(From the April 1983 issue of the Divine Life magazine)
The health of our body is known to consist in a balanced function of its internal constituents and it does not depend merely on the intake of diet or the polishing of the surface of the body, the dressing of it and the like; this fact is known to everyone. What it means is that health is an internal operation more than an external acquisition. Thus health, which is the greatest happiness we can think of, depends on conditions that we create within our own selves, and it does not seem to hang on external circumstances so much as the operations within. This is a fact which easily escapes one's vision, and it passes unnoticed. We are likely to imagine that we become healthy by eating dry fruits or consuming large quantities of diet and accumulating appurtenances from outside for the aggrandisement of physical existence. Whatever be the cooperation and the contribution that may be afforded to our body by the conjoining of external factors, all these will, in the end, mean nothing if the cooperative forces within do not stand in balance. A balancing of the forces of the body is supposed to be health, and that is the same as happiness. Health is happiness.
This is an analogy upon which we can work out a system of endeavouring to remain in a state of peace and happiness, taking into consideration this principle that the greatest joy seems to be inseparable from a sort of balance, which principle is an invariable concomitant in every field of our activities; and this balanced operation of the inner constituents of an organisational set-up is identical, as it were, with its very being, or existence. If this balance is lost, the body may deteriorate by an illness, which is equivalent to the dismemberment of the internal constituents, their non-cooperation to constitute a whole, like the dissenting members of an organisation growing larger in number than the assenting ones and the organisation collapsing.
This principle operates not merely in the body, but everywhere else also. A balance maintained in the inner constituents of what we call the mind is the cause not only of mental peace and happiness, but even of sanity. Sensible thinking and a meaningful, logical and coherent way of psychic function are the same as the maintenance of that requisite balance in the internal constituents of the psyche. Else, one becomes insane, schizophrenic, or mentally ill in some way or other.
So is the vital force within us, the prana-shakti. The system of pranayama is one of the methods employed to bring about harmony in the operation of the vital force inside, else it gets concentrated in certain parts of the body. It can cause headache if it is concentrated in the head; it can create aches and pains in the parts of the body where it operates excessively and not in an equilibrated manner. Desires get accentuated, accelerated in their potency when the prana is directed in particular channels along the dictates of the sense organs. So, we become erratically active and inordinately affectionate or excessively desirous of this or that when the prana , the energy, does not get equally distributed in the system. The beauty of the body, the glamour in the face and radiance of personality are mostly due to a proportionate distribution of the energy of the prana; otherwise, there is ugliness, a sense of deterioration, a sudden symptom of the coming of old age and a lack of attractiveness. This is the principle that seems to operate within ourselves in the body, in the vital system, in the mind, and even in our understanding. A balanced understanding is the logical process of thinking; otherwise, it is slipshod thinking, sentimental, emotional, and whimsical.
Thus, we find that there is finally a principle operating in the world, and our life depends on principles, not on objects or personalities. We are likely to imagine that objects, persons and things are the causes of the stability of our life or even the happiness that we are seeking in our life. We run after circumstances outwardly and attach ourselves to persons and things, run to objects to possess them, under the impression that a proximity to physical substances, with a psychological sense of possession of the same, brings us comfort and security and the required peace and happiness, but nothing of the kind is the fact. Even if we heap ten thousand bricks, they do not become an edifice or a structure. All the building material collected into a mountain does not become a palace or a fort. A mere crowd of particulars is not the design that is intended, but we commit this mistake of heaping particulars upon ourselves.
The beauty of a structure, the meaning that we see in a construction, is not merely in the substance such as the brick, the iron, the cement, etc., but in the pattern which it assumes, the wholeness that it presents. This is very important to remember. All these particular little bits of material gathered by the architect and the constructor assume a shape which gives us a picture of completeness, and never for a moment do we think in our minds that there are bricks or there are pieces of material, nails, iron rods, and cementing element, etc., when we are seated inside a house. Do we think of the bricks when we look at a building? The building is a wholeness; it is not merely a substance. “How beautiful is the structure!” we remark. The beauty is not in the bricks, it is not in the cement, it is not in any kind of material that may be there; the beauty is in the balance, in the feature, in the rhythm, in the organisational pattern that these little pieces have assumed.
