is there anybody

8/2/2019 Is There Anybody

1/21

IS THERE ANYBODY?

Are we sure that our accumulative way of living is the meaning of our existence?

Rajendar


2/21

2

CONTENTS

1. Introduction 3

2. Psychological security posing itself as Physical 5

3. Why arent we doing anything when people are starving? 8

4. Dominator model and Partnership model 11

5. Economy for Development and Economy for Peace 13

6. How does Education happen in this situation? 16

7. What has prevented us from seeing this all along? 18

8. Are we shielding others from experiencing their world? 22

9. Relationship with Earth 25


3/21

3

Introduction

his is not written to tell others what I have known already. This is more of writing to

myself. This is a fearless, no-holds-barred exploration of a typical human being. No

strings attached, no hidden agenda, a genuine attempt to understand human life.

We are aware of the role of millions of plant and animal life in this integral world, they are all

part of a sustainable/sustaining cycle. What is the role of a human being in this? What is the

meaning of human existence? After all, we are all part of the sustainable whole. Being an

integral part of the whole, our activities are supposed to be in harmony with the whole. Have

we swayed away from our original function? How far? Is it possible to undertake our naturally

assigned role from this moment onwards?

Our whole life is oriented towards accumulation. Somehow, this way of living has come about.

Can we explain the coming into being of a mind of religious fanatics who happily kill children

and women or the mind of those who kill in the name of caste or religion? Same way, this way

of living has come about. But, nothing sacrosanct about it. Our preference for the comfort

zone and reluctance to raise disturbing questions makes us continue this superficial life. Is it

possible to eat a sumptuous meal in the midst of starving children? Yes, of course, that is

exactly what we are doing. May be to hide this ugly sight only, we built walls. Is it possible to

make our fellow beings feel totally worthless? Yes, of course, that is what we do, a tactic

employed to win the game of life. Our insensitivity doesnt know any bound.

We know that material objects are limited and natural resources, which are used to make

material objects, are limited. Natural resources sustain itself cyclically. It needs time to regenerate

itself. But, as the human demand is unlimited accumulation, they are not waiting for nature to

regenerate itself. So, they started exploiting nature massively, much beyond its sustainability.

Nothing much is left to exploit now. We are on the brink. 15 to 20% of people have benefited

materially from this exploitation and majority of people are still struggling for survival. This way of

living is inherently flawed and destructive. Is money everything? Can we measure relatedness

and peace in terms of money? Is there any meaning in living the way we are living now? Do we

get any benefit at all in this process of living? Poverty (nearly half of world population is affectedby poverty and one billion children, roughly one in two, live in poverty), suicides (every 8 hours,

there is a farmer suicide in India), migration (there are 200 million migrant laborers in China

alone), violence, wars, overexploitation of land, water scarcity, deforestation, global warming and

benefits in the form of unlimited material objects in the hands of few (associated with broken

marriages, lack of intimate relationship with children, neglected youths pushed to extremes,

stress and other health problems) are the consequences.

T


4/21

4

In spite of so much agony and sufferings, human beings got stuck to this competitive and

exploitative way of life in pursuit of accumulation as if there is no other choice. On the other hand,

cooperation, caring and healing is the way of nature. The Sun cares. The trees, plants, soil, rain,

birds and animals and millions of living beings care for each other, thats how the universe

survives. It is all part of the sustainable process, the unintended, self-evolved sustainable rhythm

of life. The incomprehensible universe, with its millions of stars, lives this rhythm of life. We dont

have faith in this life of caring, healing and cooperation but we die, kil l, rob, cheat and hoard to be

truthful to our accumulative way of life. Only for this, we go to work and only for this, we educate

ourselves. What is our choice in this to be part of accumulation and exploitation or to be part of

the life of cooperation, caring and healing?

