For Surdas Krishna always remains a moppet; for Mira, a lover; for Shanker, a preceptor. Those who love Shrimad Bhagwatam find the Krishna of Bhagavad Gita, standing on the battlefield amidst two warring groups and preaching, an alien. And those who intellectually wrestle to understand the profundity of Gita, dismiss the frolicking Krishna of Bhagwatam as a mere prankster. It seems difficult not to be deflected by one's prismatic cribbling and embrace a facet of Krishna other than that happens to resonate with their respective predilections. Humanity is hardwired to drop all contradictions as if they don't exist but this leads to an obstinate division of opinions which is what has always been at the root of all conflicts everywhere. If we think only in terms of black or white, we are going to have either an ideal individual or a worthless one. But rainbows are formed only when we have both--sunshine and rain.
Sri Krishna is as fascinating, as colorful, as ungraspable and unembraceable as a rainbow. He is not only a yogi par excellence but a king too, not only a fighter but a nonpareil pacifist also. He is concurrently an inducer and a transducer, a flute player and sudarshan chakra wielder, a man and an overman, action prone and action free! These traits are too befuddling for a one-track mind to comprehend and hold on to. It is really a formidable task to contemplate the full spectrum panorma of Sri Krishna, to comprehend him in all his colors. People therefore conveniently drop all that appears unintelligible and highlight whatever is acceptable, to them. And this is not only relative to Sri Krishna. Whether it is Zarathustra, or Mohammed, or Jesus Christ, the story is the same. Fyodor Dostoevsky, in his novel Brothers Karamazov, introduces a parable of The Grand Inquisitor, in which Jesus visits the earth at the time of the Inquisition.
The place is the main square of Seville, in the Spain of sixteenth century, where the crowd sees him, recognizes him, mobs him, seeking his mercy. Old, diseased, dead, desperate--it is the same old milieu, he catered to when he was amongst them fifteen hundred years ago. Had he not promised he would come back again? The crowd is cheering him but then comes the Lord Inquisitor. He also recognizes him but in the face of the crowd, sends him to a prison cell, on charges of heresy. In the dead of night, he pays a visit to Jesus in his cell, offers his respects and begs him to disappear again or else, he warns him he would be obliged to pillory him again. He tells Jesus that in his absence everything was going on perfectly well in his name but if he stays back everything will turn topsy-turvy. The whole edifice of Orthodox Religion will crumble. Who will be willing to preside over the liquidation of the Papal Empire?
What do you think? If Krishna decides to come back and indulges in his raas-leela, would he be welcome? I believe he is better placed in temples. He is safe in the confines of his idols. Osho is right when he says that Krishna belongs to the future. Humanity is not yet ready to understand him in his wholeness. Is it not an irony that of all the avtars only his avtar is said to be purna, that is, whole! We can easily understand Rama because there is no contradiction in him. He is unidimensional, an epitome of an ideal human being. He is a model son, an ideal brother, an exemplary husband, and an archetypal king. He makes sense to us. Krishna, on the other hand, is multidimensional, an array of rainbow colors. He persuades Arjun to fight a war while he himself does an end run around Jarasandh, earning thereby for himself the dubious distinction of being ranchhodji, that is, a deserter! And he calls his actions non-action!
It is true Krishna is paradoxical, but so were Lao Tzu, and Buddha, and Heraclitus. The fact is that anybody who transcends the magic of logic is bound to be paradoxical. Logic appears enchanting because it tries to define the nature of Truth. But the crux of the problem is that it is not the Truth. Only Existence is true and Existence is infinitely vast. Life is all inclusive, variegated, and hence full of contradictions. Walt Whitman once remarked that I contradict myself because I am vast. When we look at something specific, we miss out on what we are not looking for. It is our effort that gets in the way of a full scale view. To get a wholesome view we don't need effort but effortless effort. Then it will be possible to perform actions free of action. And then we will be able to see harmony in seemingly paradoxical situations. Till now it has been the prerogative of only a slender segment of humanity called the mystics.
Fortunately for the rest of humanity the paradigm is now shifting from focus to what I prefer to call open focus. In focus we tend to exclude everything other than the one we are interested in, a characteristic that ultimately leads to a straitjacketing of our outlook. Most of the conflicts, whether they are national, international, or personal, that happen all over the globe, all of the time, have their genesis in the mind being focused on one thing to the total blackout of the other. Open focusing, on the other hand, opens a window on the peripheral view also, which helps place focusing in a larger perspective. It is like the glow of a lamp reaching out to an overlooked corner. Open focusing can be suitably compared to holding a butterfly in the hollow of one's palm with all the fingers loosely forming a sort of perforated barrier, instead of nailing its wings in a pincer move, with the help of one's index finger and the thumb.
