Osho - Walk
Without Feet, Fly Without Wings and Think Without Mind
Chapter 3. Love
is a Resurrection
Question 1:
What is herenow? Does 'thought' form part
of it? If so, then all-time and all-things are now. Or... Is herenow only in
no-mind?
Divya, thought is the capacity
of not being here - so thought cannot exist in the herenow, it cannot be part
of it. That is impossible. Thought can only be either of the past or of the
future. Thought can never be of the present. In the very process of thinking,
that is implied; it is intrinsic to it.
The moment you think, either
you think of the past or you think of the future. It may be the immediate past,
but it is still past - it is never the present, it cannot be the present.
Thought needs space. And the
present moment has no space in it. Thought creates the past and the future to
live in. The bigger the past, the more easily thought can move; the bigger the
future, again, the more easily thought can move. The present is not capable of
giving that space for thought to move.
The present moment is a moment
of no-mind. Whenever you are in the present you don't function as a mind. Your
body is in the present but your mind is never. Your body is always in the
present - that's why the body is so beautiful and mind is so ugly.
And, down the ages, you have
been taught to be with the mind and against the body. That has been the
greatest calamity humanity has suffered up to now. If a new humanity is to be,
we will have to put things right - you have to be with the body and not with
the mind.
Use the mind, but never get
identified with it. The mind is a good slave, but a very bad master. The body
is wiser.
When you are hungry, you are
hungry herenow; you cannot be hungry in the future and you cannot be hungry in
the past. When you are feeling thirsty, your throat is feeling it right now -
it is immediate, it has a presence. But your mind is running in all
directions... so your body and mind never meet.
That's how you have become
split, that's how schizophrenia has entered into the very being of man.
Get out of the mind and get
into the body. The more you are in your body, the more natural you will be. The
more you are in the body, the closer to God you will be.
Mind is just a device. Good!
Helpful! Can be used in a thousand and one ways! But it is from there that the
problem arises - because it can be used in so many ways, you start becoming
dependent on it and by and by you lose consciousness of the present and you
become focussed with the mind.
Then your life will be dry, a
wasteland.
And suddenly questions will
arise: What is the meaning of life? - because mind cannot supply any meaning.
Mind cannot give you any end. Mind cannot help you to live. It cannot give you
life! It can give you technology, it can give you bigger machines, it can give
you more affluence - but it cannot give you more life, more being.
So riches go on growing.
Technology goes on becoming more and more sophisticated... and man becomes more
and more poor. This is strange! that outside riches go on accumulating and
inside man becomes a beggar. Never before in the history of man was there such
inner emptiness, such inner meaninglessness, such inner poverty.
The reason is: significance
comes from the body - the body is the body of God. Mind is man- created: body
is still in God, it still exists in God, it still breathes God.
You ask: what is herenow?
Now, if any mind answer is
given to you, that won't be the right answer - because anything that the mind
can say as a definition of herenow will be wrong; anything whatsoever, it will
be wrong. Mind knows nothing of herenow! How can it define it? Just be silent;
for a moment, just be... and it is there.
This is herenow! I will not give
you a definition, because definitions come from the mind, and definitions will
be taken by the mind, and herenow is an existential experience... these trees,
this bird calling, and the traffic noise, and the train, and the sun and the
trees... and you, and me... and this silence, this presence...
When not even a single thought
is stirring in you, when the screen is utterly empty, not even a single picture
moves... this is... and this cannot be defined. You can experience it; it is
available. It is everybody's right to experience it, but how to define it? If
you try to define it you will have to bring past and future. Go to the
dictionaries, go to the Encyclopedia Britannica - what will they say? They will
say the present is a moment between the past and the future - that's the only
way to define it!
Now can there be a more wrong
way to define the present? If you have to bring past and future into the
definition, if you cannot define the present without bringing past and future
into it, how are you going to define it?
The present is neither past nor
future - and it is not between the two!
It cannot be between the two, because the past is no more and the future is not
yet. How can the present be between two non-existentials? The present is
existential; how can existence be defined by something which is not? That is
utter absurdity! But that's where logic moves. Logic appears very logical, but
remains rooted in absurdity.
The present is not between the
past and the future: the present is beyond past and future. The present is
eternity. The present is not even part of time! And it is not that the time
passes: we pass, time remains; we come and go, time remains. It is not that the
moment that was here just a moment before has become past, no. It is a single moment,
utterly one. It is eternity. It is not passing, it is not going anywhere.
Have you not observed some
time, sitting in a train, waiting on a station, and your train starts moving
and you feel the other train has started moving which is just on the other
track? Or, the other train starts moving and you feel your train has started
moving, and then you look closely and you find that, no, your train is not
moving, the other train is moving.
