जागृति के पहले मन शरीर के तद्रूप होकर शरीर का दृष्टा बना रहता है। शरीर को ही जीवन माना रहता है। उसी के अनुरूप प्रिय-हित-लाभ दृष्टियों से तुलन करता है। न्याय-धर्म-सत्य छुटा रहता है। प्रिय-हित-लाभ दृष्टियों से तुलन के आधार पर ही विश्लेषण और चित्रण हो जाता है। यही भौतिकवाद है - जो जीव-चेतना में जीना है। ऐसे में भी जीवों से अधिक अच्छा जीने की कल्पनाएँ बनती हैं। इन्ही कल्पनाओं के चलते निकले - विरक्तिवाद और आसक्तिवाद।
विरक्ति से क्या मिल गया? - यह मानव परम्परा को आज तक पता नहीं चला।
आसक्तिवाद से भोग-अतिभोग में गए, और धरती बीमार हो गयी।
मध्यस्थ-दर्शन विरक्ति-वाद और आसक्तिवाद दोनों का विकल्प है।
- बाबा श्री नागराज शर्मा के साथ संवाद पर आधारित (अगस्त २००६, अमरकंटक)
3 comments:
Again a word of caution when Babaji says "Virakthi se manav parampara ko kya mil gaya ye pata nahin chala"
This is not to be interpreted as kisi bhi manav ko virakthi se kuch nahin mil saka.
Bhakti and Virakthi are emotional responses to the world. People are made differently. For those who followed the path of Virakthi like Buddha and Bhagwan Shri Ramana Maharishi to attain Self Realization, they were so disposed by their demeanor right from childhood, to be detached from the world.It would be meaningless to force a path of worldliness on them because Virakthi was the path best suited to them. So also with Bhakthi, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or Meera for example were just made for this path. None of them asked anyone to follow only their path, Bhagwan Shree Ramana Maharishi for one I know, never asked anyone to renounce the world to realize oneself. Where followers usually go wrong in interpreting the Guru's lifestyle and words is, they think by imitating that, they will achieve what the Guru achieved. Here is where Bhakti and Virakthi get misinterpreted and misused. But this does not mean they do not mean anything to the world. Those paths are valid paths to Self Realization. Advocating or not advocating them is a different matter. It is up to each one to choose a path that suits their demeanor.
Self Realization is an Individual's experience, that is the bottom line I think even Babaji would agree with this.
The goals etc of MD and why Babaji calls it Vikalp are quite clear to me and I appreciate them as I have said before. There is simply no need to be judgmental of another path in order to establish this path otherwise the goals of the path(MD) itself are defeated which is not what Babaji wants.
The proof of what a person found (or realized) would be that person himself - and not what he wrote, and not what others interpreted of it.
Proof of self-realization in human-tradition is when the realized person in his life-time is able to replicate his feat - in another individual.
MD proposes adhyayan as the method for this.
Regards,
Rakesh...
As far as the path of jnana yoga(path of Self Enquiry) of Bhagwan Ramana Maharishi goes, in his life time itself many of his disciples attained the state(Ganapathi Shastri, Poonjaji,Nisargadatta Maharaj) to name a few. Indeed many are even now attaining that state just by reading his words and realizing their meaning.
One cannot convince the other or challenge their claim to Self Realization. It is a meaningless effort just not worth the waste of time, because only the person himself can convince himself about Realization. This is why I has said earlier no external human being can be a proof for another human being. I think we agree on this.
All one can say is there are many paths to Self Realization, one must pick one that one is comfortable walking on. There is no one size that fits all because each human is a unique individual with unique experiences.
Post a Comment