anyonya bhedavyavartaktaya visesanavisesyabhavah 'This is that Devadatta' So, are these two entities same or different? Meaning, are we talking about the same person or two different ones? We are talking about the same person It is just two different ways of saying the same thing tathatrapi vakye Similarly, in 'tat tvam asi' tatpadarthaparoksatvadivisistacaitanyasya 'tat' is vishesh chaitanya And it is also paroksha tvampadarthaparoksatvadivisistacaitanyasya And 'tvam' is aparoksha anyonya bhedavyavartaktaya visesanavisesyabhavah 'tat' and 'tvam' seem to be two different entities 'You' and 'I' - when we listen to these words, they seem to be two different entities But chaitanya is the same in both They sound like two different entities In 'you' and 'I', in 'tat' and 'tvam' 'anyoanya' - the other There is a difference between the two But then the truth is - the same entity is present in both Both are chaitanya Understand the 'laksya laksana bhava' - laksyalaksanasambandhastu Now there is a third relation, it is possible to say the same thing in a third way Third way to say the same thing yatha tatraiva sa sabdayamsabdayostadarthayorva viruddhatatkalalaitatkala 'That' and 'this' - these words are contrary to each other, right? 'That' and 'this' - are these words opposing or similar to one another? Use your intellect, use your intellect Apply some almond oil to your head before coming here! 'That' and 'this' They are contradictory words They are opposite of each other 'That' points to something far away and 'this' points to something close 'That' and 'this' are not the same 'That' and 'this' If we say, "this is that same person" Something of the past is implied in 'that' So, a doubt will arise - whether we are talking about the same person or someone else? "He has come"; so I will ask, "who has come?" "The one you had called" "But who did I call?" So, you will have to provide some attribute - "that so and so person that you had called has come" Or the person they are talking about, I could say - "I didn't call him" So, stop this person And send that person Right? 'This' and 'that' These two, in comparison to one another- In a way, these point to different incidents in the past and present visistatvaparityagenaviruddha devadatta saha Now, if we are talking about the same Devadatta Then we will have to say clearly That the Devadatta you had seen, this is the same person I will give you an example When I am at the airport And if I don't have the tilak applied on my forehead - If I don't have a tilak, then people look at me and recognize me too And then they start whispering to one another, "she is that only" "Is she?; No no"; "yes, she is the same person" And I can hear them And sometimes they just come and ask me, "are you that only?" I ask, "what do you by that?" I have great fun with them, "what do you mean by that?" They say, "the one who comes on TV" "No, you are mistaken" "Oh, sorry, sorry, sorry..." I start laughing when they leave Why should I talk? Sometimes, if I am not in the mood to talk, I say, "no...." "I don't know whom you are talking about" And once, one person said it to me only, "you really look like her a lot" 'This is not that' - I proved it because I refused Okay, sometimes people talk so innocently and genuinely There are people only interested in a selfie - I am very allergic to them Selfie - I know that's what they will say next But the ones who talk to me with love They say, "you....." I say, "yes, I am that only" Then they express a lot of happiness Because I can sense it, I can feel it - what kind of person is coming So, what do they say? "Without opening the envelope, I know the content of the letter" So, before a person opens their mouth, I know what's in their mind and what will be their next sentence I sense that very well So, sometimes when they ask, "are you that person?" My answer can be no and sometimes it can be yes And sometimes, it can be very confusing - "maybe I am that" "I might be the person you are assuming me to be" "No, no, no, please confirm it, please tell us who you are" Sometimes, it's very interesting They say, "aha! We are feeling so good to meet you - what is your name?" I say, "when you don't even know my name, then why are you asking?'" They say, "your name doesn't appear on the screen" Now, this is a genuine problem that the name really doesn't appear on the screen And if while switching channels, they land on the channel where my program is being telecasted And if they have seen me like that - then they have no idea who I am So, their question is completely genuine Then in a very nice way, I give them various answers Because it's logical, so whatever mood I am in - I give that type of answer Like I tell people sometimes, "you can call me whatever you like" "No, no - please tell us your name" I say, "please leave my name aside, just say what you want to" Then some people are really stubborn, "no, you have to tell us your name...." I say, "what's in the name?" Name - the name will be lost one day, this face will change Just leave it - there is no point running after a name and a face So, 'this is that Devadatta' So, one way is this in which we identify a person - The one who was seen earlier and the one who are seeing now - we connect them tathatrapivakye tattvampadayostadarthayorva viruddhaparoksatvaparoksatvadi In this manner, 'that' and 'thou' If I say this in English 'That' is 'tat' and 'thou' is 'tvam' meaning 