66. My Childhood Angst

On the occasion of Guru Purnima, I would like to share something personal, but relevant.

Since early childhood, a deep sense of grief would engulf me every now and then, the trigger for which would be people having fun (e.g. playing games or chitchatting) or enjoying themselves in some kind of gathering (e.g. marriage functions). I would experience untold sorrow and cry profusely, as if some great tragedy has struck. For e.g. I remember as a 5 year old boy, standing in a corner with wet cheeks looking at all the elder children of our neighbourhood happily immersed in playing cricket. The same sense of hopelessness recurred several times, especially while attending family functions. The child could not articulate the reason in words (even mentally), it was just some unknown pain, but as the brain developed it got articulated. For e.g. I vividly remember going through this when I was in 12th, and was attending a marriage function.

Here I am crying for something else.
Probably saying "Let us go home"
I don't have a photo where I am crying
in actual angst. :-)

I could not digest how we can settle for such titbits of life and not seek any further. How can we be content with such things, as if that is the whole of the world and there is nothing more to life? When wounds are festering within, when suffering is inevitable sooner or later, how can we satisfy ourselves with some decorative paintjob and pretense? I am saying 'we' because apart from those episodes of grief (which occurred once in a few months), rest of the times I was also just the same — engrossed in some silly thing. Thus, desperation and frustration would accumulate over time, and erupt periodically in such episodes, stimulated by some trigger or sometimes without any trigger. I was crying for everyone, myself included. For I did not know what to do either. I only knew this cannot be it, but did not know what more it should be. It was like getting pressed into a corner, a dead end; it was suffocation.

After getting crushed in this "I do not know what to do" for several years, it has now become evident that this is what one should fundamentally do — to hold on to "I do not know" no matter what happens, and do not compromise for anything — mystical experiences, God talking to you, elegant insights, great theories from others, whatever. This is the most fundamental aspect. Everything else that we do in the name of spirituality is auxiliary. If one has not come to painfully realize the limit of psychology, if one does not realize he is in a prison, there is no getting out. There will be just more and more illusions, even in the name of spirituality. One will compromise with and settle for something or the other within the ambit of the mind, including the illusion of spirituality, and call it soul, heart, Atman, God and whatever. Without a sense of urgency, spirituality turns into the same-old social drama, into one more layer of cosmetics, another titbit to find contentment in. It is the pain of ignorance alone that will conjure enough intensity without any direction to blast off from the atmosphere of the mind. Without intensity there is anyway no going anywhere, and setting a direction means remaining within the psychology.

It is very popularly said that Guru is that which dispels darkness. But there is something worse than darkness — illusion of light (just as pretense of humility is worse than boastfulness, and so on). If I am under the spell of the mind, imagining that there is already light, where is the question of dispelling darkness at all? I will be quite content within the limits of the psychology, imagining all kinds of great things. A Guru is possible only after one begins to intensely realize the daunting darkness. 'Ru' (dispelling) is possible only after one stops denying that he is in utter 'Gu' (darkness).

Happy Guru Purnima!

64. Why Conflict is Easy to Come by?

Why is it so easy to be in some kind of friction and conflict with people all the time? Why annoyance, anger, deceit, jealousy, criticism and hatred come easily, and why reverence, gratitude, integrity, empathy and compassion are difficult to come by?

Survival Instinct.

Friction and conflict necessarily imply a rigid boundary. All the former qualities promote friction, and the energy generated in these emotions is used up to fortify the boundaries of the personality; whereas all the latter ones, promote inclusiveness, and the energy generated in these emotions dissolves the personality. The mind, the artificial intelligence that it is, knows this very well. Your individuality can survive only if friction thrives. And therefore, the most fundamental of its algorithms—that of survival—ensures to always have some friction buzzing in the background, and brings up such experiences more often. Furthermore, you even consider the particularities of your friction with the world (dissent with person X, criticizing person Y etc.) as part of your unique identity. Thus prevails the addiction to the sadistic pleasures (which is eventually pain) born of those frictional emotions. We may give any number of external reasons for having those emotions, but ultimately this is only a desperate internal attempt to survive, or Abhinivesha (one of the five fundamental afflictions) as Patanjali calls it.

