thinking about Gayatri mantra

the days are coming closer to take a seminar on Gayatri mantra.
i don't even have idea what all i can speak.
initially i thought that i should not speak because i am not practitioner of Gayatri mantra. later i thought that whatever i know i can share with others. if i did not benefit does not mean that knowledge will not be useful to others. earlier too i have had experiences that some time people are touched by the words which i might not have even noticed while uttering.
so i decided to give the talk.
and then started thinking about the topic.
yesterday i was thinking that Gayatri is not a mantra but also a life style.
it has three sections. first is to accept the divinity, second is to meditate and third is to seek the enlightenment. at least this is what i have heard many a times from different sources.
when i see this process this is the process of doing any act.
if a driver is going to drive then first he accepts the power of vehicle, which is to be driven. then he concentrates on the process of driving and performs set of operations as he feel and as result he reaches his destination. even this is Gayatri.
so if we see in this broad context then every act is Gayatri.
in this it may look like i have removed the aspect of divinity from Gayatri mantra.
i dont think so.
Belonging to Bharat has made me realize that divinity is not an external element to be imposed in any object or process. it is basic nature of any object or action itself.
i have seen cart pullers doing namaskaar to his cart before he takes it to work. mechanic will also do the same to his implements. and this seen from a beggar to a richest, from a child to old man.
so when you do any act with this view then any act is Gayatri mantra.
this way of looking at the like may also divinize the day.
so when asked how many gayatri mantra you are doing per day just means how long you are able to concentrate on the divine aspect around you.
does that mean that have for gotten the line preceding these three lines. the line bhur bhvah swah have been told as three Lokas, Worlds. they have been told they are Three levels of existence. so this line tells that i am not one but three that is body mind and soul. and hence i am more aware of my existence. if i consider myself only as body and act then mantra will not be complete. so wheni do any act i should be aware of all levels of my existence. while doing the sandhya there are more words in the gayatri matra at one point. it talks of 7 words Bhu, Bhuva, Swah, Mahah, Janah, Tapah and Sathyam. i think these words should inspire a man to dimension which are available to him. so he has to work to achieve those higher realm of his existence.
and of course the is OM in the staring, about which i need tell anything it is self explanatory sound.
sairam

Sri Sathya Sai Organisation seems to have started its activity in direction of it next world conference, scheduled this year. Theme is "God is, I am I, Love All Serve All". In Kobe, there was pre-world conference seminar for Zone 5 countries. I too participated in that.
At the end of it, i don't know how clear it was for people. Surely it was not for me. May be my expectation were different. Whatever may be the reason, no point in pointing finger. So thoughts continued bit more about that.

The first part first. For me "God is" is medicine for people suffering from TING (there is no God) syndrome. This statement will certainly mean great change for such a person. It means changing many of his beliefs and even the mind set, a quantum jump indeed. Thank God may of us don't fall in that category and it appears to be easier.
That does not say that it means nothing for the people who believe in His existence. For the people, who believe in His existence, it is reminder of His omnipresence. this ideal tells one to be constantly aware of it. So, it emphasizes on the such a practice, to keep it in mind at all the time. What will be the effect of such a thought for us? Those who are have tendencies to do something wrong may become more cautious and thus may be weaned away from such activity with this practice. Not only this, those who love Him, will find their object of love accompanying them always. So it is useful even for them. Similarly, I think, it will have some distinct effect for all the people at any level of awareness.
One can think even beyond. At first look it appears that this is an incomplete sentence but think deeply a nd it appears that this is onlycomplete senrence. This ideal indicates that God is not represented a by any thing else other than itself. To say that He is something, only defines a part of Him. We have habit to define any new object in terms of other known objects. We also assume that certain set of known qualities, which we have observed earlier in other object, in certain permutation and combination, will be able to define the new object of analysis completely. But this does not work with the absolute. All finite cannot add up to make the infinite. More can be thought about this, but at present that look like a mental gymnastic for me due to lack of any personal experience.

