शर्तें

आज की कविता
--
आख़िर मैंने तय किया,
कि अपनी ही शर्तों पर जीना है मुझे,
नहीं करना है कोई फ़िक्र या उम्मीद,
जीवन जो भी दे स्वीकार है,
जीवन जो न भी दे वह न भी,
हाँ, मानता हूँ कि मेरी कुछ ज़रूरतें हैं,
लेकिन यह भी जीवन को ही तय करना है,
कि उनमें से कौन सी अहम हैं,
और कौन सी हैं ग़ैर ज़रूरी,
यह ’अहं’ शायद क़तई अहम नहीं है ....
फिर तय करनेवाला,
मैं कौन होता हूँ
हाँ सच है,
मैं कोई नहीं !
--

The Time.

कालजयी धर्म 
kālajayī dharma.
--
Times are changing but the change is itself the criteria, essential nature / reality of, -how we define and call 'time'.
There is this ‘physical-time’. The most crude form of ‘time’ that is though changing, is just a stable but accurately steady flow also, for it could be measured in terms of units which are again termed as interval and could be compared with other such intervals as being bigger or smaller than them.
This way we tend to think time is a tangible object, though imperceptible, we could deal with it like other physical objects. We just forget that this ‘thinking’ mode of the brain (and let us not forget that the brain is not the same thing as mind) which as an object is called ‘thought’ is again a flow / flux of energy with low or high potential. We can see (not ‘think’) that this flow of ‘thought’ that takes place in individuals, -in their individual brains defines them each as a person different and distinct from the rest.
This way what we called ‘crude’ time has 2 operating modes. One at the practical physical level while another at the level of the brain. Thus ‘Thought’ is though a form of time itself, is unique and different from other such brains, with respect to every single individual.
This constitutes what could be called the ‘psychological time’.
This psychological time could be ‘experienced’ but could not be ‘measured’ as a quantity. In Mathematics, it is not a ‘measurable’ quantity.
Now the impossible question :
Could this psychological time administrate, govern, monitor or manage (or even manipulate!) its (own?) course of movement?
That time-bit is already in movement in every brain. The working of this time-bit is: what creates one’s personal world. Though this personal world seems to be intricately in sync with other such myriad worlds, it is really never directly connected with or in contact with any of them.
Thus the myth of a ‘common world’, which is only a notion unfounded takes hold of us and is taken as Reality. And there is no question at all of altering the course of movement of time that seems to be the movement of this (assumed) world.
But as we said :
‘time’ is though changing, is just a stable and also an accurately steady flow ...,
Implies and is implied irrefutably by the presence / existence of an ‘observer’ that is there so long and is as much mysterious as time itself.
The nature of this ‘observer’ is exactly same as that of the ‘time’ that is ‘observed’ as a steady but stable flow.
This person / individual could be not mistaken as the ‘observer’, simply because this person / individual which is though a flow and all the time changing has no form or essence, while this ‘observer’ is decisively self-evident truth.
‘Observer’ is the ‘observed’ (-J.Krishnamurti)  conveys yet another implication here.
Irrespective and independent of the physical and the psychological time, there is yet another level of ‘time’ which governs the functioning of both, is  कालजयी धर्म / kālajayī dharma.
--    

’मैं’ का अर्थ / वाच्यार्थ और लक्ष्यार्थ का द्वंद्व

वाच्यार्थ और लक्ष्यार्थ का द्वंद्व 
--

प्रश्न : क्या आप व्यंग्य का अर्थ समझते हैं?

सीधा ज़वाब है : ठीक से नहीं जानता ।
उलटा ज़वाब है : शायद जानता हूँ ।
सही ज़वाब है : क्या व्यंग्य का कोई अर्थ होता भी है?
--
व्युत्पत्ति की दृष्टि से अंग > (अंग किए जाने योग्य) > आंग्य (जिसका अंग किया जाता है, अर्थात् अपनाया जाता है > अंग्य > जिसे किसी अंग का रूप दिया गया है ।)
 >वि+अंग्य = व्यंग्य > जिसे कोई विशिष्ट रूप दिया गया है।
दूसरा अर्थ है : ’वक्रोक्ति’ अर्थात् वक्र-उक्ति > जिसका अर्थ वह  नहीं होता जैसा कि सीधे प्रतीत होता है ।
अध्यात्म की पूरी समस्या यही है । जैसे ही ’मैं’ शब्द का प्रयोग किया जाता है तो उसका वास्तविक अर्थ तो वह चेतन-सत्ता होता है जो इस शरीर को ’मैं’ कहता है, जबकि जिस शरीर को ’मैं’ समझा जाता है, वह ’मैं’ नहीं होता । ’यह’ / ’वह’ / ’तुम’ ... कभी ’मैं’ का विकल्प नहीं हो सकते ।
--
The apparent and the implied sense :
--
A spoken word often bears more than one sense according to the circumstances, the object / purpose it describes, the one who speaks and the one who hears it.
A very special word that everyone inevitably uses or has to use is 'I' : The First Person Pronoun.
Though by this word, apparently the physical body / the person who utters this word is indicated, The real meaning is the 'consciousness' associated with this body.
This 'consciousness', the conscious-entity that indicates the body / the person as 'I' is the Implied / Real 'I', while the body / the person that is indicated thus (by saying 'I') is the Apparent meaning of the word 'I'.
Usually one fails to this distinction.
This is the core of all Spiritual quest.
--

अदिति aditi and सुजाता sujātā

अदिति aditi and सुजाता sujātā.
--
A few days ago I had a dream that was repeated with a different story about a week ago. The dream was about how She ‘sacrificed’ me, and in a way exorcised me of the animal-ghost that I had been host of since my innumerable past lives.
I rarely try to understand and connect the messages dreams might convey.
But here at the place ‘Hill of Devi’ I’m always clearly informed in words I can understand in my mother-tongue. And that Mother-tongue is literally so, a language that was revealed by अदिति aditi to देव deva-s while देव deva’s themselves in the first place, created the old language that animals speak and spoke before the arrival of अदिति aditi.
This rather cryptic clue / story from ऋग्वेद ṛgveda (मंडल 10 /72) and in देवी-अथर्वशीर्षम्  devī-atharvaśīrṣam is an apparent evidence that what I can think may be my fancy only is a fact, though not of this physical world only.
This has a connection with the ‘cosmic’ and the ‘universal’.
I was under the impression that the vivacious ‘Mother’ that ‘sacrificed’ me was छिन्नमस्ता chinnamastā (cin-namaH tA) / चित् / चिन् नमः ता cit/ cin namaḥ tā , one of several Goddesses in Veda, the manifest ‘चित् cit’ itself). Though that is also very true, today only I was told She was another form the Divine Mother 'तारा' / t ā r ā , who was ‘सुजाता sujātā’ in one of Her earlier birth.
She was the consort of  कहोड kahoḍa, the famous ऋषि / ṛṣi, son-in-law and student of  उद्दालक uddālaka, She was also the mother of the more famous ‘अष्टावक्र aṣṭāvakra’, but never let others know of her secret and sacred Reality.
She was also ‘māyā’ the Mother of  सिद्धार्थ siddhārtha, who left him soon after his birth.
Kahod was born and lived near the लिंगा नदी Linga-river (presently In Pakistan) and his village was the same Kahuta that is the nucleus of Pakistan’s atomic research activities.
--
kahoḍa was a bright, genius and favorite disciple of  ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka . After successful completion of वेद / Veda-learning from the Teacher, the sage / ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka gave him his only daughter in marriage.
श्वेतकेतु / śvetaketu, Sujata’s brother, (son of ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka) was also a great sage / ऋषि / ṛṣi / a seer and realized one. The King of  वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) was performing a great ritual  यज्ञ / yajña and required scholars and experts who can help him in his endeavor. So he sent a  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita to India who reached in search, at a place where कहोड / kahoḍa lived. He went to the King’s court and challenged any-one who could defeat him in शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha  (the debate about the correct interpretation and meaning of scriptures) . This way many ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita of the King were defeated by him and he sent all them to sea, (supposedly) to be drowned. But under this excuse they were in fact sent to वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo, and held captive there by the king. They were well-treated and given best comfort and food and all the luxuries, and had been told if they help the success of the ceremony, -the ritual  यज्ञ / yajña they would be released and could return to India with many precious gifts, or could live in Borneo, if they wanted so.
One day just out of curiosity, कहोड / kahoḍa reached the King’s court and was defeated by the foreign  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and was subsequently (supposedly) drowned in the sea.
When कहोड / kahoḍa reached the sea-shore, he was made to climb over a big ship and after a journey of a few days came to Borneo.
Meanwhile  सुजाता / sujātā , who was pregnant gave birth to a child who had already mastered Veda in its entirety in his earlier births. But a few days before कहोड / kahoḍa went to court, and  कहोड / kahoḍa was reciting Veda, there were errors in his pronunciation which this child in सुजाता / sujātā’s womb heard and objected to. कहोड / kahoḍa got furious and cursed him to be born with 8 limbs deformed in his body.
Having deformity in 8 limbs (2 arms, 2 shoulders, 2 knees and 2 legs) the boy was accordingly got the name अष्टावक्र / aṣṭāvakra.
The boy didn’t know that कहोड / kahoḍa was his father, and he mistook श्वेतकेतु / śvetaketu for his brother and ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka for his father.
When He was some 8 years of age he came to know he was the son of  कहोड / kahoḍa  who was defeated in  शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha, debate by a ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita, and was drowned in the sea. He went to the court where he challenged the ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and won.
When कहोड / kahoḍa had boarded the ship which took him to Borneo, his eyes were covered with a blue-green blindfold so that he could not see the route which the ship followed.
On the ship after about 4 or 5 days when the blindfold was opened he found that he has almost lost his eye-sight. Then it occurred to him and people around also told him that he was in the वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) which was a part of the earth, was also the kingdom of वरुण / varuṇa (Sea-God), and the atmosphere there was made of water where he could listen to even the most feeble sounds clearly, it was almost impossible for him to see the form of the things. He too had to agree reluctantly to this new extra-ordinary experience, where every thing was but of blue-green shade. Soon he got accustomed to it.
King वरुण /varuṇa had performed successfully the यज्ञ / yajña as was his deep wish and released all the  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and honored them with rich gifts.
The ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita from वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) also went back to his own country.
Performing great penance and observing the duties of  ब्राह्मण  / brāhmaṇa,  कहोड / kahoḍa lived his whole life doing शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha, debate, rituals and finally entered वानप्रस्थ / vānaprastha
संन्यास / saṃnyāsa आश्रम / āśrama, respectively, but till death could though attain ब्रह्मज्ञानम् / brahmajñānam only could not attain 'Realization'. This meant he could see that सर्वं खलु इदं ब्रह्म / sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma, but was not ‘realized’. ‘Realization’ of the truth अयमात्मा ब्रह्म / ayamātmā brahma / was still far away, -not attained by him. After a few thousand years when he was born to the queen माया / māyā as prince सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha in the Kingdom of the King  शुद्धोधन / he had been mature enough to see the absurdity of all those activities of ब्राह्मण / brāhmaṇa which deepened in him the urge / longing for attainment of the Ultimate ब्रह्मन् / Brahman / आत्मन् / ātman and realize the two as the one and only unique Reality. Being born in क्षत्रिय वर्ण / kṣatriya varṇa created in him a deeper aversion to the superficial meaning of Veda, on the other hand though by far now he could know and understand the real meaning and essence of them much better. In this life of prince सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha he was well-prepared and eager to put earnestly all his efforts in seeking the Ultimate.
On one deep dark mid-night in such a a state of mind, he left his wife princess-यशोधरा / yaśodharā , and son राहुल / rāhula, still asleep well in his palace, and left for the search into the unknown Reality. On the gates of the palace his obedient friend and charioteer छन्दक / chandaka, waiting for him. He was the same who used to do शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha (debate) with him about छान्दग्योपनिषत् / chāndagyopaniṣat in their past life when  सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha was कहोड / kahoḍa himself.
No one was aware of this reality except सुजाता / sujātā, who had been following him and keeping watch on him serving him as well with all due care, devotion, love and attention, without saying a word.
महानिषभिक्रमण : mahāniṣabhikramaṇa
The two left the palace.
“This was inevitable, for the ultimate good,  मोक्ष / mokṣa of the world संसार / saṃsāra,  which is but a ripple only for me on the ocean of Reality. But the same Reality is the very ocean, that is संसार / saṃsāra, is "sorrow" without a beginning or an end for itself.”
Sitting in the chariot, was in deep contemplation about the people though presently silent.
“Many a homes were left by me in many a past lives.
Many a bodies were assumed and discarded by me in many a past lives.
This one is also such a small incidence, not an exception.”
The rhythmic sound of the hoofs of the horses that were carrying the chariot could not break the silence that enveloped the place. It either just dissolved in the deep silence of his mind, or he was so absorbed in his thought that was just unaware of it.
And at the same moment there was a greater turmoil, agitation and deep anxiety in the mind of छन्दक / chandaka.
The two were the two extremes, -poles apart.
Performing an arduous and difficult तपस्या / tapasyā / great penance, for many years, his body became very emaciated, lean and weak and he could not say if he has attained his goal, -what he had been trying to attain during all these years.
On a fateful full-moon night, when he bathed in the river निरञ्जना / nirañjanā  after a prolonged fast, he was so unable to walk, yet pulled on his body, somehow reached the seat under the banyan-tree वटवृक्ष, where he used to meditate.
The delicate rays of थे moon-lit night were playing ethereal music on the waters of  निरञ्जना / nirañjanā, and the place was imbued with serenity, when the memory of his past life became vivid before the eyes of his mind. He was thinking of his son who had to endure 8 deformities since birth, because of his own fault and own curse, who was ultimately freed from the curse after bathing into the river समङ्गा / samaṅgā, and was famous all over the world as an eminant   ब्रह्मज्ञानी / brahmajñānī also a Realized one and आत्मज्ञानी / ātmajñānī  also at the same time.  While the father, namely he himself was though ब्रह्मज्ञानी / brahmajñānī  could not attain आत्मज्ञान / ātmajñāna  till that time.
The island वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa in the Ocean of Indonesia shone in his mind and he was now remembering his wife सुजाता / sujātā .
At a distance he saw a woman-figure walking towards him.
After a few minutes she reached to him.
She was holding a bowl in her hands.
This was nectar indeed, though looked like milk.
“भद्रे / bhadre!
 O Goddess of auspicious countenance …! "
 Who are you?”
 –He asked.
सुजाता / sujātā had no doubts about this ascetic, who he was in this life and in his / earlier lives of both. She had always served her husband and son with the same love, affection and was still doing the same. She knew सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha but सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha took a few seconds to recognize her.
Their eyes met and the endeavor od the Ascetic reached the pinnacle.
He was now The Blessed One, The Buddha.
There were tears in his eyes.
Tears of gratitude ?
Who knows?
And who can say;  What quantity of waters might have flown through निरञ्जना / nirañjanā since during all these times that went by?those times?
 
