YOU HAVE SAID THAT TANTRA TEACHES MAN TO TRANSCEND BOTH HIS CRAVING FOR HIS ANIMALISTIC PAST, AND ALSO HIS CRAVING FOR THE DIVINE.
DOES IT MEAN THAT DIVINITY IS PART OF THE WORLD, AND THAT TOO HAS TO BE TRANSCENDED? AND WHAT IS IT THAT GOES BEYOND BOTH?
You will have to understand many things. First: the nature of desire. Divinity is not what you call it. The god that you talk about is not the god of reality; it is the god of your desire. So it is not a question of whether the divine is part of the world. That is not the question. The real question is, can you desire the divine without making him part of the world?
Look at it in this way. It has been said again and again that unless you leave desiring, you cannot attain to him, the ultimate. You cannot attain to the divine if you don't leave desiring. Leave desiring and you can attain to him. You have heard it many times, but I wonder whether you understand it or not. More or less, you will be misunderstanding it. Hearing this, you start desiring the divine - and that is to miss the whole point.
If you leave desiring, the divine will happen to you. Then you start desiring the divine, so your divine will be part of the world. That which can be desired is the world. This is how I define it: that which can be desired is the world. So the divine cannot be desired, and if you desire it, it has become part of the world.
When desiring stops, the divine happens. When you are not desiring anything, the divine is there - then the whole world is divine. You will not find the divine somewhere in contradiction, in opposition to the world - contrary to the world. When you are not desiring, everything is divine; when you are desiring, everything is the world. Your desiring creates the world: whatsoever you desire becomes the world. This is not the world that you see - the trees, and the sky, and the sea, and the rivers, and the earth, and the stars. This is not the world - that which you desire is the world.
A flower is there in the garden. The moment you pass the tree, and you look at the flower, and the smell of the flower comes to you, look within. If you are not desiring that flower, if there is not even a slight urge to possess it, not even a slight ripple of desire to have it, that flower becomes divine.
You will have the divine face through it. But if the desire is there to possess it, or a jealousy arises about the owner of the tree, you have created a world; the divine has disappeared. It is your desire that changes the quality of existence; your desire makes it the world. When you are non-desiring, the whole world becomes divine.
Now I will read this question again. YOU HAVE SAID THAT TANTRA TEACHES MAN TO TRANSCEND BOTH HIS CRAVING FOR HIS ANIMALISTIC PAST, AND ALSO HIS CRAVING FOR THE DIVINE.
Tantra teaches only to transcend craving. It is irrelevant what you crave - that you crave is the point.
You can go on changing the objects. You crave money, you crave power, you crave prestige - you crave for the world. Then you change. You get fed up with it, you are bored. Or, you have attained whatsoever you craved, and now you are not fulfilled; you feel frustrated. You start a new craving.
Now you crave the divine. You crave moksha, nirvana, liberation - now you crave for the god. The object has changed; you have not changed - your craving remains the same. It was running after prestige and power and money. Now it is running after divine power. It is running after the ultimate, moksha, the absolute freedom, but the craving is there.
Ordinarily, religious people go on changing their objects of desire. Desire remains the same, unchanged. And it is not the objects which create the problem; it is the desire, the craving, which creates the problem. Tantra says it is futile to go on changing objects. It is wasting time and life and energy. Changing objects won't help - drop craving. Don't crave. Don't crave for freedom, because craving is bondage. Don't crave for the divine, because craving is the world. Don't crave for the inner, because craving is the outer. So it is not a question of transcending this craving or that - simply drop craving. Don't crave, don't desire. Just be yourself.
When you don't desire, what happens? When you don't crave, what happens? You are non-moving; all movement ceases. You are not in a hurry to reach anywhere. You are not serious. There is no hope and there is no frustration. You don't expect anything; nothing can frustrate you. There is no desire; you cannot be a failure. Of course, there is not going to be any success either.
When you are not craving, not desiring, what happen? You are simply left alone, moving nowhere.
There is no goal, because craving creates the goal. There is no future, because craving creates the future. There is no time, because craving needs time to move. Time stops. Future drops. And when there is no craving, mind drops, because mind is nothing but craving, and because of that craving you have to plan and think and dream and project.
When there is no craving, everything drops. You are simply in your purity. You exist without moving anywhere; inside, all ripples disappear. The ocean remains, but the waves are not there. This is what divineness is for tantra.
