self along the way is the way forward. Everyone has his/her own growth-trajectory and what appeals to someone might not to someone else -that much I concede. But this particular girl will only make you feel sick if you should ever have a chance meeting with her. And of course she was harmed by someone who induced her to believe something only on its face-value, without proper assessment, and as things stand of now you would only see a person who only thinks she believes in what she says she believes, in her. Also, I agree that the major part of spiritual/intellectual development depends on the guru. Why else are Indian children so immature, so dependent on their parents, the latest fad and what the world around them is doing. While someone like Sir on one end of the spectrum will induce, inspire us to think for ourselves, there is another (confused) tribe who only transfer their confusion to their 'shishyas' – this is the tribe of spiritual ‘babas’ and they get very annoyed if you point that out to them.
Abhirup, Thanks for the firing and for telling me to go ‘read that chapter closely’. I can say that my grouch had been terribly strong in 2007 when I first read the book and since last year in Jan it’s more of ‘throwing my arms up in the air’ sort of a wondering with quiet patches and then some disgruntled but unclear understanding with some slow sudden sense of a feeling with what Suvro da explains to me and in his different ways.
I didn’t think I needed to read that chapter from the book considering that I have lost count of how many times I’d read it in the past – but I did, and waited to read that chapter and the one before. That explains only in part my inordinate delay in getting back to you with a reply – sorry.
Piecing a bit of my own grouch together: it stemmed from my tendency to keep trying to fit it like a tangible piece in the puzzle of real life forgetting some of the things you mention in your response to my grouch, and forgetting that that is Harry and Dumbledore’s world.
But to backtrack a bit: my grouch was not limited to Dumbledore being a puzzle, and I never did question his powers as a wizard, found him fascinating from the very first book (although his working upon the ‘need to know principle’ does drive me up the wall or makes me want to shake him, and his sense of humour which got me laughing straight from the first book, I think I should find utterly barmy but don’t which makes me wonder less) – however, let me not digress into my character –sketch of Dumbledore here – I see now that my discomfort, anguish, terrible fear and grouch, sadness and anger and more is to do with Harry and Harry’s head and how he had been and was, and actually goes back to him in ‘The Order…’: that he had been utterly unable to distinguish real from unreal, wouldn’t and couldn’t learn/master Occlumency (under the disgusting Snape – yes, and that also bothers me), was sure he knew more than he did and was bellowingly smug about it, and that he was a raving lunatic (no matter he was ‘right’ a couple of times) and singlehandedly managed to set off a ghastly chain of events and also brought about something irreparable while being convinced that he was doing it all for Sirius. It was, to say the least rather terrible, and I never felt in Harry’s skin as much as I did in ‘The Order..’ which I read in 2004. I did feel a horrible sadness because I felt maybe, maybe Dumbeldore could have told Harry a little more, and earlier on in ‘The Order…’ itself but I didn’t think that Harry had any business yelling at Dumbeldore when he did.
[The other bit is that Harry in ‘The Deathly Hallows’ thinks before he meets Dumbledore that Dumbledore had betrayed him…now this one actually made me see red because after everything, I don’t see how Harry – even if he didn’t know what was going to be could even imagine that Dumbledore would betray him. So once again, it was more of Harry’s head that I thought was messed up. He was going out to meet his death and yet actually even entertained the idea that Dumbledore betrayed him?!]
I hope this explains my grouch.
I think the difference in this instance, which I don’t think I’d reflected over at all, and not in the last couple of years from the book is that here, it is indeed Dumbledore and Dumbledore alone who’s telling him that what is happening is real even if happening in some suspended state of reality and reaches into Harry’s consciousness or they meet in limbo and tells him the rest of what you mention in your summary…which actually does clear out my grouch or hand throwing up in the air or furrowed wondering with the Dumbledore-Harry equation at any rate. Also, quite frankly after reading that chapter ‘closely’ – I don’t think Harry could have conjured up such a conversation in the recesses of his mind or wherever. Only Dumbeldore could have told him and explained to him what was going on, and told him about his choices. Doesn’t make Dumbledore any less perplexing or strange but that is a separate matter .
I was sure still that I could disagree with you (this too explains in a bit my lateness of my response) – but you have been remarkably helpful with your swift and furious summary, and especially for your point of Dumbledore fulfilling ‘his “duties” as a mentor’, and in outlining Dumbledore and Harry’s relationship...so here’s a doff of the hat.