This is our only life. Right beginning is very important, once we are in a certain dynamics,

its own law will be active and it will be difficult to extricate and move, we have enough of thatexperience. Our life, the way we live, is a great opportunity, a new beginning; exploring oneself

should be the only guiding principle. Living life without understanding its meaning and so being

part of the herd is a colossal waste of human energy. Let us explore ourselves to find the

meaning of life. Meanwhile, let us dont do any damage to nature and our fellow beings. Let

sustainable living, being related, being responsible, exploration of body and mind be the priorities

of life. Let us explore together.

Psychological security posing itself as Physical security


5/21

5

hysical survival is the basic instinct for all living beings. The movement of physical

survival activities enters the psychological field and it becomes psychological security.

Activities, which are the result of seeking psychological security, are actually responsible

for all the problems facing humanity today. But calling them as physical survival activities and

justifying them that way, we continue these activities without any restraint. And this is our

accumulative way of living. Food, shelter and clothes are the physical necessities. Beyond that,

what we amass is because of this psychological insecurity. When the entire humanity is into this

unlimited accumulation, what are the effects of this on natural resources and on our relationship

with each other? We are all becoming aware of the massive destruction wrecked on nature and

its resources by us because of this accumulative living. We have become isolated human beings

and are not related anymore as we are all engulfed by fear, anger, jealousy, hatred, insecurity,

violence and wars.

It seems that thinking is the outcome of feeling insecure in a given situation. I am talking

about the thinking, which originates from the subconscious and keeps coming all the time, I am

not referring to the deliberation, the conscious thinking we do to consider something. We dont

meet a situation fully as this subconscious thinking is operating, typically like doubting whether

what we did is right or wrong or evaluating whether it is prudent to contest what the other person

said, that is, the insecure feeling is getting reflected in one form or other, that is how the

subconscious comes into play. As we didnt meet a situation fully, the response being incomplete,

that paves the way for subsequent subconscious thinking, an attempt to provide completion. As

this subconscious thinking is waiting restlessly for an opportune moment to raise its head, when

we are not actively engaged, it comes into play immediately. We are caught in a kind of vicious

circle, the seed being the psychological insecurity. As we are occupied with the insecure feeling,

evaluating defensively what we did is right or wrong, we fail to act intelligently and fully. When this

insecure feeling continues, it gives rise to a psychological person. This psychological insecurity is

acting all the time and actions emanating from this insecure feeling lead to accumulation of

resources in the hands of few and others are left just with this insecure feeling and a miserable

life of poverty. From being an integral part of a sustainable whole, psychological insecurity has

become a separate entity and this psychological insecurity seeking security is our way of

life.

Is it a problem to get the physical necessities, food, shelter and clothes, for everybody in

this world? Not at all, it is our accumulative way of living, the product of psychological insecurity,

which comes in the way. One group of people is accumulating massively and the rest is living in

the dream of doing that. So, everybody is caught in this. In the process, billions of people are

suffering from poverty and other associated problems. Poverty is just not about hunger, its much

P


6/21

6

deeper than that, it means being treated like dirt, living with overt and covert insults, humiliation,

diseases and untold miseries and agony. They are all suffering silently. The cry, because it is

silent, is not reaching us.

United Nation's publication, UN Chronicle, in its article on poverty titled "Staying Alive for

Another Day" reports, For over 3 billion of the global population of 6.45 bil lion, poverty is a way

of life. It has many faces for those who live amidst its clutches-the two most visible are the faces

of hunger and

lack of shelter. An estimated 1 billion children, worldwide, live in poverty, with over 10 million

dying each year before the age of five. Poverty is also the fear of uncertainty, of not knowing

when the next meal will come or how to care for a sick child when there is no money to buy food.

Entire generations live and die with no idea of how or where to seek help, often wondering

if anyone would listen anyway to their hardships .

A report prepared by UN-HABITAT for the Forum, states that 2007 will mark a turning

point in history, when for the first time half of the global population will be living in cities. It will also

be the year when the number of slum dwellers around the world will reach 1 billion. 30 per cent of

all urban dwellers lived in slums in 2005. Diseases arising from poor sanitation kill up to 1.6

million slum dwellers annually.