Time remains there - we go on
moving, we change. The ocean of time is there - the fish goes on moving. The
movement is in our minds. Mind is movement. Truth is unmoving; it is always the
same.
Just see: when you were born...
have you changed since then? Yes, on one level you have changed, certainly -
your body has grown, you are young or old, and so many things you have lived
through, and experiences, and frustrations, and ex-citements, and ecstasies,
and all that life gives... But go deep down: have you really changed on that
plane? at the very core of your being? Are you not the same? There nothing has
changed. It is where you were, and it is where you will ever be - it is always
the same there, it is one climate.
On the surface things go on
changing. The wheel of the cart goes on moving, but it moves on something which
remains unmoving: the axle. You are both the circumference and the axle, the
centre. Even the cyclone is not there at the centre - there is silence. Nothing
ever moves there.
That is your being! What name
you give to it matters not. That centre of the cyclone... that centre of the
cyclone is herenow; it is not part of time. It is eternity.
You ask me: what is herenow?
Feel it! Experience it! That's
what we are doing here! What is meditation? - getting into here... now.
What is love? - getting into herenow.
What is celebration? - getting into herenow. But no definition is possible.
Getting-into is possible,
because in fact you have never got out of it. It is there! You can again turn
and face it.
While making love to a woman or
to a man, have you not felt the herenow? If you have not felt it then you have
not loved. Making love to a woman, have you not forgotten the past? has not the
past utterly disappeared in that moment? In that moment do you have a past, a
history, an autobiography? If you have, then you don't know how to love. Then
you have been just playing the game of love not knowing exactly what it is -
you have not loved.
While making love, your
autobiography simply disappears. There is no more any past - as if you had
never existed. You are not old - in that moment you are virgin newness; in that
moment you are born for the first time; in that moment there is rebirth. Love
is resurrection. And there is no future. Is there tomorrow? While making love
to your woman, are you thinking of the tomorrow? what you are going to do
tomorrow? Then you are not with the woman and you are not in love either. All
thinking stops - that's the joy of love!
That's why I say that sex and
samadhi are joined together. Sex is the lowest rung, samadhi is the highest
rung, of the same ladder. They belong to the same ladder - sex the lowest rung,
samadhi the highest rung. But the ladder is the same. There is an affinity.
Man got the idea of samadhi
from two things: sex and sleep. Deep sleep is also on the same ladder.
Man became alert to the
phenomenon of samadhi, became excited, intrigued, by the phenomena of love and
sleep - because in both these moments, time disappears, time stops, mind stops,
thinking no longer functions - and because thinking no longer functions and
time stops, there is such ecstasy and such joy. Then man became intrigued: Is
it possible to attain this joy without falling into sleep? - because in sleep
it happens, but you are not aware of it; it is very uncon-scious. Only in the
morning do you hear the distant sound of it, or the later effects. If you slept
deeply in the night, in the morning you feel renewed, rejuvenated - but you had
not been there exactly while it was happening. What was it?
In sex, you are more aware, but
then the sex moment is so small that rather than satisfying you it leaves you
very much frustrated. The greater the experience of love, the greater will be
the frustration that comes in its wake. Remember: only great lovers are
frustrated with love; ordinary lovers are not frustrated with love - because
the higher the peak, the greater will be the fall. And the peak exists only for
a single moment. It comes and it is gone... it is like lightning.
And when the peak is gone, you
have known the taste of it and now nothing will taste better and everything
will look ordinary compared to it, and everything will look mundane. You have
experienced something of the sacred. You have experienced something of God -
God flashed like lightning, but you could not catch hold of His face, you could
not figure it out, how He looks, and He was gone. It was so fast and so sudden.
Man became interested: Is it
possible to prolong that experience? Is it possible to remain in that
ex-perience a little longer? Is it possible to go into it a little deeper? Is
it possible to have that experience without moving into sex? - because sex by
its very nature depends on the other. It is a kind of dependence, and all kinds
of dependence destroy your freedom. That's the eternal fight between the
lovers.
They are giving something to
each other which is immensely valuable, but mixed with poison. They cannot live
separately and they cannot live together. If they are separate they start
missing the joy that was happening through the other; if they are together, the
poison is too much - and one starts thinking: Is the joy worth it? Because you
have to depend on the other! When you depend on the other, your freedom is
destroyed, your freedom becomes defined, confined, limited. You cannot open
yourself as you would like to open. You have always to look to the other and
the other's feelings. You feel prevented, hindered. And the other starts
possessing you, the other starts becoming powerful over you - because the other
knows that it is through him or her that you feel joy.
Man started looking for the
same experience without becoming dependent on the other. Then, if it depends
only on sexual experience, it cannot last forever. You can have sex once in a
while - and what about the other times? All other times you will remain dull
and dead. Is it possible to have that joy continuously, as a continuum, like a
river flowing always?