'you' So, in this 'you' and 'tat', some things are opposing and some are similar One part is opposing and another part is similar visistatva parityagena aviruddha caitanyena saha laksyalaksanabhavah In this, we will leave out the contradictory part and keep the common part This process is called laksyalaksanabhavah They have described three types Now, further there are different types of this laksana Do you remember Vichar Chandrodaya? Who can tell? Raise your hand Yes, you Yes Yes, right - well done, well done! iyameva bhagalaksanetyucyate The verse says, first of all bhaga lakshana will be explained In jahat lakshana, The one we are talking about, we will completely leave out what is with it In ajahat lakshana, we don't leave out the complete thing but we keep a part of it We are talking very abstract right now So in jahat-ajahat, we leave out something and keep something Don't worry, this will be clarified further with an example asminvakye nilamutpalamiti vakravat vakyartho na sangacchate 'Blue lotus' Two things come in this - I have already given you an example of 'white flower' The same thing is coming again - 'blue lotus' tatra tu nila padartha nilagunasyotpala padarthotpala dravyasya ca There are two words herein One is the flower -' dravaya'- the element; object and the other is it's color which is blue sauklya patadi bheda vyavartakataya It's color and the object'- now look, flowers can be of different colors But we will call a flower, a flower only- blue flower, yellow flower, pink flower, black flower, white, so on and so forth Flower remains the same but the colors change If someone says, "we have brought flowers for you", then you will ask, "which flowers have you got?" "What color flowers have you got?" Flower will remain the same - common factor But it's color has the possibility of being changeable and variable 'sauklya patadi bheda' After this we take: anyonyavisesanavisesyarupa samsargasyanyatara visistasyanyatarasya tadaikyasya va Now that which we are talking about, what are their similarities? And what are their joining factor? Too abstract? Is it difficult to understand? Are you able to grasp it? No one is answering - are you sleeping? What are we talking about? 'Tat' and 'Tvam' The verse says, in this 'tat' and 'tvam' - what is similar and what is dissimilar? You need to understand both of them We might need to leave out something We might need to keep what is similar The thing is only this much It's just explained in a complex manner vakyarthatvanikare pramanantara virodhabhavattadvakyarthah sangacchat The verse says that meaning of any word shouldn't go into its contradiction And it should get accepted fully For that the word must be understood clearly And the meaning of that word must also be understood clearly And what must be taken and what must be discarded in that word - we must understand this as well Now the question arises - When we talk about the word 'tvam', what should be discarded and what should be taken? We are investigating swaroopa - we are trying to understand 'Who am I?' And we are trying to understand this in a a pretty methodical manner See this pressure that your intellect is experiencing in understanding this. Aren't you feeling the force? With this pressure only, the veil of ignorance on your intellect will get torn If you don't use all your might, this veil will not get torn! Sometimes when people understand People say, "why don't you tell us directly? why do you make it so complicated?" I am explaining this in a complex manner because in this complexity - Your bloated intellect gets pricked because you think that you know it all And the point where you are at now, you really get to know! "Guruji knows everything but we don't know anything" One- this point gets confirmed that Guruji is Guru Ji for a reason! And the disciple is disciple! Why is the disciple, disciple and a Guru, Guru? Someone said, "I used to think that I know everything" Now, you are bringing in a completely new idea So, it feels like we are listening to this for the first time, you never told this to us earlier I said, "I will let you know only when the time is right!" Remember this - the roots of a tree run much deeper than what it appears above the ground And the day when you can measure the Guru, you become a Guru yourself So, who is a Guru and who is a disciple? A disciple is the one who he spends all his time in trying to understand the Guru Yet one can never measure the depth of the true Guru Guru means deep Guru means deep and disciple means 'chakala' Do you know what is 'chakala'? The board on which you roll dough to make flat bread! It's completely flat, there is no depth in a 'chakala' - Is it there? There is no depth in that board, it's completely flat Guruji is very deep So, in trying to understand this secret of a Guru - The intellect of a disciple which is flat like a 'chakala' - Then it starts developing the depth- more and more depth! Like the Shabad says, "I'm no other than the Guru" "I have become like the Guru" For this to happen, just imagine how much beating does a disciple take and then he reaches this point Like someone was saying yesterday - "all that you are explaining to us, will we know the Self by merely listening to this?" I said, "do you have this doubt on yourself or on me?" "No, would we need to do something else or is listening to this enough?" My dears, you will have to do a lot more!
No comments:
Post a Comment