If nothing succeeds in changing you, try Love || Acharya Prashant (2019)

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

If nothing succeeds in changing you, try Love

Question: Acharya Ji, Namsakaar!

I want to get rid of some compulsive habits and some compulsive thoughts. There are some aspects of my personality that I do not like. I want to get rid of those aspects.

Also, I want to know how to develop unwavering attention.

Acharya Prashant Ji: It’s such an easy demand, you know.

(laughter)

It’s a small question.

You are what you want.

If you want to change who you are, then you will have to want something radically different.

Your destination, your desire decides your constitution.

You become what you intend to achieve and be.

If you love the mud, you will become an earthworm.

If you love the Sky, you will grow wings.

Your entire personality will change.

That’s what you want, right? The entire personality must come apart. Then you have to change what you Love.

If you love the mud, then you cannot grow wings. Can you? if you love the mud, all you will get is a mud-worm. Do you have love for the Sky? If yes, the personality will change. The wings will appear.

The desire, the target has to be there.

You have to submit yourself to something tremendous.

Your goal will decide your life.

Instead, we let our life decide our goal.

And that is such a costly mistake.

If you want to let things continue as they are, then let your life decide your goal. Things will remain exactly as they are. The status-quo will prevail.

“This is how I am living, and hence this is where I want to go.” That’s how most people live, don’t they? Their goals are a product of their ways of living. Therefore they do not bring about any change, any fundamental change in the way they live.

If you really want to fundamentally change the way you are, then you have to have a goal that is tremendously brilliant, supremely attractive, and Surrender to it.

Your entire system will then be forced to adjust itself, rather take a re-birth, in order to achieve that goal.

The goal must not be what your system is already programmed to achieve, the goal has to be such that it causes a breakdown in your system. It tells your system that it is beyond the capacity of the system. Therefore, the system will have to re-configure itself.

And that re-configuration is what you want, right? A total change in personality. That can only be brought about under tremendous pressure. Unless that pressure is there, things will just stay the way they are.

But why will one tolerate so much pressure? Pressure is not welcome to the system, right? Who loves pressure? Nobody. Therefore, there has to be an overpowering Love. Only when there is such great Love, that one wants to take that kind of pressure.

One says, “For the sake of the Beloved, I am prepared to die. I am prepared to take that pressure. I will be shattered. And I do not know whether I will come up again.”

It has to be something overwhelming. It has to be something that numbs down your intellect. It has to be something that challenges your reasoning. It has to be something that goes beyond your reasoning. If it is within your reasoning, then your reasoning will shoot it down.

Otherwise, personality is a tough nut to crack.

Cosmetic changes in personality are easy to bring about. You can grow some hair, or you can grow a beard. You can start wearing some western outfits, or you can lose or gain some weight. Or you can get a good tan, or get yourself tattooed. You can learn a new language. You can develop new skills and hobbies. Such superficial changes in personality are easy to bring about.

But if you want a total re-constitution of the self, then that requires a change in the center itself.

And the center is that which you live for.

You have to start living for something very-very different.

The purpose of life has to change.

When the purpose of life changes, then the personality of the living one follows.

I assure you, most people carry one the same personality that they are born with. You might find it surprising. You will say, “Oh, but the child undergoes so much. There is surely a great difference between the personality of the seventy-year old and the seven-day old.”

No Sir. The personality of the seventy-year is in many ways just a continuation of what he was when he was a seven-days old. Nothing changes. The same instincts, the same basic tendencies. Only cosmetic and peripheral changes happen. Deep inside, the same thing – fear, want, greed, comparison, anger, hope, despair, lust. What has changed?

And that’s terrible, because man keeps wanting change all his life.

What is each fellow working for? Change. We all want some betterment, we all want things to change. Right? And here we are saying that the seven-day old is the same as the seventy-year old. Then what have we worked for all our life? What was all the striving, all the effort for? It has all gone down the drain, because the center of the newly born, and the center of the seventy-year old, remains the same.

The seven-day old is driven by the prakritik center, the center of the body. And so is the seventy-year old. Both are driven by their respective bodily centers. So the personality too remains the same.