This is the magnitude of the problem facing humanity but we are all caught in our

accumulative living, cheating ourselves that we are doing it in the name of physical security.


7/21

7

When people are starving, why arent we doing anything effectively aboutit?

here are more than 48 million child-orphans in Africa alone, we dont know how many

millions are added to this from various conflicts happening all over the world. A caregiver

in South Africa says, People talk about rights of the child, doesnt the child have the right

to three meals a day? We have children often going to bed hungry. These children go through

extraordinary painful life. We dont know the agony of an orphan or a migrant laborer or a slum-

dweller? There are 200 million migrant workers in China alone, 1 billion slum dwellers in the world

and 1 billion children living in poverty. If you want to know the ruthless efficiency of market

economy and its effect on people even in rich countries, here it is: in U.S, medical treatment is not

affordable without health insurance and 43.6 million people in U.S are uninsured and so dont get

treated for their illness as insurance premium is beyond their means, yes U.S only, this is the

effect of globalization. Poverty, migration, orphans, suicides, diseases and life without any

respect and dignity are few of the problems faced by a huge mass of poor people in the world.

Why dont we do something about this? We, the human beings, as a race are extremely ruthless

and numb, isnt it?

We evaluate globalization from growth rates and GDP but do we measure its effect on

poor people? Do we compare the condition of lower segment of people before and after

globalization? Let us look at India, the second populous country in the world. It has a vibrant

democracy, functional legal and education system. It is one of the fastest growing economies in

the world. The globalization in India has created number of billionaires and millionaires and large

number of youngsters are drawing huge salary. The world is looking at Indias huge upper and

middle class, 380 million people, and their purchasing power with awe. Compare it with the

population of USA and Western Europe, which is 298 million and 186 million respectively. This

380 million, which is 35% of the total Indian population, who can read, write and study well, has

one of its family member employed in a well paying job and it has a deep pocket. These people

put together are having mammoth purchasing power, which resulted from their skills and

intelligence. As India is seeking to provide outlet to the skills of these people by offering solutions

in IT, HealthCare and few other sectors to other countries, those countries are demanding

unrestricted access to this huge market. Instead of the partial liberalization, if India decides to

liberalize its economy fully, this segment will benefit immensely and it will meet the

demands of the International community also. What does this mean to rest of the people in

India and will it eliminate the wide spread poverty in India in due course? No, it cannot.

T


8/21

8

The rest, 65% of the population, 715 million people, is uneducated or undereducated and

they are employed in agriculture, agro related and other marginal jobs. But what is the effect of

globalization on this lower segment? Government says there is reduction in the poverty level. But,

what is the ground reality in villages? We never heard about farmer suicides in our villages 10

years back, it is a recent phenomenon. If we recollect our younger days in our villages, villagers

starving were never heard-of. But, today if any of the village poor has three meals a day, that is

an exception. Actually, I was shocked when I heard 5 years back that villagers are selling their 1

gm / 2 gm gold ornament for their survival as they were not getting enough work. Those were the

days of villagers started feeling the heat from liberalization and it is worse presently. And the

resultant mass migration from villages to cities was also never heard-of. This is what 10 years of

globalization has done to the lower segment in India. This is the ground reality. The conditions

were worsened and problems are mounting. Even upper-middle class people would find buying a

house unaffordable in cities today and healthcare is prohibitively costly for everybody. For whose

benefit these are all happening, are we nuts?

The globalization has created many rich people and made life miserable to live for poor

people. Why is the Government not effective in their action against poverty? Huge amount

of money is spent on Poverty Alleviation Programs, but its not solving the problem, it is only

getting worsened. Poor people are always there, a huge segment of them. That means we are

not able to identify the exact problem and may be attacking the wrong end. Does the intricate

maze of our economic model hold the key? Is it inherent in moneymaking, when one makes

money, it is out of many peoples loss? It is obvious in stock market , lottery, race and in all

speculative activities. In sports, it is true. In education also, it is so, for one first ranker, there are

many left behind. Let us take agriculture. The farmer and farm-labourer cultivate paddy and

through the mill owner, wholesaler and super market, it reaches the consumer. The farmer and

farm-laborer gets paid marginally while the supermarket owner, wholesaler and mill owner makes

huge money out of this activity, that is out of the farmer and farm-labourer. It is the same in

manufacturing sector also. Is it true for all other economic activities also? That is, one gains out of

many. That is, when one makes money, it is necessarily out of many others. Is it inherently

structured in the economic system prevalent today, the economy for development? Let us leave it

to the experts. But, it appears that it is true. That is why poverty remains a never-ending problem.

