“Does the Mind Need the Body for its Transformation?”

When we look at this question one would ask who is asking, may be on behalf of the mind. So, now we are left with three entities, namely, the “I” or the “Me” or the “Self”, the mind and the body. Whether I myself ask or you ask or some other person asks it is the self, which is existing in everybody and hence let us simply call it the self. So, the self must be asking this question probably on behalf the mind, which means the self has considered the mind and the body as separate from itself but is it true?. So, we must ask further questions like

1.??? What or who is this “self”

2.??? Is the self separate from the mind?

3.??? Does the mind consider itself separate from the body and if so where does it exist?

4.??? What is meant by the “transformation” the mind is probably trying to undergo or to bring about in itself?

5.??? What is the current state/nature of the mind which would have prompted it to undergo a transformation?

6.??? If at all there has to be a transformation which of the three entities it must belong to?

In order to answer these questions one may refer to the teachings of J Krishnamurti and repeat what he would have said or one may refer to one’s own perception or understanding, which may or may not corroborate with JK’s teachings. Let us make a humble beginning to uncover the questions like we try to remove the knots in a thread where it is quite possible that we either succeed in removing all the knots or end up in adding more knots or even complicate the existing knot itself, with the sole intention of enquiring, learning and sharing.

What/who is the self? Is it real or an illusion? Is it a permanent entity or not? JK says that the self is an illusion in the sense that it is created by the thought, which wants to find its security in its own continuation. When there is a recognition of an object through the senses the thought creates a desire to possess the object and hence the self is created at that moment. This self persists as long as the possession of the object continues by protecting the object, building new images and pride and also a kind of fear of losing it unknowingly anytime for which the self may go on inventing many additional protective mechanisms or some means of escaping from the fear. We would have read about identification, attachment and so on, which may come in to picture if at all we go deeper and deeper in trying to explain the whole thought process.

The self must also be real in the sense that it is always interacting with the outer world, establishing and ending many relationships, building images, exhibiting anger, hatred, affection, fear, jealousy, anxiety, etc., and the thought is able to recognize it every moment.

The self may not be a permanent entity since the thought, which has created the self is the result of the content of the consciousness or the memory, which is a material process and hence will get destroyed at the time of the physical death of an organism. Also, one must ask whether there is anything as permanent at all and this may be a subject of further enquiry.

Now, what is this self? As one would have observed oneself this self always identifies with the body, the mind, all external objects that it has possessed such as property, titles, power, position, etc., and also its own beliefs, Gods, ideology and so on. Perhaps, there is nothing left by it. Of course, some people may argue that there must be a divine self, which is written as “Self” (with capital S) , which must be a permanent entity. Since we do not have any clue about this let us restrict ourselves to the simple one, the self that is very close to our perception. May be we can know something about the bigger Self but only after totally understanding the smaller self.

Now that we have explained about the self we must ask why there is a separation first, between the self and the mind and then between all three. Is there a separation between the self and the mind really? The self says I am the mind, I am the body, I am all the rest that it possesses but it is also asking does the mind need the body for the transformation as if it has disowned the mind and the body. This dilemma may be removed by enquiring and understanding, may be with the help of JK’s teachings, that the self, the mind and the consciousness are all of same nature and existence. And, since the self is an illusion and not a permanent entity whatever it does cannot be accepted or believed as true or a fact. So, we will have to come to at least a temporary conclusion that the self and the mind are same. So, it is not that the self is asking on behalf of the mind but it itself is asking.?

Now, in order to ask such a question like does the mind need the body for its transformation how is it possible at all to ask without the body and even if it asks, where is it sitting outside the body before asking? Any question may arise within us initially in the form of a feeling and then for expressing it the thought takes the help of words (language) or some means because thought may not exist without a language outside the field of feelings (?). What is a feeling and a thought? Without a physical entity like our body can there be any feeling and hence any thought? Because, they are originated in the physical matter of the body and not outside of it. But then how can the self or the mind ask such a question? Because, the self must have separated itself from the mind and the body. This separation between the body and the mind appears as the basic division that has existed causing all kinds of conflicts.? The organism’s fundamental or natural characteristic is the harmonious existence among body, mind and the heart. However, the creation of the self seems to have destroyed this harmony. This may be examined if we can observe the nature of a selfless person, if one exists, or we can observe ourselves through meditation, if possible (?).

Now coming to the meaning of and necessity for transformation let us ask why at all a necessity should arise for the mind to undergo a transformation. By transformation we mean not a movement from one state to another state indicating a kind of positive change but a fundamental change in the form of total deviation from the existing state of disorder. This is always with respect to the mind or the self but not the body. The self has identified the disorder in itself and is now trying to be free from the disorder and call it a transformation. But why did the disorder arise in it? Did the disorder arise only in the mind/self without the body in picture? It cannot be without the body since the self, as another thought form, is originated in the physical matter on the body, as said above. How did the self recognize the disorder without the help of the body or the involvement of the body? Even if we say that the disorder has occurred to the self or the mind its operation or expression must be through the body only, isn’t it? That means both body and mind together taken as an organism must be involved in creating the disorder though the culprit is the mind (self). So, both stand inseparable even in disorder. That means, in order to eliminate the disorder, which may mean for the order to prevail, which we call the transformation, the whole organism must be involved.

Going by this analysis or enquiry one may be compelled to say that the question posed in the beginning may not be relevant at all since it assumes the incomprehensible or untenable division between the mind and the body. Only when the harmony between the body and the mind is lost there can be a disorder and also the question posed.

????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????----------------------------------------