Yes the height changes, the weight changes. But do you call that ‘a change’? That’s no change. The eyes remain the same. If you look at photographs of a fellow over the various points in his life-cycle, the face keeps on changing, the eyes do not change. Do they? Because the eyes reflect the mind a lot. The mind doesn’t change. Fundamentally, it doesn’t change. But you already have a goal. And that goal in your eyes is justified.

To want something different, to take something totally different as your goal, you will have to go against yourself.

You will have to bear that suffering.

A while back we talked of ‘pressure’. You will have to take that pressure. And that pressure is difficult to take. Let’s know the facts.

Do you have the kind of Love that will enable you to willingly pass through that suffering? That’s the question that you have to answer. Only in Love can there be a radical transformation. Most of us are loveless, dry beings. Unfortunately that’s not our destiny, but that’s how we have made the choice.

They say, “It was the love of the flower, that turned the caterpillar into the butterfly.” Without that love-affair, the metamorphosis won’t have happened.

Go, find a flower!

—————————————————————————————————————-

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

Watch the session video: If nothing succeeds in changing you, try Love || Acharya Prashant (2019)

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

The four grades of mind || Acharya Prashant (2019)

The four grades of mind

Editor’s Note: To receive regular updates on WhatsApp regarding wisdom articles by Acharya Ji and to get an opportunity to connect to him directly, click here


Question: Acharya ji, what is the most important lesson in spiritual wisdom? How to understand the mind of a commoner? How to understand a spiritual mind? How to understand a scientific mind? What are the challenges faced in spiritual journey?

Acharya Prashant Ji: One of the key lessons in spiritual wisdom, is to keep imagination apart from facts, is to not take your ‘personal world’, as ‘the’ world. It is already bad enough that we take ‘the factual world’, ‘the world’ to be real. And it would become far worse if we started taking even our ‘personal world’, ‘the imaginary world’ to be real.

The mark of the commoner is, he lives in his personal world, and attributes to it, the finality of Truth. The mark of the scientist, is that he does not live in his world, he does not care about subjective interpretations of the world, he lives fully in facts. So his science is fully objective, and does not contain trace of personal subjecivity. The scientist is obviously, an advancement over the common psyche. And then the mark of the spiritual mind, is that, it does not lend veracity even to the factual world.

The common mind is inclined to say, “Something exists, because I feel it does.” Right? “Something exists, because I feel, or think that it does.” So he says, “Something exists.” So his world is very, very subjective. Then there is the world of the scientist. He says, “Something does not merely exist, because it appears to exist. Appearances can be deceptive. Appearances vary from person to person, even mood to mood. So I have to verify. I have to cross-check.” And that is the scientific method.

Prove it, and any number of proofs do not suffice to ascertain the veracity of something. But one proof against the veracity of something, suffices to prove that it is false. That’s the scientific mind.

And then there is the spiritual mind.

The spiritual mind says, “Not only is the imaginary world unreal, even this objective, factual, scientifically proven world, that you see, expanded all around you and inside you, is not quite real.”

We have talked of three kinds of minds. There is another quality of mind, that is below even the common mind. It is the mind of the madman, the crazy man. The common man cares at least a bit for facts. The crazy man does not care even one bit for facts.

The common mind would atmost say, “Yes, this is the pillar. But I do not like this pillar.” So, to him this is a dis-likable pillar. The crazy mind would may even say that this is an elephant, and he would insist that this is an elephant, and this is his totally personal truth.

The more your truth becomes personal, the more crazy you are. The madman too lives in truths, but all his truths are purely personal. If he says, “This is an elephant,” – this is an elephant for him. He says, “I do not bother about universality. I do not bother about something being verifiable. I do not bother about facts. Obviously I do not bother about the Truth. All I bother about is my subjective perception.”

The more you live in your world of subjective perceptions, the more crazy you are.

Listener: So, in the light of this, this is the good reason for travelling and wanting to explore?

Acharya Ji: Yes, very good.

Travel helps you see that several of the things, opinions customs, mindsets, you were taking as absolutes, or general, universal, are not universal at all. 

There are alternate viewpoints possible.

There are alternate ways of living possible.

