BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

What do we mean by ‘person’? Person means the idea we have about ourself as a limited entity; the limited entity which has concerns like relationships, money, physical body and even freedom. So this ‘I am something’ is the idea of being a person, the idea of separation, the idea of individuality. So, this is what we mean by ‘person’…, the imaginary one, the entity that we believe ourself to be.

Then this Sense-of-Existence Being (so we call it Sense-of-Existence Being, Consciousness, God) … the qualitative ‘finger’ [The finger which arises from the hand but is one with the hand]… I Am…, this is what we call Consciousness; that which emerges, in the light of which, the waking state comes, the dream state comes. I Am.

This I Am: we call this Beingness, the sense of Being, the Presence, Consciousness, God. All these terms are used for this sense of Consciousness.

Then, what about the Absolute, the one that is aware even of this Being? What do we call that? We call it the Absolute, we call it Awareness, we call it the Primal Witness, we call it the Self; Brahman.

Someone says: “Atman”

Atman we usually refer to as the sense of Being. Para-Atman or Brahman we would call This One.

Q: Can I ask you one thing? What is this difference between the conscious Awareness in the night sleep, when we’re gone? What is the difference?

A: Yes. What time you woke up this morning?

Q: 5:15

A: 5:15, you say so conclusively (and that´s very early). [Chuckles] So, 5:15 you woke up. What changed at 5:15? You say ‘I woke up at 5:15’. What changed at 5:15? Before 5:15, what was there?

Q: Nothing. I don´t know.

A: Nothing. Nothing was there. You didn´t know?

Q: I don´t know because it was all black.

A: [Chuckles] But even that there was ‘nothing’ needs a Knowing, isn´t it? But this Knowing is not mental. Now, our habit has become to say ‘knowing means this’ (like knowing mentally). But to even say ‘I woke up at 5:15’ requires this Knowing that there was nothing and then there was everything.

But even before everything came…, ‘I Am’. See, the sense of existence woke up; the sense ‘I Am’ woke up (that which, in our type of Satsangs, we call Consciousness). The sense ‘I Am’ woke up within You…, within You meaning ‘Within this Awareness which is quality-less, attribute-less, unborn, un-label-able, undying. You see?

Q: You say ‘When the consciousness woke up’. What was it before 5:15?

A: It was what? That is a very good question. He says ‘What was it before 5:15?’ So, let’s go with our experience.

There is no phenomenal appearance. All there IS, is this ‘Knowingness’ of ‘No-thing’. Then there is the emergence of that what we call Consciousness. What must it be made up of? If already in our experience there is only Awareness, therefore what must Consciousness be made up of? It must be made up of That itself. You see?

Sleep state [holding up his fist], waking state [raising a finger]. Is there one hand or two?

Q: One.

A: One hand. This is Awareness [holding up his fist] within which there is a sense ‘I Am’ which is arising [raises a finger]. This is the ‘I’ [pointing to his fist] within which there is the ‘I Am’ arising [raises the finger]. Did the separation really happen?

Q: No.

A: And yet, qualitatively, it can look like ‘Now, there is a finger [holds up his finger] where there was none earlier’. You see?

Now, qualitatively it can seem like ‘I have come into this existence’ but in reality it is just ‘I’ which is ‘Am’. You see?

The appearance of ‘Am’ [holds up his finger] doesn´t mean that ‘I’ changed [makes fist]. ‘Am’ is appearing [raises his finger] and ‘Am’ is disappearing [takes his finger down]. I remain the same. I-Awareness remain untouched [makes a fist] in this play of ‘Am-ing’ [holds up his finger] and ‘not-Am-ing’ [takes his finger down] …, in the waking, dreaming [holds up finger]…, all these states come and go I [makes fist] remain unchanged, untouched.

So, my dynamic aspect, my qualitative aspect, wakes up as ‘I Am’. So, ‘I’ (completely quality-less, attribute-less, beyond time, beyond space) then plays as ‘I Am’. With the birth of

‘I Am’ all these toys (time and space, light and sound) all these come into play.