When the latter emotions are pitched up, their intensity dissolves you, and it is elevating and blissful. We do experience these emotions, but accidentally and rarely. Largely we are a hard shell that is in conflict with the rest of the existence. We get bruised and deformed into a peculiar shape, and on top of that take pride in it that "I am unique". Survival instinct, which is actually a mechanism needed only for the physical organism, somehow gets unnecessarily extended to our inner dimension as well.

But the more conscious you become, the more you realize that it is the latter qualities that, by diffusing your individuality, by negating friction, give you true joy, freedom, lightness, firmness and expansiveness. Then ensues a tug of war between this longing to dissolve and the instinct of preservation of your beloved personality. The deep rooted unconscious algorithm slowly begins to get overwritten, until one day you are really willing to dissolve completely.

The next time some irritation crawls up inside you, remember that essentially it is your own survival instinct strengthening itself with the pretext of something 'wrong' outside. The external situation only stimulated and manifested the core friction that already lies within. The individual wants conflict, he seeks conflict, he thrives on conflict, whatever energy is generated in conflict is invested in fortifying the individual, but eventually he blames the world for giving him conflict and acts all innocent. This is a twisted out mess that needs a lot of beating by life to straighten up. We can wait for it to happen. The other choice is that we can become aware of this right now, and take responsibility for whatever we go through within ourselves; instead of cursing, we can be thankful to the external situation for manifesting what lies within, and making us aware of it. The same energy can then dissolve the individual.

So is there nothing wrong outside? That is not the point. External action can be consciously performed as needed, but scapegoating it for the inner friction is self-deception. If needed you can even fight a battle, but you need not be in friction within yourself - युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः (Cast off this inner turbulence and fight, Gita 3.30)

63. I will not come Alive, for I will Die!

When a situation makes you laugh your head off, or cry your heart out, or burn in rage, or sink in fear you will try to walk out of the situation saying "I cannot take this anymore". And if you do not or cannot avoid the situation, you will either faint, or lose mental balance, or perhaps even die. The system will break in some way.

When life intensity, whatever its form, crosses a certain limit, you can no more bear it, even if it is in a desirable form (as in joy and laughter). That means presently, you cannot experience life beyond a certain level of intensity; if you try to go beyond it, if you get too overwhelmed, things get dangerous.

When more aliveness, even through pleasant means, is thus perceived as danger or death, what will the human mind unconsciously do? It will make sure that you will live in low voltage, in the safe zone content with tidbits ("choti choti khushiyaan"). Although we claim to want to 'live life fully', all our attempts will be to somehow manage to live without becoming too alive; to live avoiding life. Until one is truly conscious of this irony, it continues no matter which area of life one is in, including Yoga. Life within will temporarily and apparently settle.

But when you become conscious of this limitation upon you, factually and not just as an idea, can you still accept this and settle for it? Does not your innate nature say "I want more" as it has been doing all along with everything? When they said 'seek God', 'seek Enlightenment' etc. what was it they were referring to? Some esoteric entity other than life? Could it be this very thing we are avoiding all the time — to be blazingly Alive, but still be Stable?; to be blissfully intense just by ourselves without any external stimulus?; to be an explosion within, and still not break physically or mentally? Could it be that when deluged by aliveness, we die not physically, but absolutely, and thus really live life totally?

Robert Ingersoll (an American agnostic): "We have an orange here, and we want to squeeze all the juice out of it" [indicating that a worldly man lives life fully, and there is no need of any spiritual pursuit]

Swami Vivekananda: "I have some fruit, and I too want to squeeze out the juice. Our difference lies in the choice of the fruit. You want an orange, and I prefer a mango [indicating that no pulp is wasted]... Your study is the manifestation of life, mine is the life itself"

62. Nirdhara — If you are Sure you are Dead

Our entire schooling system has trained human mind to come to an answer as quickly as possible. Only the one who gets to the answer the quickest is appreciated and rewarded. Slower ones are always neglected.

