Chapter 7
百度搜索 And Now, And Here 天涯 或 And Now, And Here 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.
I Teach Death31 October 1969 pm iion Camp at Dwarka, Gujarat, India
Question 1
A FRIEND HAS ASKED: ARE YOU TEAG PEOPLE HOW TO DIE? ARE YOU TEAG DEATH? YOU SHOULD TEACH LIFE INSTEAD.
He is right, I am ieag people how to die.
I am teag the art of dying, because one who learns the art of dying bees an expert i of living as well.
One who agrees to die bees worthy of living the supreme life.
Only those who have known how to erase themselves also e to know how to be.
These may seem like opposite things because we have taken life ah to be opposing each other, tradictory, but they are not.
We have created a false tradi betweewo, and that has produced fatal results.
Perhaps nothing has caused so much harm to the human race as this tradi.
Subsequently, this tradi has had ramifications on many levels.
If we divide things which are essentially oo separate parts -- not only separate but tradictory parts -- the ultimate result be nothing but the creation of a schizophrenisane man.
Lets assume there is a place where mad people live.
Great difficulty and trouble would arise if these people were to believe that cold and hot were not only separate but tradictory things -- for the simple reason that cold and hot are not tradictory, they are different degrees of qualifying the same thing.
Our experience of cold and hot is not absolute, it is very relative.
A little experiment will make this clear.
We always find things which are hot and things which are cold.
We also see that something which is hot is hot, and something which is cold is cold -- we ot believe the same thing be hot and cold at the same time.
Now, when you go bae do a little experiment.
Take a pot taining hot water, a pot taining cold water, and a pot taining water at room temperature.
Put one hand i water and another hand in cold water.
Now take both hands out and place them ier at room temperature.
One hand will feel the water is cold and the other will feel the same water is hot.
Is that water hot or cold? One hand will say it is hot, the other will say it is cold.
Then what is the nature of the water really? If, simultaneously, one hand feels it is hot and the other feels the same water is cold, then we will have to realize the water is her hot nor cold -- its feeling hot or cold is relative to our hands.
Hot and cold are degrees of the same thing -- they are not two different things.
The distin between them is of quantity, not of quality.
Have you ever thought about the distin between childhood and old age? Ordinarily we think they are opposite to each other -- childhood on the one hand, old age oher.
But what is the distin between childhood and old age really? The difference is only of years, the difference is only of days; the difference is not qualitative, it is only quantitative.
For example, there is a child aged five.
We call him "an old man of five" -- whats wrong with that? It is simply linguistic usage that we say "a child five years of age.
" If we want to we call him -- as is done in English -- "five years old," which also mean "an old man of five.
" One is just an old man of seventy, while there is someone who is five years old.
What is the difference? If we want, we call a seventy -- year-old man a seventy-year-old child -- after all, a child grows into an old man.
But when we look at them separately they seem like two tradictory things.
It seems like childhood and old age are trary to each other, but if they are, then no child ever bee old.
How he? How two trary things be the same? Have you ever been able to he day a child turned into an old man? or whiight? you note on a dar that on sud-such a day this man was a child and then on sud -- such a day he became old?
In fact, the problem is
For example, there are steps leading to the terrace.
You see the lower steps and you see the steps oop as well, but you may not be able to see the steps in the middle se.
It may look as if the lower steps and the steps on top are separate, far away from each other.
But one who see the whole staircase will deny such a distin.
He will say, "The differeweeeps below and the steps above only appears because of the steps iween.
The very step at the bottom is ected with the step oop.
"
The differeween hell and heaven is not of quality, the difference is only of quantity.
Dont think hell and heaven are trary, diametrically opposite to each other.
The differeween hell and heaven is the same as between cold and hot, between the lower rung and the higher rung, between a child and an old man.
The same sort of differes between birth ah; otherwise one who is born will never be able to die.
If birth ah were trary to each other, how could birth end ih? We only reach to a point of our natural growth.
Birth grows into death -- this means birth ah are two ends of the same thing.
We sow a seed, it grows into a plant, and then it bees a flower.
Have you ever believed there was any oppositioween the seed and the flower? The flrows out of the seed itself and bees a flower.
Growth is in the seed.
Birth turns into death.
God knows from what kind of foolishness and during what unfortuimes the idea became fixed in the human mind that birth ah are dious, that life ah are two separate things.
We want to live; we dont want to die -- but we dont know that death is already part of life.
Once we decide we dont want to die, it bees a certainty, that very moment, that our lives will be filled with problems and difficulties.
The whole of mankind has bee schizophrenic.
Mans mind is split into parts, intments, and there is a reason for this.
We have takeality of life as if it were made up of parts, and itted each part against the other.
Man is the same, but we have created divisions inside him and have also determihat these divisions are trary to each other.
We have dohis in all spheres.
We tell a person, "Dont be angry, be fiving," without realizing that the differeween anger and fiveness is again only of degrees -- as it is between cold and hot, between childhood and old age.
We say that anger, reduced to the lowest, is fiveness -- there is no diy between them.
But all the age-old precepts of mankind teach us, "Get rid of anger and adopt fiveness" -- as if anger and fiveness are such opposite things that you drop anger aain fiveness.
Such a thing only result in splitting man intments and in bringing him trouble.
All of our past belief systems say that sex and brahmacharya, celibacy, are trary to each other.
Nothing be more erroneous than this.
The lowest point of sex is brahmacharya.
Sex, dropping downward, decreasing, is brahmacharya.
The distaweewo is not one of enmity and tradi.
Remember, in this world there is nothing at all like tradi.
In fact, there ever be anything like tradi in the world, because if there were, there would be no way to uhe opposites.
If birth ah were separate entities, birth would move along its own course ah on its own -- nowhere would they meet.
Just as two parallel lines do anywhere, ing would ever take place between birth ah.
Birth ah are iwihey are two ends of a tinuum.
When I say this, what I am actually saying is that if man is to be saved from going insane in the near future, we will have to accept life in its totality.
We t afford any loo create divisions and to pit one part against the other.
It is se that one who says, "Sex is trary to brahmacharya, so lets get rid of sex," will himself be ultimately destroyed in his attempts to get rid of sex.
Such a person ever attain brahmacharya.
Striving to cut off sex from his life, his mind will remain fixed on sex alone -- there is no way he ever attain brahmacharya.
