The Multitasking Debate: Efficiency vs. Presence
Questioner: Namaskar, Acharya Ji, my question is that, nowadays; I mean, in the last two decades or so, this quality of multitasking has been advertised a lot, and everybody wants to have this particular quality listed under their CVs.
But as far as I know, as far as I believe, our Yogic scriptures do not agree with that. They rather say that we should be present in the moment, and we should focus only on the task we have at hand. So, what is your take on this? Is it a good thing to be a multitasker; or is it better to just be present in the moment, and focus on what we are doing currently?
Acharya Prashant: The matter needs to be taken deeper for resolution. Who is the doer? Who is the one choosing tasks? And what does he want? How much of clarity does he have? Please understand.
You sit behind your wheel on the driver’s seat, don’t you? And you are multitasking all the time. You are looking at the road; you are looking at the speedometer. And if it’s a manual thing, then you are doing the gears. There are three pedals your feet must work on. You also have to take care of the several lights that might occasionally blink on the dashboard. And obviously, you also have to look at unforeseen things like animals and kids and all the stuff on the road. And potholes, not to name them.
But in spite of all that multitasking, you are not multi-destined. Please understand! You are not moving towards multiple destinations. Moving towards one particular destination, that you know for sure, you are doing two, three or five things that are needed to keep moving. Now, this is multitasking of one nature where the various tasks are like various branches of the same tree—that’s one thing.
Even if you are riding a bicycle, are you not multitasking? Think of your legs, think of your eyes, think of your arms, you are multitasking. Think of your ears, even the ears have to do their own task in a particular way. The other kind of multitasking is when you are trying to drive five cars parallelly.
One kind of multitasking is, driving one car, I have to take care of the brakes, the accelerator, the clutch, the gear, the dashboard, the indicators, all those things, that’s one kind of multitasking. One car, one destination, and all that needs to be done, I will take care of that because that’s what is needed to reach my one destination.
The other thing is, I’m a divided self; I’m a fragmented person, so I’m driving five different cars towards five different destinations, and trying to manage them, control them, all in the same moment. Now, this is nonsense, and most of what is happening is this kind of nonsense. Because we do not know ourselves, because the problem is with self-knowledge, therefore, we drive five cars at a time.
I repeat, please understand the difference, driving one car and, you would have seen the cockpit of a plane. Seen the enormous number of controls there are? Or even a high-end vehicle; a four-wheeler, the number of controls just keeps multiplying as the vehicle keeps rising in sophistication. And an attentive driver is taking care of all the things that there are, or a pilot, he’s taking care of all those things, that’s one thing.
But mostly; because we do not know who we are, and therefore, what we must do, in our insecurity, in our blindness, we keep on trying this as well as that; and now that kind of multitasking does not help. That’s the multitasking in which you say, “One task is to go towards the right, and the other task is to go towards the left.” All that you; in this way, drive is a wedge within your own existence. Right and left and broken, torn.
I’m multitasking because I am trying to please my boss and wife at the same time, that’s multitasking. No, you cannot. Go to your roots; let your existence resemble a tree; and then you can branch out as much as you like to. But first of all, you have to be fully earthed. The roots of your existence, ‘the self,’ has to be in tremendous love with the soil. In Vedanta, we call it the great love that the ego has for the ‘Atman.’ The roots can be compared to ‘Aham,’ and the earth can be compared to ‘Atman.’
Let there be such a deep love that separation becomes impossible. And then from that kind of rooted self; a self in love, there arises a powerful, unshakeable trunk, and then it prolifically branches out. Now, that branching out might be a kind of multitasking, which is okay, which is okay. So, myself, I’m multitasking all the time, that’s fine. I’m not multi-minded; I’m not multi-destined; I’m one. From there, if I have to do several things, that’s fine. That’s like a dance then, all the things in one particular integrated harmony.
Think of dancer; think of the various steps she takes, the hands are moving; even the eyes are moving in a particularly graceful way; even the hair, they are moving, and that’s adding something to the dance. The clothes, the feet, the entire body, but all that comes together without division, as one holistic beauty.
So, look at your own various movements. Is there a core to them? Is there a root to them? Is there a centrality to them? Or are they like, this, this, this, and this, with no connection between this and this? When a dancer is dancing, the way her arms move, and the way her legs move, they are in tandem, they are in unison. They are two aspects of the one central thing.