The paradigm shift happened with Albert Einstein's path breaking energy equation, e=mc^2, which may well prove to be the watershed in human understanding. For the first time in the history of science, man's focused view that matter is the ultimate reality received a severe jolt. Understandably, after that, it underwent a sea change. It now became open and was not averse to including the invisible component of energy into it. Scientists began to speak in the language of mystics, though they were approaching the problem from a diametrically opposite direction.
While the mystics had the knack of looking deep into the invisible which then crystallized and made itself visible to them, the scientists were digging deeper and deeper into the visible and then stumbled upon the invisible! A new paradigm was born in which the visible and the invisible were not opposed to each other but were a gestalt of Reality.
When this understanding that the visible and the invisible are but only two facets of the same reality, sinks into the humanity, it will come of age. As the lines between these so called pairs of opposites become blurred, people will refrain from being adamantine about their own belief system being the only true system. Then they won't be itching to jump at the other's throat as they do now. In fact it is the uncertainty inside them about the veracity of their adopted system, that goads them to garner support for themselves by however wayward means it may come. With the dawn of a proper understanding that there is an inner harmony behind all seemingly opposite entities, this fear due to uncertainty will vanish. Nietzsche says somewhere that the higher a tree wants to go, the deeper it sends its roots into the earth. So height and depth are not opposed to each other, but only adjuncts of an inner synchronicity to support the system.
With this deeper insight, humanity will be better equipped to comprehend Sri Krishna in his totality. People will then not get bowled over by his seemingly paradoxical gestures. They will understand that Krishna is no warmonger. He is a pacifist to the core. Look, he averts fighting Jarasandh to avoid impending men slaughter. And after Jarasandh is captured, he forgives him. He tries his utmost to forestall the great war of Mahabharat also. But the war is anyway thrust upon the Pandavas. On the battlefield the signal for initiating the war comes from the Kauravas with Bhishma, their army Chief, blowing the conch first. Dhrishtdyumn should have blown his conch to give a befitting reply, as he was at the head of the Pandava army. But no, we find it is Sri Krishna, the only pacifist on the battlefield, who blows his panchjanya conch first. He is then followed by his disciple Arjun who blows his devdatta conch.
What does all this posturing signify? It signifies that yes, we acknowledge that you are here but that the war can still be averted. Time is holding its breath and we can utilise this opportunity to see reason. This was Krishna's last-ditch effort to thwart the war. On the surface he may look like he is confronting himself in different circumstances, but if we do a mid-course correction and put him in the right perspective, we will see that he has been consistently a pacifist. Be it the killing of Kamsa, or Shishupal, or Panchajan or disarming of Banasur, he always gave them opportunity to see reason, before punishing them. His actions remind one of a switch-back in a mountaneous zone which has many hairpin bends. While negotiating such a grade one may find oneself moving opposite to the direction one has to go, but making the grade all the while. How? By not looking up or down, and flowing with the Existence.
Once the war is thrust upon them by Existence, Krishna honors it because Krishna is one with Existence. He is always present in the present. He is never unavailable to the present moment. It is living in the past and in the future that generates a dichotomy of opinion which in turn opens up the dilemma of choosing one over the other. Living in the present entails that there are no end runs and hence there is no scope for dithering. Arjun like any other human being is prone to being absent from the present. This amounts to coming in the way of Existence which in its turn creates the impasse for him. When he declares that he will not fight this war, Sri Krishna smiles because he knows that Arjun is stuck between his divided self. He is uncertain inside but emphatic on the outside, like the rest of the humanity. Sri Krishna on the other hand is a sthitprajna that is established in the state of stability.
Stability means that the mental graph shows consistency. It doesn't fluctuate with the turn of events. You see an event, any event for that reason, in itself is like a wild card. It has no life of its own. We impart life to it. Imagine a monkey jumping to a market square during busy hours. The older people would perhaps scramble to find a place of safety, the not so old would try to shoo him away. The children, on the other hand, may gleefuly imitate his antics, and the dog lazing under a push cart may perk his ears sensing food in it. And if there is a monkey trainer nearby, he may like to have it as an apprentice. If we are awake which means if we are present in the present, we will have no thoughts to resist the event.
