Tuesday, January 8

U.G. again

I started reading about U.G. again, and it has a profound effect on me (not really profound, but the most profound effect any writing had on me lately.

I realized a couple of random facts by reading about him:
First, I'm starting to know my watch. I look at it and the moment I read it I realize (somehow) that I already knew what it would show me (I knew it was 8:50 a split-second before seeing it; or O think I did - it was not a conscious thought).

Second, my blog is my misguided attempt at permanence and I hold on to it.

Here's a quote of a quote (from A Taste of Death):
"Attachment becomes a problem because of our wanting to be detached. What is wrong with attachment? Permanence: we cannot hold onto attachments forever. Knowing that, one gets onto the merry-go-round of detachment. All this looks very attractive to you because you feel that you now have the mantra which will help you cope with the aches and pains attachment brings you. Then you get attached to the concept of detachment and spend a lifetime trying to make the goal of being detached into a reality," says U.G., as I smell my early morning coffee.


Ranjith said...

It may be a good idea to read Jiddu Krishnamoorty as well...

Pretty interesting thought here though... But attachment and detachment are afterall two sides of the same coin... so where does the line gets drawn.... ?

utnapistim said...

I see no line to be drawn here, unless we choose to :).

It's been said (and rightly so - I believe) that detachment is one of the marks of an enlightened person.

A problem appears when people interpret that as "detach yourself and you will become enlightened", which doesn't work.

Believing that detachment will lead one to enlightenment is just confusing cause and effect, a logical fallacy (A => B does not imply B => A).

When you are "lightened up" (to use a different word combination) you are not attached to things. Your detachment comes as a natural consequence of lightening up.

The reverse is not implied though: detaching yourself from things will not cause you to lighten up.

Even more, forcing yourself into detachment is a sure path towards apathy (or carelessness or insensitivity towards others or lots of other 'not fun' places to be in).

Ranjith said...

is it detachment afterall?
If I am detached from something it means its different from me... So in the concept of Enlightenment, this is unlikely.... if enlightenment means, lets say knowing ALL, then detachment is creating a fragmented enlightenment... and therefore, it never is enlightenment....

I think, its not detachment... it is probably, ENCOMPASSING that as well... like saying, i have an MBA as well as the MS... I'm not detaching myself, from one of them, instead i assimilate both...


D, we need to have a drink and talk about this... this is turning out to be an interesting conversation...hehe


Ranjith said...

And, I agree with the "forcing" part... it doesnt work!

utnapistim said...

I don't see detachment as separation. Instead, I see it simply as the opposite of clinging to something.

In that context it has nothing to separation, but everything to do with freedom: as long as you hold on to something, you are not free of it.

... and a drink sounds about right :) I'll send you an email ... say ... in two weeks?
(my immediate plans at the moment involve a trip to Belgium for a week, and nothing definite afterwards).

Ranjith said...