What is humbleness? || Acharya Prashant (2019)

To personally meet or connect with Acharya Prashant: click here.

What is humbleness

Question: Acharya Ji, what is humbleness?

Acharya Prashant Ji:

‘Humbleness’ is required, or meaningful, only in the context of an inflated ego. Because most of us live in stories about ourselves, and those stories cause us a lot of misery, therefore freedom from those stories is needed.

A mind free of stories about itself, is a humble mind.

The story could say everything. The story does not always say, “I am the king of the world.” Often the story says, “I am the most wretched person on this earth.” Nevertheless, irrespective of it’s content, a story is just a story.

So, what is ‘humility’? To not to live in the stories about oneself.

So, humility is not about having a poor, or humble story about oneself. Humility is not about saying, “O! I am the little one. O! I am the speck of dust in this giant universe.” You could have a big story, about a big monster. And you could have an equally big story, about a little speck of dust, right?

It is not the size of the character that matters.

It is the story around the character, that is the pain.

When we attempt to be humble, then we just reduce the size of the character, and apparently, relatively, new story comes up. But the size of the story remains the same, we said, irrespective of the size of the central character, of the central figure of the story.

Are you getting it?

Therefore, humility, is a certain cleanliness.

Humility, is a certain absence – an absence of ideas, and stories about oneself.

To be humble, is to live in the fact of one’s life, irrespective of how the fact appears.

So can we say that ‘humility’ and ‘honesty’ are two different words? Are they? Really? And then, can we say that ‘humility’ and ‘understanding’ are different words? They are not.

Are you getting it?

If you are not humble, it directly implies that you do not know yourself. Because you do not know yourself, the reaction to the ignorance is, imagination. Why else do you need to imagine? Imagination is a reaction to lack of self-knowledge.

When you do not ‘know’, then you need to weave stories and imagine.

I will repeat this, irrespective of what your story says about you, a story is merely a story. You cannot be humble, as long as you put a lot of trust in your myths, in your stories.

The more assertively you declare – “This is how I am” – the more it is certain that you do not know the – I AM. It is a strange thing you see. Knowing ‘how I am’, is an instant distancing from the one – I think I am.

So, the moment you know this thing called ‘I’, you will no more call it the ‘I’, because now you are distanced from it. And to call something as ‘I’, you have to be completely united with it, identified with it. To know the ‘I’, is to no more be able to call it the ‘I’. It’s a paradox, you see.

What is ‘humility’ then? To know the ‘I’, and therefore be a little cautious, of calling it – the ‘I’. And then that takes you to a totally different center. When you can no longer call, the usual ‘I’, as ‘I’, then how will you operate from that ‘I’? The center itself is gone.

What comes over then?

Well, who knows. Who wants to?

Why bother to know?

——————————————————————————————————————————

Excerpted from a ‘Shabd-Yog’ session. Edited for clarity.

Watch the session: What is humbleness? || Acharya Prashant (2019)

To personally meet or connect with Acharya Prashant: click here.

Donate via PayPal:

(In multiples of $10)

$10.00

Where is your Home? || Acharya Prashant on Khalil Gibran (2013)

To personally meet or connect with Acharya Prashant: click here.

Where is your Home

Question: In the book, ‘The Prophet’, the protagonist wants to got to his home, his people are calling out for him.

Acharya Ji, what is ‘this home’, ‘his people’, and ‘journey back home’?

Acharya ji: ‘Home’ is where you are. ‘Outside’ is where you think you are.

‘Home’ is, where you are.

‘Outside’ is where you think you are.

Do you get the difference?

You are always in Home, but there are some people who open their eyes and see that they are always at Home. And there are some people, who are in the Home, and yet they keep sleeping and dreaming that they are somewhere far away.

And not only are they dreaming that they are somewhere far away, they are actually planning, of course in their dreams, to go further far away. That is the ‘Home’ that Khalil Gibran is talking of – where you really are.

And you can never go away from that Home. That Home is ‘you’. You are always homed. You are always at Home. It is impossible to be anywhere else. It is just that you don’t know that.

You think you are away from Home.

Questioner: Acharya Ji, why do these people call him?

Acharya Prashant Ji: We will have to look at this. When you say ‘these people’, it appears that there are many people at Home.

It is not as if there are ‘many’ people at Home.

In your dreams, what you see is ‘many’. All occurrence of ‘many’, is a dream. There are no ‘many’, except in dreams. To the extent we perceive many people sitting in this room, we are dreaming. However, among these people that you see in your dream, some call out. After all, you only dream of what you knowDreams do not come from anywhere else.

Some of these people in your dreams, you know them. They belong so much to your past, that they belong to the beginning of time. They belong to the Source of time itself in that dream. You know them, because they are your very past, your very Source.

In that very dream, where there are many people, some of these people call out to you. They call out to you, to wake up.

Have you not noticed, and I am saying something new today, that some dreams have the power to wake you up? Have you not noticed that when you fell down a cliff in your dream, you suddenly wake up?

Have you not noticed that?

Now, it’s a very dangerous thing to say, because mind the will misuse it. The mind will say, “Yes I am dreaming, but this is a very useful dream.” I don’t want to say that, but you raised it, so I am saying this. So, some of these people, they call out in the dream.