Kahod was born and lived near the river Linga (presently In Pakistan) and his village was the same Kahuta that is the nucleus of Pakistan’s atomic research activities.
kahoḍa was a bright genius and favorite disciple of  ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka . After successful completion of learning from the Teacher, the ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka gave him his only daughter in marriage.
श्वेतकेतु / śvetaketu, Sujata’s brother, (son of ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka) was also a great ऋषि / ṛṣi /  a seer and realized one. The King of वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) was performing a great ritual  यज्ञ / yajña and required scholars and experts who can help him in his endeavor. So he sent a  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita to India who reached in the search at a place where कहोड / kahoḍa lived. He went to the King’s court and challenged any-one who could defeat him in शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha  (the debate about the correct interpretation and meaning of scriptures) . This way many
 ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita of the King were defeated by him and he sent all them to sea, to be drowned. But under this excuse they were in fact sent to Borneo and held captive there by the king. They were well-treated and given best comfort and food and all the luxuries, and had been told if they help the success of the ceremony, -the ritual  यज्ञ / yajña they would be released and could return to India with many precious gifts, or could live in Borneo, if they wanted to.
One day just out of curiosity कहोड / kahoḍa reached the King’s court and was defeated by the foreign  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and was subsequently (supposedly) drowned in the sea.
When कहोड / kahoḍa reached the sea-shore, he was made to climb over a big ship and after a journey of a few days came to Borneo.
Meanwhile  सुजाता / sujātā / who was pregnant gave birth to a child who had mastered Veda in its entirity in his earlier births. But a few days before कहोड / kahoḍa went to court, he was reciting some Veda and there were errors in his pronunciation which this child in सुजाता / sujātā’s womb heard and objected to. कहोड / kahoḍa got furious and cursed him to be born with 8 deforms in his body.
Having deformity in 8 limbs (2 arms, 2 shoulders, 2 knees and 2 legs) the boy was accordingly got the name अष्टावक्र / aṣṭāvakra.
The boy didn’t know that कहोड / kahoḍa was his father, and mistook श्वेतकेतु / śvetaketu for his brother and ऋषि उद्दालक / ṛṣi uddālaka for his father.
When He was some 8 years of age he come to know he was the son of  कहोड / kahoḍa  who was defeated in  शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha, debate by a ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita, and was drowned in the sea. He went to the court where he challanged the ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and won.
When boarded the ship which took him to Borneo, his eyes were covered with a blue-green blindfold so that he could not see the route which the ship followed.
On the ship after about 4 or 5 days when the blindfold was opened he found that he has almost lost his eye-sight. Then it occured to him and people around also told him that he was in the वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) which was a part of the earth was the kingdom of varuṇa, and the there was the atmosphere made of water where he could listen to even the most feeble sounds clearly, it was almost impossible for him to see the form of the things. He too had to reluctantly agree to this new extra-ordinary experience, where every thing was but of blue-green shade. Soon he got accustomed to it.
King varuṇa had performed successfully the यज्ञ / yajña as was his deep wish and released all the  ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita and honored them with rich gifts.
 The ब्राह्मण पंडित / brāhmaṇa paṃḍita from varuṇadvīpa / Borneo (Indonesia) also went back to his own country.
Performing great penance and observing the duties of  ब्राह्मण  / brāhmaṇa,  कहोड / kahoḍa  .. lived his whole life doing शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha, debate, rituals and entered वानप्रस्थ / vānaprastha
संन्यास / saṃnyāsa आश्रम / āśrama, respectively but till death could though attain ब्रह्मज्ञानम् / brahmajñānam  only. This meant he could see that सर्वं खलु इदं ब्रह्म / sarvaṃ khalu idaṃ brahma but was not ‘realized’. ‘Realization’ of the truth अयमात्मा ब्रह्म / ayamātmā brahma
/ was still not attained by him. After a few thousand years when he was born to the queen माया / māyā
as a prince सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha in the Kingdome of the King  शुद्धोधन / he had been mature enough to see the absurdity of all those activities of ब्राह्मण / brāhmaṇa which  deepened in him the urge / longing for attainment of the Ultimate ब्रह्मन् / Brahman / आत्मन् / ātman and realize the two as the one and only unique Reality. Being born in क्षत्रिय वर्ण / kṣatriya varṇa created in him a deeper aversion to the superficial meaning of Veda, on the other hand though by far now he could know and understand the real meaning and essence of them much better. In this life of  prince सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha he was well prepared to put all his efforts in seeking the Ultimate.
On one deep dark mid-night in sucha a state of mind, he left his wife princess-यशोधरा / yaśodharā , and son राहुल / rāhula asleep well in his palace and left for the search into the unknown Reality. On the gates of the palace his obedient friend and charioteer छन्दक / chandaka, witing for him. He was the same who used to do शास्त्रार्थ / śāstrārtha debate with him about छान्दग्योपनिषत् / chāndagyopaniṣat
 / in their past life when  सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha was कहोड / kahoḍa himself.
No one was aware of this reality except सुजाता / sujātā, who had been following him and keeping watch on him serving him as well will all due care, devotion, love and attention, without saying a word.
महानिषभिक्रमण : mahāniṣabhikramaṇa
The two left the palace.
“This was inevitable, for the ultimate good,  मोक्ष / mokṣa of the world संसार / saṃsāra,  which is but a ripple only for me on the ocean of Reality. But the same Reality is the very ocean, that is संसार / saṃsāra, is sorrow without a beginning or an end for itself.”
Sitting in the chariot, was in deep contemplation about the people though presently silent.
“Many a homes were left by me in many a past lives.
Many a bodies were assumed and discarded by me in many a past lives.
This one is also such a small incidence, not an exception.”
The rythemic sound of the hoofs of the horses that were carrying the chariot could not break the silence that enveloped the place. It either just dissoved in the deep silence of his mind, or he was so absorbed in his thought that was just unaware of it.
And at the same moment there was a greater turmoil, agitation and deep anxiety in the mind of छन्दक / chandaka.
The two were the two extremes, poles apart.
Performing an arduous and difficult तपस्या / tapasyā for many years, his body became very emaciated, lean and weak and he could not say if he has attained his goal, what he was trying to attain during all these years.
On a fateful full-moon night, when he bathed in the river निरञ्जना / nirañjanā  after a prolonged fast, he was so unable to walk, yet pulled on his body and somehow reached the seat under the banion tree where he used to meditate.
The delicate rays of moon-lit night were playing etherial music on the waters of  निरञ्जना / nirañjanā , and the place was imbued with serenity, when the memory of his past life became vivid before the eyes of his mind was thinking of his son who had to endure 8 deformities since birth, because of his own fault and own curse, who was ultimately freed from the curse after bathing into the river समङ्गा / samaṅgā
 and was famous all over the world as an eminant   ब्रह्मज्ञानी / brahmajñānī
 /who was also a Realized one आत्मज्ञानी / ātmajñānī  also at the same time.  While the father, namely he himself was though ब्रह्मज्ञानी / brahmajñānī  could not attain आत्मज्ञान / ātmajñāna  till that time.
The island वरुण-द्वीप / varuṇadvīpa in the Ocean of Indonesia shone in his mind and he was now remembering his wife सुजाता / sujātā .
At a distance he saw a woman-figure walking in his direction.
After a few minutes it reached to him.
She was holding a bowl in her hands.
This was nector indeed though looked like goat-milk.
“भद्रे / bhadre O Goddess of auspicious countenance …!
 Who are you?”
 –He asked.
सुजाता / sujātā had no doubts about this ascetic, who he was in this life and in his / both of their earlier lives. She had always served her husband कहोड / kahoḍa and son अष्टावक्र / aṣṭāvakra, with the same love, affection and was still doing the same.
She knew सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha but it took सिद्धार्थ / siddhārtha a few seconds to recognize her.
Their eyes met and the endeavor of the Ascetic reached the pinnacle.
He was now The Blessed One, The Buddha.
There were tears in his eyes.
Tears of gratitude ?
Who knows?
And who can say;  What quantity of waters might have flown through निरञ्जना / nirañjanā since and during all these times that went by those times?
--

Abstract Relationships.

