| |
All is beautiful, tremendously graceful -- but there is nothing holy. And when you enter into yourself, you will even have to leave the idea of I outside. Without leaving the idea of I, you cannot enter within yourself.
The I is your ego. It is the barrier, not the bridge.
That's why, instead of saying, "I don't know," which would have been more grammatical... But a man like Bodhidharma does not care about grammar -- do you think I care about grammar?
Bodhidharma simply says, NO KNOWING -- and he has said everything; he has not left anything.
I am reminded of a story...
Gautam Buddha is passing through a forest, it is fall time and dry leaves are falling and making great noise dancing in the wind all over the place. Ananda asks him, "I don't interfere because there is always somebody else who is asking you; it is a great opportunity for me that by chance I am alone with you. I want to ask one thing; I have been resisting but now I cannot resist. I want to know whether you have told us everything that you know, or you have told only some things."
Gautam Buddha bent down; he plucked up a few dry leaves in his hands and he said, "Ananda, do you see these dry leaves in my hand? This much I have said to you. And look at the dry leaves all over the forest: this much I have not said to you. Because you cannot understand even this much, these few leaves in my hand. It will be absolutely a wastage of time to talk about all the leaves of this forest. My knowing is vast; I have just given you a taste."
But if by chance Bodhidharma had been asked, his answer would have been diametrically opposite. He would have said, "I have said everything, I have not been keeping anything to myself" -- and that's why he is not understood. He has said too much. His words are so condensed that just this simple phrase, NO KNOWING can contain thousands of scriptures; still it will remain not understood.
Bodhidharma's uniqueness is that he does not care about anything else, he has no other considerations. Only one other man, George Gurdjieff, would have agreed with him. In the whole history of great masters only George Gurdjieff used to teach
|
|
|