Remember, they are not really ‘people’. They are not really ‘people’. To the extent, they are only characters in a dream.

Questioner: Isn’t it the Source manifesting itself in the dream?

Acharya ji: You are the Source. You are Source. And that is why you know those people. And that is the only reason why they can be there in the dreams, because there is intimacy at a deep level. The other people that you know, your relation with them is only very superficial.

But, there are these ‘people’, and your relation with them is very-very deep. They are coming right from that Source, from where you come. They are identical to you. They are just the same as you. They call out. And they call out in a way, in which the dream can be broken.

That’s what he is referring to.

Questioner: But in this dream only, he talks about many things, and says most of the times some existential truth exists in that dream only.

Acharya Prashant Ji: When he is talking of many people?

Questioner: Yes, when he is talking of many people.

Acharya Prashant Ji: Yes, of course. When he is talking of ‘many people’, ‘many’ that he is talking of are ultimately coming from his own experience. These people, who are calling him back to Home, are also coming from his own experience.

These people who are calling out to him are nobody else, but Khalil Gibran (the protaganist). If they can call out to him, that means he knows. He can surely talk of existential truths. It’s Khalil (the protaganist), in his own dream.

Are you getting it?

It’s Khalil in his own dream. The real Khalil in his own dream. And that Khalil will know far more, than the dreaming Khalil can know.

Questioner: Can real Khalil dream and go into dream?

Acharya Prashant Ji: Yes, of course. That’s a part of his Freedom.

Think of it: Where else can dreams come from? Where else can illusions come from? If there is one Reality, one Truth, how can there be space for illusion?

If everything is just Truth, just Reality, how illusion is possible?

But illusion is there.

Questioener: Illusion is there to the illusive mind.

Acharya Prashant Ji: How can the illusive mind be possible? If only Truth is there, how can there be any space for any kind of ignorance? Tell me.

Ignorance is a part of Truth.

Questioner: We are validating Truth.

Acharya Prashant Ji: Of course.

Who are you to not to validate it?

Ignorance is the freedom of  Truth.

It is so absolutely free, that it is free even to be ignorant.

You are so absolutely free, that you are free to wake up, and you are also free to sleep.

——————————————————————————————————–

Excerpted from a ‘Shabd-Yog’ session. Edited for clarity.

Watch the session video: Where is your Home? || Acharya Prashant on Khalil Gibran (2013)  

To personally meet or connect with Acharya Prashant: click here.

Or, call the Foundation at 9650585100, or write to requests@advait.org.in


Support Acharya Prashant’s work:

  • Donate via Patreon: Become a Patron!
  • Donate via PayTm @ +91-9999102998
  • Donate via PayPal:

    (In multiples of $10)

    $10.00

 

 

Acharya Prashant on Jesus Christ and Sage Ashtavakra: The world is a river; use it to cross it

T1

Acharya Prashant: Two excerpts are with us.

“Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them.”

BIBLE

(JOHN 2:15)

“Prosperity, pleasure, pious deeds. Enough! In the dreary forest of the world, the mind finds no rest.”

ASHTAVAKRA GITA

(CHAPTER 10: VERSE 7)

The questioner says that he is astounded at the commonality between Jesus and Ashtavakra and asks why are both saying that engaging in the world will not be a way to peace. What does it mean to engage in the world?

The world is a tricky thing. The world has to be understood.

The world has utility but the world is not the end.

One uses it.

Ever seen a man swimming? What is he doing? Why is he swimming at all? He is crossing a river. Man is swimming. Man is crossing the river. Why is he crossing the waters? Because if he doesn’t cross the waters, he will drown in the waters. If he doesn’t cross the waters or the river, he will drown in the river.

And what is he doing to cross the water? He is using the waters themselves.

Read more

An unnecessary relationship

An addiction is defined as something that is external, very difficult to get rid off; nevertheless.

There are no good or bad addictions. An addiction is just what it is — “An unnecessary relationship.”

Addiction says that you need something. Need is the first addiction. Whatever you claim that you need that is your first addiction.

That which begins as ignorance and dreams, cannot end as understanding.



Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant: Man’s most fundamental addiction


 

Acharya Prashant: Man’s most fundamental addiction

Acharya Prashant: Man’s most fundamental addiction is ‘man’ himself. ‘I am’ is the most fundamental addiction.

An addiction is defined as something that is external, very difficult to get rid off; nevertheless.

One can get rid-off an addiction. This feeling of taking oneself as one takes himself to be is the most fundamental addiction — the “I’’ tendency.

We are so staunchly addicted to it that it seems impossible that there can be oneself life without our conception of the “I.” It seems not only difficult but altogether impossible. It appears so difficult only because we are very deeply addicted. It is the addiction that starts with the first breath. It is the addiction that starts probably even before the first breath.

The tendency to take oneself as a limited being, as a body, as a personality, as a set of principals and concepts, as everything that one thinks himself to be. From that addiction, the hundred other addictions are born. That is why treatment of addiction is such a difficult thing because unless the ‘mother addiction’ is treated, treating the other addictions remains a problem.

