第7章 Chapter 7

I Teach Death 31 October 1969 pm in Mediation Camp at Dwarka, Gujarat, India Question 1 A FRIEND HAS ASKED: ARE YOU TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO DIE? ARE YOU TEACHING DEATH? YOU SHOULD TEACH LIFE INSTEAD. He is right, I am indeed teaching people how to die. I am teaching the art of dying, because one who learns the art of dying becomes an expert in the art of living as well.

One who agrees to die becomes worthy of living the supreme life. Only those who have known how to erase themselves also come to know how to be. These may seem like opposite things because we have taken life and death to be opposing each other, contradictory, but they are not. We have created a false contradiction between the two, and that has produced fatal results.

Perhaps nothing has caused so much harm to the human race as this contradiction. Subsequently, this contradiction has had ramifications on many levels. If we divide things which are essentially one into separate parts -- not only separate but contradictory parts -- the ultimate result can be nothing but the creation of a schizophrenic, insane man.

Lets assume there is a place where mad people live. Great difficulty and trouble would arise if these people were to believe that cold and hot were not only separate but contradictory things -- for the simple reason that cold and hot are not contradictory, they are different degrees of qualifying the same thing.

Our experience of cold and hot is not absolute, it is very relative. A little experiment will make this clear. We always find things which are hot and things which are cold. We also see that something which is hot is hot, and something which is cold is cold -- we cannot believe the same thing can be hot and cold at the same time.

Now, when you go back home do a little experiment. Take a pot containing hot water, a pot containing cold water, and a pot containing water at room temperature. Put one hand in the hot water and another hand in cold water. Now take both hands out and place them in the water at room temperature.

One hand will feel the water is cold and the other will feel the same water is hot. Is that water hot or cold? One hand will say it is hot, the other will say it is cold. Then what is the nature of the water really? If, simultaneously, one hand feels it is hot and the other feels the same water is cold, then we will have to realize the water is neither hot nor cold -- its feeling hot or cold is relative to our hands.

Hot and cold are degrees of the same thing -- they are not two different things. The distinction between them is of quantity, not of quality. Have you ever thought about the distinction between childhood and old age? Ordinarily we think they are opposite to each other -- childhood on the one hand, old age on the other.

But what is the distinction between childhood and old age really? The difference is only of years, the difference is only of days; the difference is not qualitative, it is only quantitative. For example, there is a child aged five. We can call him "an old man of five" -- whats wrong with that? It is simply linguistic usage that we say "a child five years of age.

" If we want to we can call him -- as is done in English -- "five years old," which can also mean "an old man of five. " One is just an old man of seventy, while there is someone who is five years old. What is the difference? If we want, we can call a seventy -- year-old man a seventy-year-old child -- after all, a child grows into an old man.

But when we look at them separately they seem like two contradictory things. It seems like childhood and old age are contrary to each other, but if they are, then no child can ever become old. How can he? How can two contrary things be the same? Have you ever been able to note the day a child turned into an old man? or which night? Can you note on a calendar that on such-and-such a day this man was a child and then on such-and -- such a day he became old? In fact, the problem is For example, there are steps leading to the terrace. You can see the lower steps and you can see the steps on the top as well, but you may not be able to see the steps in the middle section. It may look as if the lower steps and the steps on top are separate, far away from each other. But one who can see the whole staircase will deny such a distinction. He will say, "The difference between the steps below and the steps above only appears because of the steps in between. The very step at the bottom is connected with the step on the top. " The difference between hell and heaven is not of quality, the difference is only of quantity. Dont think hell and heaven are contrary, diametrically opposite to each other. The difference between hell and heaven is the same as between cold and hot, between the lower rung and the higher rung, between a child and an old man. The same sort of difference exists between birth and death; otherwise one who is born will never be able to die. If birth and death were contrary to each other, how could birth end in death? We can only reach to a point of our natural growth. Birth grows into death -- this means birth and death are two ends of the same thing. We sow a seed, it grows into a plant, and then it becomes a flower. Have you ever believed there was any opposition between the seed and the flower? The flower grows out of the seed itself and becomes a flower. Growth is in the seed. Birth turns into death. God knows from what kind of foolishness and during what unfortunate times the idea became fixed in the human mind that birth and death are dichotomous, that life and death are two separate things. We want to live; we dont want to die -- but we dont know that death is already part of life. Once we decide we dont want to die, it becomes a certainty, that very moment, that our lives will be filled with problems and difficulties. The whole of mankind has become schizophrenic. Mans mind is split into parts, into fragments, and there is a reason for this. We have taken the totality of life as if it were made up of parts, and we have pitted each part against the other. Man is the same, but we have created divisions inside him and have also determined that these divisions are contrary to each other. We have done this in all spheres. We tell a person, "Dont be angry, be forgiving," without realizing that the difference between anger and forgiveness is again only