His mind will be iension and trouble forever -- right there, thats his death.
His life will bee too onerous.
He will bee heavy and wont be able to live at all -- not even for a moment.
He will be irouble.
If you look at it this way -- and this is the fact -- then what I am saying is that sex and brahmacharya are related to each other, just as the lowest and the highest rungs are.
As man moves up the ladder of sex, he enters into brahmacharya.
Brahmacharya is nothing but sex reduced to its lowest degree.
One reaches to a point where it almost feels as if everything has bee empty -- it is reag to the ultimate end.
Then there is no tradi in life, no tension.
Then there is lessness in life.
Then we live a natural life.
What I am talking about is how to live a most natural life, in all its aspects.
We dont live naturally at any level, because we have learhe ways of living life unnaturally.
If you were to tell a person, "Walk only with your left foot, because the left foot stands fihteousness.
Dont walk on yht foot because the right foot represents unrighteousness
" If the mao believe this -- and there are lots of people who would believe this; people to believe in such stupid ideas have always been found.
So you would e across people who would agree that to walk on the left foot is righteous, and to walk on the right foot is unrighteous.
Then they would begin cutting their right foot off and trying to walk on the left foot.
They would never be able to walk.
We only walk with the bined movement of both legs.
A leg never walks alone, by itself, although only one leg moves forward at a time.
Walking, you only lift o a time, which may create the wrong impression that you walk on one foot.
But dont fet that the o a standstill, the one in repose, is as important as the one in motion.
The day oains brahmacharya, the sex in repose is instrumental in that attai -- in the same way as the stationary right leg is instrumental in the left legs moving forward.
The left leg would not be able to move without the help of the right one.
Sex which has bee still bees the foothold for the arising of brahmacharya.
One take the step of brahmacharya only when sex has ceased to move.
Uprooting the foothold of sex, breaking it, will certainly result in cutting off sex, but that wont help in achieving brahmacharya.
Instead, man will remain hanging in limbo -- in the same way all the age-old teags have left humanity hanging in limbo.
What we see around us in life is nothing but the movement of the left and the right step, of the left and the right foot.
In life everything is ied.
The apparent diversity is like the notes of a great symphony.
If you cut anything out, you will find yourself in difficulty.
Someone may say the color black signifies evil.
Thats why no one is allowed to wear black at marriages; black is allowed at somebodys death.
There are people who believe black is a sign of evil, and there are people who believe white is a sign of purity.
In a symbolise, it is alright to have such distins, but if someoo say, "Lets get rid of black, lets remove black from the face of the earth," then remember, with the removal of black, very little white will be left behind -- because the whiteness of white stands out in all its sharpness only against a black background.
The teacher writes on a blackboard with white chalk.
Is he out of his mind? Why doesnt he write on the white wall? Of course one write on a white wall, but the letters wont stand out.
White mas because of the black background; black is in fact causing the white to stand out.
Remember, the white of the man who invites enmity with black will iably grow dull, insipid.
One who is against showing anger, his fiveness will be impotent.
The strength of fiveness lies in anger; only one who be angry has the power to be fiving.
The more fierce the ahat much greater will be the magnanimity of fiveness.
The power of aself will lend luster to the act of fiveness.
In the absence of ahe fiveness will appear totally lackluster, absolutely lifeless, dead.
If a persons sex is destroyed -- and there are means to destroy sex -- then remember, that will not make him a brahmacharya, a celibate, he will simply turn into an impotent person.
And there is a fual differeweewo things.
There are ways to do away with sex, but a man ot bee a brahmacharya by doing away with sex, he only bee impotent.
By transf sex, by accepting it, by moving its energy towards a higher level, one certainly attain brahmacharya.
But remember, the brilliance you see in the eyes of a brahmachari, a celibate, is the brilliance of sex energy itself.
The energy is the same, but transformed.
What I am saying is that what we call opposites are not opposites -- life sists of a very mysterious order.
In this mysterious order opposites have beeed so that things exist.
You must have seen a heap of bricks piled up in front of a house under stru.
All the bricks are the same.
Then the architect, the engineer, in order to make an arch for a doorway in the house, lays the bricks in opposing order.
The bricks are the same, but making the doorway he places them opposite each other so they hold each other.
He wouldnt be able to make the arch if he placed them in the same order -- the doorway would fall immediately.
Bricks laid in the same order carry nth; there is an them.
Wherever resistance occurs a strength is created.
All strength es with opposition; all energy is produced from fri.
In life, the principle of polarity is behind the creation of energy, power.
The bricks are all alike, but they are placed in opposite order.
God, the divine architect of life, is very intelligent.
He knows that life will bee cold immediately, will dissolve right away if the bricks are not laid in opposition to each other.
So he has placed anger opposite fiveness, sex opposite brahmacharya, and because of the resistance preseween them, an energy is created.
And that energy is life.
He has put the bricks of birth ah together, fag each other, and thus of both a gateway to life is created.
There are people who say, "We will only accept the brick of life, we wont accept the brick of death.
" Thats fine.
Suit yourself.
But if you dont accept death you will die that very moment, because then all the bricks that are left will be alike.
Only the bricks of life will be left -- and they will collapse right away.
This mistake has beeed many a time.
For the last ten thousand years man has been badly afflicted with and troubled by this mistake.
He insists on plag bricks that are all alike; he doesnt want opposing bricks.
"Remove the polarity," he says.
He says, "If we believe in God, then thats all well believe in.
Then we wont believe in samsara, in the mundane world.
If God is, then there is no samsara; then we ever accept the mundane life.
We t be in the marketplace, we t attend to our businesses; because we believe in God well beonks aire to the forests.
" That man would like to create his world with the bricks of God.
you imagine what the sequences would be if, by mistake, worldly people were to go crazy and beonks? From that very day things wouldnt move an inch; from that day the whole world would be in ruins.
In fact, the man who is a monk has no idea that he is surviving, that his left foot moves forward, because someone, a worldly man, is running a store in the marketplace out there.
One foot is rooted there; thats why the monks foot is free to move.
The monks very life-breath es from the worldly man.
He is uhe illusion that he is living on his own, but the fact is, all his nourishment es from the mundane world.
A he goes about cursing the worldly man; he goes on telling him, "Renouhe world and bee a monk.
" He doesnt realize he is creating a situation for universal suicide this way -- a situation even he t escape from: he will die as well.