It could be addiction of money, material, person, drugs, substance abuse, all kind of mental distortions. Whatever be the specific name of the addiction it invariably arises from the central mother addiction itself. That is why you remove one addiction and man finds himself trapped into another one. In fact, often addiction therapy is just about finding a suitable addiction. Don’t you see how addictions are commonly taken to be treated? A boy seems to be taking to drugs, the well-wishers would say, “well, let him indulge in sports” or if he is a little elder parents will say, “let’s marry him off.”

Do you see how one addiction is used to counter way another? It is because Man fundamentally can’t live without addiction. Because our fundamental definition itself is based on a great ‘attachment.’ Addiction is an ‘unnecessary attachment.’ For that which we are, it is totally unnecessary to be attached to that which we think we are. It is unnecessary but it becomes the foundation of life and that is all quite unfortunate.

There are no good or bad addictions.

An addiction is just what it is — “An unnecessary relationship.”

Whatever you can do without, is unnecessary and if it persists for long and deeply, is an addiction.

There is a lot that one can do without. The more you can do without, the better you do. The more you tie your existence to stuff, the more bulky, heavy, loathsome and tired you live.

Getting it?

Addiction says that you need something. Need is the first addiction.

Whatever you claim that you need that is your first addiction.

A need implies incompleteness. That which you call as ‘ego,’ is another name for an addiction to incompleteness, you may call it addiction to incompleteness or you may just call is incompleteness, they are the same thing.

Listener: Then addiction shows someway. For example, somebody is addicted to camp?

If someone is addicted to camps than he is not coming to camps at all then he is coming to some other place of his dreams.

L1: If somebody is addicted to some particular type of behaviors, can be his behaviors develop some understanding?

AP: Addiction in the beginning itself means that there is no understanding. What you are asking is similar to asking that if one dreams of camps, then will he benefit from a  camp? If one dreams of holy-scripture, then will he benefit from holy- scriptures?

The holy scripture is secondary, what is primary is the dream. Whatever is happening, is happening in the dream state. And in a dream state how can there be any understanding? It doesn’t matter whether you break your head with a brick or with a voluminous book? If you take a thousand page bulky book and bang it against your head, will it hurt less? The beginning of addiction itself is an absence of understanding. One must clearly see that the beginning of something cannot be different from the end of it.

That which begins as ignorance and dreams, cannot end as understanding.



-Excerpts from a ‘Shabd-Yoga’ session. Edited for clarity

Watch the session: Acharya Prashant on Rumi: Fall in faith, and you will be given wings


Connect to Acharya Prashant: 
1. Advait Learning Camps (ALC): Advait Learning Camps are monthly 4-day retreats under the guidance of Acharya Prashant in the Himalayas. To participate in the camps, Contact Sh. Anshu Sharma: +91-8376055661

2. Course in Realization (CIR): Course in Realization is a seven-day scripture based learning program led by Acharya Prashant. To join, either physically or online, contact Sh. Kamlesh Balchandani: +91-9630055750

3. Month of AwakeninG (MAG): Attend Satsangs from Home! MAG is an online series of discourses on handpicked topics by Acharya Prashant on practical and relevant topics like Love, Fear, Achievement etc. To join the online discourses, contact: Sushri Anoushka Jain: +91-9818585917

4. Meet the Master (MTM): Meet the Master is an opportunity to meet and seek detailed guidance from Acharya Prashant, either in person or online. Contact: Sushri Anoushka Jain: +91-9818585917

5. Blessings from Beyond: Weekends with Acharya Prashant brings you the unique opportunity for a 2 day 2 night stay with the Master every month. It involves two mystical days of dynamic activities, explorations of the self, sports, meditative reading, deep reflections, midnight walks and more.

Contact Sushri. Divya Mishra: +91-8527968862

Venue: Advait Bodhsthal, Greater Noida, India.

6. A Day With Master: A day with the Master’ is a rare opportunity for genuine seekers from all over the world to spend 12 hours with the Master at the Advait BodhSthal Ashram – Greater Noida.

To register yourself, to spend the day with the Master, send in your request atrequests@prashantadvait.com
or,
call at: Shri Anmol Phutela: +91-8859069127, Shri Mohd Azaz: +91-9871952116

7. Triyog: Daily morning 2 hour Yoga feast for your total well-being. Comprising of Hatha Yog, Bhakti Yog, and Gyan Yog.

Contact: Shri Kundan Singh: +91-9999102998

Venue: Advait Bodhsthal, Greater Noida, India.

To join any of the above programs, send your specified application to:

requests@prashantadvait.com


Books by the Speaker are available at:

Amazonhttp://tinyurl.com/Acharya-Prashant

Flipkarthttps://goo.gl/fS0zHf

coverpage

Truth is not the thought of truth

Who is a sage? A sage is the one who is extremely sensitive, who is able to catch even that which we normally ignore.

The saint is one who has realized that life is not also hell but just hell.

Because in thinking and concluding thus, you’ve missed the happening.

Gratefulness is not the thought of gratefulness. Joy is not the thought of joy. Truth is not the thought of truth.

Gratefulness means not having any sense of like or dislike.

The spiritual man is neck deep into action. He is not an escapist.

Because all your imagination proceeds from the centre of what you currently have made yourself to be, what you currently are.


Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant: How to get rid of pain and suffering?Acharya Prashant: How to get rid of pain and suffering?