Thus, our satisfaction, even at the look of an object – let it be a building, an architectural piece, a human personality, a rising sun or a rose flower, it matters little what it is – the joy that these things evoke in our minds does not seem to depend on the substance out of which they are made but on a different thing altogether, which cannot be identified with the substance. Behind personalities and things, there is a principle, and all the values of life are only this much. They are certain considerations, certain attitudes, certain internal requirements, certain meanings, certain ideologies and certain aspirations; these constitute life, not bread and jam, butter and milk, buildings and lands – not these things. These objects also appear to have meaning because they seem somehow, rightly or wrongly, permanently or temporarily, to fit into a concept of wholeness which we seem to be entertaining in our minds for the purpose of a satisfaction, a peace that we are seeking.
But, the world of objects does not easily bend before us and will not consent to adjust itself into a pattern of wholeness with the structure of our longings inside, this particular reason being behind our dissatisfaction with things. The world does not fit into us. We feel dissatisfied with anything that cannot fit into the wholeness of a pattern that we conceive in our minds. We can be disgusted with anything, for the matter of that; we are tired of being ill at ease. We do not, generally, see a day when we are perfectly healthy. There is some illness, some ache in the tooth, or the ear, or the eye, or the leg, or somewhere; we have never felt a happy day, a perfectly healthy day. We feel sick of it, at least some of the time. Likewise, we have aches of various types, urges, impulses, passions, which, as mentioned, are motivated by excessive pressures exerted by the prana in directions which do not contribute to an equilibrated distribution of energy in the system.
The child has a beautiful body, but the elderly person is not so beautiful. The child is beautiful, whosoever's child it be – king's or beggar's. We like to hold it and embrace it, but we would not like to embrace an old man. There is a perfectly equalised distribution of energy in the body of the child. There is no impulsion in it which compels the prana to move in any particular direction. But, when age advances, the mind gets concentrated in certain centres of the body, which are the locations of the sense organs, and there the prana gets directed due to the impress of the mind, and then we know where we stand!
Longings, desires, passions of the mind are never a force of equilibrium; they are always forces of excess. They drive us in one direction only, and not in all directions; and inasmuch as health – whether it is physical, vital, mental or rational – is an equidistribution of force in the wholeness that constitutes this organisation, call it the body or whatever we like, we cannot be healthy and, therefore, cannot be happy if this wholeness is not to be implicitly present in the organisation that we are trying to set up around ourselves by possession of lands, buildings, properties, money, status, and the like. These things hang on ourselves like unconnected things. The objects of the world, though they are the targets of our desires, do not constitute a wholeness in our life; they do not form an organisation, for they are independent things altogether.
No person is our subservient. No thing in the world is our slave, and we cannot, therefore, possess it. If the hand, the leg, the ear, or some part of the body is an object by itself and we are trying to possess it with great effort every day, we would know we will not be anywhere. We do not, fortunately, have to struggle to possess our nose, or our ear, or the limbs of our body, and sweat day and night to see that we do not lose them. They are very livingly related to us as perfect completions or patterns of wholeness, and so we are scot-free, free from any anxiety of losing our nose, or our ear, or a finger, a liver or a stomach; no such anxiety is there. But, we have a tremendous anxiety about other things. I may lose my building, my money, my land, my relation, my husband, my wife, and so on. I may lose them one day, or any day. Why should we lose them? Why do not we lose our nose? The reason is well known. We try to seek satisfaction from things which are not ours. Things are independent existences by themselves. As long as there is an independence asserted by persons and things, they can never be possessed by another. Hence, there is no such thing as property in a permanent sense.
Property should not be understood in the sense of a belonging or a possession which is inseparably connected with us. It will be seen, in the long run, that objects, persons or things are related to us in the same way as a property in a trust is related to a trustee or the management of a trust. It does not belong to the trustee, but it is very much connected, in the sense that there is a responsible relationship of the managing body with the object, which is called the trust or the property, but it is not possessed by the managing body. It can be utilised for the purpose for which it is intended, but it cannot be possessed in the sense of a belonging to one's own self, as 'mine'; else, it would cease to be an instrument for which it is intended. Objects of the world come in relation with us; we unite with people, circumstances, things, etc., due to reasons beyond our understanding at present, but they come to us as educative media, instruments by which we can fulfil the responsibilities and the duties which are incumbent upon us.