So look at it in this way: craving is the barrier. Don't think of the object, otherwise you will be deceived by yourself. You will change one object for another, and then time will be wasted. Again you will get frustrated, and then you will again change the object. You can go on changing objects infinitely, unless you realize that it is not the object which creates the problem, it is your craving. But craving is subtle and the object is gross. The object can be seen, and craving can be seen only when you go deep down and meditate upon it; otherwise, craving is not seen.
You can marry a woman or a man with great dreams and hope, and the greater the dreams, the greater the hope, the greater will be the frustration. An ordinary arranged marriage cannot be such a failure as a love-marriage is bound to be, because with an ordinary arranged marriage there is not much hope, there is not much dreaming. It is business-like; there is no romance, no poetry. There is no peak to it; you are travelling on plain ground. So arranged marriages never fail. They cannot fail, because there is no point. How can you fail in an arranged marriage? You were never on a height, so you cannot fall. Love-marriages fail. Only love-marriages can fail, because with a great poetry, with a great dreaming force, they come up. They touch heights, on the waves you rise high, and then you will have to fall down.
So old countries, those who have knowledge, experience, they have come to settle for arranged marriages. They don't talk about love-marriages. In India they never talk about love-marriages.
They have also tried in the past, and then they felt that a love-marriage is going to be a failure.
Because you expect too much, you will be frustrated, and the proportion of frustration will be the same. Whatsoever you desire and dream gives you expectations - they cannot be fulfilled.
You marry a woman; if it is a love-marriage, you expect much. Then you get frustrated. The moment you get frustrated, immediately you start thinking about another woman. So if you say to your wife, 'I am not interested in any other woman,' and she feels you have become indifferent to her, you cannot convince her - it is impossible, it is unnatural. The moment you become indifferent to your wife, the wife knows instinctively that you have become interested in someone else.
This is how mind functions. You become aware of the woman that you have married, and you feel the frustration is coming because of her - 'This was not a right choice.' This is ordinary logic. 'This was not a right choice. This woman is not for me. I have chosen a wrong partner, so the conflict has arisen.' Now you will try to find another partner.
You can go on that way ad infinitum. You may marry all the women on the earth, and still you will be thinking in the same way - that 'This woman is not right for me'. And the subtle craving which is creating all trouble is not seen. It is subtle. The woman is seen; the craving is not seen. It is not the woman or the man who is frustrating you; it is your craving, your desire, which is frustrating you.
If you can come to understand this, you have become wise. If you go on changing objects, you are ignorant. If you can come to feel yourself and the craving which is creating the whole thing, you have become wise. Then you don't go on changing one object for another; you simply drop the very effort to possess, to desire, to crave.
The moment this craving is not there, the whole world becomes divine. It has always been so, only your eyes were not open to see. Your eyes were filled with craving. Eyes filled with craving, the divine appears as the world. Open eyes, unfilled, unclouded by craving, the world appears as the divine.
The world and the divine are not two things, not two existences, but two ways of looking at the same thing, two approaches to the same thing, two outlooks, two types of perception. One perception clouded with craving, another perception unclouded with craving. If you can look unclouded, and your eyes are not filled with tears of frustration and dreams of hope, there is nothing like the world; only the divine exists - existence is divine. This is what tantra means. And when tantra says transcend both, tantra is not concerned with either this or that - tantra is concerned only with transcendence, so there is no craving.
AND WHAT IS IT THAT GOES BEYOND BOTH? That cannot be said, because the moment anything is said about it, it comes within the two. Whatsoever can be said about God will be false, just because it is said.
Language is dualistic. There is no non-dual language; cannot be. Language is meaningful only because of dualism. I say 'light'; immediately in your mind bubbles up the word 'darkness' or 'black'.
I say 'day', and immediately in your mind comes 'night'. I say 'love', and just behind it is hidden 'hate'. If I say light and there is no darkness, how will you define it?j We can only define words because of their opposite terms. I say light, and if you ask me what light is, I say that which is not darkness. If someone asks you what mind is, you say that which is not body. If someone asks what body is, you have to say that which is not mind. All terms are circular, so, basically meaningless, because neither you know anything about the mind, nor do you know anything about the body. When I ask about the mind, you define it with the body, and the body is undefined. When I ask you about the body, you define it with the mind, which is itself undefined.