Abstract Relationships.
--
A verbatim translation of my original Hindi post. 
--
Any and every relationship is circumstantial, and though defining a relationship is a tough and perhaps also an absurd attempt, whatever be it, the relationship defines its own limits. Dealing with them within those limits may be howsoever painful and difficult or pleasant, comfortable and easy, when the relation breaks or ends up, is no cause of grief or hurt, and even if there is pain, there is at least no complaint of the kind. 
This not only helps greatly in improving and enhancing the quality of our relationship at the level of the family, society, or in the political or other fields like business, commerce, education, we deal with, but also minimizes the risks or dangers that we may come across because of our misunderstandings or lack of good communication-skills. 
But is the importance of relationship(s) confined only within the periphery of our coming into and dealings with the contacts with the humans only? Are we not in a rather deeper and closer, intimate contact with the world every moment? The only difference is that we have much interest, attraction and inclination for those things which in our view, we think / find far more important. But again, besides all those things, don’t we have even more deeper touch with our own thoughts, fears, hopes, imaginations of an assumed future, or the sweet and sour, bitter or acrid memories of the past which we keep giving reality, though exists no-where? Doesn’t a relationship which we give utmost importance presently, become such a spoilsport within the fraction of a second that calling it a silly sentimentality, or an unnecessary trouble, we at once just discard, throw it away? Understanding well, where-from the ways of a relationship start and where-to they grow and reach out, we can’t do injustice to them. This may be rather difficult but very much needed also, if we seek to have any relationship with harmony.
And what about our relationships or rather ‘relatedness’ with those things of ‘Abstract’ kind which we name ‘Art’, ‘Beauty’, ‘Peace’, ‘Bliss’, ‘God’, ‘Life’, ‘Love’…,    
--

Obscurantism

Obscurantism
--
He has lived in The U S A for 46 + years. He knew there the education system instills the idea of exceptional America in the minds of students. Summarily, ‘America First’. What Trump rephrases as ‘American First’. He calls this exceptionalism. This means
‘America’ is the Best, Supreme ... over the rest of the world. ‘America’ implies American Land, culture, society, ethics, life-style, values, language(s) and whatever you can imagine. Then He knew and studied there is ‘The Chinese Exceptionalism’, ‘The Russian Exceptionalism’, and then it struck him, Why should not be ‘Bharatiya Exceptionalism’. In His opinion and in his firm conviction, ‘Bharatiya-ta’ / भारतीय-ता is such an authentic exceptionalism since times immemorial.
So far so good.
He has some serious misgivings about saying ‘Indian’, For He is not sure if this word is evocative of and connotes with colonial past of ‘Bharat’ (or India).
So He is floating the idea / concept of ‘Bharatiya Exceptionalism’ possibly in contrast with ‘The American Exceptionalism’, ‘The Chinese Exceptionalism’, ‘The Russian Exceptionalism’, Is not Exceptionalism a essentially a glorified form of escapism only? In an attempt and will, longing for declaring yourself the Supreme, you simply isolate from the rest of the world. In other words, you just escape from the Reality -physical or mundane; of the world where there are many such other Exceptionalism already exist.
Again, Is it not fear of being dominated by the ‘others’ that you try to establish your supremacy?
What is wrong with being Indian? The word ‘India’ has roots in ‘indu’ meaning ‘moon’. And since times immemorial Veda and Jyotish, Vedic-Astronomy has The Sun, Moon as the pivot, axial basis for its ‘panchangaM’ / पञ्चाङ्ग / almanac.
So this word ‘indu’ / इंदु  >’aindava’ / ऐंदव / ‘sin’, finds place in Veda. ‘Sini’ / सिनी is another form.
(वेदोक्त : सिनीवाली अमावास्या)
Perhaps he might be obsessed with the doubt that ‘India’ has origin in ‘Sindhu’ as has been so far we are taught. But tracing the root to इंदु / iṃdu / ऐंदव / aiṃdava is justified when we see that The Veda-dharma (and religion which means orthodox rituals also) were followed all over the world and Indonesia Malaysia were not exceptions. We can see this makes our claim for ‘India’ as the name of this Geographical region even more substantive.
‘Bharat’/ भारत  or ‘Bharat-varsha’ भारत-वर्ष  is also no less important and is equally respectable as ‘India’, we can say.
Being proud of one’s place, country, culture is one thing and imposing its Supremacy is quite another thing. The later emerges from the sense of insecurity and inferiority-complex which in due course, becomes superiority-complex.
American’, ‘Chinese’ or ‘Russian’ Exceptionalism is as much an escapism as is the ‘Indian’.
Jingoism or, in a way it is sheer Obscurantism, if one could say.
--         

कालजयी धर्म / kālajayī dharma

कालजयी धर्म / kālajayī dharma 
अगच्छनपि वैनतेयो पदमेकं न गच्छति ।
तथापि शिखरे स्थिते विहंगदृष्ट्या पश्यति ॥
--
agacchanapi vainateyo padamekaṃ na gacchati |
tathāpi śikhare sthite vihaṃgadṛṣṭyā paśyati ||
--
The Eagle sitting on the top of the mountain,
though moves not, keeps the whole earth under his gaze.
--

The enigmatic, enthusiastic, ardent, vehement, forceful, adherent of ‘Hinduism’ insisted that Buddha never founded any new religion as the intellectuals with ulterior motives not only try to convince us, but also claim Buddha’s religion was against Veda.

“How can you say?” 

“We should see How Buddha has praised ‘Brahman’ and even ‘Veda’ in several of His teachings and accepted Himself as a ‘Brahman’ at many times and places.”

“So what?”

“We are repeatedly told That Buddha propounded and founded a religion of His own which was different from Veda-dharma.”

“Didn’t He talked about and praised ‘sanātana-dharma’ also many a times?”

“Yes, That is the point.”

“So what?”

“Buddha was thus Hindu only and these intellectuals force upon us the idea that He was not Hindu and His religion is different from Hindu religion.”

“Did Buddha ever say He was / was not Hindu or His religion was different from or same as the Hindu religion?”

“How could you ask such a question? Hindu religion came only later on, some 3000 to 4000 years after Buddha’s Time.”

“Then where is dispute if He was Hindu or not?”

“But is not Veda-dharma Hindu religion?”

“Is not Veda-dharma far more older and ancient than Hindu religion? How the two could be same?”

“But is not Hindu dharma essentially  sanātana dharma only?”

“You say so, but do those ‘intellectuals’ who want to thrust into our minds the idea that Hindu religion is different from the Buddha religion agree with you?”

“ ... ... ...”

“Why don’t talk straightforward for ‘sanātana dharma’? If you talk (in favor) of Hindu religion, then the disputes are strengthened only. Then Islam, Jainism, Christianity, Catholicism, Zionism, Sikhism all are there to contest / compete with this Hindu religion. Even the Buddha’s religion(?) which they claim is different from ‘Hindu’ / Veda, becomes a party, one of the many competitors. Thus we are going towards more and more fragmentation / disintegration only.”

“But doesn’t the Hindu religion tie us all in a thread of unity which is always needed to protect our identity as a culture, society, nation?”

“Really? Or, On the contrary doesn’t it empowers and strengthens the rival groups (which you think are all the other religions)? In this way turning ‘Hindu unity’ into a ‘political idea / ideology’ does not act against your own interests and perhaps even have a detrimental effect? 

Because : All Political power lies essentially in opposition and disputes.