He is thinking of using bricks that are all alike.
There are also people who say the opposite.
They say, "Theres no God, theres just this world and nothing else.
We only believe in matter.
" And, believing only in matter, they also tried to create a world of their own.
They too ?99lｉb.e landed in trouble.
Where they have arrived, suicide will happen there as well -- because if there is only matter and no God, thehing that lends savor to life, that makes life charming, that gives movement to life, that creates the desire to rise, will be gone.
If oo believe there is no God, that there is nothing but matter, then what meaning is there in life? Then life bees totally useless.
Thats why people like Sartre, Camus, Kafka and others talk so much about meaninglessness in the West.
Today, with one voice, all Western philosophers are saying that life is meaningless.
What Shakespeare once said has bee relevant all of a sudden, aern thinkers are now reiterating it in the text of life itself: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
" There ot be any significe, any meaning, because you have put together only briatter, and of matter alone.
Meaning is bound to disappear absolutely.
Just as there being only monks would take meaning away from the world, there being worldly people alone would also take meaning away.
It is iing that the worldly man survives with the help of the renunciate and the renunciate survives with the help of the worldly man -- in the same way the left foot is depe on the right foot and the right foot is depe on the left foot.
On the surface this dependence appears as a tradi, but deep down it is not.
Both feet are part of the same being: one keeps it rooted; the other causes it to move.
No one experiehe whole truth of life without uanding this tradi correctly.
A person who, in his opposition, insists on cutting out the half of it has not yet attained enough intelligence.
You do away with the half, of course, but as soon as that happens the remaining half will die as well -- because, uionably, the latter half received its life energy from the first half and from nowhere else.
I have heard
Two monks were involved in an ongoing dispute.
One believed it is good to have some money on you, that it be useful in emergencies.
His friend, the other monk, used tue, "Why do we need money? We are renunciates, what do we need money for? Only worldly people keep money.
" Both used to put forward arguments in support of their respective views, and it seemed like their arguments were correct.
The great mystery of this universe is that you present an equal number uments in support of any of the opposing bricks used in its creation, and the dispute ever end because both bricks are used equally.
Anyone point out, "Look, the universe is created of my bricks," while someone else argue against this, saying, "No, the universe is made of my bricks.
"
And life is so vast that very few people evolve enough to see that the whole doorway is made of opposing bricks.
The rest merely see the bricks that fall within the range of their view.
They say, "You are right, the universe is a creation of sannyas.
You are right, Brahman is the source of the universe.
You are right, the universe is made of atman.
" Other people say, "The universe is made of matter, it is made of nothing but dust.
Everything will eventually turn into dust -- Dust unto dust.
" These people also show only the bricks that fall within their particular view.
In this whole affair her the theist nor the atheist wins the argument; her the materialist nor the spiritualist wins.
They ot.
Their statements are ing from a diized view of life.
So there was a great dispute between these monks.
One maintai is necessary to have money, while the other disagreed.
One evening, in a great hurry, they arrived at a river.
It was close to nightfall.
One of the monks approached the boatman, who was tying up his boat for the night, and said, "Please dont tie your boat up yet, bring us across the river.
Night is approag and we must reach the other side.
"
The boatman said, "Sorry, I am finished for the day and now I have to go bay village.
Ill take you across in the m.
"
The monks said, "No, we t wait until m.
uru, with whom we lived, who taught us what life is all about, is close to dying.
The news is, he will be dead by m.
He has summoned us.
We t stay ht.
"
The boatman said, "Okay, Ill take you over for five rupees.
" The monk who had argued in favor of carrying money laughed and, looking at the other monk, said, "What do you think, my friend? Is carrying money worthless or meaningful?" The other monk simply kept laughing.
The monk paid five rupees to the boatman -- he had won.
After reag the other shore, the monk said again, "What do you say, my friend? We would have been uo cross the river if we hadnt had the money.
"
The seonk laughed uproariously.
He said, "We crossed the river not because you had money, but because you could part with it! We were able to cross the river not because you had money but because you could let go of it.
" So the argument remained.
The seonk tinued, "I always said a monk must have the ce to let go of money.
We could give it up; thats why we could cross the river.
If you had kept holding on to it, if you had not let it go, how could we have crossed the river?"
So the problem remained.
The first monk also joined in the laughter.
They came to their guru.
They asked him, "What shall we do? This has bee quite a problem.
What happeoday illustrates our differences suctly.
One of us believes we crossed the river because we had money on us, while the other says we were able to cross because we let money go.
We are firm in our beliefs, ah seem to be right.
"
The guru laughed a belly laugh.
He said, "You are both crazy.
You are itting the same kind of foolishness mankind has done fes.
"
"What is that foolishness?" the monks asked.
The guru said, "Eae of you is looking at one side of the truth.
It is true you could hire the boat and cross the river only because you let go of money -- but the other side is equally true: you could part with your money because you had moo part with.
It is true, of course, that you were able to cross the river because you had money on you.
But the other part is equally true.
Had you not had any money you wouldnt have been able to cross.
You crossed because you let go of money.
So both things are right.
There is no tradi between them.
"
But we have created such diies in all levels of our lives.
And a belief iher of the two parts provide a ving argument in its support.
It is not difficult, because after all, a man has at least half of life to draw upon -- he is living half his life; thats not a small matter.
It is more than enough tue for.
So nothing will be solved by arguing.
Life will have to be iigated, known in its totality.
I certainly teach death, but that does not mean I am against life.
What it means is: death is the gateway to know life, tnize life as well.
What it means is: I dont see life ah as trary to each other.
Whether I call it the art of dying or whether I call it the art of living -- both mean the same thing.
It depends on how we look at it.
You may ask, "Why dont you call it the art of living?" There are reasons for it.
The first thing is, we have bee extremely attached to life.
And this attat has bee very unbalanced.
I call it the art of living too, but I wont, because you are too attached to life.
If I should say, "e lear of living," you would e running because you would want tthen your attat to life.
I call it the art of dying so you regain your balance.
If you learn how to die, then life ah will stand before you equally; they will bee your left and right foot.
Then you will attain to the ultimate life.
In its ultimate state life taiher birth nor death, but it is made of the tects we call birth ah.
Of course, if there is a town where people are suicidal, where no one wants to live, I wont go there and talk about the art of dying.
There I will say, "Lear of living.
