She Thought She Had Life Figured Out. She Didn't
Questioner: Good evening, Acharya Ji. I am Sara. I am a first year engineering student.
So, we live in a materialistic world, where our entire personalities have been narrowed down so that we chase this tangible stuff around us. We know very well that emotional human connection is extremely important to us. We know that. Yet we have somehow been subjected by society to go after the material things that come and go from time to time. We are aware that emotional intellect and emotional connection with human beings around us would not quite leave us as often as materials do. Yet somehow we go on chasing the materials around us. This is a materialistic world, like I said.
How do I, as a person who is constantly surrounded by this group of people chasing the tangible, not fall for this chase and instead seek the emotional intelligence and human connection that is extremely important, more than the materials? How do I do that? I would really like to know.
Acharya Prashant: So, in the question, there is a juxtaposition between materialism and what the lady is calling an emotional connect. Right? So, the material and the emotional have been put alongside in a way of comparison, and the tone of the question suggests that she's finding the emotional part to be more important but neglected. Right? She's saying there is the material aspect of life and then there is the emotional aspect of life. Out of these, the emotional aspect is more important, but it is neglected, and there is a complaint implicit in the question. Right?
So, this is being compared to this. Now, what is more important, x or x²? That's a comparison. What's more important? What's more important? x or x by y?
Questioner: They are both important on their own terms.
Acharya Prashant: You mean they are the same?
Questioner: They are not the same, but they are important in...
Acharya Prashant: Assuming both are... x and y are nonzero rational numbers, and fine. So, what's more important, x or ax by a?
Listener: Both are same.
Acharya Prashant: Both are same, but they look very different. But they look so different, don't they? They look spectacularly different, don't they? x and ax divided by a. They look so different, right? And we want to compare and say, in favor of x, ax divided by a is being neglected, and this is unfair.
How does my position sound?
Questioner: So, you are metaphor. You are using ax by a as a metaphor for the thing that I complain is being neglected.
Acharya Prashant: What I mean to say is, what you are calling emotional is just another name for material.
Questioner: I specified materials being tangible...
Acharya Prashant: All emotions are tangible. Show me one emotion that does not have a tangible material thing at its core. Show me one thing. It's another thing to fake. I might say, "No, no, no, no, there is no material consideration involved in this emotion," but show me one emotion that is bereft of material consideration.
Just that ax upon a looks different, looks different from x. So, we say, "You know, it looks so much bigger, so much more beautiful, and a is far more well-rounded, and it is present above, it is present below. So surely the emotional part is the more aesthetic part of life."
No, sir. No. No.
Yes. Obviously, what we call materialism must be critiqued. But materialism cannot be critiqued in the backdrop of emotion because emotion too is very much material. You cannot critique materialism by bringing in emotionalism.
Emotion was evolution's way of securing material continuity. Don't you see that? What you call emotions in human beings are present, as you may call them emotions or feelings? Technically, there's a difference between the two, but the difference is superficial. Much the same thing is present in beasts also, animals also.
What do you think the animals are caring for? Every aspect of animal behavior has been very well explained to have an evolutionary basis. Even the emotions displayed by animals are nothing but means to secure tangible ends. And the moment the tangible ends are no more needed or become redundant, the emotion too evaporates.
The moment the day the calf becomes mature, the cow's emotion towards it subsides. What was evolution, prakriti, biology waiting for? What was the emotion all about?
It was Prakriti's way of continuing the species of the cow. The day the cow sees that... not even the cow does not really have to see in the manner of understanding or discretion. It is a matter of the clock and the calendar. It is inbuilt. It happens in a particular week, in a particular month. The cow, as we said, weaning away, you know what that emotion is about. And as long as the calf is little, see how strong the protective and the maternal emotion of the cow is. Just see.
See, the employee is complaining so much. "Oh, this company, I hate it, and the toxic work environment, and this and that, and bloody hell. Who wants to be here?" The notification glows. Ting! Ting! It's a mail from the HR. "Sir, you have a 25% salary hike." Seen how the emotion flips. Immediate flip. Immediate.
