BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

[Reading from the chat]: “There is a lot of anxiety, helplessness, and worry about how my career will turn out to be after graduation. Sleepless waking nights, whether or not I will not get used to a certain work lifestyle or not; whether capable of this or that. Wanting something in alignment with truth, but life promising something else.”

If you don’t define truth, then the question of alignment will go away. I don’t know actually … but these words might sound but strange to you but they are coming up to say to you now: There is only one solution to the problem of life. And that solution is to see that ‘There is no problem of life.’ You don’t have to solve anything here. You don’t have to resolve anything. Because there is no problem. A problem is just a mental concept. Problem means limitation. Now, a problem is what? Bondage. That’s why we are seeking freedom. The problem is what? Lack. That’s why we’re seeking to up fill that desire. Problem is limitation. But the Truth is not in resonance to these kinds of terms.

Nothing here has to be fixed.
Nothing here has to be resolved.

Nothing here is going wrong or right, for that matter. Because these are just terms. There is no such actual thing as wrong or right. So, nothing will go wrong … but don’t expect things to go right.

Throw away these opposites.
Throw away this intellectual box.

Because this box is what limits you. You want to live on one side of the box. You want to live on one side, the good side of the box. Good, truth, happy; all of this is one side of the box. And you want to negate the opposite side. But Your Truth is much beyond these opposites. What we are seeking for (what we think we are seeking for) is very limited actually. We are seeking for the opposite of bondage, which is just trying to live on one side of the box. ‘That side is the bad side; bondage. I don’t want to bound. I want to be on the good side, freedom, joy and bliss and all the good things are here; love and all this.’

Throw away this box. It is only notional. There is no such box in reality. There is no such thing as bondage. There is no such thing as up or down. These are just constructs; mental constructs. And these mental constructs have bound us … (not really, because then it would actually work, but it seems to play that way).

Do you know this is not messing up your recipe? Nor it is necessarily going to give you a ‘three- star’. What is that? A French rating system; very popular.

Sangha: Michelin.

A: Michelin three-star rating for your dish. It doesn’t have to be this way or that way.

It just IS …what it IS.

If we stop picking and choosing, grasping and avoiding, life is very, very, super-simple and easy. Super, super simple and easy. The only lack of ease comes because of our habit of saying [Makes grabbing gesture] ‘I got this, I’m getting this, I want this.’ Now, this is just a made-up play. It is just made-up, this idea of getting any truth as knowledge; the idea that you will get some truth as knowledge, like mental knowledge. It is just a made-up idea about the work, about anything in the world. Nobody knows anything. We just have terms for it and we think we know it.

[Asks someone in sangha]: What did ‘he’ [that teacher] say?

S: The difference between knowing the name of something … and Knowing something.

A: Yes. So, he said often in the world, this is very confused: To know the name of something verses to Know something. And all our knowing that we think we know is just to collect a collection of names and put relationships between those names and say ‘I know this how this is; this is how that is.’ It’s just words. It’s just language that we’ve collected. But we don’t know anything.

S: Isn’t it that I can only grasp at the narrative?

A: Yes, you can only grasp at the narrative.

S: So, the narrative is some visions of the past, sensory perceptions. Would we say that that is the mind? I’m trying to …

A: Okay, let’s go slowly so we can see this really clearly. Now let’s start with objects of the world. Now what would a grasping of the objects of the world be? What is the difference between wanting an object and having it?

S: You stop wanting it.

A: Yes, but what is the actual physical difference? If I want a strawberry and then I have it, what is the difference?

S: The narrative changes, first it was, I want it, I need it ….

A: Yeah, first there was a notion ‘I want, want, want’ a particular set of sensations and then a set of sensations is experienced, that is to ‘have it’ (the object) but in that, what really changed for me?

S: Nothing.

A: Nothing changed you see? If you want a big house, a huge bed, whatever you could want, what is it actually except some sensational experience? What really changes? Nothing really changes. Then that would mean that all this (makes an action of grasping) worldly materialistic desire doesn’t give us as much as we think it will. Because what happens; what do you actually get?

S: Fears of losing.

A: [Chuckling] Fears of losing is another by-product. First you want, want, want, then you don’t want to lose and sometimes you say ‘Oh, why did I want this, I want to lose it.’ You see? So, it comes with all of these by-products also.