Coming to the next part termed 'I am I'. This to me is self analysis aspect of any spiritual aspirant. While first part was about macrocosm this part is about microcosm. This too is very important. Sai organization stresses on many activities which are apparently outwards activities. these activities have to accompanied by the internal inquiry. It has been told that there are many level of a being, lower physical level to higher spiritual level. In all of these level one refers one's own self as 'I'. At every stage the meaning of I is different. It may mean the body, mind, intellect, aspiration, positive or negative feelings, status of relation, and so many similar things. These can be said as different I-states. so one has to be aware which I-state one is in. The concept of individual and fundamental discrimination can be of great help in overcoming any confusion in case of conflict between two different state of I-states. Many a times Swami has told that in reality I is Atma or the soul. but we (at least I) never reach theat ultimate I-state. But we can always observe this which itself is a spiritual sadhana. so much at present for "I am I".

the last part is love all serve all. very easy to understand and practice. but in this too there are different levels. i think there is lot of material and many people relate experiences about these. I will not delve in this now. may be later.

while comminng back from Nagoya i met a lady co passenger. she was going through the assignment of her child. it was a nice poem and i liked it.

CHILDREN LEARN WHAT THEY LIVE

Dorothy Law Nolte

If a child lives with criticism,
he learns to condemn.

If a child lives with hostility,
he learns to fight.

If a child lives with fear,
he learns to be apprehensive.

If a child lives with pity,
he learns to feel sorry for himself.

If a child lives with ridicule,
he learns to be shy.

If a child lives with jealousy,
he learns what envy is.

If a child lives with shame,
he learns to feel guilty.

If a child lives with encouragement,
he learns to be confident.

If a child lives with tolerance,
he learns to be patient.

If a child lives with praise,
he learns to be appreciative.

If a child lives with acceptance,
he learns to love.

If a child lives with approval,
he learns to like himself.

If a child lives with recognition,
he learns that it is good to have a goal.

If a child lives with sharing,
he learns about generosity.

If a child lives with honesty and fairness,
he learns what truth and justice are.

If a child lives with security,
he learns to have faith in himself and in those about him.

If a child lives with friendliness,
he learns that the world is a nice place in which to live.

If you live with serenity,
your child will live with peace of mind.

With what is your child living?

i just thought of a dance format.
there is a man the central character who is attached to many of its subsidiary part. it stands for the individual with his mind and senses.
his senses are pulled towards the sensory object in pursuit of happiness. his senses communicate with the individual through a versatile mind. dextrity and versatility are characteristics of that mind but it does not have power. so to fullfil thedesire it saps energy from the individual. with every dose of sensory pleasure the craving increases and the mind becomes more and more restless. sensory object by their nature are temporary so they dont last long. this leaves mind to seek another object to satisfy. this saps away the energy of the individual. there comes a stage when there is not even energy to fulfill the demand of the senses and the individual feel the emptiness. he better thinks of giving up whole thing and start again. this means the death and restarting the life. but again it is the same cycle going on. he is again left high and dry.
at one point he cries out. and his cry his heard
there come in this cycle a vision where he sees s God intoxicated person. he wonders and prods his senses to seek. senses dont even have idea how they can derive happiness from that. mind also refuses to follow such a unkown path rather wants remain in this pain producing pleasure seeking process.
indivual is again reminded about this with reoccuring vision of that god intoxicated person. he pursues and the takes resolution to seek it. he trains his senses. pulls his mind and then it starts with the first glimps of that divine. and the then it becomes that he cannot resist even his mind. mind finds a uncomparable peace and joy. senses too become intoxicated . individual is attached to the eternal power souce and never feel dried up.
slowly senses too ask for more of such joy and push mind for divine and then mind pushes individual closer to divine.
same mind which was pulling away becomes the force to bring it closer.
at last he becomes another god intoxicated person joining the glorious group.

i go through news and sometimes it irritates to see that good questions are asked to wrong persons. it looks like the man putting question did not even tried to find the worthiness of the person to answer the question. for example they ask all sorts of philosophical and social question to a film star. rarely there is any question regarding nuances of the acting part itself. they expect them to give solution for every known problem. i am grateful to those people for not asking any scientific questions to their ideals. and these fan accumulating people dont know when to keep quite. they think that all the question which are posed should be answered.

when i said that worthiness of the person to answer the question. there is another problem i feel many times that there no sincerity in the question which makes even profound question look very foolish.