Thoughts require space to manifest but there is no space available in the present. In the present we don't think, we simply are. It is not that one can't think. In fact one thinks so much that he chooses to go beyond thinking having realized fully well the futility of thinking. When you fall in line with the Whole, your actions become non-actions. Hence Sri Krishna says that he is action free. Sri Krishna appears like a scrambled rainbow because we do not know how to slip into that thought free state. Baba Muktanand launched his meditation revolution in the hope that it will generate mystics galore. If that happens, Krishna will not appear enigmatic but only a human being who happens to be at that end of the spectrum which we call divine. It will then be easier to unscramble the rainbow!
Om Shantih
Ajit Sambodhi
Sri Krishna is as fascinating, as colorful, as ungraspable and unembraceable as a rainbow. He is not only a yogi par excellence but a king too, not only a fighter but a nonpareil pacifist also. He is concurrently an inducer and a transducer, a flute player and sudarshan chakra wielder, a man and an overman, action prone and action free! These traits are too befuddling for a one-track mind to comprehend and hold on to. It is really a formidable task to contemplate the full spectrum panorma of Sri Krishna, to comprehend him in all his colors. People therefore conveniently drop all that appears unintelligible and highlight whatever is acceptable, to them. And this is not only relative to Sri Krishna. Whether it is Zarathustra, or Mohammed, or Jesus Christ, the story is the same. Fyodor Dostoevsky, in his novel Brothers Karamazov, introduces a parable of The Grand Inquisitor, in which Jesus visits the earth at the time of the Inquisition.
The place is the main square of Seville, in the Spain of sixteenth century, where the crowd sees him, recognizes him, mobs him, seeking his mercy. Old, diseased, dead, desperate--it is the same old milieu, he catered to when he was amongst them fifteen hundred years ago. Had he not promised he would come back again? The crowd is cheering him but then comes the Lord Inquisitor. He also recognizes him but in the face of the crowd, sends him to a prison cell, on charges of heresy. In the dead of night, he pays a visit to Jesus in his cell, offers his respects and begs him to disappear again or else, he warns him he would be obliged to pillory him again. He tells Jesus that in his absence everything was going on perfectly well in his name but if he stays back everything will turn topsy-turvy. The whole edifice of Orthodox Religion will crumble. Who will be willing to preside over the liquidation of the Papal Empire?
What do you think? If Krishna decides to come back and indulges in his raas-leela, would he be welcome? I believe he is better placed in temples. He is safe in the confines of his idols. Osho is right when he says that Krishna belongs to the future. Humanity is not yet ready to understand him in his wholeness. Is it not an irony that of all the avtars only his avtar is said to be purna, that is, whole! We can easily understand Rama because there is no contradiction in him. He is unidimensional, an epitome of an ideal human being. He is a model son, an ideal brother, an exemplary husband, and an archetypal king. He makes sense to us. Krishna, on the other hand, is multidimensional, an array of rainbow colors. He persuades Arjun to fight a war while he himself does an end run around Jarasandh, earning thereby for himself the dubious distinction of being ranchhodji, that is, a deserter! And he calls his actions non-action!
It is true Krishna is paradoxical, but so were Lao Tzu, and Buddha, and Heraclitus. The fact is that anybody who transcends the magic of logic is bound to be paradoxical. Logic appears enchanting because it tries to define the nature of Truth. But the crux of the problem is that it is not the Truth. Only Existence is true and Existence is infinitely vast. Life is all inclusive, variegated, and hence full of contradictions. Walt Whitman once remarked that I contradict myself because I am vast. When we look at something specific, we miss out on what we are not looking for. It is our effort that gets in the way of a full scale view. To get a wholesome view we don't need effort but effortless effort. Then it will be possible to perform actions free of action. And then we will be able to see harmony in seemingly paradoxical situations. Till now it has been the prerogative of only a slender segment of humanity called the mystics.
Fortunately for the rest of humanity the paradigm is now shifting from focus to what I prefer to call open focus. In focus we tend to exclude everything other than the one we are interested in, a characteristic that ultimately leads to a straitjacketing of our outlook. Most of the conflicts, whether they are national, international, or personal, that happen all over the globe, all of the time, have their genesis in the mind being focused on one thing to the total blackout of the other. Open focusing, on the other hand, opens a window on the peripheral view also, which helps place focusing in a larger perspective. It is like the glow of a lamp reaching out to an overlooked corner. Open focusing can be suitably compared to holding a butterfly in the hollow of one's palm with all the fingers loosely forming a sort of perforated barrier, instead of nailing its wings in a pincer move, with the help of one's index finger and the thumb.
The paradigm shift happened with Albert Einstein's path breaking energy equation, e=mc^2, which may well prove to be the watershed in human understanding. For the first time in the history of science, man's focused view that matter is the ultimate reality received a severe jolt. Understandably, after that, it underwent a sea change. It now became open and was not averse to including the invisible component of energy into it. Scientists began to speak in the language of mystics, though they were approaching the problem from a diametrically opposite direction.
