Chapter 9: A Philosopher Asks Buddha
In African mythology there is a bird: the name is woofle-woofle - African. The bird is one of the most mythical of all the mythologies of the world. That bird has only one peculiarity: it is not interested in where it is going, it is only interested in where it is coming from - so it goes backwards. It never reaches anywhere because it is always interested in where it is coming from. It is interested in the past. That is as if you are old and going towards the womb. This is impossible - but this is how human mind functions.
With logic you move towards the source; with love you move towards the ultimate flowering - the dimensions are different. Logic asks, “Who created the world?” It is interested in the creator, in the past, the original source - the Gangotri, from where the Ganges flows. Love never asks who created the world. It is already there, so why bother? Whosoever created ABC makes no difference. How is it going to affect you, whoever created the world? Whether it was a Hindu god, a Brahma, or a Christian trinity - what difference does it make?
Love is interested in what the ultimate flowering is going to be. Love is interested in buddhahood. Love is interested what is going to happen to me, to my seed, how it will flower. Note the difference: logic is always interested in the known, in the past, the path that you have already traveled; love is always interested in the unknown, in the ultimate flowering, the path that you have not traveled - not only not traveled, the path that you have not even imagined, not even dreamed of.
That’s why a philosopher rarely comes to a buddha. They are moving in diametrically opposite directions; a philosopher going to the past, a buddha moving to the future. Their departing point may be the same, but there is no meeting point. But when a philosopher comes to a buddha.rarely it happens, but whenever it happens there is immediate transformation.
Why? Because if a philosopher comes to a buddha, it means deep down he has understood the failure of philosophy. Otherwise, why would he have come? Deep down he has felt the failure of logic. He has made every effort to know truth through it: arguing about and about, for, in favor, against. He has been arguing and arguing and has now come to the point where he knows the whole thing is futile; nothing can be known through it. This failure gives him the deepest humility possible in the world. Even an ignorant man is not so humble, because he is not such a deep failure. He has not come to know the suffering of failure. He has not been thrown from the peak to the valley.
This philosopher was thinking that he was at the peak. Suddenly he became aware that he had been standing in the valley and dreaming about the peak. There had never been a peak: he had not moved a single inch. The truth had remained as unknown as ever. His whole life had been a waste. When somebody comes to feel this, suddenly the ego disappears, one becomes humble. And unless you are humble, you cannot come to a buddha. Only humbleness, deep humility, can bring you to a buddha - now you are ready to learn, because you don’t know anything.