 

Acharya Prashant: How to get rid of pain and suffering?

Question: Explain ‘bad.’

Acharya Prashant: OK. Let’s take something which you call as ‘bad.’ We will begin with that. Tell me anything which you call as ‘bad.’

Listener: Inadequate idea.

AP: Too abstract. I’ll then have to make it more abstract and Do you call a disease as bad?

L1: Yes.

AP: OK. A disease is bad only when you experience the pain and suffering associated with it. Only when a disease shows up in medical report. Let’s say there is a wound here. The wound has become infected and it is oozing puss. Now, you’ll say this is bad. Won’t you say that? Don’t be so guarded as if you want to block my next step.

L1: I just…one might say it’s bad, yes.

AP: What would you call as bad? Because I have to start from there. What do you see all around that you would call as unacceptable? Is there anything that you dislike?

L1: I’m just grateful.

AP: Then, then everything is alright. You are home.

L1: I’m celebrating.

L2: If I see somebody beating a child, I call it bad.

AP: Yes, yes. I like honest statements. He’s saying he’s grateful when somebody beats up a child.

L1: I’m not saying this, I never said that

AP: Then, why not say that when you find somebody raping somebody you don’t like it. Do you like it?

L1: I don’t like it.

AP: Yes, just say that. See, living in the fact means an honest acknowledgment of what life for you really is like. Do you really like it if you’re beaten up? Then why not simply say that. Why put it in abstractions?

So, you don’t like it when somebody beats a child right, Okay? Now, beating the child is a gross act. It is visible. Let’s say somebody is carrying a cane and spanking the child with it. It is visible. Stay with this…so, it is visible when the child is being beaten and these eyes can look at that visible, material act. Something goes up, something comes down, somebody cries. You can look at that, it’s a gross thing. It’s very difficult to miss it. Now, make it more subtle, bring it down a level. Suppose the violence is not so gross. It’s a more subtle violence. What happens in a more subtle violence? Come on, speak.

L3: Shaming.

AP: Shaming. So, now he’s not beating. He’s just accusing. He’s making the child feel ashamed using words. Now, words are also gross. A little less gross than action but the words are also gross because sensory mechanism can catch them. So you still call it violence. If you’re sensitive enough you still call it violence but somebody might say that no… no… no, beating was violence, this is just counseling. Right? You make it even more subtle. Now, the violent one is neither using a cane nor is he using words. He’s just using..?

L2: Ignoring.

AP: Ignoring. Wonderful. So using nothing or just using a glance. Now, it’s very subtle. Now, only the sensitive mind will say that it is violence. If you’re not sensitive, you’ll not even know that it is violence. But violence is continuing. Violence is continuing. It is just that now you are not calling it violence. Only 1% people are now calling it violence. What have you done? You’ve done nothing. You have just been apathetic to the child. Make it even more subtle.

L4: Thinking.

Read more

You are born, so that you may totally die

All Karma, all action is for the actor. And if the actor is a desirous actor, then all action just leads to a continuation of the cycle of desire!

When you start from a wrong place, then you cannot reach a right place.

A wrong place is a wrong dimension.

More action will not take you out of action. More effort will not lead to effortlessness. More desires will not lead to desirelessness.

Seeing is effortless. Desiring is an effort.

“Mumukshtva” is realization.

You are born, so that you may totally die.

The purpose of life is total death. That is the only purpose of life.

Immortality is to feel so fulfilled that you are not counting years anymore. You are not asking, am I going to die at 50 or 80? That is ImmortalityWhen you are no more bothered about time, then you are immortal.

When you are looking at the decomposition of compounds, you are actually studying your own decomposition.

Karma is always associated with desire. That is why, to give you pure Karma, Krishna talks of ‘Nishkama Karma’. Karma, without the expectation of Karmaphal. Then you are acting without the actor.

“I” tendency does not differ. “I” tendency is the same. The objects that the “I” tendency gets circumstantially attached to, they differ. And the object that you are currently associated with, guides the next object that you would be associated with. But this craving for association and subsequent association; the tendency to get attached is the same.

Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant: No action can lead to liberation

Acharya Prashant: No action can lead to liberation

Question: Acharya Ji, can you please speak something on Karma (Action) and Karmphal (Fruit of action)?

Acharya Prashant:

All Karma, all action is for the actor.

And if the actor is a desirous actor, then all action just leads to a continuation of the cycle of desire!

You look at your Karma and the Karmphal. Does any Karmphal ever mean a ‘full stop?’ Is any result, ever so very satisfying that it is final? So, Karma and Karmphal are a continuity. They are a cycle and they are a cycle of ignorance. The doer, the actor, behind the Karma keeps feeling that, action will lead to Liberation. Now, action cannot lead to Liberation.

Action emanating from the actor, that is the ego, the “I” tendency, can never lead to Liberation. Because the very beginning is flawed. The beginning itself is ‘loneliness,’ the beginning itself is in ‘incompleteness.’ The results of such beginnings cannot be auspicious.

When you start from a wrong place,

then you cannot reach a right place.

That sounds counterintuitive because we do see this happening in the world, right? You are standing at some undesirable place, and from there, you can reach a desirable place. But in the domain of Truth, there is no interdimensional-ladder.