While the mystics had the knack of looking deep into the invisible which then crystallized and made itself visible to them, the scientists were digging deeper and deeper into the visible and then stumbled upon the invisible! A new paradigm was born in which the visible and the invisible were not opposed to each other but were a gestalt of Reality.
When this understanding that the visible and the invisible are but only two facets of the same reality, sinks into the humanity, it will come of age. As the lines between these so called pairs of opposites become blurred, people will refrain from being adamantine about their own belief system being the only true system. Then they won't be itching to jump at the other's throat as they do now. In fact it is the uncertainty inside them about the veracity of their adopted system, that goads them to garner support for themselves by however wayward means it may come. With the dawn of a proper understanding that there is an inner harmony behind all seemingly opposite entities, this fear due to uncertainty will vanish. Nietzsche says somewhere that the higher a tree wants to go, the deeper it sends its roots into the earth. So height and depth are not opposed to each other, but only adjuncts of an inner synchronicity to support the system.
With this deeper insight, humanity will be better equipped to comprehend Sri Krishna in his totality. People will then not get bowled over by his seemingly paradoxical gestures. They will understand that Krishna is no warmonger. He is a pacifist to the core. Look, he averts fighting Jarasandh to avoid impending men slaughter. And after Jarasandh is captured, he forgives him. He tries his utmost to forestall the great war of Mahabharat also. But the war is anyway thrust upon the Pandavas. On the battlefield the signal for initiating the war comes from the Kauravas with Bhishma, their army Chief, blowing the conch first. Dhrishtdyumn should have blown his conch to give a befitting reply, as he was at the head of the Pandava army. But no, we find it is Sri Krishna, the only pacifist on the battlefield, who blows his panchjanya conch first. He is then followed by his disciple Arjun who blows his devdatta conch.
What does all this posturing signify? It signifies that yes, we acknowledge that you are here but that the war can still be averted. Time is holding its breath and we can utilise this opportunity to see reason. This was Krishna's last-ditch effort to thwart the war. On the surface he may look like he is confronting himself in different circumstances, but if we do a mid-course correction and put him in the right perspective, we will see that he has been consistently a pacifist. Be it the killing of Kamsa, or Shishupal, or Panchajan or disarming of Banasur, he always gave them opportunity to see reason, before punishing them. His actions remind one of a switch-back in a mountaneous zone which has many hairpin bends. While negotiating such a grade one may find oneself moving opposite to the direction one has to go, but making the grade all the while. How? By not looking up or down, and flowing with the Existence.
Once the war is thrust upon them by Existence, Krishna honors it because Krishna is one with Existence. He is always present in the present. He is never unavailable to the present moment. It is living in the past and in the future that generates a dichotomy of opinion which in turn opens up the dilemma of choosing one over the other. Living in the present entails that there are no end runs and hence there is no scope for dithering. Arjun like any other human being is prone to being absent from the present. This amounts to coming in the way of Existence which in its turn creates the impasse for him. When he declares that he will not fight this war, Sri Krishna smiles because he knows that Arjun is stuck between his divided self. He is uncertain inside but emphatic on the outside, like the rest of the humanity. Sri Krishna on the other hand is a sthitprajna that is established in the state of stability.
Stability means that the mental graph shows consistency. It doesn't fluctuate with the turn of events. You see an event, any event for that reason, in itself is like a wild card. It has no life of its own. We impart life to it. Imagine a monkey jumping to a market square during busy hours. The older people would perhaps scramble to find a place of safety, the not so old would try to shoo him away. The children, on the other hand, may gleefuly imitate his antics, and the dog lazing under a push cart may perk his ears sensing food in it. And if there is a monkey trainer nearby, he may like to have it as an apprentice. If we are awake which means if we are present in the present, we will have no thoughts to resist the event.
Thoughts require space to manifest but there is no space available in the present. In the present we don't think, we simply are. It is not that one can't think. In fact one thinks so much that he chooses to go beyond thinking having realized fully well the futility of thinking. When you fall in line with the Whole, your actions become non-actions. Hence Sri Krishna says that he is action free. Sri Krishna appears like a scrambled rainbow because we do not know how to slip into that thought free state. Baba Muktanand launched his meditation revolution in the hope that it will generate mystics galore. If that happens, Krishna will not appear enigmatic but only a human being who happens to be at that end of the spectrum which we call divine. It will then be easier to unscramble the rainbow!
Om Shantih
Ajit Sambodhi