" And as I tell you, "Meditation is the gateway to death," I would tell the people of that town, "Meditation is the gateway to life.
" I would tell them, "e, learn how to live, because unless you have learned how to live, you wont know how to die.
If you wish to die, the me teach you how to live -- because once you have learned how to live you will have learned how to die as well.
" Only then would the people of that town e to me.
Your town is just the opposite: you are residents of a town where no one wants to die, where everyone wants to live, where people want to g to life so hard they keep death away forever.
Therefore, I am pelled to talk to you about death.
It has nothing to do with me; because of you I am calling it the art of dying.
I have been saying the same thing all along.
Once Buddha entered a village.
It was early m and the sun was just about to appear on the horizon.
A man came to him and said, "I am an atheist, I dont believe in God.
What do you think? Is there God?"
Buddha said, "God alone is.
There is nothing but God everywhere.
"
The man said, "But I was told that you are an atheist.
"
"You must have heard wrongly," said Buddha.
"I am a theist.
Now you have heard it from my own lips.
I am the greatest theist ever.
There is God, and nothing but God.
" The man stood there uhe tree with an uneasy feeling.
Buddha moved on.
Another man came at noon and said, "I am a theist.
I am an absolute believer in God.
I am an enemy of atheists.
I have e to ask you, what do you think about Gods existence?"
Buddha said, "God? her is there one, nor there ever be one.
There is absolutely no God.
"
The man couldnt believe his ears.
"What are you talking about?" he exclaimed.
"I heard a religious man had e to this village, so I came to ask whether God is.
And whats this you are saying?"
Buddha said, "A religious man? A believer in God? I am the greatest atheist ever.
"
The man stood there utterly fused.
We uand this mans fusion -- but Ananda, a disciple of Buddhas, was in a terrible suspense; he had heard both versations.
He became very restless; he couldnt figure out what was going on.
It was all right in the m, but by afternoon it became a problem.
"What has happeo Buddha?" Ananda woo himself.
"In the m he said he was the greatest theist, while iernoon he said he was the greatest atheist.
" He made up his mind to ask Buddha in the evening, when he would be alone.
But by evening Ananda was in for yet another surprise.
By the time it was evening another person came to Buddha and said, "I dont uand whether there is God or not.
" The man must have been an agnostie who says he doesnt know whether God is or not.
No one knows, and no one ever know.
So he said, "I dont know whether there is God or not.
What do you say? What do you think?"
Buddha replied, "If you dont know, then I dont kher.
And it would be good if we both remained silent.
"
Listening to Buddhas ahis man was founded as well.
He said, "I had heard you are enlightened, so I thought you must have known.
"
Buddha said, "You must have heard wrong.
I am an absolutely ignorant man.
What knowledge I have?"
Just try to feel what Ananda must have gohrough.
Put yourself in his shoes.
you see his difficulty? When it was night and everyone had left, he touched Buddhas feet and said, "Are y to kill me? What are you doing? I almost lost my life! Never have I been so upset aless as I have been today.
What is this you have been saying and doing the whole day? Are you in yht mind? Are you sure you know what you said today? In the m you said ohing, iernoon another, and in the evening you gave airely different ao the same question.
"
Buddha said, "I did not give these ao you.
I gave my ao the people ed.
Why did you listen to them? Do you think it is right to hear what I say to others?"
Ananda said, "Now this tops it all! How in the world could I not hear? I resent, right there; my ears were not blocked! And could it ever be possible I wouldnt want to hear you speak? I love to hear you speak, no matter who you talk to.
"
Buddha said, "But why are you upset? I didnt answer you!"
Ananda said, "Maybe not, but I am in a quandary.
Please answer me, right now.
What is the truth? Why did you give three different answers?"
Buddha explained, "I had t the three of them to a point of balance.
The man who came in the m was an atheist.
Being an atheist only he was inplete, because life is made of opposites.
"
Keep this in mind: a truly religious person is both -- an atheist on one hand, and a believer in God oher hand.
His life tains both aspects, but he brings harmoweewo opposites.
Religion is in that very harmony.
And one who is only a believer in God lacks religious maturity.
He has not yet attained a balan his life.
So Buddha said, "I had t a balao his life.
One side of him had bee very heavy, so I had to put some rocks oher scale.
And besides, I also wao ule him, because somehow he had bee vihere is no God.
His vi o be shaken up, because one who bees certain, dies.
The journey must go on; the search must tinue.
"The man who came iernoon was a theist.
I had to tell him I was an atheist because he had bee lopsided too; he had also lost his balance.
Life is a balance.
One who attains this balaains the truth.
"
The reason I say to you, you should lear of dying is because your life has bee lopsided.
You are sitting very solidly on the scale of life, and so everything has turo rock.
Life has bee solidified; the balance is gone.
Go ahead.
Invite death as well.
Say, "e and be my guest too.
Well stay together.
" The day life agrees to live with death, it is transformed into life supreme.
The day one weles death, gives it a hug, embraces it, the matter is over! That day the sting of death departs.
The sting lay in our running away from death, in our being afraid of it.
When a person es forward and embraces death, death loses, death is quered, because the man who embraces death bees immortal.
Now death t do anything to him.
What death do when the man himself is ready to disappear?
There are two types of people -- one whom death seeks and the other who seeks death.
Death seeks those who run away from it.
And there are those who seek death, but it keeps eluding them.
They seardlessly but t fih.
What kind of a person would you like to be -- the one who runs away from death or the one who embraces it? A person eludih will tio be defeated; his entire life will be a lifelong story of defeat.
One who embraces death will instantly triumph over it; defeat will no longer exist in his life.
Then his life bees a triumphant journey.
Yes, I teach the very art of dying.
I am teag you how to die so you may attain life.
Do you know a secret? The man who learns how to live in darkness -- the moment he accepts the totality of darkness, the darkurns into light for him.
Do you know that the man who takes poison lovingly, joyfully, as if he were takiar -- the poison bees ar for him? If you dont, then you must find out.
One of the most profound truths of life is that the man ts poison lovingly, the poison no longer remains poison for him -- it turns into ar.
And the man who has accepted darkness itself, wholeheartedly, finds to his astonishment that darkness has bee light.
And one who greets pain with open arms, finds there is no pain at all -- only happiness remains for him.
For one ts his state of agitation and agrees to live with it, the doors of pead tranquility are thrown open.
