I came to a realization the other day that can be seen as n light-bulb moment if you want to call it that. I read the below quite from a Krishnamurti, a spiritual wise-man/ yogi (I’m not sure what to call him):
As long as there is the desire to gain, to achieve, to become, at whatever level, there is inevitably anxiety, sorrow, fear. The ambition to be rich, to be this or that, drops away only when we see the rottenness, the corruptive nature of ambition itself. The moment we see that the desire for power in any form – for the power of a prime minister, of a judge, of a priest, of a guru – is fundamentally evil, we no longer have the desire to be powerful. But we don’t see that ambition is corrupting, that the desire for power is evil; on the contrary, we say that we shall use power for good which is all nonsense. A wrong means can never be used towards a right end. If the means is evil, the end will also be evil. Good is not the opposite of evil; it comes into being only when that which is evil has utterly ceased. So, if we don’t understand the whole significance of desire, with its results, its by-products, merely to try to get rid of desire has no meaning
This really resonated with me. All the books and quotes I’ve read by him, and Deepak Chopra suddenly started to make sense: I am someone that loves unity, a place and situation where everyone is included, happy, safe and one. Take the opposite of that and that makes me totally and completely against anything that divides. If there is division then chances are I will have a gripe with someone in the room or party responsible.
I can think of quite a few examples.
Example 1: A rich guy rocks up at a party where everyone is seemingly middle-class. This rich person is quite comfortable with flaunting his new car, flashy job, clothes or overseas holiday experiences in front of everyone else. Right here we have division happening. I clear line of separation is being drawn between the rich guy and the rest. This division is preventing true community, connecting, happiness and love to flourish.
Can this notice of division by me be rooted in an insecurity about being poor/rich? Yes it is possible, but in my case as I’ve come to learn – not the case.
Example 2: Take the sexy skinny blonde that is not shy at all to walk around in a skimpy bikini on the beach among all her friends. Her friends are more conservative in what they wear, they are not necessarily as skinny, and they are not as revealing with the type of clothing they wear. Again we have division happening. Division between the other girls and the blonde in the form of jealousy or self regret, and division in the form of a more attractive group of people/person being compared to a lesser group of attractive people/persons.
This division can happen on so many levels, but it normally has to do with a lack of something on the one parties side, and a overflow of confidence/arrogance on the other side. One cannot escape this division, it is all around us. Some of us create this division willingly, and other unwillingly.
My issue is with those that create division willingly.
People who are arrogant, proud, self-centered, insecure, selfish, ambitious, power-hungry and greedy. These are the prime candidates for people that will boast in themselves and break down others just in order to fulfill their need – hence creating division.
This may seem insignificant, but it is an important characteristic I learnt about myself. Give me unity, a place where there is no distinction between class, race, area or suburb. I will end with this last quote from Krishnamurti, this is simply mind-blowing:
The fullest development of every individual creates a society of equals. The present social struggle to bring about equality on the economic or some spiritual level has no meaning at all. Social-reforms aimed at establishing equality, breed other forms of antisocial activity; but with right education, there is no need to seek equality through social and other reforms, because envy with its comparison of capacities ceases. We must differentiate here between function and status. Status, with all its emotional and hierarchical prestige, arises only through the comparison of functions as the high and the low. When each individual is flowering to his fullest capacity, there is then no comparison of functions; there is only the expression of capacity as a teacher, or a prime minister, or a gardener, and so status loses its sting of envy.