A wrong place is a wrong dimension.

You will keep moving in that dimension. Starting from a wrong center, a wrong place, you will keep moving in a space that is wrong. In that space, you can travel far and wide. The space of the ‘Ego’ too is an infinite space.

Read more

Consciousness is a ‘kite’

Question: How was the Ego created? 

Acharya Prashant: Ego was not really ‘created.’ Ego is being created all the time.

Ego is a belief in ignorance and hence knowledge.

Consciousness is a ‘kite’ that feels it is flying freely. It does not know that it is being controlled by the Master, sitting deeper than its flight. The controller of all thoughts is the ‘deep mind,’ the ‘latent tendencies.’

Why do different people have different thoughts upon being subjected to the same stimulus? It is because their ‘deeper patterns’ are different, it is because their ‘deeper tendencies’ have been differently created.

What is it that determines our actions, our thoughts? What is it that determines the whole movement of activity that we see around? Whenever action happens from where does it arise?



Read the complete article:  How was the ego created?

How was the ego created?

Question: How was the Ego created? 

Acharya Prashant:

Ego was not really ‘created.’

Ego is being created all the time.

Would silence ever ask this question? So ego has been given a fresh breath of Life, when one professes ‘ignorance’ or ‘knowledge.’ If you ask something about ego, if you say what is ego? The answer would be this, “the one who is asking.” The question itself is ego. How was the question created? By asking. How was the ego created? You tell me, you asked.

How did you come to believe? How does you continuously keep believing that you do not know and secondly the knowledge is important? In this moment from where did, this thought arising you that you did not know? And this beautiful moment of Silence, what makes you think that something additional in form of knowledge needs to be added?

If two people are sitting together in intimacy. Is the moment not already complete? Do they further need to beautify the moment by adding questions to it? Ego is this that which feels that knowledge is needed, that which feels that the world is incomplete, that which feels that it needs support. A beefing up, a furtherance, that is Ego. If you are silent there is no ego because you will not be asking about the genesis of ego. And remember that any question you ever ask is ultimately a question about the Self.

You may ask a question about nuclear technology but if you go deeper into it, you will discover that it was the question about the ‘Self.’ Ego is that which feels that the Self is not yet fully revealed. So, knowledge must be further used to know it, explore it, to reveal it.

Ego is a belief in ignorance and hence knowledge.

If it is not there, it is just not there. Then even the question that from where did it come is just not there. Moment this question, springs up in the mind, that is the moment the ego is born. The moment when that question receds goes off to sleep, is the moment when the ego to is put to sleep.

Read more

An inner disorder is bound to be false

You don’t identify the false by matching it with your conception of the false. The false is identified by what it does to you.

How do you know it is false? If it unsettles you, if it leads to disquiet, it is false. If it needs protection, if it demands security, it is ‘False.’

Falseness has to be understood in the context of your nature.

Your nature is peace and hence whatever, leads to an inner derangement, an inner disorder is bound to be false.

L: Where is the mind located? AP: Nowhere, you are located in the mind.



Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant on J. Krishnamurti: How to know the false as false?

Acharya Prashant on J. Krishnamurti – How to know the false as false

Question: Acharya Ji, what does J. Krishnamurti mean when he says, “To understand what is, is more important than to create and follow ideals.”

Acharya Prashant: Actually, the first part of that sentence, is the absolute, the second part is the actionable. Understanding what is, is not really a task. It is not even needed. What is needed is the second part.

Just stop taking your ideals seriously. Just stop having, fanciful pictures of existence. And understanding what is, the present, will then no more be needed because a need is meaningful only when something is absent and we are talking of the present. So there is no need really then. So the useful part of that sentence is just the later part. The first part you can even ignore. That’s the thing about Truth,  you can ignore it.  You can totally ignore it because you can depend on it that it will never go away. It is utterly reliable, hence, you can forget it. The first part of that sentence is the absolute so you can totally forget and ignore it. The second part is useful.

L: Related to the same, I want to ask a question, “To perceive the Truth requires the understanding of the false.”

~ J. Krishnamurti. 

I have two questions based upon it. How is one to identify the false? And if we are able to identify the false, and if you have a doubt in its falsehood, that’s the question?

AP: No. See,

You don’t identify the false by matching it with your conception of the false. The false is identified by what it does to you.

I am glad you raised this question.

How do you know it is false?

If it unsettles you, if it leads to disquiet, it is false. If it needs protection, if it demands security, it is ‘False.’

You see,

falseness has to be understood in the context of your nature.

Your nature is to be careful and whatever demands care from you, is bound to be false.

Your nature is relaxation and hence whatever demands a lot of doing from you, is bound to be false. Your nature is faith and hence whatever will demand a lot of testing and verification is bound to be false. Your nature is trust that arises from that faith and hence whatever puts you in the situation of doubt, is bound to be false.

Are you getting it?

Your nature is peace and hence whatever, leads to an inner derangement, an inner disorder is bound to be false.

In short, anything that leads to mental excitation is bound to be false. That’s how you know the false. And that is why the truth cannot be known because the apparatus that you use for knowing is the mind and if it excites the mind, it is false.  Hence, the Truth cannot be know, because the Truth will?

L: Never create ripples.