These were the speculations of
man, but they came from sleep and love. In love sometimes it happens, and that
is the moment which is called orgasm. If time stops, if thinking stops, and you
are utterly herenow, it is orgasmic.
This orgasmic experience will
give you the taste. I cannot define it, but I can indicate ways how to feel it.
If you have some aesthetic
sense, then some aesthetic experience will give you the taste.
Seeing a sunset, if you have
the heart of a painter, the heart stops; you start missing beats. The sun is
setting, just falling and falling... and a moment more and it will be gone. And
all that colour in the clouds, and all that sublime beauty! And the birds
returning back to their homes, and the silence settling on the earth, and the
trees getting ready to go to bed, and the whole of nature saying goodbye to the
sun... If you have the aesthetic heart, if you are a poet or a painter or a
musician, if you know what beauty is, if you are affected by beauty, not so-so
but tremendously, if beauty gives you awe - then you will know what herenow is.
Or listening to music it
happens sometimes. There is nothing more meditational than music. Or if you can
play some instrument yourself, then it is far better - because Listening you
remain on the periphery; playing you are at the centre. If playing some
instrument - playing a flute or sitar or guitar - and you are lost into it,
absolutely lost into it, time stops, mind is no more there, a Buddha moment
arrives, and you know what herenow is.
Or if you can dance - which
seems to me the most profound experience - if you can dance and dance so deeply
that the dancer disappears, only the dance remains, then again you will be
herenow.
I cannot define it, but I can
indicate a few things. You will have to experience it. It is a taste! If you
ask me how sugar tastes, how can I define it? I can say it is sweet, but that
will not make much sense - it will be a tautology. You were asking what sweet
is; I have simply substituted another word for it. If I say to be herenow means
to be in the present, I am not saying anything - I am simply substituting
another word for it. That's what dictionaries go on doing.
All dictionaries live on
tautologies. And if you look into the dictionary you will be surprised: ask the
philosopher or the philologist 'What is mind?' and he says 'Not matter'; and
then ask him 'What is matter?' and he says 'Not mind' - but what is the point
of it? You don't know either. When it comes to defining matter you use 'mind'
as if you know mind, and you say 'Not mind'; and when it comes to defining the
mind you start using 'matter' as if you know matter, and you say 'Not matter' -
but you don't know either. Now, two things themselves undefined, how can they
define each other? - that is not possible.
Ask the philologist who knows
words and languages - what does he go on saying? You ask one word, he
substitutes another word for it - but the real problem remains.
A Zen Master was dying and the
disciples had gathered. And his whole life he had been talking about herenow -
that's what Masters have been doing down through the ages. The disciples asked
again, 'Master, you are leaving us and we will be left in darkness. Is there
any last message so that we can cherish it and remember it forever? We will
keep it as a sacred memory in our hearts.'
The Master opened his eyes...
at that moment on the roof of his hut, a squirrel ran making noise - tit tit, teevee, tit tit - and the
Master raised his hand and said, 'this is
it!' and died.
What is he saying 'This is it'?
He is simply indicating. He-is simply saying there is nothing to say - there is
much to see, but there is nothing to say.
You ask: does thought for my part of it?
No, thought cannot form part of
it. It is asking: Does darkness form part of light? Just like that.
Darkness cannot form part of
light. When light is present, dark-ness is absent; when light is absent,
darkness is present - they never meet. So is the state of mind and herenow -
they never meet.
Herenow means no-mind. No-mind
means no thought. And you know it! Many times it happens to you: there are
moments, small, but they ARE there, when you suddenly see no thought stirring in
you, no ripple arising - those are Buddha moments! You just have to get more in
tune with them, you just have to get deeper into them, you just have to change
your emphasis.
For example, you read a book.
Naturally, you read the words printed on the paper; you don't see the paper.
The paper remains in the background. The words written with the black ink, they
are the figure, and the white paper is the background. You may not even see the
white paper while you are reading - although it is there! Without it, those
words -cannot exist; they exist because of it, against it, in contrast to it.
It happened: a psychologist did
a small experiment. He fixed a big piece of white paper over the whole
blackboard, and the students watched. Then he brought his pen and on that big
sheet of white paper he made just a small dot, a black dot - just a small one,
barely visible. The students had to look very very closely, only then could
they see it. And then he asked, 'What do you see?'
They all said, 'A small dot.'
And nobody had seen the white paper - nobody, not a single student out of the
fifty, said 'We see a big white sheet of paper over the whole blackboard.' Not
a single student said! They all said, 'A black dot.' And he had simply asked, 'What
do you see?'
What happened?! Emphasis.
Continuously reading, you emphasize the dots, the black marks on the paper; you
don't see the white paper.
Just change the emphasis. Start
looking at the white paper rather than at the black dot - and that brings great
revolution.