This seems tradictory.
Remember, however, that one who says he wants to attain peace ever bee peaceful, because to say "I want to attain peace," is, in fact, looking for disturbance.
Man is restless as he is, ahere are some who create a new restlessness by saying, "We want to be peaceful.
"
Once a man came to me.
He said, "I have been to the Ramana ashram, to Pondicherry, and to the Ramakrishna ashram -- they are all full of hypocrisy.
I couldnt find anything else there.
I am looking for peace, which I find nowhere.
I have been wandering in search of it for the last two years.
In Pondicherry someoioned your name.
I have e straight from there.
I eace.
"
I said, "Get up and walk out that dht this moment, otherwise I shall be proven to be a hypocrite as well.
"
He said, "What do you mean?"
I said, "Simply get out.
And dont ever look ba this dire again.
It is better I save myself before I am called a hypocrite as well.
"
"But I have e to find peace," the man said.
"Simply get lost," I said.
"A me ask you this: who did you go to and ask how to be in agony? Which guru has initiated you into agitation? Which ashram did you go to, to learn how to be restless?"
"I went nowhere," the man replied.
Then I said, "You are such a clever fellow, you evee mental disturbance for yourself.
Then what is there for me to teach you?" The way you have created yitation, take an opposite route and you will find peace.
What do you want from me? Dont tell anyone you came to see me too, even by mistake.
I have nothing to do with whats happening to you!"
The man said, "Please show me the way to find peace.
"
I told him, "You are looking for ways of being agitated.
There is only one way to attain peace: be at peace with restlessness.
"
One ts restlessness in its totality, one who says, "e, stay with me.
Be my guest in this very home," suddenly finds the restlessness has left him.
With the ge in our state of mind the restlessness departs.
One ts even the restlessness itself, his mind quiets down.
How restlessness last if the mind is attuo peace?
Even though it may be a noance of restlessness, the very restlessness itself is the product of our attitude of noance.
One who says he will not accept beiless will tio be restless, because this very non-acceptance is itself the root of restlessness.
A man says, "I wont accept restlessness, I t accept suffering, I t accept death, I t accept darkness.
" Thats just fine, dont accept them -- but you will tio be surrounded by what you will not accept.
Instead, see what happens by accepting, by agreeing to something no one else wants to agree to.
And to yreat surprise you will find what you sidered your enemy became your friend.
If you invite your eo be yuest, what other course is there for him but to bee your friend?
The reason for my discussing these issues with you for three days was because I saw you came here with the desire to quer death.
You must have thought I would let you in on some trick so you would never die.
A friend has written a letter in which he says:
Question 2
ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW US HOW TO REJUVENATE OUR BODIES? ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW SOME ALCHEMICAL METHOD TO BEE YOUNG AGAIN? IF THATS THE CASE THEN ITS WORTH SPENDING OUR MOO E THERE.
Maybe you have e here with the same idea too.
If so, you will be disappointed, because I am teag the art of dying here.
I say unto you: Die! Learn how to die.
Why run away from death? Accept it, wele it.
And remember, I am giving you the very key to be victorious over death.
Rejuvenation is not the key for attaining victory over death.
No matter how much you gh a process of rejuvenation, you will still have to die.
The body is sure to die.
Rejuvenation only push death a little further away; death be avoided a little longer.
It only means your problems will be extended over a longer period -- instead of dying iy years, you might be able to die in seven hundred years.
The suffering you could have otherwise finished with iy years will be prolonged for sev<q>9９ｌｉｂ.</q>en hundred years -- what else? The troubles of seventy years will extend to seven hundred.
The quarrels of seventy years will tinue up to seven hundred.
The problems of seventy years will spread over seven hundred years -- they will be stretched that much, multiplied.
What else do you think will happen?
This may not have occurred to you, but if you really should e across someone who could give you a potion and say, "Take this and you will live for seven hundred years," you would tell him, "Wait a minute, let me think it over.
" I dont believe any one of you would agree to take a potion that would extend life for seven hundred years.
So what does that mean? That means "I will tio be as I am.
This very I will now have to live for seven hundred years.
" And that would prove to be very costly; it would have very grave sequences.
Should stists someday discover how man live infinitely -- and such a discovery is possible; it is not difficult -- remember, people will start looking furu to teach them how to die quickly.
Just as now people are looking furus who rejuveheir bodies, people then will look for someone who will show them the secret, the teique of dying, so that even stists will not be able to save them.
They will try to cheat the gover so they ease themselves out of life.
We have absolutely no idea that aended life has no meaning.
The meaning of life es with living.
An individual live so totally in one moment -- more totally than another man could even in an infinite number of lives.
Its a matter of living, and only a man who has no fear of death live -- otherwise how he live? The fear of death keeps man trembling -- he ands still; he keeps running all the time.
Have you noticed that speed is tinuously on the increase in the world? Everything is speedy.
In one respect a rocket is better than a bullock cart -- because a rocket take us places faster -- but why so musisten speed? You may not have realized this, but all mans attempts at speed are attempts to escape where he is.
Where he is, he is so scared, he is so afraid, he wants to get away.
He feels he would be better off anywhere except where he is.
All over Europe and America weekends and holidays have bee a great nuisance.
People get more tired on these days than ever.
The idea is to jump into the car and dash off -- fifty miles, a hundred miles, two hundred miles -- to escape to a piic spot, to a mountain, to a hill resort, to the beach.
The motivation for rushing off so fast is because others are running off, are in a hurry too -- they might reach first.
If one asks where they want to reach, they dont know.
Ohing is certain, however: they want to get away from where they are -- away from the house, away from the wife, away from their work.
Man is uo live; thats why there is so much running about.
He wants to go on putting more power into his vehicles so he run faster.
Ask where he is going, where he wants to reach, and his answer will be, "I t tell yht now; I dont have time.
I have to get there soon.
We have to land on the moon; we have to land on Mars.
" All our lives we are running.
What are we running from? What is the fear? The fear is that on the one hand we are uo live fully, and oher hand the fear of death is immi, present.
Both things are interected.
The man who is afraid of death will not be able to live his life; he will remain terrified of death.
Then what is the answer?
You ask me, "Whats the answer? Whats the solution?" I say: accept death.
Invite death and say, "e on, Ill worry about living later -- first you e.
Let me first be finished with you so the matter is over ond for all.