--       

सुजाता

--
सुजाता
--
कहोड ऋषि उद्दालक के सुयोग्य और प्रिय शिष्य थे । शिक्षा पूर्ण करने पर ऋषि ने अपने प्रिय वेदाधीत शिष्य को अपनी कन्या सुजाता प्रदान की ।
सुजाता का भाई श्वेतकेतु भी ब्रह्मवादी ऋषि था । वरुणद्वीप (वर्तमान बोर्नियो, इन्दोनेशिया / Borneo, Indonesia ) का राजा उन दिनों किसी यज्ञ का अनुष्ठान कर रहा था जिसके लिए उसे वेदों तथा यज्ञ में कुशल पंडितों की आवश्यकता थी । इसीलिए उसने अपने एक कुशल ब्राह्मण पुरोहित को समुद्र-पार भारत भेजा जहाँ वह ऋषि उद्दालक के देश जा पहुँचा और उसने राजा की सभा में जाकर अपना परिचय देते हुए शास्त्रार्थ के लिए राज्य के पंडितों को ललकारा । राजा ने उसे बन्दी बना लिया ताकि वह शास्त्रार्थ में हार जाने पर भाग न जाए । उसकी शर्त थी कि यदि कोई पंडित शास्त्रार्थ में उससे हार गया तो उसे समुद्र में डूबना होगा । तब बहुत से पंडित उससे शास्त्रार्थ करने आए और हार जाने के बाद उन्हें उसने अपने देश वरुण-द्वीप भेज दिया । प्रकटतः वह यही कहता था कि वह इन्हें समुद्र में डुबो रहा है और ऐसा दिखलाई भी देता था कि वह उन्हें समुद्र-तट पर बड़ी नौका में ले जाकर सुदूर सागर में कहीं छोड़ आता था ।
इसी क्रम में एक समय कहोड भी उत्सुकतावश राजा के दरबार जा पहुँचा और शास्त्रार्थ में उस आगंतुक से हार गया ।
जैसी कि शर्त थी, कहोड को भी एक बड़ी नौका पर ले जाया गया जिसमें कुछ कक्ष भी थे । कहोड को समुद्र में ’डुबा’ कर नौका लौट आई । इस पूरे क्रम में कभी-कभी पूरा सप्ताह लग जाता था ।
कहोड और सुजाता का पुत्र जब माता के गर्भ में ही था तो एक बार उसने पिता के मुख से वेद के मन्त्रों का अशुद्ध उच्चारण सुना और गर्भ से ही उनके इस दोष को इंगित कर उस त्रुटि को दूर करने के लिए कहा । इस पर कहोड ने क्रुद्ध होकर कहा : तू पिता के दोष देखता है, जैसे ही तेरा जन्म होगा तेरे आठ अंग त्रुटियुक्त होंगे । समय आने पर सुजाता ने जब शिशु को जन्म दिया तो उसके आठ अंग वक्र थे, दोनों स्कंध, दोनों हाथ दोनों पैर तथा दोनों घुटने । इससे कुछ ही दिनों पहले कहोड को समुद्र में 'डुबो' दिया गया था ।
उसका लालन-पालन उसकी माता और मामा ने किया । किंतु जब कहोड को समुद्र में ’डुबो’ दिया गया तो अष्टावक्र की देख-रेख माता सुजाता, मामा श्वेतकेतु और नाना उद्दालक ही करने लगे । अष्टावक्र उद्दालक को अपना पिता और श्वेतकेतु को अपना भाई समझने लगा था ।
उधर जब कहोड नौका पर चढ़ा तो उसकी आँखों पर नीले-हरे रंग की पट्टी बाँध दी गई ताकि उसे कहाँ ले जाया जा रहा है वह देख न सके । कई दिन समुद्र में यात्रा करने के बाद जब उसकी आँखों की पट्टी खोली गई तो उससे कहा गया कि वह अपनी आँखें बंद ही रखे । उसे जल्दी ही समझ में आ गया कि आँखें खुली या बंद रखने का कोई प्रयोजन ही नहीं रह गया था । जहाँ उसे समुद्र में छोड़ा गया था वहाँ अनेक सुन्दर जलचर, मछलियाँ, कछुए और दूसरे जलीय जन्तु और वनस्पतियाँ थीं । उसे समझ में आ गया कि वह भूमि पर नहीं जल में ही था किंतु जल इतना विरल था मानों वायु ही हो । उसे वास्तव में अपने चारों ओर जल और जल का ही विस्तार दिखली देता था । उसके हाथों में लोहे की कठोर श्रंखलाओं के बंधन थे जिन्हें लेकर उस स्थान के प्रहरी उसे ले जा रहे थे । वहाँ पर भी उसके पैरों तले कठोर भूमि थी जिससे उसे चलने में कोई कठिनाई नहीं थी । एक अद्भुत् और विचित्र बात यह थी कि वहाँ की सभी वस्तुओं का रंग हरित-मिश्रित नीला श्वेत कहीं कहीं सुनहला या चाँदी जैसा शुभ्र भी था किंतु अन्य कोई आकृति बहुत ध्यान देने पर भी कठिनाई से देखी जा सकती थी । अर्थात् समस्त वस्तुओं की आकृति एक दूसरे से भिन्न होते हुए भी इन्हीं रंगों में होने से केवल छूकर ही उनकी पृथकता जानी जा सकती थी । कहोड को इससे भी अधिक आश्चर्य इससे हुआ कि उसके श्रवण-शक्ति अत्यंत तीव्र हो गई थी और इस आधार पर कौन सी वस्तु या जलचर आदि उससे कितनी दूर है इसका सटीक अनुमान वह अनायास ही लगा लेता था । वास्तव में वह वरुण-द्वीप के राजा के महल में आ चुका था जहाँ उसका स्वागत किया गया और उससे यज्ञ के अनुष्ठान में सहायता, पौरोहित्य करने का निवेदन किया गया । उससे कहा गया कि यदि वह चाहे तो इसी द्वीप में रह सकता था या बहुत सी इच्छित वस्तुएँ ग्रहणकर, यज्ञ पूरा होते ही अपने देश वापस जा सकता था । कहोड के पास कोई विकल्प नहीं था और वह देश भी इतना अद्भुत् और रमणीय प्रतीत हुआ कि उसने वहाँ रहने के लिए सहर्ष स्वीकृति दे दी ।
अष्टावक्र जब अपने उसके देश के राजा की सभा में पहुँचा तो प्रहरियों ने पहले तो उसे भीतर जाने से रोका किंतु जब उसने अपने पिता के बारे में जानकारी दी तो वे उसे राजा के पास ले गए । अष्टावक्र ने पिता की मुक्ति के लिए बन्दी अतिथि से शास्त्रार्थ करना स्वीकार कर लिया और उसे शास्त्रार्थ में परास्त कर दिया तो उसने उन समस्त ब्राह्मणों सहित कहोड को भी समुद्र से निकालकर राजा को सौंप दिया और अपने देश वरुण-द्वीप को लौट गया ।
कहोड पूरी आयु तक शास्त्रार्थ, वेदाध्ययन और गृहस्थ-धर्म का निर्वाह करते हुए वानप्रस्थ और संन्यास में प्रविष्ट हुए किंतु तब तक उन्हें केवल ब्रह्मज्ञान की ही प्राप्ति हो सकी थी । आत्म-ज्ञान या ’आत्मा ब्रह्म ही है’ इस ब्रह्मात्मैक्य-ज्ञान की जागृति उनमें नहीं हो सकी ।
सहस्रों वर्षों बाद फिर कपिलवस्तु के शाक्यवंशीय राजा शुद्धोधन की रानी माया के गर्भ से जब उनका पुनर्जन्म हुआ तो ’आत्म-ज्ञान’ की प्रबल अभीप्सा उनमें परिपक्व और प्रगाढ़ हो चुकी थी । क्षत्रिय वर्ण में जन्म लेने से ब्रह्म-कर्म करना उनके लिए न तो संभव था और न उन्हें उस सबमें रुचि या उसका महत्व प्रतीत होता था । विवेक, वैराग्य और मुमुक्षा ही अब उनका जीवन-क्रम था जिसे कोई समझ नहीं पाता था ।
ऐसी ही एक निविड अंधकारपूर्ण रात्रि में अपनी रानी यशोधरा और नन्हें पुत्र राहुल को उनकी निद्रा की स्थिति में विदा कहते हुए उन्होंने राजमहल को त्याग दिया । जब बाहर आए तो एकमात्र सारथि छन्दक को प्रतीक्षा करते पाया ।
प्रसंगवश, यह छन्दक वही था जो उस पूर्व-जन्म में, जब वे कहोड के नाम से विख्यात थे, उनका सखा था जिसके साथ वे छान्दोग्य-उपनिषद् के मंत्रों पर प्रायः शास्त्रार्थ किया करते थे । यद्यपि उनमें से किसी को भी यह स्मरण नहीं था ।   छन्दक के साथ रथ में बैठकर उनका मन जीवन के अर्थ और प्रयोजन का चिन्तन करने लगा ।
महाभिनिष्क्रमण  ...
यह आवश्यक था, मेरे नहीं उस जगत् के उद्धार के लिए जो केवल भास है ...।
यह गृहत्याग भी उसी का एक अत्यंत छोटा अंश है ...।
कितने गृह त्यागे, कितने शरीर धारण किए और त्यागे ... कब तक ....?
महल से दूर जाते रथ के घोड़ों के टापों की ध्वनि इतनी लयबद्ध थी कि रात्रि के मौन में उससे यत्किञ्चित भी बाधा नहीं हो रही थी । या राजकुमार के मन का मौन इतना गहन रहा होगा जहाँ ये ध्वनियाँ बस विलीन होकर रह जाती होंगी।
अब रात्रि का तीसरा प्रहर होने जा रहा था । जिन्हें पहनकर वे महल से चले थे, राजकुमार ने सारथि को अपने वे राजोचित वस्त्र-आभूषण भेंट किए, और उसे राजधानी लौट जाने के लिए कहा ।
एक मौन-चिन्तन राजा के मन में था और एक हाहाकार छन्दक के मन में दोनों मनुष्य की वेदना के दो ध्रुव थे ।
अनेक वर्षों तक कठोर तपस्या करते हुए जब उनकी काया अत्यन्त कृश और दुर्बल हो गई तो वे निरञ्जना के तट पर स्नान कर दुर्बलतापूर्वक देह को खींचते हुए वटवृक्ष तले स्थित ध्यान के अपने आसन पर जैसे-तैसे पहुँच सके ।
वैशाख-पूर्णिमा की नीरव शीतलता से युक्त चन्द्ररश्मियाँ निरञ्जना के तट से खेल रही थीं । और उन्हें उस नारी का स्मरण हुआ जो किसी पूर्व-जन्म में उनकी जीवन-सहचरी थी । उन्हें अपने उस पुत्र का स्मरण हुआ जो उनके ही शाप से आठ अंगों से वक्र था, और समंगा नदी में स्नान करते ही जिसके सब अंग सरल, साधु हो गए थे । उन्हें वरुण-द्वीप का स्मरण हुआ और दूर एक नारी-आकृति दिखलाई दी ।
"भद्रे ! तुम कौन हो?"
उन्होंने उससे प्रश्न किया ।
सुजाता को कभी इस बारे में संशय न था कि यह तपस्वी कौन है, किंतु जैसे अपने पूर्व-जन्म में वह बस पति और पुत्र की सेवा स्निग्ध मौनभाव से करती थी, बिलकुल उसी तरह उसने तपस्वी के सम्मुख खीर का पात्र प्रस्तुत किया । दोनों की दृष्टि मिली और तपस्वी की तपस्या पूर्ण हो गई । सिद्धार्थ अब संबुद्ध थे ।
उनके नेत्रों में दो अश्रु-बिन्दु छलक आए ।
निरञ्जना में तब से कितना जल बहा कौन कह सकता है ?
--

The Dream -2.

The Dream -2.
The day I had this dream went on peacefully. The mind was silent the whole day, though sporadic thoughts, worries, fears, anxieties kept rising and disappearing .
The rooms are terribly hot but because of Mosquitoes I can’t sleep on the open terrace. In the room, I keep the pedestal fan close to my head and keep the body below my waist covered under the mosquito-net.
Yesterday did the routine things, there were so many to be done on the net, but the hot weather typing apart, didn’t let me sit for even a stretch of 15 minutes.
In the evening the weather suddenly took turn for half an hour as if gave me a new lease of fresh cool rejuvenating breath and life. I went on my usual path, the street where I usually go for the evening / morning walks. There was the Hill, before the hill is visible; there is a temple on the left on that street. A few teak-wood trees on the same side of the temple.
In the temple there is an idol of राजराजेश्वरी Rajarajeshvari, having 4 arms and in one, there is a dagger, blood stained. I bowed to Her, as I always do whenever I pass by that temple. Yesterday The Divine Mother (राजराजेश्वरी / Rajarajeshvari), had a saffron mark on Her forehead which enchanted my attention and I didn’t look the other things with much attention, -like Her vehicle face to face to Her, sitting on the entrance, with His tail towards me. And in a second my dream rolled out before my mind.
“Oh ! भवानी / Bhavani ! So You were there yesterday! I exclaimed with joy. I could sense a sign of approval on Her face. But presently and even after 27 hours later (08:36 p.m. Monday 15 May, 2017) when I’m writing this, I can’t remove my eyes away from that saffron mark (sandal and saffron mixed) on Her fore-head exactly where the eye-brows meet.
--
Last night I could not go to bed till 11:30 p.m. though was just lying awake.
The air in the room was almost still except the waft coming from the fan. Don’t remember when I must have gone to sleep. After that almost every 1, or 1 and a half hour thirst disturbed my sleep. Around 3:30 a.m. today, I think the last time I went to sleep again. Today, between 4:00 and 4:30 Though I was neither asleep nor fully awake nor dreaming, I felt a presence in my room. I had a vague idea about, where I was sleeping and perhaps having kind of a dream.
The voice that seemed to be of the presence, asked:
“Do you think?”
“Yes, sometimes.”
“Really?”
“No, it is the brain where thought happens.”
“Good.”
“And what about your mind?”
“This thought-stream could be called the mind, yet because the thought-stream is a process that happens for the reasons unknown to me, I really don’t think.”
“Are you the mind?”
“No, if by mind we mean the thinking faculty of the brain.”
“So, in a way thought / thought-stream happen to you?”
“Not sure, there may be other thought / thought-stream at another level at the same time, which are not perceived by me.”
“Where do they happen?”
“Presumably, in the brain itself.”
“So you are not associated with, nor with the one responsible for them?”
“Exactly.”
“That means the identification with thought / thought-stream is no more.”
" ..."
“Do You know exactly who was the animal that was sacrificed a day before yesterday?”
-Asked the presence.
All of a sudden a silvery light shone like a lightening-streak.
I at once knew who was the animal and who the presence.
I could not stay there for much long.
During the next few minutes, I didn’t know if I was awake, dreaming or sleeping.
Don’t know how long those few minutes were.
--

द्वैत-अद्वैत

द्वैत-अद्वैत

--

चाहकर भी मुलाक़ात नहीं हो पाती है,
मुलाक़ात हो भी तो बात नहीं होती है,
और होती भी हों तो दूसरों की ही तो होती हैं,
अपने-आपसे अपनी भला कभी कहाँ होती है?
अपने-आपसे बात करने की ज़रूरत भी क्या है?
अपने को अपने से छूना भी कहाँ मुमक़िन है?
जहाँ दो होते हों वहाँ होता है छूना मिलना,
शब्द हों या न हों खुद से कहाँ मुमक़िन है?
--
गहरी सुषुप्ति में द्वैत नहीं (अनुभव) होता । ज्ञाता ज्ञान तथा ज्ञेय की त्रिपुटी का लय हो जाता है । सुषुप्ति से उठते ही कुछ क्षणों तक जागृति में भी यही स्थिति बनी रहती है । थोड़े समय बाद वृत्ति सक्रिय होते ही स्मृति से ’मैं’ और ’मेरे संसार’ की पहचान स्पष्ट होकर उस लय की स्थिति को ज्ञाता ज्ञान तथा ज्ञेय की त्रिपुटी के रूप में अभिव्यक्त कर देती है । तब ’मैं’ को संसार से भिन्न वस्तु मान लिया जाता है और इस प्रकार ’अपनी त्रिपुटीरहित वास्तविकता’ को दो के रूप में ग्रहण कर लिया जाता है । फिर मैं और ’मेरा मन’ इन दोनों के रूप में अपना कृत्रिम विभाजन कर लिया जाता है । वहाँ इन दोनों का परस्पर स्पर्श, मिलन होने -न होने का प्रश्न बन सकता है । किंतु जहाँ द्वैत का अस्तित्व ही नहीं वहाँ कैसा स्पर्श और कैसा मिलन? कैसा बिछुड़ना और कैसी दूरी?
--

Realities of the dreamy kind.

