The individual sense is a foolish one, indeed, in that it cannot succeed in its attempts.
Yet it persists, though it does not succeed, because it does not know that its failure is
due to its own erroneous methods employed. It thinks it is right in its methods, and
that something is wrong with the objects themselves. We always find fault with
conditions outside when we fail, not knowing that the failure is due to a mistake
committed by us in the methodology employed. But, the mind will never understand
this. Nobody will ever accept that there is a mistake in one’s own self. We always
impute the mistakes to circumstances and conditions outside. So goes this world.
This is the short history of the immediate consequences that follow from an
ignorance of the true nature of one’s own Self, a consequent sudden affirmation of
personal individuality, and then the running after pleasures of sense.
Chapter 59THE SELF-PRESERVATION INSTINCTThe sense of personal being, or asmita, immediately begins to act in the form of its
various contacts with things outside, because every stage of the manifestation of
avidya is an active manifestation. It does not remain quiet even for a single moment.
It is like the movement of a forceful river which flows continuously until it reaches its
destination. It will not halt at some place. Likewise, once avidya gets channelised
and concentrated as asmita, the green signal for further action has been given and
then there is a very persistent movement of the individual sense towards its objects.
The intention behind this activity of asmita is to gain pleasure. It feels a satisfaction
by coming in contact with things; and once there is a sensation of pleasure, it stirs
the ego for further effort in the same direction so that the quantity of pleasure may be
increased. A moment’s experience is not sufficient. The memory of having had
pleasurable contact earlier becomes a goad for further effort for contacts of a similar
nature. Sukha anuśayī rāgaḥ (II.7): Raga, or desire, which becomes passion when it is
very intense, is pleasure objectified. When pleasure is externalised on an object
outside, the attitude of the mind towards that object is called desire. Therefore, it is
not a desire for objects; it is a desire for pleasure. The experience of pleasure is
invested upon the form of the object, and what the mind sees in the object is not the
substance of the object, but its capacity to fulfil its desires—just as when we see a
currency note we do not see a piece of paper, and we do not see the ink with which it
is impressed; we see the value which it has in respect of our personal life. It acts as an
instrument for the fulfilment of certain purposes of the individual, and that is why we
have a liking for currency notes, money, etc., while really what we physically see is
only a scrap of paper.
In a similar manner the object of sense, living or non-living, has a physical existence
of its own, but that is not the meaning that is read into it by the perceiving mind. The
meaning is a value that it inheres in itself—a kind of significance that is read there
secretly by the cognising mind. “Here is a tool for the satisfaction of my desires,”—
thus contemplates the mind. The mind’s attitude towards the object is, therefore, a
hundred percent selfish. There is not even an iota of unselfishness there, because it