When two thoughts are moving in
you, between the two thoughts there is a gap, an interval, a pause. When
two-words move-in you, between these two words there is a gap again. Just
look-into the gaps more; become negligent of the words - look at the gaps.
Just standing on the road, try
one experiment: you are standing on the road and cars are passing; maybe it is
an international car rally and cars are passing. One car has gone, another car
has gone, another car, but between two cars there are gaps... the road remains
empty. Just change the emphasis! Just change the gestalt, as the Germans would
like to say - change the gestalt, change the pattern.
Start looking between one gap
and another gap. Rather than thinking one car has passed, another car has
passed, another car has passed, start looking at the one gap that has passed,
another gap, another gap - forget about the cars, start counting the gaps, how
many gaps are passing. And you will be surprised - so many gaps are passing and
you had never seen them before!
Just a change of emphasis: move
from the figure to the background. Thoughts are figures, conscious-ness is the
background. Mind consists of figures and no-mind is the background. Just start
looking into the gaps. Fall in love with the intervals! Go deeper into them,
search more into them - they have real secrets in them. The mystery is hidden
there. It is not in the words that pass in your mind; those words are trivia,
impressions from the outside. But see on what they pass, those ripples; look
into that conscious-ness. And it is infinite. It is your being.
That consciousness is called
no-mind.
That is the meaning of the
English expression 'reading between the lines'. Read between the lines and you
will become a wise man. Read the lines and you will become an ugly scholar, a
pundit, a parrot, a computer, a memory - a mind. Read between the lines and you
will become a no-mind.
And no-mind is herenow.
Question 2:
You often say sannyas is to live in the
utmost insecurity, but my experience has been different. I have felt more
secure in my heart only since taking sannyas. What should I listen to? I am
confused.
Yoga Bharti, both things are
true - life is very paradoxical. I say to you: Sannyas is to live in utmost
insecurity... but the moment you start living in ut-most insecurity, all
insecurity disappears.
Then you are secure for the
first time.
Why does it happen?
The moment you accept
insecurity, you stop asking for security. The moment you understand that
insecurity is the nature of life, the moment you see that asking for security
is asking for death... a secure person is a dead person. If you are alive you
will have to live in insecurity.
Life is insecure, rooted in
insecurity. One day you will have to die - how can you be secure? And you love
a woman, and the woman is still alive - she can fall in love with somebody
else. Nobody knows the ways of life - they are mysterious. And she is still
alive; she is not dead. You can trust only a dead woman or a dead man.
That's why, the moment people
fall in love they start killing each other - to create security. If you have
killed the woman she becomes a wife; if you have killed the man he becomes a
husband. Now you can be secure. There is security with a husband, but no life;
and there is security with a wife, but no life. You have killed her so much
that she cannot fall in love again. But remember: she cannot fall in love with
anybody else - she cannot fall in love with you either. You have destroyed
love.
You catch hold of a bird, and
you had loved see-ing it flying in the sky, it was so beautiful - it was
freedom on wings. Now you are afraid: the bird may fly again. So you cut the
wings and put him in a beautiful cage. Do you think it is the same bird that
you had seen in the sky on the wing, whispering with the clouds? Do you think
it is the same bird? It is a corpse, although it breathes. And it will never
give you that joy.
That joy was not only because
of the bird - many many things were involved in it... the open sky, the clouds,
the sun, the wind. The freedom was implied there! Now you have destroyed
freedom, you have taken the sky away; you have taken the bird out of the whole
context. Now it has no meaning any more.
You see a beautiful flower on
the rosebush and you cut it and you bring it home, and you put it on your table
in a flowerpot - but it is no more the same flower. You have kiLled it! It is
dying. And you will never see that beauty - because the juice was flowing, the
flower was rooted in the earth.
The earth was nourishing it and
the sun was nourishing it and the wind was playing with it, and the fragrance
was there... and all! You have taken it out of context. Now, in your plastic
flowerpot you have encaged this beautiful flower, but it is dead.
That's what we go on doing...
You love a woman, and she was so alive - that's why! She was pure life. She was
joy, she was dance, a song, and you had fallen in love with all those things
together. Then you make a prisoner of her. You go to the court, you make legal
conditions on her - you reduce her from the woman to a wife. This is an ugly
pheno-menon: to reduce any woman to a wife, to reduce any man to a husband. You
have taken away all that was beautiful and glorious, all that was divine.
And now you are stuck with the
woman and you wonder what has happened. Now you don't feel so much joy in her
being. Now being with her is a tedium, a boredom. Have you not seen husbands
and wives sitting together, how bored they look - utterly bored? If a friend
comes or a neighbour, they start becoming a little alive; otherwise, they are
utterly bored... looking into each other and finding nothing. They both have
killed each other! And, naturally, they are angry too, because how can you
forgive your murderer? You cannot.