We are barking up the wrong tree all along, that is why in spite of the huge money spent on it, it

keeps its presence all the time. So, a solution has to be found outside of this economy for

development.

At the same time, upper and middle class people, who are benefiting from this economy

for development, would like to continue this. So, let the Government liberalizes fully, opening


9/21

9

out even trading and banking sectors. Let the educated class be happy totally. Let them

make money out of their effort, on their own, but not out of the lower segment. If they do, that is

looting, isnt it? So, let the government also protect the lower segment from being expended

and exploited like this and open up for them an economic model that will give them

respect, dignity, food, shelter and all their basic necessities a model called economy for

peace. Let the government open communes in all the villages. There is no financial outlay for the

Government. It is going to be a facilitator, if possible it can allot land for the communes.

Communes will have activities like cultivating food crops, vegetable farming, fruit farming, dairy,

woodworks, weaving, cloth making and other necessary activities to make it self sufficient.

Anybody can become a member of the commune. Members own the commune, its land and

produces. Members reside inside the communes and have common kitchen and dining. The

commune will be financed by financial institutions and the commune will repay the loan from its

operations. All the massive resources deployed by the Government now for Welfare Schemes

can be utilized to help the communes, if they get into difficulties.

There is nothing new about this, 250 years back throughout the world, people in villages

put in their labour and got their needs, nobody is left out of this process and everybody got

whatever is their needs through work and barter. It is not easy to act differently when everybody

is going in one way; that is why we had only one Mahatma. Is there anybody who has the

courage to do this?


10/21

10

Dominator model and Partnership model

obin Martin justifying the necessity of bringing in the alternate model of living for those

who are not able to survive in the present model, says, There are dozens, perhaps

hundreds, of ways in which one can examine the patterns of culture and why societies

choose, consciously or unconsciously, the directions that they do. To simplify some of the pivotal

issues of social transformation, I shall examine two modes of thought for viewing life that greatly

impact how we live our lives and the growth of institutions such as education that support our life

styles. The first and dominant mode of thought is often labeled "Materialism." The other mode of

thought goes by many names as it is still in the process of being defined. For the purposes of this

paper, this evolving mode of thought shall be called "Holism."

Rooted in an objective (or object-oriented) reality, Materialism underlies a set of cultural

practices that leads to the continual and unquestioned acquisition of more and more material

objects by individuals as well as by groups. Due to the history behind Materialism, it is primarily

associated with Western development and capitalism. The society that evolves from Materialism

is what cultural researcher and author Riane Eisler calls a "dominator model" where half of

society outranks the other half, and persecution and violence are considered a "normal" part of

human nature. When our views of reality are determined primarily by objects and scientific facts

that are outside of us, this leads to a scarcity for meeting human needs because those needs are

also perceived outside of us. In the material world, there are always limits on what or how much

each community member can

have, which leads to a "dominator model" in which certain groups of people attempt to control the

scarce resources to their own benefit. In the material world of achievement, power is based on

what you have, what you know, or what you can do; it is not an inherent part of who you are. As

such, power can be abused as society breaks down into the "haves" and the "have nots."

Holism allows people to conceptualize the world beyond a materialistic focus on mind

and body. It values the internal world of spirit where meaning is not derived from the logic around

the scarcity of objects in the world, but from one's personal interpretation of the world. The type of

society that derives from this mode of thought is what Riane Eisler calls a "partnership model"

of society. When a society places its primary values on internal processes rather than external

objects, then the need to dominate scarce resources is eliminated; people can work in

partnership toward common goals such as community peace and well being .

