It is difficult to appreciate something we have not experienced. For example, it is difficult for a layperson to appreciate the hard work an astronaut puts in, especially when they have no idea of the processes the astronaut must undergo before entering outer space. It will be difficult for us to appreciate the dedication and hard work of the scientists who carry out research to unravel the secrets of nature. It will be difficult for us to appreciate what Buddha must have gone through while being in the forest searching for the truth.
There would always be a few individuals in society who would continue to strive to excel beyond the norm. On the other hand, the narrative of the society will always be set by the average intelligence. Therefore, it will be almost impossible for the masses to understand these outliers. They will always be considered weird or strange. This weirdness will be a generally accepted attribute of the outliers. However, it is also true that whenever society progresses, it is due to these outliers who devote their lives to inventing technologies or discovering natural phenomena, thereby enabling humanity to grow by Leaps and bounds.
Not so that all the princes and kings after Buddha have left their kingdom in search of truth. Only very few were actually inspired by Buddha. Most kings and rulers continued to fight the battles for their dominance. At the same time, there have been many people who gave away everything in order to understand the truth. Both types of persons coexist in society, and most people fall somewhere between them. The problem is that Buddha can appreciate what it means and how it feels to be a king because he has already passed through that stage and realised how limited it is; therefore, he has set it aside in search of truth. Having understood the true meaning of life, the Buddha clearly recognises where the ruler is stuck and why he is unable to relinquish his kingdom. However, it is very difficult for the ruler to understand Buddha because he has never experienced losing control and letting go. All his desires and instincts still revolve around expanding the boundaries of his kingdom.
How can an egocentric person understand somebody whose life is given by love and compassion? Love and compassion of a realised soul, like that of the Buddha, would always be directed towards the self and not the ego. However, for a person whose existence is limited to the ego, the words of Buddha will sound threatening. The more he listens to Buddha, the more irritating it will be for that person. Every time the Buddha makes him realise the limitations of existence, he feels more frightened and threatened. Generally, people avoid meeting realised souls such as the Buddha. Even if they met, they would generally resent listening to Buddha. Even if they listen, they would resent contemplating. Even if they contemplate it, they would feel threatened by such thoughts and would feel restless to come out of these Thoughts.
The problem is that all these thoughts of an ego-centric person come from the land of ego. Ego, by its very nature, is full of ignorance and therefore very fragile. It feels threatened by every single ray of light and therefore resents every single word of wisdom. The problem with almost all of us is that we are never willing to completely let go of the ego. Mostly, we hold on to a part of it and seek realisation, as if realisation is also a target or milestone set by the ego for itself. We feel as if realisation is an achievement or a medal for us. However, it does not work this way; unless we are able to see and drop ego in its entirety, it will never work. The problem is that if we leave that Ego, it would mean losing control and being vulnerable. Are we ready for that? Generally, no. We become very uncomfortable, losing control. That’s why we mostly hold onto the core and pretend to follow Spirituality by sharing peripheries; in the process, the core becomes more dance.
It requires constant self-examination to understand the nuances and the game ego plays with us. It’s very subtle, and unless we are absolutely aware, it will be very difficult to notice the game ego plays. We will continue to justify our actions under different names. Sometimes we will behave egotistically in the name of preserving self-dignity, and sometimes in the name of self-love. The central question we need to ask ourselves is: what is that self when we speak of self-love and self-dignity? Where lies the locus? Is it in the limited Ego, which considers itself to be different from others, like the self-love of Duryodhan, who threw thousands of human beings into the fire of the battle, primarily caused by his greed? Or the Locus lies in universal consciousness, where the self is just a unit thereof, and the unit loves itself, the way it loves others. Since everyone has the same consciousness. In that case, self-love and self-dignity would mean a very different thing, whereby we would love ourselves and give dignity to ourselves the way we respect and love others. In that case, we will not allow anybody to suffocate or kill our aspirations and freedom, just as we would have fought for the freedom of others. An egoist Arjuna may perceive the sharp words of Krishna in Bhagwad Geeta as an attack on self-dignity.
Comments