The idea of security brings
death in life. Afraid you may catch cold, you don't go into the rains. Afraid
you may harm your body, you don't go to the playground. Afraid that you may
fall from the tree, you don't climb. Afraid that death may happen, you don't go
to the mountains. Afraid, afraid, afraid... you go on withdrawing yourself from
life.
A moment comes - you are there
but all life has disappeared. Then you are secure, but at what cost? And the
more you make yourself secure, the more fear arises.
Have you not seen it? Poor
people are less afraid than rich people - naturally, because they have much to
lose, so more fear of insecurity. A rich man feels more insecure, because
communism can come. What does a beggar bother about communism? He says, 'Okay,
let communism be! It doesn't matter.' The rich man is always afraid the bank
may fail, the business may fail... this may happen, that may happen. He is
continuously worried.
It is not accidental that the
rich man cannot sleep; the rich man suffers from insomnia. It is very rare to
find a beggar suffering from insomnia; I have not found. I have been searching
for a beggar who suffers from insomnia - I have not found. That is the rich
man's disease. The beggar has nothing to worry about! He has nothing to lose!
The rich man has a thousand and one things to worry about.
He goes to bed, but the mind
goes on spinning, weaving; it goes on working - a thousand and one things have
to be settled, arranged, planned. Something may go wrong - how can he sleep?
How can he afford sleep? A rich man is so poor, he cannot afford sleep; only a
poor man is so rich that he can afford sleep.
Just watch how life functions:
the more secure you become, the more afraid, frightened. And when you are more
afraid, you want more security. When you have more security, you become more
afraid... it is a vicious circle.
That's why I say sannyas is to
live in utmost in-security.
What do I mean by saying it? I
mean that insecurity is life. There is no life without insecurity. That is the beauty
of life! that all can be lost. Hence the joy of the game. If it is certain that
you will win, what will be the joy of it? If winning is certain, abso-lutely
certain there cannot be any joy in it. The more uncertain the victory is, the
more joy, the more search for it.
Life is insecure. This, when
understood deeply, brings a kind of security - then you are no more afraid.
Life is insecure! You know perfectly well you have fallen in love with this
woman and this woman can still fall in love, because she will still breathe,
she will still be alive. Who knows about tomorrow? You are not the only man in
the world. What foolish-ness to think that this woman cannot fall in love with
anybody else! She can fall! And because she can fall, love her intensely -
because who knows about tomorrow? Tomorrow she may go and may not turn again
and may not see you again. This may be your last time - make as much of it as
you can.
This is the understanding of
sannyas, that tomorrow is not certain, only this moment is my moment - I have
to live it in totality.
And I am not saying that she will
leave you, or she has to leave you. In fact, if you love her totally in this
moment, how can she leave you? If you have loved her so much, how can she leave
you?
Out of today will come tomorrow.
Out of this moment will follow the next. If this moment has been of such
ecstasy, how can she leave you? Out of insecurity, security is born - she
cannot leave you. It is impossible to leave you - not because of the law and
the court and the marriage and the society, but just because you loved her so
much.
You have given her the first
insight into no-time, no-mind. You have been a door to the divine - -how can
she leave you? She has already become part of you; you have become part of her.
But this is happening of its own; it is unmanaged. Out of insecurity you loved
her totally, and out of total love life becomes secure.
So, Bharti, you are right -
what I say is true, what you feel is true too. Sannyas is uttermost inse-
curity, and once you are a sannyasin you start having a new vision of life. And
that new vision knows nothing of insecurity.
Because it is such a paradox,
the problem arises: what should i listen to? I am confused.
You need not be confused.
Always remember: anything, to be true, has to be paradoxical. Truth is
paradoxical. Only lies are not paradoxical. Whenever you see that something is
not paradoxical, beware! - there must be some lie.
Truth is paradox. That is an
absolute quality of truth.
Question 3:
What is desirelessness? Is it to be totally
without desire or to be totally free to have or not have desire?
To be totally free of desire
will make you dead - you will not be alive any more.
That's what has been taught: Be
desireless! But what can you do? You can go on cutting desires; the more
desires are cut, the poorer your life becomes. If all desires are destroyed,
then you have committed suicide, spiritual suicide.
No, desire is the energy of
life, desire is life. Then what do I mean when I say be free of desire?
The second is my meaning: to be
free, totally free, to have or not have desire. Desire should not be an
obsession - that is the meaning. You should be capable... for example, you see
somebody's beautiful house, newly built, and a desire arises in you to have
such a house. Now, are you free to have this desire or not? If you are free, I
will say you are desireless. If you say, 'I am not free.