AP: If it creates ripples here, please know, that it is false. And when I say it is false, glad that, when I say, ‘it is false’ that does not mean the object outside of you is false. When I say, ‘It’ is false, I mean that, this ( points to self) and the relationship. So do not start labelling objects outside of you as false, false, false, false, false, false ( points in different directions).

You pick up a J. Krishnamurthi book and it troubles you and you say false.

L: Laughs.

AP: It’s not about that book. It’s about the book, the reader of the book and the way of reading. In fact, the way of reading can be dispensed with. Just say ‘the book’ and ‘the reader of the book.’ And even among these two, what is more relevant?

L: The reader of the book.

AP: The reader of the book. That is where the falseness lies. So, will we be specific about the application of this word now, false? Yes?

L: Acharya Ji, Psychology, and Psychiatry,  these days, try to treat the mind by giving medicines, psychiatry or by suggesting some methods or therapy. Acharya Ji, to what extent are they useful? Because they do not treat the basic.

AP: The brain can be treated. The brain is just like any other organ of the body. The brain can be treated. So if you have a tumor here or some other malfunction, and if there is, a drug available. Kindly do not say that normally, treatment of the mind is surrender so I will not take that drug.

Those who are prescribing the drugs, are not treating the mind really, they are treating the brain, and the brain is the mass of flesh, so allow them to treat the brain.

L: Where is the mind located?

AP: Nowhere, you are located in the mind.

AP: As a person, that perceives only through senses. This is the organ, that is related to the senses. The mind and the brain, really have no particular connection. It is just that because you are identified with the senses, hence, even to talk of the mind, you use the brain. Otherwise, brain and mind, have no great, in-depth relationship. If they have a relationship, that is only in context of the person. Remove the person, and you have removed the brain.

Are you getting it?

L: Yes. Krishnamurthi talks about mutation.

AP: But does he says that the mutations happen only in the brain cells? I have not looked at the brain cells of people around me but I have looked at their facial cells. That fellow, over there, does not look the way he used to look two years back. Neither does that girl here or that boy there.

Does Krishnamurthi say that the mutations happen only within the skull? I don’t know of that, maybe a doctor is more qualified to speak. But I have seen mutations happening, in the faces. And flesh is flesh. If the brain cells change, that is no more significant, than the change in the cells of the face.  And the face cannot really change without the brain changing. So that is the same thing. So don’t be particularly interested in the mutation of the brain.

The whole body, of the wise one, bears wisdom.  It is for more, abstract reasons that saints are depicted as having an aura. It is just that, we show that aura, only around the head. I tell you that that aura is there on also, on the fingers, the eyes. Your eyes are no more the same, once you have been touched.  The eye cells have undergone mutation and of course, there would be an accompanying mutation, an underlying mutation, in the brain cells also, of course, that has to be there. But why think only of the brain, it’s evident and obvious even in the face, in the eyes.

Are you getting it?

When you are relaxed, you do not sit in the same way as when you are agitated. Don’t you see that there is a mutation? Your entire, body chemistry changes, when you are, relaxed. Don’t you see there is a mutation?



-Excerpts from a ‘Shabd-Yoga’ session. Edited for clarity

Watch the session: Acharya Prashant on J. Krishnamurti – How to know the false as false


Connect to Acharya Prashant: 
1. Advait Learning Camps (ALC): Advait Learning Camps are monthly 4-day retreats under the guidance of Acharya Prashant in the Himalayas. To participate in the camps, Contact Sh. Anshu Sharma: +91-8376055661 or Sh. Vishal Soam: +91-9358866667

2. Course in Realization (CIR): Course in Realization is a seven-day scripture based learning program led by Acharya Prashant. To join, either physically or online, contact Sh. Apaar: +91-9818591240

3. Month of AwakeninG (MAG): Attend Satsangs from Home! MAG is an online series of discourses on handpicked topics by Acharya Prashant on practical and relevant topics like Love, Fear, Achievement etc. To join the online discourses, contact: Sushri Anoushka Jain: +91-9818585917 +91-9818585917

4. Meet the Master (MTM): Meet the Master is an opportunity to meet and seek detailed guidance from Acharya Prashant, either in person or online. Contact: Sushri Anoushka Jain: +91-9818585917

5. Blessings from Beyond: Weekends with Acharya Prashant brings you the unique opportunity for a 2 day 2 night stay with the Master every month. It involves two mystical days of dynamic activities, explorations of the self, sports, meditative reading, deep reflections, midnight walks and more.

Contact Sushri. Hiba Khan: +91-8512828430

Venue: Advait Bodhsthal, Greater Noida, India.

6. A Day With Master: A day with the Master’ is a rare opportunity for genuine seekers from all over the world to spend 12 hours with the Master at the Advait BodhSthal Ashram – Greater Noida.

To register yourself, to spend the day with the Master, send in your request at requests@prashantadvait.com
or,
call at: Shri Anmol Phutela: +91-8859069127, Shri Mohd Azaz: +91-9871952116

7. Triyog: Daily morning 2 hour Yoga feast for your total well-being. Comprising of Hatha Yog, Bhakti Yog, and Gyan Yog.

Contact: Shri Kundan Singh: +91-9999102998

Venue: Advait Bodhsthal, Greater Noida, India.