While those who are benefiting from the development economy, the Dominator

Model, may not give up that way of living because that is what they have prepared

R


11/21

11

themselves to be. The rest have unwittingly become exploited in this model and this role-play,

particularly by the majority, is a necessary element in the structure of development economy and

their dream to become the beneficiaries is keeping them in this. They should become part of the

Partnership Model as it not only takes care of the individual needs but also brings in equity and

peace.


12/21

12

Economy for Development and Economy for Peace

e all know Einstein, the great scientist, but the lesser-known side of Einstein, a

passionate champion of socialism, is equally radical. Analyzing human problems at

fundamental level, he said, Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a

social being. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in

which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in

which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of

behavior. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their

hopes.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational

system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student,

who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

Offering a solution to the problems faced by majority of people in the world, Einstein

suggested establishment of a socialist society while cautioning that there are certain conditions,

which we cannot modify. I would infer from this that to guarantee a livelihood to every man,

woman, and child, we need to establish communes for the lower segment of people, while the

upper strata of society continues in the present model of living in which they are prospering.

Einstein said, If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man

should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be

conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. Asmentioned

before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. I am

convinced there is only oneway to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment

of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward

social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are

utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the

community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would

guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in

addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of

responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present

society.

The primary objective of the present economic model, the economy for development, as

pointed out by Robin Martin and Einstein, is unlimited accumulation of material objects. But

W


13/21

13

material objects are limited. And everybody, as individuals and as groups, is trying to control

these limited materials and the highest accumulator is the victor in this model. So, the result is

conflicts, violence, wars and destruction of natural resources beyond restoration. There is

destructive exploitation of soil, water, plants, trees, forests and other natural resources in this

economy for development. Whoever finds meaning in this, let them continue in this. Let

everybody else embrace economy for peace.

Let us peacefully coexist with each other and with nature. If possible, let us live in

communes. If there are community settlements all over, where everything is shared equally

amongst the members, the land, the work, the yield from the land, the revenue from various crafts

which are all part of the

settlement, that will put an end to suicide of farmers and the large-scale migration happening from

rural to urban areas. Let us bring about these collaborative mechanisms to eliminate poverty

totally, instead of waiting for them to be saved by trickle down effect.

If communes are not possible, let us live in land & land related activities. Even if the land

is not large, let us make the place whole and sustainable. Let us be responsible to the land, lack

of it only brought the world to the brink of collapse. We had millions of plant varieties and

thousands of food crops but the monoculture has brought widespread cultivation of only 12

prominent species, we have lost all that diverse plant life. Let us have an integrated land with

forested area, ponds and lakes to store rainwater, topsoil cultivation, diversified food crops and

other sustainable practices to make the place and activities integral with sustainable cycle. Let us

be an integral part of this and learn.

Without the accumulative occupation, with space and leisure, as we understand our

integral role in the sustainable whole and as we see that we are able to relate with everything

around us if we are unoccupied, there is possibility for remaining open.


14/21

14

How does Education happen in this situation?

ccumulative life is the most predominant and all pervading force in the world. Almost

everybody is into this. It causes massive damage to nature and its resources. The

person who is into this accumulation, what is he gaining from this, other than the material

objects, the pleasure of owning that and the security derived from that. Is this only his life? Could

it be the meaning of human life, occupied all the time with this accumulation, no leisure, no

silence, no space and no openness? Surely, it cannot be. Look at the flowers, why do they have

honey, it is for the honeybees, and in this process the honeybees propagate flowers, its the

sustainable cycle in action. If we dont have cats, the world will be full of rats. Let us assume that

the cats decided to accumulate rats required for their entire lifetime, may be for their child rens

and grandchildrens lifetime. Imagine about the consequences. That is whats happening in

reality, that is what human beings are doing. We are accumulating for our generations. The

consequences are there for all to see. We are not integral part of the sustainable cycle anymore.

