Some people doubt Buddha's selflessness because he left his wife and his child in his quest to understand the nature of reality. They also question his decision to marry when he was to move on the path of sannyasa. I feel that to understand "selfishness" and "selflessness," we need to first understand what "self" means. Most people identify "self" with the body. Generally, a person is considered to be selfish if he is fixated on the comforts of their body and their targets, while a person is considered to be selfless if they can let go of their bodily comforts for the sake of others. At the very foundation of this concept of selfishness and selflessness, there is a deep division between self and others.
On the other hand, the path of Buddha is the path of self-realization, wherein a person first makes efforts to understand what "self" means. Once a person understands what "self" means, there is no difference between "self" and the "other". There is no question of being selfish or selfless, because if someone realizes the meaning of "self", that "self" includes everybody else, and therefore being "connected to self" would mean that we have love and compassion with everybody else.
Devoid of that understanding, insecurity and fear become the foundation of our lives. We feel as if we are alone in this world and feel quite vulnerable. We seek the support of our parents, siblings, friends, and community to fight this insecurity. They, too, have the same fears and insecurities, and that's why a complicated bond is formed. There is a constant exchange of emotions. We help each other, let go of some of our comforts to make the other person comfortable, let go of our freedom to abide by the social norms, and in turn, society makes us feel safe by creating an illusion of standing with us. Though we know very well that this entire support is illusory and conditional. That support is available as long, we conform to the standards of society, and the expectations of the relative. At any moment, we may be tainted, and support may be withdrawn. That makes an insecure person more insecure, and to get more security, he bows down further till he becomes fanatically compliant with the social standards and expectations of his relatives. This security is at the cost of freedom to think and have independent opinions.
Buddha dared to defy all these supports and become utterly insecure. He had the courage to let go of this security and walk alone. How many of us have that courage? We start panicking when we are diagnosed with a small disease, when our kids undergo some health issue, when there is politics in the office, when our kids underperform in some examination, or when there is some problem with our finances. It's not easy to let go of the entire support system for searching for the meaning of life. That needs 100% conviction towards the cause, and that can come only when the person already has 100% conviction about the futility of the support system. When a person can see through the fakeness of the security offered by relationships and society. When the person can see through the relationships.
When somebody sees through the relationships and society and realizes that the entire concept is based on false sense of security, his understanding of "selfishness" and "selflessness" undergoes a very significant change. "selflessness" does not mean letting go "freedom to think" just because society considers certain behaviour pattern or thought process to be good and the other to be bad. Rather, "selflessness" means "extreme selfishness with the realization of the true meaning of self". A "self" which is not limited to the body and the thoughts. "Self" is universal. That encompasses all. With that realization, there is no fear or insecurity, and a person makes their best efforts to express that "self" through love, compassion, and exploration. A person carries out his "swadharma" even if he needs to kill his own "gurus" and the "relatives" like Arjuna. Is Krishna asking Arjuna to be selfish by telling him to fight the battle against his own relatives and elders? No. He is just telling Arjuna that "selflessness" is not a limited concept, being kind to the selected few and unconcerned about the rest, just to get that social validation of being selfless. In fact, selflessness and selfishness have a meeting point when we understand the true meaning of "self" where "self" includes everybody else and therefore the acts of selflessness are driven by the "undivided concern" for all.
Comments