The intellectual, the philosopher is not ready for inner change.
While we obtain more information through books, classes, DVDs, conferences, etc. less aware of inner observation we will be.
It doesn’t mean that classes and books are “bad.” It just means that what we gain in information, we lose in inner awareness.
The authority in the book is giving us a concept. We repeat that concept. We think we “know.”
What we hear, we interpret it according to our experiences. It just remains as an “idea,” a nice concept to like or dislike.
A strong experience, something intense will change a person.
Why? Because that person does not have control over it. The “I” is unable to fight back and “teach a lesson” to another.
We easily label the experience as “bad” or “good” according to our interest or some moral code. However, the bottom line is change. That change is not fake, for it does not come from intellectual understanding.
Any intellectual understanding when referred to living Life, is worthless without inner awareness. However, intellectual understanding is necessary to survive in the “office world,” our society away from Nature and Life. In that world, inner awareness is not needed, in fact; it may be an obstacle for proper conditioning.
The rupture is evident. Most intellectual neophytes will pretend to understand Life under the premise of accumulation of information, concepts, ideas. Nevertheless, part of the spiritual journey is to unlearn all of that.
If we just go to Nature and observe the Ocean, we will learn all we need to be in tune with Life.
There is high tide and low tide. We ask: Which is better? Which one is good? Which one is more convenient?
Both are one. Just different polarity. To understand that, may take a Lifetime to many. Those who are busy “choosing” between high and low, left and right, straight and crooked, good and bad, right and wrong… Those are the intellectuals.
Yes, they “understand” the concept that opposites are complements; but because there is no first hand experience, because there is no observation… still they will be trapped in labeling incidents, judging outcomes, taking sides, babbling opinions.
What is empathy? They may ask. They want a concept. A definition. The Hawk grabbed a fish from the Ocean.
Is the Hawk empathic with the fish? Well… that doesn’t fit the definition of empathy. Is the Hawk compassionate?
No? Here comes the rationale: Therefore, the Hawk is “bad.” If the hawk was “good,” the hawk will display empathy and compassion. What about a human fishing and taking a fish out of the Ocean? Is he empathic? Compassionate? Yes/No? What the mind says? Isn’t this a moral problem? an ontological issue?
Hawk, fish, Ocean, wind… all are one. Life sustains itself through different forms. Our moral concepts are worthless to understand Nature.
The Ocean moves, changes. It is alive. The wind is part of the Ocean, and so all the creatures although for intellectuals; those are different things.
There is no better lullaby than the waves of the Ocean breaking into shore. It is the magical tune to quiet our busy minds… but rather than listening to it, we may ask: “What is the cause of that sound?”
Oh! It is the Jacques Cousteau Factor… The mind is happy. It has an answer! The intellect knows… while that empty container called “self” is still looking for fulfillment…