Accumulating and being with material objects cannot be our life. We need silence, space, and

openness. We need to be related, to the land, to the nature.

But, we prepare our children only for this accumulative life in the name of education. Is

this really the function of education in this situation? Mainstream schools will make the child

caught in the accumulative life. The formal classroom based education is a mainstream

accumulative activity. Education need not be formal as such, say in a classroom. Why should weconfine the children, anyhow they have been learning all along right from their

childhood wherever they are? Why should we pluck them from these learning contexts and

confine them in a room to learn? Let them start from the basics, the fundamentals of life. Let them

learn about soil, they will understand, as they are interacting with the soil, the necessity for topsoil

cultivation if they want to grow food crops on it. Water, plants and forestation are integral part of

this. As they interact, they will know what to do. Understanding that soil, water, plants, trees,

forests and themselves are all integral part of the sustainable cycle is their education. Let

them visit places which practice sustainability, live there for few months and learn. It could be a

commune in Auroville or Sholai School, a self-sustaining community and a school run in the spiritof J.Krishnamurti's teaching where children learn by experimenting, building roofs and furnitures

or Gurukula Botanical Sanctuary, Wyanad where along with self sustenance children can learn

sense based education. Let them live in a village for few months. As they have leisure, let them

explore their body and mind. Exploration of body could be through yoga, pranayama, kalari,

music, games, dance, hand skills like drawing, clay work, woodwork, spinning, weaving or

cooking. Exploration of mind could be through silence, questioning the social norms, behavior

A


15/21

15

and habits. These explorations again are not to achieve or accumulate anything. This again is

part of the sustainable cycle. Let them learn basic history, geography, math and science and

good communication skills. Again this is not an accumulative process. All these experiences will

make them feel that they are integral part of the sustainable cycle and there is an alternative to

the accumulative life.


16/21

16

What has prevented us from seeing this all along?

hat has prevented us from seeing that by nature we are integral part of a sustainable

cycle? And there is an alternative to the accumulative life. We are seeing right from

our childhood all around us that everybody is deeply into accumulative life. Our

parents, uncles, neighbors, teachers, leaders and the whole world is into accumulative life, that is

what education is and that is what our education prepares us for. This only prevented us from

seeing this. When the whole world is going in one direction, who would have had the courage to

question it. One man has seen it all, long time back J.Krishnamurti. He says that human

problems cannot be solved at conscious or unconscious level and that a change must begin at a

level which the mind cannot reach and he asks whether we can be free of society society being

all the education, the culture, the norm, the values, the standards. This is what he is saying about

this, "We are quite familiar with this process, it is what we are doing all the time; all our social

structure, our moral structure, our adjustments, and so on, are based on that. But does that bring

about a change? If not, then must not a change come about at a totally different level, which is

not in the field either of the conscious or of the unconscious? Surely the whole field of the mind,

the conscious as well as the unconscious, is conditioned by our particular culture . My

whole being is the conscious as well as the unconscious. In the field of the unconscious are all

the traditions, the residue of all the past of man, inherited as well as acquired; and in the field of

the conscious I am trying to change. Such change can only be according to my conditioning. So

transformation, obviously, is something which is not of the mind at all; it must be at a different

level altogether at a different depth, at a different height".

"I see the truth that a change, a transformation, must begin at a level which the mind, as

the conscious or the unconscious, cannot reach, because my consciousness as a whole is

conditioned. So, what am I to do? If I may put it differently, can my mind, the conscious as

well as the unconscious, be free of society? - society being all the education, the culture,

the norm, the values, the standards. Because if it is not free, then whatever change it tries to

bring about within that conditioned state is still limited, and therefore no change at all. If I see the

truth of that, what is the mind to do? Can my mind exist without any incentive, without any

motive to change or not to change? Because, any motive is the outcome of the reaction of a

particular culture, is born out of a particular background. So, can my mind be free from the

given culture in which I have been brought up? This is really quite an important question.