Within this is the birth of a power; the power of belief. ‘I Am’ can take itself to be something which is emerging within itself, like an object. It can say ‘This is ‘I Am’: I am a person, I am a good person, I am a spiritual person, I am this body, I am the husband, I am the father’. You see?

So, the ‘I Am’ itself. Before ‘I Am’ there is nothing, none of this. Once ‘I Am’ comes, then the power to take on all of these attributes of ‘I am this, I am this, I am this, I am that’. So, this is called conditioning. This is called conditioning. And as we look more and more at ‘What is it that I Truly Am?’ …, (what is the source of this finger? It is the hand itself)…, then all the false conditioning starts to wash away.

It starts to wash away. Then you say that ‘None of this really applies to what I Am in reality. And we come from associated (which is conditioned Being, in a way) to unconditioned. ‘All of these attributes which I`ve given myself don´t truly apply to Me because I Am this unlimited Being. No limitation applies’.

That´s why I said ‘What is the perspective you want to take?’ Do you want to start with the perspective that ‘I am a person, I am a body/mind and I want my freedom’ from that perspective? Are we open to just looking at what is Truly Here?

Being without a concept. Being without a limitation. And to even ask ‘What is aware of this Being?’ …, because ultimately, even this sense of Being is a coming and going.

[As we saw above, coming in the waking state then disappearing in deep sleep]

A: You say that ‘When you report that I am this awareness’…, are you saying that that is personal or the Seeing of it is personal? I’m not very clear about what you are saying.

Q: Okay, like when you say ‘In deep sleep, what were you there?’ I’m the one who is there to say that ‘Nothing else, even this talking, I am, was not there’…, it’s my direct experience, I don’t have to ask anybody.

A: Exactly.

Q: But this rising of this ‘I Am Consciousness’ doesn’t seem to be my direct experience. That is what I’m saying.

A: The arising of ‘I Am’. Then what would you say your experience of waking up from sleep is?

Q: Yes, now I feel ‘the person’ is talking and saying, “I did not see ‘I Am’ arising.”

A: Okay, let’s slow down a bit. When we say ‘person is talking’ is it really possible for a person to talk?

What we are really saying is that there is Consciousness (which is believing itself to be a limited entity called Jyotima) is now making a report. But that concept of the limited entity Jyotima cannot really have a report for itself, isn’t it? All reports are Consciousness.

Q: Yeah. Okay, so now when I’m now looking as Consciousness (I’m looking)…, I have nothing to report.

A: How do you mean you have nothing to report? The phenomenal universe is appearing in front of you, isn’t it?

Q: Yes, it’s there but I don’t have any question to say ‘Did this appear or not?’

A: Yes, yes. Is that a problem?

Q: No.

A: Maybe I’m missing the essence of what you ask.

Q: What I’m saying is just ‘Why can I not see the arising of this ‘I Am’? Yes, I see this whole waking state. I am the witness of it. Okay, I got the answer! As being the witness of it, I am the awareness who is the witness of this waking state. So, how can I say I don’t see it arising?!

A: Yes, that is what I’m saying. For those who say ‘There is no difference actually in my life between Awareness and Consciousness and why do you speak about Consciousness?’ what they really mean is that they don’t find any difference between deep sleep and waking state, which is not true.

We know that there is no substantive difference, but there is a qualitative difference. We know this is the hand, and yet the finger appears. [Pointing one finger upwards]

Q: Just now, I’m witnessing it. Yes, I see now, as the Awareness I am witnessing this whole state. You know, when I consider myself as person then I’m asking ‘Why don’t I see the ‘I Am’ arising but when I stay as just the Awareness, then I am the witness of it. I see it has come and I will know when it will go.

A: Very good. So, now I have a question to confuse you, which is: If Awareness was the witness (but awareness was already witnessing and it was knowing that it was witnessing) so who just now came to the recognition that Awareness has always been the witness?