Now, without the narrative, as you say, is any of that play possible?

So, that is what we mean by grasping. Grasping is only grasping at the concept or grasping at the notion or grasping at the narrative.

Which means that first we have to give some acceptance to the validity of some thought, some concept, including the concept ‘I want’. Because when we give validity to the concept ‘I want’ then what do we believe our representation to be? Who are you when you want?

S: Limited.

A: Limited, isn’t it? So, in our wanting, we buy into our idea of our limitation. And any limitation means duality, separation, ego.

So now, what naturally plays out … like a child crying as soon as it is born; is a child crying because it’s thinking ‘I want some attention now?’ It is not wanting anything and yet naturally, some actions are playing out. It knows how to drink milk. Is it saying ‘I really want to drink milk!’ So, these natural actions can still unfold without this conceptual grasping, you see.

That is why it’s important what you said, that the grasping that we are speaking of is not material but is conceptual.

S: So, in that same way, like you said that the child is crying naturally, when did I learn to do this grasping?

A: As soon we started the labeling.

S: Like ‘This is your name, this is your …’

A: With labels came separation, with labels came the idea of wanting, of not wanting, all of these things.

S: So, within the play, Father, suppose if the perception now decides ‘I will pick this bottle?’ So, you’ll actually know if something needs to be straightened out or …?

A: In a simplistic way, I can say yes. Consciousness will unfold in the most beautiful way, but what I really want to say is that even that is a narrative because even that has a preference in mind that it should be this way or that way, and that is what I talk about when I say surrendering with one eye open: ‘When I let go, will you guarantee me that things will go well?’ And I will say it depends on your definition of what ‘well’ is. If it is still ‘my way’ then there is no guarantee like that.

When we say ‘Will things also go fine when I let go?’ if fine means that they must go according to your projections or your ideas of how they must be, then there is no guarantee like that.

Then if you were intelligent you would say: ‘Then what do you mean by fine?’ And I would say ‘Everything.’

S: Is that what it means when they say you allow anything, even this expression from this body; just being open. Anything can unfold, not because I think it’s right or wrong or any judgement … without the narrative, then whatever is unfolding in through this body or that body, there is no distinction left between this or that body.

A: And no then folding or unfolding. We don’t have to settle for some term. And all terms are being used provisionally. So, it’s not that things are going to unfold, you see, because on one hand you say ‘Nothing ever happened’ and on the other hand you can say ‘Everything will unfold beautifully.’ Both are true and untrue.

So, this wanting to ‘understand how will it be’ … there is no true answer to that.

There are two approaches we can take and say” ‘Everything will be fine, don’t worry’ then at least you’re free from the worry, of ‘How will it be, how will it be?’

And the second could be” Forget it. Nobody can tell you how it would be. Nobody can ever give you an answer for something like that because there is no answer for anything at all, ever. And actually, even that is not an answer. [Chuckling]

Q: Does that mean I can discard also everything?

A: Discard everything … in the sense …?

Q: Discard everything.

A: Whatever can be discarded should be discarded.

Q: So, that includes everything.

A: Yes, if that included everything, then everything.

Q: Everything, everything. Something says inside ‘It can’t be that.’

A: That is also something, so discard it.

Q: Everything?!

A: Yes, everything. [Chuckles] Yeah, this is good. This is what I’ve been saying actually; everything.

Q: Even this discarding…

A: Even discarding, and even everything. [Laughter in the room] Something-nothing and something-everything. Discard everything.

Now, I could ask you then: Did you also go?

Okay, but I don’t want you to conclude an answer. Maybe at best you can check.

When you discarded everything, did you also go?

Q: Yes, No.

A: Exactly, good. That’s the best answer; yes and no. It is not in that box. Everything that you thought about YourSelf can go … your birth, your death, that is gone; your life, your story, your good things, your bad things; everything is gone. And yet … something.

This is very good to clarify sometimes like this because it gives me an opportunity to reiterate that I’m saying, Your Notionless Existence actually IS Your Notion-LESS Existence. Everything, you see; everything.

So ‘doing’ is a notion, (just to connect a little bit to what we were saying) ‘desire’ is a notion, ‘duality’ is a notion, ‘time’ is a notion, ‘space’ is a notion.

S: So, when we say it is a notion then we can’t even have a notion that ‘it’s gone’.