After that Ill live at leisure.
Let me take care of you first, then Ill settle down and live fortably.
" Meditation is the means to accept death with this attitude.
To extend su invitation to death, meditation is the means, meditation is the answer.
One ts death in this way es to a halt immediately.
His speed disappears.
Have you ever watched? When you are angry and you are cyg, you pedal faster.
When you are angry and driving a car, you press the accelerator harder.
Psychologists say car acts happen, not because of bad roads but because of the man on the accelerator -- there is something wrong with the man.
His teeth are ched in anger and he is pressing the accelerator harder, and somehow or other he is wishing to have an act.
He is filled with the desire to crash into something.
Life seems so dull and useless to him that he wants t some excitement, some juito it -- at least by crashing against something, if nothing else.
He thinks hell get some thrill out of it, will feel good about it.
He feels hell have the satisfa that something happened in his life, that it was not a total waste.
Many criminals in Europe and America have given statements in court, saying they had nothing against the person they killed -- they just wao see their names in print, and that was the only way.
A good mans name never appears in the papers; you only see names of murderers and criminals.
There are two types of murderers: those who it a single murder for personal reasons, and those who it collective murder -- the politis.
Only their names are printed in the neers, the rest are ignored.
Although you may be a good citizen, your name will not be in the papers -- but stab a person and it will create headlines.
A criminal fesses in the court, "I had y with the person, I had never seen the man before.
I just looked at his bad plunged a ko it.
When the blood gushed out of the victim I felt satisfied that finally I had done something people would talk about, that my life had not passed in vain.
The neers are filled with the story.
The courts, the big judges and lawyers in their black gowns are discussing my case with great seriousness.
Looking at all this, I feel I have also done something, I am not an ordinary man.
"
A man who is evadih, who is scared of death, has bee so frustrated, so sad and bored that he is ready to indulge in anything.
The ohing he is not doing, however, is welih.
As soon as a man weles death, accepts death, a new door opens in his life -- a door that leads him to the divine.
The word "Die" is inscribed oemple of God, whereas ihe stream of life is overflowing.
Looking at the signboard -- "Die" -- people turn back.
No one goes inside.
Its a very smart idea, a very clever idea, otherwise there would be a crowd inside and it would be difficult to live -- so the temple of life has the signboard "Die" hanging outside.
Those who bee frightened looking at it, run away.
Thats why I said one has to learn how to die.
The biggest secret of life is to learn how to die, how to accept death.
Let the past die every day.
Let us die every day.
We dohe yesterdays past die.
A seventy-year-old mahe happy memories of his childhood alive.
His childhood is not yet dead.
He still carries the desire to return to his childhood.
The man is too old to move about, he is bedridden, but his youth is not yet dead.
He is still thinking about the same things.
He is still dreaming of the female movie stars of his youth, although none of them are the same now.
The pictures are still moving before his eyes; nothing has died.
In fact, our yesterday never dies.
We never gather the ce to die; we never let anything die, and sequently everything piles up.
We dohe dead be dead; instead, we amass it like a heavy load.
And then it bees impossible to live us weight.
So one of the keys to the art of dying is: let the dead be dead.
As Jesus assing by a lake, a wonderful iook place.
It was early m -- the sun was about to rise; the horizon had just turned red.
A fisherman had thrown his in the lake to catch fish.
As he began pulling the out, Jesus placed his hand on the fishermans shoulder and said, "My friend, would you spend all your life catg fish?"
The same question had crossed the fishermans mind many times before.
Is there any mind in which it doesnt? Of course, the fish may be different, the may be different, the lake may be different, but heless, the question arises, "Am I supposed to spend the whole of my life catg fish?"
The fisherman turned around to see who the man as raising the same question he had in his mind.
He looked at Jesus.
He saw his serene, laughing eyes, his personality.
He said, "There is no other way.
Where else I find a lake? Where else I find fish and throw my o catch them? I also ask myself, Will I go on catg fish the rest of my life?"
Then Jesus said, "I am a fisherman too, but I throw my in some other o.
e, follow me if you wish, but remember, only a man throw a new who has the ce to give up his old .
Leave the old behind.
"
The fisherman must have really been a ceous man.
There are very few ceous people like him.
Right there, he dropped the filled with fish.
A desire must have occurred in his mind to at least pull out the hat was already filled, but Jesus said, "Only they throw the new into the new o who have the ce to leave the old behind.
Drop your right there.
" The fisherma go of his and asked, "Tell me where I have to go.
"
Jesus said, "You seem to be a man of ce.
You have the potential to go some place.
e with me!" As they reached the outskirts of the village, a man came running.
He caught hold of the fisherman and said, "You madman, where are you going? Your father, who was ill, has died.
Where were you? We went looking for you at the lake and found your lying there.
Where are you going?"
The fisherman said, "Please let me take leave for a few days to perform my fathers last rites.
Then Ill e back.
"
Jesus words in reply to the fishermaremendously wonderful.
He said, "You fool, let the dead bury the dead! What need is there for you to go? e.
Follow me.
Now one who is dead is already dead, why even bother to bury him? These are all tricks to keep him alive.
So one who is now dead, is dead forever.
And there are many dead people in the village.
They will bury the dead.
You e with me.
"
The fishermaated for a moment.
Watg him, Jesus said, "Perhaps I wrongly uood you could leave your old behind.
" The fisherman paused for a moment and then followed Jesus.
Jesus said, "You are a ceous man.
If you leave the dead behind, you itain to life.
"
Actually, that which has died in the past should be dropped.
You sit iation but then you always e and tell me it never happens, that thoughts keep ing.
Thoughts dont e like that.
The question is, have you ever left them? You always keep holding on to them, how they be at fault? If a man keeps a dog, feeds him, ties him in his house and then suddenly one day sets him loose, turns him out; if the p es back to the man again and again, would the dog be at fault?
All these days you fed the dog, petted him, loved him, played with him, tied a collar around his neck, kept him in your home.
And then all of a sudden you decide to meditate ahe dog to get lost.
How that be? The p has no idea what has happeo you so suddenly, so he wanders around for a while and then es back to you.
He thinks maybe you are having some kind of fun with him, hehe more you drive him out the more playful he bees, the more he keeps ing back to you.
He feels something new is happening, that maybe the master is in a good mood, so he takes more and more i in the game.
