Last night I was discussing the how somehow the wisdom and the ways of great Saints and Masters like Rumi, Sultan Bahu, Nanak, Buddha, Bulleh Shah although extremely profound had seemed a bit incomplete to me and those did not resonate with me. Not that what they said was “wrong” but just somehow “incomplete”. This has been a predicament for sometime for me.
Somehow the joy I find when I read or think over my own self after I have read Krishnamurti or the Upanishads or Gita – my sense of joy and completeness is far more. Not that these writers/thinkers are more “right” but somehow they are able to complete a circle that the earlier mentioned Saints do not for me.
Why is that?
My own introspection says that this is because of the “way” they followed and then “preached” or talked about. Majnu was in love of Laila. He knew the depths of his love. He could experience it. He might sing those songs of love in front of me in the most profound manner, but will it help me love Laila just as he does? Is love transferable? Can love be “taught”? Yet all the Saints I mentioned above were “lovers” or Bhakti Yogis. Of the highest order perhaps but ones who followed the path of Love. Those who follow the path of Love can only talk of that way unless they can keep aside their experience while preaching and handle the seeker with his/her own baggage.
Krishnamurti somehow appeals to me because he was more of a Jnana Yogi. He approached the Eternal through knowledge. To me that is easier to impart and easier to understand although difficult to inculcate. And in that sense it is as difficult to transmit as Love. My knowledge and experience is mine and your is yours. Knowledge being an estimation in any case is as much a personal expression as Love. But knowledge is the way I feel resonates with my soul. Love, yet, has not found the string in my heart.
Gita, of course, transcends all these paths in that it documents the 4 topographies – the Love, the Knowledge, the Karma, and the Meditation (Raja Yoga). Most paths are built across these topographies it reaches a conclusion. Its an analytical take as opposed to a prescriptive dictate. And then it goes on to discuss the 4 topographies and what they generally entail. Not as a pros and cons assessment but more an analytical discussion. Ultimately they all end where the dissolution of ego is complete. The Karma path however gets more footage simply because Krishna believed that is an inherent path for all humans. One cannot escape action.
To me given the life I have, my path somehow is a combination of Karma (Deeds) and Jnana (Knowledge) Yoga. Therefore, in that sense the resonance with Gita, Upanishads, and Krishnamurti seems obvious. But I do realize that this “categorizing” exercise is a useless exercise. It doesn’t help the progress – it just makes you follow a method – which in itself is of no use.
However the resonance at the soul level is difficult to explain… it happens on its own and there is no explanation to it not any justification. So, I will leave my givings and misgivings with any paths with that.
Get Drishtikone Updates
in your inbox
Subscribe to Drishtikone updates and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.
Thank you for subscribing.
Something went wrong.