We have duties towards persons and things, but we have no rights over persons and things, even as a trustee, as I mentioned, or a managing body of an organisation, has a duty towards the property vested in the management but there is no ownership in the person or the body. We are mostly trained and educated in such a way that we cannot believe that duties can bring satisfaction. We are trained in such a way that duties are understood as impositions or extractions of work from us, by powers which are not ours and with which we are not really connected. The world is a harassing medium; it is a torture to us. We would like to be rid of it as early as possible, if it is not going to be an object of our chosen pleasure. We fight for rights, and we do not believe that duties can bring us anything.
I had occasion to mention elsewhere that the analogy of the perfect organisational cooperation of the limbs of the body is to be considered by us as a symbol for our working in society, in relation to things and persons around. What right has the nose over the body? But it has a duty to perform. What right have the legs? But they have a duty to do. Now, do the limbs of the body lose anything by performing the duty? Do they clamour for their rights? “We have walked two miles to the bazaar to purchase vegetables so that the stomach may eat them, and we must have our dues,” the legs may cry. “Why should we freely walk for the stomach to eat food or the eyes to see cinemas?” The legs do not requisition fees for this work they have done. They do not demand their rights, though they have worked so much for the sake of the other limbs of the body. What do they lose?
The limbs of the body do not lose by the performance of their duty in the form of collaboration with the purpose which transcends the very existence of the body. A mechanism does not exist for its own self; the purpose of the existence of the machine is the production, which is transcendent to the very organisation called the mechanical set-up. Likewise, there is a purpose for which our bodily functions operate, and this purpose itself is a satisfaction. The health of the whole organism is also the health of every part that has performed its duty by way of a collaboration in the function of the whole system.
Here, we have, perhaps, a scientific and a visible illustration of the significance and meaning of the much-misunderstood doctrine of karma yoga, action for action's sake, and not for an ulterior motive. This illustration of the cooperation of the parts of the body, without asserting rights, but by only performing duties, beautifully illustrates how karma yoga is to be performed. We have a duty, but we have no rights. We may be wondering, “What for should I perform the duty, if I get nothing out of it?” This is a disease of the human mind to think in this manner.
A duty is an obligation that we owe to the organisation to which we belong. How can we say that it is a punishment that is meted out to us? An obligation that we owe to the completeness or the whole to which we belong as parts is not to be considered as an imposition from outside, because we belong to the whole, and the healthy existence of the whole is our very life. The very existence of the body is the life of the nose; let the body go, and the nose also goes. Where do we stand independently? But, we seek for a foolish independence, which seems to be denying the very existence of such things as duties in the world, because we do not understand by duty anything that is worth the while, palatable, meaningful, or that which brings something to us. What does duty bring? Look at the way we are thinking! But, why should it bring anything? Here is the principle of karma yoga, again, coming into highlight.
Karma yoga does not bring anything other than its own self. “Why should I reach God? What does God give me?” Look at this question! We want God to give us something other than God Himself, which means to say that there is an ulterior reality transcending God Himself, superior to God, which He has to give us, by acting as an instrument, as our servant. This is why we want God! “What will He give me if I pray to Him?” Otherwise, why do we pray?
God is the symbol of perfection, and here is the commingling of the purpose of all duties. God does not give us anything. The imagination that God should give something implies a foolish notion that there is something greater than God; otherwise, why do we ask for anything from God? When we ask for some remuneration for being healthy in the body, we do not understand what we are saying. “Why should I be healthy? Let me get some fee for it!” We want a fee even to work for our health. Is not health itself the aim of our existence? Is it a medium to bring us a remuneration, or a salary?
The duties that we perform in life are not instruments for bringing something else; they are the fulfilment of a purpose, which is itself the satisfaction sought for; and that purpose is the bringing about of a balance in life, whether physically, vitally, mentally, rationally, or even socially and politically in any form of organisation wherein we are involved as ingredients of a completeness. Social crisis, political tension, family feuds, do all arise on account of a thoroughgoing lack of understanding of the purpose that is behind the necessity to collaborate with this whole to which we belong in a vitally connected manner. We belong to society vitally; we belong to the governmental, national system vitally; we belong to humanity vitally; we belong to the whole astronomical universe also in a similar manner. What does it bring? Such questions should not arise, because whatever we need will be provided to us by the very fact of the consequence that will naturally follow from the fulfilment of our obligations.