That does not mean that alternate ways of living are truer than your ways of living. That merely means, that there do exist alternatives, and Truth has no alternative. So, a thing to which an alternative does exist, is just not the Truth. If it is not the Truth, it must not be given the position of Truth. It must be taken lightly, casually, with a pinch of salt.

Do not be sold out to it. Do not become a fanatic. Do not hold your opinions, as if they are the last thing. But, if you have seen nothing, apart from opinions of your personal kind, then you would be much more inclined to believe that you opinions are not personal, or subjective opinions of a person, or a place, but that they are the final Truth.

It is always helpful to see an alternative. It is probably even more helpful, to watch your point of view challenged, even defeated. All of that helps you, come out of your false truths.

The key challenge in spirituality, is not the attainment of absolute Truth, because there is as such nothing to be attained. What are you going to attain with these little hands? Can you really attain immensity? You cannot. The infinite is not given to be contained in littleness. And we are all very little.

Hence, the key challenge is not the attainment of the infinite. The key challenge is to come out of the finite. And that is far more difficult. We keep talking of the immense, the great, the unknowable, the unreachable, the absolute. But hardly do we bother to challenge all the relatives, all the littlenesses, all the subjectivities, that we so very identify with. And not only do we identify with them, we label them as the – final Truth.

Challenging your personal truths, is most of spirituality. Those are the ninety-none steps. Ninety-nine steps of the personal demolition. And the final step, that just happens. What is incumbent upon you, that for which you are responsible, is personal demolition. You are not responsible for attainment of the absolute Truth.

That is not at all your responsibility, because you are too small to do that. However, you are surely, definitely, responsible to challenge yourself. That responsibility everyone must bear. That is the basis of personal integrity, personal honesty.

Personal integrity is – to not to take the person too seriously.

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

Watch the session:  The four grades of mind || Acharya Prashant (2019) 


Editor’s Note: To receive regular updates on WhatsApp regarding wisdom articles by Acharya Ji and to get an opportunity to connect to him directly, click here

Donate via PayPal:

(In multiples of $10)

$10.00

Books by the Speaker are available at:

Amazonhttp://tinyurl.com/Acharya-Prashant

Flipkarthttps://goo.gl/fS0zHf

coverpage

Why falsely satisfied with the personal?

Why falsely satisfied with the personal

Editor’s Note: To receive regular updates on WhatsApp regarding wisdom articles by Acharya Ji and to get an opportunity to connect to him directly, click here


Question: Acharya ji, many times of the day, there may be happiness in the background, but if any sad event happens, then it takes more time to recover to my normal, common state.

Why is it so?

Acharya Prashant ji: Don’t give yourself so much time. The Satan was once asked, “When you want to fool people, what do you tell them?” He replies, “I whisper in their ears, “Your time is, ‘your’ time.” Why do you have so much of personal time? Why do you have free time at all? Free-time, is the most un-free time.

Why is your time not committed, not dedicated to a higher purpose?

If you will have free time, what will you do? You will only use that time to destroy yourself.

Your time must be a something, that you are merely a trustee of.

When you are a trustee of something, then you don’t own it. Then you just look after it. You maintain it, you keep it.

You don’t possess it, you don’t utilize it.

And even if you utilize it, you utilize it for a goal that is not your personal goal. Why do you utilize your time for your personal goals? That’s bad, and that’s why you are punished.

Question: Acharya ji, for e.g. if a death happens in my neighborhood, I come to normalcy sooner or later. But if a death happens in my family, it takes me longer time to recover. Why is it so?

Acharya ji: What if the death happens in your family, and at the same time, an earthquake strikes the entire country. Would you still have time to ponder over that solitary death? Why don’t you have a higher purpose?

Why don’t you see that an earthquake is constantly hitting us? There is a constant upheaval. Nobody is centered, or peacefully situated. All are in turmoil. All living beings are passing through the harrowing cycle of life and death.

