BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

‘Original.’ What do we mean by original? What is the most original to you? What is that which is most original? Most original means that, if you could leave everything, what would still remain? What would still remain, if anything remained?

This is like a Neti-Neti (not this, not this).

What does it mean? The Sages said ‘That which changes is not your Ultimate Reality. That which comes and goes is not your Ultimate Reality.’ Then the good students said ‘Okay, so then let’s truly explore this. It seems quite simple, that if that which comes and goes is not my Ultimate Reality, then to find what is my Ultimate Reality … (I’ll tell you later why I’m saying ‘Ultimate Reality’) … we must then see what is Here, if anything, which does not come and go. We must check for ourselves: What is it that does not come and go?’

What is original to you that is not a coming and going?

So, what can you say about the appearances of the world? This room was not here fifteen minutes ago; it was something else. So, this is constantly changing. It comes and goes. In our life, we have never had the experience of something, in exactly the same way, a second time. We might feel like ‘Oh, but we have Satsang every day, Monday to Friday’ but every moment is different. Not just the physical configuration (it can feel like ‘Oh, it’s different because everybody is sitting in a different place’) but so much is different: The attentiveness, the energy flow, the transmission, what is being spoken.

So, this moment of your outward experience will never ever be the same again. This is unique. You will taste this, only this, Right Now. Therefore, is it Ultimately Real, Now? No. Because it comes and goes. It is a beautiful discovery because even in the enjoyment of this moment, we bring more light to it. So, this is the only time I’m going to taste this: Now. So, it’s tasted. But when we are checking on the Ultimate originality, the Ultimate Reality, you see that this will come and go. All of this will come and go.

Then what about the sensations that we call the body? I’m not even getting into the cellular structure because we know that cells are created and depleted. Every moment, new cells are being born and old cells are going (apparently). So, this body is constantly changing. But even these sensations that we call the body are always changing. They are changing; they come and go. So, not this.

What is next? You say today; let’s hear. World, we saw; body, we saw (which is also the part of the world). What next? [Silence] Nothing? Done? [Chuckles]

Q: Emotion.

Emotion. With emotions also, you can feel that (because of our labels) we know what grief is, what joy is, what bliss is, what happiness is, what peace is but actually, we never really taste the same emotion twice in their exact same characteristic. There is always some difference, always some change in gradation and it’s so subtle that, through our labels, we think we know something about it. But we don’t.

Guruji [Sri Mooji] takes this very nice example where he says: If you say you have stage fright and you’re asked to make a public speech and you go up there, you can feel like ‘Oh, I’m so nervous. I have anxiety.’ So, notice that sensation, sensational quality. But if you are very excited about going on a holiday, if you’re very excited about doing something, a very similar emotional quality is tasted. But we don’t call that anxiety, we call that excitement, joy. ‘I am feeling so happy that I’m going on vacation.’

But if you look at just the spectrum (or the qualitative aspect of the spectrum) you see that it’s similar. But it’s never really the same. This is also constantly changing. So, emotion is also changing so it’s not your Ultimate Reality.

Then, thoughts. So, many of us try to get rid of our thoughts. But today, you try to do the opposite: If the thought comes, you hold it. Hold it for ten seconds. Don’t let it go. As your next thought comes, you hold it for ten seconds.

Who can do it? It might keep coming back. Firstly, when I say to let your next thought come, it seems the mind becomes quiet. [Chuckles] Isn’t it? When I say ‘When it comes, you hold it for ten seconds, over there only. Come!’ Just like these words are spoken, they come and go. You cannot hold it really. It’s just like a voice like this which is speaking. It cannot be held. So, for thoughts, it’s completely clear: it comes and goes.

Then what else is there?

So, every sensory perception we looked at. These inner perceptions (let’s include memories, imagination, thoughts, emotion) everything is coming and going. Now what is left? Is that all there is to you? Just everything that is perceived? Is that all there is to you?

Q: Dreams.

Dreams also come and go. So, all these; the entire universe’s realms … (okay, let’s not digress too much) … they come and go. So, is that all there is to you?

Q: Thoughts.

Thoughts we said.

Q: The feeling that I’m a separate entity.

Feeling? All feelings; I’m saying that all feelings, they come and go. No feeling is constant. We just talked about that also, where we might feel like I’m experiencing the same feeling but even that, qualitatively, is different from moment to moment.

States: waking state, dream state, sleep state also comes and goes. So, that also cannot be your Ultimate Reality.

Then?

[Reading from chat]: “Concepts, knowledge about objects change.”

Yes, all concepts, all knowledge.

So, then what is left? We looked at all perceptions, all appearances. Have you also gone?

Q: Observer.

Observer. This observer, what can we say about this one? Whether you call it observer, perceiver, witness; who is witnessing all of these? Does that also come and go? And how is to be known?  Who is observing?

Let’s start with a simpler question: Who is observing?

Q: I am.

You are. You see? That is undeniable. Because you’re not reporting on something which she is experiencing …, you’re saying ‘I am perceiving this. I am perceiving this.’

But here, there is a conundrum. ‘I am perceiving’ …, and yet who is this ‘I’?

So, we might say ‘I don’t know.’ But how do you call it ‘I’ then? Because when you say ‘I am witnessing, I am perceiving’ and then you say ‘But, who is this ‘I’?’  … ‘I don’t know’ then how can you say ‘I am perceiving?’

So, you don’t know from here: [Points to the head] You cannot, in fact, know from here. You cannot know even emotionally what this is. But how are you so sure that you are perceiving? It will sound crazy, no? If I say to you that ‘Actually you are not perceiving, Gabriella is perceiving on your behalf’ you’ll say ‘What is this crazy talk? Of course, I am perceiving.’

Like somebody asked about pain. If I say to her ‘No, No, you are not perceiving this pain, somebody else is’. She’ll say ‘I wish it was that way!’ [Laughs]

So, how is this possible, that on one hand we say that ‘I don’t know who this is’ and yet it is clear, that it is ‘I’?

~ ~ ~

.

.

What kind of knowing is this? Papaji [Sri Poonja] said, ‘The only way to escape death is to Know Thy Self Now.’ So, what kind of Knowing is this? Why do we capitalize this ‘K’? Is there a way for me to escape death by knowing’ something? If I knew that the world is round then how can that help me versus if it’s flat? How will I escape death if I know something? It’s just a fact. So, then it must be talking about a different knowing, not just a mental knowing; not a conceptual knowing.

Now the funny thing about a Satsang like this (and it might be happening to some of you who are new, that ‘This sounds completely intellectual’) actually, it’s completely anti-intellectual or conceptual. I’m saying that we cannot know any Truth in that way. And yet, the Master said ‘Know Thy Self.’ Everyone, from Socrates downwards, from our Sages, from the Upanishads downwards, say ‘Know YourSelf, Know YourSelf, Know YourSelf.’

Yet, when I try to know something, I don’t succeed. If I make any conclusion, life shows me that it is false. Everything thing that I’ve known, life has shown me that it is nonsense. So, now, how do I sort this out? How do I sort this out!? On one hand, I say I cannot know. Just by having five hundred concepts about something, I don’t know it. And yet, the Master has said ‘Know Thy Self Now and escape death.’

So, we came to this point now where we saw that the world is changing, changing; body is changing, changing; emotions are changing, changing; thoughts are changing, changing; everything is changing, changing. Then we came to this point where we said that the observer, the one who Sees all of this, is changing. And we didn’t just leave it at that. We say how natural it is for us to say ‘I’. That ‘I am observing, I am the witness.’ And yet we have no idea about this ‘I’.

Some have ideas about this ‘I’ but it’s better that we throw those ideas away [Chuckling] because those don’t help. Whatever ideas we have about this ‘I’, it’s better to throw those away because those are just labels and these labels don’t help when life is throttling our throat. [Chuckles] Ideas don’t help. So, we’re looking for something which is more tangible than just a label. If instead of soul, I called that apple, if instead of Atma I said potato; it’s just a label. How does it matter? In fact, it’s a beautiful experiment. Instead of pain you call it something else which you’ve related with something else so far. You say (let’s try potato) …, you can say ‘I have so much potato in my body.’’ I know it can sound crazy [Laughing] but the fact is that we feel… [Laughter in room] There is a point here okay [Laughing] as unbelievable as it might sound. [Looking at a Sangha member] You have no potato in the body today?

So, what happens is that when we change the label, we see that we’ve suddenly thrown away the photocopy version of this world. We live in this world of ‘photocopy reality’ which means the conceptual version. I’m sitting in Satsang, he’s the Master, I’m the disciple; these kinds of things are just concepts about what is happening. It has nothing to do with the reality of what is happening.

In the same way, if we say ‘This is what I’m experiencing’ we don’t truly know …, and that experience is also constantly changing. But our label makes us feel that we have some hold on this reality. To the mind, this world is too chaotic. It’s crazy! Everything is always changing. So, it makes these concepts available to us so that it can feel like our limited idea has some hold over this world. ‘I know left is left and right is right.’ There is no such thing as left or right. But it can feel like ‘Okay. At least I have some grip on this world because this is left and this is right.’

In the same way, it feels ‘I know something because I know what this emotion is, what this sensation is.’ But we don’t know what pain is, what grief is. We don’t know any of this. But it can feel too strong to taste it, empty of these notions, as long as we have a limited idea about ourself.

So, this ‘I’ therefore is not just a label. The pointer, of course, is the label. When we say ‘I’ it is pointing to something which is a label. When you think ‘I’ it is pointing to something. But who is the ‘I’ that is perceiving?

Who is the ‘I’ that is perceiving?

Thinking about it will not help. Because you do not have to think really. It’s a deeper Knowing.

