SoundOn

WE ARE TRAINED in wrong ways; otherwise, security is something to be
afraid of, and insecurity is something to be rejoiced. What exactly is
insecurity? It means tomorrow is not going to repeat today. It means
tomorrow you may not even be alive. It means that one has to live each
moment as if it is the last moment. A life of security will be simply boring. It
will be like seeing the same movie again and again and again -- knowing
every detail of what is going to happen. You can enjoy a movie only once.
If you are an idiot, then it is another matter .

Insecurity is the very fabric of life. If you dont understand insecurity, you
can never understand life. Seasons will change; climates will change; the
fall will come, the spring will come. Everything will go on changing, nothing
can be taken for granted; this is insecurity. You want everything to be
certain, permanent. But have you ever thought what will be the outcome of
it if everything is permanent? You eat the same food every day, you say
the same things every day, you listen to the same things every day. And
there is no death even to demolish this tragic living -- you are living in a
nightmare.

Insecurity keeps people fresh, alive, adventurous -- knowing that things
can be changed. Even without their changing them, they are going to be
changed. So there is great scope for change, for transformation.

AN ANCIENT SAYING is, "The authentic man is one whom the sunrise never
finds where the sunset leaves him"; or, "where the sunrise leaves him, the
sunset never finds him there." He is always on the move, he is a flow he is
not a dirty pond going nowhere.

But the whole training of our minds is such that we are made afraid of
insecurity, and our whole life we are trying for safety. Financially, politically,
religiously -- in every dimension we want to be secure. But security means
death, a living death. It means tomorrow will be simply a repetition of
today, and today is a repetition of yesterday.

Are you living? Is there a dance in your life? Are you moving, growing,
risking, taking the challenges of dangerous paths? In the acceptance of the
danger, in the acceptance that anything can happen any moment, life
comes to its best, to its fullest.
Insecurity is not a space that has to
be disliked, it is a space that has to be loved and cherished, celebrated
because tomorrow will bring new news.

And because of the fear of insecurity, you are also fearing not knowing; and
not knowing is the highest peak of consciousness. But certainly you must
be afraid of peaks because you can fall from there; you prefer the plain,
asphalt road -- no danger of falling from there. You would like to be at the
lowest point in consciousness, because from there you cannot fall.

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE have decided to live at the minimum out of the simple
fear that from the maximum you can fall. It is safer to live at the minimum;
it is even safer not to live at all. Nobody has ever heard that dead people
are insecure; graveyards are the most secure places. Once you enter your
grave, there is no fear: even death cannot do anything to you -- one
cannot die twice.

Man has been trying to create false props for security, knowing perfectly
well that they all fall down, but still he goes on piling up props around him.
Time does not care about your props, nor does life care about your props.
In fact, it is compassionate of nature that whatever you do, you remain
insecure. You can have a bank balance, you can have a big insurance --
but these are just strategies to befool yourself. What insurance can there
be against death? What insurance can there be against the constantly
changing flux of life? You cannot prevent it: it is a mountain river flowing
fast, dropping from high mountains into waterfalls, moving into valleys
towards the ocean where it will disappear completely.

The idea of safety has created the idea of accumulating knowledge --
nothing should be left unknown because the unknown creates insecurity. If
it is known, you feel safe.
So people go on filling
their heads with all kinds of knowledge, most of which is simply rubbish and
crap; people become walking encyclopedias.
By cramming the Oxford Dictionary, one cannot know the English language.
Language is a living phenomenon: it comes through dialogue, it comes
through contact with living people. The Oxford Dictionary may be marginally
helpful, but just the Oxford Dictionary there are only words. You can
knew the whole language, and still not able to make a single
sentence.
This is the situation of the scholars: they are afraid of their not knowing;
they go on piling up scriptures over their not knowing, covering it up with
thick layers of knowledge. But underneath they are as ignorant as ever.

Ignorance has not to be covered, but transformed into innocence.
Ignorance has not to become knowledgeability, ignorance has to become a
feeling of the mysterious and the miraculous in existence.

This is the way of a religious man. The scholarly man is never religious --
cannot be.