How can you then allow yourself to be perturbed by a solitary death? Tell me. Why do you have only personal considerations in mind? What does one death in my neighborhood mean, in the context of the billion animals that are being slaughtered every day? Why don’t you have a perspective? Why don’t you have a bigger picture available to you? Even as you are grieving over the one death, in let’s say your cousin’s family, a billion goats, rabbits, lambs, fish, cows, camels, and off-course chicken, have been slaughtered even as the tear-drop rolls down your eyes, to your chin.

In the time, that it takes the tear-drop to roll down, from your eye, to your chin, millions of living beings have been slaughtered, and you are grieving over the one personal relationship you had. How noble is that? How are you available to grief?

Listener: But, ultimately it is true.

Acharya ji: It is not true, till it is true for you.

Question: Acharya ji, why does it happen, that I worry only about something bad happening to me?

Acharya ji: Your consciousness is too self-centred. It needs expansion, it needs sublimation.

Listener: My daily life rotates around only certain aspects.

Acharya ji: Change the daily life. Give it up. That’s why you have been called here. Why must you preserve this thing called ‘daily life’? I invite you to begin afresh. Why is there such sacredness around your personal life? What is really sacred about this thing called ‘personal life’, ‘personal time’, ‘personal relationships’? I tell you, given a chance, you will want to give all that up.

Given a chance to really re-live your life, you will never want to live the same way you have done. Even the most self-assured person, would want to greatly amend his life, if allowed a chance to begin again. Is it not true?

Publicly you may claim, that you would want to again live the same life, if you get a chance. Inside you know, that is not the case. Nobody is contended.

Why attach some, or great sacredness, to the thing that you are already not satisfied with. Don’t you see a gross contradiction? We live in perpetual flux of desires. What does that mean? We are not contended. Do you see that? Do you see that?

And on the other hand, we attach the great sanctity to our personal life. Now, on one hand, you are not at all contended with your state. On the other hand, you treat it as some divine absolute – unchangeable and perfect.  Isn’t it contradictory? Isn’t it self-destructive?

Please!

I will put it in simpler words. On one hand, you are not at all satisfied with your state of affairs, are you? On the other hand, you do not want to touch a lot of things in your life, as if they are absolutely the Truth – not touchable, not changeable. C’mon, be prepared to discard all that. All ‘this’.

Question: Acharya ji, I am now realising that one should have a larger perspective towards life. Our life should not be limited only to one’s family and locality. Am I right?

Acharya ji: Obviously a larger perspective, obviously. But you have to differentiate between your personal capacity, for action, your personal, physical, limited energy, and the possibility o infinite realization.

One very well knows that hunger is widespread. That must be known. One has  a capacity for global consciousness, or is that capacity not available? But that does not mean that you will simultaneously have the capacity to globally eradicate hunger. These two must go hand-in-hand.

On one hand you must have sympathy, rather close empathy for all the animals being mis-treated, ill-treated, exploited. On the other hand, you very well know that you cannot go to Africa or Canada and prevent all the exploitation that is happening there. But what is it that you can do? You can at least protect animals in your vicinity.

And these two must go hand-in-hand – a universal consciousness, and local action.

You cannot say that because I cat locally, so my consciousness is also local.

No!

Because if your consciousness is local, then your entire person-hood will become very-very local.

You will become, in simple words, very-very narrow-minded.

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

Watch the session:  Why falsely satisfied with the personal? || Acharya Prashant (2018)


Editor’s Note: To receive regular updates on WhatsApp regarding wisdom articles by Acharya Ji and to get an opportunity to connect to him directly, click here

Donate via PayPal:

(In multiples of $10)

$10.00

Books by the Speaker are available at:

Amazonhttp://tinyurl.com/Acharya-Prashant

Flipkarthttps://goo.gl/fS0zHf

coverpage

Acharya Prashant, with teachers: Are you the suppliers for society’s demands?

T15

Acharya Prashant: The first question that a teacher must ask himself is, “What does he mean by change? Is he going to teach the habitual subjects, the habitual ways? Is he going to prepare the student to become another social machine? Right?

It seems that the end result of all habitual teaching is nothing but the production of a human being who fits in nicely in the social machine.

Let’s try to see. Let’s try to understand what is it, that we are producing in our classrooms.

