The Wandering Mind : A Dialogue
Hi Anurag,
I'm enormously delighted to see that you have started off a new
journey for helping people know their true selves. You are one
of those people who has had tremendous influence on my
self-inquiry journey. Thanks a lot for that.
Anurag : You are most welcome !
My mind is in future or past most of the time; it wanders there
continuously.
Anurag : The mind is a movement of memory.
Till one has not understood the mind completely and the
movement of memory, the mind will wander. The traditional
approach is concentrating the mind on an idea, ideal, image or
object. But concentration of mind results in conflict because
there is something "what is" and then on that you superimpose
an ideal called "what should be".
We are not interested in understanding the mind because it
demands a lot of energy. We are rather looking for some quick
fixes or remedies to "feel good". When we say that our mind
wanders, we are actually judging our mind according to an
ideal. We have an ideal or an image of a silent mind. Against
this ideal we compare and judge our present state of mind and
call it wandering. When there is no such ideal then there is
no judgement and no comparison. Then there is mere awareness
of mind as it moves. This requires alertness and attention
because the mind is moving every second. We pine for ideals
because we are lazy and want stability; a kind of static order
where there is no need for vitality and energy. Consequently
we dull our minds through self discipline, escapes and ideals.
Have we ever inquired from where our ideals come about? Are
they again not a result of memory? We have heard from
religious gurus that our minds have to be calm and focused. We
have been trained in schools that we must concentrate our
minds in order to learn a subject. We have been subjected to
such a conditioning because our society is built around
conformity and obedience. We had to attend schools not out of
choice but out of the desire of our parents to ensure us a
livelihood. So we have actually never tried to understand the
mind as it is, it's natural movement. We have been moulded,
shaped and enticed to focus our minds on desired goals and
objects through various means.
What would happen when we do not have any ideals? That would
be the beginning of freedom to observe the movement of your
mind as it is. But doing this would also mean stepping beyond
the security of known ideals and behaviours. It would mean
stepping out of the fabric of security created by society for
one's physical, psychological and emotional sustenance. It
would mean moving alone. We are very scared of being alone. We
adopt ideals so that we can remain a part of the social
fabric. The real reason for having ideals are fear of losing
security and pleasure.
So if one has gone into all this and deeply understood the
significance of not having any "should be" in our life then
one will drop all forms of self discipline. Then there is just
a passive awareness of "what is" from moment to moment,
without condemnation or justification. Then all the deeper
layers of the mind which were suppressed by the force of our
ideals reveal themselves. When they reveal themselves, we are
freed from them. Freedom is not at the end. In order to look,
we have to be free from ideals. Freedom is at the beginning.
Only a mind unburdened by all "should be's" is free to look.
And in that freedom there is a release of energy that shall
shatter all conditioning.
I think about helping others instead of pulling myself
out of the suffering I'm in. Doesn't one create more trouble in
the world by seemingly helping others while one oneself is in
trouble?
Anurag : An intellectual understanding of
an issue is not the same as understanding something totally :
from your mind and heart. It is not an insight which creates
an instantaneous action. Intellectualization is just analysis,
a sort of logical understanding of cause and effect, a play of
symbols. And one of the effects of intellectualization and
analysis is paralysis. We are caught between "what is" and
"what should be".
How does one come to know that one is going to create more
problem in the world by helping others? Is this your own
understanding or the understanding of another, whom you are
trying to imitate?
All imitation of others is based on fear of "going wrong". One
has to understand life for oneself. No one can help you out
with this. Even though I am corresponding with you, I cannot
help you ultimately. You can only help yourself by observing
yourself in the mirror of relationships. In relating with me
and all others you have to study your own reactions and
thoughts and understand the significance of mind in
relationships.
If one has a desire to help others one has to go into this
desire and observe what happens. No amount of
intellectualization is going to give you insight. When you try
to help others and remain open to seeing all that comes about,
you shall learn about this desire, which no book or no guru
can teach you.
I spend most of my time reading spiritual books, watching video
courses on spirituality and so on. Aren't these activities a way
to escape facing ourselves?
Anurag : The spiritual mind is one of the
most difficult mind to deal with. It knows a lot but
eventually all it's knowing is sterile. The only knowing is
knowing oneself from moment to moment. All knowledge which is
accumulation of concepts, ideas, ideals and practices prevents
oneself from seeing oneself as one is. Our lives are basically
petty, empty, dull and repetitive. We are caught in the
movement of pleasure, it's demand and hence repetitive cycle.
The spiritual mind is nothing but the same movement of
pleasure continued in a different form. It is an escape from
facing the actuality of our lives. While some are caught in
the pleasures of technology, relationships and work, others
are caught in the so called spirituality. Because of the
respect endowed to it by society, one finds it more difficult
to understand spirituality as a movement of pleasure.
All movement of the mind in the psychological realm is a means
to escape emptiness or nothingness. We want to be and become
something : if not in the material world then in the so called
spiritual world. You may know this intellectually, which means
having a knowledge about this but having an insight into this
is a different matter. Insight leads to instantaneous action.
To have insight, one has to go very deeply into oneself and
one has to be totally alone.
If one is escaping and one is aware that one is escaping,
without the compulsion to do anything about it then the very
awareness has it's own action. The way our minds function, it
can easily convert "not escaping" into an ideal. When one
starts understanding the escape, as it is happening, by
constant awareness of it from moment to moment, then there is
an action which is not predetermined. The significance of our
escaping, it's various subtleties, it's twists and turns and
the compulsions start revealing themselves. One has to be
without any motive to watch all this. The moment there is a
motive or a direction in our mind, learning stops and we get
into a pattern. One has to learn from moment to moment. For
this there cannot be any accumulation. Every moment one has to
meet life afresh. Having a motive prevents such innocence of
mind.
Could I ask a personal question? How do you spend your time
during the day? Our minds love to be busy all the time and hate
us sitting somewhere calmly. How can one put a stop to such a
restless mind?
Anurag : Why do we want to establish a
pattern of living? Doesn't the building of this pattern come
in the way of knowing ourselves as we are. Further, how do we
establish any pattern of life? Is not such construction based
on ideals gathered in our memory.
Why should one sit calmly? Isn't calmness an idea we have
constructed as an opposite to what we call "restlesness". How
doe we judge our minds as restless? Is it not in relation to
the established ideal of "calmness"? What if we do not form
any ideal of calmness? Will there then be something called a
restless mind?
If one has an insight into the fundamental duality of "what
is" and "what should be", then one shall end the whole
movement of building ideals as opposites of what one is. When
there is freedom from this duality, there is freedom to
observe "what is". In that freedom there is no direction, no
destination, no goal but a living in a silence. It does not
mean that life shall not precipitate crisis. In fact it will,
because we are all tethered to different forms of security.
Only in crisis will all patterns of security reveal themselves
and come to an end.
So silence is not what we conceive of it. It's a silence that
comes with the understanding of every movement of thought.
It's not a dead silence of practice of a system or self
discipline or absorption in any samadhi or trance. It is a
silence which is not caught in the acquisitive net of thought.
It's not the silence of the known : not a silence which you
invite.
I do not have any pattern to spending my day. I work when I
feel like, do not work when I don't feel like. There is no
effort or struggle to do anything, not do anything or reach
anywhere. There are moments when I am just quietly watching my
mind, moments when I am talking to people, moments where I am
watching TV, moments when I am doing carpentry and moments
when I am doing office related work. I also sometimes read J
Krishnamurti, the only person whom I read sometimes, now.