Ego, Love and the Purpose in Life – Sri Sri Ravishankar

[Guest guest]

Ego, Love and the Purpose in Life – Sri Sri Ravishankar

 

A Short Article by Sri Sri Ravishankar (as appeared in the Times of India)

 

I never say that some emotions are good or bad, right or wrong. We are

looking at what the consequences are. In fact, when anger comes, what can you

do? You may think a hundred times, “Oh I should not get angry,” but when the

mood comes, it comes like a thunderstorm. You are unable to control it. You are

swept by your emotion. Emotions are 20/30 times more powerful than thoughts and

promises you make. Understanding this mechanism opens your heart. In fact, anger

is an instrument. Anger is essential when you are able to be in control of it,

when you are able to know it, how to use it, where to use it, and how to apply

it. That takes skill –the art of handling your own might. Knowledge and anger

are mutually dependant. This knowledge gives a possibility for you to be

flowering in life at any moment, anywhere, anytime. Maybe you are walking on the

beach; suddenly you are in love with the whole entire universe, the sun, the

moon, stars, the sunset, the waves on the beach and the

wind in the trees. Everything appears to be very lively to you. So alive you

become that moment and it stirs something deep inside you.

 

Simultaneously, there is awareness in you, and there is love flowering. Our

capacity to love depends on how deep and open we can be. The capacity to love

can be increased by knowledge, by diving deep into oneself. When the capacity to

love is greater, the ability to know and understand also becomes greater.

Typically, we limit ourselves. A Hindu says Hinduism is great because he is a

Hindu not because of what it is. A Christian says the Bible is great, because he

is a Christian. Muslims say Koran is the greatest book in the world, because

they are Muslims. If a Hindu says “Bible is wonderful,” it is more authentic

than a Christian claiming, Bible wonderful. We think things are great just

because we belong to that thing. Why not wake up and see that all that exists in

this world, from time immemorial belongs to you? “Am I not just from time

immemorial, do I not belong to you?” I am not just from America, I am not a

German, I am not just an Indian or an Asian, or an African, but I

am at home everywhere and with everybody. All the wealth of humanity belongs to

me, whether it is the Gita, Koran or the Bible, or Sikhism or Jainism, all this

wealth is mine.”

 

A mature person would claim the whole world as his wealth. Maturity is –

someone does not limit the wealth that is present in the world and divide it. He

says, “The whole entirety belongs to me and I belong to everybody.” That is

enlightenment. The whole evolution of man starts from being somebody. Being

somebody is ego. “I am great, I am very evolved.” This is an ego. Recognizing

the truth of the two steps of evolution takes one from somebody to being nobody

to being everybody. To an enlightened person, everyone is a form of God.

Everyone is a form of the Divinity.

 

An enlightened person when he speaks does not speak from the position, “You

are all ignorant, I am very enlightened. I am going to tell you something.” No.

He knows nature, the Divine is providing this beautiful knowledge, and it is

just coming out in another form. An exchange is happening. In fact, everything

in life is just a happening.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

for Good

Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

 

 

[Guest guest]

> A Short Article by Sri Sri Ravishankar (as appeared in the Times of India)

> If a Hindu says "Bible

> is wonderful," it is more authentic than a Christian claiming, Bible

> wonderful.

 

Noble thought indeed. However will it be any good if I started saying

good things about Bible or Quran or other scriptures without actually

appreciating what they are trying to say?

 

Each tradition is unique with its own heritage of rich imagery and

vast symbolism. Developing understanding of a tradition takes a

lifetime. Making a remark on someone else' closely held beliefs, based

on a shallow understanding of them, is showing disrespect to that

tradition, even if the remark is worded positively. If someone

superficially kept on saying, "advaita is great", "advaita is great"

without actually appreciating it, I may find it irritating rather than

opening up.

 

Wouldn't it be just as good as sticking to one tradition and simply

leaving the possibility open that others also may be right rather than

trying to claim everything?

 

praNAm

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

In the context of this discussions, this quoation from Mahatma Gandhiji

is quite appropriate: "All religions are true, but each is truest

in its own time and place."

 

Interestingly Gandhiji lived by Gita and a true follower of Hinduism

but at the same he gave the impression to Christians that he was

following the bible and the Muslims believed that he was following

Koran. Great spiritual leaders had no problems with vision of other

religions and they could transcend from the visible differences

experienced by the fanatic followers!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin, Sanjay Srivastava

<sksrivastava68@g...> wrote:

> .....

> Wouldn't it be just as good as sticking to one tradition and simply

> leaving the possibility open that others also may be right rather than

> trying to claim everything?

>

> praNAm

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <RamChandran@a...>

wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> In the context of this discussions, this quoation from Mahatma

Gandhiji

> is quite appropriate: "All religions are true, but each is truest

> in its own time and place."

>

> > Warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

>

>

> advaitin, Sanjay Srivastava

> <sksrivastava68@g...> wrote:

>

> > .....

> > Wouldn't it be just as good as sticking to one tradition and

simply

> > leaving the possibility open that others also may be right

rather than

> > trying to claim everything?

> >

> > praNAm

 

Namaste, all

 

The question of different religions and different schools of thought

within the same religion being all true is similar to the question

of children of different mothers fighting among themselves about the

statement: "My mother is great". One need not worry about the logic

or absence of it in the statement "As far as I am concerned, my

mother is the greatest, I am proud of her"!

 

Secondly, it all depends on the hypothesis from which you start. It

is a question of what you believe in, for a start. A statement like

5 + 3 = 2

may be wrong if you think of ordinary numbers but becomes true when

you think of the numbers as remainders modulo 7. So each religion

has its own fundamental hypotheses, not to be questioned, just as

you don't question the existence of your mother!

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk