I and my father are one - Jesus

In the gospel of John chapter 10 verse no 30 Jesus says "I and my father are one". I consider this as one of the most revolutionary statement of the bible. Once realized, this statement has power to bring the revolution of super consciousness. If not realized, it just remains like another sentences. However, this statement is wrongly understood even by catholics. Yesterday, I was chatting with a catholic saintly person from Texas about this statement. We differ in our understanding of this statement. This is not a simple statement. It looks simple but, actually it's not. The whole of the crux is hidden in this statement. However Jesus said that in slightly diplomatic manner. And mind you, this statement is complete. Means you don't need to read few more verses before and after this verse. It's a complete statement - I and my father are one. One thing is clear - he is definitely not talking about Joseph. He is talking about God. That he and his father who is God himself are one, means Jesus is God. Even catholics say this. But catholics think that this statement is only applicable to Jesus. That is, it's not entirely true for you. It's fully true only for Jesus. I differ with them on this. According to me it's true for whole of the humanity. Not only for Jesus. If it is not true for us that means God doesn't love us. What they say is - we can never become God but we can become god-like. There is a difference between God and God-like. Huge difference. According to Hinduism we can become exactly equal to God. Brihadaaranyak Upanishad says - "Aham Brahmasmi" perhaps the most straight forward declaration ever made so far. It's not a mantra, it's a declaration. Means you don't have to chant "Aham Brahmasmi". It's a one time declaration, that's it. The sage who realized it wrote it. He didn't realize Brahman by chanting Aham Brahmasmi. No way. He somehow realized the Brahman, but how? - that's different topic. And then he wrote "Aham Brahamsmi". It's a post effect of realization. So, it's a declaration. It's not a mantra. Gayatri mantra is a mantra.

So, basically I noticed catholics and Hinduism differ in philosophy greatly.

Oneliner

I love "you" but I don't love "your"

There are some more oneliners here

मान्यता

एक और एक मिल के दो होता है, पर हम नही माने तो? एक और एक मिल के दो ही हो और तीन नही हो यह हमारी मान्यता है। सत्य भी है। पर हमारी मान्यता भी है। सत्य के ऊपर मान्यता की परत है। एक और एक मिल के तीन भी हो सकता है, सम्भावना तो है पर, हमने यही माना की एक और एक दो ही होगा। मान्यता पर निर्भर करता है। अगर यह कहें की मान्यता पर ही निर्भर करता है तो कोई बहोत बरी अतिशयोक्ति न होगी। हर एक परिस्थिति मे एक और एक दो ही हो यह कोई जरुरी नही है। अगर ऐसा हो तो जोरना सत्य हो जाएगा, फिर हमारी मान्यता का क्या होगा? हमने जो भी सत्य सीखे हैं चाहे वो सत्य हो या न हों उनपर मान्यता की मुहर लगाने के बाद ही सीखे हैं। कितना भी बरा गणितज्ञ हो, जो तरह तरह का गणितीय प्रमाण दे की एक और एक जुड़कर दो ही होगा लेकिन हम उस प्रमाण को नही माने, और नही मानने का जो भी मूल्य चुकाना परे वो चुकाएं तो फिर उसका प्रमाण दो कौडी का भी नही रह जाता है। पर मान्यता मष्तिष्क की उपज है। उस से सत्य का कुछ लेना देना नही है। सत्य भी एक विचारधारा है। की ऐसा है। हमने मान्यता दी है। ऋषियों मुनियों ने मान्यता दी है। स्थूल रूप मे मान्यता तो हमने सत्य की ऊपर भी लगाये है। इसका मूल कारन यह है की सत्य गौन रह्ता है। वह तुम्हे मानाने देता है। इस से सत्य को कोई फर्क नही परता है, फर्क तुम्हे भी नही परना चाहिए। अगर तुमने मान ली लिया की हम सत्य को नही मानेंगे तो वोही तुम्हारे लिए सत्य होगा। सत्य की अमान्यता भी सत्य हो सकती है। बशर्ते तुम ठिक से मानो. तुम ठिक से मानते भी नहि हो. मान्यता प्रगाढ होनि चाहिये. आगर मान्यता प्रगाढ नहि है तो वो द्वैत हो जाता है. और सत्य कि स्थिति अद्वैत है. इसलिये मान्यता ऐसि होने चाहिये कि उसमे शक कि कोइ गुनजाइश न हो.