of degrees -- as it is between cold and hot, between childhood and old age. We can say that anger, reduced to the lowest, is forgiveness -- there is no dichotomy between them. But all the age-old precepts of mankind teach us, "Get rid of anger and adopt forgiveness" -- as if anger and forgiveness are such opposite things that you can drop anger and retain forgiveness. Such a thing can only result in splitting man into fragments and in bringing him trouble. All of our past belief systems say that sex and brahmacharya, celibacy, are contrary to each other. Nothing can be more erroneous than this. The lowest point of sex is brahmacharya. Sex, dropping downward, decreasing, is brahmacharya. The distance between the two is not one of enmity and contradiction. Remember, in this world there is nothing at all like contradiction. In fact, there can never be anything like contradiction in the world, because if there were, there would be no way to unite the opposites. If birth and death were separate entities, birth would move along its own course and death on its own -- nowhere would they meet. Just as two parallel lines dont meet anywhere, no meeting would ever take place between birth and death. Birth and death are intertwined, they are two ends of a continuum. When I say this, what I am actually saying is that if man is to be saved from going insane in the near future, we will have to accept life in its totality. We cant afford any longer to create divisions and to pit one part against the other. It is so strange that one who says, "Sex is contrary to brahmacharya, so lets get rid of sex," will himself be ultimately destroyed in his attempts to get rid of sex. Such a person can never attain brahmacharya. Striving to cut off sex from his life, his mind will remain fixed on sex alone -- there is no way he can ever attain brahmacharya. His mind will be in great tension and trouble forever -- right there, thats his death. His life will become too onerous. He will become heavy and wont be able to live at all -- not even for a moment. He will be in great trouble. If you look at it this way -- and this is the fact -- then what I am saying is that sex and brahmacharya are related to each other, just as the lowest and the highest rungs are. As man moves up the ladder of sex, he enters into brahmacharya. Brahmacharya is nothing but sex reduced to its lowest degree. One reaches to a point where it almost feels as if everything has become empty -- it is reaching to the ultimate end. Then there is no contradiction in life, no tension. Then there is no restlessness in life. Then we can live a natural life. What I am talking about is how to live a most natural life, in all its aspects. We dont live naturally at any level, because we have learned the ways of living life unnaturally. If you were to tell a person, "Walk only with your left foot, because the left foot stands for religion, righteousness. Dont walk on your right foot because the right foot represents unrighteousness " If the man were to believe this -- and there are lots of people who would believe this; people to believe in such stupid ideas have always been found. So you would come across people who would agree that to walk on the left foot is righteous, and to walk on the right foot is unrighteous. Then they would begin cutting their right foot off and trying to walk on the left foot. They would never be able to walk. We can only walk with the combined movement of both legs. A leg never walks alone, by itself, although only one leg moves forward at a time. Walking, you only lift one leg at a time, which may create the wrong impression that you walk on one foot. But dont forget that the one at a standstill, the one in repose, is as important as the one in motion. The day one attains brahmacharya, the sex in repose is instrumental in that attainment -- in the same way as the stationary right leg is instrumental in the left legs moving forward. The left leg would not be able to move without the help of the right one. Sex which has become still becomes the foothold for the arising of brahmacharya. One can take the step of brahmacharya only when sex has ceased to move. Uprooting the foothold of sex, breaking it, will certainly result in cutting off sex, but that wont help in achieving brahmacharya. Instead, man will remain hanging in limbo -- in the same way all the age-old teachings have left humanity hanging in limbo. What we see around us in life is nothing but the movement of the left and the right step, of the left and the right foot. In life everything is integrated. The apparent diversity is like the notes of a great symphony. If you cut anything out, you will find yourself in difficulty. Someone may say the color black signifies evil. Thats why no one is allowed to wear black at marriages; black is allowed at somebodys death. There are people who believe black is a sign of evil, and there are people who believe white is a sign of purity. In a symbolic sense, it is alright to have such distinctions, but if someone were to say, "Lets get rid of black, lets remove black from the face of the earth," then remember, with the removal of black, very little white will be left behind -- because the whiteness of white stands out in all its sharpness only against a black background. The teacher writes on a blackboard with white chalk. Is he out of his mind? Why doesnt he write on the white wall? Of course one can write on a white wall, but the letters wont stand out. White manifests because of the black background; black is in fact causing the white to stand out. Remember, the white of the man who invites enmity with black will inevitably grow dull, insipid. One who is against showing anger, his forgiveness will be impotent. The strength of forgiveness lies in anger; only one who can be angry has the power to be forgiving. The more fierce the anger, that much greater will be the magnanimity of forgiveness. The power of anger itself will lend luster to the act of forgiveness. In the absence of anger, the forgiveness will appear totally lackluster, absolutely lifeless, dead. If a persons sex is destroyed -- and there are means to destroy sex -- then remember, that will not make him a brahmacharya, a celibate, he will simply turn into an impotent person. And there is a fundamental difference between these two things. There are ways to do away with sex, but a man cannot become a brahmacharya by doing