按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
eep； unconsciousness。
the ultimate passivity of attention is matter； the ultimate dynamism of attention is god。
question 2
you have described two states； one of plete unconsciousness and the other of absolute awareness。
one travels from plete unconsciousness to absolute awareness。
the question is； where do we reach after attaining the state of absolute awareness？ also； from which point does the plete unconsciousness begin； and where does it e from？
actually； as soon as we use the words absolute or whole we need to take a few conditions that go with it into account。
for instance； it is wrong to ask 〃where does wholeness end？〃 because wholeness means that which can never e to an end。
should it ever end somewhere it will not be whole。
it will remain confined at that very point； right there it will cease to be whole。
when we ask； 〃from where does wholeness begin？〃 we are asking a wrong question； because the whole means that which has no beginning。
if it has a beginning then it cannot be whole。
the whole； the absolute is beginningless and endless。
it neither has a beginning before nor an end afterwards。
if there were ends on any side it would not be the whole。
therefore； we cant ask any questions about the beginning or the end of the absolute。
if one needs to ask a question at all； then one should only ask before he es to the question； 〃what is whole？〃 as such； the very meaning of whole is something about which all questions are meaningless。
questions occur in our minds： 〃where did this unconsciousness e from？ why did it e？ when did it e？ where will it end？ why will it end？ when will it end？ where in existence is this state of consciousness located？ and where in existence could the state of plete unconsciousness be？〃 it is natural that questions such as these should arise。
the questions are perfectly consistent； yet totally meaningless。
one should not be under the illusion that just because a thing is consistent it is also meaningful。
a thing can be consistent and yet meaningless。
so the questions are absolutely pertinent but the answers will have no meaning； will solve nothing。
whatsoever answer there may be can only give rise to more questions of this nature。
so what do i intend to tell you？
there are certain questions you never ask a scientist。
why not show the same attitude towards a religious man？ there are certain things a scientist is never asked to explain。
why are they asked of a religious man？ a scientist refuses to answer such questions； while the silly religious man makes the mistake of answering them。
all religions make this error。
by answering such questions …… questions which cannot be answered in the first place …… they get themselves into trouble。
for example； if you ask a scientist； 〃why is a tree green？〃 he will answer； 〃because the tree contains chlorophyll。
〃 and if you ask； 〃why does the tree contain chlorophyll？〃 the scientist will disregard the question …… it is a fact； thats the way it is。
he will point out； 〃the tree is green because it contains chlorophyll！〃 if you continue to ask； 〃why cant the tree be without chlorophyll？〃 the scientist will state frankly； 〃i am not the creator； and there is no answer to this question！〃
in this way； science escapes falling into stupidities。
it leaves everything to the facts。
〃this is how it is； these are the facts。
〃 the scientist says； 〃when we mix hydrogen with oxygen； water is created。
〃 no one goes on asking him； 〃why is it so？ why is water created by mixing hydrogen and oxygen？〃 he will simply make it clear。
〃the question doesnt arise；〃 he will say。
〃we know this much； that by mixing both； water is created； by not mixing them； water is not created。
this is a fact。
beyond this； fiction begins。
〃
if we could give an explanation as to why such…and…such a thing happens； then i would like to say that； in this world； there is unconsciousness and there is awareness。
this is a fact and as yet no way has been found to go beyond them。
and i dont think a way can ever be found。
this is the ultimate fact。
there is darkness at one end and light at the other。
eventually darkness disappears into infinity； and one never knows where it began； where its point of initiation was。
light eventually disappears into infinity too； and one never knows the point of its disappearance。
and we are always in the middle； we can only see a short distance in either direction。
as we look backward we find darkness increasing； being more and more dense。
as we look forward we find darkness decreasing and light growing； being increasingly dense。
but we never see either the end of darkness or of light。
nor do we see any beginning of darkness； nor any termination of light。
this is how we are situated …… in the middle。
no matter how far we look； this is all we see。
even the most farsighted man has not seen farther than this。
what causes the difficulty？ when we form a question； some fool turns up to answer it。
once a question is formulated； someone or other is bound to e up with an answer for it。
this is how philosophy has e about。
philosophy is made of foolish answers to foolish questions。
and the questions remain； right where they always were。
there can be different answers to each question； because each answer reflects an individuals perception。
in answer to the question； 〃who created man？〃 someone can say； 〃god created man。
〃 but so what？ we can ask； 〃why did god create man？ why did he create him the way he did？ why did god create man in the first place？〃 this would leave the matter right where it is。
finally one might say； 〃well； this is the way he does it！〃
if this is the answer we are going to get ultimately
someone might say； 〃it is all maya； it is beyond prehension。
〃 on the one hand this man is saying that everything is beyond prehension； that it is all an illusion； maya； however； when he is talking about everything being an illusion； he is saying something which is actually ing out of his understanding。
he appears to have fully understood that everything is maya； that everything is beyond prehension。
if everything is indeed beyond prehension； then he needs to shut up； then he need not say all is maya。
how can there be an answer if it is really beyond prehension？ so one must keep quiet； there is no need to answer。
some people say god created man so man can attain god。
what foolishness！ if this were really true then why didnt he create man as a god in the first place？ where was the need to go through all this trouble？ someone else declares； 〃this whole thing goes on to fulfill the unfinished karmas of previous lives。
〃 but then it can be asked； 〃there must have been a first life without any other life preceding it。
then what fruits were we reaping in that initial birth？〃 obviously it was without cause。
in my view； no philosophy has ever provided any answer to the ultimate questions。
all philosophies are fundamentally dishonest。
but the dishonesty is hidden very deep。
and once this basic dishonesty escapes your notice； the remaining structure will look very convinci