बुद्ध का जीवन

बुद्ध के जीवन ने मुझे बहोत प्रभावित किया है। मुझे डर है की कहीं मैं बौद्ध धर्मं को न अपना लूँ। इतना प्रभावित किया है। सबसे बरी बात जिससे मैं प्रभावित हुआ वो यह है - बुद्ध थे तो राजकुमार। और वो भीख मांग के जीवन यापन करते थे। आश्चर्य है। की एक राजकुमार भीख मांगे। कपिलवस्तु की गलिओं मे भीख मांगता फिरे। सबसे अच्छा जीवन राजकुमारों का होता था। स्वर्णमय जीवन होता था उनका। राजा से भी अच्छा। राजकुमार मनुष्य जाती की पराकाष्टा हुआ करती थी, ऐश्वर्य के मामले मे। उनसे जादा ऐश्वर्य मनुष्य जाती की इतिहास मे किसी को नही मिला और आगे भी नही मिलेगा। तो बुद्ध जब सिद्धार्थ थे तो उनके पास जीवन का सारा ऐश्वर्य था। जितना ऐश्वर्य हो सकता था, था। ऐसा होता है, अगर तुम्हे अनंत ऐश्वर्य मिले जाए तो वो भी कुछ समाया के बाद एक कांटे जासी हो जाती है। तो फिर मन यह सोचने लगता है की ऐश्वर्य के बाद क्या है? तो बुद्ध (सिद्धार्थ) यही सोचे। ऐश्वर्य तो था ही उनके पास। काफ़ी ऐश्वर्य था। इतना जादा था की आज हम भी उतना ऐश्वर्य प्राप्त नही कर सकते। बुद्ध जब सिद्धार्थ थे तो उनको भी धीरे धीरे पता लगने लगा की इस ऐश्वर्य मे कुछ भी नही रखा है। क्षणिक है यह ऐश्वर्य। आज है, कल नही रहेगा। बस बात ख़तम हो गई। इस बात को समझने के लिए प्रगाढ़ चैतन्य चाहिए। नही तो जन्म-जन्मान्तर मे भी कहाँ समझ मे आता है। जब जब मनुष्य जाती ऐश्वर्य की चरम सीमा पर होगी तब तब वो सत्य का दरवाजा खात्खातायेगा। इसलिए राजकुमारों को खूब सत्य मिला। बहोत सारे राजकुमार ब्रह्मज्ञानी हो गए। महावीर भी राजकुमार थे, ब्रह्मज्ञानी हो गए। तुम जीसस की बात न मानो थो थोरा तार्किक है क्योंकि, तुम तर्क दे सकते हो की जीसस तो ख़ुद गरीब था, बकरी चराता था तो दूसरों को भी गरीब करना चाहता था। तो हम उसकी बात नही मानेगे। काफ़ी अच्छा तर्क है ये। पर, तर्क तर्क होता है। तर्क के माध्यम से सत्य कभी नही मिला है और नही मिलेगा। हालाँकि इस तर्क का भी काट है मेरे पास, पर फिर तर्क पर तर्क हो जाएगा। और इस बीच सत्य खो जाएगा। अगर तुम तर्कवादी ही हो तो तुम बुद्ध के जीवन मे कोई भी तर्क नही लगा पाओगे। जीसस के जीवन मे थोरा बहुत तर्क लगाने जी जगह है। तुम जीसस के जीवन मे थोरा बहोत तर्क लगा सकते हो। पर बुद्ध और महावीर के जीवन मे तर्क लगाने की थोरी भी जगह नही है। क्योंकि दोनों ही राजकुमार थे। दोनों ने ही ऐश्वर्य की चरम सीमा को देखा था और पाया की यह कुछ भी नही है। इसलिए वे सत्य की तरफ़ अग्रसर हुए। जीसस की बात थोरी अलग है। और शायद बुद्ध और महावीर के जीवन से भी जादा प्रगाढ़ है। क्योंकि जीसस गरीब था। गरीबों की तृष्णा जादा होती है। उनकी अकन्षाएं असीम होती है। उन्हें अभी ऐश्वर्य को पाना है। सत्य से उनका अभी कोई लेना देना नही है। जीसस के पास ऐश्वर्य नही था पर वो फिर भी समझे गए की ऐश्वय कुछ भी नही है। ऐश्वर्य न रहते हुए भी समझ गए। थोरा कठिन हैं। बुद्ध के पास था, तब वो समझे थे। जीसस के पास नही था, फिर वो समझ गए जो थोरा कठिन है। इस मामले मे जीसस की प्रगाढ़ता जादा है। मैं कोई तुलना नही कर रहा हूँ। बस मैं अपना दृष्टिकोण व्यक्त कर रहा हूँ।