away with sex, he can only become impotent. By transforming sex, by accepting it, by moving its energy towards a higher level, one can certainly attain brahmacharya. But remember, the brilliance you see in the eyes of a brahmachari, a celibate, is the brilliance of sex energy itself. The energy is the same, but transformed. What I am saying is that what we call opposites are not opposites -- life consists of a very mysterious order. In this mysterious order opposites have been created so that things can exist. You must have seen a heap of bricks piled up in front of a house under construction. All the bricks are the same. Then the architect, the engineer, in order to make an arch for a doorway in the house, lays the bricks in opposing order. The bricks are the same, but making the doorway he places them opposite each other so they can hold each other. He wouldnt be able to make the arch if he placed them in the same order -- the doorway would fall immediately. Bricks laid in the same order carry no strength; there is no resistance in them. Wherever resistance occurs a strength is created. All strength comes with opposition; all energy is produced from friction. In life, the principle of polarity is behind the creation of energy, power. The bricks are all alike, but they are placed in opposite order. God, the divine architect of life, is very intelligent. He knows that life will become cold immediately, will dissolve right away if the bricks are not laid in opposition to each other. So he has placed anger opposite forgiveness, sex opposite brahmacharya, and because of the resistance present between them, an energy is created. And that energy is life. He has put the bricks of birth and death together, facing each other, and thus of both a gateway to life is created. There are people who say, "We will only accept the brick of life, we wont accept the brick of death. " Thats fine. Suit yourself. But if you dont accept death you will die that very moment, because then all the bricks that are left will be alike. Only the bricks of life will be left -- and they will collapse right away. This mistake has been repeated many a time. For the last ten thousand years man has been badly afflicted with and troubled by this mistake. He insists on placing bricks that are all alike; he doesnt want opposing bricks. "Remove the polarity," he says. He says, "If we believe in God, then thats all well believe in. Then we wont believe in samsara, in the mundane world. If God is, then there is no samsara; then we can never accept the mundane life. We cant be in the marketplace, we cant attend to our businesses; because we believe in God well become monks and retire to the forests. " That man would like to create his world with the bricks of God. Can you imagine what the consequences would be if, by mistake, worldly people were to go crazy and become monks? From that very day things wouldnt move an inch; from that day the whole world would be in ruins. In fact, the man who is a monk has no idea that he is surviving, that his left foot moves forward, because someone, a worldly man, is running a store in the marketplace out there. One foot is rooted there; thats why the monks foot is free to move. The monks very life-breath comes from the worldly man. He is under the illusion that he is living on his own, but the fact is, all his nourishment comes from the mundane world. And yet he goes about cursing the worldly man; he goes on telling him, "Renounce the world and become a monk. " He doesnt realize he is creating a situation for universal suicide this way -- a situation even he cant escape from: he will die as well. He is thinking of using bricks that are all alike. There are also people who say the opposite. They say, "Theres no God, theres just this world and nothing else. We only believe in matter. " And, believing only in matter, they also tried to create a world of their own. They too have landed in trouble. Where they have arrived, suicide will happen there as well -- because if there is only matter and no God, then everything that lends savor to life, that makes life charming, that gives movement to life, that creates the desire to rise, will be gone. If one were to believe there is no God, that there is nothing but matter, then what meaning is there in life? Then life becomes totally useless. Thats why people like Sartre, Camus, Kafka and others talk so much about meaninglessness in the West. Today, with one voice, all Western philosophers are saying that life is meaningless. What Shakespeare once said has become relevant all of a sudden, and Western thinkers are now reiterating it in the context of life itself: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. " There cannot be any significance, any meaning, because you have put together only bricks of matter, and of matter alone. Meaning is bound to disappear absolutely. Just as there being only monks would take meaning away from the world, there being worldly people alone would also take meaning away. It is interesting that the worldly man survives with the help of the renunciate and the renunciate survives with the help of the worldly man -- in the same way the left foot is dependent on the right foot and the right foot is dependent on the left foot. On the surface this dependence appears as a contradiction, but deep down it is not. Both feet are part of the same being: one keeps it rooted; the other causes it to move. No one can experience the whole truth of life without understanding this contradiction correctly. A person who, in his opposition, insists on cutting out the half of it has not yet attained enough intelligence. You can do away with the half, of course, but as soon as that happens the remaining half will die as well -- because, unquestionably, the latter half received its life energy from the first half and from nowhere else. I have heard Two monks were involved in an ongoing dispute. One believed it is good to have some money on you, that it can be useful in emergencies. His friend, the other monk, used to argue, "Why do we need money? We are renunciates, what do we need money for? Only worldly people keep money. " Both used to put forward arguments in support of their respective views, and it seemed like their arguments were correct. The great mystery of this universe is that you can present an equal number of arguments in support of any of the opposing bricks used in its