Because if the mind is not free from the culture in which it has been reared, nurtured, surely the

individual can never be at peace, can never have freedom. His gods and his myths, his symbols

and all his endeavors are limited, for they are still within the field of the conditioned mind.

W


17/21

17

Whatever efforts he makes, or does not make, within that limited field, are really futile, in the

deepest sense of that word".

"So, what is the mind to do? I see the importance of change. And I see that any change

at any level of the conscious or unconscious mind is no change at all. If I really understand that, if

I have grasped the truth of it - that so long as there is the maker of the effort, the thinker, the `I'

trying to achieve a result, there must be a division, and hence the desire to bring about an

abridgment, an integration between the two, which involves conflict, - if I see the truth of that,

then, what happens?"

"Do I see that any effort I make within the field of thinking, conscious

as well as unconscious, must entail a separation, a duality, and therefore conflict? If I see thetruth of that, then have I to do anything? Please, this is not some oriental philosophy of doing

nothing, or going into some kind of mysterious trance. On the contrary, this requires a great

deal of thought, penetration, and inquiry. One cannot come to it unless one has gone

through the whole process of understanding the conscious as well as the unconscious.

That is why it is very important to have self-knowledge. Not self-knowledge according to

some philosopher or some psychoanalyst, great or little, that is mere imitation, it is like reading a

book and trying to be that book; that is not self-knowledge. Self-knowledge is actually discovering

in oneself the process of one's thinking, feeling, motives, responses, - the actual state in which

we are, not a desired state".

"That is why it is very important to have self-knowledge, - of whatever we are, ugly, good,

bad, beautiful, joyous, the whole of it, to know one's superficial conditioning as well as the deeper

unconscious conditioning of centuries of tradition, of urges, compulsions, imitations, - to know, to

actually experience the whole totality through self-knowledge. Then I think we will find that the

conscious as well as the unconscious mind no longer makes any movement to achieve a

change; but a change comes about, a transformation comes about, at a totally different

level, at a height, a depth, which the conscious as well as the unconscious mind can never

touch. The transformation must begin there, not at the conscious or unconscious level, which is

the product of a culture.


18/21

18

That is why it is very important to be free of society, through self-knowledge. And I

think then, when this whole process of recognition by society has ceased, when the mind is no

longer concerned with reform of any kind, then there is a radical transformation, which the

conscious or the unconscious mind cannot touch, and from that transformation a different

society, a different state, can be brought about. But that state, that society, cannot be

conceived of, it must come from the depths of self-discovery. So it seems to me that what is

important is this inquiry into the `self', the `me', and to know the self as it is, with its ambitions,

envies, aggressive demands, deceptions, the division as the high and the low, - to uncover it, so

that not only the conscious mind is revealed but also the unconscious, the storehouse of past

tradition, the centuries of deposits of all kinds of experiences. Knowing the totality of that is the

ending of it. Then the mind, not being concerned with society, with recognition, with reformation,

even with the changing of itself, finds that there is a change, that there is a transformation, which

is not the outcome of a purposeful effort to produce a result".


19/21

19

Are we shielding others from experiencing their world?

es, we are shielding others from experiencing their world, having their own experience,

which is real for them. Everybody acts out of whatever is his or her understanding, there

may be limitation in the understanding but he/she acts out of his/her understanding.

Otherwise, he/she will not be doing what he/she is doing. If he/she acts contrary to his/her

understanding, he/she is a hypocrite. If I criticize the other person for his actions, I am preventing

his experiencing and delaying his learning process; I am doing injustice to him. We justify our

criticism by imagining that we prevent the danger, that otherwise would have happen to him.