The legs will receive sustenance if the stomach eats food, and they need not have to eat independently. “Why should we not eat?” The legs do not quarrel like that, because it is well known to these limbs of the body, in their perfectly harmonised working, that the well-being of one is the well-being of the other, inasmuch as the well-being of each one consists in the well-being of the whole of which they are parts and from which they can never be separate. If the society is healthy, I shall be happy. But, why should I work for society? This question, again, cannot arise. It is like the leg asking, “Why should I walk for the sake of the body?”
Karma yoga is a difficult thing to understand. We may do some work and imagine that it is karma yoga. Karma yoga is not merely work; just being busy, running about, doing something or the other – it does not mean that. It is a highly reoriented technique by which we organise our consciousness into the pattern of a collaboration with a purpose that is hidden as a principle behind the organisation to which we belong. When we serve society, we are not serving people. This is also to be remembered very well. A society is a deified form of a super-individual set-up. It has a value which is independent of mere isolated persons. We should not identify society with a heap of people. A society is an organisation, a principle that is operating to cement the individuals into a completeness. So, society is an immanent coordinating principle which brings individuals together into a whole, and is not the individuals themselves, merely.
Bring back to your memory the analogy that the beauty and the perfection of the building is not just in the heap of bricks that are there. Bricks do not make a building. Likewise, people alone do not make a society. They are necessary for the society, as bricks are necessary for a building, but they themselves are not the building. The building is the name we give to a concept in our mind that arises on account of an arrangement of these particulars called bricks, etc. So is society, political organisation or any kind of whole to which we belong not merely a jumble of particulars; rather, it is an ideological perfection. Finally, we would realise that we live in an ideal world. We do not live in a physical realm.
It is not for nothing that great philosophers have thought that the world is, in the end, made up of mind only, not of substances. We are not worried about things; we are worried about the principle which operates behind this apparent diversity of particulars called things. So, people cannot bring us satisfaction; nothing in the world can give us joy, unless we approach persons and things as ingredients in this organisation to which we also belong. Thus, selfishness gets rooted out in our dealings in life.
In yoga, in karma yoga, in service, in cooperation, in sympathy, in love, in sharing, we are not merely dealing with persons and things, but with a principle which requires us to behave in that way because we are also part of that principle, and so, thereby, we are performing a kind of divine worship, not just doing some work. Thus, it is said: Work is worship; otherwise, work is a bondage. It becomes a worship only when we behold in the act of our performance of work the principle which is hidden behind the individuals in relation to whom we are working. Likewise, taking the logic a little further, the whole world to which we belong – not like a servant belonging to a master, a subordinate belonging to a boss, money belonging to a rich man – it is not in this way that we belong to the universe, but as an inextricable part of a vital organisation, as a principle. The universe is a logical principle rather than a thing. It is a law that is operating, rather than a substance that is before our eyes.
Finally, God Himself is a great law. We cannot regard God as a sort of person sitting somewhere, but as a principle of justice, a principle of collaboration, a principle of harmony – as a principle. “Unite yourself with Me (the Eternal Law), and everything shall be provided to you” as energy flows to all the parts of the body by the very fact of their belonging to the system. When the universe is satisfied, which means to say, if the principle of the perfection or the harmony of existence is satisfied, we and all are also satisfied. The resources of the body are the resources of every limb of the body. The wealth of the whole system, the organism, belongs to every toe, every finger. The resource of the cosmos is our resource. Why do we run here, there, to every person to beg, borrow and steal? There is no such necessity. Things will come on their own, provided we are honest in our understanding of the duty of life.
Again, we have to understand that life is a duty; it is not a matter of rights. We need not ask for rights, for they shall be taken care of. When the sun rises, we need not cry for light; light follows the sun. The fulfilment of duties implies all that we call 'rights'. No need of clamouring, for duties and rights are not two different things. The rights so-called are the needs which will devolve upon us as a natural consequence of the discharge of our duties. Duty is our obligation to the organisation to which we belong, which is a principle rather than a person or thing, and this organisation begins from our physical body itself until it reaches the Supreme General Organisation, which is Absolute Being.