creation, and the dispute can never end because both bricks are used equally. Anyone can point out, "Look, the universe is created of my bricks," while someone else can argue against this, saying, "No, the universe is made of my bricks. " And life is so vast that very few people evolve enough to see that the whole doorway is made of opposing bricks. The rest merely see the bricks that fall within the range of their view. They say, "You are right, the universe is a creation of sannyas. You are right, Brahman is the source of the universe. You are right, the universe is made of atman. " Other people say, "The universe is made of matter, it is made of nothing but dust. Everything will eventually turn into dust -- Dust unto dust. " These people can also show only the bricks that fall within their particular view. In this whole affair neither the theist nor the atheist wins the argument; neither the materialist nor the spiritualist wins. They cannot. Their statements are coming from a dichotomized view of life. So there was a great dispute between these monks. One maintained it is necessary to have money, while the other disagreed. One evening, in a great hurry, they arrived at a river. It was close to nightfall. One of the monks approached the boatman, who was tying up his boat for the night, and said, "Please dont tie your boat up yet, bring us across the river. Night is approaching and we must reach the other side. " The boatman said, "Sorry, I am finished for the day and now I have to go back to my village. Ill take you across in the morning. " The monks said, "No, we cant wait until morning. Our guru, with whom we lived, who taught us what life is all about, is close to dying. The news is, he will be dead by morning. He has summoned us. We cant stay overnight. " The boatman said, "Okay, Ill take you over for five rupees. " The monk who had argued in favor of carrying money laughed and, looking at the other monk, said, "What do you think, my friend? Is carrying money worthless or meaningful?" The other monk simply kept laughing. The monk paid five rupees to the boatman -- he had won. After reaching the other shore, the monk said again, "What do you say, my friend? We would have been unable to cross the river if we hadnt had the money. " The second monk laughed uproariously. He said, "We crossed the river not because you had money, but because you could part with it! We were able to cross the river not because you had money but because you could let go of it. " So the argument remained. The second monk continued, "I always said a monk must have the courage to let go of money. We could give it up; thats why we could cross the river. If you had kept holding on to it, if you had not let it go, how could we have crossed the river?" So the problem remained. The first monk also joined in the laughter. They came to their guru. They asked him, "What shall we do? This has become quite a problem. What happened today illustrates our differences succinctly. One of us believes we crossed the river because we had money on us, while the other says we were able to cross because we let money go. We are firm in our beliefs, and we both seem to be right. " The guru laughed a belly laugh. He said, "You are both crazy. You are committing the same kind of foolishness mankind has done for ages. " "What is that foolishness?" the monks asked. The guru said, "Each one of you is looking at one side of the truth. It is true you could hire the boat and cross the river only because you let go of money -- but the other side is equally true: you could part with your money because you had money to part with. It is true, of course, that you were able to cross the river because you had money on you. But the other part is equally true. Had you not had any money you wouldnt have been able to cross. You crossed because you let go of money. So both things are right. There is no contradiction between them. " But we have created such dichotomies in all levels of our lives. And a belief in either of the two parts can provide a convincing argument in its support. It is not difficult, because after all, a man has at least half of life to draw upon -- he is living half his life; thats not a small matter. It is more than enough to argue for. So nothing will be solved by arguing. Life will have to be investigated, known in its totality. I certainly teach death, but that does not mean I am against life. What it means is: death is the gateway to know life, to recognize life as well. What it means is: I dont see life and death as contrary to each other. Whether I call it the art of dying or whether I call it the art of living -- both mean the same thing. It depends on how we look at it. You may ask, "Why dont you call it the art of living?" There are reasons for it. The first thing is, we have become extremely attached to life. And this attachment has become very unbalanced. I can call it the art of living too, but I wont, because you are too attached to life. If I should say, "Come learn the art of living," you would come running because you would want to strengthen your attachment to life. I call it the art of dying so you can regain your balance. If you learn how to die, then life and death will stand before you equally; they will become your left and right foot. Then you will attain to the ultimate life. In its ultimate state life contains neither birth nor death, but it is made of the two aspects we call birth and death. Of course, if there is a town where people are suicidal, where no one wants to live, I wont go there and talk about the art of dying. There I will say, "Learn the art of living. " And as I tell you, "Meditation is the gateway to death," I would tell the people of that town, "Meditation is the gateway to life. " I would tell them, "Come, learn how to live, because unless you have learned how to live, you wont know how to die. If you wish to die, then let me teach you how to live -- because once you have learned how to live you will have learned how to die as well. " Only then would the people of that town come to me. Your town is just the opposite: you are residents of a town where no one wants to die, where everyone wants to live, where people want to cling to life so hard they can keep death away forever. Therefore, I am compelled to talk to you about death. It has nothing to do with me; because of you I am calling it the art of dying. I have been saying the