I am fine as I am

 For long there has been a discontent in me that I am not following my "perceived passion". I call it perceived because in order to know that it is indeed my passion I should have tried doing it... but I never did. But I know my heart yearns for it. That discontent only grew as I continued on my current path and I grew older. But as I read and thought more I realized that the passion is itself an attachment when you give it so much importance to it. 

If not following it creates so much discontent it sure is going to be a part of your identity when you pursue it and you will pursue it with so much vigor and passion, that everything else becomes secondary. But is there a problem with following your passion... I don't know. As Gita talks about "Nishkama Karma" i.e work that you do dispassionately but sincerely. There is no desire of some personal gain from that work. Then you know you are an instrument and not the subject and you will not attach much significance to you or your identity and it will not lead to the growth of your 'self'. Also, when you are in a pursuit you are always seeking something which is in the future and giving up your present.

That was a digression from the main point of this blog. 

I recently came across UG Krishnamurti and I found him interesting. Although I don't seem to understand much of what he says and hence can't follow, but there are a few things that are true. Following is text from JSRL Narayana Moorty's Introduction to U.G and his Teaching.

There is no problem with our present life. For thought there seems to be one because it extracts certain knowledge out of past pleasures and pains, compares the present with it passes judgments, avoids the present by concocting a future and pursuing it. But for the comparisons that thought makes there is no problem with our life as it is; and there is no other life. It is precisely our thought of a better state that prevents us from coming to terms with our life as it is.

And towards the end of the article he writes: 

In this muddle of U. G., ourselves, and his conversations or talks with us, we get all mixed up, get separated and get mixed up again, and we haven't the faintest idea of where this is all leading. Where does it, U.G.? 

It does not have to lead anywhere. U. G. constantly reminds us that it is the urge to know and to create a state of permanence that makes us ask all these questions, and when we quit them, everything will be all right, as it should be. You take what comes, and no questions asked. No one is there to keep a tally. No accounts kept. And what's wrong with that? Where is a problem there? What happens, then as U. G. says, would be none of our concern. 

 After reading this and some of what U. G. says, I have realized that I don't have to do anything great or achieve something to say that I have lived a fulfilled life. I am fine as I am. 

Granted, the society gives a great importance to people who have achieved something and they continue to live beyond their death because of what they have done, but it's the individual's thoughts/desires/aspirations or some other reasons that made them do what they did. Not achieving something does not trifle your life. It should not cause me discontent and inner turmoil. Just being is good enough. After all from nature's point of view, just being is good enough like a tree or a creature. You have fulfilled your role by just being there/just living. Rest all is the creation of human thought and societal conditioning.

This does not mean that I will voluntarily stop doing the thing I am passionate about. It means that I will not call it passion, but instead do it because I feel like.. not because it will give me a purpose to my life... not because it's a noble thing to do ... not because it will make me feel important in the eyes of the society.