Tag Archives: Morality

Man’s world is one of stories

Man’s world is one of stories:

myths, morals, codes, institutions, money…

Man is an animal that weaves stories.

Animals live in objects, man in stories.

Why does man weave stories?

Because man is a story.

To defend his inner story, man is compelled to dream external stories.

What is mysticism?

The story that ends the inner story.

~ Acharya Prashant

Continue reading

Pure giving

The ego is interested in its own nourishment.

Because the ego wants only that what the ego values, not which is absolutely valuable.

Getting tired of getting hurt is a rare happening. Man is extremely resilient. We keep on getting hurt again and again, at the same place and yet we are hardly ever tired of repeating the same processes, the same actions that bring us to hurt.

You can call it a stage of demolition. The old patterns are seen as worthless and hence given up.

In the first level, the ego gives, and this giving is of a nature that strengthens the ego. In the second level, the ego gives up its trust in itself and hence gets diminished.

In the third stage giving up does not happen. The third stage is of pure giving.

You just give. Meaninglessly, purposelessly, reasonlessly. You don’t even give, you are just being what you really are.

And when you just start giving, since you are giving to yourself, you start receiving a lot.

Tremendously bored we are with everything, that even an invitation to get rid of boredom sounds boring.

Your mind is already afraid of death, and Rumi is just exposing, or at worst exploiting that fear.

Given the way we are, fear is our reality. Wherever there is body identification, there would also parallely be the fear of the loss of the body.

Everything is done for a purpose, for a reason, with the expectation of gain. And where there is the expectation of gain, there is also the parallel fear of loss.

Because an action that arises from fear can never eliminate fear.

Take care of the ‘first’ in the ‘first place.’ Do not let the disease guide your actions. Rather, the first action should be to eliminate the disease. And these are the only two ways of living.



Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant on Rumi: The three levels of giving

Acharya Prashant on Rumi: The three levels of giving

IMG-20180628-WA0017 

Before death takes away what you are given,

give away what there is to give.

Rumi

Acharya Prashant: Here is something from Rumi: “Before death takes away what you are given, give away what there is to give.”

The question says, “Statements like these are interpreted as being pleasure aversive, and we already are pain aversive, so together it means being life aversive. Is Rumi really talking about being life aversive?”

I’ll repeat the quote, “Before death takes away what you are given, give away what there is to give.”

‘Giving’ is the keyword. Let’s go close to it and understand it. ‘Giving’ happens at three different levels. All three are connected to each other, yet there is a dimensional difference between the three. The three appear to be progressively leading to each other, yet there is also a quantum jump from the first to the second and from the second to the third. The first kind of giving is the giving that we are all very familiar with.

You give somebody a hundred rupee note and then you expect in return a value of at least hundred rupees, right? And it is great if you give hundred rupees and are in return given a value of two hundred rupees. If you just look at the event partially, then giving is happening. Is it not? You are giving something, right?

Similarly, we give gifts to each other. We give compliments to each other. We give advices to each other. We even give help to each other. We see that happening all around us. What is common between all these types of givings? We are talking about the first level of giving. What is common between all these types of giving?

Listener: It’s given to someone else.

AP: Yes, and?

L: Expectation of a return.

AP: Expectation of a return. Now what kind of return do you expect? When you give something to somebody, what do you expect in return?

L: Something of same value.

AP: Something of value at least, or do you expect something valueless? Be with me, do you expect something valueless or something you deem as worthy?

L: Something we deem as worthy.

AP: Who decides whether what you are getting in return is indeed valuable?

L: Me.

AP: You decide. So you are the one who decides that you are giving away something that has value, let’s say a note or a compliment. And you are also the one who decides that what you are getting in return too is valuable, correct? Who is this ‘you’, who is this ‘me’ who decides what to give and what to get? And whether to give and whether to get? And whether the given and taken has value? Who is this entity that decides all this? That entity is called the ‘ego.’

The ego is interested in its own nourishment.

So, whenever it enters into a transaction with the world, whenever it enters into a transaction in a relationship, its objective is always to enhance itself. Which means that if it is giving hundred, it wants hundred and fifty in return. This is our normal day-to-day giving, which appears like giving but is actually a business transaction in which the ego wants to benefit and hence enhance itself. Are you getting it?

If you give something but get something in return which the ego does not like, then you will say that this is not a fair transaction. Take an extreme example. Let’s say you have become habituated to substance abuse, drugs. You take one thousand rupees and you give it to a drug peddler. And what you get from him instead is some sane advice and a copy of the Upanishads. An entire set of the principal Upanishads, that’s what he gives you the moment you hand over your thousand bucks to him. Will you say that you have been given a fair deal? Would you?

