Take, for instance, this matter about ' faith.' With all manner of cut and dry approaches converging, painting it as black or white, yes or no, man and God, intellectual and mental or emotional ... it just makes me wonder if people understand what it is they are talking of !
Madhur Bhandarkar, a film director of some eminence, shares what faith is, as it was, as it worked, in his life. He'd made his first ' Trishakti,' a big budget film then, which bombed on the box office. With the public treatment that followed, the avoidance he faced, the humiliations he experienced, his * confidence * lay in tatters, but not his faith ... on God, something external, on himself, working within, such as it is difficult to distinguish the external from the internal, God from his self. And, many months later, he came back, with his faith, getting the support of few individuals, to put together ' Chandni Bar.' It's history since ! What do people wish to confirm or deny about such faith, the phenomenon, as it is with us, as it works ? It just is, take it or leave it ! There are few finer individuals than Madhur, in terms of cinematic sensibilities. The same with ' ego.' Or, ' egotistic ' aplomb we find amongst us. My observation is that those who achieve little with themselves, not necessarily in terms of name or money, are the most affected by this disease ! Those who keep improving, continue to discover, germinating their own better self, are relatively free of the malaise, are more rounded, understanding and peaceful beings. On May 29, 5:46 pm, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > you are right about structures...we have to construct and de-construct > continously...i guess its not about the destination but the journey...how > can we ever be sure of wat the destination is.... > > On 5/29/10, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > It seems the way I came across to this Group, the ideas and views I > > presented, have affected some people. Pat may be true in saying that > > he'd been thus ' helped.' I do remember communicating with a few > > others through mail. > > > But my query is : so what ? ... not to dismiss, but to remind > > ourselves of the duty to go back to our de - anchored view or > > perception, or continue with the search, even as we live it out in the > > world, live out the mind and the concept structures that constitute > > us ... with the desire to know, reflect and awaken into greater > > peace, from where more loving, effective and fulfilling, and > > regenerative actions proceed. > > > I have no doubt that all well - meaning people are doing the same, in > > their own ways, to consequences appropriate to their own preoccupying > > natures and exigencies, that mean and form us in the middle of things. > > Most are vivacious, cooling off their minds from time to time than > > knowing it. But they are preferable than those who do not rise and > > merely become adept, great adepts but chilling like lords Voldemort, > > dedicated to a specific concept - structure that is deified but only > > because it assures one's own overriding self - importance. > > > Few indeed see the measure of our acceptance of diversity, and of the > > plurality about us, as a definite KPI of love, peace and wisdom in our > > lives. Because for it to be, much of our earned spiritual power, > > happiness and freedom, need to be subsumed in the practice of ' not > > this,' ' not this.' > > > The destination is without all concept structures, of oneself and of > > the other(s).