The repercussions of this are enormous. Human intellect is now always in a hurry to conclude. The mind has been deeply programmed with the reward-penalty system administered during schooling. Now he thinks that the more quickly he concludes, the smarter he is — a self-conferred reward.

So now he concludes about every bit of life that comes his way, including himself, with reprehensible urgency, and as a result, all possibilities of further enquiry are eliminated. He knows what he is, what others are, what happiness is, what a relationship is, what life is, what death is, what spirituality is, what God is... you name it and he knows what it is (words from books, or some lame logic). So smart!

This kind of arriving at a conclusion as quickly as possible is suitable and needed in analytical and executive fields of life, where an outcome, a decision has to come about as quickly as possible. But having idiotically extended this pattern to all aspects of life, not at all stopping for a moment to reflect deeply upon fundamentals of his life, including 'What am I? What am I seeking in life?', is rampaging his life, and he is not even noticing it? His intellect has turned so impotent that it cannot think about anything or anybody without strongly concluding about them; he cannot hold onto a certain fundamental question and inquire deeply into it for two minutes straight. He has forgotten what it is like to be aflame and alive with '?'.

In Samskrita one of the words for Conclusion is निर्धार (Nirdhara), and the word is very interesting. Nir-dhara can mean 'holding on thoroughly' and it can also mean 'devoid of flow'. Concluding in analytical and executive areas of life would refer to the former meaning, and it is very much needed. But concluding about life itself would refer to the latter meaning, and you would become stagnant, dead, numb to life - 'Ah big deal, I know what it is'; 'Oh I know all about him'; 'You know who I am?'



While the religious ones today are dead sure about everything (even God's name, address, family members etc.), the Vedic Rishis boldly declared "We do not know".

If you are sure, you are dead!

61. Role of External Supports in Spiritual Sadhana

I will pick up the following thread of discursion from the previous post and elaborate on it:

"Should we do things on the outside to crackle our aliveness, or should we do things on the outside because we are crackling with aliveness? Which way should it be? Aliveness first or Action first?"

Here one may ask the question — if it is said that Aliveness is first, then can we not seek the support of the external environment to enhance the state of our consciousness?

There are several things to be addressed here.

Firstly, note that this is a different issue than the one in the original thread. When I say "doing things on the outside to crackle our aliveness" I am referring not to spiritual supports, but to all the things that people pursue to charge themselves with liveliness — relationships, hobbies, pleasures etc. Here, which way should it be? Aliveness first or Action first? We may presently be dependent on the outer actions to keep our spirits up, but there is no question that this should be reversed. Our engagement in the world should be to exude our aliveness, not consume it. As living beings we should be producers of aliveness, not consumers.

How do we put Aliveness first? It was already so in our early childhood, but as we grew up the psychology got conditioned in many ways and the equation reversed. And now we are all the time running around looking for charging points to remain up and alive, very much the same way we look for charging points for our phone. In breaking out of this conditioning Yoga kriyas can help greatly. From my personal experience I am referring here specifically to Shambhavi Mahamudra and Shakti Chalana kriya that I have learnt from Isha and have been regularly practicing. I have come to see how it makes the energies exuberant, and how there is a natural buzz of aliveness in the system. There may be many such Kriyas taught by many other schools. In this regard, one can also use the faculties of intellect and emotion to engage in Self-enquiry and Devotion respectively; but these are greatly dependent on the temperament of the individual whereas Kriyas are well-defined techniques that anyone can make use of. With regular practice they bear fruit, of life.

Coming to the question of external support, there may be two different points that need to be addressed — using external support, and creating external support for our use.

