When we find ourselves facing an existential crisis, what resources or measures do we call upon? How do we validate our experience and the contrast between thought life and reality? How do we separate ignorance from correct perception, when one is not sure which is which? And ultimately, how does one transcend one's own (temporary) block or limitation so that the emphasis is not on the finite, but on the infinite?
We all are seeking something. If we are doing this sincerely, then it is to be expected that there is a process involved, which in most circumstances requires patience. So the question of in the meantime often applies to situations that await results. Example: One wants to live a bhakti-filled life. One perceives obstacles. One goes crazy trying to eradicate all obstacles. One realized one's dependency or limitation in the material world. One cannot see the future. One faces separation when one would wish for union. What does one do? If you read about bhakti yoga, then you may come across the notion that separation is where bhakti is most intense, so perhaps this is where we learn.
What do you do when your standard for knowledge is perception and visible evidence? The answer may well be in non-attachment and practice.
So, after a nod from a teacher to the
klishtas and
aklishtas, I began looking at Patanjali's
Yoga Sutras in order to sort through the flood of thoughts that sometimes obscure my perspective at a decision-making juncture.
The suggestion I found there is that the best way to frame this question of what to do in the meantime is to look at the ways in which our thought patterns, which are multifarious, boil down to five kinds of thinking: correct thinking; wrong thinking; imagination; deep sleep; memory. This can be daunting at first, if one is unsure of which is which, and what is true, on a personal basis.
Sutra 1.2 states that yoga is the nirodhah (stilling) of the thought patterns of the mind field. With this stilling, the seer or true self, abides in its own nature. What joy would it be to still one's thoughts! This can be attained with practice, tapas (the fire of discipline), concentration, and other practices of yoga.
Patanjali proposes that thoughts that interfere with self-realization are either colored (
klishta), that is, not useful, painful, impure, troubled, negative, vice, leading us away from enlightenment and resulting in bondage -- or they are uncolored (
aklishta) and thus useful, not painful, not afflicted, pure, not troubled, positive, virtue, leading us towards enlightenment, resulting in true freedom.
Here, it says that thought patterns are "the colorings of our
samskaras, the deep impressions that drive our
karma or actions." So, observing a thought and deciphering if it is colored or uncolored is a useful practice. After all, if thoughts are the makeup of our actions and
karma, we would do well to pay attention to their degree of distortion and let them run clear. From that practice of observation, decisions may better follow.
To detangle ourselves from our identification with mental thoughts, which are either klishta or aklishta, sounds very easy to say and I wonder how hard it is to do--especially when all areas of life seem to be bound up into one giant ball. But again, the next step is to observe whether our thoughts are colored or uncolored, useful or not useful, and it is said that this can be done as one goes about one's day. Once again, training the mind and its habits comes down to awareness and practice. And perhaps with this practice and the stages that ensue, we can reduce the coloring of thoughts that no longer serve us. So then, the various categories of life begin to become more and more transparent, matter of fact, correctly prioritized, and purified:
This means
observing your fear of spiders, your desire for a martini or even for a kiss, your attachment to your health or home, and not letting those impulses rule you. That's the scent of freedom attracting you. Letting the colored thought patterns run clear is like removing the veil over the beauty of the deepest inner reality. And on another reassuring note: "This does not mean that one becomes inert or robot-like, without enjoying life and the world. Rather, it means that the coloring is not dragging us around by our senses, either externally or internally"
(source).
To commit to this purification, one should cultivate the following efforts, according to Sutra 1.20:
The sutra reads: Others follow a five-fold systemic path of 1) faithful certainty in the path 2) directing energy towards the practices 3) repeated memory of the path and the process of stilling the mind 4) training in deep concentration, and 5) the pursuit of real knowledge, by which higher samadhi (asamprajnata samadhi) is attained.
So to return to my seemingly thwarted spiritual life and material life indecision and discontent and seeking my path, i.e. my mid-life crisis, I wonder: What do we do when we want to program our spiritual path, but the way of doing so in the real world seems concealed? What do we do when we need more shraddha and virya in making a decision--now--so that we may commit the energy to go there? And what do we do with the silence that follows self-inquiry, prayer, japa (all our meager efforts to pursue higher wisdom) as we wait for some bhakti signpost?
In any dilemma, the ability to simply forego current limitations would be lovely, and indeed, certain frames of mind call for a radical departure from forms of limitation. One wants to set sail, wants to be a forest-dweller, wants to cultivate peace in a certain setting, wants validation, experience, knowledge--and if one can find the signpost and the means, then this is wondrous--but in instances of limitation that come from the world and karma and dependency on certain factors, real or imagined, I would say that wants wanting wants can create havoc. One can only hope the quest is not over if a false step were to be made. Spiritual pursuit requires also material support, dharma, and responsibility. With desires framed by those that are more pure in nature, one can still become flustered by living in the world without a highly individualized manual. Or perhaps this again is the working out of karma by grace, which requires time... and more practice.
In closing, a dream last night: I was waiting for Steve Martin to arrive to an engagement party I was attending by a little pond. It was an odd place, fenced in, quiet, and the group of ladies, one of whom was getting engaged, was telling me about a nearby grocery store. I was suggesting a sign be placed there to let others know of this resource, since there were no indicators as to the function of the place. They liked that thought. Then I was informed we were waiting for an event at this party: Steve Martin was coming to give a blessing to the engagement, and I thought this odd. He was to arrive on a tour bus. Why this formality just to bless an engagement, I wondered? Having no clue as to the meaning of this dream in the morning, I googled Steve Martin, and thanks to the wealth of fun reads on Wikipedia, I found the following passages (which, if nothing else, tickled my vritti):
Inspired by his philosophy classes, Martin considered becoming a professor instead of an actor-comedian. His time at college changed his life.
“It changed what I believe and what I think about everything. I majored in philosophy. Something about non-sequiturs appealed to me. In philosophy, I started studying logic, and they were talking about cause and effect, and you start to realize, 'Hey, there is no cause and effect! There is no logic! There is no anything!' Then it gets real easy to write this stuff because all you have to do is twist everything hard—you twist the punch line, you twist the non-sequitur so hard away from the things that set it up.”
Martin recalls reading a treatise on comedy that led him to think:
“What if there were no punch lines? What if there were no indicators? What if I created tension and never released it? What if I headed for a climax, but all I delivered was an anticlimax? What would the audience do with all that tension? Theoretically, it would have to come out sometime. But if I kept denying them the formality of a punch line, the audience would eventually pick their own place to laugh, essentially out of desperation.”
Martin periodically spoofed his philosophy studies in his 1970s stand-up act, comparing philosophy with studying geology: “If you're studying geology, which is all facts, as soon as you get out of school you forget it all, but philosophy you remember just enough to screw you up for the rest of your life."
Martin's first TV appearance was on The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour in 1968. He says:
“[I] appeared on The Virginia Graham Show, circa 1970. I looked grotesque. I had a hairdo like a helmet, which I blow-dried to a puffy bouffant, for reasons I no longer understand. I wore a frock coat and a silk shirt, and my delivery was mannered, slow and self-aware. I had absolutely no authority. After reviewing the show, I was depressed for a week."
