Today I will tell you something
about ‘satya’, often translated as ‘truth.’
There are well known instances in
which one is likely to be confused. For example, Krishna suggests Yudhishthira
to speak a lie to get Drona killed. How can the Lord, who is Himself the embodiment
of satya and dharma insist on asking someone to speak a lie?
Satya has in fact two meanings,
the one that is in currency (rudha) and the other that may be derived from its
etymology : the composition of words - sat + ya.
The current, popular, meaning
centres on speaking of a thing as it is (known to the speaker). If a speaker
knows that ‘something’ is A, telling to others about that ‘something’ to be B while B is at a deviance from A is speaking a lie, while telling A about that ‘something’
is truth. In this sense, truth is contingent upon being of that ‘something’, ‘knowing’,
‘others’, and speaking. Knowing is a problematic issue. Knowing ultimately
becomes believing. I know of something means I believe that such and such thing
is correctly associable with ‘something’. Also, one cannot lie to oneself.
The other meaning is related to
sustenance (protection) of being and becoming. I am and I am becoming every moment.
You are and you are becoming every moment. There are trees and insects and
thunder and rain – the entire society and the ecology and the cosmos – and all
of them are becoming every moment, evolving every moment. My thought or action towards
supporting and sustaining that unfolding is satya and hindering that unfolding
is asatya. That is why satya is dharma and dharma is satya.
Then if my speaking A about ‘something’
goes against the said being and becoming, it is not satya indeed. In this
sense, satya is not limited to speaking. If I do not speak, but think or do
something that goes for or against the said being and becoming, it would be satya
or asatya accordingly. Then, not ‘satyam vada, dharmam chara’, but ‘satyam chara,
dharmam chara’, because satya and dharma are the one and the same.
How do I know whether my thought
or action would support or arrest the said unfolding?
Our prakriti supports that and vikriti makes us deviate from that knowing. All the vikaras (kama, krodha, etc) are the signs of vikriti. To balance these vikaras is to set ourselves to prakriti. That is why ‘yogah chitta vritti nirodhah’. That is what is said in Gita: sthitadhee – ‘nabhinandati, na dweshti’ neither loves nor hates. “dukheshu anudwigna mana, sukheshu vigata spriha’.
To attain the state of a sthitadhee
is difficult, but continued practice may lead us towards that.
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें