|
Main Index
|
| |
| |
|
| |
have those who recognize only the body? They are debating the being, but attraction and repulsion for the body still arise; hate and attraction still arise. They are looking at death while talking of the deathless! I'm blessed that you came and disturbed me, that you broke my sleep. Please come to the palace!"
Janak had the palace decorated magnificently. He welcomed Ashtavakra and seated him on a golden throne -- this twelve year old Ashtavakra. Then he put his questions to him. The first sutra is Janak's inquiry. Janak asked and Ashtavakra explained. Beyond this, nothing is known about Ashtavakra. And there is no need to know more, it is more than enough! Diamonds are not many; only pebbles and rocks are so common. A single diamond is enough.
These are two small incidents. One before birth: a voice from the womb with the proclamation, "What madness have you fallen into? Confused by scriptures... by words? Wake up! This is not wisdom, this is all borrowed. It is all snares of the mind, not experience. There isn't the slightest bit of reality in it. How long are you going to delude yourself?"
And the second incident: the pundits in the palace laughing and Ashtavakra's saying that in life there are two visions: one is to see being and the other is to see skin.
Butchers see skin, the wise see being.
Have you noticed? A shoemaker doesn't look at your face, he sees only your shoes. Actually a shoemaker can know everything about you just by looking at your shoes: How your economic situation is, if you are successful or a failure; how your luck is.... The condition of the shoes tells him. Your autobiography is written on your shoes -- the shoemaker can read it. If the shoes are shiny, if the shoes are clean and new, the shoemaker is happy to meet you. For him your shoes are the proof of your being. A tailor looks at clothes. Seeing how you dress he understands your situation. All have their own narrow vision.
Only one full of his own being sees being. He has no fixed vision. He has only seeing, darshan.
One more small incident -- it is not about Ashtavakra but about Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, but Ashtavakra is involved
|
|
|
|
| |