I have an elderly friend who says that after several years
of meditative practice, he has attained the realization that “world does not
exist!”
He looked at me for a reaction. I said nothing except a light smile on my face. He asked me why I am not reacting. I said it is futile to react when I don’t exist ;-) For any exchange of views, there has to be at least two people. When there is one or none, discussion makes no sense!
Such realization of non existence of the world is common for anyone
who meditates for long. Does that mean that it is true?
Take for example; Patanjali says that in the ultimate stages
of meditation, the soul realizes itself as if it is standing in front of a
mirror! But Buddha disagrees and says that that is only an intermediate state.
Buddha talks of going beyond that, when ‘one’ realizes that there is neither
body, nor the mind, not even the soul that exists. In fact there is ‘nothing’.
Buddha goes on, and says that ‘one’ reaches a
further state of ‘no perception’ when even this perception of ‘nothing’ goes.
Is that the ultimate? No, says Buddha. He says the ultimate state is a ‘state
of neither perception, nor non perception’. What does that mean? It is beyond
me!
I am not trying to equate Buddha with Upanishadic sages. But
what Buddha says is akin to the ‘Turïya’ state described by sage Mändükya in
Mändükya Upanishad. In that state, Mändükya says that “there is neither
perception of external things, nor perception of internal world, nor there will
be non perception. It is a state beyond description”.
I can only give a sane advice to my realized friend that “as long as you are conscious of your individual existence, don’t talk
about these states. If you have crossed that stage, then anyway you can’t talk!”
That is what Buddha is supposed to have done when he attained the ultimate
realization ;-)
No comments:
Post a Comment