same thing all along. Once Buddha entered a village. It was early morning and the sun was just about to appear on the horizon. A man came to him and said, "I am an atheist, I dont believe in God. What do you think? Is there God?" Buddha said, "God alone is. There is nothing but God everywhere. " The man said, "But I was told that you are an atheist. " "You must have heard wrongly," said Buddha. "I am a theist. Now you have heard it from my own lips. I am the greatest theist ever. There is God, and nothing but God. " The man stood there under the tree with an uneasy feeling. Buddha moved on. Another man came at noon and said, "I am a theist. I am an absolute believer in God. I am an enemy of atheists. I have come to ask you, what do you think about Gods existence?" Buddha said, "God? Neither is there one, nor can there ever be one. There is absolutely no God. " The man couldnt believe his ears. "What are you talking about?" he exclaimed. "I heard a religious man had come to this village, so I came to ask whether God is. And whats this you are saying?" Buddha said, "A religious man? A believer in God? I am the greatest atheist ever. " The man stood there utterly confused. We can understand this mans confusion -- but Ananda, a disciple of Buddhas, was in a terrible suspense; he had heard both conversations. He became very restless; he couldnt figure out what was going on. It was all right in the morning, but by afternoon it became a problem. "What has happened to Buddha?" Ananda wondered to himself. "In the morning he said he was the greatest theist, while in the afternoon he said he was the greatest atheist. " He made up his mind to ask Buddha in the evening, when he would be alone. But by evening Ananda was in for yet another surprise. By the time it was evening another person came to Buddha and said, "I dont understand whether there is God or not. " The man must have been an agnostic, one who says he doesnt know whether God is or not. No one knows, and no one can ever know. So he said, "I dont know whether there is God or not. What do you say? What do you think?" Buddha replied, "If you dont know, then I dont know either. And it would be good if we both remained silent. " Listening to Buddhas answer, this man was confounded as well. He said, "I had heard you are enlightened, so I thought you must have known. " Buddha said, "You must have heard wrong. I am an absolutely ignorant man. What knowledge can I have?" Just try to feel what Ananda must have gone through. Put yourself in his shoes. Can you see his difficulty? When it was night and everyone had left, he touched Buddhas feet and said, "Are you trying to kill me? What are you doing? I almost lost my life! Never have I been so upset and restless as I have been today. What is this you have been saying and doing the whole day? Are you in your right mind? Are you sure you know what you said today? In the morning you said one thing, in the afternoon another, and in the evening you gave an entirely different answer to the same question. " Buddha said, "I did not give these answers to you. I gave my answers to the people concerned. Why did you listen to them? Do you think it is right to hear what I say to others?" Ananda said, "Now this tops it all! How in the world could I not hear? I was present, right there; my ears were not blocked! And could it ever be possible I wouldnt want to hear you speak? I love to hear you speak, no matter who you talk to. " Buddha said, "But why are you upset? I didnt answer you!" Ananda said, "Maybe not, but I am in a quandary. Please answer me, right now. What is the truth? Why did you give three different answers?" Buddha explained, "I had to bring the three of them to a point of balance. The man who came in the morning was an atheist. Being an atheist only he was incomplete, because life is made of opposites. " Keep this in mind: a truly religious person is both -- an atheist on one hand, and a believer in God on the other hand. His life contains both aspects, but he brings harmony between the two opposites. Religion is in that very harmony. And one who is only a believer in God lacks religious maturity. He has not yet attained a balance in his life. So Buddha said, "I had to bring a balance to his life. One side of him had become very heavy, so I had to put some rocks on the other scale. And besides, I also wanted to unsettle him, because somehow he had become convinced there is no God. His conviction needed to be shaken up, because one who becomes certain, dies. The journey must go on; the search must continue. "The man who came in the afternoon was a theist. I had to tell him I was an atheist because he had become lopsided too; he had also lost his balance. Life is a balance. One who attains this balance attains the truth. " The reason I say to you, you should learn the art of dying is because your life has become lopsided. You are sitting very solidly on the scale of life, and so everything has turned to rock. Life has become solidified; the balance is gone. Go ahead. Invite death as well. Say, "Come and be my guest too. Well stay together. " The day life agrees to live with death, it is transformed into life supreme. The day one welcomes death, gives it a hug, embraces it, the matter is over! That day the sting of death departs. The sting lay in our running away from death, in our being afraid of it. When a person comes forward and embraces death, death loses, death is conquered, because the man who embraces death becomes immortal. Now death cant do anything to him. What can death do when the man himself is ready to disappear? There are two types of people -- one whom death seeks and the other who seeks death. Death seeks those who run away from it. And there are those who seek death, but it keeps eluding them. They search endlessly but cant find death. What kind of a person would you like to be -- the one who runs away from death or the one who embraces it? A person eluding death will continue to be defeated; his entire life will be a lifelong story of defeat. One who embraces death will instantly triumph over it; defeat will no longer exist in his life. Then his life becomes a triumphant journey. Yes, I teach the very art of dying. I am teaching you how to die so you may attain life. Do you know a secret? The man who learns how to live in darkness -- the moment he accepts the totality of darkness, the darkness turns into light for him. Do