What do you think the entire jewelry industry is for? It is to flip emotions. The man might be looking out, cheating, doing anything, not keeping promises, turning a plate, doing anything. But the moment he gets that 5½ kg necklace, the emotions just turn upside down. That's what that jewelry industry exists for. What else?
You won't find too many love songs dedicated to physically unattractive women. Does that happen? In fact, that's the content of most of these so-called love songs. What's the content? "You see how beautiful your eyes are, and your hair, and your body, and your curves, and all those things."
Don't you see how tangible this thing called emotion is? Don't you think there is a clear physical and material basis? Don't you see that that is happening? That's obviously happening.
So, if there must exist a comparison or a contrast, it is not between material and emotional. It is between the material-emotional, which is one thing and must be hyphenated, the material-emotional and the spiritual. And what is spiritual about? No, that's not another material. That's not another subtle kind of material. By spiritual, I mean nothing but the understanding of the material.
Spiritual is not another kind of material. It is the understanding of the material. And the material includes emotions, thoughts, intuitions, feelings, everything.
So, you're right. I appreciate your sentiment, the place you're coming from. One gets fed up with all this materialism. Everybody's running after this or that. Yes. But the solution is not emotionality. The counterweight, the antidote to materialism, is not emotionality because emotionality is another kind of materialism. The antidote to materialism is understanding of the material.
Do I understand the material? Do I understand my material self and its flawed longing for more material stuff? Do I understand that now? Now, that's a more gainful comparison.
Are we together on this?
Yes, a line must be drawn, but the line that you are drawing is at the wrong place. You are drawing a line between material and emotional, and emotional, in its turn, is again material. So, you're drawing a line between x and ax upon x. So, the line does not mean anything.
You must draw a line. The line must be drawn between the material-emotional and the spiritual. And spiritual, I repeat, is not another kind of emotion because most of us practice sentimentality in the name of spirituality. "I'm longing for a God, and I'm weeping," or imagining some kind of divine figure and dancing. No, that's not spirituality. That's another kind of materialism. That's very much materialism.
Spirituality is about understanding whatever is going on. And whatever is going on is material. Right? Only material goes on. What moves is material.
Questioner: So, you mean to say that acquiring this emotional spirituality is not equivalent to materializing the existence of God?
Acharya Prashant: I didn't get you. Repeat what you're saying.
Questioner: So, you said there is another thing called emotional spirituality.
Acharya Prashant: Sentimental. Yes.
Questioner: Yes. So, we aren't, like you said, practicing spirituality as sentimentality.
Acharya Prashant: A lot of people. Yes.
Questioner: Yes. So, we aren't supposed to materialize the existence of God in the name of spirituality, and then, in turn, how do I acquire this spirituality that you have just enlightened me about?
Acharya Prashant; No, no. See, material can be acquired. We said spiritual is not?
Questioner: Material.
Acharya Prashant: So, spirituality cannot be acquired.
Questioner: It can be understood?
Acharya Prashant: No. It is the understanding of the material. And when you understand material, you understand what it cannot give. The flawed promises that material seems to make. So spirituality, then, is not a process of acquisition. It is a process of negation.
We have beliefs. Spirituality is the process of dropping those beliefs. Spirituality is not about acquiring more material beliefs.
Questioner: So doesn't spirituality beg for acquaintance in any way?
Acharya Prashant: You already have so much. What will you do by acquiring more? The mind. Why is the mind troubled and burdened so much? Because it is overloaded with concepts, including concepts of God, etc. Spirituality is about examining your concepts. And then..
Questioner: So spirituality is also equal to singular belief in singularity.
Acharya Prashant: No, no. No belief at all. If there is a singular belief in singularity, even that has to be examined.
Questioner: In a positive way.
Acharya Prashant: No way. Even positivity has to be examined.
Questioner: How?
Acharya Prashant: How do you examine anything? By not identifying with it. By not attaching with it.