There is the activity of teaching going on. It starts when the student is how many years old? “When the process of teaching starts? How old is the child when his teaching process starts?”

Listener: Five years.

AP: Right. Organize teaching?

L: Three or four years.

AP: 3 years or 4 four years. And goes on till the age of?

L: Till the death.

AP: Organise teaching?

L: Twenty.

AP: Twenty to twenty-five.

Let’s see clearly that a period of at least twenty years is being dedicated to the student who is emerging out of our education system. Are we one of this? Are we clear on this? For twenty years, the time has come to prepare a student who eventually comes out of our system as a product.

Now, what are we doing? Are we acting as suppliers? Please be attentive because we are trying to understand what is meant by saying are we preparing a child to be a cog in our social machine. We want to understand what does it mean? Twenty years we teach him and what is happening twenty years later?

We are supplying to the child back to the society. Correct? So it enters us in a process and then he leaves us and then he enters the society. Right? The society wants a certain kind of output from the teacher. Is that true?

L: Yes.

AP: The society wants a certain kind of output from the teacher that becomes such and such personality. Right? And what is the teacher doing? The teacher is supplying to the society what it wants from the teacher.

Read more

Acharya Prashant, with students: You are the mother of all importance

T3

Acharya Prashant: All your student life, you have been talking and studying about this and that. The languages, Science, Social Sciences – History, Geography, Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry. Now, Technology.

But there is one entity that you have forgotten so much, that it is very difficult at this moment, to even remind you of that entity. That entity has never been in the domain of your education. You have studied about a lot of things, but there is one entity that you have never studied about. Never bothered to attend to.

What is that entity?

Listener: Personality.

AP: Personality?

You will get to study a lot of Personality.

In fact, you have been studying about nothing but ‘Personality’!

‘Personality’ by definition is nothing but what you gather from outside.

Read more

Acharya Prashant, with students: The need to impress

Acharya Prashant: How many of you see, this, a very important factor in your life? Actually, we have been able to look at the issue right in the eye then we say that we need English to impress others.

Someone talked of communication. ‘Communication’ is an expression, right? And that’s a pure thing. Uncorrupted, unadulterated. But when ‘expression’ becomes a desire for ‘impression’, then are we really aware of what is happening?

You have the photographs and words of this man (Sh. APJ Abdul Kalaam), all over this place. Have you heard him speak? If not, look at some of his videos on youtube, expression is happening, communication is purely happening. But is there also a desire to ‘impress’ anybody? Did he proceed with a particular kind of accent? Does he proceed with great fluency?

Listeners: No.

AP: Is ‘communication’ happening or not?

L: Yes.

AP: And is communication happening with great felicity or not? ‘Felicity’ means, ease, smoothness. Is communication happening in a very smooth and spontaneous way or not?

L: Yes.

AP: But is he also inflicted by a desire to impress somebody?

L: No.

AP: And what would have happened, had there been a desire to impress the audience? What would have happened? Let’s try to understand, what might have happened, had there been a desire to impress the audience?

L: The pitch goes high and higher.

AP: What have you printed here? His accent or his words, his content?

L: Words, content.

Read more

Acharya Prashant: How to really listen to the Guru?

Question: In one video, you said that to listen to Krishna, you need to be Arjuna. To Listen to Ashtavakra also you need to be Janak.

To listen to you, what should the person be?

Acharya Prashant: The person should not be insistent on being the ‘person.’ That begins with not seeing the speaker as a person and not imagining the listener to be the person. If here a person is speaking sitting on this chair, then surely there is another person sitting on another chair who is listening. Now, listening cannot really happen. Because persons cannot really relate to each other.

A person is a limitation.

Limitations can associate with each other. But limitations cannot relate to become limitless.

You take one limitation and you associate it with another one, you do not get limitlessness. What you get is another limitation.

One person listening to another person will not listen to the Truth. He will come to some opinion, some conclusion, something of the mind or attitude. But he won’t come upon Truth or silence.

To listen to me you need to forget all about yourselves. And you need to forget that what you are listening to is a person’s personal viewpoints.

If you will insist on saying that what is coming to you is somebody’s personal opinion, then no person ever has the obligation to be non-resistant to another person’s opinions. Opinions by definition are meant to be analyzed, judged, dissected, then partially accepted or rejected.