[Pause]

Q: [Laughing] It’s all pointing back to Awareness. I have no other answer. Nothing else but awareness Knows; I mean nothing.

A: As Consciousness, as Being…, because for Awareness there is no forgetting. Delusion recognition, enquiry; all this does not apply. Awareness is just aware. But in the play as its dynamic aspect (which is Consciousness) the play is the finger, because it can believe itself to be a finger with a hat on, a finger which is a nice finger, a finger that is like that and like that. And now, then the finger is turning inwards and recognizing its own source and saying ‘No, I’m not any of this. I Am this’.

So, Maharajas book, ‘I Am That’ (Tat Twam Asi) is a pointing for who? It is for ‘I Am’ to see that I Am That. There is nothing personal in this; no person is coming to the recognition because no person exists.

Who is recognizing that there is awareness? Who is recognizing that I am Awareness? Who is here that can make this discovery? So, it is not awareness in its quality less attribute less aspect that can play this game of deluding and play the game of personhood and stepping away from the personhood and come to clarity. It is only Being, pretending in this leela to play as if it can get caught up in its limitation. And as if it has designed these alarm clocks, to come in the form of gurus to come and show you, that you are not this limited entity, you are truly Awareness.

Beingness itself is dropping all the false attributes it has given to itself.

Q: But when we say just now ‘It is the I which becomes the ‘Am’.., sometime back we said ‘It is I-Awareness (and only Awareness) attribute-less which becomes the Am, from this awareness arises this feeling of Beingness, Consciousness, Am-ness, and the power to delude itself, the power of belief arises with this Am-ness. Right? So, at the end of the road, at the end of the end, I can’t go beyond Awareness. So, isn’t it the Awareness itself which is doing this? This question always bugs me. At the end of the day it has to be Awareness itself which wants to do this. Why would it do it otherwise?

A: Yes, but the thing with this is that is that there is no quality, there is no attribute to this Awareness. So (to make the question go away) I can tell you that a primal urge came within this Awareness, a desire to experience itself as if it was phenomenal; and from that came this entire phenomenal world, this entire phenomenal sense of existence. But even that is a conclusion we use to make the question go away, because we cannot truly say anything about That which is non- phenomenal.

Can that which is non-phenomenal have a desire? If you don’t have a quality or an attribute, can you desire something? Can you have an urge?

Q: No.

A: All of these are answers which we use to just make the question go away because the true answer is not there. There is no such thing as a true answer as to ‘Why I choses to play as I Am’. It just does.

Usefulness is a pointer, usefulness if it helps in our True looking, our True insight. This is what all these definitions are meant for, but if it just becomes like: ‘Okay I know these fifteen definitions therefore I know Brahman,” no we don’t [Laughs]. We just got aspects which were supposed to be used (or definitions which were supposed to be used) for our contemplations, for our inner looking and we have confused that to be ‘something that I know now’ because our way of knowing has been to learn concepts. You see right from school ‘I know that the speed of light is this; the earth is this big; there are however many planets in the solar system…’ You see now all of these things we just learn without really ever knowing them truly, we just know concepts about them.

There is the conceptual knowing of all the concepts we have picked up and that becomes the root of our conditioning (all that we know conceptually) basically our belief system. So what do we know conceptually? Our beliefs, and then these beliefs are always in opposition to other beliefs because no concept is actually true because there will always be those who believe the opposite of what we believe and this leads to all this worldly (seeming) confrontation. So this is the conceptual Knowing.

Then there is a perceptual knowing that ‘I know, there are one, two, three, four, five; five people in the room because I’m getting the perception of five – five bodies here.’ So there can be knowing which is reliant on this perception and ‘I see it for myself, therefore I know this.’ So it can be like this through perception, through sight, through sound; ‘Okay I know there’s a street down there because I can hear the traffic, I know there’s a fan because I can feel the air’. So this is the second sort of knowing which is this perceptual knowing.