With regard to using external support — apart from practicing specific Yogic techniques, one can certainly take all the external support available to them — conducive places, times, objects, food regulation, company of people etc. But then one should be careful not to go into the whining mode "I am not progressing because this particular support is absent". While the availability of some support is certainly a boost, absence of it should not be painted as a roadblock. Moreover, today in the age of internet we have access to plenty of spiritual content, online sessions etc. at our fingertips which we can use to keep ourselves oriented and focussed. Compare this to the situation a hundred years ago when a seeker had to leave his house to go in search of a teacher. So, what are we complaining about, really? If we go into that mode, where do we draw the line? There can be really no end to it. We can go to the extent of saying that only after there is a great transformation in the society, only when it reverberates with a spiritual ambiance, is it possible for me to transform myself. That would be fool's paradise. Why can't we be the ones who begin that transformation in the society? Or do you want to be the last fool to transform? Therefore even in regard to this aspect of using external support, the first focus should be upon ourselves. We may use all the support available, but it should not become an excuse to whine and wait. We cannot put the onus on others to provide the support and demand it from them. No one is obligated to support us in our journey. It is our own. Whatever support comes from outside is only a bonus, and we should be thankful for it, not cynical complaining about a lack of it. This sense of ungratefulness is by itself very unbecoming for a spiritual seeker.

Also, external supports are eventually meant to be transcended. One should be attentive to make sure that it does not become a dependence of a new kind. For e.g. children use ruled notebooks to practice writing so that they can eventually write without those printed lines. But in the name of practice if they are made to write in moulded grooves of the letters it will just become a new dependency. They will never be able to write with ease without that support.

With regard to creating external support — there is this possibility of creating a simpler external support to hold us up. Swami Vivekananda points out that the Puja Griha in Indian houses is meant to be a place which should be gradually charged with sattvik reverberations. We should use that space/room only for spiritual sadhana, and imbue the space with that quality over time. Just as we build a physical house brick by brick, just as we accrue a bank account rupee by rupee, it is possible to build an energized space bit by bit. We can make a space come alive, and then use it as a support — "...when you are miserable, sorrowful, doubtful, or your mind is disturbed, the very fact of entering that room will make you calmer" (Raja Yoga, chapter 2)

There are also some who argue that the external environment at large, because of its highly materialistic nature, is too unfavourable for spiritual sadhana, and that we will have to first work towards bringing about a major change in the society to make it conducive, and then (or parallelly) use that to transform ourselves. But this sounds absurd. How can a man, who is himself unconscious, inspire and change the people and society around him? He may exhibit lot of fire and will, but a man without clarity of perception and inner balance will only add to the problem no matter how much of good intentions he has. We see a whole lot of such enthusiastic individuals having great plans to transform the world. But one can change the outside only to the extent he is stable and aware. Not more. One's impact on the society is equivalent to the amount of his own transformation. You can have great slogans, create web pages, market yourself well, make videos with spiritual messages, become a keyboard warrior preaching spirituality and debating with random people on the internet, or even open a Yoga center — but people will listen to you only to the extent you are fragrant and vibrant. Not more. You may be teaching Bhagavadgita, but people will resonate with it only to the extent Bhagavadgita resonates in you. Therefore with regard to this aspect too, our transformation comes first. Only then we will earn the listenership of others, and can perhaps be of some support to others who need it.

But it is possible for someone to become a tool in someone else's hands, and thereby create a much bigger impact on the society than they can by themselves. For e.g. I have been working at Isha as a fulltime volunteer from a couple of years. I was primarily part of the team that translated and dubbed Sadhguru's English videos to Kannada. The Kannada channel now has over 2.5 lakh subscribers, and many more things have happened in the Karnataka domain. This is much bigger an impact on the society than I can make by myself in my present state of awareness. So as I was working upon myself, parallelly I was also a tool that was enabling some large scale change in the society. This is what all the volunteers at Isha experience. This requires the quality of keeping oneself aside, and simply doing what is asked without preferences, likes and dislikes. Therefore here too our transformation comes first, in that your special individuality is no more a priority in your psyche. The only difference is that here our transformation produces a magnified impact on the society instead of just an equivalent impact. So, if you dream of great changes in the world and you really mean it, then you should keep yourself aside, and join hands with such organizations (to whatever extent you can) — whichever you wish. If you cannot empower yourself quickly, you can at least quickly become an empowered tool.