you know that the man who takes poison lovingly, joyfully, as if he were taking nectar -- the poison becomes nectar for him? If you dont, then you must find out. One of the most profound truths of life is that the man who accepts poison lovingly, the poison no longer remains poison for him -- it turns into nectar. And the man who has accepted darkness itself, wholeheartedly, finds to his astonishment that darkness has become light. And one who greets pain with open arms, finds there is no pain at all -- only happiness remains for him. For one who accepts his state of agitation and agrees to live with it, the doors of peace and tranquility are thrown open. This seems contradictory. Remember, however, that one who says he wants to attain peace can never become peaceful, because to say "I want to attain peace," is, in fact, looking for disturbance. Man is restless as he is, and yet there are some who create a new restlessness by saying, "We want to be peaceful. " Once a man came to me. He said, "I have been to the Ramana ashram, to Pondicherry, and to the Ramakrishna ashram -- they are all full of hypocrisy. I couldnt find anything else there. I am looking for peace, which I find nowhere. I have been wandering in search of it for the last two years. In Pondicherry someone mentioned your name. I have come straight from there. I want peace. " I said, "Get up and walk out that door right this moment, otherwise I shall be proven to be a hypocrite as well. " He said, "What do you mean?" I said, "Simply get out. And dont ever look back in this direction again. It is better I save myself before I am called a hypocrite as well. " "But I have come to find peace," the man said. "Simply get lost," I said. "And let me ask you this: who did you go to and ask how to be in agony? Which guru has initiated you into agitation? Which ashram did you go to, to learn how to be restless?" "I went nowhere," the man replied. Then I said, "You are such a clever fellow, you can even create mental disturbance for yourself. Then what is there for me to teach you?" The way you have created your agitation, take an opposite route and you will find peace. What do you want from me? Dont tell anyone you came to see me too, even by mistake. I have nothing to do with whats happening to you!" The man said, "Please show me the way to find peace. " I told him, "You are looking for ways of becoming agitated. There is only one way to attain peace: be at peace with restlessness. " One who accepts restlessness in its totality, one who says, "Come, stay with me. Be my guest in this very home," suddenly finds the restlessness has left him. With the change in our state of mind the restlessness departs. One who accepts even the restlessness itself, his mind quiets down. How can restlessness last if the mind is attuned to peace? Even though it may be a nonacceptance of restlessness, the very restlessness itself is the product of our attitude of nonacceptance. One who says he will not accept being restless will continue to be restless, because this very non-acceptance is itself the root of restlessness. A man says, "I wont accept restlessness, I cant accept suffering, I cant accept death, I cant accept darkness. " Thats just fine, dont accept them -- but you will continue to be surrounded by what you will not accept. Instead, see what happens by accepting, by agreeing to something no one else wants to agree to. And to your great surprise you will find what you considered your enemy became your friend. If you invite your enemy to be your guest, what other course is there for him but to become your friend? The reason for my discussing these issues with you for three days was because I saw you came here with the desire to conquer death. You must have thought I would let you in on some trick so you would never die. A friend has written a letter in which he says: Question 2 ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW US HOW TO REJUVENATE OUR BODIES? ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW SOME ALCHEMICAL METHOD TO BECOME YOUNG AGAIN? IF THATS THE CASE THEN ITS WORTH SPENDING OUR MONEY TO COME THERE. Maybe you have come here with the same idea too. If so, you will be disappointed, because I am teaching the art of dying here. I say unto you: Die! Learn how to die. Why run away from death? Accept it, welcome it. And remember, I am giving you the very key to be victorious over death. Rejuvenation is not the key for attaining victory over death. No matter how much you go through a process of rejuvenation, you will still have to die. The body is sure to die. Rejuvenation can only push death a little further away; death can be avoided a little longer. It only means your problems will be extended over a longer period -- instead of dying in seventy years, you might be able to die in seven hundred years. The suffering you could have otherwise finished with in seventy years will be prolonged for seven hundred years -- what else? The troubles of seventy years will extend to seven hundred. The quarrels of seventy years will continue up to seven hundred. The problems of seventy years will spread over seven hundred years -- they will be stretched that much, multiplied. What else do you think will happen? This may not have occurred to you, but if you really should come across someone who could give you a potion and say, "Take this and you will live for seven hundred years," you would tell him, "Wait a minute, let me think it over. " I dont believe any one of you would agree to take a potion that would extend life for seven hundred years. So what does that mean? That means "I will continue to be as I am. This very I will now have to live for seven hundred years. " And that would prove to be very costly; it would have very grave consequences. Should scientists someday discover how man can live infinitely -- and such a discovery is possible; it is not difficult -- remember, people will start looking for a guru to teach them how to die quickly. Just as now people are looking for gurus who can rejuvenate their bodies, people then will look for someone who will show them the secret, the technique of dying, so that even scientists will not be able to save them. They will try to cheat the government so they can ease themselves out of life. We have absolutely no idea that an extended life has no meaning. The meaning of life comes with living. An individual can live so totally in one