Who Told You That Life Needs a Destination?

Questioner: Sir, in the start you mentioned how we make our ego, how our ego comes into function when we are born. So, how do we really know ourselves? Like, what are the step-by-step? I want to do it, but how would I do it? How should I do it?

Acharya Prashant: So, for example, among all these people, you were the one, or you are among the few who chose to come here, ask, expose yourself to questions, and be questioned. That tells you something about yourself. That's how you know yourself, through your daily actions, through your thoughts, emotions, deeds. Actions are the most powerful indicator, more powerful than thoughts, more powerful than emotions. You look at your desires, your fears, they exist. They definitely exist. For you they exist. Right? You start from there. That's how one knows himself.

You may keep saying, you know, I am a very fearless person. But when it comes to asking a simple question, let's say in a gathering like this, you find yourself developing cold feet. You are actually having some inquiry with it, but you find you are just too nervous to expose it. Right?

So, your actions are a more telling indicator of who you are than your thoughts.

Thoughts often cater to a lot of imagination. Actions are there for there.

Questioner: Let me give an example. Last year, my grandmother got an attack in front of me, and I didn't panic at that time. I was able to get her hospitalized and everything. But when I returned from the hospital, to my surprise, I cried. From then, I started to work on this only. I started to learn about myself so that I can work on it. I watch your lectures, some books too, but yet I'm not able to move forward from it. So that is why I was asking that.

Acharya Prashant: There should be no desire to move forward because you do not know what forward means. Forward too is just a concept, an imagination. No? What do you mean by forward? Please tell me.

Questioner: Sir, I didn't want to be a person who cries at someone's death.

Acharya Prashant: Why?

Questioner: Because I think that it is not necessary. Why am I being?

Acharya Prashant: Is that what you think? Or is that something that came to you from somewhere? Are your other values and actions consistent with this thought?

Questioner: That is one of the parts of my question. I think I know it, but I don't, I'm not able to accept it. I observe my actions. I saw my problem. But what is the solution?

Acharya Prashant: No, you don't have to look for a solution. Just keep going into the problem. The more you go into it, the problem disappears, and that is the solution. What you want is a solution along with a problem. No. How it internally operates is, you enter the problem, and because you enter it, it disappears, and that is the solution.

In mathematics, you have the problem written here, right? And then there is a solution. You want to apply that framework to the inner world also. That framework doesn't operate there. How it happens internally is, there is the problem. There’s the problem, and you enter the problem. You say, "Okay, what is the problem? Where is it coming from?" And the more you approach the problem, you find it unraveling, and that is the solution.

No solution exists outside the problem. The solution is in entering the problem. So, don't apply these external frameworks to inner situations.

Questioner: So, sir, how do I enter the problem? Let's make it a case.

Acharya Prashant: Yes.

Questioner: She got hospitalized. I cried. I was sad. I thought, why I was sad. I can say that because I love her, because I am in fear that she will die. Now how do I move forward? What is the next question?

Acharya Prashant: No, no. There is no next question needed. Just see that you are afraid of death. Right? Let that stay. Why do you need to quickly hop onto something else? There is fear of death. What does death mean? Disappearance of something you like. Why do I want continuity? Why do I want more of something? You only want more of something when what you have had of it does not suffice, right? Why does it not suffice? These are the questions that, you know, play with each other and remain, and there's a progressive deepening of the question. It never reaches a conclusion. You just stay with it. And in that staying, there is a deepening. That deepening ends at no point.

In fact, when you started speaking. You started off by saying, "Yes, we have now reached a conclusion," something. You use the word conclusion, and I noted that because there was no conclusion we came to. All conclusions are dangerous; you don't need to conclude. Conclusion means the end. You say you are afraid of death, but the conclusion is death. Why do you want to conclude? Isn't the conclusion a death?

There is this living process of inquiry, organic inquiry, branching out into this, that, and you want to put a full stop to it. You want to have an answer because you don't want to live with uncertainty. That's how one knows himself. I am eager to come to a conclusion. Why? Because I can't live with uncertainty. Why? Because I'm afraid. And that is death.

Questioner: Sir, from all these conversations, I could infer that, like, this is my understanding: there is a very fine line. On one side is nihilism; on one side is dogmatism. And on this fine line, I'm searching for the Truth. But if I don't believe in anything at all, if I reject all existing structures and all existing examples of people who have been here before me, who have searched for the same Truth and who might not have been successful or whatever their story was, so what am I going to do with my own time and my own life? How do I move forward?

Acharya Prashant: Not believing does not mean disbelieving. Disbelief is also a belief that something is worth rejecting. Not getting it?