Dreams of the Real kind.
--
This morning I had a dream. 
A vivacious girl of about 25 years was talking to me. She hinted that she was going to sacrifice me. Though she didn’t use this word to say that she would kill me, I was just told about this without her saying a word.
The next moment the stage was set.
In a small room of about 6’ by 8’ where there was a single bed and a chair where I was sitting before her, she looked into my eyes. She and the whole room were glowing with a kind of milky silvery light. She had before her a plate, that too was looked like made of silver, upon it there was a scimitar, a straight one knife, with a single blade on one edge while the other was quite thick. The handle of the knife was like of a decorated sword.
She looked in my eyes. Our eyes met for a second as if mute conversation was taking place between them. Verbally, she might have uttered :
“Ready?”
To which I nodded, saying:
“Yes!”
The next moment I was awake.
A bit thoughtful of the meaning of the dream, 
I got up, As the room was hot and the dawn (5:00 a.m.) was at the door, I opened the door and sat on the parapet of the stairs with 2-steps that leads to the terrace. 
Behind was the Great Hill of Devi. With eyes closed, I sat there for a few seconds, turned back and wished ‘Hello’ to Devi.(As usually, as I often do).
Then suddenly I was told the meaning of my dream.
She uttered:
“I sacrificed the animal in you!”
Sigh! What a great relief.
And then at once I remembered a passage about Ma Anandamayi, Who while performing ‘Kali-puja’ had remarked : ‘Sacrificing an animal is symbolic of killing the animal in man.”
Here this needs to be mentioned, as the passage tells:
She had only ‘reluctantly’ agreed to perform this ritual at the behest of some devotees of Her.
I had no slightest imagination or fear of death in dream when I was ‘informed’ that this ritual was going to be performed upon me.
When we looked into each-other’s eyes for a second, even then I was just waiting for Her orders.
Again a short conversation happened in that moment, when I questioned Her if She knew how to ‘use’ the weapon? To which She showed me my neck and the exact point on the spine, just above the throat.
This was quite simple. 
-I agreed.
--     

एवं मे श्रुतं -1. / evaṃ me śrutaṃ -1.

॥ धम्मचक्कप्पवत्तनसुत्त ॥
_________________________________
पालि
--
ॐ नमो तस्स भगवतो अरहतो सम्मासम्बुद्धस्स ।
एवं मे सुतं, एकं समये भगवा बाराणसियं विहरति इसिपतने मिगदाये ।
--
pāli
om̐ namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa |
evaṃ me sutaṃ, ekaṃ samaye bhagavā bārāṇasiyaṃ viharati isipatane migadāye |
--
संस्कृतं
--
ॐ नमो तस्मै भगवते अर्हते सम्म्यक्-संबुद्धाय ।
एवं मे श्रुतं एके (एकस्मिन्) समये भगवा (भगवान्) वाराणस्याम् विहरति (स्म) ऋषिपत्तने मृगदावे ।
--
saṃskṛtaṃ
om̐ namo tasmai bhagavate arhate sammyak-saṃbuddhāya |
evaṃ me śrutaṃ eke (ekasmin) samaye bhagavā (bhagavān) vārāṇasyām viharati (sma) ṛṣipattane mṛgadāve |
--
हिंदी
--
ॐ उन भगवान् अर्हत् सम्म्यक्-संबुद्ध को नमन !
ऐसा मेरे द्वारा सुना गया : एक समय भगवान् वाराणसी में ऋषिपत्तन नामक मृगवन में विहार कर रहे थे ।
--
English :
om̐ Obeisance at the feet of the Lord The Blessed Enlightened One !
Thus have I heard :
On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling in the Deer-Park at ṛṣipattan (abode of ṛṣi).
--
 
    

The Hinduism.

वन्दे मातरम् !
vande mātaram!

बुद्ध-पूर्णिमा की शुभ-कामनाएँ !

buddha-pūrṇimā Greetings!

The Hinduism.
--
The Reality, The Spiritual Truth when relegated to ethical, moral or any other system of thought or ideology, say philosophy or ritual, becomes religion. ‘Hinduism’ is no exception to this. The result is even worse when such a thought or ideology is stained with political motives. Political ideology thrives in the spiritual vacuum.  
All such political ideologies spring from collective fear-psychosis of man and his escape from the bare Reality that is ‘Life’ where violence, greed, ‘my’ and ‘your’, envy, past, future, anger, pleasure, sorrow, thrill, excitements take roots, persist and keep growing. When, instead of dealing with them directly and understanding all them, an attempt is made to improve human condition, by means of any ideology we are caught into the idea that this will be the only solution and the way. We simply fail to sense the inherent contradictions.
‘Secularism’ is also a political ideology only, to please all but in fact pleases none.
Socialism, theocracy, capitalism, communism are no lesser evils.
Naming an ideology leads us in believing that this is a tangible instrument of revolution and we just forget that it is but yet another word-structure / phrase only which could be translated and interpreted in a thousand ways. None of them takes us to Spiritual harmony, for thought is divison and divides more and more enhancing fragmentation only. 
--
The Hindi Translation .
--
’हिन्दुत्व’
--
आत्यन्तिक वस्तुनिष्ठ सत्य, आध्यात्मिकता का जब नैतिक, व्यावहारिक शिष्टता या किसी भी अन्य विचार-प्रणाली अथवा वैचारिक-आदर्शों / मतवादों, दार्शनिक या रूढ़िगत स्तर की कोटि तक विरूपण कर दिया जाता है तो वह ’रिलीजन’/ religion बन जाता है । ’रिलीजन’ / religion शब्द ’टू रेलिगेट टू ऍ लॉवर लेवल’/ 'to relegate to a lower level' से बना है । (इस लेख को मूलतः जब अंग्रेज़ी में लिखा था, तब अलग से इस व्युत्पत्ति का उल्लेख करने की ज़रूरत नहीं पड़ी, यहाँ केवल इसलिए करनी पड़ी ताकि ’रिलीजन’/ religion  ’धर्म’ से भिन्न है इस ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जा सके । अस्तु)
’हिन्दुत्व’ (नामक ’रिलीजन’) भी इसका अपवाद नहीं है । और जब भी ऐसा कोई ’विचार’ या ’वैचारिक-आदर्श’ / मतवाद राजनीतिक लक्ष्यों, अर्थात् ’सिद्धान्तवाद’ से ग्रस्त हो जाता है, सिद्धान्तवाद से प्रतिबद्ध होता है, परिणाम तब और अधिक हानिकारक होता है ।
राजनीतिक सिद्धान्तवाद आध्यात्मिक शून्य में ही जन्मता और फलता-फूलता है ।
ऐसे समस्त राजनीतिक सिद्धान्तवाद मनुष्य के सामूहिक ’भय-मनोरुग्णता’ / ’फ़ियर-सायकोसिस’ (Fear-psychosis) से, और वास्तविकता के नग्न स्वरूप अर्थात् ’जीवन’ से उसके पलायन से उपजते हैं, -जहाँ हिंसा, लोभ, ’मेरा’ और ’तुम्हारा’, ईर्ष्या, घृणा, अतीत, भविष्य, क्रोध, सुख-बोध, विषाद, उत्तेजना, उत्कट भावोद्रेक, अनायास जड़ें जमाते हैं, सतत बने रहते और बढ़ते रहते हैं । उन सबका सीधे सामना करने और उनसे समुचित व्यवहार करने, और उन्हें ठीक से समझने के बजाय, जब किसी आदर्शवाद (ideology) के माध्यम से मनुष्य की स्थिति को सुधारने का यत्न किया जाता है, तब हम इस विचार / मत में अटक जाते हैं कि यही (आदर्शवाद) / idealism एकमात्र हल और मार्ग है । जाने-अनजाने, हम यह नज़र-अन्दाज़ कर बैठते हैं कि किसी भी आदर्शवाद में अपनी अन्तर्निहित विसंगतियाँ (inherent contradictions) आवश्यक रूप से होती ही हैं ।
’धर्म-निरपेक्षता’/ secularism भी एक राजनीतिक आदर्श / मतवाद है, जो सबको खुश रखने का प्रयास होता है जबकि वस्तुतः उससे कोई भी खुश नहीं होता ।
’समाजवाद’ / socialism,  समुदायपरक-विशिष्ट-रूढ़िपरक रीति-रिवाज़ों की सत्ता (थिऑक्रेसी) / theocracy, पूँजीवाद / capitalism, साम्यवाद / communism, भी ’धर्म-निरपेक्षता’ / secularism जैसी ही बुराइयाँ हैं ।
किसी मतवाद या आदर्शवाद का नामकरण कर दिए जाने से हमें यह भ्रम हो जाता है कि यह ’वाद’ ऐसा कोई व्यावहारिक भौतिक रूप से ग्राह्य उपकरण (tangible instrument) है और हम बिलकुल ही भूल जाते हैं कि यह भी दूसरे सिद्धान्तों जैसा ही एक शब्द-विन्यास / मुहावरा या वाक्य भर है जिसे हज़ारों तरह से अनुवादित और व्याख्यायित किया जा सकता है । उनमें से कोई भी हमें आध्यात्मिक सौहार्द्र / Spiritual Harmony की ओर नहीं ले जाता, क्योंकि विचार मूलतः विभाजनपरक होता है और विखंडन का अधिक से अधिक और विस्तार करता है ।

--    

    