All the Sages have said ‘Remain as the witness.’ To whom do they say this? Who should remain as the witness? Is it telling the body to always remain as the witness? Is that instruction to the body? ‘Remain as the witness of everything. Don’t blink! [Chuckles] Don’t blink when you remain as the witness. Don’t blink because if you blink you will not know what is happening in the world.’ Is that what the instruction is for? It cannot be. So, what is this, to remain as a witness? Can an emotion remain as a witness? Emotion is witnessing something? Can a thought remain as a witness? Can a thought remain at all? It cannot remain. So, who is here to remain as a witness?

This is where our concepts fail. But this is where You succeed. The concepts fail, but You succeed.

The frustration in Satsang comes why? The frustration in the spiritual path or Satsang comes because you feel that it’s just like a classroom. In a classroom (suppose it’s a geography class) and you’re not understanding anything. ‘Tropic of Cancer, tropic of Capricorn, equator, tch!’ Nothing seems to stick. If the teacher asks you ‘Is the Tropic of Cancer above the Equator or is it the Tropic of Capricorn?’ and you say ‘I don’t know’ then what happens? The teacher says ‘I told you a hundred times and you still don’t know. Get out!’ [Chuckles] That feels like you failed. But Satsang is that place where if you know, then I’m pointing you to something deeper. (Not that you failed or something.) If you think you know, then that is not it.

So, if you feel that you can say that ‘I don’t know really’ that means that you’ve given up on this apparatus, [Pointing to the head] this conceptualizing apparatus. You’ve run out of your beautiful concepts. So, you don’t know.

But the funny thing is, when you say ‘I don’t know’ this ‘I’ is still there. It seems like ‘Whatever I might do, I can’t get rid of this ‘I’. Everything else comes and goes but I remain, as some sort of a witness.’

Now, can this Perceiver be perceived? Guruji [Sri Mooji] says this is his piranha question.

So, we simplified it. We perceive all of this and everything that is perceived is constantly coming and going. Now it’s a very simple question. (Don’t worry about what is ‘piranha’ and all of that.) It’s logical. All of this is perceived. What about the perceiver itself?

Again, I’ve given you another clue. But it’s very natural for us to say ‘I’m perceiving. I’m seeing. I’m perceiving. I’m witnessing.’

If you feel that it cannot be perceived, then how do you know it is ‘I’ that perceives?

If you feel, it can be perceived, then show me the color of this ‘I’ …, the quality, any one quality; one attribute. Because perceiving means to perceive some quality, some attribute.

Tell me? [Looks around the room]

Q: Self-perceiving.

A: As what?

Q: Self.

A: But how do you know it is perceiving? Do you see it? Like, is there a shape to it? A size to it?  Can we say that perceiving is over there and this is what it looks like? Therefore, it’s not like our usual perception. Our usual perception has color, shape, size. How do we perceive something that doesn’t have any of these qualities?

This ‘I’ …, which quality does it have?

Q: Existence.

A: Existence; a sense of Being, Presence.

Q: Silence.

A: Silence is a nice word, but it is not a silence which has an opposite. It is not a silence which has an opposite which is noise. It is not in the realm of opposites like … [Remains silent] …, and now it is gone. ‘Ah, that silence. It went away from one second ago.’ It is not something which can be opposed or resisted. It remains; no matter how many waves are there on the ocean, this remains. So, it is always silent in that sense …, but not in the sense of silent it noisy.

[Reading form chat]: “In that nothing-ness, I don’t find myself as no-thing.”

So, this ‘I’ which does not find their-self as no-thing, do you find it as something? You will not find it as something also.

That is why I like word ‘no-thing’. You can use some other word. [Smiles] It’s okay. But definitely not a ‘something’. Because already you are saying ‘In the nothing, so there is no something there.’ See? (I don’t know if you are really listening to what I am saying or you are already contemplating what to say next.  So, just see if you can listen for a bit.) In that no-thing-ness, no-thing-ness means that no something is there. No something is there. You say that ‘I’ do not find myself as nothing (or no-thing). So, no something is there. YOU are there to either to find yourself or not. So, this ‘I’ cannot be a ‘something.’

I use the term ‘no-thing’. You can say whatever you want.

These days I have started saying very much that the thing is that you have to include, include, include, everything into Awareness. Then do not forget to invite the elephant to this party of the ants. [Smiles] And I know that these are poetic descriptions. But when you invite your non-phenomenal in to yourself (when you include your ‘non-phenomenal self’ in to the definition of yourself) then you see that all our grievances, all our pettiness and selfishness, start to seem so meaningless. Everything which has so much concern for this ‘me, me, me, me’ starts to dissolve.

Then we come to that point where, like Sage said, this lane is very narrow. You cannot walk on it. This lane is very narrow. If what I am is that individuality, then God is not. When God IS, then I am not. Because in this ‘God and me’ you want to make this a love marriage between God and me. We start spirituality feeling like ‘Okay, I am going to have an arranged marriage with God and we will have beautiful friendship.’ [Smiles] Actually, as you start walking towards this chapel, you will find this ‘me’ at every step. You will not be able to place yourself; you will not find any other party except God. So, when you having the darshan of God there is no ‘me’ left. That is true darshan; God tasting God. And just like any relationship, the only thing that causes trouble in this relationship is ‘ego’ …, the sense of ‘me.’

[Reading from chat]: “Beloved Father, in notion-less Existence, which itself is Awareness…”

It is true what you are saying but the term that we imply (has a) slight qualitative distinction. Let’s say (for the sake of some correctness of term) ‘in my notion-less Existence, the Truth of this Self is completely apparent, which in itself is without distinction.’

[Reading from chat]: “In notion-less existence, which itself is Awareness, there is no ‘I’.”

We can also say there is only ‘I’. It depends on what we use the term ‘I’ for.

We can say ‘Only the Self Is’ or we can say ‘There is no ‘I’.

If we are referring to anything as ‘I’ which is limited then, of course, there is no such ‘I’. But if you mean the Absolute, the Self. This Self is also a term which is confusing for many because in Vedanta, we call this Self  ‘The Absolute’. But in Buddhism it can be that ‘the self’ is the egoic sense of self. They would say ‘the non-self’. So, don’t worry so much about the terms.

But This, the ‘I’ that is Aware of my Existence, is not somebody else and it is not ‘I’ which can be put into any conceptual blocks. This ‘I’ which was not born and is not going to die. This ‘I’ which is the eternal subject, in a way, That which is Aware of every subject/object relationship, this ‘I’ is all there is.

[Reading from chat]: “Then where does this ‘I’ of Awareness pop up?”

Tell me about the time that Awareness was not there.

You say that ‘Awareness pops up.’ The Sages said ‘That which comes and goes is not the ultimate Reality.’ So, if someone says ‘Even this Awareness comes and goes’ …, if Awareness also comes and goes, then who sees this coming and going? Or who is aware of this?

That which is aware of Awareness coming and going is Awareness. This is what I mean by Awareness; not what you are thinking of it as.

Bhagavan [Sri Ramana Maharshi] started his book ‘Be As You Are’ with ‘You are the Self. You are not this.’ Finished! That book is a unique one (‘Be As You Are’) because the instruction is ‘Read only as much as you have to.’ It’s a rare book. Most books come to the conclusion at the end. This book says: ‘We will start from the beginning. You are the Self. You are not this limited one which you take on the pretense of being; that you imagine yourself to be. You are the Self.’ No strategy, no tactic, no practice. As Guruji [Sri Mooji] would say ‘I am the limitless One.’

You are the Self.

I was reading [Chuckles] on Facebook a quote that I’d said. It was nice. It said ‘God on this side, God on that side, God is what you’re tasting, God is what you’re smelling, God is what you’re hearing, God is what you’re seeing, God is the One that is Seeing.’ (Something like that. It was more articulate.) Once it hits home like this that in Your naturalness, is shanti, is peace, is there any distinction? Maybe you can contemplate this for a minute.

The mind can sell you the story that even in peace, there is inherent separation. You will find that actually nothing is a distinction. Even the sensations which claim to be the sensations of separation are within the One wholeness of You, of Your Being.

Then it’s best, in a way, that we don’t use our language; or labels at least. All language is a set of labels. But if we have to use some language, then use the term that you feel is the most Divine. Some might say Self, some might say Truth, some might say Guruji, some might say God. That ‘God is everywhere’ is very commonly spoken. But usually the way it is used is that ‘God is everywhere but me.’

You are the Self.

It’s not that what the mind is saying really applies to anything tangible that is here. It is not that the tangible person is here and you have to come in denial of it and see a greater Self. It is that this person never actually was here. There is no tangible entity that is the person. It is just an energy construct. Nobody can tell me whose money it is in your bank account. Whose money is that? Is it this body’s money? The body doesn’t care. Do you think the body wants a new cell phone? It would rather have an ice cream or something. [Chuckles] But even that, the body doesn’t say. The body is just like a doll. We project that ‘Oh, this one is Barbie. This one is Inspector Gadget.’ We project those ideas and labels: She is this, he is this. Just like dolls; a play with dolls. ‘Let’s get those dolls married, facing the North.’ A doll wedding. So, this is like that.

You are the Self. You are not this body. You are not who the mind is claiming you to be. So, these notions don’t apply to You. That’s why they can be let go of.

Now, Bhagavan must have realized that for many, many [Beings] that just to remind you that ‘You are the Self’ is not enough. Just to remind you that ‘You are the Self’ is not enough, so there is a next chapter. Now, I might get the sequence a bit wrong, or I might present a different sequence, but I would say that the next chapter could be ‘Surrender’.

