|
|
|
|
In the simplest form, it is reasonable to
look at life as a series of
relationships — some momentary, some perpetual. However, the way we
deal with these relationships is dependent entirely on the thought process
through which we approach them.
Our response to relationships is seldom on the basis of an appreciation of
events as they present themselves to us from moment to moment; how we react
is predominantly guided by a large corpus of memory, impressions and
preconceived notions that we have accumulated about the moment on hand.
In fact, most of us would find it difficult to face life without the
strength of information on a possible approach that could be made
applicable to it. After all, what strength do we have in standing up to the
myriad challenges faced by us day after day if we do not have a large
reserve of memory and experience to help us navigate them? Is it not our
constant effort to gain more and more knowledge and experience, and do we
not seek payback in the form of greater confidence and self-assurance?
So our search for that stage is an ongoing one, for only then will we be in
a position to deal with anything that life might present in an adequate,
immediate and correct manner.
There is, however, a fundamental flaw to this approach. The flaw lies in
confusing functional knowledge with wisdom. We may have need for functional
knowledge in dealing with the objective world, but can it ever help us
respond to any situation presented by life? Every situation that we face,
every choice that we make, should logically be the result of a complete
evaluation of the situation itself and is not in any way guided by a
preconceived notion or a body of information possessed by us.
In reality though, even the simple instance of a person greeting us is not
dealt with by us — consciously or otherwise — without reference to the
image of him stored in our memory. Is this necessary? Should memory, based
as it is on experience, have such an overriding influence on our response
as to render ineffective our capacity to meet life afresh, moment to
moment? Why do we persistently deny ourselves the capacity to act in the
moment and then be done with it?
Once in a while, at the gut level, we have a feeling of inadequacy of the
whole process, but what we do in response is to fall back upon a book, a
teacher, or an idea. This only perpetuates the process, since the approach
is still related to the process of mind, knowledge and memory and has no
correlation with the core of our being.
And thus we continue meeting life in a non-integral, fragmented and
inadequate manner. Instead, we should allow life to touch us in its
entirety, offering it no value judgment and no fixed notions. We can try to
be like a mirror, in matters of life and the relationships it offers us, capable
of truly reflecting the present without any reference to the past and any
expectation for the future.
Of course, we've heard all this before. One has heard all this before. The
same sentiments have been expressed by philosophers like Kabir, Krishnamurti,
and Nisargdatta Maharaj. One wants to, however, avoid the trap of
comprehending the ultimate reality only at intellectual level, and through
the process of the mind. Life can become a fulfilling experience if only we
could live the experience. Only then we can feel the level of freedom,
adequacy, and joy yielded by such moments.
|