Ramblings

If I write a better blog, that doesn't mean I am a better person. If I write a worse blog that doesn't mean I am a bad person. If I type good words, that doesn't mean that I am a good person also. If I type bad words that doesn't mean I am a bad person also. A bad person can type good words. A good person can type bad words. Even a rapist can talk sometimes on dharma and realizations. Possible. Highly possible. Because, words doesn't depict the clear picture of what's running into person's mind. No body knows what's running to anybody Else's mind. You just have a cognitive perception of the person. But in most of the cases that meets our requirements. Some people like writings. I don't like writing much. Playing with words is not my game. Arranging words to make beautiful sentences following the rules of grammars is not my game. I don't write English, I write shubhenglish. Lol. We have learnt some of bad things as a good things and some of good things as a bad thing. And this understanding is so strong that there is no scope of modify that learning. This may be the propaganda of the society. We have been taught some of the pathetic learning assuming that these are good learning. And vice versa also. And we learnt these so strongly that now nothing can be done. Because, those socialists and those educationist made those structure of teaching that met their requirements for survival. So, it's like imparting their ideology to the coming generations that meets their "known" ways of requirements of the survival. Word "known" is important here. Those educationists know the subject matter. But very little. They don't know the root. They know superficially. Little knowledge is dangerous. And even more dangerous is learning bad(some of them) as good and good(some of them) as bad. Which we did that as I said above. Because of their principles and ideology they imparted on us. This is how society makes sheeps. Which goes whole life following others. Haven't we done everything which others have done. Till today, I have not done anything which has not been done by anybody so far. The whole life has become like a copy-pasted from others. That is one reason I stopped reading books. Reading book is a form of copying. When you read a book, you copy the information therein the book into your brain. We call it as a learning. We have been taught that learning is always good. No. Not always. Some times it can be disastrous. This is what is the bad thing we have learnt as a good thing. Whole life is a copy paste. Even all those inventions and discoveries are copy-paste. Copy-paste at slightly subtler level which essentially doesn't look like a copy-paste. But, actually it is a copy paste. Because, those scientists get ideas from other scientist. Einstein takes idea from Newton, Newton takes idea from Galileo, Galileo takes idea from Kepler, Kepler takes idea from someone I don't know. That someone takes idea from other someone...So, those scientist keep on taking ideas from other scientist. If you grow up a scientist in a forest and don't give him books, don't tell him about Newton or Einstein then he cant make discoveries. Because, he can't copy now. But then, he will make an entirely new discovery. Which humanity would have never thought. He will comeup with entirely new dimension. Because, he has not copied anything. All of your learning including your greatest innovation can be mapped to already existing similar innovations/ideas. Even my this post you can map somewhere. I would have got these ideas from somewhere. It can be mapped to somewhere. It's not coming on my own. I did read few books, watched few movies, videos, the kind of friends I have, etc. So, it can be mapped somewhere. So, everything is like a copy-pasted from others lol.