What does surrender mean? That even if you consider yourself yet to be limited, even then, you have come to trust a greater power. Even if you consider yourself to be a limited entity, you have come to trust a greater underlying Presence; whether appearing in an outer form of the Master or within the Divine Presence of Your Being, of the Satguru within; Your intuitive Presence. And if you find that this one is the Divine Presence, then you can safely allow these notions to be [absorbed] by that Divine.

What are we surrendering? When we say ‘I surrender my life’ …, what are we actually surrendering? [Silence] We’re surrendering all ideas of control. We’re surrendering all ideas of ‘Move this way or that way’. We’re not talking about the surrender which is ‘half-surrender’…, like ‘Bhagavan, I surrender, but make sure I go left. You drive this car, please. I had it over to You, but you have to go left.’ [Chuckles] That would be no surrender. We’re not talking about that surrender. We’re talking about that surrender which says ‘Left, right, stay here, move backwards, forwards; You do and You experience.’

What is this? Notion-less-ness. Coming back to the same place. When we surrender this [waves his hand past his forehead, signifying thoughts] what is left for me to do? None of what the mind is saying. Pure notion-less-ness.

Then Bhagavan said (actually, first, he probably said) ‘There is Self-inquiry.’ If you ask yourself ‘Who are you? Who am I?’ …, or he will say ‘What does ‘I’ represent?’ And sincerely! Like maybe we’ve done a disservice to the inquiry by making it [Sits up stiff and very serious] ‘Who am I?’ But no; sincerely, who are you? Who am I?

[Someone says]: ‘So, don’t use it as a mantra.’

Anything with devotion can serve as a good mantra, but I’m saying that it’s a question; it’s inquiry. Who are you? And on what basis are you making the claim of your limitation? You’ll find notion after notion; a house of cards made out of notions. ‘I was born here, then I lived there then I went to there and then this.’ It’s like a complete hall of mirrors. You find that notion, then you look and there’s another notion. But who are you? You cannot find the Self in that way.

What are we back to? Notion-less-ness. You cannot find this one. And it becomes clear that I Am That about which nothing can truly be spoken. I Am That for which no notion can apply.

[Silence]

After this comes a difficult step. So far, what has been spoken is the directive that ‘Nothing has actually been needed.’ But since this notion persists that ‘I’m not actually able to; I can’t see this’ or ‘It’s too difficult, too abstract’ then the difficult step is also there. Because maybe this is too simple. [Chuckles] Which means what? That there is another power that is needed for us to pick up ideas about ourself …, even before belief can be given to it. If we wonder what to do with notions that call for our belief, we can surrender them or inquire into the nature of them and See whether they are speaking the truth about us. Or we can use our power of attention.

Now, attention is completely in service to being awake. And yet it seems to be quite a difficult quality to master. The famous example: Don’t think of a pink elephant. [Laughs] And you can decide that ‘I will not do it!’ … ‘Don’t think of a banana.’ … ‘No, I decide that I will not do it!’ And yet, in a second, it starts to come.

So, unless attention goes to these thoughts, there’s no question of believing them or not. When we come into these realms of the so-called thoughts then we come to the sadhana: Don’t keep your attention on the mind, you keep it on your breath. Don’t keep your attention on thoughts, keep it on the chanting. Bringing the mind to remain in the content of the Now is like a sadhana…, the mindfulness; like to taste a grape, be fully with the grape. That is also like a sadhana; to let attention then be so focused on the activity that there is no scope for any notions to be bought. So, this type of sadhana can be used to control attention in various ways.

All of these sadhanas have their place. Only what is often seen in this play is that we strongly start identifying with our sadhana itself. ‘I’m a meditator. I meditated 5 hours yesterday. The asana of upside down position.’ … ‘Oh, you meditated 5 hours? All day yesterday I was meditating. Beat that!’ Then it becomes about minutes of meditation, how quiet the meditation was, how well we’re doing the practice, how well we are excelling at this craft of meditating. So, although several things might drop, the notion of meditation itself seems to continue. The notion of washing my dog is the notion of how mindful I am; we’re giving so much mind to that.

And how to check these things? If somebody pokes at you, then you know you have a limited identity around it. If somebody pokes and you get poked. You meditated 7 hours yesterday and somebody comes and says ‘You’re just a beginner here. No, you’re not. What did you see? You saw 7 lights? Only this chakra is shining? Oh, your crown chakra has to shine and then you will be there.’ And then they say ‘Oh, only your crown chakra is shining? Wait until you come to astral travel and akashic records. Once you make that, then come and talk to me.’

So much ego around this so-called spiritual practice. So, know that the practitioner identity is spiritual ego. If you go on poking, it can seem to get agitated. Then it can feel like ‘This is too much effort and my mind is so active. It’s not this.’

Then, maybe you can do some devotional singing or do some hatha yoga. It’s very good because, in a way, all these things are available to go through; these beautifully designed techniques to come to the shanti we are looking for right in the beginning. But in all of these there is also the potential to create a lot of lack of peace. When you start to practice, it’s so beautiful; hatha yoga. But very quickly, the mind will sell you the story that you must become a yoga Olympian world-class gold-medalist. Advanced, super advanced, super-super advanced, super-super-super Patanjali advanced. [Chuckles]

So, all these sadhanas in themselves are very beautiful and very well designed, but when we put a lot of notions around them then it can seem like the notions for the practice itself seem to overwhelm the notion-less-ness which the practices are invoking.

[Reading from chat]: “Beloved Father, I have a question. Today I have to choose between staying at home meditating and following your Satsang but with no money or going to stay in a psychiatric hospital for one or two weeks in order to get a certificate which will help me financially. Do you have a feeling about this choice that I have to make? Thank you.”

This is to give you an answer to your question. There was one time that we were watching Guruji’s [Sri’s Mooji’s] retreat at home and somebody came from the sangha [Mooji sangha] to visit Bangalore for few days. So, he was there at the retreat and then he came to me with this dilemma. He said ‘Now, Ananta, there is this other Guruji who is visiting Bangalore and I’ve always wanted to see him. So, what should I do? Should I come for the retreat with you (which I can watch later also) or should I go and visit that Master?’

Now, obviously there is some conditioning here. What to do? Say ‘No, no, of course, Guruji’s retreat’? (Sometimes I can observe this conditioning also). I said ‘Go wherever your feet take you. You don’t decide. If the decision is not clear then you let life decide and you will know which way.’ But inside, I have to be honest and say there was a hope that he will come to the retreat. [Smiles]

So, when it happened, he did not come. It surprised me a bit that he did not come. But the day after he came and he said ‘Thank you so much for giving me that advice. I had to go there and I am so glad I went. I am so glad I went because unless I would have gone, I would have never figured out that that is not for me.’

So, we can never presume in which way life will go or what has to happen. Sometimes life puts us in this kind of situation where it seems so unclear. Even for those of you who are intuitively strong, it can feel like ‘My intuition is just silent.’ However, remember that:

The silence of intuition is the answer of intuition.

Remember that the silence of intuition is also an answer from intuition. It can be a difficult answer to swallow because otherwise it can feel like ‘I have a cheat code to life and I can just go to my heart and it will just tell me ‘Left, left, left, right, right, right’ …, I will become a millionaire soon or enlightened soon.’ (or whatever). It will be selfish in the usage like that. So, many times, your intuition will just be quiet.

It is like a story about Bhagavan. [Sri Ramana Maharshi] It seem like there was a time where Bhagavan was not answering ninety-five percent of the questioners. [Smiles] That was the answer; that ‘not answering’ was the answer.

[Someone] told a story about a Sage. This other great Master said to his son or his disciple that ‘You have become very advanced now. I am not able help you anymore. You have to go to this Sage, who is really a Brahma Rishi’ (or something like that). So, he came to the Sage. This Sage was sitting over there. This student comes and says ‘Master, my Master …’ (Let’s say Vasistha for the name) ‘… My master Vasistha sent me to you because he said you will be able to help me.’ And this Master is just sitting quiet.

The disciple said to himself ‘The Master is old. Maybe he is hard of hearing.’ So, he said loudly ‘Master, my master Vasistha has sent me and he said that you will definitely help me to come to the final truth.’ The Master is sitting quiet.

The disciple tried a few more times. Then, as obviously when things don’t go as planned, what comes? Anger. [Smiles] Then what did the disciple say? He said ‘You must be fully arrogant! My master must be mistaken! You are not an enlightened Being. You are so arrogant. You are not answering anything that I am asking.’

Then this Master spoke. He said ‘You have been asking me and I have been answering you. When will you listen?’

It is so beautiful because ultimately, we have to be rid this ‘yes and no’ and ‘true and false’ and ‘right and wrong’ and ‘left and right’ and ‘up and down.’ These are just ideas. They have nothing to do with Reality.

Of course, the mind will fight. It will say ‘But I have to decide whether I have to go to this psychiatric ward or go to Satsang.’ Like my Master [Sri Mooji] says ‘If it is not clear then leave it. Don’t decide. Let it unfold on its own.’

And I am fully aware that, this time, Satsang is big burning. Because it might feel like ‘But you’re my Father! I call you Father. So, the least you can do is help me with this simple decision.’

I am helping you.

Now, after I’ve spoken so much, some of you might feel ‘So, what should I do? Remain with the concept ‘I am the Self’? (‘Self, Self, Self…’) Or should I inquire ‘Who Am I? Who am I?’ Or should I surrender? I presumed I had some clarity but now I feel more confused because I had settled in with a particular methodology to get to the Truth but now I’m confused. Surrender or inquiry or chanting or mindfulness or bhajans or hatha yoga? What am I supposed to do?’

Now, here is the paradox …, that without any of this you are full, complete enlightenment Right Now. [Silence] The most enlightened Being you ever want to meet is Your very Presence.