In summary, no matter which angle you approach the matter from, it comes to the inevitable conclusion that our transformation, our aliveness, is first and primary. The other side may or may not be pertinent. We cannot afford to focus on the other end more than ourselves.

Therefore, this should indeed become our mantra:

Adhyatma - fundamental responsibility rests always on myself.

The moment we begin to point fingers on the other side, we are on a ride down an endless slippery slope.

56. Question, But out of Conviction, not Suspicion

In the fourth chapter of the Bhagavadgītā, Kr̥ṣṇa clarifies and resolves a significant issue in relation to questioning, śraddhā (faith/conviction), surrender and suspicion.

While emphasizing jñāna as the ultimate goal, he advises Arjuna that to attain ātmajñāna he should approach a Guru as a seeker (4.34). Here he lists three qualities of a seeker: 1) Praṇipāta (prostration, attitude of surrender) 2) Paripraśna (questioning) and 3) Sēvā (serving the Guru)

The first two are apparently contradictory. Our usual idea is that once you have surrendered to someone and have utmost faith in them, you should not question what they say. Whenever someone questions some tradition elders usually say that it should not be questioned and should be followed with faith.

This attitude exists because people have confused "questioning out of inquisitiveness" with "questioning out of suspicion". Since latter type of questioning is more prevalent (as in news channels!), all questions get branded as against faith. But questions by themselves are not against faith. In fact sincere questions rise out of deep faith/conviction.

Questions arise because something seems odd, and you want an explanation for it. For e.g. if a physics professor is teaching General theory of Relativity of Einstein, many aspects of the theory will defy common sense. Therefore a student may raise a question about it. Here the student is asking the question not to challenge the theory (or Einstein or the professor), but to get explanations as to how it is so. Question is arising out of the conviction that the theory is right, not out of suspicion towards it. But if you fall into suspicion mode, the moment something seems odd, you will straightaway presume that something is wrong with the theory; thereafter no one can convince you what the theory really says as you have already made a [negative] conclusion. You will no more put any effort to understand the theory. All your questions and efforts thereafter will only be to challenge and ridicule the theory; no answer will matter to you anymore[1]. Thus Kr̥ṣṇa says "saṁśayātmā vinaśyati" (a suspecting man perishes) (4.40).

Thus we should question out of conviction. But how does the conviction come? Should we have conviction no matter what is said? In case of physics, theories are proved by experiments, and therefore a new student will naturally have conviction on its legitimacy. But what about spirituality?

For instance, spirituality claims "You are not the body or mind, you transcend both". Now this is an apparently odd claim. But just because it is counterintuitive we cannot brush it aside in a hurry. We may not be able to obtain objective proof (pratyakṣa pramāṇa) for such lofty spiritual claims in a laboratory as in physics (because they are subjective experiences), but we surely can infer (anumāna pramāṇa) the higher possibilities—grand qualities such as equanimity amidst great turmoil—that have been exhibited by spiritual masters in every age. And consequently, the words of such beings become āgama pramāṇa[2]; for they not only claim that they have experienced something, but also explain how we can also get there[3]. Also, we should ask ourselves — if spirituality was all dummy without any substance to it, why is it that so many individuals in every age endorsed it? If it was fundamentally baseless, how is it that these spiritual disciplines survived for thousands of years without any forceful imposition by anyone? Therefore, suspecting and ridiculing the entire gamut of spirituality is outright idiocy.