This is good as a game. Language is good as a game - language is a game. But we never feel that the whole thing is absurd, circular; and nothing is defined, so how can you define anything? When I ask about the mind, you bring in the body - and the body is undefined. With an indefined term, you define mind. And then when I ask, 'What do you mean by body?' you have to define it with the mind. This is absurd - but there is no other way.
Language exists through the opposite, so language is dualistic. It cannot be otherwise. So nothing can be said about the non-dual experience. Whatsoever is said will be wrong. It can be indicated, symbols can be used for it, but silence is the best. That which can be said about it is silence.
Everything else can be defined, talked about - not the ultimate. You can know it, taste it, you can be it, but nothing can be said about it. Only negatively we can say something, but only negatively. We cannot say what that is; we can only say what that is not.
The whole mystic tradition is simply using negative terms for it. If you ask what that ultimate is, they will say, 'That ultimate is not this, not that. It is neither life nor death. It is neither light nor darkness.
It is neither near nor far. It is neither I nor you.' They will say in this way, but this makes no sense.
Drop craving and you come to know it face to face. And the experience is so deep and individual, non-verbal, non-linguistic, that even when you come to know it, you cannot say anything about it.
You will become silent. Or, at the most, you can say this that I am saying. You can say, 'Nothing can be said about it.'
Then what is the point of talking so much? Then why do I go on saying something to you if nothing can be said? Just to bring you to that point where nothing can be said. Just to push you to that abyss where you can take a jump out of language. Up to that point, language can be helpful. Up to the point when you take the jump, language can be helpful, but the moment you have taken the jump, it is silence, it is beyond language.
So I can push you to the very end of the world through language - to the very end of the world - but not a single inch into the divine through language. But this pushing you up to the very end will be helpful, because then you can see with your own eyes that there is this blissful abyss beyond. And then that beyond will call you by itself; then the beyond will attract you; then the beyond will become a magnet, a pull. It is impossible then for you to come back, to retreat. The abyss is so enchanting - the abyss of silence - that before you know, you will have taken a jump.
That's why I go on talking, knowing well that all that I am saying will not help you to know it. But it will help you to take a jump. It is methodological. It will look contradictory, paradoxical, if I say that all language that I am using, or that the mystics have ever used, is to bring you to the temple of silence; to force you into silence, to call you unto silence. It looks paradoxical. Then why use language? I can use silence also, but then you will not understand.
When I have to talk to madmen. I have to use a mad language. It is because of you I am using language. It is not that anything can be expressed by it; only your inner chattering can be destroyed by it. It is just as if you have a thorn in your foot - another thorn can pull it out. The other one is also a thorn. Your mind is filled with words, with thorns. What I am trying to do is to pull those words out of you. What I am using are also words. You are filled with poison. What I am giving you is again a dose of poison, just an antidote. It is also a poison. But a thorn can pull out another thorn - then they both can be thrown.
When I have talked to you to the point where you are ready to be silent, throw all that I have said to you; it is useless, it is even dangerous to carry it. When you have come to realize that language is useless, dangerous, that inner verbalization is the only barrier, and when you are ready to be silent, then remember well - don't carry whatsoever I have said to you. Because the truth cannot be said, and all that can be said cannot be true. Be unburdened of it.
The last thing Zarathustra said to his disciples is very beautiful. He had taught them. He had given them glimpses. He had stirred their souls. He had challenged them to the ultimate adventure. The last thing he said to them was, 'Now I am leaving you. Now beware of Zarathustra.'
So they asked, 'What are you saying? Beware of Zarathustra? You are our teacher, our master, our only hope.'
And Zarathustra said, 'All that I have said to you, now beware of it. Don't cling to me, otherwise I will become a bondage to you.'
When one thorn has pulled out your thorn, throw the other one also with it. When I have prepared you to move into silence, then beware of me. Then whatsoever I have said has to be thrown; it is rubbish, of no use. It has utility only up to the point before you are ready to take a jump into silence.
Nothing can be said about that which transcends both. Only this much can be said - and this is too much really. If you can understand, this is enough to indicate towards it.
I am saying this - that if your mind becomes totally vacant of words, you will know it. When you are not burdened with thoughts, you will realize it, because it is already there. It is not something which is going to happen; it has already happened within you. You are just an expression of it. But you are so much engrossed, involved, with thoughts, with clouds, that you miss the key. You are too concentrated on the clouds; you have forgotten the sky. Allow the clouds to disperse, and the sky has always been there just waiting for you. The beyond is waiting for you. Just drop the duality and it is there.
