There is a significant difference between ‘saying’ and ‘being.’ All around us, much is being said—some of it makes sense, some doesn’t. Some things resonate within us, while others fail to leave a mark. Upon closely observing this dynamic, two key scenarios emerge.

In the first scenario, we speak with ourselves at the center of what is being said—’I’ am at the center. In the second, ‘I’ am not the focus; instead, the subject being spoken about is at the center. Most people find themselves in the first scenario: they speak and listen with themselves at the center, where what they say is directly connected to or affects them personally. They are not separate from their words. For example, when they talk about devotion, faith, or similar topics, it’s because these things hold personal meaning for them. Their words may not always be precise, but the intent is clear, for they are speaking from personal experience. They are not speaking for someone else—it’s all about their own understanding. Likewise, they listen with themselves in mind: if what they hear resonates positively, it’s good; if it triggers something negative, it’s bad.

In this scenario, what you say reflects what is happening within you—it is an expression of your mental state and circumstances in that moment. While you may not be saying anything untrue, that doesn’t necessarily mean you are speaking an ultimate truth either—you are simply sharing your own thoughts. In this state, deep intellectual analysis is absent; there’s no philosophical depth, and sometimes the words may seem imprecise or inadequate. The lack of linguistic clarity can make communication difficult.

The second scenario occurs when ‘I’ am not the center. I speak not for myself, but for others. Great thinkers and philosophers operate from this state. They can observe their thoughts as detached facts and analyze them without personal attachment. Adopting a ‘witness’ state of mind, they use their sharp intellect to dissect these thoughts and convey them through carefully chosen words. However, if they are not vigilant, their deeply ingrained beliefs or conditioning can influence this analysis. Even when they are alert, their insights remain a product of intellect, which has its limitations. This is knowledge without direct experience. In this scenario, what they say doesn’t impact their personal lives because they are not the subject of their words. It doesn’t imply dishonesty—they are truthful, speaking from a place of intellectual observation. But their words aren’t rooted in lived experience; they emerge from reason and analysis.

For those who speak from this second scenario, their words may not initiate change within their own lives or in the world around them, but they are still listened to, read, and followed because their ideas are logical and well-considered. Their words hold intellectual depth, which impresses people but doesn’t necessarily inspire lasting change. Over time, people begin to realize this. With the greatest respect for intellectuals like Osho, Jaggi Vasudev (Sadhguru), Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and others, I believe they fall into this category. They do not lie or deceive; rather, they speak from a place of intellectual understanding, not from deep personal experience.

An ordinary person like me might get entangled in their words for a time, but nothing transformative comes from it. The biggest challenge I face is that I don’t hear their words as they intend them. The moment their words reach my ears, I filter them through my personal lens, and the meaning changes. Instead of absorbing their words as they are, I place myself at the center, leading to confusion and entanglement. I may even try to change myself based on what they say, but no real transformation occurs because this effort is also rooted in the mind. I try to become something different, and in the process, I may lose myself temporarily. This is the source of confusion. Yet, by God’s grace, I eventually find my way back to being ordinary. This ordinary state is closer to God, and one cannot reach God through intellectual efforts alone.

The word ‘change’ came up earlier. But what is this change? Are we seeing it clearly? There are two types of change. The first is the change that comes through effort. For example, I might think wearing traditional clothes like a kurta-pajama or dhoti will make people perceive me differently, or speaking kindly will make others think I’m good. There is nothing wrong with dressing traditionally or speaking kindly. But the critical question is: am I truly what I am trying to portray? There’s a subtle but important difference between being and appearing. At my core, I am something. Then, through life experiences and learning, I may evolve into something more. For instance, if simplicity and a spirit of service become a part of my nature, I might naturally begin wearing a kurta-pajama, and my behavior will reflect love. This will be effortless. But if I am trying to project myself as a loving person, while change may occur, it won’t be genuine. It will be a performance. Idealism is often built on this kind of pretense—there’s outward display but no inner substance.

The second perspective is that if I speak with the subject at the center and not myself, I won’t change much. But when I place myself at the center of my words, a natural transformation begins within me. For example, if I say, ‘uncertainty is inherent,’ and this truth becomes a part of my being, my entire approach to life will shift. I will become more relaxed, and faith in God will naturally become a part of me. But if I merely state this fact without embodying it, nothing within me will change, and I will continue striving for certainty in life.

Ultimately, it’s not about what I’m saying; it’s about who I am, and this is what makes the difference. When someone speaks from a place of being, their words carry profound weight. This is why figures like Ramana Maharshi, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, and, to a great extent, Mahatma Gandhi, seem so impactful to me.

Anil Maikhuri
29th September 2024

Note: Originally written by me, with grammar correction and language editing assisted by AI.