On the other hand there is another problem of simply believing things without trying to experience them firsthand (because of laziness to put the efforts). Many people have great faith on Kr̥ṣṇa; but they do not attempt to study and adopt the teachings of the Gītā! While some quickly suspect and disbelieve, some others quickly believe. Both are not very different in that both are not honest enough to accept that "I do not know". Believers simply utter the lofty statements present in the scriptures without any personal exploration or experience of the same. This is like claiming marks for the derivation of an equation in the mathematics examination without actually deriving it, saying "I have complete faith on my teacher who derived it in the class!"

Therefore only when surrender and questioning go together something worthwhile happens. Śraddhā and questions are therefore complementary, not contradictory. "Śraddhāvān labhatē jñānam" (4.39) — a man of śraddhā surely attains jñāna.

---

[1] Indeed, the major problem of today's generation is that we quickly yield to some conclusion without much exploration or study; sharp but impatient/lazy intellect is the trademark of this century. Most of the discussions reveal that people involved have already decided something, and are discussing only to assert.

[2] In fact even in case of science a new student has no personal understanding (nor the ability to understand) of the proof to begin with. She goes by inference (seeing the technological advancements) and faith on the scientists (because they provide a method to experiment and understand it ourselves), and only in the end comes to a direct understanding of the theoretical-experimental proofs. Similarly in spirituality a seeker goes by inference (seeing the human advancement in the masters) and faith (because of the methods provided for personal realization).

[3] But if someone claims that he has a spiritual realization that is reserved only for him, then there is no point in believing him, disbelieving him or questioning him. We may as well just ignore him.

51. Recognizing the Feminine

<< Previous - The Imaginary Plight of Light

We decide gender based only on biological features, which results in the superficial idea of man-woman. In contrast, there is much more to the idea of masculine and feminine. These are fundamental components of any living system, and everyone is a mixture of both feminine and masculine characteristics. In Chinese philosophy they are called as Yin and Yang respectively. Fritjof Capra, in his classic work 'The Turning Point', gives a beautiful account of this concept. Later I got to hear similar ideas from various other sources, and also realized a few points myself. And thus this post. The concept is vast; only an essence is presented. And some may find it contentious.

The characteristics of Yang are - assertive, competitive, demanding, analytical etc. Basically self-preservative - the inherent urge to preserve myself at various levels - physical, mental, ideological, social etc.

The characteristics of Yin are - adjusting, cooperating, accepting, intuitive etc. Basically self-expansive - the inherent urge to become something more than what I currently am, by surrendering to and identifying myself with a bigger picture (say, nation).

For a healthy growth of an individual/society a mixture of both is necessary. But the crisis today is that masculine qualities have become dominant dinosaurs and feminine qualities have become endangered species. I am not speaking in terms of men-women; I am speaking in terms of masculine-feminine. By saying masculine is dominant today, I mean that not only men have forgotten their feminine side, but even women are becoming increasingly masculine. Manly women! Due to the physical and psychological suppression of biological women over the centuries by biological men, biological women are trying to retaliate. They should retaliate. But instead of bringing feminine qualities to the forefront, the biological women are again promoting masculine qualities. So even if females rise, the feminine will anyway fall. This is a lose-lose situation.

The masculine is dominant because it is portrayed as success in today's society. But masculinity, the self-preservation part, has to do only with survival. Earn money, status, security etc. It ends there. It is only the initial necessary part, not the final fulfilling part. But we somehow seem to have missed that point. We are running a blind race only to survive. Even after we have well more than what we need to comfortably survive, we still run after money. Because we measure success with how much money one has. You know very well what "He is very successful" means by default. But measuring success with just how well you survive is very dumb. For instance, an individual with a 3-bedroom house is considered more successful than the one with a single room - we should be laughing at this really.

Success should in fact be decided by feminine qualities. It is that additional thing you do after you have managed to survive. How well are you in tune with the bigger picture? How fulfilled you feel with your life? What have you experienced beyond the basic physical world?

For instance, social service is feminine, an additional thing beyond your survival. And that gives you a sense of contentment. Motherhood is intensely feminine, something which can biologically be supported only by women (fatherhood is also feminine, but less intensely). But due to the rampaging masculinity, modern mothers think that working in office is success rather than spending time with their children. Is motherhood - bringing up a child with good values and preparing the next generation - not success? Men have anyway lost their minds in masculinity. And now women too are defeating the feminine.