DOES IT MEAN THAT DIVINITY IS PART OF THE WORLD, AND THAT TOO HAS TO BE TRANSCENDED? AND WHAT IS IT THAT GOES BEYOND BOTH?
You will have to understand many things. First: the nature of desire. Divinity is not what you call it. The god that you talk about is not the god of reality; it is the god of your desire. So it is not a question of whether the divine is part of the world. That is not the question. The real question is, can you desire the divine without making him part of the world?
Look at it in this way. It has been said again and again that unless you leave desiring, you cannot attain to him, the ultimate. You cannot attain to the divine if you don't leave desiring. Leave desiring and you can attain to him. You have heard it many times, but I wonder whether you understand it or not. More or less, you will be misunderstanding it. Hearing this, you start desiring the divine - and that is to miss the whole point.
If you leave desiring, the divine will happen to you. Then you start desiring the divine, so your divine will be part of the world. That which can be desired is the world. This is how I define it: that which can be desired is the world. So the divine cannot be desired, and if you desire it, it has become part of the world.
When desiring stops, the divine happens. When you are not desiring anything, the divine is there - then the whole world is divine. You will not find the divine somewhere in contradiction, in opposition to the world - contrary to the world. When you are not desiring, everything is divine; when you are desiring, everything is the world. Your desiring creates the world: whatsoever you desire becomes the world. This is not the world that you see - the trees, and the sky, and the sea, and the rivers, and the earth, and the stars. This is not the world - that which you desire is the world.
A flower is there in the garden. The moment you pass the tree, and you look at the flower, and the smell of the flower comes to you, look within. If you are not desiring that flower, if there is not even a slight urge to possess it, not even a slight ripple of desire to have it, that flower becomes divine.
You will have the divine face through it. But if the desire is there to possess it, or a jealousy arises about the owner of the tree, you have created a world; the divine has disappeared. It is your desire that changes the quality of existence; your desire makes it the world. When you are non-desiring, the whole world becomes divine.
Now I will read this question again. YOU HAVE SAID THAT TANTRA TEACHES MAN TO TRANSCEND BOTH HIS CRAVING FOR HIS ANIMALISTIC PAST, AND ALSO HIS CRAVING FOR THE DIVINE.
Tantra teaches only to transcend craving. It is irrelevant what you crave - that you crave is the point.
You can go on changing the objects. You crave money, you crave power, you crave prestige - you crave for the world. Then you change. You get fed up with it, you are bored. Or, you have attained whatsoever you craved, and now you are not fulfilled; you feel frustrated. You start a new craving.
Now you crave the divine. You crave moksha, nirvana, liberation - now you crave for the god. The object has changed; you have not changed - your craving remains the same. It was running after prestige and power and money. Now it is running after divine power. It is running after the ultimate, moksha, the absolute freedom, but the craving is there.
Ordinarily, religious people go on changing their objects of desire. Desire remains the same, unchanged. And it is not the objects which create the problem; it is the desire, the craving, which creates the problem. Tantra says it is futile to go on changing objects. It is wasting time and life and energy. Changing objects won't help - drop craving. Don't crave. Don't crave for freedom, because craving is bondage. Don't crave for the divine, because craving is the world. Don't crave for the inner, because craving is the outer. So it is not a question of transcending this craving or that - simply drop craving. Don't crave, don't desire. Just be yourself.
When you don't desire, what happens? When you don't crave, what happens? You are non-moving; all movement ceases. You are not in a hurry to reach anywhere. You are not serious. There is no hope and there is no frustration. You don't expect anything; nothing can frustrate you. There is no desire; you cannot be a failure. Of course, there is not going to be any success either.
When you are not craving, not desiring, what happen? You are simply left alone, moving nowhere.
There is no goal, because craving creates the goal. There is no future, because craving creates the future. There is no time, because craving needs time to move. Time stops. Future drops. And when there is no craving, mind drops, because mind is nothing but craving, and because of that craving you have to plan and think and dream and project.
When there is no craving, everything drops. You are simply in your purity. You exist without moving anywhere; inside, all ripples disappear. The ocean remains, but the waves are not there. This is what divineness is for tantra.