moment -- more totally than another man could even in an infinite number of lives. Its a matter of living, and only a man who has no fear of death can live -- otherwise how can he live? The fear of death keeps man trembling -- he never stands still; he keeps running all the time. Have you noticed that speed is continuously on the increase in the world? Everything is speedy. In one respect a rocket is better than a bullock cart -- because a rocket can take us places faster -- but why so much insistence on speed? You may not have realized this, but all mans attempts at speed are attempts to escape where he is. Where he is, he is so scared, he is so afraid, he wants to get away. He feels he would be better off anywhere except where he is. All over Europe and America weekends and holidays have become a great nuisance. People get more tired on these days than ever. The idea is to jump into the car and dash off -- fifty miles, a hundred miles, two hundred miles -- to escape to a picnic spot, to a mountain, to a hill resort, to the beach. The motivation for rushing off so fast is because others are running off, are in a hurry too -- they might reach first. If one asks where they want to reach, they dont know. One thing is certain, however: they want to get away from where they are -- away from the house, away from the wife, away from their work. Man is unable to live; thats why there is so much running about. He wants to go on putting more power into his vehicles so he can run faster. Ask where he is going, where he wants to reach, and his answer will be, "I cant tell you right now; I dont have time. I have to get there soon. We have to land on the moon; we have to land on Mars. " All our lives we are running. What are we running from? What is the fear? The fear is that on the one hand we are unable to live fully, and on the other hand the fear of death is imminent, present. Both things are interconnected. The man who is afraid of death will not be able to live his life; he will remain terrified of death. Then what is the answer? You ask me, "Whats the answer? Whats the solution?" I say: accept death. Invite death and say, "Come on, Ill worry about living later -- first you come. Let me first be finished with you so the matter is over once and for all. After that Ill live at leisure. Let me take care of you first, then Ill settle down and live comfortably. " Meditation is the means to accept death with this attitude. To extend such an invitation to death, meditation is the means, meditation is the answer. One who accepts death in this way comes to a halt immediately. His speed disappears. Have you ever watched? When you are angry and you are cycling, you pedal faster. When you are angry and driving a car, you press the accelerator harder. Psychologists say car accidents happen, not because of bad roads but because of the man on the accelerator -- there is something wrong with the man. His teeth are clenched in anger and he is pressing the accelerator harder, and somehow or other he is wishing to have an accident. He is filled with the desire to crash into something. Life seems so dull and useless to him that he wants to bring some excitement, some juice into it -- at least by crashing against something, if nothing else. He thinks hell get some thrill out of it, will feel good about it. He feels hell have the satisfaction that something happened in his life, that it was not a total waste. Many criminals in Europe and America have given statements in court, saying they had nothing against the person they killed -- they just wanted to see their names in print, and that was the only way. A good mans name never appears in the papers; you only see names of murderers and criminals. There are two types of murderers: those who commit a single murder for personal reasons, and those who commit collective murder -- the politicians. Only their names are printed in the newspapers, the rest are ignored. Although you may be a good citizen, your name will not be in the papers -- but stab a person and it will create headlines. A criminal confesses in the court, "I had no enmity with the person, I had never seen the man before. I just looked at his back and plunged a knife into it. When the blood gushed out of the victim I felt satisfied that finally I had done something people would talk about, that my life had not passed in vain. The newspapers are filled with the story. The courts, the big judges and lawyers in their black gowns are discussing my case with great seriousness. Looking at all this, I feel I have also done something, I am not an ordinary man. " A man who is evading death, who is scared of death, has become so frustrated, so sad and bored that he is ready to indulge in anything. The one thing he is not doing, however, is welcoming death. As soon as a man welcomes death, accepts death, a new door opens in his life -- a door that leads him to the divine. The word "Die" is inscribed on the temple of God, whereas inside the stream of life is overflowing. Looking at the signboard -- "Die" -- people turn back. No one goes inside. Its a very smart idea, a very clever idea, otherwise there would be a crowd inside and it would be difficult to live -- so the temple of life has the signboard "Die" hanging outside. Those who become frightened looking at it, run away. Thats why I said one has to learn how to die. The biggest secret of life is to learn how to die, how to accept death. Let the past die every day. Let us die every day. We dont let the yesterdays past die. A seventy-year-old man keeps the happy memories of his childhood alive. His childhood is not yet dead. He still carries the desire to return to his childhood. The man is too old to move about, he is bedridden, but his youth is not yet dead. He is still thinking about the same things. He is still dreaming of the female movie stars of his youth, although none of them are the same now. The pictures are still moving before his eyes; nothing has died. In fact, our yesterday never dies. We never gather the courage to die; we never let anything die, and consequently everything piles up. We dont let the dead be dead; instead, we amass it like a heavy load. And then it becomes impossible to live under its weight. So one of the keys to the art of dying is: let the dead be dead. As Jesus was passing by a lake, a wonderful incident took place. It was early morning -- the sun was about to rise; the