Spiritual seeking is the culmination of the feminine. The deepest yearning, which is way beyond the realm of the survival. All seekers are intensely feminine. As Meera put it, there are no other men in existence apart from Krishna, the final reality. Only when we become extremely feminine in seeking this reality can we surrender ourselves to it and annihilate the self-preserving masculine individuality. Therefore, may all of us invoke the feminine in us.

13. Convolutions Compiled

<< Previous - The Upturned Priorities

By now, we have talked about several blunders that a spiritual aspirant may commit due to his eagerness, urgency and over-enthusiasm. In this post I thought a few more of such roadblocks can be presented.

I once attended a meditation session being conducted by an instructor. He made all the people sit in a meditative posture and then the session began. He gave several instructions such as “Relax your whole body. Slow down your breathing. Watch your heart beat etc.”. The session went on for about 10-15 minutes. After that he asked all the attendees to share their experience. People started telling things like “I felt as if time stopped”, “I felt as if I was out of the body” etc. Now I was in a fix. Because I hadn’t felt anything. Throughout the 15 minutes, I was half asleep with some weird thoughts running amidst the slumber. When my turn came I said “I felt nothing.”. The instructor was taken aback. He expected at least “It was good”. Now, being the instructor of the session, his ego was at stake in front of the group. He asked again with a little exclamation “You didn’t feel ANY thing?”. Well, now I felt a little compelled to say something positive. So, I said “Hmm, I think I heard some sound. It could have been OM kara, but I’m not sure.”. And the instructor said in a victorious tone “Yes, when mind goes into deep silence, you will hear OM”. I didn’t observe at that time, but when I look back now I notice that he was least concerned about my spiritual progress. His only focuses were his success as the instructor, his popularity as a Yoga teacher, more student enrollments into his classes, and the resulting increase in his revenue. So, finally it is $$$. What a great spiritual teacher!

But in the process of lying to others, I slowly started lying to myself. I really started believing that I am seeing light, hearing sounds, having the experience of spiritual bliss etc during my meditation sessions. And all this in a matter of 2-3 weeks. How foolish! Time passed by and after an year or so, finally I couldn’t cheat myself. I started thinking “I have been meditating for a year now, and nothing has happened! Same anger, jealousy and lust. Everything is as it was a year ago!”. Then what was the use of the light I saw? What was the use of the sound I heard?

And all this stagnation just because I wanted results in a hurry and pretended to myself by showing dummy progress reports. If I had honestly pursued, without cheating myself, in one year I would probably have had some real experiences. But now I had wasted all my effort and time in pretending and reporting fake progress to myself!

In the realms of spirituality, urge for respect and recognition from others is quite irresistible. Sometimes we lose ourselves in this maze of impressing others around us by following certain practices – such as wearing white and white, saying “All is Brahman” every now and then etc. Sometimes, I have even seen each and every action of a person throughout the day being a drama performance, just with the intention of gaining some recognition from others. The style of walking, way of talking, the gestures – everything being a pretence! And all this just for getting to hear “Oh what a great spiritual person he is”. What a waste of effort! And what a load on ourselves to pretend the whole day, instead of just being ourselves freely! This can be called as spiritual constipation ;-)

But why so much of complexity? What do we gain? What do we get from the respect and recognition? Do we progress spiritually because of their respect? In fact, such respect from others is going to put us in a dream world, that we are great spiritual practitioners. But don’t we know about our real colors? This is only going to stagnate us. Our entire focus falls on something trivial and our precious time and effort are completely wasted on actions intended towards gaining respect. Is the goal of spirituality just to make others fall at our feet? What an insignificant and childish ambition!