This desire persists. Even if I
want to drop it, I cannot drop it - it haunts me. I see dreams of that house, I
think about it. I am afraid to go on that road, because that house creates
jealousy in me, that house creates disturbance in me.' If you say, 'I am not
capable of either having or not having the desire,' then you are not in a
healthy shape - then desires are your masters, you are a victim.
And you will suffer much
because there are millions of things going around, and if so many desires take
possession of you, you will be torn apart.
That's how it is happening:
somebody has become the prime minister, now you want to become the prime
minister; somebody has become very rich, now you want to become very rich;
somebody has become a famous writer, now you want to become a famous writer.
And somebody is something else... and somebody is something else... and all
around there are millions of people doing millions of things. And from every
nook and corner a desire arises and jumps on you and takes possession of you,
and you are not capable of saying yes or no you will go mad.
That's how the whole of humanity
is mad. All those desires are pulling you into so many directions.
You have become fragmentary,
because many desires have possessed parts of your being.
And those desires are
contradictory too. Then it is not only that you are fragmentary: you become a
contradiction. One part of you wants to become very rich, another part of you
wants to become a poet - now, this is difficult. It is very difficult to become
rich and remain a poet. A poet cannot be that cruel; it will be very difficult
for him to become rich.
Money is not poetry: money is
blood, money is exploitation. A poet worth the name cannot exploit.
And a poet worth the name will
have some vision of beauty. He cannot be so ugly himself as to deprive so many
people just for his desire to hoard money.
Now, you want to become a
politician, and you also want to meditate; you want to become a medita- tor
too. This is not possible. Politicians cannot be religious. They can pretend to
be religious, but they cannot be religious. How can a politician be religious?
- because religion means non-ambitiousness and politics is nothing but pure
ambition.
Religiousness means: I am happy
as I am. Politics means: I will be happy only when I am at the top - I am not
happy as I am. I have to run and rush, and I will destroy if it is needed. If
by right means, okay; if not, then by wrong means - but I have to be at the
top, I have to prove myself.
A politician naturally suffers
from an inferiority complex. A religious man has no complex - inferi-ority or
superiority.
Politicians pretend to be
religious because that pays in politics. Morarji Desai pretends to be religious
- that pays in politics. Now, look at the disgusting thing Jimmy Carter has
done: he came to India and he asked, first thing in India, three hours for
prayer. He knows India is a religious country - three hours for prayer?! Prayer
is nothing to be bragged about. You can do it in your bedroom - three minutes
are enough - three seconds are enough - just a single moment is enough -
because prayer has nothing to do with time: it needs intensity. Now, a
three-hour prayer! think of God also a little bit: listening to Jimmy Carter
for three hours... poor old man! Nobody thinks of God. And what will you be
saying for three hours? You will bore Him to death! But he knows that India is
a religious country, people will be impressed by the idea.
And what can Jimmy Carter do
for three hours, what will he pray for three hours? A politician can-not pray
even for three minutes; he will be thinking all the time about politics.
To be religious means to be
non-ambitious, to have no ambitions of being somewhere else, somebody else - to
be herenow!
Now, if you have these two
ideas together, that you want to be a politician and you also want to be a
meditator, you will be in difficulty - you will drive yourself crazy. If you
are honest, you will go mad; if you are dishonest, then you will not go mad -
then you will become a hypocrite. That's what your politicians are.
And I am not saying that all
those who are in reli-gion are not politicians: out of a hundred there are also
ninety-nine who are politicians. They are there in a different kind of
politics: the religious politics. They have their hierarchy and the priest
wants to become the Pope - again it is politics.
Or, the sinner wants to become
the saint - again it is politics, again it is inferiority complex; again, once
you have started doing something holy, religious, saintly, you will carry
around yourself that ego of 'holier than thou'. Then you will have a condemnation
of others in your eyes; then everybody is doomed and only you are going to be
saved. Then you can look at others with pity: These people are going to hell.
This is again politics.
A religious man knows no ego.
He is not even humble - remember - he is so egoless he is not even humble.
Humbleness is also a pretension of ego; the humble person is also TRYING to be
humble and trying to prove that 'I am humble'; or even may have ideas deep
inside his heart that 'I am the MOST humble man in the world.' Again it is the
ego!
Many desires will take
possession of you and many will be contradictory and you will be pulled apart
and you will start falling into pieces, you will lose integrity, you will no
more be an individual.
You ask: what is desirelessness?
Now, these are the two things:
you know desireless-ness, then you have to cut your life completely, then
everything has to be cut. Then you become a Jain monk - just an empty shell
utterly discontented with everything, with yourself; uncreative, no celebration,
no flowers ever bloom. Or you know desirefulness: then you become torn apart.
Both are ugly states.
The right thing to do is to be
so totally free from desire that you can choose, that you are always able to
choose: to have or not to have. Then you are really free. And then you will
have both the creativity, the celebration, the joy of desires, and the silence
and the peace and the calmness of desirelessness.