You e and tell me thoughts wont leave you.
How they? You have nourished them with your own blood.
You have tied them to yourself; you have put a collar around their necks with your name on it.
Just tell someohat what he thinks is wrong -- he will jump back at you saying, "What do you mean, what I think is wrong? My thoughts ever be wrong!" So the thought with a collar with your name on it es back to you.
How is your thought supposed to know you are meditating? Now you say to your thought, "Get out! Scram!" The thought is not going to go away like this.
We nourish thoughts.
We nourish thoughts of the past, we keep tying them to ourselves.
And then, one day, you want them to leave you all of a sudden.
They wont leave you in one day.
You will have to stop feeding them; you will have to <dfn></dfn>stop rearing them.
Remember, if you want to drop thoughts, stop saying, "My thoughts.
" How you leave something you claim as yours? If you want to get rid of thoughts, then stop taking i in them.
How will they depart unless you stop taking i in them? Otherwise, how will they know you have ged, that you are no longer ied in them?
All our memories of the past are thoughts.
There is a whole work of them we are holding on to.
We dont allow them to die.
Let your thoughts die.
Let the dead remain dead; dont try to keep it alive.
But we are keeping it alive.
This is also a part of the art of dying.
Keep this key in mind too: if you want to lear of dying thehe dead be dead.
Let the past be past.
It no longer exists, let it go.
There is no need even to preserve it in your memory.
Say goodbye to it, let it depart.
Yesterday was finished yesterday; now it is no more -- a keeps its hold over us.
There is another small question.
A friend has asked:
Question 3
WHAT IS A MIND FILLED WITH ILLUSIONS? WHAT IS A VERY FUSED MIND? WHAT IS CLARITY OF MIND?
This o be uood, because it will be useful for meditation as well as in learning the art of dying.
He has asked a very signifit question.
He asks, "What is a fused mind?" But here we make a mistake.
We say, "disturbed mind," "fused mind.
" This is where the mistake is.
What is the mistake? The mistake is we are using two words -- fused and mind -- and the truth of the matter is that there is no such thing as a fused mind.
Rather, the very state of fusion itself is mind.
There is nothing like a fused mind.
Mind is fusion.
Mind is another name for fusion.
And when there is no fusion does not mean that the mind has bee peaceful; then there is no more mind at all.
For example, there is a storm at sea, the sea is restless.
Would you call it a "restless storm"? Would anyone call it a "restless storm"? You would simply call it a storm, because a storm is just another name for restlessness.
And wheorm dies down, do you now say the storm has bee peaceful? You simply say the storm no longer exists.
In uanding the mind, remember too, mind is just another name for fusion.
When peace desds it does not mean the mind bees peaceful; rather, the mind does at all.
A state of no-mind appears.
And when the mind is no more, then what remains is called the atman.
The sea exists evehere is no storm.
Wheorm disappears, the sea remains.
When the fused mind ceases to exist, then what remains is atman, soul.
Mind is not a thing, it is a state of disorder, a state of chaos.
Mind is not a faculty, it is not a substance.
The body is a substahe atman is a substance -- aing as a state of fusion that bees a liweewo, is mind.
In a state of peace, the body remains, the atman remains, but the mind is no more.
There is no such thing as a peaceful mind.
This error in expression is because of the language we have created.
We say an "uhy body," a "healthy body.
" This is okay.
There is an uhy body, of course, and there is a healthy body as well.
With the disappearance of uhiness, a healthy body remains.
But this is not true in the case of the mind.
There is no such thing as a "healthy mind," an "uhy mind.
" Mind by itself is uhy.
Its very being is fusion.
Its very being is uhy.
Its very being is a disease.
So dont ask how you save the mind from being fused, ask how you get rid of this mind.
Ask how this mind die.
Ask how you do away with this mind.
Ask how you let go of this mind.
Ask what be done so that the mind will exist <big>?９9lｉｂ?</big>no more.
Meditation is a way to be finished with the mind, to part with the mind.
Meditation means to step out of the mind.
Meditation means to move away from the mind.
Meditation meaion of the mind.
Meditation means to stay away from where the fusion is.
By moving away from the fusion, the fusion stills -- because it is our very presehat creates it.
If we move away, it ceases to be.
Say, for instawo people are having a fight.
You have e to fight with me and the fight is on.
If I were to step aside, how would the fight ti would stop, because it only tinue if I make myself a part of it.
We live on a mental plane; resent right where the disorder, where the trouble is going on.
We dont want to get away from there, a we want t peace there.
Peace ot be there.
Just be kind enough to step aside, thats all.
As soon as you step aside, the turmoil will e to an end.
Meditation is not a teique t peace to your mind; rather, it is a teique to move away from the mind.
Meditation is a means to slip away, to turn away from the waves of fusion.
Yet another friend has asked a question which is related to the previous one.
It would be good to uand that as well.
He has asked:
Question 4
WHAT IS THE DIFFEREWEEN TO BE IATION, AND TO DO MEDITATION?
It is the same difference I am already explaining to you.
If a person is doiation, he is trying to make a fused mind peaceful.
What will he do? He will attempt to make his mind quiet.
When an individual is being iation, he is n to quiet down his mind; instead he is slipping away from it.
If it is sunny outside, you may see a man trying to open his umbrella -- and umbrellas be opened outside in the sun; one may stand us shade, or any other shade -- but such umbrellas, however, ever be opened within the mind.
The only kind of umbrella there be in the mind is of thoughts -- but they make no difference.
It is as if a mao stand in the sun with his eyes closed, thinking that an umbrella is over his head and that he is not feeling hot now.
But he is bound to feel hot.
This man is trying to cool down the sun.
He is trying to "do" meditation.
Now there is another man.
When it is sunny outside, he merely gets up, walks ihe house and relaxes.
He is making no effort to cool down the sun, he is merely moving away from the sun.
Doiation means making an effort, an effort to ge the mind.
And to be iation means not making any effort to ge the mind but instead moving within without a sound.
You must take into at the distin betweewo.
If you make an effort to meditate, meditation will never happen.
If you try to make a scious effort, if you sit down, strain your muscles, force yourself, bee determio calm your mind no matter what, it wont work -- because, after all, who will be doing all this? Who will be showiermination? Who else but you?
As it is, you are already fused, restless.
Now you try to calm yourself down -- that means you will be adding one more headache.