Questioner: Attachment is the core problem for the solutions that we inherit on our...
Acharya Prashant: You don't hold any of these notions. You simply say, "Here I am, and my nature is to know. I must know.
Questioner: How do I know then?
Acharya Prashant: How do you know anything? How do you listen to me?
Questioner: Paying attention to you.
Acharya Prashant: That's it.
Questioner: So paying attention is the key.
Acharya Prashant: Obviously. And you cannot pay attention if you are constantly holding beliefs. If you already have beliefs about what I am saying, those beliefs will not allow you to listen to me.
Questioner: So I must acquire knowledge if I'm acquiring it, let's say, by putting aside the set beliefs that I already had within me, and that is the only way that I can..."
Acharya Prashant: Not acquire. Listen.
Questioner: Listen. So, by listening, I'm not acquiring anything. I'm…
Acharya Prashant: No. And if listening becomes acquisition, then you are not listening but copying.
Questioner: Yes. That makes a lot of sense. Thank you. I'm truly grateful to be able to speak to you.
Acharya Prashant: Pranam, Acharya Ji. My name is Khusi Agarwal, and so, sir, my question is, to avoid the real-life problems we face in our day-to-day lives, we start consuming things like material things, shopping, or we start ordering food, or we go to the OTT platforms or social media. And due to the overconsumption we are facing, I think overall problems like climate change and the animals are getting extinct.
So, what do you think? What actions can we take? As, like, I'm a student, and even if I'm a vegetarian, the animals are getting extinct. So, what actions can I take as a student to create awareness, and what can we do as a society?
Acharya Prashant: Whatever has happened has happened due to false belief. Actions come later. Beliefs come first. Right?
Questioner: Yes.
Acharya Prashant: We do not just act. We act out of some idea. We act out of some notion, out of some belief. And beliefs reach the mind in many ways, including the way of word. So those who are destroying the planet today have probably heard a lot of false words. It is the corruption and the destruction of mind that is causing the destruction of the planet. So, if you want to stop the destruction of the planet, you'll have to cleanse the mind of the false word.
A lot of people say, "But what will mere speaking attain?"
Sir, this destruction that we are seeing all around is because a lot of foolish people spoke a lot of foolish things, and they were not challenged. Their word penetrated the common mind and colonized it, and it is their word that is now taking the form of action.
We are creatures of philosophy. Human beings don't just operate out of animal instinct. They create mental models. They create philosophies. They create systems of thought. And powered by those mental models and thought systems, they proceed to act and destroy. That's how we act. Right? So, before the destruction comes the mental model. If you want to stop the destruction, challenge the mental model. The power of words. Speak, speak, speak as much as you can. People were corrupted because they were spoken to. Now people can be redeemed if they are rightly spoken to.
There is a lot of power in this word. This man-machine acts out of mental ideas, and it is the ideas that stand corrupted. So challenge and purify those ideas. Speak a lot. And that's what I keep telling the community. If you are sitting idle and not speaking, you are contributing to the destruction.
Speak as much as you can. Speaking is the biggest activism.
How else are you going to raise awareness? When you say, "I want to raise awareness," human beings have what is called as the panch gyanendriya. You have to reach them using only these. Either they must see something, or they must touch something, or they must hear something, they must read something. That's how you have to reach out. Show them. Make them listen. Use the power of social media.
Questioner: Like, sir, we can also see that some of the most powerful leaders of the world, they think that humans are getting extinct, and they're promoting...
Acharya Prashant: Challenge them. Intellectually, you are their equal. Intellectually, actually, you are superior to them. We know the ones you are referring to. You are intellectually superior. So, without any hesitation, come out and challenge on all fronts possible.
Questioner: Yes, sir.
Acharya Prashant: Hello, sir. Good afternoon. I'm Prachi, a first-year B.Tech student. I've been reflecting on my thoughts lately, and I wanted to ask you how do I differentiate between my mind's noise and my true inner voice? Like, how do I differentiate between the thoughts that come from overthinking, fear, anxiety, stress, and the thoughts that are calm and guiding, that come from within?