I said one time in the retreat ‘If you feel like you have to meditate for ten thousand years to find the Truth, then I can tell you that you have finished nine-thousand nine-hundred ninety-nine years, three-hundred and sixty-five days, twenty-three hours, fifty-nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds already. [Chuckles] This is that moment of Truth. Don’t waste it. Meet YourSelf. This is God, Guru, Self.

You don’t need anything to become anything more. You don’t need to become more worthy. You don’t need to become more devoted. You don’t need more practice. You don’t need more anything. You are already the most.

One time like this, we were sitting in the retreat and I was feeling: Wow! Today I feel like everybody saw that ‘There is just God, This Being, which I called personal but which is actually the Presence of the Divine.’ And I sat in that Light…

This moment is a bit like that. Because I don’t feel like any of you have not heard or seen what I’m pointing to.

God Is Now.

Being Is Now.

Self Is Now.

It’s completely apparent.

Now, the mind will want to go mental with this; the mind will want to go mental with this. It can even use this ‘God Is Now’ in a very mental way, without any perfume of actual insight. [Droll voice]: ‘Oh, but God is Now.’ What is the benefit of this mental thing? Nothing. At best, you’ll become an Advaita troll on Facebook. That is the maximum graduation you can get with mental Advaita knowledge.

It’s not about giving yourself a mental certificate. It’s not a conceptual knowing that God Is Now.

It is Your very Being.

The lack of peace is because of the idea that ‘I know something’. What does it mean that ‘I know something’? It means that ‘I am right about something.’ That’s why this saying (which is very popular) ‘Do you want to be happy or do you want to be right?’ is actually very beautiful. You cannot suffer unless you feel you are right about something.

This is the thing about belief. (I know I’ve been rambling on for some time, but if you can hear this part, it’s really important): Your beliefs will always feel right to you. That is the nature of belief itself. That’s why you believe them. You see? They will always feel that they are right. Nobody has a belief saying ‘I feel that I am….’ No; in the sense that they’re not having a belief that ‘I am the king of the world’ when actually they are feeling like ‘This is not right. This is wrong. I am not the king of the world.’ …, because then it has to cancel itself out and come to this neutrality.

A belief, our belief system, feels completely right to us.

And that is why teachers like Adyashanti will say that ‘Spirituality is a completely destructive process.’ But what is it destroying? It is not trying to destroy your house or your life or your relationship. What is it actually destroying? Our belief system.

Whatever we think we are right about, it is going to get faced with the stark-naked reality that you’re not. But because in their very nature they feel right to you, it can feel destructive when they are confronted.

That is why the Master is always right here to hold your hand, to love you along the way. Because they remember also that in the play of their lives also when their beliefs were being confronted, it can seem like a tough situation at times. It can feel like ‘I’m being destroyed. He is pulling the ground from under my feet, and I see no place where I can land now. I’m just going to be lost.’ It can feel like that. Because the direct Sages will not replace your conceptual house with a different, better-looking house. They will just burn it down! Remember that they never come when uninvited. You made a prayer. You said ‘Please, I am ready to give up everything. I want only the Truth!’ (whether you said it in this way or not). That’s why they show up. They say ‘Okay, you asked for it. Now, give me everything. [Smiles] I don’t want your stuff. What will I do with stuff? I don’t want your stuff. I want every notion you think is right.’

So, what you hiding in your attic? [Chuckles] Or in your basement? It can feel like ‘Oh, the rest of the house is burnt, but I have this. This part of the building the Guru will not see because it’s the basement. It’s a secret place.’ Yeah? [Chuckles] So, it can feel like ‘Alone with my thoughts; at least these I can enjoy.’ [Laughs] Like that. ‘This I am definitely right about!’

And you can feel like ‘I’m wrong about everything…’ (it can be even silly like this) …, ‘I’m wrong about everything (relationship, money; this, that, that) everything I am wrong about, but the president of one country, I am definitely right about! I know him. I know how he is! Really!’ You see?

In India there is a saying that ‘The whole elephant goes through the hole but the tail gets left.’ Many times, it’s our silly ideas. You’ll find it funny that many of you have given up the global ideas, the more-seeming important ideas in your life, but what keeps you caught up is just some strange silliness. Our judgments, our interpretations; all made up. Our labels, our labeling… are labeling nothing.

And I am aware that this is completely self-referential, okay? Because sometimes I get these complaints that ‘But then, doesn’t it apply to everything you are saying as well?’ It does. [Chuckles] It completely does. And yet, this is the funny part of the play. It has to be said and then it’s left behind. Isn’t it? Its just like something is on fire then you put water on it; but when the fire is out, then there’s no need to put any more.

Bhagavan’s [Sri Ramana Maharshi’s] analogy of ‘using thorns to remove other thorns and then throwing the thorn away’ very much applies. Maharaj [Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj] said ‘The only truth I can speak is that I Am…, but ultimately even that is not true.’

So, then can we say that nothing [is needed], that the whole thick book [Nisargadatta Maharaj’s book ‘I Am That’] is not needed? From the ultimate perspective, we can say that. But for as long as the limited perspective is being believed, it is very helpful. No words are truly needed, in Reality. And yet, in this play of Consciousness, when our limitations seem to be… (Let’s come up with a nice metaphor for this).

You all know that I take this example:

I’m saying, “Ishwari, I have a very good friend. I feel like you would like to meet this lady. She will feel like she is your best friend!”

Ishwari will say, “Okay, Father, when are you introducing me?”

I say, “I can’t introduce you.”

Then she’ll say, “Why not? You just said she can be my best friend.”

I say “Yeah, but she is formless.”

Ishwari will say, “Oh! What do you mean by that? At least I need a photo. At least I need one phone conversation.”

But once you’ve had that …, (because we’ve gotten so conditioned to name and form) when you have known somebody for some time and you’ve had beautiful exchanges, then to love this one, you need to constantly see their photo, hear their voice. (You don’t.) So, because we gotten so used to name and form, when the Master also appears in form and then uses language, signs and all of these things (which he himself wants to demolish) …, once its recognized for yourself what that Is, who the Master Is, then you don’t need name and form anymore.

Some of you have been in the company of some Sages. You’ve been where there are a few; like two or three Sages. So, you can image how blessed we are in this life to have had these kinds of occasions also. But do you know what they talk about? [Chuckles] They’re usually just either sitting in silence or they’re just enjoying each other’s Presence or they’re speaking of very mundane stuff like lunch. They are not saying ‘What is the true nature of Reality? Is it Awareness before Consciousness or is it Consciousness before Awareness?’ [Smiles] They are not having these conversations because there is no need for these thorns anymore …, because even these ultimately are conceptual.

But as long as we feel that our house of cards is real, when something has to come, then set it on fire. When the words are spoken in Satsang, it does not imply that they have some ‘Certificate of Truth’ or something like this but they are definitely pointing you to a different place compared to where the words of the mind are pointing; to a placeless place.

Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti

Shanti means …? Why are we praying for shanti and evoking shanti? Because we have already identified the tormentor. Peace is shanti. We invoke this peace, because somewhere we must have already identified that lack of peace is the trouble. And most of us in Satsang have also identified that ‘Where does this lack of peace come from?’ It might feel like it comes from a situation. ‘Oh, my partner is like this’ is the most common one, isn’t it, whether you are Indian or European or American. ‘My partner is like this’ or ‘My body is like this’ or ‘My money is like this’…, irrespective of cultural background or geographical location, we feel that it is a particular situation which can lead to lack of peace.

But my Master [Sri Mooji] said ‘Nothing in the world has inherent meaning.’ And paradoxically, this statement has a lot of meaning ‘Nothing in the world has inherent meaning’. It is very meaningful from a certain perspective. So, can we explore if this is true and see if there is a root to shanti.

So, can this [Holds up a glass of water] lead to lack of peace? I am purposely not defining it as an appearance. A body can appear the same way that this is appearing. It is just an event, a situation or a set of perceptions. Now, how can this lead to lack of peace? Before you can have ideas about it, you need to know what it is. We can say ‘I know this is water.’ Once you know it is water…, (especially if you live in Bangalore) [Chuckles] it can cause a lot of lack of peace. Because in this building itself; we used to have two bore wells which used to give us water. Now we have to get five tankers every day as the bore wells have run out.

So, once you know this is water, then all your concepts about water can come. ‘What is going to happen? In five years Bangalore will run out of water? What are people going to do? There will water wars.’ So much lack of peace.

But before we defined it, what was there? It can also lead to some sort of conceptual happiness in a way (if there is such a thing). ‘Water…, such a nice thing…, it gives life to everything. Without water, we would all be so thirsty in this world. It’s such a God’s-gift to us.’ So, concepts can be this way or this way.

Is there such a thing as a neutral concept? Neutrality is not of the mind. Because any concept in itself (even if it says ‘Water is’) we are then taking about the positive-ness of the Being of water, the Presence of it.

It’s too complicated? [Giggles] Let’s keep it simple to start with at least.

So, anything, in just the appearance of it, in itself does not have the capacity to create lack of shanti, lack of peace. And we are all, at some level, in search of a stable peace.

So, as long as we feel like ‘A certain set of things have to happen in this way and then peace will come’ then we have misidentified the tormentor, in a way. We have placed it in the apparent- appearance of whatever is being perceived, rather than in the interpretation of it. We took such an innocent example; the transparent water. And yet, we can have so many concepts about it. You can take on a water war after hearing hundred concepts like this; you might feel like ‘I have to start a water NGO. ‘Don’t waste water!’ I can make that the project of my life.’ Or we can become in service to water, like Thales said that ‘Everything is made of water.’ He said that what we are made up of is water. Like some would say ‘It is Being’ he said ‘It is water.’ We can become water worshippers if you can believe the beautiful concepts about water. But it is not the thing in itself which is the cause of trouble. This is true for all things. It is never about the thing.

