Question 13
QUESTIONER: PLEASE TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT RAMAN'S AJATVAD OR THE PRINCIPLE OF NO-BIRTH.
According to Raman and people like him, that which is has no beginning, it was never born, it is unborn. The same thing has always been said in another way: that which is will never die, it is deathless, it is immortal. There are hundreds of statements which proclaim the immortality of Brahman, the ultimate, who is without beginning and without end. Only that which is never born can be immortal, that which is beginningless. This is Raman's way of describing the eternal.
Do you know when you were born? You don't. Yes, there are records of your birth which others have kept, and through them that you came to know that you were born on a certain date, month and year. This is just information received from others. Apart from this information you have no way to know that you were born. There is no intrinsic, inbuilt source of information within you which can tell you about it; you have no evidence whatsoever to support the fact of your birth. The truth of your innermost being is eternal, so the question of its birth does not arise. In fact, you were never born; you are as eternal as eternity.
You say you will die someday, but how do you know it? Do you know what death is? Do you have any experience of death? No, you will say you have seen others die, and so you infer that you too will die someday. But suppose we arrange things, and it is quite possible, that a certain person is not allowed to see any other person die. Can he know on his own that he is ever going to die? He cannot. So it is just your conjecture, based on external evidence, that you will die in some future. There is no internal evidence, no intrinsic source of knowledge within you which can sustain your conjecture that you will die. That is why a strange thing happens, that in spite of so many deaths taking place all around, no one really believes that he is going to die; he believes while others will die he is going to live. Your innermost being knows no birth and no death; it is eternal. You only know that you are.
Raman asks you not to guess, but find out for yourself if there is really birth and death. You have no inner evidence in support of birth and death; the only dependable evidence available within you says, "I am."
I too, say to you there is every evidence that makes you know, "I am." And if you go still deeper you will know, "I am not." Then you will know only a state of "am ness" within you.
|
Next: Chapter 15: Life After Death and Rebirth, Question 1
Energy Enhancement Enlightened Texts Krishna Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy
Chapter 14
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 1
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 1, YOU SAY THAT ON KRISHNA'S PATH SELF-REMEMBERING IS ENOUGH; IT DOES NOT LEAVE ROOM FOR ANY OTHER SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINE. BUT SINCE YOU ALSO SPEAK ABOUT DISCIPLINING THE SEVEN BODIES, CAN YOU GIVE US A BRIEF SKETCH OF KRISHNA'S DISCIPLINE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SEVEN BODIES? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 2
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 2, WE ARE GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR SUPERB EXPOSITION OF ACTION, INACTION AND NON-ACTION. YOU HAD EXPLAINED TO THE FOREIGN DISCIPLES OF MAHESH YOGI WHEN THEY MET YOU IN KASHMIR LAST YEAR ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INACTION IN ACHIEVING SELF-KNOWLEDGE, AND WE HAVE NOW NO CONFUSION ABOUT IT. BUT SOME CONFUSION SURELY ARISES FROM KRISHNA'S EXPOSITION OF INACTION IN THE GEETA. HE EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF INACTION, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE CONFUSING, BECAUSE IT HAS MORE THAN ONE MEANING. HE SAYS THAT A YOGI IS ONE WHO, HAVING ACTED DOES NOT THINK HE HAS ACTED, AND A SANNYASIN IS ONE WHO DOES NOT ACT AND YET ACTION HAPPENS. THERE IS YET ANOTHER SIDE TO THIS QUESTION WHICH SEEMS IMPORTANT. SHANKARACHARYA SAYS IN HIS COMMENTARIES ON THE GEETA, THAT A WISE MAN DOES NOT NEED TO ACT, BECAUSE ACTION BELONGS TO THE DOER. AND YOU SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO ACT, BECAUSE ACTION HAPPENS ON ITS OWN. BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ARJUNA'S INDIVIDUALITY IF HE CONSENTS TO BE JUST AN INSTRUMENT IN THE HANDS OF EXISTENCE? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 3