कला का अर्थ -2-/ -'अकेलापन'-

कला का अर्थ -2
--अकेलापन--
--
’वृत्तिसारूप्यमितरत्र’ से स्पष्ट होता है कि जब जब किसी वृत्ति से सारूप्य (एकात्मता) नहीं हो पाता चित्त ’अकेलापन’ अनुभव करता है । अर्थात् ’मैं अकेला हूँ’ इस भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति का आगमन होता है जो अभी कुछ क्षणों पहले तक अनुपस्थित सी थी । इस भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति के आगमन और ’मन’ पर इसके हावी हो जाने पर मनुष्य इससे अपने को जोड़कर प्रमादवश इसे ’अकेलापन’ कहता है । इस भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति के आगमन तथा मन की इस अवस्था की पहचान तथा नामकरण ’अकेलापन’ किए जाने के बाद ही ’मैं अकेला हूँ’, यह विचार उठता है । स्पष्ट है कि यह विचार और मन की जिस अवस्था की पहचान और नामकरण ’अकेलापन’ किया जाता है अस्थायी घटनाक्रम है और जिस ’चेतना’ में यह सब होता हुआ प्रतीत होता है वह अपेक्षाकृत स्थायी अचल, इस पूरी गतिविधि का आधार है । इसे बौद्धिक रूप से भी समझा जा सकता है कि चेतनारूपी इस आधारभूत सत्यता को किसी नई जानकारी, अनुभव या तर्क से नकारा नहीं जा सकता । ’अकेलापन’ की मनःस्थिति भी एक अस्थिर अवस्था होने से किसी अन्य भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति का आगमन होते ही विदा हो जाती है, इसलिए यह भी स्पष्ट है कि यह नई प्रतीत होनेवाली  किसी अन्य भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति का आगमन होने की स्थिति भी उस ’अकेलेपन’ की भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति जैसी ही एक और अस्थायी अवस्था है जो अपने आने-जाने के लिए ’चेतनारूपी’ किसी अपेक्षतया स्थिर परिप्रेक्ष्य की आधारभूमि पर संभव होती है । जिस प्रकार ये सभी भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति आदि जिस तरह से अनायास जाने जाते हैं और अपने-आपकी पहचान और नामकरण उनके ’जाननेवाले’, - उनसे पृथक् और स्वतंत्र ’मैं’ के रूप में किया जाता है वह पहचान तथा नामकरण भी उन सब जैसी ही अस्थायी अवस्था है जो अपने आने-जाने के लिए ’चेतनारूपी’ किसी अपेक्षतया स्थिर परिप्रेक्ष्य की आधारभूमि पर संभव होती है । यदि इसका नामकरण ’दृष्टा’ किया जाए, तो यह ’दृष्टा’ उन दृश्यों जैसा अस्थिर तत्व न होकर अखंडित निरंतरता है जिसकी न तो पहचान की जा सकती है, न स्मृति बनती या बनाई जा सकती है । चूँकि पहचान स्मृति का ही पर्याय है और स्मृति पहचान का, इसलिए उस दृष्टा-तत्व का वास्तविक स्वरूप स्मृति या पहचान का विषय न होते हुए भी केवल विवेक से ही अवश्य ही समझा जा सकता है । प्रश्न यह है कि क्या उसे ’मैं’ कहा जा सकता है?
 दूसरी ओर एक ’मैं’ वह भी होता है जो कहता है : ’मैं अकेलापन महसूस / फ़ील / अनुभव कर रहा हूँ ।’
इनमें से पहलेवाला मैं ’दूसरों’ अर्थात् संसार और संसार की तमाम वस्तुओं से अछूता है जबकि यह दूसरा ’मैं’ जो ’अकेलापन’ महसूस / फ़ील / अनुभव करता है हमेशा किसी न किसी ’दूसरे’ के सन्दर्भ में ही अस्तित्व ग्रहण करता और अस्तित्व खो बैठता है । क्या इस दूसरेवाले ’मैं’ को दृष्टा कहा जा सकता है? स्पष्ट है कि यह दूसरावाला ’मैं’ स्मृति और पहचान से क्षण-क्षण बनते-मिटते रहनेवाला अनित्य ’विचार’ है जो निरंतर प्रतीत होता है किंतु होता नहीं । वह क्षणिक भी होता है यह भी तय नहीं । क्योंकि विचार एक गतिविधि है, - एक गत्यात्मकता । और गत्यात्मकता की पहचान (और इसलिए स्मृति भी) बनना या बनाये जाने का प्रश्न ही कहाँ उठता है?
संक्षेपतः मन किसी भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति से जुड़ा होता है तो ’अकेलापन’ या रिक्तता की कल्पना तक नहीं होती, किंतु जब मन ऐसे किसी सहारे से वंचित होता है तो ही ’मैं अकेला हूँ’ इस भावना / संकल्प / वृत्ति का आगमन होता है । और इससे जुड़ी निराशा, व्याकुलता, ऊब या अर्थहीनता मन पर हावी हो जाते हैं । तब मन पुनः किसी सहारे की तलाश करता है जिससे ’अकेलेपन’ से छुटकारा हो । यह सहारा कुछ भी हो सकता है, कोई ’आदर्श’, ’धर्म’, ईश्वर, या कला, संगीत, साहित्य, जिसे वह ’रचनात्मकता’ का नाम देता है । धन-संपत्ति, कीर्ति, मान-सम्मान, पद, प्रतिष्ठा, इस लोक में या परलोक में, ऐसे असंख्य सहारे उसे मिल जाते हैं । किसी नशे के अभ्यस्त होना सबसे सरल रास्ता होता है ।
किंतु इस सूत्र से पहले का सूत्र कहता है :
योगश्चित्तवृत्तिनिरोधः
इसके अनुसार ’अकेलापन’ वस्तुतः इसका द्योतक है कि चित्तवृत्ति का निरोध नहीं हो पाया है । यह वृत्तिनिरोध होना ही समस्त ध्यान, दर्शन का सारतम ध्येय है और यह कैसे होता है यह प्रश्न मौलिक प्रश्न है । एक ऐसी समस्या जिसका निराकरण किसी विचार / सिद्धान्त से नहीं हो सकता, क्योंकि विचार / सिद्धान्त से सारूप्य और उसकी गतिविधि भी वृत्ति-विशेष ही होती है और चित्तवृत्ति के स्वाभाविक निरोध में बाधक ही होती है ।
कला और ज्ञान इसी प्रकार किसी न किसी वृत्ति से बाँधे रखते हैं । कहना न होगा कि ’चित्त’ का वृत्ति से तादात्म्य निरंतर बनाए ही रखते हैं ।
ऑल आर्ट इज़ इमिटेशन / All Art is imitation.
ऑल नॉलेज इज़ इग्नोरेन्स / All knowledge is ignorance.
तो फिर आत्मानुसन्धान क्या है?      
कला, विज्ञान-ज्ञान अर्थात् सिद्धान्त-मात्र वृत्ति है, जबकि ध्यान / जागरूकता (attention / अटेन्शन) इससे नितान्त भिन्न प्रकार की वस्तु है । ध्यान चित्त की गतिविधि है जिसका अभाव  नहीं होता किंतु उसकी तीव्रता कम-अधिक होती रहती है । ध्यान चेतना की स्वस्फूर्त,  स्व-प्रेरित अनायास होनेवाली गतिविधि है, जबकि चित्त में कोई भी वृत्ति स्मृति से ही आती है, और पतञ्जलि ने स्मृति को भी निद्रा की ही तरह ’वृत्ति’ कहा है ।
तप और वैराग्य भी मूलतः वृत्ति ही हैं, इसलिए बुद्ध या महावीर की शिक्षाएँ वृत्ति-निरोध की दिशा नहीं दिखलाती ।
ईश्वर / आत्मा का अस्तित्व है, -इस प्रकार का विश्वास और वह एक है या अनेक, निराकार है या साकार, सगुण है या निर्गुण, व्यक्ति-विशेष है या समष्टि इस प्रकार के विश्वास यद्यपि विश्वास हैं किंतु विश्वास होने से ही वे स्मृति के अन्तर्गत हैं ।
इसी तरह, ईश्वर /आत्मा ’नहीं’ है, यह आग्रह भी एक भिन्न तरह का किंतु फिर भी बस विश्वास ही तो है,
-न कि सत्य का दर्शन ।
चित्तवृत्ति अर्थात् सारूप्य / तादात्म्य के बारे में कहा गया है :
चित्तं चिद्विजानीयात् ’त’-काररहितं यदा ...
अर्थात् जिसे चित्त कहा / जाना जाता है वह ’त’-कार से रहित हो तो चित् अर्थात् विशुद्ध बोधमात्र ही है,
’त’-कार विषयाध्यासो ...
और ’त’-कार है विषय से चित् का अध्यास ..
जब विषयों से चित् का संसर्ग होता है तो इस अध्यास (निकटता) से ’चित्त’ अस्तित्व ग्रहण करता प्रतीत होता है, और इस चित्त का उद्भव वृत्ति-रूप में होता है । चित्त ही मन, बुद्धि और अहं के रूप में भी होता है और ये चारों अहंकार-चतुष्टय कहे जाते हैं । दूसरी ओर ’चित्’ चितिमात्र है जो सत्-चित् का अभिव्यक्त प्रकार है ।
आत्मानुसन्धान (’मैं कौन?’) जैसा कि शब्द से ही पता चलता है, ’स्व’ या ’आत्मा’ के बारे में जानने-समझने का प्रयास है । चूँकि वृत्तिमात्र ’चित्त’ है, जिसका निरोध किए जाने की शिक्षा पतञ्जलिप्रणीत योगशास्त्र देता है, इसलिए यह जानने पर कि ’मैं’ अर्थात् ’स्व’, जो मूलतः चित्त या चित् के ही रूप में होता / पाया जाता है, और प्रथमरूप (चित्त) में किसी न किसी वृत्ति के सहारे से ही अस्तित्व / जगत् से पृथक् शरीर-विशेष या स्मृति-विशेष की तरह से आभासी रूप से स्वतन्त्र और भिन्न समझा जाता है, अहं-वृत्ति है, न कि आत्मा / अहं / स्व की वास्तविकता, इसलिए चित्त के निरोध का तात्पर्य हुआ वृत्तिमात्र का निरोध होना ।
यह कैसे होता है इसे जानना-समझना, इसकी शिक्षा पातञ्जल-योगशास्त्र का केन्द्रीय तत्व है । पुनः किंतु यदि पातञ्जल-योगशास्त्र से यह भाव ग्रहण किया जाता है कि चित्त-निरोध कैसे ’किया जाता है?’ तो यह एक भूल है । यदि ’किया जाना’ है, तो वह पुनः स्मृति, वृत्ति और संकल्प के ही अन्तर्गत रह जाता है । किंतु जब ’यह (चित्त-निरोध) कैसे होता है?’ इसे समझा जाता है तो वह आत्मानुसन्धान हो जाता है ।
यहाँ ध्यातव्य तथ्य यह भी है कि जब तक चित्त में विषय-मात्र से वैराग्य नहीं हो जाता, -जब तक चित्त में वैराग्य उदित नहीं होता तब तक मनुष्य में आत्मानुसन्धान की जिज्ञासा / रुचि / उत्सुकता भी नहीं जाग्रत होती, और न उसके महत्व की ओर उसका ध्यान जाता है । वैराग्य का आगमन ’नित्य-अनित्य’ के विचार से ही होता है जिसकी आवश्यकता बुद्धि के शुद्ध, सूक्ष्म होने और अपनी आत्मा की कृपा होने पर ही अनुभव की जाती है । किंतु जब तक संसार की स्वतंत्र और पृथक् सत्ता में अपने को कोई शरीर-विशेष, और उस शरीर से जुड़ा मन-विशेष समझा जाता है,तब तक इस आभासी संसार में सुखों की निरंतर प्राप्ति और दुःखों से दूर रहने की कामना  बने रहते हैं और 'अकेलापन' भी !     
--
                    

           