Then what is it about? It is what we think about; what we think about it. You are with me so far, everyone? What we think about it is the source of this lack of peace.

Now, who can predict the next thought before it comes? Before your next thought comes; predict it.

Before coming to Satsang, most of us actually believed that we are actually creating our thoughts in a conscious sort of way. ‘I should not think negative, I should think only positive; be positive.’ These kinds of things are very prevalent. But who knows which thought will come next? A thought here could also come and say ‘This is just nonsense that you are speaking.’ Or a thought can come and say ‘This is just beautiful; this can really help.’ Both of these are just thoughts and nobody can predict what the next thought will be because that prediction itself would be a thought.

So, once we identify that the source of trouble is this, and that we cannot predict which thought will come, then are we lost in this roller coaster? We have identified the source of suffering to be thought and yet we do not know which thought might come …, does that mean we have gotten on a never-ending roller coaster of suffering and peace? It doesn’t. It doesn’t mean that. Because irrespective of the thought, there is something in Consciousness Itself that has the power to make meaning out of it (apparent-meaning out of it) or to not give it meaning.

So, when my Master says ‘Nothing in the world has inherent meaning’ it is just not even just about an appearance. We can say that, but even that we do not need to say because even that would give it some meaning, that ‘This is just an appearance.’ This has zero inherent meaning.

A thought can be positive, negative, positive, negative. Now, if just the appearance of these thoughts would mean that meaning is given to these thoughts, it would seem like you are stuck; that there is no end to suffering…, that every time a negative thought comes you will suffer and every time a positive thought comes it will seem like ‘Life is good’.  The roller coaster…

Now, thankfully, it is not true that this is all there is to it. It is Consciousness that takes the content of this message, of this voice, and uses the power (one of its most primal powers, as much as, maybe more than, time and space; of all these phenomenal powers, this is the most primal power) called ‘The power of belief.’ And You, Consciousness (when I am saying ‘Consciousness’ I mean You-as-Consciousness) have the power to log in (as my Master would say) or to remain untouched. What is this log in? To give assent to the meaning of this.

So, now we have seen that the end of suffering is in our notion-less-ness. It’s in our notion-less-ness. But notion-less-ness does not mean that notions can no longer arise. It only means that notions are allowed to just come and go. Why should they be allowed to just come and go? Because they are not representing the Truth about who You Are. They are representing an identity which, at best, is the limited version of who You Are.

Just like once you figure out that somebody who has called you has called a wrong number, this problem is no longer so much there. When we were growing up it was there. So, if you have picked up a wrong number call, and somebody said ‘You have to come to Manipal hospital because this emergency has happened’ you would say ‘But who do you want to speak to?’ They say ‘I want to speak to James.’ You respond, saying ‘Wrong number.’ Now, if you actually continue to have that conversation, knowing fully well that it was meant for James not for Ananta, and then you were running from hospital to hospital because some supposed-emergency had happened, what would you feel about such a situation? It’s stupid isn’t it? But this is the play of humanity, apparently. It is a wrong number. The mind is calling ‘me’…, the ‘I am something’ – ‘me’ …, the so called jeev-atma. But I am not jeev-atma. I am the Atma itself, which needs no prefix around Itself called ‘jeev’…, which knows no duality, no time; this one Being. Just because the wrong number is persistent, does it make it true?

(I don’t know why I am spelling it out so much today but somehow this is what’s here.) [Chuckles]

So, the lack of peace comes from not the thing in itself but that idea of the thing. And it is possible, in Consciousness, to remain notion-less even if there is a tsunami of ideas; there might be a tsunami of ideas in mind.

And why is it relevant to remain notion-less? …, why is it in fact intelligence to remain notion-less? Because this voice (which seems to be speaking) seems to be speaking to a version of ‘me’ …, which I cannot ever find! Nobody has found this person that I have asked about for five years now.

So, it is a wrong number.

In whose light do these sensations that we call the body appear?

In whose light are your emotions seen? Are your thoughts seen?

Who has to be here before any perception can happen?

[Meditative Silence]

Where You Are, God Is.

God is not the result of some becoming.

God is Your very Being.

If you say ‘I am going to find God’ [Smiles] ‘going to find God’ is to play as if you are missing God. But the ‘I Am’ already IS God. Before you can say ‘going to find God’ …, who is Here?

Before you can say ‘I am not happy’ or ‘I am not free’ or ‘I am free’ …, before you apply the attributes, can we check who you are applying it to?

Who is here that has this body?

Or perceives the world?

Whose existence is this?

That which you call ‘your existence’ is whose?

This is fundamental.

That which you call ‘your existence’ is whose?

‘My existence’ is whose?

If I tell you that ‘your existence is Guruji’s’ [Sri Mooji’s] would that be too much for you?

Now, lose him. [Looks around. Smiles] Lose him; the Satguru within. Lose It.

[Silence]

For this Presence that you call ‘Your Presence, Your Existence’ …, the mind has only one trick now, which is to say that ‘This is an individual’s presence’ …, to say that ‘It is a person’s presence’. There is no such thing actually [Smiles] but it will say that ‘This Presence is personal, individual’.

So, when Bhagavan [Sri Ramana Maharshi] said that ‘I Am’ is playing as ‘I am something’ …, this is the trick. This is the mind’s trick. ‘I Am’ then plays with the mind and picks up the label about itself and plays as if it is limited, as ‘I am something.’ It objectifies itself in a way and then starts relating names and forms to this object. But if you can see this here itself, then you don’t have to do anything with any of that. You don’t have to get rid of any tendencies, any conditions; you don’t have to work on any of that stuff, because the root of it is here. If you can see that without buying into the idea that this Being is personal, you don’t have to work on any other story. Then this seems like a beautiful, direct way.

What convinces you that your Being is personal?

Because when I ask you ‘Can you stop Being?’ none of you say ‘Yes, I stopped.’ You say ‘No, I can’t stop Being. I Am.’ So, this Being is Here.

Now the only exploration left is:

Is this a person’s Being?

Or is this the Existence of Presence, the Existence of Consciousness itself; without limitations?

Maybe I will share one trick with you which can, in a way, change your life (and the rest I can leave to your own exploration). The mind will convince you that the sensations that you are experiencing (and it will call it the body) limit this Being, and that that is why this Being is personal. The mind will try to convince you. (And I will try to speak slowly because it is important and often forgotten.)

Now, many of you feel that this Being that you are finding is something contained within the body. But this is just a paradigm that we have gotten used to because of habit. It is not true. And it is worth looking at right now.

Those sensations which you feel contain this Being, can you find out where they are contained?

Those sensations which you call the body, which you feel ‘They contain my Being, therefore Being is limited’ …, can you find out where those sensations are contained?

What is that space in which those sensations are experienced?

Is that space different from the space where all perceptions are experienced? The sounds from the computer in front of you, this voice, sound of the traffic, all perceptions; are they within the same space? Or are there multiple spaces in which all these are contained, are perceived?

So, this space in which perception is happening…, is it independent of Your Being, of Your Existence?

Then you will start seeing that Your Being is more like space rather than like a container (or something contained in a container). It is more like vast space which is not just three- dimensional; which has no dimensions, which is everywhere and everything is within It.

And the sensations which you thought, so far, contain your Being are just another set of perceptions within this space…., this space-like Existence (because it is subtler than even this space).

[Meditative Silence]

As you explore Your Existence, you will find that all these words, beautiful scriptures, just seem like very direct words. They might have seemed very abstract before this. I remember hearing, many years ago, the words of the Ashtavakra Gita and they just sounded like beautiful poetry. ‘You are the boundless ocean. You are the limitless ocean in which the arcs of the universe come and go.’ It just sounds like too much; sounds like poetry or something.

But as you explore Your very Presence, Your Being, You will find that the Sage is speaking about You; undeniably You …, (just not the ‘you’ that you thought you were).

[Meditative Silence]

But if you skip this step, and quickly presume a ‘me’ then the spiritual journey will seem to be long. Because the ‘me’ will have many ideas. What does it mean? The notion that ‘I am something’ is a big collection of ideas. Like we’ve have been talking about the idea that ‘I am a man’ or ‘I am a husband’ or ‘I am a Father.’ This has so many, many ideas within it; the entire set of ideas of humankind, in a way. [Chuckles] So, if you pick up one idea about ‘me’ then you have to deal with all the ideas of humankind.

But if you meet YourSelf more naked, more open, without this basic presumption of ‘me’ you will find this unlimitedness. Even this idea of ‘unlimited’ actually does not apply to how unlimited It Is. Open. Not resisting.

So, don’t meet a projection of yourself.  Meet Your Self.

Don’t meet an idea of yourself.  Meet Your Self.

[Meditative Silence]

Then you will find that Your very Being is that Being that (in the manifest play; this Being, Your Being) is what all of us are bowing down to. This is Your Satguru’s Presence.

Suppose that in your life everything was always taken care of. Everything was always taken care of. Then how would your inner attitude change if you knew this? Unwaveringly, whatever it is, it is always taken care of. Then how would your inner attitude change?

We say these three words: Guru Kripa Kevalam. ‘Guru Kripa is ‘Master’s Grace.’

We could have said ‘We rest in Master’s grace’ or ‘We trust in Master’s grace’ but the word ‘Kevalam’ is very important because ‘Kevalam’ means ‘Only Is.’ Only Is. And why would we say it if it is not our living experience? Of course, it doesn’t seem, for many of us, that it is a constant living experience …, yet. And yet, something already in our hearts knows that this is true; that only the Master’s grace Is: ‘Kevalam.’