You will have to see that that which speaks from this chair is the same that listens from that chair, or listening simply doesn’t happen.

Till the time there is A speaking to B, listening cannot happen.

Only Truth listens to the Truth.

Only that within you can listen to me which speaks from within me. And they are one. Which means that there has to be a certain unity between the ‘listener’ and the ‘speaker.’ I said,

to listen to Krishna you need to be Arjuna. But it’s not really Arjuna who listens to Krishna. It’s Krishna within Arjuna that listens to Krishna. No Arjuna can ever know Krishna. Even to look at Krishna, Arjuna requires eyes that are bestowed upon him by Krishna.

You’ll have to give your listening a total chance, a total freedom. And that is a very impersonal freedom. You’ll have to simply drop giving importance to all that is personal about the speaker.

Read more

Core value is ‘Clarity’

Why can’t my response to a situation arise directly of my out of my intelligence? Why do I need an ideal? Why do I need an ideal to show me the way? Why do you need to give me ideals? Don’t I have the power to understand? And can’t my action come out of my own power? Why do I need the support of an ideal? Why?

Every course of action and its opposite course of action both are alright in a different situation. So, how can there be an ideal response? 

Your very fundamental core value is ‘Clarity’ except that there is no core values.

Ideals obfuscate ‘clarity.’ So, anybody who will have ideals as core values will find that he is missing out on clarity. That clarity has also been given the name of ‘emptiness.’ Emptiness because it is clear, clear of everything. It is empty. That is the only core value. A little ahead that core value takes the shape of a few other core values. They are called Truth, Joy, Love, Freedom.



Read the complete article: Acharya Prashant: Your ideals will always limit you

Acharya Prashant: Your ideals will always limit you

L1: Acharya Ji, my question is on the applicability of idealism that is practicality of idealism. Basically, an idealism and practical approach both are separate, It cannot be together. But if some people try to bring idealism in the practical life. It’s always like to creates a problem. Like we all are on and off face the problem which becomes a prison for saying the Truth.

So, what my question is does idealism that applies to the practical world does it create the issue and problem that was meant to solve the issue and the problem?

Acharya Prashant: Good! Pranay?

Pranay has asked the question the gist of which is that following ideals often lands one into trouble. What to do when the situation is like this? What are the Ideals?

L2: Ideals are ethics. Just as my Life is there and there is no conflict in between me and my favorite personalities and I keep on following him and practicing him.

AP: Can you simplify it a little more? I don’t know what the ideals are. You need to educate me. What are the ideals?

L2: Which are right things.

AP: What is the right thing?

L2: Which doesn’t land us into the problem.

AP: How do you know that it is right to express your hands like this? You just did that. How do you know that it is right to look that way? You just did that. How do you know? Can you have an ideal for every situation? And life is moments and remember a moment is not a second. A moment is infinitesimally smaller than a second. And for every moment you need some kind of a response right? Some kind of a right response. Can you have an ideal to guide you?

What is an ideal answer to the question that I am posing? How do I know? How do I know that it is ideal for me to ask you this question? How do you know that it is ideal of you to listen attentively?

Ideals sound like a well-meaning word but what are they? What are the ideals?

Alright! Let me try something and tell me whether it’s okay. I am saying ideals are some kind of predetermined response to a situation. When the situation is like this you respond like this. X comes to you and your output is Y. That is an ideal, right? Input X output Y. Is that an ideal? Is that not what an ideal is?

Read more

Beginning itself is wrong

Defeat is hardly ever to be measured in terms of the events that happen outside of you. Defeat hurts exactly because defeat happens inside of you.

The beginning itself is wrong. The end will follow the beginning. When you have begun wrongly, the process cannot correct the beginning.

You might be a great driver, but if you do not know where you are coming from and where you are going, then your driving skills will only take you quicker to the wrong place.

What has begun wrongly cannot be corrected by the finesse involved in the process.

And one feels bad about his condition only when he strongly identifies with his condition.

Defeat is not the end of the war. Defeat is not in the end of the war. Mostly defeat lies in the beginning of war.