Of course, no harm in wearing white and white etc. If it is being followed without any intention of gaining respect then it is perfectly fine. But only we will know what our intention in doing such activities is. We cannot afford to lie to ourselves. As emphasized in the earlier posts, honesty to ourselves is a must in spiritual progress. Let alone the transparency towards others, let us first be fully transparent and truthful to ourselves. This perhaps constitutes the major portion of ‘Satya’ prescribed by Patanjali in his Yoga sutras. This is both crucial and essential.

All get very much drawn towards the mystic Hatha Yoga and Tantra techniques. ‘Kundalini’ has become a household name all around the world. Although this science has its own efficacy and helps seekers in its own way, in the modern times we can see several distractions and disruptions being caused because of the over-technicality involved in it. This is perhaps because genuine Hatha masters are scarcely available and the bogus Hatha teachers only look at raising their income, not raising the Kundalini.

The genuine seeker is already in a disturbed state. He already has worries bugging him or her. And over that he gets bombarded with ‘Kundalini’, ‘Chakra’, ‘Nadi’, ‘Nada’, ‘Bindu’, ‘Laya’… All this is going to depress him further and make him feel miserable “Oh God, so many things, and I don’t know even a bit! When will I do all this!”. This has been explained in detail in the ‘Miraculous Mistake’. So, instead of calming down the mind, he has shifted the disturbance of the mind from one area to another. From the distractions of the world to the distractions of technical terms of Yoga. Why do we need something that depresses us? Perhaps if it is taught by a genuine Hatha teacher, its usefulness would become evident. And the Hatha texts clearly indicate this fact – ‘This text only gives a general guideline, but should not be practiced without the guidance of a real Hatha Guru.’. So otherwise, it will just become a blind practice as it has become today. Some people follow this path even to improve their sex life. What a degradation!

Moreover, it is well known and told clearly in the texts that Hatha practices can be dangerous if practiced without proper guidance. So, it is nothing but a risk, especially if practiced under the guidance of a money-oriented bogus master who himself does not know about the results of the practices.

Ramana Maharshi, when asked about the technicality of such things, simply said “You are already deluded enough by the world. Why do you want to delude yourself more with all this technical terms? Self-Realization is just being as your true self. Why do you need all this just to be yourself?”

So, for innocent practitioners like us let the mystic science remain mysterious! The attraction of Hatha techniques is sometimes irresistible. But let us not get dragged into this just because it looks amusing. Not a good idea! We can take simple and more prevalent practices like Pranayama and certain simple Kriyas, but not everything that is prescribed. After all, Hatha Yoga is just one of the paths and it is not necessary that it must be practiced. We can safely and generously exempt ourselves from it.

“Yesterday night I had a wonderful experience. I was meditating and I saw divine light”

“When you were meditating I quietly came to the room and switched on the tube light for a minute. It was the flickering of the tube light, not celestial light.”

After a few days…

“Yesterday night I really saw divine light. Because I know nobody was in the room, I had locked from inside”

“We were taking photos just outside your room. It was the powerful flash of the digital camera.”

After a few days…

“This time I meditated in the afternoon. I had a strange blissful feeling, I felt as if I was floating. I also heard some trumpet sound. It has been told in Hatha texts that different chakras have different sounds.”

“You idiot. You were sleeping and snoring in your sitting posture itself. The trumpet was your own snoring. And obviously it will be a strange feeling to sleep in sitting posture.”

After a few days…

 “I felt a tingling sensation in my Ajna chakra. And I think I saw the Ajna chakra. I verified the shape in the book”

“You were squinting your eyes so forcefully for so long that just by looking at you even I felt the pain between my eye brows. First see Mooladhara, Swadhishtana, Manipura, Anahata and Vishuddhi chakras. Than speak of Ajna chakra.”

After a few days…

“I think I saw Kundalini. It was coiled like a snake as described in the book”

“With your squint and half open eyes, I think you saw your own curly hair drooping over your forehead”

After a few days…

“I felt the rising of the Kundalini within my spinal column”

“Ok, I have had enough of your comedy show. You better visit a psychiatrist”