Because you want to believe. I say there is a problem; don't do this. And when you say, "I will not believe in this," that too is a problem, because that too is a belief, just like theists and atheists. What to do with all the words and literature of those before you who have written books and passed on their wisdom? Read it, but how do you know that those words are exactly communicating to you what they wanted to say?

Keep it tentative. Never trust yourself too much. That is the first and fatal belief, the most fatal belief; trusting oneself too much. I believe I have understood.

There is this (Truth Without Apology) book that you are referring to. Read the chapter once; it will mean one thing to you. Read it five times; something else will open up, the same chapter. And these are very precise chapters; one page, two pages. Never believe that you have understood. Never conclude. Never let it end. Are you getting it?

Why? Why do you need to say, "This is it?” That is an end to your own journey. What's the fun in living then if the journey has ended?

Questioner: Sir, can I take the example of Albert Einstein in this scenario? He was arguably the greatest physicist of his generation, and he used to quote, "God doesn't play dice." Maybe if he did inquire into the other systems as well, he might have understood something. So such a great physicist, and even he didn't have that clarity at the end. So shouldn't we hold on to maybe a certain thing, that maybe if we do this, we will find clarity? Because at the end, I feel like the goal of life is to find clarity.

Acharya Prashant: No, no, clarity is nothing to be found. Clarity is like clean air, air clear of pollutants; clarity is like that. Clarity is always a thing of progressive cleansing. It is not something you can come to. It is not a statement of conclusion. It is not a finality. There is a lot that you believe in, and you keep testing it and rejecting it. That is the process of clarity, a lifelong process. You never come to clarity because it is not a destination. It's a process. It's not a state. You understand the difference between a process and a state, right?

Clarity is not a state. It's a process. You can keep coming to it like you can keep coming to 0 Kelvin. You can never reach the end of it, the absoluteness of it. That is not possible. And when you're talking of Einstein, you are talking of someone who dealt with the material universe, right? The subject of the senses. Einstein was not somebody who was anyway going within. He was not even in the attempt to gain inner clarity. So yes, his example can be instructive, but only to a point, not beyond that.

What happens is, when you come from a science or technology background, clarity to us often means an answer. Yeah! Eureka! Well said. I got it. Now finally the jigsaw stands solved. So that's your concept of clarity. That's not clarity.

You can never say I have achieved clarity or I am enlightened now or whatever, or I am liberated now. It's a lifelong thing, because pollutants will keep entering the air continuously. So you have to keep clearing the air continuously. That's the process.

Questioner: Sir, you mentioned that we should keep questioning ourselves continuously. I have also mentioned before in your lecture that we should know what the right questions are.

My question is, how do we know these are the right questions? Like, you teach Gita, right? Variety of Gitas. Where should I start? Because you have also mentioned in one of your lectures that Shrimad Bhagavad Gita is one of the easiest books to misinterpret. So where should I start?

Acharya Prashant: Start with yourself. You have no other place to start from. Let's say you start from me. How do you know I even exist? No, you are starting not with me but with your eyes. No? Your eyes are testifying that I exist. So anyway, you are not going to start with anybody but yourself.

So be honest and straight and simply say I have to start from my own present condition. That's how one starts. What am I doing? Where do I stand? The important question is that which concerns you deeply. That's the right question to ask. Never be ashamed of any question that involves where you stand. Right? It may appear petty to others, inconsequential to others, laughable to others. That's fine.

Remember, even those others and their opinions exist only to you. And if you give a lot of weightage to their opinions, that weightage has again been assigned only by you.

So you are anyway the master, you are anyway the center. And if you are the center anyway, why not start with yourself? You don't need to come up with humongous questions. Start with something that troubles your heart. Start with something that doesn't let you sleep. Start with something that keeps you insecure. Those are the real questions. And only from there does real inquiry happen.

Real inquiry is not so much about asking, “Well, you know, what happens 72 hours after death?” You haven't died. You don't even know what death means. Hell, you don't even know what life means. Why are you asking , “What happens 72 hours after death?” And you think you have raised a big spiritual question. It's not spiritual. It is nonsensical. And anybody who takes you into those questions, what happens 72 hours after death, is just fooling you, or rather entertaining you.

The real questions are that which concern you right now, as you are, because that's your life. What else?

Questioner: So, all that you have said, that we should not carry beliefs, but since childhood we have carried our beliefs, and we shape our dreams and purpose through those beliefs. All are nurtured. So if we discard them, then what are we left with? How do we define our purpose? Like, you need to have a destination. If you start walking, you have a destination in mind.

Acharya Prashant: When you were born, did you know all this; you need to have a destination? Don't you see, you were fed all this? This is an implant. How do you know you need to have a destination? Tell me why. Why? How do you know? Isn't that a good question to ask? How do I know? Not the destination, but the fact that I need to have a destination. How do I know that I need to have a destination? How do you know whether a destination even exists? These are just theories drilled into you.