प्रसंगवश / स्त्री-विमर्श

प्रसंगवश / स्त्री-विमर्श
(कच्चा-चिट्ठा)
क्या आज की स्त्री ने अपने-आप को ’सेक्स-ऑब्जेक्ट’ मानने से इन्कार कर दिया है और वह अपनी स्वतंत्र अस्मिता को नए ढंग और नए सिरे से परिभाषित कर रही है? कुछ इस प्रकार का विचार एक मित्र ने प्रस्तुत किया है ।
सबसे बड़ा सत्य यह है कि स्त्री प्रकृति-तत्व प्रधान होने से सदा से ही पुरुष के द्वारा शोषित रही है और यदि उसने कभी अपने स्त्री होने के यौन-पक्ष को अपने लिए वर्चस्व पाने का साधन बनाया भी है तो पुरुष ने सदा उसे ही वैश्या कहकर अपमानित किया है । दूसरी ओर पुरुष आज का हो या सुदूर अतीत के ज्ञात इतिहास का, सदैव स्त्री को ’सेक्स-ऑब्जेक्ट’ की दृष्टि से ही देखता रहा है, हाँ अपवाद अवश्य हैं किंतु उँगलियों पर गिने जाने योग्य । ’व्याकरण’ का एक अर्थ होता है ’विकृत’ करना !
ग्रंथों में नवधा व्याकरण का वर्गीकरण इस रूप में किया गया है :
ऐन्द्रं चान्द्रं काशकृत्स्नं कौमारं शाकटायनम् ।
सारस्वतं चापिशलं शाकलं पाणिनीयकम् ॥
इनमें से प्रथम दो तो इस बारे में विश्व-विख्यात हैं ही । इन्द्र ने व्याकरण की रचना की किंतु गौतम ऋषि की पत्नी का शीलभंग भी किया जिसके लिए अहल्या को पाषाण हो जाने का शाप पति से मिला । ज़ाहिर है कि वह भी ऋषि होते हुए भी पुरुष ही था । चन्द्र ने गुरु-पत्नी तारा से दुराचार किया जिससे बुध का जन्म हुआ । बुध इसलिए तभी से शापग्रस्त है और इसलिए बुद्धिजीवी भी उस शाप से अछूते नहीं हैं ।
दूसरी ओर वाल्मीकि रामायण में हनुमान को भी व्याकरणवेत्ता कहा गया है जिनके ब्रह्मचर्य के चरित्र की तुलना में बड़े-बड़े ऋषि-मुनि भी कहीं नहीं ठहरते । यह उल्लेख इसलिए आवश्यक है कि कपि होते हुए भी वे इन्द्र और चन्द्र जैसे देवताओं से भी अधिक शीलवान और चरित्रवान थे !
परंपरा बन चुके सामाजिक-नैतिकता के ठेकेदारों ने चाहे वे किसी भी समुदाय से संबंध रखते हों, स्त्री को हमेशा उपभोग की वस्तु और ’संपत्ति’ की कोटि में रखा । वेदों और वर्णाश्रम-धर्म ने ’वंश’ की शुद्धता की दृष्टि से ’विवाह’ की संस्था को स्थापित और गौरवान्वित किया जिसमें ’पिता’ के आधार पर वंश की प्रामाणिकता परिभाषित और सिद्ध भी होती है । (इसके लिए हमें एक्स-एक्स और एक्स-वाय क्रोमोसोम के आधार पर लिंग-निर्धारण के सिद्धान्त को समझना होगा, जो यहाँ अनावश्यक प्रतीत हो रहा है)  किंतु यदि ’वर्ण’ की शुद्धता का विचार और महत्व समझा जाता है तो कुल के विस्तार के लिए, जो कि ब्रह्मा के कार्य का ही अंश है, विवाह ही सर्वोत्तम विकल्प है । इसलिए कामोपभोग ’विवाह’ का गौण उद्देश्य था न कि प्रधान, और संतानोत्पत्ति के माध्यम से वंश और कुल की शुद्धता बनाए रखना ’विवाह’ का प्रधान उद्देश्य था । बाद में ’व्याकरण की भूलों से (पुरुष की दृष्टि में ) ’काम-तुष्टि’ विवाह का प्रधान ध्येय बनकर रह गई और स्त्री केवल उपभोग का साधन बनकर रह गई । स्त्री को अपनी पवित्रता की परीक्षा पुनः पुनः देनी पड़ी चाहे सीता हो या जौहर करनेवाली क्षत्रिय वीराँगनाएँ रही हों ।
प्रकृति से भी ’काम’ कल्पना और विचार के रूप में पुरुष में ही होता है, न कि स्त्री में । यह ठीक है कि परिवेश के प्रभावों से स्त्री का मन भी (जो वैसे तो पुरुष के मन से अधिक पवित्र और निष्कपट होता है) दूषित होकर विकार में रस लेने लगता है, किंतु मूलतः तो पुरुष के ही दोष के कारण यह स्थिति उत्पन्न हुई है ।
तथाकथित आधुनिकतम 'मनोविज्ञान' भी पुरुष-केंद्रित है और स्त्री (के मन) को कितना समझ पाया है निश्चित रूप से कहना कठिन है ।
--
एक प्रश्न : ’व्या’ और ’वि’ में कोई अंतर नहीं?
काम, मूलतः पुरुष का दोष है यह कथन भी उपयुक्त नहीं लगता ।
जन्तु-जगत् में भी और मनुष्य-जगत् में भी ।
उत्तर :
वि उपसर्ग का प्रयोग दो अर्थों में किया जाता है, - एक है विशिष्ट या विपरीत, दूसरा है भिन्न,
जैसे रम् > राम > विराम में विराम का अर्थ है आराम करना या रुकना, विरमते का अर्थ ’रुकता है’ या ’विश्राम करता है’ प्रसंग के अनुसार दोनों में से किसी भी रूप में ग्रहण किया जा सकता है । वि+आ+कृत > का इसी प्रकार प्रसंग के अनुसार व्याकृत तथा विकृत दो भिन्न तात्पर्यों में ग्रहण किया जा सकता है । इन्द्र और चन्द्र का उदाहरण और सन्दर्भ इसे ही स्पष्ट करता है ।
पुनः ’काम’ को दोष दिया ही नहीं जा रहा । काम तो मूलतः एक 'पुरुषार्थ' है, चार परम श्रेयस्कर पुरुषार्थों , -'धर्म', 'अर्थ', 'काम' तथा 'मोक्ष' में से एक ! जीवन की निरंतरता का प्रेरक और मूल आधार भी । दोष तो केवल इस सन्दर्भ में है कि मनुष्य काम-प्रवृत्ति को किस दृष्टि से ग्रहण करता है? ’कर्तव्य’ की दृष्टि से या उपभोग की दृष्टि से? यदि कर्तव्य की दृष्टि से ग्रहण करता है तो वह संतान की उत्पत्ति, संतान से प्रेम के लिए काम-प्रवृत्ति के लिए प्रकृति के प्रति अनुग्रह अनुभव करता हुआ ’काम’ का भोग करते हुए भी काम से त्रस्त न होगा । किंतु यदि वह केवल अधिक सुख के लिए ’काम-प्रवृत्ति’ का दुरुपयोग करेगा तो ’काम-प्रवृत्ति’ से मुक्त कभी न हो पायेगा । 'मुक्ति' अर्थात् मोक्ष भी ऐसा ही एक और 'पुरुषार्थ' है ! जीवन में एक उम्र में ’काम’ की अपनी भूमिका है किंतु एक उम्र आने पर मनुष्य का ’काम’ से ग्रस्त होना उसकी मानसिक अपरिपक्वता का द्योतक है । और यह दर्शन पुरुष पर ही अधिक लागू होता है क्योंकि स्त्री तो स्वभाव से ही कामोपभोग की भावना से रहित होती है । किंतु जैसे पुरुष  उसमें इस प्रवृत्ति को उद्दीप्त करता है तो वह भी ’काम-सुख’ के जाल में फँस जाती है । इसलिए प्रथमतया तो पुरुष का, -उसकी अपरिपक्वता का ही दोष है । ’काम-प्रवृत्ति’ को शारीरिक आवश्यकता तक सीमित न रखकर उसे मानसिक आवश्यकता बना लेना ही उसे विकृत करना है ।  
--

कला का अर्थ

वन्दे मातरम् !
vande mātaram !
Please see the English translation of this post just underneath the Hindi text.
कला का अर्थ
--
प्लेटो और अरस्तू के युग में ’ऑल आर्ट इज़ इमिटेशन ऑफ़ नेचर’ / 'All art is imitation of nature' इस वक्तव्य पर विचार-विमर्श होता था । आधुनिक युग में श्री जे.कृष्णमूर्ति ने एक समानान्तर वक्तव्य दिया ’ऑल आर्ट इज़ इमिटेशन’ / 'All art is imitation' । संभव है कि जे.कृष्णमूर्ति ने प्लेटो और अरस्तू के समय के उपरोक्त वक्तव्य को पढ़ा या न पढ़ा हो । जो भी हो, यह विचारणीय है कि अंग्रेज़ी ’emiṭ’ ’imit’ और ’emoṭe’ का उद्भव एक ही संस्कृत प्रत्यय ’इम्’ से हुआ है जिसका अर्थ अन्य वर्णों के योग से भिन्न भिन्न होता है । एक ओर यह पुंल्लिंग ’एतत्’ के रूप में ’अयम्’ अर्थात् ’यह’ होता है, जैसे कि ’अयम् आत्मा’ में, तो दूसरी ओर स्त्रीलिंग ’अस्मद्’ के रूप में ’अयम्’ अर्थात् ’यह’ भी होता है, जैसे ’इयम् माता’ । दूसरी ओर ’इम्’ के रूप में यह प्रातिपदिक पद से युक्त होने पर ’की तरह का’ का द्योतक हो जाता है, जैसे स्वर्णिम, रक्तिम, स्वनिम, रूपिम, आदिम, अंतिम, इत्यादि । ’अलं’ जो ’अलंकार’ में ’पूर्णता’ का द्योतक है, ’अल्’ के रूप में अरबी, फ़ारसी, फ़्रेन्च, जर्मन, तथा अंग्रेज़ी में भी भिन्न-भिन्न रूप लेकर प्रयुक्त होता है इसमें सन्देह नहीं । अब हम ’अर्थ’ के तात्पर्य की विवेचना करें तो सामान्यतः जिसे ’ज्ञान’ कहा जाता है वह दो प्रकार का होता है । प्रथम तो शब्द-विशेष के वर्णों और उच्चारण अर्थात् उसके ’रूपिम्’ (figurative) और ’स्वनिम्’ (phonetic) प्रकार की स्मृति और उस ’रूपिम्’(figurative) और ’स्वनिम्’(phonetic) से जिस वस्तु या भावना को इंगित किया जाता है उस वस्तु या भावना की स्मृति । रोचक तथ्य यह है कि न तो शब्द-विशेष, न उसकी ’रूपिम्’ (figurative) और ’स्वनिम्’(phonetic) प्रकार की स्मृति, और पुनः वह ’ज्ञान’ जिससे किसी विशिष्ट-वस्तु या भाव को इंगित किया जाता है, वस्तु अथवा भाव का विकल्प हो सकता है । सरल भाषा में कहें तो ’रोटी’ शब्द ’रोटी’ नामक वस्तु का कार्य नहीं कर सकता । ऐसे ही ’पानी’ या ’भूख’ और ’प्यास’, ’सुख’ या ’दुःख’ आदि शब्दों के अर्थ को देखें । इसलिए किसी वस्तु या भावना की अनुकृति को कला कहा जाता है जो वास्तव में उस वस्तु या भावना का द्योतक या उसे कम या अधिक स्पष्टता से इंगित भले ही करता हो वास्तव में ’नक़ल’ होता है न कि वह वस्तु या भावना ।
पाणिनी १/१/९ ’तुल्यास्य प्रयत्नं सवर्णं’ की सहायता से यह समझा जा सकता है कि किस प्रकार ’प्र’-उपसर्ग और ’कृ’ धातु से ’प्रकृ’ और ’प्रकृति’ शब्द बना । इसी ’प्रकृ’ से अंग्रेज़ी ’फ़िगर’ (figure) अस्तित्व में आया । ’आ स-अलं’ से सलाम, सलामती, मुसल्लम, सालिम, असलम, और ’सलीम’ बने । इस सूत्र की सहायता से தமிழ்  भाषा के प्रचलित स्वरूप को भी समझा जा सकता है, जहाँ वर्ण के भिन्न-भिन्न ध्वनिम (phonetic) रूपों के लिए एक ही रूपिम (figurative) प्रकार प्रयुक्त होता है । यह தமிழ் का सौन्दर्य और वैभव तो है ही, किंतु भाषा के प्रयोगकर्ताओं के प्रमाद के कारण एक अभिशाप बन गया है जिससे शास्त्रीय तमिऴ् विलुप्त होने के संकट की स्थिति की ओर जा रही है ।
अभी तो इमिता (imitation) / अनुकृति पर पुनः लौटें । ’अर्थ’ से ही व्युत्पन्न हुआ ’आर्ट’ / Art, ’आर्टिफ़ीशियल्’ / artificial, ’आर्टिस्टिक’ / artistic, ये सभी ’अनुकृति’ के ही पर्याय हैं । इसलिए ’ऑल आर्ट इज़ इमिटेशन ऑफ़ नेचर’ / 'All art is imitation of nature' सत्य तो है किंतु आंशिक रूप से ही । क्योंकि जब अनुकृति अपनी प्रेरणा को अधिकतम स्पष्टता से व्यक्त करती है तो यद्यपि वह उस प्रेरणा अर्थात् वस्तु या भावना का कार्य तो नहीं करती किन्तु उसे देखने-सुननेवाले के मन-मस्तिष्क में उसकी निकटतम आकृति अवश्य निर्मित कर देती है । अंग्रेज़ी में ’emoṭe’/ ’emotion’ को, ’evoke’ कर देती है ।
यह ’evoke’ पुनः ’अव-वाक्’ से ही आया है, इसके लिए पुनः पाणिनी १/१/९ ’तुल्यास्य प्रयत्नं सवर्णं’ की सहायता ली जा सकती है ।
--
संक्षेप में यह कहना अनुचित न होगा  :
भाषा एक कला-विधा है !
अगली 'पोस्ट' में इस पर विस्तार से !