You are sitting uptight, ready, disregarding everything.
The more stiff you bee, the further you get into difficulty, the more you go on being tense.
This is not the way.
I ask you to meditate because meditation is relaxation.
You have not to do anything, just be relaxed.
Make sure you uand.
Let me explain a little further through one small principle.
Keep it in mind finally.
A man is swimming in the river.
He says he wants to reach the other side.
The current of the river is swift, and he flaps his arms arying to swim across.
He is getting tired, worn out, broken, but he keeps on swimming.
This man is making an effort to swim.
To swim is an effort for him.
Doiation is an effort too.
Then there is another man.
Instead of swimming he just keeps floating.
He has let himself go in the river.
He does not throw his arms and legs about; he is simply lying in the river.
The river is flowing and, along with the river, so is he.
He is not swimming at all, he is just floating.
An effort is not required to float; floating is merely no-effort.
The meditation I am talking about is like floating, its not like swimming.
Watch a man swimming and a leaf floating in the river.
The delight and the joy of the floating leaf is simply out of this world.
There is no trouble, no hindrano quarrel, no bother for the leaf.
The leaf is very smart.
And whats its smartness? The smartness of the leaf is that it has made the river its boat and is now riding on it.
The leaf is ready and willing to go wherever the river takes it.
The leaf has broken all the strength of the river.
The river do it no harm because the leaf is not fighting against the river.
The leaf doesnt want to create aas just floating.
So the leaf is in plete accord.
Why is that so? It is because now, it is n to fall in accord with the river, it is simply floating; thats all.
Wherever the river wants to take it, so be it.
So keep the floating leaf in mind.
you float like this in the river? There should not be even a thought of swimming, not even the feeling of it; there should be no mind at all.
Have you ever observed that a living man drown in a river whereas a dead man floats on the surface? Have you ever wondered what this is about? A living man drowns, but never a dead man.
He es to the surface right away.
Whats the differehe dead body enters into a state of no-effort.
The dead body does nothing; it ot even if it wished to.
The body es to the surfad floats.
A living man drown because a living man makes an effort to stay alive.
Attempting to do that, he gets tired -- and as he gets tired he drowns.
His fighting drowns him, not the river.
The river t drown the dead man because he doesnt put up any fight.
Since he doesnt fight, losing his strength is out of the question.
The river do no harm to him.
So he floats in the river.
The meditation I am talking about is like floating, not like swimming.
You just have to float.
When I say relax your body, I mean you should let the body float.
Now one does not maintain any hold over the body; now one does not tether oo the shore of the body -- you let it go, you float.
When I say to let go of the breath as well, then do not g to the shore of breathing.
Then leave that too, then float with it also.
Then where will one go? If you let go of the body you will move within; if you hold on to the body you will e out.
How oer the river if he holds on to the shore? He only be ba the shore.
If one leaves the shore, he will ght into the river.
So a stream of life, a stream of divine sciousness is flowing within us, but we are grabbing on to the shore, on to the shore of the body.
Let go of it.
Let go of breathing too.
Let go of thoughts as well.
Now all the shores are left behind.
Where will you go now? Now you will begin to float in that stream which flows within.
One who allows himself to float in that stream reaches the o.
The stream within is like a river, and one who starts floating in it reaches the o.
Meditation is a kind of floating.
One who learns how to float reaches the divine.
Do not swim.
One who swims will go astray.
One who swims will, at the most, leave this shore and reach the other.
What else will he do? What more a swimmer do? He will go from one shore to the other.
This shore brings you out of the river, and so does the other shore.
A poor man, after a great deal of swimming, may bee a rich man at most -- what more? After swimming a great deal, a man occupying a small chair may sit on a high chair in Delhi -- what more will happen?
This shore takes you out of the river, the same as that shore does.
The shore of Dwarka is as outside the river as the shore of Delhi is -- it makes no difference.
A swimmer only reach the shore.
But what about the one who is floating? No shore prevent a floater, because he has let himself go iream.
The stream will carry him.
It is sure to carry him and bring him to the o.
The very goal is to reach the o -- the river bees the o and the individual sciousness bees the divine.
When a drop is lost in the vast o, the absolute meaning of life, the supreme bliss of life, the paramouy of life is attained.
The ultimate thing is: the art of dying is the art of floating.
One who is prepared to die never swims.
He says, "Take me where you will.
I am ready!"
What I have talked about these four days has pertaio this.
Some friends, however, believed I was merely answering questions.
They have written over and ain, "Please say something of your own.
Dont simply answer questions" -- as if someone else were giving the answers!
The problem is that pegs beore important than the clothes hanging on them.
What they are saying is, "Just show us the clothes.
Why are you b to hang them on pegs?" But what am I hanging on the pegs anyway? Whatever I have to say, I will be hanging it on the pegs of your questions.
But thats how our minds are.
I have heard
There was a circus.
Every day, the owner of the circus used to give four bananas to the monkeys in the m and three in the evening.
One m it happehere werent enough bananas in the market, so he gave them three bananas.
The monkeys went on strike.
They said, "This is impossible, we want four bananas in the m.
"
The owner said, "Ill give you four in the evening, take three now.
"
The monkeys insisted, "This has never happened before.
We have always had four bananas in the m.
We want four bananas now!"
The owner said, "Have you gone crazy? Youll have seven bananas altogether anyway.
"
The monkeys persisted, "We dont care about your arithmetic.
All we care about is that we have beeing four bananas every m.
We want four bananas right now!"
On and on friends write to me, "Please say something of your own.
Dont answer questions.
" Indeed I will speak, but the question is, what will I speak? The questions merely serve as pegs; whatever I have to say, I hang on them.
Whether I speak or whether I answer questions, what difference does it make? Who is it that will be answering? Who is it that will be speaking? But they feel I must speak my own stuff because they have beeing four bananas every m.
In each meditation camp there used to be four discourses and four question-and-answer sessions.
This time it has happehat you have turned all the meetings into question-and-answer sessions.
But this makes no difference.
Keep the arithmetic of seven bananas in mind.
Add them together.
There is o t one by ohat there are four in the m and three in the evening, or vice versa.
I have given you all seven bananas.
If you get mixed up ting, you might miss the point.
Thats why, at the end, I have said there are seven bananas.
What I had to say, I have said it all.
百度搜索 And Now, And Here 天涯 或 And Now, And Here 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.