| |
anything -- but it always reaches God.
Love is something addressed to the whole. Wait for it. And love is the secret key to open all the locks and all the blocks. And a block is nothing but a lock in your being. Love is the secret key; it opens all the locks. The master key....
The Path of Love
Chapter #2
Chapter title: So Far, So Good
22 December 1976 am in Buddha Hall
Archive code: 7612220
ShortTitle: PLOVE02
Audio: Yes
Video: No
Length: 95 mins
The first question;
The question is from Veereshwar....
Question 1
MANY PEOPLE IN THE WEST ARE ENGAGED IN THE CREATION OF A SCIENCE OR TECHNOLOGY OF ENLIGHTENMENT. THE NEED IS CERTAINLY THERE, BUT HOW DO YOU SEE THE POSSIBILITY? IS IT IRRESPONSIBLE TO ENGAGE IN ITS CREATION WITHOUT HAVING REACHED THE STATE OF ENLIGHTENMENT? IS THE ARICA METHOD A VALID APPROACH?
The first and most fundamental thing to be remembered is that enlightenment can never have a technology. By its very nature it is impossible. But the west is obsessed with technology, so whatsoever comes into the hands of the west, it starts reducing it into a technology. Technology is an obsession. For the outside world, science is a valid approach, but partial, not total; not the only approach, but only one of the approaches. Poetry is as valid as science.
Science is knowledge without love, and that is the danger in it. Because it is knowledge without love, it is always in the service of death and never in the service of life. Hence, the whole progress of science is leading man towards a global suicide. One day when man has committed suicide -- the Third World War -- cockroaches will think, `We are the most fit to survive.' Some Darwin, some cockroach-Darwin, will prove, `We are the fittest because we have survived; the survival of the fittest.'
Man has committed suicide; he has destroyed himself. Knowledge without love is dangerous, because in its very root is poison.
Love keeps balance, never allows knowledge to go too far, so it never becomes destructive. Science is knowledge without love; that is its danger. But it
|
|
|