According to Suki Sivam (Sun TV, 22, December, 2012), wisdom requires ‘silence’. Whether you require it or not, yet wisdom requires it. As everything in this world has both merit and demerit, good and bad mixed together, not only involving but also supporting—including passing any comment, criticism and condemnation- is not wise. So a wise man will keep quiet and won’t get involved in anything.
To highlight his point, he shared one illustration. Four sannyasis were taken by an eagle to God’s abode. But on the way, the first one was dropped as he supported the eagle and condemned its enemy snake. The next one was dropped as he supported the snake and condemned the eagle. The third one also was dropped as he supported both of them. But the fourth one, realizing the inherent mixture of good and bad, kept quiet and reached the abode of God.
But if the question was asked, ‘then why Sivam is not keeping quiet and sharing such thoughts’, his answer was, ‘the mike was given to me and a stage was provided for me to share’ (added to this, he was paid to share such thoughts).
But for me true wisdom lies not in keeping a stoic indifference to the affairs of the world, but having the discerning spirit: when to support and not to support, when to comment and not, when to criticize and not and when to condemn and when not. A true wise man (jnani) knows that there exists no perfect being without any defect. All those involved in the affairs of this world know that they have to deal with an imperfect world. And true wisdom is required as to how to involve and also help others amidst the troubles. Though I have high respect for Sri Suki Sivam, the problem with such reputed speakers is that because they get a mike and a stage they have to share some thoughts which are entirely new and different from others’. The interesting thing to note in this is that he is not going to keep quiet (silence) and this won’t be his last talk on any stage, to prove that he is a wise man or become a jnani. In fact, I wish him to continue to do his seva as a speaker with a difference. For me he proved himself as a wise man several times by not keeping silent but critically approaching the subject and presenting his view without any hesitation.@ We need such jnani and not a person with a stoic indifference.
For me, keeping quiet and minding one’s own business not only is selfish but also proves the immaturity in us. Above all, for me, keeping silent and having a stoic indifference is also a kind of comment. It says, ‘I don’t get involved as all are corrupt and no one is perfect’. It is like giving a big lecture or claiming to experience inner silence. The moment you talk or experience that silence you already broke it. Keeping silence only means not commenting verbally but through our attitude.
No one can eternally wait for the waves to stop to take a dip in the sea. Similarly, no one can become a jnani (wise man) by keeping silent about everything—which itself is a comment. So true wisdom lies in the discerning spirit.
There were some good speakers and orators, who took a vow not to speak anymore. This decision they took most of the time, unable to face severe criticism, sometimes even personal attack on them by using unparliamentary words. As hurt by few, they decided to withdraw. But they cannot keep quiet for a long time as that is not part of their nature. They resurfaced with various forms but continue to talk. This is normal as Gita well said: natural tendencies. What will one gain by repression? [3.33].
So instead of ‘repressing’ one’s nature the best option is to discipline it and this alone should be the mark of a true Jnani.
Though the story that Sivam told is an illustration and we should not stretch beyond its central message, still there is some inconsistency. When the sannyasis were taken by the Eagle, after seeing the first one fall, how and why could the second one condemn the very same bird that carries him? The same is the case with the third. When he saw that two of his companions already fell, like the fourth he also should have kept silent. Anyhow, every illustration has its own illogic and inconsistencies and we should not probe it too much.
Db. Kumbakonam.
December 22, 2012’
@ I have high regard for Sri Suki Sivam. He is a speaker with a difference who always introduces new insights in any thought. For example, in a recent debate in Podhigai TV by Kamban Kazhagam (05/01/2013)on the topic whether Kampan highlights ‘dharma, artha or kama’ of Valluvar in his epic, he brought a new twist to the entire debate. After Prof. Satyaseelan gave his verdict in favor of ‘dharma’, at the end (kama being eliminated by the audience vote) both Dr. Arivoli gave his view in favor of ‘kama’ and Sri Lankan Jayaraj in favor of ‘dharma. However, by pointing out that a level playing field is not provided for both ‘kama’ and ‘artha’ by introducing ‘dharma’ as a third party to contend, as ‘dharma’ being proved as the basis for both ‘kama and artha’ by Jayaraj, Sivam not only dismissed the verdict by Satyaseelan but also recommended an entire debate to be done again between ‘kama’ and ‘artha’. No one could bring such a twist to the entire debate not only by such a logic but with rationalistic argument. Like+wise, Sivam challenges several times the traditional values and views held in our society. So we need such ‘jnani’ to speak more and give his revolutionary (sometimes controversial) thoughts than keeping a stoic indifference.