Then somebody was saying in the book they read, ‘there’s a sense of emotional knowing’, in the emotion something is sensed: ‘So this is grief, I know there is grief because I’m experiencing it emotionally’, you see? – ‘There is joy today because I Am experiencing’. The experiencing of these sensations, the experiencing of these emotions is like an emotionally knowing,

But that Knowingness which we talk about is That which is the Changeless One, That which Knows even of our existence. So all of the other three depend on our sense of existence – I AM; they depend on the waking state or the dream state to happen, but what is That which knows that there is dream state, there is waking state, sleep state? What is the common ground they travel along, through all these; the substratum of all of these states, what is that? So we look at this and see that this unchanging substratum is the True Knowingness.

So even when we say ‘I don’t know’, what we are truly saying is ‘I know now that I don’t know.’ So either we are saying it because there is a Knowingness of it, which is like this, or there is a conceptual, perceptual or emotional knowing of it. So to Know that we exist, to Know that ‘I exist’ (actually this is where there is no ‘we’ now) to know that ‘I exist’ it is not perception, it is not conceptual, it is not emotional; what is this Knowing? What is that one? This Knowingness is actually undeniable because truly nobody can say that ‘I don’t exist’ even that has to be spoken in the realm of existence itself. So we know that ‘I exist’ on the basis of this very primal knowing and this is why Sages like Maharaj [Nisargadatta Maharaj] had said ‘stay with the I Am, stay with the sense of existence’ because it is this I AM itself which will lead you to this I which is prior or beyond I Am.

Why? Because as we stay with this sense of existence we see that ‘Yes even this sense of existence is Known – I Know I exist, I Know I Am’. And this ‘I’, This that is aware of I AM is prior even to this Presence, and yet because it comes from That (all comes from Knowingness itself, all comes from Awareness itself including existence, including the I Am) therefore only this Knowingness actually exists insight of all the seeming differences. Satsang is about the dropping of conceptual knowing and coming to the true Knowing of Knowingness itself.

Therefore the best and only use truly of all these pointers and these contemplations is to bring them into my own looking and see ‘ is this true or not? Which sense am I using to know that I exist? Do I need to refer to a concept of existence to see that I exist? No. Do I need to refer to some emotion to see that I exist? No. Do I need to refer to eyesight, hearing, taste, smell, touch to see that I exist? No. There is something that is much more primal, this primal Witnessing, primal Awareness, the Knowingness itself, (that’s with a capital K).

That’s why I like it when the author said ‘listen, this Knowledge cannot belong to anyone’ [Laughs] it is Knowledge Itself, pure Knowledge, it is not a belonging (in the sense of) nobody can own It, because to own It would just be to have a concept of It. IT is IT [Laughs].

We can see that our sight is dependent, it comes and goes, it changes. Our ability to see with our eyes also changes according to how much attention is spare (in a way), we can see that if our attention is just on a worry or a concern or some trouble or something then we are not even looking at the world clearly, it just starts to look blurry and it’s not just because we have blurry eyes [Laughs] it’s just that we have a lack of attention available to look at things with clarity, even perceptually. So because attention is limited then sight, sound, taste, touch, smell; all these are dependent on attention. I cannot hear you completely clearly and the sound on the street completely clearly [at the same time], that’s why people with many kids seem to have stressful lives because there are too many kids asking for their attention at the same time so they run out of it.

So all this perceptual knowing is dependent on how much attention is available, but that which Knows of sight, that which Knows of taste, that which Knows of touch and smell and hearing, that is independent of attention, that is not limited by attention; it is unchanging depending on what sight might be there, what hearing might be there, what other perceptual functioning might be happening.

So what is ‘I’ that sees sight?

What is it that Knows that the eyes are open right now?

The only point of all the words that I’ve shared in satsang is pointing to this Silence. Never mistake the pointers with That to which they were pointing. Remain still. Be quiet.

Don’t ever believe that ‘I know something because I know a concept’. True Knowingness is not special.