A: Yeah, then ‘coming, going’ … because time, I said that all of this can only happen in time.

S: I’m just saying, when you say ‘Everything is ‘gone’ … then you said ‘Leave gone.’ Like you said ‘Gone is also gone.’ So, I’m just connecting it with what you said. It’s not as if it was there and now it’s gone; it was never there to begin with. It was something; I had this notion…

A: But leave this notion also.

S: Yeah, the mind is always trying to conclude something. I can see that.

A: … to conclude something. Yeah. The mind is a conclusion machine. (And even this is a conclusion.) [Chuckling] The Truth does not rest in this box. Like I defined for her, which is ‘The truth is nothing / no, it is not nothing.’ … ‘The truth is something / no, it is not something’ / ‘It is everything / no, it is not everything’ … and it is not NOT any of these, all of these or none of these also.

You cannot conclude the Truth. If you think ‘You have found the Truth’ that thought is not true.

So, in a way (if we feel like we still need an explanation): What are we really after, in a sense? We are after something, which must be Here Now. If it comes as result of some steps I have to take then it is not the Truth that Always Is. So, if I had to think a certain thing or I have to do a certain thing or I have to be a certain way to get to the Truth then that is the truth I’m not interested in. I’m interested in a Truth, which IS Isness. So, I’m interested in a Truth which just IS.

Now, if I’ve constructed bridges to get to the Truth, you see, then it can make me believe MySelf to be something that is apart from the Truth, that’s why I need a bridge to get to the Truth. Whether that bridge is a thought, a practice, whatever it is.

So, in the notion of the bridge is the idea of my separation from the Truth.

So, in way, the only bridge then is to burn the bridge. That is why it is deconstructive. To construct would be to build the bridge to get to the Truth. But because it seems like ‘I still need a bridge’ then I’m giving you the bridge that is to ‘burn the bridge’. You see? … which is also a bridge, it doesn’t need to be done, but if it feels like something has to be done, if it feels like we have a choice: burn the bridge. [Silence]

[Laughter]

Whatever bridge you have to get to the Truth: Burn the bridge. That is the bridge.

S: So, separation anxiety comes.

A: Separation anxiety, say more …

S2: When you said I had to locate the bridge …

A: What did you find?

S2: The ideas, the notions of me.

A: And you burn those. Then?

[Pause]

It’s very simple what I’m saying; I’m saying: Do you need a bridge to sit where you’re sitting now?

You don’t need a bridge to sit where you’re sitting now.

What is more primal to you than sitting?

S: Being

A: What is more primal to You than Being? That is what you’re looking for. (Apparently.)

So, if you don’t even need a bridge (or any steps to sit where you’re sitting now) how to build a bridge to that which is even more intimate?

What series of steps can I give you?
What Truth can I speak that will bring you to This?
You see?
I wish I could speak the Truth.

My child, my advice for you really is: Before you can say anything about the mind, see the mind for what it is.

For a few years, I kept reminding you that the only thing that will help you is to let go, to surrender, at my Master’s feet [whom you also love]. But even this, you are not really able to hear, because the trouble is you are not yet able to distinguish between what is mind and what is not. And this causes a lot of confusion sometimes; a lot of pride, sometimes a lot of humility, sometimes a lot of confusion, sometimes a lot of seeming-clarity because you are riding this roller coaster of the mind thinking that you are getting rid of the mind. I’m not saying this as any sort of insult or any sort of affront or anything. I’m just saying it like a doctor. The doctor is saying that you are not while you are saying that you are taking the precautions … but you have not understood what is the precaution that you have to take.

So, I would invite you to look at (before you make any conclusion) look at what you refer to the mind as. What are these thoughts, what are these messages? What is this voice that you call the mind? Just look at that. Don’t claim anything of what it is saying as ‘you’.

There is really no point speaking about anything else if this fundamental aspect is not clear.

If you can’t see a thought for a thought, if you can’t see the mind for just the mind, then only confusion has to follow, and this confusion will want to get everybody involved in it; everything involved, everybody involved. But the way to step back from this conclusion is to see that this is what a thought is. Notice that this is a thought. It is just a thought. Every claim that it is making, every seeming-piece of knowledge it seems to hold, is garbage. It is just a thought. Then you will start to notice your attachments to the mind. So, before we get into any other discussion, start to see that ‘This voice, which is just a thought, I have taken to be my voice, I have taken to be something which is true.’