Questioner: See, you'll have to go into the content of the thought. Thought will always have you at one end and some content, some object belonging to this big universe at the other end. Thought always will have these two ends. One end is always you. Always you.
So, I might lose this mug. I have not yet studied this book. I need to reach that place. What if I do not succeed in that exam? You see two things always present here: the subject and the predicate. Basic grammar. But that grammar leans on psychology. So, I am there at one end of the thought, and something else in the world is there at the other end of the thought. Right?
How important really is that other thing? And how do I know that the other thing has importance? That's what probably one would do well to evaluate. How do I know that this object that I aspire to get, or fear to lose, is actually valuable? How do I know? I feel that I know. It intuitively appears quite certain that the object is definitely valuable.
But wait, wait, wait. Can I just re-ascertain? Can I just re-evaluate? Is this object that is dominating my mind really valuable? Because the mind is nothing but a cluster of those objects, and often we do not know how that object made its way into the mind.
Do I know whether the object deserves space here?
Thought is the relationship between the two ends. At one end are you; at the other end is that object. Right? So, instead of talking about thought, we would do well to talk about the objects that we have chosen to place here in this thing called the mind. Right?
Obviously, if it is here, then somewhere there is a belief that it deserves to be here. Right? It is important. So it's here. How do I know it's important? How do I know? Now, you are a B.Tech first-year student. You know the logical method. You know what it means to experiment and test. You know what it means to verify and falsify.
How do I know that this thing that I'm attaching so much importance to is really important? And if it is important, then all kinds of thoughts are welcome. But if it's not important, then that thought is what you called as noise.
That was your question, right? How do I differentiate between useful thought and noise? That depends on the object you, the ego-self, have chosen to relate yourself to. If that object is indeed valuable, then the thought is all right. But most of the time, the objects that we carry are here only coincidentally, only ignorantly. We do not even know how something managed to sneak into our inner space, into the mental space. We don't even know.
Sometimes we follow the crowd. Sometimes, when we are asleep, that is, unconscious, some object manages to sneak in, to break through, like it happens at night, a burglary. And you'll be astonished when you will look at your mind-stuff, the content that you carry. You'll be astonished how little of it has been consciously allowed by you to enter. Most of it never gained any conscious entry pass.
How did it manage its way in then? You don't even know. Somebody implanted it. Somebody told you. You can't even examine it. Often that also happens. You know, there are objects that are deemed so sacred that you are not even allowed to test.
"Oh, this is something you must not question." So, just take it and place it here. And not just place it here, hold it so sacred that you worship it, surrender to it, bow down. Or, here is this concept. And concepts are also objects, right?
Anything that you can think about, anything that you can visualize, anything that can have a name, anything that can be placed somewhere in space and time, that is an object. So, some of those objects are just concepts that you soaked in because you found everybody else doing the same.
You said, "Because everybody else is venerating this object, so it must be all right." Or, "I trust these few people, and they are carrying this thing on their head, so it must be auspicious or useful. So I too am carrying this."
Now, when those mental objects will have that unexamined quality, then thought will be noise. Whenever the object of thought will be an unexamined one, then the thought will be nothing but noise. And also, to extend the thing further, this, that is at the other end of thought. What was at the far end of the thought? What was at the far end of the thought? The object. What is at the near end of the thought? The self, the thinker, right? The thinker, the subject. These two are not really unrelated. If you allow the object to stay unexamined, then the thinker also remains unexamined. Also, a useless object of thought renders the thinker useless. If that which you are thinking of is worthless, then the thinker too will slowly decay and become worthless.
Hence, it is very, very important to be conscious of what you are allowing to enter your inner space. It must be fiercely guarded. It is your most valuable property. Right? Not everybody can have access to this sacred chamber. You must be quite strict about it, vigilant about it. Am I making myself clear, or is it too little, too far, too much, too fast? Is it fine?
Acharya Prashant: Thank you, sir.