horizon had just turned red. A fisherman had thrown his net in the lake to catch fish. As he began pulling the net out, Jesus placed his hand on the fishermans shoulder and said, "My friend, would you spend all your life catching fish?" The same question had crossed the fishermans mind many times before. Is there any mind in which it doesnt? Of course, the fish may be different, the net may be different, the lake may be different, but nevertheless, the question arises, "Am I supposed to spend the whole of my life catching fish?" The fisherman turned around to see who the man was who was raising the same question he had in his mind. He looked at Jesus. He saw his serene, laughing eyes, his personality. He said, "There is no other way. Where else can I find a lake? Where else can I find fish and throw my net to catch them? I also ask myself, Will I go on catching fish the rest of my life?" Then Jesus said, "I am a fisherman too, but I throw my net in some other ocean. Come, follow me if you wish, but remember, only a man can throw a new net who has the courage to give up his old net. Leave the old net behind. " The fisherman must have really been a courageous man. There are very few courageous people like him. Right there, he dropped the net filled with fish. A desire must have occurred in his mind to at least pull out the net that was already filled, but Jesus said, "Only they can throw the new net into the new ocean who have the courage to leave the old net behind. Drop your net right there. " The fisherman let go of his net and asked, "Tell me where I have to go. " Jesus said, "You seem to be a man of courage. You have the potential to go some place. Come with me!" As they reached the outskirts of the village, a man came running. He caught hold of the fisherman and said, "You madman, where are you going? Your father, who was ill, has died. Where were you? We went looking for you at the lake and found your net lying there. Where are you going?" The fisherman said, "Please let me take leave for a few days to perform my fathers last rites. Then Ill come back. " Jesus words in reply to the fisherman are tremendously wonderful. He said, "You fool, let the dead bury the dead! What need is there for you to go? Come. Follow me. Now one who is dead is already dead, why even bother to bury him? These are all tricks to keep him alive. So one who is now dead, is dead forever. And there are many dead people in the village. They will bury the dead. You come with me. " The fisherman hesitated for a moment. Watching him, Jesus said, "Perhaps I wrongly understood you could leave your old net behind. " The fisherman paused for a moment and then followed Jesus. Jesus said, "You are a courageous man. If you can leave the dead behind, you can indeed attain to life. " Actually, that which has died in the past should be dropped. You sit in meditation but then you always come and tell me it never happens, that thoughts keep coming. Thoughts dont come like that. The question is, have you ever left them? You always keep holding on to them, how can they be at fault? If a man keeps a dog, feeds him, ties him in his house and then suddenly one day sets him loose, turns him out; if the poor dog comes back to the man again and again, would the dog be at fault? All these days you fed the dog, petted him, loved him, played with him, tied a collar around his neck, kept him in your home. And then all of a sudden you decide to meditate and tell the dog to get lost. How can that be? The poor dog has no idea what has happened to you so suddenly, so he wanders around for a while and then comes back to you. He thinks maybe you are having some kind of fun with him, hence the more you drive him out the more playful he becomes, the more he keeps coming back to you. He feels something new is happening, that maybe the master is in a good mood, so he takes more and more interest in the game. You come and tell me thoughts wont leave you. How can they? You have nourished them with your own blood. You have tied them to yourself; you have put a collar around their necks with your name on it. Just tell someone that what he thinks is wrong -- he will jump back at you saying, "What do you mean, what I think is wrong? My thoughts can never be wrong!" So the thought with a collar with your name on it comes back to you. How is your thought supposed to know you are meditating? Now you say to your thought, "Get out! Scram!" The thought is not going to go away like this. We nourish thoughts. We nourish thoughts of the past, we keep tying them to ourselves. And then, one day, you want them to leave you all of a sudden. They wont leave you in one day. You will have to stop feeding them; you will have to stop rearing them. Remember, if you want to drop thoughts, stop saying, "My thoughts. " How can you leave something you claim as yours? If you want to get rid of thoughts, then stop taking interest in them. How will they depart unless you stop taking interest in them? Otherwise, how will they know you have changed, that you are no longer interested in them? All our memories of the past are thoughts. There is a whole network of them we are holding on to. We dont allow them to die. Let your thoughts die. Let the dead remain dead; dont try to keep it alive. But we are keeping it alive. This is also a part of the art of dying. Keep this key in mind too: if you want to learn the art of dying then let the dead be dead. Let the past be past. It no longer exists, let it go. There is no need even to preserve it in your memory. Say goodbye to it, let it depart. Yesterday was finished yesterday; now it is no more -- and yet it keeps its hold over us. There is another small question. A friend has asked: Question 3 WHAT IS A MIND FILLED WITH ILLUSIONS? WHAT IS A VERY CONFUSED MIND? WHAT IS CLARITY OF MIND? This needs to be understood, because it will be useful for meditation as well as in learning the art of dying. He has asked a very significant question. He asks, "What is a confused mind?" But here we make a mistake. We say, "disturbed mind," "confused mind. " This is where the mistake is. What is the mistake? The mistake is we are using two words -- confused and mind -- and the truth of the matter is that there is no such thing as a confused mind. Rather, the very state of confusion itself is mind. There is nothing like a confused mind. Mind is confusion. Mind is another name for confusion. And when th