Question 4:
Beloved Master, I know we are not the body,
or the 'cloud' as you called it... But when I open my eyes I can't help
noticing that your toes ere turning blue from the cold! Why won't you wear a
wrap or a shawl, or why won't you let us put a quilt or something over your
legs?!
This question is from divya -
but there are four other questions similar, all from women sannyasins:
Pradeepa, Gyan Bhakti, Krishna Priya.
Thank you, but you don't know
anything about my toes - they enjoy cold like anything. I under-stand your
sympathy, but from my very childhood I have enjoyed cold like anything. Just as
you enjoy ice-cream my toes enjoy cold. Don't feel sorry for them - they are
very happy.
Question 5:
You always speak so beautifully of
creativity and aesthetics...! Will there be work for poets, painters, sculptors,
designers, musicians, craftsmen, etc. At the new commune?
Yes, Katyayani - art is going
to be the religion of the new commune.
Question 6:
I do not trust your words. At first I could
grab on to a phrase or a theme and hug it to my bosom - paste it on my wall -
repeat it as a mantram - aha! Now I have a key - but the next day or the next
week you say the opposite. Now I am afraid to listen to you.
That is the whole purpose of
listening to me: so that you don't become a hoarder, so that no thought becomes
so important to you that it takes possession of you.
I would like you to become a
no-mind. And those phrases, howsoever beautiful they are, if you hug them to
the bosom and paste them on the wall and repeat them as a mantram, they will
create mind.
That's why I have to go on
destroying myself. I say one thing, and before you can hoard it, I destroy it.
I will do it so continuously, so consistently, that sooner or later you will
not hug any phrase to your heart, and you will not paste any phrase on your
wall, and you will not take anything as a mantram!
That day, Amida, will be a
great day of liberation for you. Then you will simply listen as you listen to
music. Why can't you listen to me as you listen to music? Why listen to me with
a business mind, with some purpose in it? Why jump upon things and start
collecting them? Why not listen simply, innocently, without catching hold of
anything? Listen just as you listen to music, and that will be far more
enriching. Then mind will not be nourished.
And my work here is to destroy
your mind, so that your no-mind becomes available to you.
Question 7:
What is a question? And is there an answer
to every question? And why do you answer our questions?
A question is a
misunderstanding. You have misunderstood life as a problem - hence questions
arise. Life is not a problem: life is a mystery.
But the misunderstanding is
possible because a mystery looks like a problem, a mystery looks like a riddle
- and the ego starts trying to solve it. Hence the question. But a mystery
means a mystery - it is a riddle which cannot be solved. A mystery is by its
very definition insoluble. So all questions are irrelevant.
And when questions are
irrelevant, naturally answers are also irrelevant. A question is a
misunderstanding about life: you think it can be solved - this is the
misunderstanding. Nobody has ever solved anything. Great philosophies have been
evolved, but not a single question has been answered ever.
One can believe that one has
got the answer, but that is just a belief. Just look a little bit more and you
will find that your answer was just a make-believe.
There are no answers.
All questions are meaningless.
But then the question arises: and is there an
answer to every question?
There is not a single question
which can be answered. Small questions: What is yellow? - cannot be answered.
All your science and all your philosophy and all your religions cannot answer a
simple, silly question: What is yellow? How can you answer it?!
A great philosopher, G. E.
Moore, has written a Book Principia
Ethica. In two hundred pages he goes on asking one question only: What is
good? And he was one of the most important philosophers of this century and one
of the most logical minds. You cannot improve upon Moore.
And he asks a simple question:
What is good? And he asks in a thousand ways, and answers and answers and
answers... and finally, in the end, he says: The good is indefinable.
It is like yellow - what is yellow?
All philosophies have failed.
So it is not that there are
questions which can be answered and there are a few questions which cannot be
answered - not a single question can be answered. Questioning is a wrong
approach towards reality. You question: you go wrong.
Then, naturally, you ask: and why do you
answer our questions? - if no question can be answered, then why do
I go on answering you?
Just to help you know that no
questions can be answered. Just to destroy your questions - not to answer but
to destroy.
Watch my answers! They are not
really answers to your questions - they are just like hammers. I try to destroy
your questions - sometimes politely and sometimes not so politely. But the
whole effort is to destroy the question.
Naturally, I destroy one, you
produce another - -then I have to destroy that. This is the fight between a
Master and a disciple. It goes on and on. But the disciple has always been
defeated.
How long can you go on asking?
Many of you have stopped asking, but neW people go on coming so the story
continues. One day, all of you will have stopped - stopping, not out of defeat,
not out of des-peration, but out of understanding. Seeing the point, that life
is a mystery to be lived, not a problem to be solved - that is metanoia. You
are converted. You have moved from mind to no-mind.