Actually, our intervention only worsens the situation. Whatever may be the action of the other

person, it may be social activism, misbehavior, so called undesired or inferior interests, if that

irritates us, the conflict is in us, not in the other person. Our irritation only is vitiating the

atmosphere. In our relationship with children also, its the same. By limiting their experience, we

come in the way of their freedom and make them closed. By criticizing them, we bring in the value

system and conflict in them. The problem with the value system, becoming good, is that it

stipulates, brings in what should be against what is. It assumes what is is a problem. When we

approach a situation, we brand it as a problem and immediately the demand for solution arises

along with it. The situation we are in may not be a problem at all. We could experience the

situation only when we look at it in total silence without any movement from that reality. This is

true for me, for others and also for children. When we intervene and criticize others for their

action, branding it as a problem, not only we prevented the other person seeing it as a simple

situation, not a problem situation, we are also seeing it that way. The other

person can see it as a simple situation only out of his experiencing; for that to happen, we should

not intervene. Many of our problems in our relationships will come to an end when we look at this

reality. Silence only allows the exploration of reality.

Y


20/21

20

Relationship with Earth

o we have any relationship with the earth, the trees & flowers, the birds and the air we

breathe? Do we see the regeneration capacity of the land when we produce so much

out of it? When we consume produces, which is the result of such careless production,

are we also not responsible for making our lands barren? Forests are cleared for urbanization,

coffee, tea and vanilla cultivation, paper & packaging products manufacturing, and various other

industrial activities. Being beneficiaries, are we not responsible for this? Concentration (camps!)

of vast number of people in urban areas puts lots of stress on resources, particularly on land and

water. Lakes were converted into housing colonies, one street, which had 40 houses, now has

400 families in flats, greenery has given place to concrete. Lakes, ponds and wells were holding

the rain water and they were given place to bore wells, rainwater is let into the sea and we are

pumping out water from aquifers, we were augmenting and using aquifers earlier but now we are

depleting it very fast. Through the process of rain, saltwater was converted into fresh water and

that was stored in lakes, ponds and wells and seeps into aquifers. Now, as this is not happening,

seawater, that is salt water, is intruding into aquifers. Another aspect of this is the reduction of

moisture content both in the surface soil and air. We dont know what are the effects of all these?

The burnt fossil fuel and industrial emissions are playing havoc with the atmosphere to the extend

of getting warning like this, Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb. If the vast majority of the

world's scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send

our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts,

epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced. We dont know the

magnitude of the effects. We are only talking about global warming reluctantly; we are not even

aware of the damage done to our soil, plants and water. What is our responsibility in all these?

Are we going to wait for governments to act? Or is it the time for individuals to act? The

immediate question would be what an individual can do? Let us see what we could do.

If we are involved in primary (land & land related) activities, we could act. But, when we

are indulging in activities, which are far removed from the primary activities and at faraway

locations, and which are in a way responsible for all these damages, then the demand would be

to give up these activities for which we have prepared ourselves from our childhood. Can we live

just doing primary activities? If we do so, what are we missing? We will miss our money, comforts

and fame but we will also miss the irreparable damages we do to the nature. We will also miss

the feeling we get when we do a job satisfactorily and when we put in hard work. But does it really

matter in comparison with the damages these works have wrecked on nature? Instead if we do

just the primary activities, taking care of earth, plant and trees, then we are related to the earth,

D


21/21

the trees & flowers, the birds & animals and the air we breathe and so we will not be doing any

harm to them, instead there will be harmony.

We care so much for our studies, job, money, properties, name and fame. This is all our

life. It is all for our security; pleasure and sense of achievement are part of that. Our security

inherently creates insecurity for others. When I am first, there are 99 others who are not, when I

get the job, there are 70 others who didnt, when I make money, it is out of others loss. So, when I

secure myself, I create so much insecurity around me. Injustice is inbuilt in this process of life.

That is why it leads to violence, war, murders, anger, fear, jealousy and frustration. Apart from the

harm this process brings to human beings, it wrecks so much damage to nature also. We are kind

of closed when we have only these priorities (job, money, etc.,) in life. Silence, peace and leisure

are rarity in this life. We are not open to explore our true self, meaning of our existence and such

fundamental questions. If we are in primary activities, we care for the land, water, plants, trees,

animals and air. If this is our life, we will have so much leisure, silence and peace. We will beopen to explore. The silence will bring forth exploration.

is there anybody

Documents