#150 Why do we make ourselves unhappy?
I am thrilled to share that this episode is the 150th episode. That’s right! You have been flowing with me for 150 episodes over 3 years in this podcast, your podcast Vedanta – the river of wisdom. And so a heartfelt thank you!
Back to this week’s episode – Why do we make ourselves unhappy?
Now that ‘s a strange title. Who in their right mind would make themselves unhappy? But we do. If we continue the pursuit of happiness without enquiring who is the one that is seeking the happiness, then happiness will always be far away.
The anniversary may be happy, the birthday may be happy, but the question is – can I be happy on the anniversary, the birthday or for that matter, everyday?
Let me do a quick exercise with you. Try to complete the sentence with the first thought that comes to your mind.
I will be happy when…
Some of you will say –
I will be happy when I find a job that I love
I will be happy when I meet the partner of my dreams
I will be happy when the pandemic ends
I will be happy when I lose weight
I will be happy when I recover from the illness
I will be happy when our family agrees on at least one matter
And so on..
What does Vedanta have to say in this matter?
The Taittiriya Upanishad reveals that we are happy when Ananta, the limitless manifests in the mind as vrittis, thoughts.
The vrittis that are experienced are of three levels of happiness called as priya, moda and pramoda. Priya is like the pleasure that we have while seeing a desired object, moda, is a little more pleasure than priya and less inhibited. We experience pramoda when we are enjoying the desired object. Depending on the proximity of the desired object, condition or situation there is a changing degree of happiness.
One of our dear students gifted me Lindt chocolates. There is sukha and delight on seeing the desired object which is now kept on the table. We can call this vrtti, priya, some happiness. After a quick lunch I walk towards the table eager to eat a piece. My degree of happiness is now moda because there is the distance between me and the chocolate has reduced. I hastily unwrap the wrapper and take a bite of the chocolate with a soft gooey centre as the chocolate melts in my mouth. Now there is an experience of pramoda which is a fusion of me with the object of desire.
If we look into any experience of happiness, whether it is meeting the partner you waited for a long time or having a child or getting a job there is I and something other than I, the object of happiness. This may be an object, a person or a conducive situation.
Let us call I as the subject and that which is other than me, as the object.
Right now as the subject, I am not happy because I depend on a condition that will make me happy.
When I find the job that I love or I meet the partner of my dreams, the separation between the subject and the object dissolves. They are one. The person seeking happiness or the wanting person is resolved. There is a fusion of the subject and object. In that moment I am no longer the wanting person, the dissatisfied person.
In that fusion or oneness there is no division and there is an experience of happiness.
Chandogya Upanisad says:
Yo vai bhuma tatsukham nalpe sukhamasti bhumaiva sukham| 7.23.1.
“That is ananda which indeed is the limitless
There is no ananda in the limited.
The limitless alone is ananda”
The reasoning is simple.
Where there is infinite, there can be no want.
A want arises where there is separation between me and something else.
Where there is no want, there can be no unhappiness.
This brings us to a question – If Atma is itself Ananda then why are we not permanently happy?
Even though Atma is ananda-svarupa, fullness, ananda can be experienced by the mind only when it is in a state that does not oppose the limitlessness of atma.
What is that state?
When the mind is not assuming, not desiring, not willing, not seeking or rejecting anything outside or inside then the fullness manifests easily. This happens when we experience something that makes us non-judgemental and non-demanding. When you go for a walk in nature the projecting mind that wants things to be different, resolves. You don’t think – If only the sky could be purple. The tree should grow more to the right. The birds should stop chirping. You don’t place any demands on the situation around you. You are in harmony with what is. The distance between you the subject and nature around you is very little and sometimes hardly there as you feel one with nature.
The mind resolves during sleep and in the state of absorption during meditation. During these occasions of non-projection and resolution of the mind, the unobstructed completeness is experienced as happiness through the vrttis in the mind. Its duration and degree are dependent respectively, on how long and how far our mind does not obstruct it.
When I, the subject wants to manage and control the object the projecting mind starts its game again. A new series of wants begin – Earlier I was just looking forward to getting the job. After the happiness passed, new wants arose. At my new job I hope to prove that I am worthy. I hope I get a bonus or stock options get offered and so on.
The earlier moment of happiness seemed momentary because the wanting person has sprung up again.
Thus the pursuit of happiness continues day after day.
Sometimes, the subject and the changing object fuse. There is the experience of happiness.
Then there is perceived separation. The dance between the subject and the object continue.
Happiness proves to be elusive.
Perhaps an enquiry is needed into the nature of the subject and object. Are these really distinct from each other?
What is the defining reality of I, the subject?
The body? No. If it is constantly changing how can the body define me?
The mind? No. If it is constantly changing, especially when you are wondering what to wear at the party, then how can the mind define me?
Does the breath define me? Inhalation and exhalation keep going on. If the prana is changing how can it define me?
Then, what is the defining reality of I, the subject?
The doer, the one who performs actions and has many achievements to her credit? No. At the age of two being able to walk was celebrated as a milestone. Now making the first million is a recent achievement. Since the number of achievements keep changing how can they define me, the subject.
What about me the experiencer? Since I have had all kinds of experiences – good, bad and ugly and these change daily, can one or a few experiences really define me, the subject?
And so we see that while the body, mind, breath, actions and experiences are constantly changing, I am aware of all these changes.
What is that makes me aware? We are not referring to social or political awareness. That which is the basis of it all – Awareness that is Existence that is Satyam.
Does I, Awareness change if one is aware of changes in the body?
Does I, Awareness change when one is aware of the mind or the galaxies?
Does I, Awareness get limited by the shape of the body or the mind or the galaxies?
Awareness is existence is unchanging consciousness and has no limits.
Awareness is neither the property or a part of the body and mind but rather the body/mind are present in awareness that has no limits. Hence awareness or existence is the defining reality of the subject.
This brings us to the enquiry into the object.
What is the defining reality of the object? The form of the object could be a piece of chocolate or a subtle thought form of a loved one. The chocolate could melt and the thought could change. What is it that does not change? The existence that is present in and through the object.
Does this existence have any dimension ? Is it limited by the chocolate or the thought or the galaxy?
Existence is neither a property of the object like when we say existing object nor is it a part of the object. Existence always is. Our focus on matter makes us focus on the object which is in the foreground. We miss existence which seems to be in the background and pervading the object.
Different objects appear in existence. They change form and color. The defining reality of the object also is unchanging existence
Can any object displace the existence that always is? No.
Can any object which is a name and form displace the existence that you are?
If unchanging existence, isness, satyam defines both the subject and object, are they different?
Is there any distance between the existence pervading the subject and existence pervading the object?
Is there any separation between the existence that defines you and existence that defines the object?
I recognise all-pervading existence that is limitless that is fullness in all names and forms.
The existence that I am is not in opposition to any form.
No form can add to or take away from the existence that is fullness that is me
The subject seeking to be happy and the object of happiness have their dance as changing manifestations of the changeless existence that is I.
All that is here is one. There never were two.