Significance of Art.
In the times of Plato and Aristotle, discussions were aplenty about the nature and role of ‘Art’. And a most famous quote which was ascribed to them was:
 “All Art is imitation of nature.”
In our times however, J.Krishnamurti turned this into even a more concise form by saying:
“All Art is imitation”.
We may assume J.Krishnamurti might have or haven’t gone through the thoughts of those old thinkers like Plato and Aristotle.
Whatever be the case, this may be pointed out that the root-stem in Sanskrit which gave rise to the English words 'emit', 'imitation', 'omit, and 'emotion' was the same संस्कृत प्रत्यय ’इम्’ / Sanskrit qualifying affix 'im' which takes the form अयम् / 'ayaM' and is used in the sense of masculine singular demonstrative pronoun 'this'.  'im' again takes the form इयम् / 'iyaM' to denote the feminine indicative pronoun 'this'.  अयम् आत्मा / ayaM  ātmā , इयम् माता / iyaM mātā mean : This 'Self' and 'This mother'. Again as suffix 'इम्' / 'iM' is the suffix used to make a noun an adjective.
Like in the words :
स्वर्णिम, svarṇima , रक्तिम, raktima , स्वनिम, svanima , रूपिम,  rūpima , आदिम, ādima अंतिम  aṃtima which mean :
Golden, blood-red, sonic, figurative, aboriginal, and last,
respectively, this means : of the kind of / 'like'.
Again अल् / 'al  and  अलं alaṃ which in Sanskrit mean completion, perfection are also प्रत्यय affixes, which are frequently found in varied forms in Arabic, French, German English and other many languages.
Let us consider the term 'Art' which is derived from Sanskrit word अर्थ  .
What do we mean by 'knowledge'?
Knowledge has two forms : First is the memory of the figurative and phonetic forms of the letters that constitute a specific word. And another is the memory of the object / mental impression associated with the object which we have in mind when we use the word.
Even more interesting is the fact that neither the word nor the meaning of the word that is supposed to convey the fact of the object described so could be a substitute for the real object or the feeling / mental impression associated with the object.
In simple way, the word 'food' could not be used to satisfy the hunger. The word 'water' could not quench the thirst.
But language has immense utility because we 'imitate' / 'translate' / transform an object of the material or abstract kind into a spoken and / or written word that effects the result.
So word is but imitation / translation / transformation.
Take the word 'figure'  
पाणिनी १/१/९ ’तुल्यास्य प्रयत्नं सवर्णं’
pāṇinī aṣṭādhyāyī 1/1/9 / tulyāsyaprayatnaṃ savarṇaṃ’
defines the 'similarity' of letters (phonetic, figurative or both).
Which gives us how ’प्र’-उपसर्ग > pra-upasarga  ’कृ’ धातु > kṛ dhātu gave us ’प्रकृ’ prakṛ > figure
and ’प्रकृति’ > prakṛti > figurative.
We could infer thereby All language is imitation of nature'
(by the way  प्रकृति /prakṛti translated into English is called nature)
And we could safely simplify the notion :
"All Art is imitation of nature"
into :
"All Art is imitation"
As remarked by J.Krishnamurti.
And use of the term 'nature' becomes just superfluous.
Conclusion  :
We can say Language is but an Art-form.
--
(In the next post the same theme in detail.)
--

.

Yemen, Arab, Somalia in ṛgveda

ऋग्वेद मण्डलं १, सूक्तं १६३,
यदक्रन्दः प्रथमं जायमान उद्यन्समुद्रादुत वा पुरीषात् ।
श्येनस्य पक्षा हरिणस्य बाहू उपस्तुत्यं महि जातं ते अर्वन् ॥१
यमेन दत्तं त्रित एनमायुनगिन्द्र एणं प्रथमो अध्यतिष्ठत् ।
गन्धर्वो अस्य रशनामगृभ्णात्सूरादश्वं वसवो निरतिष्ट ॥२
असि यमो अस्यादित्यो अर्वन्नसि त्रितो गुह्येन व्रतेन ।
असि सोमन् समया विपृक्त आहुस्ते त्रीणि दिवि बन्धनानि ॥३
त्रीणि त आहुर्दिवि बन्धनानि त्रीण्यप्सुत्रीण्यन्तः समुद्रे ।
उतेव मे वरुणश्छन्त्स्यर्वन्यत्रा त आहुः परमं जनित्रम् ॥४
--

ṛgveda maṇḍalaṃ 1, sūktaṃ 163,

yadakrandaḥ prathamaṃ jāyamāna udyansamudrāduta vā purīṣāt |

śyenasya pakṣā hariṇasya bāhū upastutyaṃ mahi jātaṃ te arvan |1

yamena dattaṃ trita enamāyunagindra eṇaṃ prathamo adhyatiṣṭhat |

gandharvo asya raśanāmagṛbhṇātsūrādaśvaṃ vasavo niratiṣṭa ||2

asi yamo asyādityo arvannasi trito guhyena vratena |

asi soman samayā vipṛkta āhuste trīṇi divi bandhanāni ||3

trīṇi ta āhurdivi bandhanāni trīṇyapsu trīṇyantaḥ samudre |

uteva me varuṇaśchantsyarvanyatrā ta āhuḥ paramaṃ janitram ||4

--

While going through regular routine daily पाठम् / pāṭham of ऋग्वेद / ṛgveda,
on 30-June 2016, at Navaghatkhedi, Barwah, M.P.   came across this सूक्तं / sūktaṃ 163 of मण्डलं / maṇḍalaṃ 1.

And at once the Geography of Yemen, Arab, Somalia came before my mind.

How categorically the description tallies with their geographical location on the earth this day too!

I'm not going to translate and elaborate this.

ऋग्वेद / ṛgveda further indicates by saying : 

त आहुः परमं जनित्रम् ॥४

ta āhuḥ paramaṃ janitram ||4 :

the this place was the cradle of human civilization indeed in a way. 

--

अवतार / avatāra / संस्कार / saṃskāra / पुनर्जन्म / punarjanma

Prologue :
While walking in a forest in शाहबाग / Shahbagh, I had repeatedly requested माँ / Ma to reveal Her true स्वरूप identity. माँ / Ma said,’Get me the thorn of a lime tree.’  A tiny berry which had purplish juice was peeled partially and served as an ink bottle. The lime tree thorn was the nib. There was no one else near us. With the improvised ink and nib, माँ / Ma wrote the word 'नारायण " /“Narayana” on my hand or my dress.”
    —Sri Gurupriya Devi, (Didi), Diaries, Vol II, p 83 (April 1927) ❤
--(श्री गुरुप्रिया देवी दीदी , डायरी, खंड II , पृष्ठ 83 -अप्रैल 1927 )

❤️
6:46AM
Me : Great ! http://shilpsnutrilife.blogspot.in/2014/06/all-about-karvandakaronda.html
All About Karvanda(karonda)
  All About Karvanda(karonda) Karonda is one of the many berry-like fruits believed to originate near the Himalayas, though som...
shilpsnutrilife.blogspot.com
But there is another tiny kind of this berry which has purple juice and I often savored it. So tiny that while plucking it got burst on the twig itself ... ! And this is the secret of माँ / Ma, She is said to be नारायणी / NarayaNI (The feminine form of नारायण / NarayaNa) They are Brother and Sister. The same नारायणी NarayaNI is Lord Shiva's Consort. I have also written about the etymology of नारायण / NarayaNa and this implies माँ Ma (Anandomoyee) was incarnation of The Divine Mother. The narration in the post that you shared in Facebook also affirms this. Because She told to devotee : This body has come (and is) the result of your prayers and aspirations, and not because of the past 'karma' which happens in the case of the ordinary mortal men.
(Incidentally, विष्णु / VishNu  as मोहिनी attracted Lord शिव / shiva , and that is another aspect why
नारायण /  NarayaNa and  नारायणी / NarayaNI are but two aspects / forms of   विष्णु / VishNu. This is वैदिक / Vaidic, पौराणिक / पौराणिक way of narration. We should not hurry to infer it was a biological relationship of the kind.)
? : Hmmm why would she say Narayana and not Narayani? I suppose it wouldn't matter given she's beyond name and form.
Me : yes, Reality in terms of words is extremely inexplicable and inexpressible ... And I wanted to point out only that She was an avatAra. Her story for us is understand that The Supreme Reality (Ishita/ IshTAr) comes on earth because of Her own volition and there is no cause and effect behind that.
Even Ramakrishna and Sri Ramana were though jnAnI were not avatAra like Rama, Krishna, Buddha or Kalki.
? _()_ it's my understanding that Ramana has had many divine incarnations. Did he not appear in form by His own will?
Me : Ramana and Ramakrishna had a 'past-birth' and 'karma' probably. Though again I doubt if Ramana was jnAnI only or avatAra (of Arunachala Shiva) like shankarAchArya...

? ShankarAchArya was avatAra also?
Me : yes, This has been described so, and all his life and whatever He did was an evidence that He had come (and not 'sent') for a special purpose...

? Thank you. My apologies for not being very well read or knowing about avatAras. I remember a dream as a child before birth and did not want to come to earth but it was insisted that I do...lovingly, but truly there was no choice.
Dream body was in child form
Me : your case is somewhat similar to mine. I wanted to come and had choices out of which this choice (parents) was the best suited to me. Though I had to face many hardships, but I'm happy for all and everything.

? : Often times I ask why I'm still here. Honestly. I feel I could just pray or be of good will without a body also. You remember choosing your birth?
Me : Oh! A long story indeed if I go on narrating but summarily remembering past life takes place in 2 ways. First according to Patanjali yoga-sutra : by way of 'saMyama' on 'sanskAra', another is on its own as if in dream or in waking-dreams.
I want to 'publish this dialogue (today's only) in blog... what do you think?
--

Ode to Reality.

Ode to Reality.
--
In your face, I see many faces,
In many faces I see but you!
Occasionally a bit sad,
Though watchful, witty.
Or just a fountain of joy immense.
Serene, silent, waters of Bliss.
Oh! In you I see many faces.
In many faces, I see but you!
Since times ancient-most,
When you were Sin,
The Moon The mind,
Since those times,
When you were Liz,
And since those,
When you were Monet.
And even much before those,
When you were गौरी / GaurI,
दुर्गा / Durga, काली / Kali, and ललिता / Lalita,
When I was just a vehicle for you !
The Lion, The सिंह / SiMha, The Sphinx,…
Though as Sphinx,
I was नृसिंह / NrSiMha too!
And through a few millennia later,
I was transformed into Leonardo da Vinci,
And transformed you into Mona the Lisa,
I never forgot you!
You were like सदाबहार / बारामासी / Vinca,
 छुई-मुई, लाजवन्ती or Mimosa,
And I painted your image,
Sculpted your forms as इष्टार / Ishtar,
The Liz, लक्ष्या / Lakshya, लक्ष्मी / LakshmI,
ललिता / Lalita, लास्या / LasyA,
लाजवंती / LajjavatI or Elizabeth,
In your face, I saw many faces,
In many faces I saw but you!
And you said unto me:
“This body is the manifestation of,
Your prayers and your aspirations,
And your earnestness and devotion.
This body has not come into being,
Because of past karm, -like yours,
And those innumerable mortal,
That wanders the face of Earth,
Though I am the Earth too,
And all they are but my children.
This body is but the form of the Formless,
The Mother Supreme,
-Of the Whole Existence.”
And you at once lost all form,
Alas, Since then I kept seeking you,
In all infinite forms,
Again and again,-desperately …
A forlorn child of you,
O Mother!
--