Spirituality and Trust

No :) - not that I am becoming an expert on the topic of trust, but I thought I would share my observation on this.

As people tread the spiritual path, I feel we tend to be more trusting towards other people on the path. It is not a conscious decision, but happens at a deeper level. There is some form of realization about the integrity of the other person.

I recently met a colleague from my previous company. He was a good acquaintance, but someone I would have never called a good friend. Our relationship was always that way. He recently completed his Isha programs - 7 day IYP and BSP in quick succession and is now planning for his Silence program. We actually met at Mahashivarathiri and we drove back to Coimbatore city after the events were over. Then, he was sharing things about his life during this drive which he probably wouldn't have during other times.

There is a stramge way about *the path* that intensifies and purifies ourselves and the way we relate to other people!

I need help

When I was driving to Mahashivarathiri, I had to witness a dog being run over by a truck. Unfortunately (yes, in the circumstances), the dog did not pass away and was alive after that. Many drivers thereafter (me included) stopped by the sheer helplessness of the dog - but then no one knew what to do. Painfully, it tried to yelp and cross the road from the middle to the end.

It was a village area, and I wasn't sure who could help. In any case, I don't think it would have survived the damage. Slowly, everyone drove away after watching the dog suffer the assault.

During Mahashivarathiri, several times during the night, this image was playing back inside me.

What should I do in such situations? I need help. This is not the first time this is happenning to me.

Mahashivarathiri 2009

Blessed to have been there!

---

the red turban
the smoke of ash

the dark silhoutte
becoming one with the dark night
the chant into oblivion

what else to say!

---

Trust and Doubt

Trust obviates doubt.
Doubt obviates trust.

Conditionally trusting someone doesn't work.
But if you cannot be naturally trusting, it is (perfectly) ok to be doubtful.

In the current realm of things, it is an extraordinary achievement to have absolute trust from someone.

Strangley, in a relationship it might work because of either person!

Life is a celebration

1) Watch what the Master's presence does to the disciples

2) I have read that this "celebration procession" sometimes lasted for as much as two hours!

3) Look at him and his smile, there is no one there!

Domestic Violence

This is a very powerful ad. However, I want to discuss a larger context. What exactly is domestic violence? Rigidly speaking, violence that happens at home. This video makes two assumptions, correct as per the context it sets here, but not necessarily the case everywhere.

1) Domestic violence constitutes physical abuse
2) Because of the above assumption, necessarily, the woman is on the receiving end

But is violence merely physical? With some exceptions, physical violence happens in the end after a threshold has been crossed. When it happens, it is true the male takes the female for granted. There are few other cases like this, where subordination of women has become second nature. Without denying any of that, as I mentioned, I want to discuss the larger context.

I would like to define violence as being larger than, but including, physical abuse. Mental abuse or emotional abuse also constitute violence. If you don't agree, think about the precursors to physical abuse, excluding those cases where people truly take women for granted. Doubt, nagging, jealousy, harangue, anger or rage - all of these areas where are shared by both men and women (as providers and / or receivers). As far as I know, there is no law that can prevent these in households. But if as much as a finger is raised on the intention of physical abuse, the recipient is covered by law, on paper at minimum.

Physical abuse must definitely not be allowed - not on women, not on children. But my point is, in general, it happens at the end as the climax of a much larger drama that has unfolded beforehand. I know families, where physical abuse doesn't happen, but domestic violence does happen. I know of families, where physical abuse of women does not happen, but it happens on children (yeah, the woman is involved as a provider) - which is also domestic violence.

We view everything other than physical abuse (and definitely only on grown ups, not children) as normal. My view is that it is a very limiting view. Domestic violence as a whole must come to a halt. And it cannot be done by laws. The size is too high to control this through directives. In any case, it is an ineffective way. Violence is a negativity that exists only in the absence an ingredient called love. It can only be addressed that way.

I hope I did not sound like a(n) MCP - this was my honest view!

Changing inner state

Once we acknowledge that perceptions vary:

Next step would be to be clear on what we need to create.
Finally, expose ourselves to that atmosphere on a continuous basis.

Why? Because, exposing ourselves to an atmosphere when we are not receptive will not work.
When we are receptive is not in our hands in the current realm of our inner states.
But setting this condition sets up a conducive atmosphere and a cycle. When the meeting happens, even for tiny moments, the impact is long lasting.
It essentially means a life time commitment.

So, if breaking all limitations is our goal...
So, if we want our Sadhana to be effective...
So, if a peaceful and joyful existence is what we desire...
So, if we want to be loving towards fellow human beings and other life in general...
So, if we want to look at something and understand it's in and out in entirety...

Sri Lanka

The situation there is chronic, burning and incisive. My views below. Since it has a long history - any incorrect assumptions here can be corrected:

1) Both the Indian central government and the TN state government are not interested in solving the problem. It is fine - just state that as a fact and step away. Do not use this kind of scenario for politics - please!

2) The situation is not a concern because tamilians are being killed, but because people are being killed.

3) LTTE is not the problem. LTTE is an outcome of the problem.

4) This is important: LTTE is not the solution either. Any perceived solution that is rooted on terrorism can never be the solution.

5) The Sri Lankan president is not the president of the country. Politically, may be. In spirit - no! He is only a president for a subset of the people. It will never work in running a country.

6) Tamilians are no longer a minority in the country. It is infeasible and unfair to treat them that way.

7) My understanding of the problem: There is a deep seated prejudice that tamilians are outsiders of the country. It is no longer true. In spirit, they need to be accomodated as part of the country. All priviliges extended out to people must be common without any demarcation.

8) There is only one solution. Removal of the prejudice. Stated in one sentence, but it is nowhere going to be easy. It at least needs to happen on paper from the president. If that is not feasible, there is no end to the problem. An alternate solution, at least on temporary basis, is to consider something like dual presidentship for the country, one representative from each side. I am tempted to laugh even as I type this.

9) A separate state is not a bad idea, but it is being requested out of prejudice. It will be a "no" at all times. If it is for cultural convenience, it may be fine (Think on lines of Kerala or Tamil Nadu for example). It is not a pressing necessity.

10) The current situation is only compounding the existing problem. "Peace will not come automatically" if LTTE is elimiated.

We are not viewing people as people. This problem will be non existent if that were the case! Where we are today, I don't see a solution in the near future and that is a very sad fact.