Otherwise, this recording device called the mind can be full of the best scriptural knowledge also. You can say the best-sounding things but it is still the mind. And this is how it functions. Every day some new things, some new drama, some new excitement, some story.

So, maybe it was my mistake actually to suggest surrender to you. Maybe even before that surrender can happen, you just need to look and see: What is it that you are representing? Have you seen (you speak so much of the mind but have you seen) what this mind is? And if you have seen it then why do you continue to represent it?

And even now, you may forget what I’m saying because this is the nature of the mind. So, if you find yourself taking a position, which might seem like it is a position in response to what I said, then notice that that is the mind. There is something more natural, more simple, at the core of our very existence. In fact, the Existence is made of that essence. But this essence cannot be distilled in some concept, into some idea. And the more you try to do that, the more you will struggle, the more you will suffer.

[Reading from the chat]: “Thank you, Father. I will practice silence and will abide in silence.”

A: This is not what I am saying. Now like an innocent child, just look at what I am saying now. Just look at what I’m saying now. In everything that I said, did I say anywhere that you have to practice silence or abide in silence? Now this translation (listen carefully now, because if you miss this point, you will keep missing it over and over) this translation that happens between ‘What he is saying’ to ‘I know what he is saying; he is telling me to be in silence’ … this is the mind. Are you getting this? This is how it gets lost in translation. I am saying ‘ABC, ABC’ but your mind is saying he is saying ‘XYZ, XYZ’ and then it feels to you that this is what it is. ‘He is saying XYZ.’ Don’t make anything up about what I am pointing to. You don’t know. To claim to know is the mind.

To claim to know is the mind.

So, I said whatever I said and you say ‘This is just what I will do; I have heard you’ … but I never said that. You translated it with your mental capacities and you said ‘This is what he was saying.’ And this is what keeps us in trouble. That’s why these days in Satsang, I often start asking: ‘So, what are you hearing?’ Sometimes I will give you a question [enquiry question] to ask and then ask you: ‘So, what is the question you are really enquiring with?’ Because I notice it so often that sometimes I’m saying (whatever) but what the mind already, even before you can start looking at it that way, already got in the way and [Gestures to scramble] gets very strict and says ‘Yeah, this is what he is saying.’

This is how it plays out. Because this is like a habit. But actually, it is something deeper than that, which is the very basis of the ego, which is ‘my way’. The very basis of the ego is ‘My way.’ So, even when the Master is saying something, he is saying ‘Okay, look at this this way’ [but the mind comes with] ‘That is what he is saying, but for me, what works best is if I do this.’ It presents it to you claiming to be your friend. This is the mind.

That’s what I’m saying, that sometimes you are not yet seeing what even the mind is, even though we speak so much about it. It is this guy that comes in the middle and says ‘No’ but for you, for your way. ‘This is what works best.’ It comes and mixes that up. Like Guruji [Sri Mooji] says ‘I make chocolate cakes for you but the mind comes and mixes mud in it’ … but you don’t realize it. But this is the very basis of egotism. This ‘My way; me, me, me.’ Like ‘This is what he is saying, this is what I have understood, this is what I have to do.’ All of this, it doesn’t need; the words of Satsang don’t need your intervention in this way at all.

I said something very simple. I said: Notice this voice which claims to be speaking the truth in your head. That is the mind. Just notice that.

But it came and sold you the story of silence in the middle. Did I say it like that? That is the mind. Notice this. This is the mind. Okay?

There is a nice report which I want to read.

[Reading from the chat]: “Father, this is so crucial what you are saying. Not seeing what the mind is, is the problem. Seeing it here, too, that so often that I go with the interpretation of your words.”

A: This is the thing, You don’t need interpretation. because these words are already one level of interpretation, which I keep struggling to tell you that I cannot speak the Truth. And yet I’m trying to interpret in some way so that I can show it to you, in a way; so that you can catch it, in a way. But then if you add another layer of interpretation on top, then it is really many times lost in the translation.

So, it is very good that we started to notice these things because this is what makes us a long-term seeker, these kinds of things.

Q: Father, whatever pointer I follow, I can still perceive (with some distance maybe) the sense of the ‘I-thought’ … the emotional energy and interpretations moving through. Is that, okay? Should they just be left alone? Do they ever disappear?