Your whole approach is categorically wrong -- not in part, but absolutely.
You have to understand that insecurity is the very nature of life; there is
no way to avoid it. And when there is no way to avoid it, the only wise way
is to enjoy it. When it is impossible to avoid it, why go on hitting your head
against the wall? Then it is better to transform insecurity into a beautiful
experience. In fact, it is that.

MAN CAN NEVER DEMYSTIFY EXISTENCE, he can never become all-knowing.
The desire to become all-knowing is dangerous. In this ambition of becoming
all-knowing so that you can be safe, the possibility is that you may collect
much information. And in collecting information, you will forget one basic
thing: that you have to go through a transformation. Information is not
going to help you at all -- you need a transformation of your consciousness.
By transformation, you will not become a knower, you will become more and
more a mystic.

Each and every thing in life, from the smallest grass leaf to the biggest star
it is all mysterious. Neither holy scriptures have any answers for it, nor
science has any answers for it, although they both go on proposing
hypotheses. Religion tries to propose a hypothesis of God: that he created
the world. This is really pitiable; it has nothing to do with authentic
religiousness, it is a childish effort to forget your ignorance. Nobody has
witnessed any God creating the world. By the very nature of the fact,
nobody can be a witness; otherwise the world is already there, somebody is
there to witness it.
Some day when man really comes of age and to maturity, he will laugh at
us: "What kind of idiots is the whole history full of? They create a
hypothesis, and they worship a hypothesis."

BUT SCIENCE IS NOT in a better position either. They say that at a certain
point, near about four billion years ago . Their calculation is as bogus as the
religious calculation: four thousand and four years, or four million years, or
four billion years. How do you come to that conclusion? It is simply
whimsical. They say the world came into existence out of an explosion.
Explosion of what? They have removed God; now instead of God, it is an
explosion of energy. But that means the energy was there. And if the
energy was there, existence was there.

Gautam Buddha seems to be more logical, Mahavira seems to be more
logical; they dont believe in the creation at all. They have simply denied
that the world has ever been created: it has always been there, and it will
always be there, changing its forms.

You cannot conceive a point when the world was not, and then suddenly it
was there. It is not logic, it is magic: a moment before there was nothing
and a moment after, there was everything. God seems to be a street
magician! But the street magician knows only tricks. Out of an empty cap,
he brings birds -- but they are hidden in the empty cap. He creates the
illusion that the cap is empty, but it is not empty.

Gautam Buddha is right when he says, "The very idea of the creation of the
world is foolish. It will lead to more stupid answers and questions." But why
do people want to know such things? There must be a psychological need,
and a universal psychological need. This is the need: safety. Knowing that
God created the world, you feel at ease.

Strange, I have never felt any unease about whether God created the world
or not. Who cares? In what way am I related to that creation? It does not
affect me this way or that. I am ready to accept the mystery of life, and I
am against all those people -- whether religious scholars or scientific
researchers -- who are going to satisfy your fear of insecurity by giving you
hypotheses.

Even science could not control its temptation and accept the
mysteriousness of existence, that we dont know. Not even a single
scientist has been so courageous as to say, "We dont know." In fact, the
whole project of science is such that slowly, slowly our area of knowledge is
growing, and the area of our ignorance is decreasing. Logically it can be
inferred that one day, somewhere in the future -- it may take millions of
years -- a point will come when everything will be known; the whole area
will be covered by knowledge, and there will be nothing left to be known
anymore.

I cannot agree with this. Yes, science tries to know things, but that does
not demystify them. It simply pushes the mystery back a little. You split the
atom -- soon you will be able to split the sperm -- and then you say that
the atom consists of electrons, protons, and neutrons, and you think you
have provided the knowledge. But the question is, why does the atom
consist of electrons, protons, and neutrons? The mystery is not dissolved, it
has become more subtle.

THE MAN OF UNDERSTANDING will accept that insecurity is the very fabric
of life, and that not knowing is the counterpart of the miraculous and the
mysterious existence. We know nothing. All that we know is very superficial,
and all that we know goes on changing. That which seems to be so certain
today becomes uncertain tomorrow.

Have you observed that for almost thirty years, no big volumes on science
have been written? Only periodicals, monthly publications . And people dont
write big books for the simple reason that by the time their book is finished,
it will be out of date -- so great is the explosion. All old theories become
wrong; new theories come in. All old hypotheses drop dead; new
hypotheses arise like the phoenix, out of the ashes of the old hypotheses.
And they know perfectly well that these are also going to fall.