Question 8:
This crazy, sweet, totally demanding and
physically exhausting, delightful marathon called motherhood... Since this
fireball came to us - almost two years now - not one uninterrupted night's
sleep, not one day of rest. And feeling nothing so important as simply being
present for him - and so very often inadequate and tense and tired in that.
Where is laughter in this?
Help! Help! Yuck, yuck, yuck.
Yet another 'Jewish mother'
Ma prem punita
Punita, just to give birth to a
child is one thing - to be a mother is totally different.
Any woman can give birth to a
child; that's a very simple phenomenon. But to be a mother needs great art,
needs great under-standing.
You are creating a human being
- that is the greatest creation! A painter paints a picture; we call it great
art. Picasso - we call him a great artist. But what about the mother who
created Picasso? A poet writes beautiful poems, but what about the mother who
created Shakespeare? We don't think about mothers as the greatest creative
people on the earth.
That is one of the reasons why
women are not great painters and great poets - they need not be:
they can be great mothers. Why
does man try to become a great scientist, poet, painter, this and that? - he is
jealous of women: he cannot create children. He feels impotent.
Sigmund Freud has talked much
about phallic Jealousy - that women suffer from a jealousy because they don't
have penises. Now this is utterly meaning-less, absurd. It is as if a woman
Sigmund Freud is born and starts talking about men suffering from
breast-jealousy because they don't have breasts.
But, one thing is certain: deep
down man always feels jealous that he cannot mother, that he cannot carry an
alive life in him, that he cannot reproduce life. To substitute it he paints,
he sculpts, he writes poetry, he composes music; he goes to the moon, he goes
to Everest. He wants to prove at least to his woman that 'I can also do
something,' otherwise he feels impotent. Compared to woman's capacity, he looks
like a child, looks almost accidental. His work is not much: giving birth to a
child, he simply triggers the process. A small injection can do that; that is
not much of a work.
The woman passes through those
nine months of agony and ecstasy. And then the work is not finished! In fact,
then the work, the real work, starts - when the child is born. And the child
brings again a fresh quality to life. Every child is primitive, a barbarian;
now the mother has to civilize.
Every child is a barbarian,
remember; he is animal, wild. And the mother has to give him culture, has to
teach him the ways of life, the ways of man. It is a great work.
Punita, you have to remember
that - that your work has not finished, it has started. Take it joyously!
You are creating something
immensely valuable - you are carving a life, you are protecting a life.
The work is such that no
sacrifice is great enough for it - any sacrifice can and should be made.
One thing.
Second thing: don't take it too
seriously, otherwise you will destroy the child. Your seriousness will become
destructive. Take it playfully. The responsibility is there! but it has to be
taken very playfully.
Play upon the child as one
plays upon a musical instrument - and she knows how to play on musical
instruments. Let the child be your instrument now. Play carefully but play
playfully. If you become serious, then the child will start feeling your
seriousness and the child will be crushed and crippled.
Don't burden the child; don't
start feeling that you are doing something great to the child. When I say you
are doing something great, you are doing something great to yourself. By
helping this child to grow into a beautiful human being, into a Buddha, you
will be becoming the mother of a Buddha.
You will not be obliging the
child: you will be simply enjoying your own life; your own life will become a
fragrance through the child.
This is an opportunity, a
God-given opportunity.
And these are the two pitfalls:
either you neglect the child, you are tired of it; or you become too serious
about the child, and you start burdening him, obliging him. Both are wrong.
Help the child - but for the sheer joy of it. And never feel that he owes any
debt to you. On the contrary, feel thankful that he has chosen you to be his
mother. Let your motherhood bloom through him.
If you can bloom into your
motherhood, you will feel thankful to the child forever.
And, naturally, there will be
sacrifices, but they have to be made... joyously. Only then is it a sacrifice!
If you do it without joy it is
not sacrifice. Sacrifice comes from the word 'sacred'. When you do it joyfully,
it is sacred. When you don't do it joyfully, then you are just fulfilling a
duty - and all duties are ugly, they are not sacred.
This is a great opportunity.
Meditate over it, go into it deeply. You will never find such a deep
involvement - in fact, there is none as it is between a child and the mother.
Not even between the husband and the wife, the lover and the beloved - the
involvement is not so deep as it is between the mother and the child. It cannot
be so deep with anybody ever - because the child has lived in you for nine
months as you; nobody else can live in you for nine months as you.
And the child will become a
separate individual sooner or later, but somewhere deep down in the
un-conscious the mother and the child remain linked.
If your child can become a
Buddha, you will be benefited by it; if your child grows and becomes a beautiful
human being, you will be benefited by it - because the child will always remain
connected with you. Only the physical connection has been disconnected; the
spiritual connection is never disconnected.
Thank God! Motherhood is a
blessing.