The more you pick unnecessary battles, the more you will feel defeated. The more you will feel defeated, the more will be the urge to fight another unnecessary battle. It’s a downward spiral. Once caught you remain caught.

Willpower, commitment, determination they are of so little use because they are extremely superficial. One can be a very committed person and yet have a very petty mind because one is needlessly committed. Committed to the wrong thing from the wrong center.

Efficiency or discipline or determination or commitment make sense only when the fundamental has been taken care of.



Read the complete article: Forget winning, first choose the right battle

Forget winning, first choose the right battle

Question: “What are the reasons due to which we remain trapped in defeat? We continue with our irregularities, knowing fully well that we are not doing justice to ourselves. At times there is a strong feeling to do better, but this feeling or commitment does not last.”

Acharya Prashant: In the right battle there can be no wrong result. Defeat is possible only when one is fighting the wrong battle. If you find yourself defeated, and defeated regularly, just know that you have picked up a battle that you should never have been fighting in the first place.

Defeat is hardly ever to be measured in terms of the events that happen outside of you. Defeat hurts exactly because defeat happens inside of you.

How is it possible for any movement outside of you to hurt you? That is the reason Kabir had to say, “Mann k haare haar hai, mann ke jeete jeet”(You lose, if the battle is lost in the mind). Mind is shaken up, impacted, and hurt by an external happening. This is what we call as defeat. Did this defeat happen when a particular event took place? Is this defeat the result of an action? No, every defeat is a defeat right since the inception of the action that at some point hurts.

If you are fighting a battle, if you are involved in something, and somewhere along the way that thing, the process, the result of an action, starts hurting you, it only means that you started from a position of inadequacy, incompleteness in the very first place. That is why this session on defeat comes after the last session on incompleteness. You start from a point of incompleteness and you fight, you strive, to somehow get over the incompleteness.

The beginning itself is wrong. The end will follow the beginning.

When you have begun wrongly, the process cannot correct the beginning.

You are proceeding with the wrong idea. You are proceeding with an assumption. You’re driving from the wrong place with the wrong map. Now even if the process of driving is immaculate, yet it would not help.

You might be a great driver, but if you do not know where you are coming from and where you are going, then your driving skills will only take you quicker to the wrong place.

Read more

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

Look at that which really bothers you

 First, create a problem out of nothing and then solve it and feel good. Life is worthy. That is the mantra of living. Spend the first half of the day creating the problem, spend the second half of the day solving it. And do not see that this mind that wants to live in this escape is itself the biggest problem. Hide that like an assumption. Keep that buried. The real dictator is hiding and all the time creating dummies so that you can keep shooting the dummies and feel like a winner.

Look at that which really bothers you. Look at the core of your fear. Go to your innermost pain point. See what is it that makes you cry out without any apparent reason. Touch your innermost suffering. Only that can be a true relief. Not that I am greatly happy because I got 2% discount on my new sweater. Touch your innermost suffering, not surface trivia that these days I am suffering greatly because the temperature is in the range of 15 to 19 degrees. Whenever the temperature is in this range I suffer.

This is not suffering. This is an escape.

What is the problem of problems? What is the mother problem? Can we find that out? What is the soil on which all these problems germinate, can we find that out? Or, will we keep ourselves occupied with rubbish? What is the problem of problems? Let’s go ahead, what is the problem of problems? Look at that, what is the real dictator? Not the dummy ones.



Read the complete article: Mind invents dummy problems to escape looking at itself – the real problem

Mind invents dummy problems to escape looking at itself – the real problem

gen 1

Question: I fear a student who would fully surrender and dislike a student not attentive. If both the states and anything in between are only reaffirming my ego, can the session be of any use to the student?

Acharya Prashant: Who is facing this problem? Is the student asking this question?

Right now whatever he is saying is a concept of his own mind. When he says can the session be of any use to the student, the definition of use is coming from…?

Listener: Teacher.

AP: From the mind of the teacher, right? You would regard one particular thing as useful to the student and she (addressing another listener) would regard another thing as useful to the student. You might regard that if I could get the student to laugh, it indicates that the session was useful. She might regard that if I could get the students to silence, then the session was useful.