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 3, IT IS SAID THAT SHANKARA'S MAYIC WORLD, ILLUSORY WORLD, REALLY MEANS A CHANGING WORLD, NOT A FALSE ONE. WHAT DO YOU SAY? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 4
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 4, IS IT A KIND OF COMPROMISE ON THE PART OF SHANKARA WHEN HE SAYS THAT MAYA IS INEXPRESSIBLE? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 5
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 5, NOW YOU SAY THAT HESITATION IS GOOD. EARLIER YOU SAID THAT INDECISIVENESS IS DESTRUCTIVE AND THAT ONE MUST KNOW CLEARLY WHERE HE STANDS at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 6
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 6, YOU SAY THAT SHANKARA'S COMMENTARY ON THE GEETA IS INCOMPLETE. THERE ARE DOZENS OF COMMENTARIES ON THE GEETA. CAN YOU SAY IF ANY ONE OF THEM IS COMPLETE? DO YOU THINK LOKMANYA TILAK'S INTERPRETATION IS COMPLETE? AT LEAST IT DOES NOT TAKE AN ESCAPIST VIEW OF LIFE; IT IS ACTIVIST AND MORALISTIC. OR ARE YOU TRYING TO SYNTHESIZE TILAK'S ACTIVISM WITH SHANKARA'S SUPRA-MORALISM? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 7
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 7, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU ARE SAYING RIGHT NOW? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 8
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 8, AND WHAT IS THE OTHER THING? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 9
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 9, A PART OF MY QUESTION REMAINS UNANSWERED. DO YOU THINK THE GEETA WILL BE COMPLETE IF SHANKARA'S SUPRA-MORALISM AND TILAK'S ACTIVISM ARE MADE INTO ONE PIECE? BECAUSE THE SUPRA-RATIONALITY THAT YOU SPEAK ABOUT IS ECHOED BY SHANKARA, NOT TILAK; THE LATTER IS OUT AND OUT A MORALIST. ON THE OTHER HAND TILAK, NOT SHANKARA ECHOES YOUR POSITIVISM, YOUR DYNAMISM. SHANKARA IS FOR RENUNCIATION at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 10
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 10, DO YOU BECOME KRISHNA HIMSELF WHEN YOU SPEAK ABOUT HIM? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 11
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 11, SHREE ARVIND HAS WRITTEN A COMMENTARY ON THE GEETA IN WHICH HE TALKS ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CREATION AND ITS PERCEPTION. FROM ONE POINT OF VIEW IT IS REALITY THAT IS IMPORTANT, AND FROM ANOTHER ITS PERCEPTION IS IMPORTANT. IN HIS CONCEPT OF THE SUPRAMENTAL HE BELIEVES THAT DIVINE CONSCIOUSNESS IS GOING TO DESCEND ON THIS EARTH, BUT THIS CONCEPT OF HIS SEEMS TO BE DUALISTIC. WHAT DO YOU SAY? AND DO YOU THINK THAT RAMAN MAHARSHI'S CONCEPT OF AJATVAD, OF UNBORN REALITY, IS CLOSER TO YOU AND TO CHAITANYA'S CONCEPT OF ACHINTYA BHEDABHEDVAD, OR UNTHINKABLE DUALISTIC NON-DUALISM? AND CAN YOU SHED SOME LIGHT ON THE EPISODE OF ARVIND SEEING KRISHNA'S VISIONS? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 12
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 12, YOU COMPARE RAMAN WITH BUDDHA WHO HAPPENED IN THE DISTANT PAST. WHY NOT COMPARE HIM WITH KRISHNAMURTI WHO IS SO CLOSE BY? at energyenhancement.org
- Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 13
Krishna, Krishna: The Man and His Philosophy Chapter 14: Action, Inaction and Non-Action, Question 13, PLEASE TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT RAMAN'S AJATVAD OR THE PRINCIPLE OF NO-BIRTH at energyenhancement.org
|