So look at it in this way: craving is the barrier. Don't think of the object, otherwise you will be deceived by yourself. You will change one object for another, and then time will be wasted. Again you will get frustrated, and then you will again change the object. You can go on changing objects infinitely, unless you realize that it is not the object which creates the problem, it is your craving. But craving is subtle and the object is gross. The object can be seen, and craving can be seen only when you go deep down and meditate upon it; otherwise, craving is not seen.
You can marry a woman or a man with great dreams and hope, and the greater the dreams, the greater the hope, the greater will be the frustration. An ordinary arranged marriage cannot be such a failure as a love-marriage is bound to be, because with an ordinary arranged marriage there is not much hope, there is not much dreaming. It is business-like; there is no romance, no poetry. There is no peak to it; you are travelling on plain ground. So arranged marriages never fail. They cannot fail, because there is no point. How can you fail in an arranged marriage? You were never on a height, so you cannot fall. Love-marriages fail. Only love-marriages can fail, because with a great poetry, with a great dreaming force, they come up. They touch heights, on the waves you rise high, and then you will have to fall down.
So old countries, those who have knowledge, experience, they have come to settle for arranged marriages. They don't talk about love-marriages. In India they never talk about love-marriages.
They have also tried in the past, and then they felt that a love-marriage is going to be a failure.
Because you expect too much, you will be frustrated, and the proportion of frustration will be the same. Whatsoever you desire and dream gives you expectations - they cannot be fulfilled.
You marry a woman; if it is a love-marriage, you expect much. Then you get frustrated. The moment you get frustrated, immediately you start thinking about another woman. So if you say to your wife, 'I am not interested in any other woman,' and she feels you have become indifferent to her, you cannot convince her - it is impossible, it is unnatural. The moment you become indifferent to your wife, the wife knows instinctively that you have become interested in someone else.
This is how mind functions. You become aware of the woman that you have married, and you feel the frustration is coming because of her - 'This was not a right choice.' This is ordinary logic. 'This was not a right choice. This woman is not for me. I have chosen a wrong partner, so the conflict has arisen.' Now you will try to find another partner.
You can go on that way ad infinitum. You may marry all the women on the earth, and still you will be thinking in the same way - that 'This woman is not right for me'. And the subtle craving which is creating all trouble is not seen. It is subtle. The woman is seen; the craving is not seen. It is not the woman or the man who is frustrating you; it is your craving, your desire, which is frustrating you.
If you can come to understand this, you have become wise. If you go on changing objects, you are ignorant. If you can come to feel yourself and the craving which is creating the whole thing, you have become wise. Then you don't go on changing one object for another; you simply drop the very effort to possess, to desire, to crave.
The moment this craving is not there, the whole world becomes divine. It has always been so, only your eyes were not open to see. Your eyes were filled with craving. Eyes filled with craving, the divine appears as the world. Open eyes, unfilled, unclouded by craving, the world appears as the divine.
The world and the divine are not two things, not two existences, but two ways of looking at the same thing, two approaches to the same thing, two outlooks, two types of perception. One perception clouded with craving, another perception unclouded with craving. If you can look unclouded, and your eyes are not filled with tears of frustration and dreams of hope, there is nothing like the world; only the divine exists - existence is divine. This is what tantra means. And when tantra says transcend both, tantra is not concerned with either this or that - tantra is concerned only with transcendence, so there is no craving.
AND WHAT IS IT THAT GOES BEYOND BOTH? That cannot be said, because the moment anything is said about it, it comes within the two. Whatsoever can be said about God will be false, just because it is said.
Language is dualistic. There is no non-dual language; cannot be. Language is meaningful only because of dualism. I say 'light'; immediately in your mind bubbles up the word 'darkness' or 'black'.
I say 'day', and immediately in your mind comes 'night'. I say 'love', and just behind it is hidden 'hate'. If I say light and there is no darkness, how will you define it?j We can only define words because of their opposite terms. I say light, and if you ask me what light is, I say that which is not darkness. If someone asks you what mind is, you say that which is not body. If someone asks what body is, you have to say that which is not mind. All terms are circular, so, basically meaningless, because neither you know anything about the mind, nor do you know anything about the body. When I ask about the mind, you define it with the body, and the body is undefined. When I ask you about the body, you define it with the mind, which is itself undefined.
This is good as a game. Language is good as a game - language is a game. But we never feel that the whole thing is absurd, circular; and nothing is defined, so how can you define anything? When I ask about the mind, you bring in the body - and the body is undefined. With an indefined term, you define mind. And then when I ask, 'What do you mean by body?' you have to define it with the mind. This is absurd - but there is no other way.
