Acharya Mahaprajna
Many a time I thought of uncovering myself, so that my colleagues could see my real self. It is the cover, which has created doubts about me in them. They will persist as long as the cover is there. Uncovering begets trust. This world likes duality. It explains the creation of the cover. Doubt would not even have been born had the world been a straightforward place without any bends and concealment.
The world likes duality; it does not like uniformity. That is why there are countless bends and hideouts. Bends and hideouts cannot but create doubt.
Many a time I thought of lighting such a lamp as would enable my colleagues to see my real self. It is the darkness, which creates doubts in them. Doubts will not be dispelled as long as darkness is there. It is light that begets trust. This world likes duality. That is why it has room for both, light and darkness.
Many a time I thought of destroying the Himalayan heights so that my colleagues could see my real self. It is these heights, which create doubts in them. Doubts will not be dispelled as long as the heights are there. It is evenness that begets trust. This world likes unevenness. That is why it has built a high wall dividing two even surfaces.
Many a time I thought of drying up the endless waters so that my colleagues could see my real self. It is the depth of the waters, which creates doubts in them. Doubts will not be dispelled as long as the depth remains. It is equal levels that beget trust. This world likes duality. That is why it has created this deep gulf between two equal levels.
Many a time I thought of giving up living in my mansion so that my colleagues could see my real self. It is the wall's obstruction, which creates doubts in them. Doubts will not be dispelled as long as the obstacle remains. Trust is born when there are no obstacles. This world likes duality. That is why mansions have been created. If there had been open spaces, there would have been no distrust. Distrust comes into
Being, wherever spaces has been enclosed.
I again thought wondering whether I was not being swept away by the currents of fancy, as a rudderless ship is adrift.
I again thought wondering whether I was not flying in infinite space like a bird caught up in a cyclone.
Is there an anchorage for my ship? Is there any resting-place for my bird? Are the acts of uncovering, light, absence of obstacle, and evenness real? Are they practical? Are they vouchsafed to these marionettes?
Many questions in quick succession came to my mind, and then the infinite voices of my colleagues started ringing in my ears: they are unreal, impractical and impossible for these marionettes which move but not on their own.
Those voices were very sweet. I don 't know why they did not fascinate me. To a man bitten by a snake, neem (Azadirachta indica, very bitter in taste) tastes sweet. This is a contrariety, but it is not untrue. How can I say that I was not a victim of snakebite? A man who has even a small trace of violence in him, whose mirror of mind bears even a tinted shadow, is not free from poison and to him neem must taste sweet. If what tastes bitter, to the rest of the world does not taste sweet, to a man afflicted with poison, he must be considered unconscious. He has got into an irretrievable condition. I thought I had poison in me, when the voices of spirituality, felt bitter by the world, started sounding sweet to me. The taste of sweetness gave me the assurance that I was not an incurable patient.
My doctor had not treated anything as incurable. His declaration is: This medicine of mine is for all those who are afflicted with poison, no matter whether they are awake or asleep, active or indolent, mobile or static, with or without inflammation, dependent or independent.
My doctor had such an impact on me that I could not satisfy my colleagues. My beliefs are becoming increasingly problematic as I come increasingly poison-free.
I had assumed that sugar is sweet and neem is bitter. Today it has become problematic. Is sugar sweet? Is neem bitter?
I had assumed that fire is hot and ice is cold. Today it has become problematic. Is fire hot? Is ice cold?
I had assumed that something was light and something was darkness. Today a question is being raised from somewhere: Is darkness indeed darkness? Is light indeed light?
These questions have agitated my mind. My stupefied consciousness had awakened. Now I see; I do not hear. Now I know; I do not assume.
I see that all things consonant with people's selfishness, are sweet for all of them and all things dissonant with people's selfishness, are bitter for all of them. Nothing is absolutely sweet or bitter for anybody. That which is sweet is also bitter and that which is bitter is also sweet.
I see clearly that everyone is aggressively assertive towards authority that lacks power and very meek towards powerful authority. No one is absolutely assertive or meek. One who is assertive is also meek, and one who is meek is also assertive.
I see clearly that those endowed with sight see light everywhere, while those deprived of sight find darkness everywhere. There is nothing like absolute light or absolute darkness. That which is light is darkness also and that which is darkness is light also.
This experience of non-violence has enabled me to realise that the path that gives entry is also the path that leads to the exit.
Nourished by the same truth once I wrote: The steps that take up, are also the steps that bring down, and likewise the steps that bring down are also that steps that take up. These are not two different sets of steps.