So, when we say that my session is useful to the students then what do we mean? Whatever we will mean will be an indicator of my own life. What I think of as useful for myself that I’ll think of as useful…

Read more

The wall is as open a book as the Upanishads

Grace might be falling freely, but you are not in a position to receive it because you are confined with the limits of the person; and the person does not know Hindi. Hence you require a medium on the outside that tally’s with; who is conducive to, who matches with the requirements of your personality.

In such a case, the master, also needs to be a person. Because you cannot hear walls speak. The wall is as open a book as the Upanishads. But you cannot hear the walls speak. Because you are a person, you only need a person speak. In such case, you require that grace appears in front of you like a person.

Otherwise, the master is really not a person. And the more you advance, the more your person-hood is dissolved, the more you see, you do not need a person in front of you. In fact, the shape of the master will change according to your shape! As long as you are one type of a person, you will find that the teacher is of one type. The more your constitution, your personality changes; you will find the personality of the teacher is also changing. In fact, the teacher has no definite personality. His personality is just a veneer that he has put up in order to assist you.

You change; you will find him changing. When you are moving out of your persona, you will find the teacher is also moving out of your persona. That is why the teacher is bound to disappear one day. He appears only in forms that are useful to you. The moment that utility is exhausted, he is done.



Read complete article: The Guru is not a person

The Guru is not a person

just sold-5

To receive regular updates on WhatsApp regarding wisdom articles by Acharya Ji and to get an opportunity to connect to him directly, click here)

Acharya Prashant: You concern yourself only with the Truth. The Truth will take care of the material world. You remain with the Truth, the Heart, the Self, whatever you like to call it.

When the ego remains with the Truth, then the mind, which is nothing but the environment of the ego, remains alright.

Then all the calculations are just perfect.

These things you must understand. Read more

How to get rid of addictions?

 

Slide2

Question: How to get rid of addictions like smoking, overeating?

Acharya Prashant: Do you overeat when you are sleeping? Do you feel an urge to smoke when you are sleeping? Do you feel an urge to smoke, even when you are deep in relaxation? When do you feel like smoking?

Listener: I have been drinking and it started when I was feeling depressed. But later on, drinking became a habit. Then you drink because you are happy, you drink because you are sad, you drink because nothing is happening, out of boredom.

AP: Yes, but I still want to go into that.

Do you still drink when you are sleeping? Do you drink in your deep moment of contentment? You said, you drink when you are happy, you drink when you are sad. Don’t you see, both of these are moments of excitement? Do you feel like smoking, when you are utterly peaceful? Does that happen? Read more

The Real Saint looks like a heretic or a lunatic than a saint

himalaya1

The myth of the Saint, the Saint!

And with, the myth of the Saint we would be able to touch many associated myths. Like the myth of the respect: respectability rather, the myth of godliness. And of course Love!

When we use the word “Saint”, we use it obviously, inevitably in the same frame of mind. From the same center, as we use many other words.

Our language is a language of objects. Any and every words that we know refers to something; something that can be thought of; something that can be touched, conceptualized, seen, felt, hurt; something that is within the domain of the mental activity.

So the obvious result is that even when we use words like saint, God, Truth, freedom, joy, love they turn into objects due to the sheer fact of verbalization. Because you have put them into words, you have willingly or unwillingly turned them into objects. The same thing happens when we refer to the word “Saint”. Read more

Connecting to the Truth, or appreciating the Truth, are not possible

12687796_769461706493142_4797734967644914102_n

Listener 1 (L1): Sir, I try to remind myself that I have to first start loving and respecting myself, then I think there’s a huge conflict because the moment I do love and respect myself then I am immediately reminded of thousand of things wrong with me. Then I think that there is so much I need to change in myself. How can I be perfect and beautiful?

Acharya Prashant (AP): You talked about three ways of relating to yourself: appreciating, loving and connecting. Let’s say here is this poster containing a quote. Even if you connect to it, sitting there you connect to it, yet, what remains between you and this quote? Do you become one with the quote in an attempt to connect with it?

You remain. Read more