|| Satsang-1 ||

This post is about a small yet valuable exchange between two seekers of Truth walking on the path of “Atma Vichar”.

One of the two seekers (Novice –N) was going through the acclaimed treaty called ‘Tripura Rahasya’. Tripura Rahasya is a celebrated Vedantic treaty of the same level  of Yoga Vaasishtha but probably less popular. It has been highly recommended by Ramana Maharshi and other spiritual masters. The YV is the discourse between Rishi Vasishtha (Guru) and Lord Ram (Disciple) whereas the TR contains the instructions of Guru Dattatreya and disciple Parashuram. Both, YV and TR instruct about the highest truth and also use many relevant analogies, stories and examples.

‘N’ came across few initial pages wherein human body is severely criticized (for the purpose of removing the attachment from the body pleasures) and sent those phrases to the other seeker who is wiser and more advanced (Advanced –A). ‘N’ wanted to provoke wisdom-filled comments from the fellow seeker ‘A’ on this. Following are the paragraphs which N sent to A and also the reply from A.

 

 

 

Reply from 'A' (Note:- Underlining is from me)

Quote

[ This dialogue is designed to see the human body as it is (ugly inside) & produce vairagya in the mind. If the body were not ugly then? How about if a man or woman is promised a mate from heavens where bodies are eternally beautiful & not made of flesh & blood (apparently).

In this context, I recall the vairagya of Nachiketa, he was promised the best of bestest by Yama but he still refused saying that he does not want to partake of that which is perishable

Imho, the best way to produce vairagya is not to bring disgust in the mind but to make it see that no matter how much you have of it, it will never satisfy you, you will always be left empty! The more you have, the emptier you get! ]

Unquote

Ruthless criticism of human body is not uncommon in various shaastras of Vedic Sanskruti and the purpose is obviously well intended, understood and accepted. Intentions are to create disgust in the minds of true seekers and remove the attachment from the love for the body pleasures. Main target of such severe yet truthful criticism is sexual impulses which are considered to be the most powerful of all and one of the major roadblocks in the path of Mumukshus.

I found this reply from ‘A’ to be refreshing and unique. The observation in the given context seems to be from deeper levels of understandings on the detachment (Anaasakti) and provides a different perspective. It differs from common acceptance of the criticism and understanding, and at the same time, also provides 'better idea for gaining detachment' from the love of body and its pleasures by giving Nachiketa’s example.

Interested ones can ponder and get benefited if destined.

Jay Arunachala

Jay Ramana