L: No.

AP: No,

because the ego wants only that what the ego values, not which is absolutely valuable.

It has to be valuable in relation to the ego’s configuration. I want that which I think is good for me. Now even if what you are giving me is beautiful advice and a copy of the scriptures, yet I reject it because I do not value it because this is not what I expected. Give me that which I want.

Continue reading

The Truth is only for those, who really really are qualified for it.

The scriptures are very clear on this. The Truth is only for those, who really really are qualified for it. And if you are not qualified for it, you must not get it even if you beg for it.

That is why such rigorous conditions have been put. You go and you first clear this test, you prove your worth in this criteria, you do this, you do that, you spend years first becoming capable of receiving the Truth. And only then the Guru will initiate you. Otherwise, the Guru will keep turning you away, go back

you don’t deserve the Truth yet. Similarly, there are so many people who just don’t deserve even facts, you are not morality bound to keep serving what they aren’t even looking for.

You give Truth to someone who is not looking for Truth, he will slaughter you. You give facts to someone who is not looking for facts he’ll call you are a liar. That doesn’t mean you have to have an instinct for self-preservation. That only means that you’ll be taking the fun out of the game.



Read the complete article: Answer the questioner, not the question

 

Answer the questioner, not the question

SR Generic_ English

Question: In daily routine life, sometimes we say we should speak the truth, and truth only, and avoid speaking lies. But once you are speaking the Truth, you are more relaxed and you don’t have to think every time what the lie was. So, should we speak the truth all the time?

Acharya Prashant: No No, see, first of all, what you are calling truth is just facts. You are asking whether you should be stating facts to someone all the time.

Continue reading

Start with your own welfare

It is not for social responsibility or for social welfare or for the progress of humanity that you probably want to have a child. Ask yourself is it not because of social pressure instead that you are feeling the need to confirm. Surely somebody is pressurizing you. It is the prerogative of the Buddhas and the Saints to think of human welfare. And they have gone to human welfare only after they have done themselves a lot of good. Only after their own eyes have opened up do they start opening the eyes of the entire world. Have your own eyes opened up? Then how are you talking of the welfare of the mankind?

Have you been able to come to your own welfare? Don’t you see it is such a bizarre situation? You do not know your own welfare but you are intending the welfare of the world and that too how? By having sex and getting a kid.

What exactly is the thinking? What is the logic? What is the inner argument? Are we living in an age where populations have been wiped out by war or plague? Are we living in a country where the birth rates are so low that the government has to incentivize births? Are we living as tribes in a jungle that are in a danger of extinction due to their underpopulation? Are human beings the threatened species on this planet? Then how exactly are you thinking of social welfare through reproduction?

Don’t you see that it is just absurd? Instead, the matter of fact might be that you are feeling pressurized by social norms or by somebody, in particular, maybe somebody of the household. Maybe neighbors, relatives, maybe one of the old ladies in the house who are constantly bugging you to become a father or a mother. Or, maybe the movies that keep on telling you that unless you are a father, there is something missing in your life.

If you really intend anybody’s welfare and welfare is wonderful, I love it and respect it when you talk about the welfare of others.

Start with your own welfare. See what life is like, understand what sex is? Understand what is procreation? Know what it means to bring a baby into this world. Know what human being is and what his relationship with the society must be? Know what is birth? Know what is bad for a human being? Only then you will know that in which lies human welfare.



Read the complete Article: Sex for fun, sex for social obligation

Sex for fun, sex for social obligation

SR Generic_ English

 

Question: “Acharya Ji, my whole life, I treated sex as fun due to my early age experience. I would treat it as fun-just to relax my body. But now, at my mature age, I feel that it’s a responsibility to have a son or a daughter for humanity, to strengthen our world. I feel I must procreate for the welfare of humanity. And I realize that at the time of such creation, both the partners must be aware of what they are creating- it must be for the betterment of society and not only for fun. Only then will one be responsible, otherwise both I and the society will suffer.”

Acharya Prashant: You are saying that in your teenage, in your early youth you had sex for fun and now you want to have sex in order to fulfill a social responsibility.

It is far better to have sex for fun than to have sex to fulfill some social obligation. Sex is something very intimate, it cannot be driven by the dictates of others, it cannot be driven by social norms, it cannot be a method to fulfill a responsibility towards others. Having fun and then moving on is a far more innocent and spiritual thing. Because in having fun, you are not aiming for the future, in having fun, you are not expecting a reward after the action. In having fun you will not try to hold the other captive, you will not say that you must now stay with me and fulfill your responsibilities and sign this contract with me that obliges you for such time into the future.

Continue reading