To join any of the above programs, send your specified application to:

requests@prashantadvait.com


Books by the Speaker are available at:

Amazonhttp://tinyurl.com/Acharya-Prashant

Flipkarthttps://goo.gl/fS0zHf

coverpage

Pure giving

The ego is interested in its own nourishment.

Because the ego wants only that what the ego values, not which is absolutely valuable.

Getting tired of getting hurt is a rare happening. Man is extremely resilient. We keep on getting hurt again and again, at the same place and yet we are hardly ever tired of repeating the same processes, the same actions that bring us to hurt.

You can call it a stage of demolition. The old patterns are seen as worthless and hence given up.

In the first level, the ego gives, and this giving is of a nature that strengthens the ego. In the second level, the ego gives up its trust in itself and hence gets diminished.

In the third stage giving up does not happen. The third stage is of pure giving.

You just give. Meaninglessly, purposelessly, reasonlessly. You don’t even give, you are just being what you really are.

And when you just start giving, since you are giving to yourself, you start receiving a lot.

Tremendously bored we are with everything, that even an invitation to get rid of boredom sounds boring.

Your mind is already afraid of death, and Rumi is just exposing, or at worst exploiting that fear.

Given the way we are, fear is our reality. Wherever there is body identification, there would also parallely be the fear of the loss of the body.

Everything is done for a purpose, for a reason, with the expectation of gain. And where there is the expectation of gain, there is also the parallel fear of loss.

Because an action that arises from fear can never eliminate fear.

Take care of the ‘first’ in the ‘first place.’ Do not let the disease guide your actions. Rather, the first action should be to eliminate the disease. And these are the only two ways of living.



Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant on Rumi: The three levels of giving

Identify with God

When Jesus is acting and he is doing, then it is not arising from a motivation to serve his own personalhood. He has already arrived. He is home. He does not want to go anywhere or reach or become better. He is now merely doing. He is not aspiring. He is the doer, not someone who wants to be transformed through the doing.

 

When you just do then you have the right to call yourself the doer.

 

You are not discontented, your tendencies are discontented.

 

Fear is subjugating you. Fear has dominated you to the extent that it has stolen your identity. So in spite of you not being the doer, fear being the doer, you identify with the doer because you’re identified with the fear. You are not getting mad in lust, it’s your deep latent sleeping tendencies that are so lustful.

 

But because you in your ignorance, in your childish cleverness fight the truth, so you have no option but to identify with lust. And when you identify with lust, the doing of lust becomes your doing.

 

Very often you have to pay the price in spite of you not being the culprit.

 

What does it mean to identify with God? It means to identify with completeness.

Identify with God.

 

Give yourself up, and if you cannot do that then submit yourself as you are to the truth, that’s what the devotee does.

He says accept me as I am, O Lord! I’ve given myself totally to you. Good or bad I’m yours.

I’ll not even try to improve myself. I’ll not even try to correct myself.

I’ve lost all doership. Even to improve myself I must be left with a modicum of doership. I have no doership left at all.

If I am evil, cunning, ugly, deceptive, I’m giving myself to you. You take care of me. I’m nobody to improve myself.



Read the complete article: On Jesus Christ and Sage Ashtavakra: Don’t accompany the thief!

On Jesus Christ and Sage Ashtavakra: Don’t accompany the thief!

 

Poster 5

The thought ‘I am the doer’ is the bite of the poisonous snake.

To know ‘I do nothing’ is the wisdom of faith. Be joyful.

Ashtavakra Gita

(Chapter 1, VERSE 8)

Acharya Prashant: Ashtavakra Gita has been quoted.

“The thought ‘I am the doer’ is the bite of the poisonous snake. To know ‘I do nothing’ is the wisdom of faith. Be joyful.”

Ashtavakra Gita (Chapter 1, VERSE 8)

The question says “The Ashtavakra here is saying that doership is sin. But Jesus says ‘Let me do it. I’m the doer’. So why is there this contradiction? ”

Obviously there can be no contradiction. If Ashtavakra is saying that doership is sin, and Jesus is saying that He’s the doer, then obviously Ashtavakra and Jesus are not talking about the same entity. When Ashtavakra says doership is sin, he’s saying let not the ego act. Only the ego is interested in claiming doership. Only the ego is interested in creating and maintaining a divide in which one part can do something to the other.

The doership of the ego is always an exercise in fear, incompleteness and exploitation. Therefore, Ashtavakra is saying that doership is sin. When Jesus says in many place, on multiple occasions that He is the doer or the knower, he’s not talking as a limited person. He is not talking because the talking would gratify him, inflate him, magnify him, or help him become something. His doing is no doership at all because the common doership that we see is always the doership of fear and faithlessness.

When Jesus is acting and he is doing, then it is not arising from a motivation to serve his own personalhood. He has already arrived. He is home. He does not want to go anywhere or reach or become better. He is now merely doing. He is not aspiring. He is the doer, not someone who wants to be transformed through the doing.

Read more

You must be a temple dweller, who acts as the householder also

Your observations in the world, will never, never bring you to the Truth. Forget about the Truth, your observations will not even reveal the facts to you, if you do not start off with a clear mind.

