|   ENERGY
        
       
           
  | 
         GAIN ENERGY  APPRENTICE 
      
      LEVEL1
               | 
        THE     ENERGY BLOCKAGE REMOVAL 
      
      PROCESS
        
           | 
        THE       KARMA CLEARING 
      
      PROCESS       APPRENTICE    LEVEL3
            | 
        MASTERY 
      OF  RELATIONSHIPS     TANTRA      APPRENTICE    LEVEL4
               
  | 
    
  Add to Onlywire 
Del.icio.us 
Digg  
Reddit 
Technorati
THE DHAMMAPADA: THE WAY OF THE BUDDHA, VOL. 4
Chapter 8: Meditate a little bit
Question 1

Energy Enhancement Enlightened Texts Dhammapada The Way of the Buddha, Vol. 4
The first question:
  Question 1
  BELOVED MASTER,
  I HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THE SENSE OF SCIENCE LIES IN ITS  UTILITY FOR HUMAN NEEDS; IN HELPING TO PROVIDE ENOUGH FOOD, FINDING TREATMENTS AGAINST  SICKNESS, CREATING MACHINES TO DELIVER MAN FROM HARD AND STUPID WORK, ETCETERA.
  UNTIL NOW I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONVINCED THAT THERE IS NOTHING  WRONG WITH SCIENCE, BUT RATHER WITH THE POPULAR ATTITUDE TOWARDS SCIENCE: THAT  IT CAN DISCOVER THE INTERIOR LAWS OF LIFE.
  NOW I HEAR IN YOUR WORDS THAT SCIENCE ITSELF IS A ROOT OF  THE MISERIES IN THE WORLD, BECAUSE IT DESTROYS THE MYSTERIES OF LIFE AND HENCE  LEADS TO AN ANTIRELIGIOUS ATTITUDE. ARE YOU AGAINST SCIENCE?
Prem Peter, I am not against science, but I am certainly for  a different kind of science, with a totally different quality to it. Science as  it exists now is very lopsided; it takes account only of the material, it  leaves the spiritual out of it -- and that is very dangerous.
  If man is only matter, all meaning disappears from life.  What meaning can life have if man is only matter? What poetry is possible, what  significance, what glory? The idea that man is matter reduces man to a very  undignified state. The so-called science takes all the glory of man away from  him. That's why there is such a feeling of meaninglessness all over the world.
  People are feeling utterly empty. Yes, they have better  machines, better technology, better houses, better food, than ever. But all  this affluence, all this material progress, is of no value unless you have  insight -- something that transcends matter, body, mind -- unless you have a  taste of the beyond. And the beyond is denied by science.
  Science divides life into two categories: the known and the  unknown. Religion divides life into three categories: the known, the unknown  and the unknowable. Meaning comes from the unknowable. The known is that which  was unknown yesterday, the unknown is that which will become known tomorrow.  There is no qualitative difference between the known and the unknown, only a  question of time.
  The unknowable is qualitatively different from the known/  unknown world. Unknowable means the mystery remains; howsoever deep you go into  it, you cannot demystify it. In fact, on the contrary, the deeper you go, the  more the mystery deepens. A moment comes in the religious explorer's life when  he disappears into the mystery like a dewdrop evaporating in the morning sun.  Then only mystery remains. That is the highest peak of fulfillment, of  contentment; one has arrived home. You can call it God, nirvana, or whatsoever  you like.
  I am not against science -- my approach is basically  scientific. But science has limitations, and I don't stop where science stops;  I go on, I go beyond. Use science, but don't be used by it. It is good to have  great technology; certainly it helps man to get rid of stupid work, certainly  it helps man to get rid of many kinds of slavery. Technology can help man and  animals both. Animals are also tortured; they are suffering very much because  we are using them. Machines can replace them, machines can do all the work. Man  and animals can both be free.
  And I would like a humanity which is totally free from work,  because in that state you will start growing -- in aesthetic sense, sensitivity,  relaxation, meditation. You will become more artistic and you will become more  spiritual because you will have time and energy available.
  I am not against science, I am not antiscience at all. I  would like the world to have more and more of science, so that man can become  available for something higher, for something which a poor man cannot afford.
