Renunciation & Abdication: World of Difference
A thin line divides renunciation and abdication of responsibility. Sonia Gandhi's supporters hail her decision to give up her membership of Parliament and chairmanship of the National Advisory Council. Critics however say it is abdication of responsibility. Let's extrapolate to the realm of spirituality. Is renunciation a sacred act? Should a person withdraw from a society of which she is an integral part? Orthodox spiritual dogmatists prescribe renunciation to get out of the birth-death-cycle. Others, like Osho, differ. He said: "Don't renounce. Celebrate life. Celebration is the foundation of my sanyas, not renunciation. Rejoice in all the beauties, all the joys, all that life offers. But never renounce the outer world that is beautiful". Osho advocates the 3-M formula: music, mathematics and meditation; he says it is absurd to turn one's back on the delights and creativities of arts, knowledge and the living standards that science and technology bring in. When you've no hope, desire or urgeto succeed, what then is your role in this world? Leading a life of contentment? If contentment is the sole aim of spiritual exercise, why then doesn't it begin with intellectual contentment? How can one person renounce today's delights that were yesterday's hopes and today's conceptions that would be tomorrow's creativities? Fundamental though, these are complex questions. Buddha's renunciation is germane. He walked away from a kingdom, its pleasures, and a young, beautiful wife all in pursuit of the ultimate truth. In Buddha's (Prince Siddhartha's) world of royalty, there were agonies and afflictions, injustice and inequities. Navigating conflicting schools of thoughts, t arrived to assert that desire was the root cause of all miseries. The answer Buddha received was not political, scientific, or artistic. It was spiritual. However, leading a life of contentment leaves one with no other role to play in this world. And contentment is not confined to the precincts of material affairs alone. It should permeate intellectual territory. By renouncing his kingdom and refusing to explain the constitution of God on being challenged by a seeker, Buddha's message to humanity is precise and blunt. Osho's dilemma is quite understandable. For, he denounces re nunciation of the world which in effect doesn't exist. If one is to go by Buddha's experience, no one has ever renounced the world and none can, ever In fact, Buddha ever renounced the world. He only renounced his kingdom. Since the magnitude of human problems was such, his prescription of a remedy was universal in nature and not only to the people of his kingdom. By renouncing his political ambitions, Buddha placed himself on the path of an unusual responsibility, which many fear to tread. If Buddha's desire was to renounce the world, he would never have sought a remedy for its problems. Yes, nobody has ever renounced; neither Mahatma Gandhi nor Sonia Gandhi. For those who have renounced the world, the state of freedom' or 'slavery', 'powerful' or 'powerless' can't make a difference. And, that is not something very sacred. For, being part of this world, it is only mandatory that man passes through a kaleidoscope of vivid emotions without worrying about its outcome. Lao Tzu says: Only the one who wants to win should be worried about getting defeated....
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are TS SREENIVASA RAGHAVAN views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy: TS SREENIVASA RAGHAVAN and Speaking Tree,Times of India
Renunciation & Abdication: World of Difference
A thin line divides renunciation and abdication of responsibility. Sonia Gandhi's supporters hail her decision to give up her membership of Parliament and chairmanship of the National Advisory Council. Critics however say it is abdication of responsibility. Let's extrapolate to the realm of spirituality. Is renunciation a sacred act? Should a person withdraw from a society of which she is an integral part? Orthodox spiritual dogmatists prescribe renunciation to get out of the birth-death-cycle. Others, like Osho, differ. He said: "Don't renounce. Celebrate life. Celebration is the foundation of my sanyas, not renunciation. Rejoice in all the beauties, all the joys, all that life offers. But never renounce the outer world that is beautiful". Osho advocates the 3-M formula: music, mathematics and meditation; he says it is absurd to turn one's back on the delights and creativities of arts, knowledge and the living standards that science and technology bring in. When you've no hope, desire or urgeto succeed, what then is your role in this world? Leading a life of contentment? If contentment is the sole aim of spiritual exercise, why then doesn't it begin with intellectual contentment? How can one person renounce today's delights that were yesterday's hopes and today's conceptions that would be tomorrow's creativities? Fundamental though, these are complex questions. Buddha's renunciation is germane. He walked away from a kingdom, its pleasures, and a young, beautiful wife all in pursuit of the ultimate truth. In Buddha's (Prince Siddhartha's) world of royalty, there were agonies and afflictions, injustice and inequities. Navigating conflicting schools of thoughts, t arrived to assert that desire was the root cause of all miseries. The answer Buddha received was not political, scientific, or artistic. It was spiritual. However, leading a life of contentment leaves one with no other role to play in this world. And contentment is not confined to the precincts of material affairs alone. It should permeate intellectual territory. By renouncing his kingdom and refusing to explain the constitution of God on being challenged by a seeker, Buddha's message to humanity is precise and blunt. Osho's dilemma is quite understandable. For, he denounces re nunciation of the world which in effect doesn't exist. If one is to go by Buddha's experience, no one has ever renounced the world and none can, ever In fact, Buddha ever renounced the world. He only renounced his kingdom. Since the magnitude of human problems was such, his prescription of a remedy was universal in nature and not only to the people of his kingdom. By renouncing his political ambitions, Buddha placed himself on the path of an unusual responsibility, which many fear to tread. If Buddha's desire was to renounce the world, he would never have sought a remedy for its problems. Yes, nobody has ever renounced; neither Mahatma Gandhi nor Sonia Gandhi. For those who have renounced the world, the state of freedom' or 'slavery', 'powerful' or 'powerless' can't make a difference. And, that is not something very sacred. For, being part of this world, it is only mandatory that man passes through a kaleidoscope of vivid emotions without worrying about its outcome. Lao Tzu says: Only the one who wants to win should be worried about getting defeated....
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are TS SREENIVASA RAGHAVAN views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy: TS SREENIVASA RAGHAVAN and Speaking Tree,Times of India