If you have done anything which humanity has not done so far I would love to hear. In my case , I have not done anything so far which has not been done by anyone. And to my knowledge no one has done anything entirely new which was never done.

Hope this post meets the requirements of the title of this post - Ramblings.

Chess

Won this game. Click here to follow the game.

Game started in another variation of Sicilian defence e4-c5. On the 10Th move Nxc5 got a pawn advantage which made it an easy win. Black bishop at e3 helped a lot in defencing.

More on meditation

I described two meditation techniques in the one of previous post on meditation. In this post I will write about philosophy behind meditation and possibly few more techniques too. Let see how it goes...

As I said, if you understand then you don't need to meditate. For example Buddha understands. So, he doesn't need to meditate. Like you don't have to travel if you are at the destination. Meditation is like a journey whose final destination is the liberation from the cycle of birth and death. So, you don't have to meditate provided you understand. This is what is called Gyan Yoga. Gyan means you understood that - that's how it is. Now there is no scope of further analysis here. All analysis are done due to incomplete understanding. If you understand by 100% then analysis vanishes. It has to vanish. Gyan yoga is very high form of yoga. It needs very mature very ripe consciousness to understand it. Some people have that level of consciousness. They are born with that level of consciousness. Meditation helps you to rise you consciousness. It opens another doorway of the consciousness. The five senses you have is not the only senses in the entire universe. Meditation can open different dimension to you. It can levitate your consciouses to higher level. But, if you already have higher consciousness you don't have meditate. And also, the more you understand the more meditative you will be. Mind you, I am not talking of understandings you get by reading junk books. Those are different. Here, by understanding I mean understanding by the consciousness.

As I said - meditation is the journey. It's not the destination. It's a way. It's one way. There are many other ways. One way is bhakti. Athato bhakti jigyasa. In Bhakti you surrender to your lord completely. That's also a kind of meditation but usually they don't call it as meditation. Hinduism says God has two form - personal and impersonal. Personal means those whose images have been made. Impersonal means God whiteout image. I personally am the worshipper of impersonal form of God. This is topic of debate between personalist and impersonalist that who is supreme - Brahman (Impersonal God) or Krishna/Shiva/Ram (Personal God). Such debate doesn't interest me. But I personally feel Brahman is the highest God. Krishna/Shiva/Ram is not even parts of partial of Brahman. Even Ramakrishna paramhams ultimately realized that Brahman is the highest God. God with form is duality. That means two thing should exist. One is God and other is devotee. As at the time of truth two should exist. God and his devotee. And whenever two separate thing exists so what is the cause of their existence. Two things means a change. Means a difference. Difference between God and his devotee. So, what is the cause of the difference? How did devotee became devotee and not God? So, there are many unanswered questions at the time of duality. So, the idea is to marge them - only one will exist. Either devotee or God. Because if only devotee exists then God is merged into devotee and if only God exist then then devotee is merged into God. And that's what I call it as - existence. You can call brahman or anything doesn't matter. So, according to me existence is the only God.

So, if you meditate at the existence that will be the most effective. Because, everything is coming from the existence level. Initially you won't understand everything. Because, there is an ego. Even meditation is also kind of ego. Ego of meditating. But slowly and slowly the more you meditate ego will dissolve into the existence. Source of ego is a separate topic. One practical thing I want to state out here is - if you meditate you will feel god, and if you don't meditate for long time the effect of last meditation will decrease slowly and slowly. And finally it will become to same moron state. So, again you have to meditate and rise you consciousness. So, basically you have to constantly meditate. If you leave it in between it won't be helpful much. Because, your consciousness will again go down. But once it reach to certain level then it won't go down. For example water boils at 100c only. No matter how many times you boil upto 99 degree Celsius. To boil the water you have to boil 100 degree Celsius. Similarly in meditation you have to keep meditating unless the consciousness rise to a certain level. If you reach to that level then it won't fall down or more accurately the probability of it's falling is very less.

More on it later...