Calvin and the right to remain ignorant :-)
Last updated on 19th Feb. 2018
Thoroughly enjoyed this cartoon of Calvin complaining about being educated against his will and his rights (to remain ignorant) being trampled upon, and that he liked things better when he didn't understand them: http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/2013/01/08.
I think that this cartoon of Calvin is even more relevant in the spiritual field. Many people prefer to be devoted to a particular spiritual master and be obedient to the associated spiritual group leaders, or similarly be devoted to religion, but not get too deep into philosophy related to deep questions about life and death, suffering, good and evil etc. taught by the spiritual master and/or religion. In Hinduism which is my religion, I think I can say that most Hindus prefer to be devoted to their Ishta Devatas (favourite spiritually powerful beings/gods) and be very reverential towards, but not deeply study and understand, scripture associated with deep philosophy of the Hindus, like the Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads and the Brahma Sutra (Prasthana Trayee) which talk about the ONE formless God/Divine power behind the universe and which is referred to sometimes as Absolute Brahman.
It is only a few Hindus who take to studying its deep philosophical scriptures like the Prasthana Trayee mentioned above.
And sometimes it seems that those who don't get too deep into such spiritual/religious philosophy but are steady in their devotion, lead quite happy lives in their spiritual/religious path!
================================================
Given below are some comments I made on my Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2084138811802685, associated with this post:
In response to a comment which said in part, "Wouldn’t the ritualist have as much right as the recluse to practice his chosen path based on his capacity? Would it be appropriate for another to be judgmental on either?", I (Ravi) wrote (slightly edited);
Sai Ram --Name-snipped-- sir, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba was very, very clear and unambiguous in his teachings about NOT viewing any particular path to God as superior. The traditional paths being: devotional path i.e. Bhakti marga which includes ritualist paths like Karma Kanda Vedic approach as well as non-Vedic devotional approaches and similar non-Hindu religion devotional approaches, path of wisdom i.e. Jnana marga which would include paths involving study of Upanishads/Vedanta, and paths of good works (benefiting poor and suffering in society) done with devotional attitude i.e. Karma marga. And so I follow that approach taught by Bhagavan. I don't know whether this should be called a non-judgemental approach. I prefer viewing it as being (equally) respectful of various paths to God.
I believe my above/previous comment was non-judgemental. It was simply stating the reality as I perceive it about most Hindus not taking to study of deep philosophical Hindu scriptures like the Prasthana Trayee. I was not stating it as a good/happy or unhappy situation. I also stated that people in devotional path who are steady in devotion without study of deep Hindu philosophy seem quite happy! That is a positive statement about the power of steady devotion without knowledge of deep Hindu philosophy, to provide happiness.
----
In response to a further comment, "Thanks for this elaboration. It’s consistent with my little understanding of our dharma.", I (Ravi) wrote:
My understanding too is limited. So I could be wrong at times. Please feel free to question my views and ask for clarifications. That could help catch my mistakes and help me to improve my understanding of Santhana Dharma.
----
================================================
Given below are some comments I made on my Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2084138811802685, associated with this post:
In response to a comment which said in part, "Wouldn’t the ritualist have as much right as the recluse to practice his chosen path based on his capacity? Would it be appropriate for another to be judgmental on either?", I (Ravi) wrote (slightly edited);
Sai Ram --Name-snipped-- sir, Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba was very, very clear and unambiguous in his teachings about NOT viewing any particular path to God as superior. The traditional paths being: devotional path i.e. Bhakti marga which includes ritualist paths like Karma Kanda Vedic approach as well as non-Vedic devotional approaches and similar non-Hindu religion devotional approaches, path of wisdom i.e. Jnana marga which would include paths involving study of Upanishads/Vedanta, and paths of good works (benefiting poor and suffering in society) done with devotional attitude i.e. Karma marga. And so I follow that approach taught by Bhagavan. I don't know whether this should be called a non-judgemental approach. I prefer viewing it as being (equally) respectful of various paths to God.
I believe my above/previous comment was non-judgemental. It was simply stating the reality as I perceive it about most Hindus not taking to study of deep philosophical Hindu scriptures like the Prasthana Trayee. I was not stating it as a good/happy or unhappy situation. I also stated that people in devotional path who are steady in devotion without study of deep Hindu philosophy seem quite happy! That is a positive statement about the power of steady devotion without knowledge of deep Hindu philosophy, to provide happiness.
----
In response to a further comment, "Thanks for this elaboration. It’s consistent with my little understanding of our dharma.", I (Ravi) wrote:
My understanding too is limited. So I could be wrong at times. Please feel free to question my views and ask for clarifications. That could help catch my mistakes and help me to improve my understanding of Santhana Dharma.
----
Comments
Post a Comment