I was thinking about many distortions to the meaning of love and work in this world. I often see many people repeating the word "Love" without ever contemplating over the meaning of love. Often we say "I" to love a person or a thing. When there is "I", where is the question of love? Can Arjuna love Krishna? So long as the "Ego" remains, where is the question of love? In a worldly sense, love implies taking care of somebody. However, the only question relevant here is "who comes first?". So long as there remains "Ego", it is always "I" that will come first.
We see a famous proverb "Chamri jaye par damri an jaye". It means that a miser may allow his skin to go but not his money. Thus, a miser's "Ego" forms so much of an association with money that he may give away his life for money. The ego forms similar associations with different things such as money, positions, power, relationships, friends, self-image, etc. For example if "Ego" forms a strong association with son, one may give away money for the well being of his son. Is that love or protection of the "Ego" or "Self". Can there be love till there remains "Ego"?
I feel that love is like an interference of the waves. When two waves of the same frequency meet each other an interference is created. In the case of constructive interference, the amplitude of the resultant wave is higher than the sum total of the two waves. The two waves post-interference lose their individual identity and merge into one. Such an interference is not possible with the matter. Whatever way we merge two matters, they are never going to create an interference pattern.
Similarly, so long the "Ego" remains, there is no possibility of love. Love is possible when the "Ego" melts and individuality is lost. In that case, when a being takes the form of a wave, an ego-less existence, and when it meets a wave of a similar frequency, constructive interference takes place. Whatever task they take up, the combined amplitude of the task is far greater than the individual amplitude. Such a merger results in the creation of so many new things in this world.
Most of us look forward to the weakened break. It appears to me as if work for us is just a means to get some money and security. In some cases even powers. Can't we just love the work we do? If our "Ego" gives little space to the attention, we can feel the joy of work. Work allows us to explore so many things. It allows us to connect to life. Our workplaces do not operate in isolation,. They have very close contact with nature and society. It is so much of a joy to see that interaction. For example, in the Government, we make different rules and procedures to facilitate the public. It is interesting to see the interaction of these rules and procedures with the systems of different organizations, We often come to know the difficulties being faced by certain organizations post-framing the rules and procedures and it is so interesting to get the feedback and take corrective actions.
The "Love" with "Work" at any workplace brings us to a state of "Flow". In such a state, we just enjoy the process. Almost the whole of our attention is on the process, the work at hand. There is some sort of constructive interference with the work at hand. Our attention does not wander into the past or future comparing the outcomes with past projects or imagining the rewards in the future. Rather it is completely in the present moment at the work in hand. Love for the work not only makes the work interesting but also allows us to explore the work from many different perspectives. "Flow" allows us to have a constructive interference with the creative powers of the divine. That is what happened in the case of most brilliant scientists, artists, sportsmen, and in fact, all other people who have been pioneers in their fields. However, it seems almost impossible for a strong "Ego" to experience the joy of "Flow" since the focus of a strong "Ego" is always the preservation and promotion of its identity and there is no possibility of having a merger with divine creativity.
Comments