Shilpidi
Suvro da, I was so sure I could be a clam... And maybe you’ll tell me what you think and feel about my pestering you about that line for so many years, I think it’s been….I’ll write the rest of the comments after a short pause.
Nishant, Shilpi, Aakash, Sayan, Rashmi, Rajarshi, Saikat and Abhirup... thanks for everything said so far, but it would be nice if other people joined in, with queries/doubts/reflections of their own. Especially older and younger people. I know for a fact that young people - a lot of them - do think a lot over questions such as these, and they bring over those questions to me when they meet me in person. Let them not feel shy or scared about raising the same issues here: no one is going to bark at them for being silly even if they are, that's a promise. As the great physicist Richard Feynman said, 'The only foolish question is the one you don't ask!' And the only people we scorn at are those who do not or cannot think, yet insist on being called human...
Now this is an embarrassing richness and variety of comments to reply to in one or even three comments of my own! So let me try to address just a few of them for now.
Nishant, the wiki article itself should lead you to good books on the subject of samkhya. I don't consider myself anywhere near qualified enough to recommend some, though I hear that centuries ago Madhavacharya made a masterful summary/critique of it in his compendium of philosophies, and there is also a good summary in the philosophical encyclopedia published by the Ramakrishna Mission. As for how to strike the right balance, heaven knows I am only a novice who's been trying lifelong to find it myself, but I do know that a lot of people have come close to doing it, down the ages, Tagore being one most extraordinarily energetic and gifted case in point. This should answer Sayan to some extent, too.
Aakash, thanks for the tip about looking up myths from the northeast. My knowledge is shamefully inadequate. I shall look forward to help from you. Thanks also for the heartwarming recollection: your memory amazes me sometimes.
Rashmi, your early experience horrifies me. Good indeed that you have survived and outgrown it. Nothing can be worse than imposing half-baked but extreme philosophies on young, growing minds, whether it be vedanta or fascism or Marxism. As for your other questions, all I can do is quote the poet who said 'through a riddle, in the end, sagacity must go'. And yet it is by pondering over such questions that men throughout the ages have not only made life interesting for themselves but for many others: think of all the fantastic art and music and literature that has been created by the human imagination that has refused steadfastly to be imprisoned by the iron chains of matter and by the limitations of the here and now...
Saikat, you have got one thing about my grouch absolutely right: mainstream scientists are becoming increasingly like a closed shop of intolerant and querulous people, who refuse to accept any kind of criticism of their worldview, their methods, their sense of responsibility to humanity as a whole - and in the process they are doing great disservice to the cause of science itself. But in the likes of you I have some hope.
Rajarshi, many thanks for the several inputs. Also, I am glad to see that Frankl's book has struck a similar chord with you as with me. I wish many more people would read it. I hope that everybody here would also try Erich Fromm's 'To have or to be?' and 'Fear of Freedom', as well as E. F. Schumacher's 'A Guide for the Perplexed'.
Shilpi, too many questions, sorry! But thanks for the priceless bit about Tagore and the strawberries with cream.
I shall try to answer more questions if someone points out that I have left out something important. For now, let me sign off by saying that a strenuously world-denying philosophy can be subscribed to only by people who have suffered too much at the hands of the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' and can't take it any more, and also cannot accept that 'this is all there is' (with this latter part I have a great deal of sympathy).
So much for now.
Dear Sir,
This is a wonderful post. In my opinion this is one of the "live" posts on this site. At the end of every paragraph, I had questions which you answered in your next paragraph and eventually it has left me with more questions.
I guess I have one question which encompasses all the questions I have about topics discussed in this post.
Sir, you have often mentioned that you have deep respect for the likes of vivekananda, aurobindo and ramakrishna, but if you have any doubt in your mind about what happens after you die and indian spirituality in general, then is it not the case that these people are charlatans and frauds of the highest order. How is it then, that one respects these people?
With best wishes,
Navin
I didn't quite get your question, Navin. Hinduism embraces a lot of philosophical positions, including strong forms of materialism and agnosticism, as I am sure you know: one does not have to believe in any conventional form of God or afterlife in order to be able to respect extraordinary men. As far as I am concerned, I judge people such as those you have named by the strength of their character (as it has come to be known to us), clarity of mind, nobility of purpose and the work that they did for the good of their fellow men. Why should there be a problem with that?
Post a Comment