If you are trying to write a complete history of something scientific, you are
wasting time. So scientists only write papers, not books; they read papers,
not books, because a paper can be read in a university or at a conference
of scientists. At least it is real, true at that moment; nobody knows about
tomorrow. People used to think that Albert Einstein will never be refuted. He
has been refuted, he is no longer the giant he used to be. Inch by inch, his
whole theory of relativity has been criticized, and better proposals have
come into being.

But now one thing is certain -- because three hundred years experience of
science shows that no theory is going to become authentic knowledge, it is
only a temporary hypothesis. Somebody with a better intelligence, with
more logical acumen, with better scientific equipment, is going to demolish
it.

Charles Darwin is no longer accepted. The idea that man has come from the
monkeys or apes is very appealing; looking at man, it needs no proof! But
for millions of years, monkeys have remained monkeys, man has remained
man. Neither do we see people falling back towards monkeys -- going up
the trees, and growing tails, and jumping -- nor do we see another modern
monkey getting down from the tree, standing on two feet, and declaring,
"Now I am a human being."

There has not been a single scientific theory which has remained true.
Everything has changed, and everything is changing so fast that perhaps in
the future it will not be possible to read even papers.

SCIENCE IS AN EFFORT to demystify existence in every way. And thats
what theology has been doing before science -- trying to demystify
everything. God created the world -- that makes you safe. God is the
father -- that makes you secure; he will take care of you. Everything is
decided by God; of course, it cannot be against you. God is compassionate
thats what Mohammedans say: Rahman Rahman -- he is kindness, he is
compassion itself. So dont be worried about anything. Even all your sins will
be forgiven, because his compassion is far bigger than your ability to
commit sins.
Theology was trying to create safety, consolation, security. And now
science has taken over from theology, on a more pragmatic basis, and is
doing the same thing: just giving you a false idea that you need not worry,
science knows all.

The very word "science" means knowing.

But I want to insist again and again to you: neither theology, nor science,
nor philosophy -- no effort of man can demystify existence.

You need to be courageous to accept the insecurity -- not only accept,
but rejoice in it. You have to rejoice in the mystery of existence: the trees,
the oceans, the mountains, the stars everything is mysterious. From the
smallest pebble on the beach to the whole universe, everything is so
mysterious that there is no possibility of knowing it.

Not knowing is the way of the mystic. Insecurity is the way of the mystic.
And to be a sannyasin is to be on the path of the mystic.

If you change your basic standpoint -- which is wrong, utterly wrong --
then your whole problem disappears. And then you are capable of dancing
amidst all insecurity; you are capable of loving and laughing amidst all not
knowing.

Not knowing is nothing but innocence, and insecurity is nothing but a
constantly changing panorama, always fresh and new. Nothing is repeated
in existence.

You must have heard the saying, "History repeats itself." History repeats
itself because history has consisted up to now of stupid human beings.
Existence is so intelligent: it never repeats itself; it never creates another
Jesus, another Moses, another Buddha, another Chuang Tzu, another
Socrates. It simply never repeats. Its creativity is tremendous,
inexhaustible.

Yes, the history of man repeats itself, because the life of man is a routine.
If you look at your life you go on repeating it. Slowly, slowly the repetition
becomes your efficiency: you become almost a robot, you lose your
consciousness. Consciousness is needed only if each moment is new,
because you have to respond to a new situation. Old answers wont do.

IT IS A GREAT BLESSING that life is insecure, love is insecure, and
fundamentally we are in a state of not knowing. We can be childlike --
running after butterflies, collecting seashells on the beach, or colored
stones, as if they are diamonds, and enjoy all of them.
Whenever I would come home with my pockets full of stones, I would even
go to bed with all the stones. Everybody was angry "What do you think
these stones are? Diamonds, or emeralds, or rubies?"
I said, "I dont know, but they are immensely beautiful and I cannot sleep
without my treasure; it feels good that they are close to me."

Not knowing is nothing but innocence. These two things are very
foundational: insecurity and not knowing. If you can relax in these two, you
are a sage, you are awakened. If you go against these two, you are going
against your own enlightenment, against your own possibility of being a
sage.

ClickMe 2 go back 2 "MyPhoto"