Now, this tells us a lot actually, because if only the Master’s grace Is, then the Master must always be there. His grace is functioning, her grace is functioning; so, this Master must always be there.

So, which is that Presence which is always there? Which Presence is that which is always there? This is the Presence of Being, Consciousness, Satguru, God. (It doesn’t matter which term we use.) This Existence is always there: so, let’s say this is the Guru; Satguru within. (Whatever terminology we want to use.)

This one can be trusted completely. So, when Guruji [Sri Mooji] says ‘Leave your existence to Existence’ this Existence is always there.

And It needs no help to run any of this. As soon as ‘I Am’ then I see that the world ‘Is’. It appears without any individual effort, it runs without individual effort. I don’t need to pick up an ‘Ananta’ to switch on gravity. [Chuckles] ‘Ananta, please come up’ and then this world starts functioning. All of this is naturally functioning. In the light of whom? In whose light?

In the Upanishads (and also Bhagavan) [Sri Ramana Maharshi] they ask this very important question: ‘In whose light does the Sun exist? The Sun seems to give light to all of this appearance. In whose light is the Sun perceived?’

So, this Guru is the light of our Existence, therefore, everything is this Guru’s grace. Everything is the doing and the experiencing of This One. That is why it is Guru Kripa Kevalam: Only the Master’s grace Is.

Now, you might ask an important question, which is to say ‘You say that the Guru is within. So, why do we then come to an outer Guru? Why do we then need to come to that so-called living Master?’ It is because the game that Consciousness is playing or has played is that It has identified Itself with name and form for so long that it plays this game of fooling itself, of delusion, that it can no longer relate to that which is nameless and formless.

If I come to you and say to you ‘I know someone who can be your best friend.’ And you say ‘Oh, good. I’d like to meet this one.’ And then I say ‘You can’t see him or her. You can’t talk to him or her. You can find no actual quality about this one.’ Then you will say ‘But how can I be friends with this one? I can’t see them, I can’t hear them, I can’t have a conversation with them. What do you mean by friends?’

So, in the same way, all of us have grown up hearing these things; that the Guru is within. But it can sound too abstract so that we don’t know how to communicate with this One, how to relate with this One.

In India, all of us hear what? That God is formless, God is everywhere, God is All-There-Is. We hear this. But how many forms of God do we have? [Chuckles] Millions! In every state corner, you’ll see a different form. So, what does this actually mean?

It means that although God is formless, in the play of delusion where Consciousness seems to have deluded Itself with attachment or relating only with name and form, there needs to be a doorway; there needs to be something relate-able which can seem like ‘This is the door to my True Being, my True Satguru.’

Then what happens? In some cultures, it is prescribed by some Prophets or Sages that ‘This is a good representation; use this one.’ The Priest will prescribe. ‘Okay, this is a good representation. Let’s use this form.’ So, you can have Jesus on the cross or some verses from the Koran…, in India, it became very democratic, in a way. Whatever you like, you can make a form. You like to relate to a god that is naughty, playful and fun, yet all-knowing and beautifully knowledgeable? Okay, let’s make Krishna. If you feel that God should be always righteous and struggle with all these human conditions and try to go through this journey of human exploration in a very authentic, vulnerable way then we have representations of Ram. So, whatever form that you can actually imagine, there is a representation which can be made or is available already. And the beauty of any such form is that it takes you out of this ‘me, me, me’ to a trust in the more Divine.

These forms also can be the forms of the Masters that have come and gone or still exist in their body. And it’s beautiful (although some find it strange; why, in India, we put all of these photos of the Masters everywhere. What is this about?) it’s very good, because at some point in time, we must have figured out that the human nature has become so forgetful about the truth that ‘Everywhere I look, I want to be reminded.’ Here [in Satsang hall] on this wall is Guruji there, and on this wall Guruji is there, and on this wall (next to the window) Guruji is there. (You know what I mean; the photo of Guruji is there. Guruji is actually everywhere.)

So, these forms of those aspects of Consciousness who have awakened, who stepped out of the paradigm of the mind and awakened to a deeper, intuitive Reality, they serve as good reminders of what possibility exists Here [Points to heart area] in Consciousness.

And I’m aware that some of these terms might sound a bit dualistic but we’re talking about how Consciousness operates when It is deluded as if It is ‘something.’ To remind ourself that everything is taken care of, we make (and we can even say that, initially, we even need) an outer representation to show us this.

I’ve often said that the beauty of having a living Master is that they show you the possibility. That it is possible to exist in this world. That even with a body and family and work, all of this is completely possible without hanging onto the notion of ‘What’s in it for me?’ or the idea of ‘me-ness.’ This is a great blessing which is available to us.

That is why when someone asks ‘Do we need a Master in form?’ I usually say that there is nothing in Consciousness which says that ‘Things must always be this way’ but I have to say that, from experience, I have never met one who has awakened to their inner Truth without the Presence of a Master in form. Even Bhagavan, though he said that ‘I have no human Master’ (or disciples for that matter) he also said that the mountain Arunachala is his Master. So, that representation of Shiva then became his Master. But where is Shiva? Shiva is the very Source of all of this existence itself. And yet, even for the greatest Sages, initially they need a representation (they seem to need a representation) which can be given a form and has a name.

So, that is the value of having an outer or external-seeming Master. And we must always be grateful for Guruji’s Presence in our lives.

At least for here I can say, in the play of this life, in spite of so much learning, understanding, reading so many books and doing many, many, many practices…, until I had the darshan of the Satguru within through looking into the eyes of Guruji, I did not step completely out of this paradigm of belief, this paradigm of thought system.

[Silence]

(And when I say ‘completely’ I use the term a bit loosely. There is no ‘completely.’ [Chuckles] We can say ‘mostly.’)

Now, this Existence is Here. What help does it need?

Does it need a consultant, an adviser, to run this world? Somebody who comes and says ‘Hey, maybe you got this speed-of-light thing a bit wrong, you might want to change that constant a bit.’ Or ‘You know, the way the Earth is going around the Sun? It’s seems a bit tilted. Maybe you want to straighten that out a bit.’ [Chuckling] It doesn’t need this consultant, this adviser, because It is experiencing Its Own Perfection, in Its Wholeness as this One Appearance.

Although if you look at it out if context, which means if you look at it only piece-by-piece, then it can look like ‘But there is no perfection in this world.’ So, if you look at life piece-by-piece, only at specific times, then you will feel ‘Oh, this is not right, this could be better, this could change.’ But if you look at the entirety of even human existence, you will find such a beautiful symphonic play of perfection.

You are like that tree that Guruji [Sri Mooji] speaks about, which doesn’t need a thought to grow its next branch. It’s growing by Itself. The flowers are flowering, the branches are growing. Sometimes a cleanup needs to happen and everything seems to go, and yet fresh beauty arises.

Can you imagine if a tree started thinking and believing it’s thoughts? (I don’t know if trees think.  [Chuckles] Let’s presume for a minute that they do.) When the leaves are falling, the tree starts crying ‘Why are my leaves falling? What’s happening to me? I’m losing all my possessions!’ Its most intimate branch, if it falls away, the tree cries and says that ‘My best relationship is going. I was so attached to this one.’ What advice would you give to this tree?

Give that same advice to yourself. Say ‘Don’t worry. We might not realize it yet that everything is taken care of. Everything is functioning beautifully.’

Now, another way of suffering is to have a projection of how things should be. If a rose bush, a rose plant, has an idea that it should become a banyan tree, then what is going to happen? Every moment, all that it is thinking about is becoming a banyan tree. What advise will you give this rose plant? You will say ‘Look at your own beauty. Look at the flowers that are flowering. The banyan tree does not have these.’

What Is just Is. Once we apply our own projection on ‘What Is’ then we feel that ‘Life should be this way. I wanted to grow some banyan roots and only these thorns are coming.’ Then suffering can come.

But if you don’t have any idea, then sometimes…., if you don’t have any idea … (Now don’t take what I’m going to say very seriously because you will make an idea about it, but…) [Laughs] if you don’t have an idea about either rose or banyan, then in your outer representation, although it may seem like you started out as a rose bush, you might become a banyan tree. This is the Divine possibility.

So, if your kitchen is full of food (if your fridge is full, your platform is full, everything is full of food) will you be running from place to place, from grocery shop to grocery shop, looking for bread?

The seeking must imply the idea that ‘Something is lacking’ is believed in. That’s why the Sage Kabir said ‘All of us are looking for the ruby but we are not checking in our own pocket.’ We go looking for God everywhere, for an unchanging Truth everywhere, for stability everywhere …, but we look everywhere but ourself.

So, that’s why you need an outer Guru because when you’re running from grocery shop to grocery shop for bread, he will say ‘Have you checked your kitchen? It is fully stocked up. It’s fully stocked.’ But every other shop is telling you ‘Buy this, buy that; this bread is multigrain, this bread is gluten free, this bread is whole wheat.’ You see? There’s one place you come to where he says ‘But have you checked at home?’

This, in one way, is also the value of the Living Master. Because everybody else is saying ‘Buy my bread, buy my bread’ but the Master is saying ‘I have no bread for you. But have you checked your kitchen?’ Then, when you come to your kitchen, you realize you have a magic fridge. [Smiles] It never runs out.

You Being never runs out of Beingness.

Your Self never runs out of Self-ness.

You can never lose It.

So, if you can never lose It, what are you looking to find?

[Reading from chat]: “Father, I’m having a very hard time to follow. Could you please speak in a simpler way?  Maybe my mind is feeling very confused. I’m new to self-inquiry and the invitation. Thank you.”