I do not know who said it, but he said it beautifully, “We are not material beings, having spiritual experiences. We are spiritual beings having material experiences.”

That sums it up. You are both. The difference lies in seeing what you fundamentally are, what is the core and what is the gloss, what is the Truth and what is the manifestation of the Truth. You are both. But you must figure out, what you principally, primarily, fundamentally are.

You are not a Householder who can sometimes go to the temple. You must be a temple dweller, who acts as the householder also.

The worldly man says, “I live in a house and sometimes I go to the temple. The wise man says, “I live in the temple and acts sometimes as if I am a householder.” The worldly man gets neither the house, his house is full of stress and strife. Neither does he get the temple, as his temple is fake. The wise man gets both – the temple and the house. His temple is his house, his house is his temple.

And that gives you a hint. Is your temple, away from your house? Then you would be suffering, both in the house and in the temple. Then both are fake.

And this is one of the deepest errors that mankind has made. It has made temples, churches, and mosques, as separate and special places. Till the time, there is a house, there is a workplace, there is a marketplace and there is a temple; there would be confusion, separation, frustration and suffering in the house, workplace and marketplace, and in the temple. These two must be one. For the wise man, these two cannot be separate. And when these two are one, the wise man says, “I belong to the temple, which is also my house. He will not say that my house is my temple.

He knows that, fundamentally, he is ‘of the temple’. He is acting as if he is in the house. Not that he does not take up house related work, he does. But if you will ask him what is your primary identity, he will say “I am a temple dweller. He will not say I am a householder.” Though, I am repeating, though his temple and house are one. He could have easily said, that I am a householder and my house is my temple. No. He would say, “I am a temple dweller and the temple is also my house.”

And this creates all the difference.

What is your primary identity?

“Who are you?” That question must be rightly answered.

Who are you?



Read the complete Article: Begin in Truth, and roam about in the world

Begin in Truth, and roam about in the world

BFB1

“Do your duties in the world and also fix your mind on the Lotus feet of the Lord”

“You are like ‘Elder, the pumpkin cutter’. You are neither a man of the world nor a devotee of God”

~The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna

Acharya Prashant: We are referring to a man. A man is, flesh and blood. And a man is consciousness. You could say that on one end of man’s consciousness, lies flesh and blood, and on the other end, lies real living, realization, understanding, ecstasy, love. And man is both, rolled into one. On the end where man is flesh and blood, there is a primitive spell of conditioning. At the end, where man is realization and understanding, there is complete freedom – Freedom from conditioning and Freedom Absolute.

Man will always think and feel that he is one of these two ends and the other end will be a function of what he thinks and feels about himself. For example, if you deeply feel that you are flesh and blood, then you would still experience a void in your life. A general sense of dissatisfaction will be there. There would be something, that the mind would ask for, would chase. This, that the mind would ask for, this that the mind would chase, would be the God of this flesh and blood man. But because he has already thought of himself as flesh and blood, so this God too will be just flesh and blood. And sometimes, this, that he is chasing, he won’t even call it God.

Read more

There can be no controller and no controlled

Few things about the dualistic nature of mind, of existence, probably needs to be seen.

First, there is no control ever – in the sense, that there can’t be a controller and a controlled. There would always be a controlled one and another controlled one, out of which one would appear to be the controller. But no one is really the controller.

Similarly, there can never be an exploiter and an exploited. There would always be the exploited and the exploited. And out of the two exploited, obviously, one would appear to be the exploiter. And the one who appears like the exploiter, need not be a definite one. Among these two, the role of the exploiter would keep changing hands. So, sometimes the man would appear like the exploiter and other times a woman would appear like the exploiter.

Whenever, the natural harmony of things, of movement, of existence is upset then there is disease; disease on both sides – the man and the woman. When things are healthy, then, nobody controls anybody. Neither the man controls anybody nor does the woman control anybody. When things are diseased, then both parties control each other.

It is not as if, because we have named it a patriarchal society, which it does appear on the surface, right? That it is dominated by man; the man is the head of the family; the man controls 97% of the wealth; the man is at the top in most organizations, so the man does appear to be the controller. Which, I would like to submit, is just an illusion.

Man controls in his own way. But because, there can be no controller and no controlled, so the woman controls in her own way. Both are at war with each other. Both are trying to enslave each other. Both are trying to get on top. It’s the exploited and the exploited, just that their ways are different because their respective constitutions are differently from a woman. A man is constructed differently from a woman. So, the way the man tries to control has got to be different from the way a woman tries to control.



Read Complete Article: Is the man-dominated society fearful of women?

Is the man-dominated society fearful of women?

Slide2

Question: We come from a society which is patriarchal in nature, everything around revolves around a man and there is a general subjugation of a woman in the sense that the laws, the rules and regulations around whatever woman can do, not do; things like that. My question is that, is there a general fear of a woman in the man’s mind and society at large? Because we control things, we subjugate a thing to rule or regulation only when we feel a threat, may be inferiority, if I may say. So, that is my question – “Is there a fear of a woman?”

Acharya Prashant: So, you see you are already in hold of something important. At one end you see that it’s a patriarchal society that we are coming from. On the other end your question is – “Is the man afraid of woman?” 

Firstly, we are saying that the man is the controller and then we are asking that is the man afraid of woman. Read more