“Sir, you told us to be free of beliefs. How will we live then? What will we do next?” Then you are not free of beliefs. Are you? Sitting here you carry just beliefs, and they decide your career decisions, your love affairs, your friend circle, which course to choose, which country to settle in. Everything that you deal in comes from your beliefs. So, you have a lot at hand. Start from there.

Educated people rejecting partners on the basis of horoscopes; start from there. Start from there. Why not? That's a matter urgently pressing, is it not? You want to get hedged, and you have been quoting her for ten years, seen everything except the horoscope. Now the horoscope comes into the picture. Doesn't match. “No, no, no. Can't get married.” Beliefs decide everything.

A good job is one that pays at least this much. How exactly do you know? How do you know? But one, two, or five dream companies, and the entire campus is mad after them. How do you know? All you have is beliefs, untested beliefs. Dangerous! “Oh, he speaks so sweetly to me. He must be a nice guy and acts so chivalrous.” How do you know, kid? “I don't know.” I know movies. You don't know. You got it from there.

So, if you say, “We won't carry any beliefs, how will we live?” The question is totally different. You have so many beliefs that "If" is a big assumption. You'll never come to that space, that point where you have no beliefs. Practically impossible. So, don't say, "What will happen when we'll have no beliefs?" Right now, you have just so many beliefs. The most fundamental belief is that you exist. How do you know you exist? You have beliefs, right? Start with examining them, and don't be in a hurry to act based on your beliefs.

“I believe life is great in the US.” How exactly do you know? No, I'm not asking you to believe the opposite of that. That too would be just a shallow belief. But how exactly do you know? Yes. Fine. Proven that there is more money there, and there can be statistics to corroborate that. Now, next question: Why do you believe that you are someone who needs money? Yes, maybe that job or that place gives you money. Understood. Factual evidence available, right? But how do you know?

Now, next part, the next level of inquiry: How do you know you are someone who will be pleased with money? How exactly do you know? Is it possible that someone is not pleased with money? Look around. Some of the most miserable faces you will find are at the quest of cars. I'm not saying those who don't have money are any less miserable, but there is great evidence to prove that money does not take care of your misery beyond a point. Obviously, if you are starving, you need money. Yes, you need a roof over your head. Fine, understood.

But a point comes beyond which money doesn't help. You remain miserable. And that point comes, that's the bad news; quite early. As soon as you have enough money to meet your basic needs and aspirations, beyond that, the curve of returns plateaus, flattens. You can keep accumulating more money, but you won't have more freedom or wellness, or pleasure won't happen. But we believe that the curve is y = mx + c. No, it is not.

Questioner: Sir, you told us we should question ourselves, we could test ourselves, but it looks to me like it's a black hole, right? We cross the event horizon. I know I should question myself. I know I should test myself, but it would keep narrowing until down the singularity. But then, how would I function?

For example, you, when Shishir asked you, "Who would create the society?" You said that you should understand what you need and you should work on it, but I would keep reaching the singularity.

Acharya Prashant: How do you know? You reach there? You've been there? Have you ever tried that? Sitting as you are, you're speculating about black holes and singularities. How does that help? When you progress, do you remain the same? No.

So, it's a journey, let's say, tentatively, where you walk from there to there (pointing towards the two different points). is a journey of progress, right? Sitting here, you imagine what that place looks and feels like. But the very definition of the journey is you change with every step. This imagination that that place feels like X is a function of this one who, right now, is stationed at Y. Correct?

Let's put it in a more technical way: Y is a function of this X. As you move, this X will change, so that Y will also change. So sitting here, why do you want to debate that? That Y is nothing but a projection of this X. There is no reality to that today. Today, the future that you conceive of is a function of who you are in the present. As you change, your conception of the future will change.

Something that appears very scary to you today, tomorrow it won't appear scary to you. Would it? When you were in class 2, had you been shown your engineering textbooks and told you'll have to deal with them, you would have been scared, right? Because you were in class 2. And then, had there been an option whether or not to choose that future, you would have immediately opted out of it. You would have said, "If this is the future, I don't want it." But that decision is coming from the 5-year-old in class 2, the seven-year-old. So don't decide too much about the future sitting where you are right now.

As a second grader, if you decide on what will happen in engineering, you'll always make a flawed decision; always. Cross the bridge when you come to it because that's the only moment when you can cross the bridge anyway. Things will appear very scary from where you are. Equally, some things will appear very tempting from where you are. But when you approach them, you find you have changed. And since you have changed, your conception of those things will also have changed. So what is the point of speculating from here? Nothing.

show_less