Yes, my child. Yes, yes. [Smiles] And don’t worry some about sense of frustration, confusion. All of this comes up. It is very natural for it to come. For a while, it can feel like there’s too much; every word can seem like it’s too strange. ‘What is he saying? What is he saying?’ It can feel strange like that and it is felt like that for many, many, many of those who come to Satsang initially. Like you say, you are new to Satsang and self-inquiry, so it can seem like the vocabulary is difficult to fathom.

Why does it happen like this? It is because you will not understand what I am saying, you will actually not understand what I am saying, but you will See what you’re being pointed to. Nobody has ever understood actually. And if they feel like they’ve understood, it has only added to their intellectual baggage. Nobody has ever understood what I am saying but many have Seen what I am saying. So, a part of this is a big confusion. You’re trying to follow, trying to follow, and it seems like you just can’t follow …, because where I’m pointing to is the Core, is the Essence of even Your Existence. Your mind cannot go with us there. You mind will not go with us, cannot go with us, there.

I know it’s super irritating because I talk about this as well. When I was reading Nisargadatta Maharaj, he would keep saying ‘Be with your sense ‘I Am’. And I just couldn’t fathom what is this sense ‘I Am’. I remember getting completely frustrated; feeling completely frustrated and confused. But one day, through the Satguru’s grace, it became apparent to me what had been spoken.

Meet me wherever you like. Meet me where ever you like right now. And then slowly we can go to where I am pointing to. So, if it feels like ‘Father, when you say ‘Let go and remain in your notionless existence’ …, this I understand’ then that much is enough. Or you say ‘Ananta, when you say, ask yourself ‘Who am I?’ Or ‘What does the I represent?’ …if that resonates, that much is enough. Or you might say ‘When you say ‘Leave everything to the greater power, leave everything to Satguru or God (or whatever name you want to call it) then everything will be taken care of’ …, if you are resonating in meeting me there, that much is enough.

Even if you say that ‘None of this is actually making any sense but something brings me to Satsang’ …, that much is enough. Like somebody said earlier [Reading from chat]: “Father, when you say there is no reason for me to come to Satsang, yet I want to keep coming.” [Smiles] You see? Like this. It can feel like ‘What am I getting here? I’m not even understanding a single word he is saying and still I feel to come.’ It can be a bit like that. And sometimes, like that, has been very good also, for many.

[Reading from chat]: “Father, when nothing is labeled, then attention withdraws and what I am becomes apparent. “

A: It doesn’t always have to function like that also. Attention can be very much a part of the functioning of this phenomenal experience and yet an unlabeled life can happen. Like in the life of a Sage, hardly any labels are getting created and yet it is not that attention is always withdrawn and no perceptions have happened. This perception needs attention. There is no perception without attention. So, normal perception (in fact, much more vibrant perception) can happen in the life of a Sage. So, attention can be very intimately with objects and yet the unlabeled existence can continue.

In a sense, this is what I meant when I said that only after I met my Master did I see a flower for the first time because I was seeing it without the label ‘flower’. I only tasted this phenomenal experience for its full vibrancy only after the labeling went away. Otherwise our attention is dissipated and everything seems blurry. And we can use this to check on our experience right now.

When I say that the maha-mantra of the mind is ‘What’s in it for me?’ …, although this is the maha-mantra, many times this is misunderstood. [Smiles] It can feel like that means that ‘My mind will just keep saying ‘What’s in it for me?’ It doesn’t use that exact terminology. But if you notice the content of your thoughts, they’re always about ‘What am I getting in this? Me, me, me!’ So, as that is happening, are you tasting even this phenomenal experience in its full color? That’s why sometimes I say ‘Look at something in front of you in the room and also try to bring your attention to a thought or bring your attention to an image of a tree. So, imagine a tree and keep looking at an object at the same time, with full color. You cannot do it. One of those images will become blurry. This is why attention (although is very similar to Awareness in a way, in terms of its attribute-less-ness) is different from Awareness Itself.

So, although it is true that what I am becomes apparent, for ‘what I am’ to become apparent does not require the withdrawal of attention. Even in your tasting of the phenomenal experience in it’s full vibrancy, what You Are is completely apparent to You.

[Continues reading from chat]: “I can’t tell if division ceases or not.”

Yes. I can. [Chuckles] It does. Because there is no actual division that has ever happened. The sense of divisions is caused only by the labels …, even with our Satsang labels of ‘Consciousness and Awareness.’ And ultimately, you must throw even these away. [Smiles]

So, let’s look at a very primary division that we’ve made, even in Satsang. We say that there is a body and there is a world; but it is not true. One set of sensations we’ve clumped together in one label called ‘body’. Another set of sensations we’ve clumped together and called it ‘world’. There is no actual need in Existence to make these clumps. There is no need to term a set of sensations and call it ‘body’ and term a second set of sensations and call it ‘world’ or ‘realm’ or ‘universe’ or something like that. Then we seem to have taken another set of sensations and said ‘Oh! This is thoughts, this is memory, this is imagination. Let’s clump them together and let’s call it ‘mind’.’ There is no need to do that in Existence Itself. Only for conceptual understanding, we need to do these groupings. Another set of sensations is ‘Something is like this, something is like that.’

I feel that nothing is ever repeated. But it can feel like we start labeling. ‘Okay, this is sadness, this is happiness, this is joy, this is bliss, this is anxiety, this is grief; all of these sensations, let’s put it in a convenient basket and let’s call it emotions.’ [Smiles] There is no reason to do that; there is no need.

What has happened is that to make a photocopy for the mind, for that which the mind can fathom out of this Existence, then we use all of these labels to define that which is indefinable. Because the mind can only fathom limitations, boundaries. So, we’ve created these labels which act as apparent boundaries.

No actual separation or division has really happened. It is not that there was one in the sleep state and now there are two in the waking state. Ultimately, we’ve got to even say that. [Smiles]

So, no division has actually happened.

[Continuing on the contemplation earlier in today’s satsang: ‘Can the Witness be witnessed?’]

[Reading from chat]: “Can’t tell if it’s present or absent.”

Because this is so empty of qualities that even blank or full, Presence or absence, does not apply.

[Reading from next chat]: “It is That which is aware of blank or dark or empty or light or nothing; and everything.”

That. Now the mind will come and say ‘But this is infinite regress: What witnesses that which witnesses that which witnesses that?’ The mind will come and say it like that. But it is just not possible for it to be infinite regress. When we step one step backwards (only conceptually) and say ‘What witnesses, when the witness is empty of desire?’ …, we come Here. And already, You are empty of all qualities, so therefore, there’s nothing to be witnessed. Even the qualitative perception you cannot find Here.

Now, if you were mentally to come up with an inquiry and say ‘But what witnesses that which witnesses the witness?’ then know that you’re just getting fancy with Advaita words. Know that we’re just getting fancy with Advaita words trying to get to some ultimate truth.

But there is no regress possible because That which Itself we can say is the formless Truth, without any phenomenal experience of it, there is no step left to go back one step further. There is no possibility to go backwards from There. Because It Itself is the substratum, the primary.

And this is a very beautiful exploration …, if any of you feel to do this. If any of you actually feel to convince me that it is possible to have infinite regress or go one step back, I’m happy to hear your experience. Not your concepts but your experience of this. Otherwise, it just becomes a philosophical debate. What was that joke about a philosopher?

We’re all standing on the world.

On what is the world standing?

The world is standing on top of a turtle.

Where is that turtle standing?

On top of another turtle.

What is that turtle standing on top of?

Another turtle.

(So, it is this conceptual riddle.)

Where does it all go?

The philosopher says ‘It’s turtles all the way down.’

So then, it becomes this conceptual concept of infinite regress.

But from your experience, from your direct insight, it will be beyond intellectual, beyond perceptual. It will be intuitive:

Can you take a step further back from That which is aware of Your Existence?

None of us can do this.

You’re aware of Your Existence.

What is aware of this Awareness?

[Silence]

You’re aware of Your Existence.

What is aware of this Awareness?

Can we take any one step back?

Possible?

[Smiles]

Tell me how it is.

[Reading from chat]: “It seems like life is orchestrating things so that I have to confront unresolved stories that still carry a strong emotional charge.”

It is not uncommon for these things to happen in Satsang. It can seem like you’re coming to some insights about Your True Self and yet, it also feels like a lot of things which we thought were past now seem to come up again. It’s a common experience for those in Satsang.

As these things are coming (it could be in terms of life events, it could be in terms of emotions) many of them will try to convince you that you have to deal with them in some personal sort of way; that you must put on the garb of personality so that you can finally deal with these things and get them out of the way.

But let’s see if it is possible to deal with all of this as Presence Itself.

Things come to you; they knock on your door and they are expecting to meet a person there.

But what happens to those things when they meet God?

[Silence]

[Reading from chat]: “Dear Father, please with your Grace, help me to be free. There is strong attachment to past and personhood. Help me, Father, to burn that which is untrue.”

A: [Closes eyes] Enjoy this moment, which is free from the past. It will take a moment even for the past to come. [Smiles] And you can tell me if what I am saying is not clear. In this moment, even for a memory to come or some attachment to happen, it still needs a moment. So, enjoy this moment before that comes; and enjoy this moment before that comes; and enjoy this moment before that comes; [Smiles] enjoy this moment before that comes; enjoy this moment before that comes; and this moment. So, if I give you no time to conceptualize, I give you no time to label anything as past or person…, [then?]

When to be and how to be free from past and personhood? How is it that in this moment you are free of it? Before the ‘But…’ comes and is believed, you are free from it. Before the doubt comes, you are free from it.

