जीवन विद्या एक परिचय

Orderliness in human existence necessitates evaluating jeevan based on its purpose and the body based on its utility. The body serves as a vehicle for jeevan's awakening in human tradition.

Humans have not created the human body; upon birth, when a child is already alive due to jeevan's presence, we mistakenly identify the body as jeevan itself. Over time, the child adopts this misconception, perpetuating the cycle. To break free from this cycle, guardians and parents must attain wisdom.

A child’s body forms in the womb and is driven by a jeevan. This jeevan, already present in nature, begins to animate the body from the fourth or fifth month of pregnancy. Thus, jeevan and body unite within the womb. It's essential to understand that jeevan is distinct from the body. This distinction becomes apparent when we consider that no part of the body anticipates or expects justice, dharma, or truth. However, we expect and anticipate justice, dharma, and truth from every human being. These expectations being fulfilled is the manifestation of the ten activities of jeevan.

Jeevan has to be there with the body for it to be alive. ‘Jeevan’ starts evidencing the two activities of mun that are taste (asvadan) and selection (chayan) from the infant stage itself. Subsequently, analysis (vishleshan) takes place in vritti, but deliberation (tulan) happens based on pleasure, health and profit only. One of the activities of chitta – visualisation (chitran) – we do anyway. Humans have visualised and accomplished all the objects of their common and special aspirations because of visualisation activity. Even after accomplishing these, we could not achieve orderliness.

Idealism presented lofty visions in various forms, while materialism—driven by its three obsessions (sex, indulgence, and profit)—spread the culture of comfort and accumulation through education and training. Yet, despite this widespread propagation, comfort and accumulation did not become accessible to all. We have continued to mistake these very outcomes as achievements of excellence, of humanity, of human rights—even of struggle and exploitation. Listening to such claims evokes both laughter and regret. How could we accept that we have attained everything for humankind, that we have fully studied the human being? This is an issue that calls for reconsideration.

What is taught under the name of anatomy is merely the study of bodily structure and processes, yet it is claimed to be the study of the human being. But can one truly study the human being by dissecting the body, by counting muscles and bones? Can one understand the human being simply by examining eyes, ears, and other organs in the living body? In this way, tradition has saddled us with bundles of falsehoods: we have not actually studied the human being, yet we boast of having done so.