|
You Can Be Spiritual In Everything That You Do
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it believed that
spiritual practice is possible only within traditionally accepted limits and
not outside them?
Meditation, observance of silence and physical relaxation are indeed
spiritual practices but are speaking, eating, drinking, sitting and standing
not spiritual practices?
The following story illustrates this point: Once two kings went hunting,
riding their own chariots. One chariot got burnt down, while the horse
pulling the other chariot died. Both kings were stranded. But they worked it
out. One gave his chariot and the other his horse, and the two were able to
return to town. This is called Dagdhashvarath.
The same is true of spiritual practice. In a fragmented or partial form it
does not bring liberation. The integrity of spiritual practice is questioned
by those who insist that it is possible only in a particular place, at a
particular time and through a particular activity and not otherwise. One of
the incongruities of life is spending two hours in spiritual practice and
the remaining 22 hours in non-spiritual pursuits.
Anuvrat — giving up anything beyond the "I" — implies that there be no
incongruity in life from the time one wakes up in the morning till one goes
to bed, and there be uniformity of spiritual practice at all times of day
and night.
Anuvrat manifests the nature of spiritual practice. In Sanskrit grammar, the
word veepsa is used which means Vyaptumichcha, the desire to permeate or
extend. In veepsa, saying the same word twice or four times is not
considered a fault. It is in this sense (of veepsa) that the words
‘spiritual practice’ have been appended to anuvrat.
Meditation and yoga are necessary but by themselves they do not constitute
spiritual practice. You need to remain spiritually alert in whatever you do
throughout the day. A man who stayed in our camp recently was very
religious.
Earlier, with great faith he would practise meditation and silence for four
to five hours daily. But he was indifferent to good behaviour. As a result
his family members were angry with him. His behaviour made them shun
religion.
A man cannot be religious if his practice turns others away from it. Slowly,
though, in the camp, his ideas got transformed. And so too, his life. As
soon as he became alert about the connection spirituality had with all
activity, he began to infuse everything he did with spiritual insight. All
around him became happy.
It is pointless to believe in the possibility of doing meditation if your
life is devoid of humane behaviour, if your ideas lack clarity and if you
have rigid beliefs. It is a different matter if spiritual practice is viewed
in a partial and fragmented manner. Fasting, meditation and observance of
silence are means. |
The success of spiritual practice will be in proportion to the diminution of
distance between means and ends. A sthitpragya — person gifted with
unshakable mental equilibrium — discourses on various themes throughout the
day, yet he is in reality silent. Remaining silent in anger is not really
silence. If it is, then even a heron can be called a meditator. Under this
very illusion a sulking son went and sat down in a corner. He refused to
eat. He was angry.
Should we call it fasting? Spiritual practice is neither in not doing
something, nor in doing something. It lies in inner awakening, no matter
whether it is accompanied by activity or inactivity.
|