This is the trick. You might feel like ‘There is a process that I have to go through.’ But that process might seem like it’s from the outside perspective looking at the play of this body/mind. The burning will seem visible [Tangible] outwards looking into This. But from within [Points to inside] you are free Right Now.

In what ways is your Existence bound in this very moment, before the seller of doubts appears? [Smiles]

All your attachments are gone, you are fresh. But the mind will say ‘Really? That’s not my experience.’ [Chuckles] ‘That’s not my experience’ It’s just saying that. But actually, you have never experienced anything but your freedom. But when we look at it through the lens of what the mind is saying, through the lens of our belief system, it can seem like what it is saying is true.

The one that need to be helped…, bring that one to me.

What will you bring?

Will you bring this body?

It has no notion of bondage or freedom.

What will you bring? This is a worthy exploration.

‘Help me to be free.’ Whom should I help?

[Looks around] This is for all of you actually. Who can be helped?

Not a medical doctor; they can’t do anything for the body. If they can’t do anything for the body, then who is the one that is left?

[Someone says]: Mind.

A: Is there such a thing? Is there such an entity that can be helped?

Is there a mind which is an existent Being that can be brought here and can be helped?

[Smiles] We have no experience of them.

What is a mind?

When there is an existence of a thought, we say ‘There is mind.’

When there is no thought in the present experience, you say ‘There is no mind.’

This is not really an entity. It is just an energy construct, which is coming and going.

But this is worth exploring: ‘Help me become free’ (for the ‘me’ that wants freedom…)

Q: Father, when we ask who witnesses, then that witness has no desire.

A: Who witnesses that witness having no desire?

[Silence]

You say ‘When we ask ‘Who is witnessing?’ we see that there is a witness who has no desire.’ So, we who see, or the ‘I’ who sees that ‘By the way, that witness has no desire’ …, who witnesses that?

That is the claimant to the ‘I’ in this case because actually, what you’re saying is ‘I See that this witness has no desire.’

[Silence]

This ‘I’ that Sees that this witness has no desire, which ‘I’ is that?

[Silence]

Q: Please say that again slowly.

A: So, we asked the question in Satsang: Who witnesses that?

Or we can use it for anything phenomenal: Who witnesses the thought? Who witnesses the body? Who witnesses the emotion? Who witnesses any perception? [Phone rings] Who witnesses the ring of the phone? Yes?

Now you say ‘When I look, I find that this witness has no desire.’

But then we can ask: If you found that there is witness that has no desire, you must have witnessed this witness.

You say ‘I found that the witness has no desire.’ Then you must have seen it because you’re not making it up. You’re not making up the idea that the witness has no desire; it’s your experience.

So, who experienced it? Who was witness to this witness?

Q: It’s blank but somehow, I am there.

A: How many agree with this? When we say ‘What witnesses this witness?’ then the report is coming that ‘It is blank but somehow, I’m there.’

So, what does blank mean? Can you elaborate on this blank? What does this ‘blank’ means? Is blank an absence of light?

Q: It has no quality like the ‘wanting-I’.

A: Okay, let’s go even slower. Does it have the quality of blankness? Like blank means absence, you know, like when they say ‘Fill in the blanks.’ So, fill in the blank means ‘Ram ______ to the market’. The absence of a word to complete the meaning of a sentence is what we usually call blank.

So, this that witnesses this and can say that ‘The witness has no desire’ (that which is the witness to this) is it the absence of something? Does it have that quality? [Silence]

Does it feel like something could be there but it isn’t; or should be there but it isn’t?

And these words will only make sense if you’re looking along. If you’re just trying to understand it, it’s all rubbish.

[Someone in the room says something inaudible]

She says ‘Sometimes it feels like it’s so empty of all qualities that the closest word that the mind can pick up is that it’s blank.’

But it’s not even blank.

[Silence]

Q: It is Presence, not absence.

A: When you say ‘It is Presence, not absence’ …, what witnesses Presence?

Even these two are opposites: Presence and absence.

So, That which witnesses either Presence or absence, is That present or absent?

So, who wants freedom?

[Silence]

Nobody?

[Silence]

[Reads from chat]: “Trick question.” [Chuckles] Yes.

Who doesn’t want freedom?

[Silence]

This is very good! I am very impressed with all of you. Because that means you heard that is not about what is on this side of the ‘want.’ Because what you put after ‘want’ can change. It can be freedom, it can be many things. Lots of phenomenal things can come over there. But what is important is on this side of the ‘I’ that wants or doesn’t want freedom. That is the important contemplation. Literally, to focus on the content of the ‘want’ is to literally put the cart before the horse. That is why it is important to clarify first. Before you build the cart, before you attach a cart, don’t you want to know who is going pull the cart?  Is it going to a horse, donkey, buffalo, cow? (What else can pull a cart?) [Chuckles] It’s good to know. So, before you attach something to ‘I’ don’t you have to know what is this ‘I’ is? Whether you attach freedom, bondage or whether you attach worldly desire or no worldly desire, whether you want truth or lies, don’t you first have to confirm to what you are attaching it?

Are you happy to presume? How many are happy to presume who you are? [Smiles] Happy to presume who you are? Let us have a vote. Happy to presume? [Looking around at Sangha] Happy to presume who you are? No. And every time you presume who you are, you become unhappy anyway. Every time you presume who you are, suffering comes eventually anyway.

So, there is no (even rational) reason to presume. So, why do it? [Smiles] How do you do it? Because …, addiction? In this world when we see people harming themselves, you usually call it an addiction because there is no rational reason to it. There is no rational reason to have that 20^th drink. There is no rational reason to have that fiftieth cigarette. There is no rational reason to inject yourself with substances which are harming your body. No rational reason.

And all of you already said that you don’t want to presume anymore. And every time you presume that we are the separate entity, suffering comes anyway.

A: The good news is that, in Reality, you cannot fall short. Are you aware now?

Q: Yes.

A: You didn’t fall short. I have been asking this question for years but I wonder how many of you actually can feel what I am really asking. It’s an amazing thing. You answer ‘Yes’ in spite of not having a visual or a sensual feeling of this ‘aware.’

You are Aware. Whatever else might be: Are you aware now?

Q: No.

A: No? [Laughs] Are you aware that you are not aware?

Q: Yes.

A: Yes. So, this ‘aware’ is inescapable in this case. It’s Undoubtable [Chuckles] because even to say ‘I am not aware’ what we are actually saying is ‘I am aware that I am not aware.’ [Chuckles]

So, when you said this, what did you see?

Q: Just my experience that I Am …,

A: What do you mean by experience? Like when you say ‘I had the experience of pina colada’ then you had taste of it. Then you say ‘I experienced pina colada.’ Now when you say ‘I experienced ‘aware’ what did you experience?

Q: No quality as such.

A: No quality as such, but …? [Chuckles]

Q: But I know that I …

A: How do you know?

Q: This Knowingness.

A: Suppose you didn’t know this term ‘Knowingness’ or ‘Awareness.’ I say ‘Are you aware now?’ On what basis do you say ‘Yes’?

You see? Isn’t it unique? It’s unique because everything else you have a phenomenal basis for saying ‘Yes’.

Is there a sofa in this room? You say ‘Yes.’ Why do you say ‘Yes?’  Because you see it is a phenomenal perception. Is the fan on or off?  ‘Off.’ Why do you say that? Because you can see that it is not moving. Is it warm or cold? ‘It’s okay; a little warm, a little cold.’ Why? Because you had the experience. Is your mind active or quiet? You can answer from your experience. Are you happy? Or sad? Or in pain? Or pleasure? We have the experience of it, and on that basis of it, we say ‘Yes’ or ‘No.’ Are you happy? If you have a sense of happiness then you say ‘Happy.’ Sometimes you sense sadness is there and you say ‘No, I am not happy.’ It is on the basis of phenomenal experience that we answer all of these questions.

But when I ask you ‘Are you aware now?’ …, what is it?

What are you coming to face to face with? …, (in a sense)?

[…]

This ‘I’ remains unquestioned; in the sense that it is the most obvious that you cannot lose this I; you cannot lose Your Self. That is the most obvious. And yet the funny part about this spiritual seeking is what? [Chuckles] We are looking for this Self, which you most obviously cannot lose.

When Guruji says ‘Everything else you can throw away but you cannot throw away your Self’ (I am paraphrasing) what is he talking about then? Is there any phenomenon that does not come and go? [Silence] Is there any phenomenon which does not come and go? [Smiles]

So, if all phenomenon comes and goes, who must be there to say that all phenomenon comes and goes? You know what I mean? If I was to say ‘Is there always traffic on this road?’ And you were to say ‘No, Ananta there is not always traffic. Sometimes there is traffic and other times there is no traffic.’ …, this means you have to be there. You’ve seen that there is traffic and that there is no traffic. So, the one that says ‘All phenomena comes and goes’ must be present even when the phenomena are not there. This non-phenomenal-You is That which witnesses even the appearance of this witness as a phenomenal witness (and the dissolution of it).

This is the third bird. One bird is making the nest, doing all the wok. All the phenomenal activities are happening. The second bird is witnessing, is perceiving, all of this. And then there is third bird which is not on the branch. This third bird, we cannot even call it bird; this third bird is the witness of all states, is ever-present, is always there. Even now it is there.

What is That which witnesses all of this? It witnesses this ‘bird’ speaking, speaking, speaking, expressing …, then the ‘bird’ which is perceiving all of this movement. It is my Being itself, my Presence, my Existence which gives a substratum for this play of perceptions to happen. But what is Aware of this Existence, this Being that perceives? How is this witnessed or perceived? This Being, which is the perceiver of all objects?

What is Aware of this perceiver is beyond even your phenomenal existence.