Erode (camp)
06/01/2013
###
According to Suki Sivam (Sun TV, 22, December, 2012), wisdom requires ‘silence’. Whether you require it or not, yet wisdom requires it. As everything in this world has both merit and demerit, good and bad mixed together, not only involving but also supporting—including passing any comment, criticism and condemnation- is not wise. So a wise man will keep quiet and won’t get involved in anything.
To highlight his point, he shared one illustration. Four sannyasis were taken by an eagle to God’s abode. But on the way, the first one was dropped as he supported the eagle and condemned its enemy snake. The next one was dropped as he supported the snake and condemned the eagle. The third one also was dropped as he supported both of them. But the fourth one, realizing the inherent mixture of good and bad, kept quiet and reached the abode of God.
But if the question was asked, ‘then why Sivam is not keeping quiet and sharing such thoughts’, his answer was, ‘the mike was given to me and a stage was provided for me to share’ (added to this, he was paid to share such thoughts).
But for me true wisdom lies not in keeping a stoic indifference to the affairs of the world, but having the discerning spirit: when to support and not to support, when to comment and not, when to criticize and not and when to condemn and when not. A true wise man (jnani) knows that there exists no perfect being without any defect. All those involved in the affairs of this world know that they have to deal with an imperfect world. And true wisdom is required as to how to involve and also help others amidst the troubles. Though I have high respect for Sri Suki Sivam, the problem with such reputed speakers is that because they get a mike and a stage they have to share some thoughts which are entirely new and different from others’. The interesting thing to note in this is that he is not going to keep quiet (silence) and this won’t be his last talk on any stage, to prove that he is a wise man or become a jnani. In fact, I wish him to continue to do his seva as a speaker with a difference. For me he proved himself as a wise man several times by not keeping silent but critically approaching the subject and presenting his view without any hesitation.@ We need such jnani and not a person with a stoic indifference.
For me, keeping quiet and minding one’s own business not only is selfish but also proves the immaturity in us. Above all, for me, keeping silent and having a stoic indifference is also a kind of comment. It says, ‘I don’t get involved as all are corrupt and no one is perfect’. It is like giving a big lecture or claiming to experience inner silence. The moment you talk or experience that silence you already broke it. Keeping silence only means not commenting verbally but through our attitude.
No one can eternally wait for the waves to stop to take a dip in the sea. Similarly, no one can become a jnani (wise man) by keeping silent about everything—which itself is a comment. So true wisdom lies in the discerning spirit.
There were some good speakers and orators, who took a vow not to speak anymore. This decision they took most of the time, unable to face severe criticism, sometimes even personal attack on them by using unparliamentary words. As hurt by few, they decided to withdraw. But they cannot keep quiet for a long time as that is not part of their nature. They resurfaced with various forms but continue to talk. This is normal as Gita well said: natural tendencies. What will one gain by repression? [3.33].
So instead of ‘repressing’ one’s nature the best option is to discipline it and this alone should be the mark of a true Jnani.
Though the story that Sivam told is an illustration and we should not stretch beyond its central message, still there is some inconsistency. When the sannyasis were taken by the Eagle, after seeing the first one fall, how and why could the second one condemn the very same bird that carries him? The same is the case with the third. When he saw that two of his companions already fell, like the fourth he also should have kept silent. Anyhow, every illustration has its own illogic and inconsistencies and we should not probe it too much.
Db. Kumbakonam.
December 22, 2012’
@ I have high regard for Sri Suki Sivam. He is a speaker with a difference who always introduces new insights in any thought. For example, in a recent debate in Podhigai TV by Kamban Kazhagam (05/01/2013)on the topic whether Kampan highlights ‘dharma, artha or kama’ of Valluvar in his epic, he brought a new twist to the entire debate. After Prof. Satyaseelan gave his verdict in favor of ‘dharma’, at the end (kama being eliminated by the audience vote) both Dr. Arivoli gave his view in favor of ‘kama’ and Sri Lankan Jayaraj in favor of ‘dharma. However, by pointing out that a level playing field is not provided for both ‘kama’ and ‘artha’ by introducing ‘dharma’ as a third party to contend, as ‘dharma’ being proved as the basis for both ‘kama and artha’ by Jayaraj, Sivam not only dismissed the verdict by Satyaseelan but also recommended an entire debate to be done again between ‘kama’ and ‘artha’. No one could bring such a twist to the entire debate not only by such a logic but with rationalistic argument. Like+wise, Sivam challenges several times the traditional values and views held in our society. So we need such ‘jnani’ to speak more and give his revolutionary (sometimes controversial) thoughts than keeping a stoic indifference.
Erode (camp)
06/01/2013
Leave a Reply