  Religion is the ultimate in luxury. The poor man has to  think about bread and butter -- he cannot even manage that. He has to think  about a shelter, clothes, children, medicine, and he cannot manage these small  things. His whole life is burdened by trivia; he has no space, no time to  devote to God. And even if he goes to the temple or to the church, he goes to  ask only for material things. His prayer is not true prayer, it is not that of  gratitude; it is a demand, a desire. He wants this, he wants that -- and we  cannot condemn him, he has to be forgiven. The needs are there and he is  constantly under a weight. How can he find a few hours just to sit silently, doing  nothing? The mind goes on thinking. He has to think about the tomorrow.
  Jesus says: Look at the lilies in the field; they toil not,  they don't think of the morrow. And they are far more beautiful than even  Solomon, the great king, in all his grandeur, ever was.
  True, the lilies toil not and they don't think of the  morrow. But can you say it to a poor man? If he does not think of the morrow,  then tomorrow is death. He has to prepare for it; he has to think from where he  is going to get his food, where he is going to be employed. He has to think. He  has children and a wife, he has an old mother and an old father. He cannot be  like the lilies of the field. How can he avoid toil, labor, work? -- that will  be suicidal.
  The lilies are certainly beautiful and I totally agree with  Jesus, but Jesus' statement is not yet applicable to the greater part of  humanity. Unless humanity becomes very rich, the statement will remain just  theoretical; it will not have any practical use.
  I would like the world to be richer than it is. I don't  believe in poverty and I don't believe that poverty has anything to do with  spirituality. Down the ages it has been told that poverty is something  spiritual; it was just a consolation.
  Just the other day, a French couple wrote a letter to me.  They must be new arrivals here, they don't understand me. They must have come  with certain prejudices. They were worried, very much worried. They wrote in  the letter that, "We don't understand a few things. Why does this ashram  look luxurious? This is against spirituality. Why do you drive in a beautiful  car? This is against spirituality."
  Now, for these three or four days I have been driving in an  Impala. It is not a very beautiful car; in America it is the car of the  plumbers! But in a sense I am also a plumber -- the plumber of the mind. I fix  nuts and bolts. It is a poor man's car. In America, the people who use  Chevrolet Impalas, etcetera, their neighborhood is called the Chevrolet  neighborhood -- that means poor people's neighborhood.
  But this French couple must have the old idea that poverty  has something spiritual about it. Man has lived so long in poverty that he HAD  to console himself, otherwise it would have been intolerable. He had to  convince himself that poverty is spiritual.
  Poverty is not spiritual -- poverty is the source of all  crimes.
  And I would like to tell the couple that, "If you want  to cling to your beliefs and prejudices, this is not the place for you. Please  get lost! -- the sooner the better, because you may be corrupted here.  Listening to me is dangerous for you."
  To me, spirituality has a totally different dimension. It is  the ultimate luxury -- when you have all and suddenly you see that, although  you have all, deep inside there is a vacuum which has to be filled, an emptiness  which has to be transformed into a plenitude. One becomes aware of the inner  emptiness only when one has everything on the outside. Science can do that  miracle. I love science, because it can create the possibility for religion to  happen.
  Up to now, religion has not happened on the earth. We have  talked about religion but it has not happened; it has not touched the hearts of  the millions. Only once in a while a person has been able to become  enlightened. In a big garden where millions of bushes and trees are, if only  once in a while in thousands of years a flower comes to a tree, you will not  call it a garden. You will not be thankful to the gardener. You will not say,  "The gardener is great, because look: after one thousand years, out of  millions of trees, one tree has again blossomed with one flower." If this  happens that simply shows it must have happened in spite of the gardener!  Somehow he has forgotten about the tree, somehow he has neglected the tree,  somehow the tree has escaped his grip.
  Man has lived irreligiously: talking about God, certainly --  going to the church, to the temple, to the mosque -- yet his life showing no  flavor of religion.