Language exists through the opposite, so language is dualistic. It cannot be otherwise. So nothing can be said about the non-dual experience. Whatsoever is said will be wrong. It can be indicated, symbols can be used for it, but silence is the best. That which can be said about it is silence.
Everything else can be defined, talked about - not the ultimate. You can know it, taste it, you can be it, but nothing can be said about it. Only negatively we can say something, but only negatively. We cannot say what that is; we can only say what that is not.
The whole mystic tradition is simply using negative terms for it. If you ask what that ultimate is, they will say, 'That ultimate is not this, not that. It is neither life nor death. It is neither light nor darkness.
It is neither near nor far. It is neither I nor you.' They will say in this way, but this makes no sense.
Drop craving and you come to know it face to face. And the experience is so deep and individual, non-verbal, non-linguistic, that even when you come to know it, you cannot say anything about it.
You will become silent. Or, at the most, you can say this that I am saying. You can say, 'Nothing can be said about it.'
Then what is the point of talking so much? Then why do I go on saying something to you if nothing can be said? Just to bring you to that point where nothing can be said. Just to push you to that abyss where you can take a jump out of language. Up to that point, language can be helpful. Up to the point when you take the jump, language can be helpful, but the moment you have taken the jump, it is silence, it is beyond language.
So I can push you to the very end of the world through language - to the very end of the world - but not a single inch into the divine through language. But this pushing you up to the very end will be helpful, because then you can see with your own eyes that there is this blissful abyss beyond. And then that beyond will call you by itself; then the beyond will attract you; then the beyond will become a magnet, a pull. It is impossible then for you to come back, to retreat. The abyss is so enchanting - the abyss of silence - that before you know, you will have taken a jump.
That's why I go on talking, knowing well that all that I am saying will not help you to know it. But it will help you to take a jump. It is methodological. It will look contradictory, paradoxical, if I say that all language that I am using, or that the mystics have ever used, is to bring you to the temple of silence; to force you into silence, to call you unto silence. It looks paradoxical. Then why use language? I can use silence also, but then you will not understand.
When I have to talk to madmen. I have to use a mad language. It is because of you I am using language. It is not that anything can be expressed by it; only your inner chattering can be destroyed by it. It is just as if you have a thorn in your foot - another thorn can pull it out. The other one is also a thorn. Your mind is filled with words, with thorns. What I am trying to do is to pull those words out of you. What I am using are also words. You are filled with poison. What I am giving you is again a dose of poison, just an antidote. It is also a poison. But a thorn can pull out another thorn - then they both can be thrown.
When I have talked to you to the point where you are ready to be silent, throw all that I have said to you; it is useless, it is even dangerous to carry it. When you have come to realize that language is useless, dangerous, that inner verbalization is the only barrier, and when you are ready to be silent, then remember well - don't carry whatsoever I have said to you. Because the truth cannot be said, and all that can be said cannot be true. Be unburdened of it.
The last thing Zarathustra said to his disciples is very beautiful. He had taught them. He had given them glimpses. He had stirred their souls. He had challenged them to the ultimate adventure. The last thing he said to them was, 'Now I am leaving you. Now beware of Zarathustra.'
So they asked, 'What are you saying? Beware of Zarathustra? You are our teacher, our master, our only hope.'
And Zarathustra said, 'All that I have said to you, now beware of it. Don't cling to me, otherwise I will become a bondage to you.'
When one thorn has pulled out your thorn, throw the other one also with it. When I have prepared you to move into silence, then beware of me. Then whatsoever I have said has to be thrown; it is rubbish, of no use. It has utility only up to the point before you are ready to take a jump into silence.
Nothing can be said about that which transcends both. Only this much can be said - and this is too much really. If you can understand, this is enough to indicate towards it.
I am saying this - that if your mind becomes totally vacant of words, you will know it. When you are not burdened with thoughts, you will realize it, because it is already there. It is not something which is going to happen; it has already happened within you. You are just an expression of it. But you are so much engrossed, involved, with thoughts, with clouds, that you miss the key. You are too concentrated on the clouds; you have forgotten the sky. Allow the clouds to disperse, and the sky has always been there just waiting for you. The beyond is waiting for you. Just drop the duality and it is there.
Nema komentara:
Objavi komentar