But look at most multitaskers; look at how they move in that part of their self, and in this part of their self, and you will find nothing that unites. There is no relationship. This way they say is their professional life, the boss. This way they say is their personal life, the wife, the mother, the kids, and all the rest of it. And there is just no unity. There is nothing that connects, harmonizes.
The most beautiful life is like a symphony, unending symphony. You must listen to symphonies, you know. The way they rise and fall; the way the whole, the whole experience changes, and yet remains the same. And the beauty is that underlying unity. It does not last just for five minutes. We are not talking of some ordinary song; we are talking of symphonies. Things keep varying, and yet they remain the same. Can your existence be like that?
You’re in the gym one moment, you’re in the kitchen another moment, can you still have a unity? Or in the gym, you are trying to beat calories, and in the kitchen, you are trying to eat calories? There is no harmony, no harmony. Not sure whether the examples are going anywhere, are they? Am I able to communicate something?
Now, multitasking is an imperative of life, you will have to do that. Even when you are doing one thing, please pay attention, you are actually doing several things. Even when you think you are not multitasking, you are actually multitasking. Even as I speak to you, I have to be careful that I do not get too distant from these two (mikes). Am I not multitasking, even this moment? If I get too distant, he starts quipping from there because he’ll have to face the brunt. And I can’t get too close either, even that is a problem. I’m multitasking, am I not? You, too, are multitasking. Even as you are listening to me, you are also ensuring you stay within the frame.
Multitasking is an imperative, but don’t be a multiple-divided person. Multiple selves are not welcome; multitasking is alright. We live lives of multiple selves. One self, other self, and all those selves are all fake, borrowed. This self-taken from here, who gave this self to you? You know, I got a kid, and the kid gave me this self. Who gave this self to you? My father or my husband. Who gave this self to you? The shopkeeper, the market. Who gave that self to you? You know, my body, my physicality — Multiple selves. And those selves rarely agree with each other. So, what do they do?
Do the various branches of the tree fight with each other? Or do they dance with each other? Oh, in such beauty they dance with each other, don’t they? But the various, the multiple parts of the self, they fight with each other. One part of your self is saying, “You know, I need to fast. I’m a religious man.” The other part of your self is saying, “You know, I’m a modern person. Should I believe in these antique things? I don’t need to fast.”
One part is saying, “You know, I’m that obedient, good chap that my mother brought up.” The other one says, “No, no, no, I’m a cowboy; I’m rather a playboy that my wife fell in love with.” Now, between being an obedient son and a playboy husband, you are torn apart. And sometimes, you become an obedient husband. I need not utter the other side, mothers will get offended. We can simply say, “Disobedient son.” Does that not happen?
So, that kind of multiplicity or duplicity is what we need to guard against. In love, you have to do many things, you have to. But all those things are for the one thing called love.
I had this rabbit, Nandu, and those were the days I would sleep on the floor. And when I would be sleeping on the floor that was the only time, she would get active. She was quite sick. So, all the day, she would just sit in her corner; could not run around like the other rabbits. And many times, it happened. Because I was anxious about her health; in fact, her very being, she would utter some little noise, and I would wake up. Many a times, in my cabin, I would be working, and there was a small partition, and she would be on that side. And the usual drill of the day, and all the noise, and the din, and the…
Have you heard a rabbit speak? The sound of a rabbit, have you heard? It’s a very faint sound. They don’t shout. They are such vulnerable creatures that even if they have to signal to other rabbits, they just stamp their feet. They don’t utter much from their throats. They do utter some sounds, but I noticed, I was working, I would be working, I would be speaking to someone, and there would be the usual noise around me as there is in any workplace. And it would utter something, and I would know it has said something. And I would go and pick it up and…
So, you are multitasking. You know what’s going on. Even if you are occupied in ten things, that one little thing matters so much to you. You cannot get yourself off it. And it’s not as if only that thing matters; something else matters in an equally big way. So, if this happens, you go to this. If that happens, you go to that. But it’s not this versus that. This and that are two parts of the same harmony. If this calls for your attention, you give yourself to this. If that calls for your attention, you give yourself to that. But it’s never this versus that.
And if in your life, it’s this versus that, then it’s a problematic life. This versus that, this thing should not be there in life. One branch fighting against the other is quite inauspicious. The tree would die. Applies to organizations as well. If one department fights against the another, the organization would die.
Questioner: Thank you, Acharya Ji. Thank you so much.