  My vision of religion is totally different. It has nothing  to do with poverty. I would like the whole earth to become as rich as paradise  -- richer than paradise -- so that people can stop thinking about paradise.  Paradise was created by poor people just to console themselves that, "Here  we are suffering, but it is not for long. Only a few days more, or a few years,  and death will come and we will be transported into paradise." And what a  consolation! -- that those who are rich here will be thrown into hell.
  Jesus says a camel can pass through the eye of the needle,  but the rich man cannot pass through the gate of heaven. What consolation! The  poor people must have felt very satisfied, contented, that, "It is only a  question of a few days more: then you will be in hellfire and I will sit in the  lap of God, with all the luxuries, with all the riches, with all the joys that  I am deprived of here and you are enjoying." The idea of paradise seems to  be just a revenge.
  I would like this earth to be a paradise -- and it cannot  happen without science. So how can I be antiscience? Peter, I am not  antiscience. But science is not all. Science can create only the circumference;  the center has to be that of religion. Science is exterior, religion is  interior. And I would like men to be rich on both sides: the exterior should be  rich and the interior should be rich. Science cannot make you rich in your  inner world; that can be done only by religion.
  If science goes on saying there is no inner world, then I am  certainly against such statements -- but that is not being against science,  just against these particular statements. These statements are stupid, because  the people who are making these statements have not known anything of the  inner.
  Karl Marx says religion is the opium of the people -- and he  has never experienced any meditation. His whole life was wasted in the British Museum,  thinking, reading, collecting notes, preparing for his great work, DAS KAPITAL.  And he was so much into trying to gain more and more knowledge that it happened  many times -- he would faint in the British Museum! He would have to be carried  unconscious to his home. And it was almost an everyday thing that he would have  to be forced to leave the museum -- because the museum has to close sometime,  it cannot remain open for twenty-four hours.
  He had never heard about meditation; he knew only thinking  and thinking. But still in a way he is right, that the old religiousness has  served as a kind of opium. It has helped poor people to remain poor; it has  helped them to remain contented as they are, hoping for the best in the next  life. In that way he is right. But he is not right if we take into  consideration a Buddha, a Zarathustra, a Lao Tzu -- then he is not right. And  these are the really religious people, not the masses; the masses know nothing  of religion.
  I would like you to be enriched by Newton, Edison,  Eddington, Rutherford, Einstein; and I would like you also to be enriched by  Buddha, Krishna, Christ, Mohammed, so that you can become rich in both the  dimensions -- the outer and the inner. Science is good as far as it goes, but  it does not go far enough -- and it cannot go. I am not saying that it can go  and it does not go. No, it CANNOT go into the interiority of your being. The  very methodology of science prevents it from going in. It can go only outwards,  it can study only objectively; it cannot go into the subjectivity itself. That  is the function of religion.
  The society needs science, the society needs religion. And  if you ask me what should be the first priority -- science should be the first  priority. First the outer, the circumference, then the inner -- because the  inner is more subtle, more delicate.
Next: Chapter 8: Meditate a little bit, Question 2
Energy Enhancement Enlightened Texts Dhammapada The Way of the Buddha, Vol. 4
|   ENERGY
        
       
           
  | 
         GAIN ENERGY  APPRENTICE 
      
      LEVEL1
               | 
        THE     ENERGY BLOCKAGE REMOVAL 
      
      PROCESS
        
           | 
        THE       KARMA CLEARING 
      
      PROCESS       APPRENTICE    LEVEL3
            | 
        MASTERY 
      OF  RELATIONSHIPS     TANTRA      APPRENTICE    LEVEL4
               
  | 
    
| 
       	
       	
		
		
		
		ENERGY ENHANCEMENT TESTIMONIALS EE LEVEL1 EE LEVEL2 EE LEVEL3 EE LEVEL4 EE FAQS  | 
      	 
  
EXPERIENCES 2005 AND 2006
| 
       	
       	
		
		
		
		ENERGY ENHANCEMENT TESTIMONIALS EE LEVEL1 EE LEVEL2 EE LEVEL3 EE LEVEL4 EE FAQS  |