39, 40, 41
39. INTONE A SOUND, AS AUM, SLOWLY. AS SOUND ENTERS SOUNDFULNESS, SO DO YOU.
40. IN THE BEGINNING AND GRADUAL REFINEMENT OF THE SOUND OF ANY LETTER, AWAKE.
41. WHILE LISTENING TO STRINGED INSTRUMENTS, HEAR THEIR COMPOSITE CENTRAL SOUND; THUS OMNIPRESENCE.
I wonder whether or not you have heard about the concept of anti-matter. A new concept has entered recently in the world of physics -- the concept of anti-matter. It has been felt always that nothing can exist in the universe without its opposite. It is impossible to conceive of anything which exists alone without its opposite. The diametrically opposite must be there whether known or not.
The shadow cannot exist without light, life cannot exist without death, morning cannot exist without night, man cannot exist without woman -- or the same with anything you can think of.
The diametrically opposite pole is inevitably needed. This was always proposed in philosophy, but now this is a proposition of physics. And very absurd notions have developed because of this concept. Time moves from the past to the future, but now physicists say that if time moves from the past to the future, there must be somewhere the opposite time process, which moves from the future to the past; otherwise this time process cannot be -- but it is. The opposite, the diametrically opposite must be there somewhere -- anti-time. Moving from the future to the past? It looks very absurd. How can something move from the future to the past?
They also say that matter exists, so anti-matter must be existing somewhere. What will be the anti-matter? Matter is density. Suppose a stone is here in my hand. What is that stone? Around it is space and in the space there is a density of matter. That density is matter. What will be the anti-matter? They say anti-matter will be just a hole in space. Density is matter, and there is also a hole in space with nothing in it. A space will be around it, but it will be just a hole of nothingness. They say anti-matter must exist to balance matter. Why am I talking on this? Because these sutras which are to follow are based on this "anti"phenomenon.
Sound exists, but tantra says sound can exist only because of silence; otherwise sound will be impossible. Silence is anti-sound. So wherever there is sound, just behind it there is silence. It cannot exist without silence; it is the other aspect of the same coin. So I utter a word; for example, Aum. The more I utter it, just side by side, just behind it is the anti-phenomenon, soundlessness. So if you can use sounds as a technique to enter soundlessness, you will enter meditation. If you can use a word to go beyond words, you will move into meditation. Look at it in this way: mind is the word; meditation is no-mind. Mind is filled with sound and words and thought. Just by the corner is the other extreme -- no-mind.
Zen masters have called meditation the state of no-mind. What is mind? If you analyze it, it is a process of thought. Or if you analyze it in terms of physics, then it is a process of sounds. This sound process is mind, then just near it the no-mind exists. And you cannot move into the no-mind without using the mind as the jumping board, because you cannot even conceive of what no-mind is without understanding what mind is. Mind has to be used as a jumping board, and from that jumping board you can have a plunge into the no-mind.
There have been two opposing schools. One school is there -- it is known as "Sankya." Sankya says mind has not to be used, because if you use mind you cannot go beyond it. The same is the teaching of J. Krishnamurti; he is a Sankyaite. You cannot use mind. If you use mind you cannot go beyond it, because the very use of the mind will strengthen it, will make it more powerful. When you use it, you will be in its clutches. Using it, you cannot go beyond it. So don't use mind. That is why Krishnamurti is against all techniques of meditation: because any technique is bound to use mind as a base. Mind has to be used if you are going to use a technique. Any technique is bound to be a sort of conditioning -- or a reconditioning, or an unconditioning, or whatsoever name you give to it, but it is going to be with the mind.
Sankya philosophy says that mind cannot be used: just understand this and take a jump. But yoga says this is impossible. Even this understanding is to be done by mind. Even with this understanding -- that you cannot use mind, that no technique will be of help, that every technique will become a hindrance and whatsoever you do will create a new conditioning -- you will still be using mind, you will move within mind. This too has to be understood by mind.
So yoga says there is no way in which mind is not used; mind will have to be used. It should not be used positively, it should be used negatively. It should not be used in such a way that it is strengthened, it should be used in such a way that it is weakened. And techniques are the ways to use the mind in such a way that you use it to jump beyond it. You use it just to go beyond it -- as a jumping board.
If mind can be used as a jumping board -- and yoga and tantra believe that it can -- then something which belongs to mind has to be trained. Sound is one of the basic things, you can use sound to go into soundlessness.
Next Meditation Technique