If any words from satsang create frustration, guilt or anguish of any sort, keep them aside for some time. Don’t get into any debates; no arguments about right and wrong or about superior knowledge; there is no such thing. Just different pointers. If a pointer is not being used to demolish other concepts, to remove false conditioning, if the pointer itself is new conditioning, then it can be thrown away.

Remain in your not-knowing. And when we don’t know anything mentally, then we allow ourself to remain open. If you find yourself in conflict, rely on your own Seeing, not on your own concepts. Live concept-free; unconditionally.

The Satguru’s Presence is always with you.

Don’t fear your emptiness. Remain open. Don’t rush to cover yourself with some concepts when your openness feels too raw, too naked. You will not lose anything but the false.

If there are times when you experience suffering, don’t go into any denial. Smell your own concepts, your own words and notice if they are some sort of conceptual denial. Remain empty of this. When you feel unworthy, know that it is a complete lie; because all of this is your play. All exists because You exist. When you feel special, know that it is a lie; because the special one does not exist. All is One; before the concept of One.

Advaita is not the Truth. Advaita is beautiful pointers to the Truth. Even to emphasize Oneness, gives belief, reality, to ‘two-ness’, of separation.

When you experience different forms of energy, like form kundalini to energetic transmission from the Sages to energetic transference to energetic afflictions, Know that even this energy You are not. That which witnesses this is not energetic.

Remain empty of arrogance and false humility; which is the same. Remain empty of doership and non-doership, of desire and aversion, of separation or Oneness. Have no concept about anything. No debates about Self or non-Self, existence or non-existence. Never look down upon another’s path. Never try to teach another, unless invited. Never use this knowledge as a sword to attack another.

Always have reverence in your hearts for beautiful Sages, who in their compassion have spent lifetimes sharing this Truth. And if you can’t have reverence, at least remain empty. Never attack one with good intentions.

When true spirituality meets the world, there must be kindness, compassion and love. Making one who is suffering smile is a beautiful seva. [Selfless service, serving God in all]

Stay open to the possibility that you could be wrong. Don’t get stuck in any conceptual righteousness.

Know that a Supreme Power, a Supreme Intelligence, runs this life.

Those who truly want freedom must also learn to provide the same freedom to their families, to their friends, to all those who they meet. They don’t want to dance to your projections; just like you don’t want to dance to theirs.

Let the world be as it is. You remain still.

Know that all of this (all of these multi-layers; this seeming-outside world, this body, these thoughts, emotions, any sensations) all of this is part of the play of One Consciousness. There never has been any individual with any control over any aspect of this play.

All is moving in the Light of Consciousness.

What then can we desire? What duality remains? Which doer is here?

You are never experiencing any separation. You are only believing it to be true.

Let go of all control. Let go of these fallacies. Surrender everything to the Satguru. And if you feel like you cannot surrender, see if you can find the ‘you’ that is not surrendered. Find the one that is not surrendered already. Inquire into the Truth. And if neither surrender nor inquiry you can do, then go to the Sage and request his guidance. His pointing will get you to this beautiful letting go.

When suffering seems to arise, find out if there is something which is not phenomenal, which cannot suffer, about yourself. Check if you can put some attention on the space in which this misery arises. And see if that space remains untouched by it. Who witnesses this space? Can That suffer?

May my Master’s grace bring peace in all your lives.

May you be blessed with gratitude, joy, contentment.

May your lives be expressions of your Reality.

Satguru Moojiji ki Jai!

[Sangha]: Anantaji ki Jai!

[Ananta]: Sangha ki Jai!

[Silence]  [Namaste]

Om Namah Shivaya

Om Namo Bhagavate Bhagavate Vasudevaya

Om Sri Ram, Jai Ram, Jai Jai Ram

Om Shanti Shanti Shanti

The true Master is Your own Presence.

Never feel like the Satguru is going anywhere.

All you have to do is call out to him, invoke the Presence of the Master.

And if this [Ananta’s] instrument is needed, this instrument will also continue to show up.

Always at your service,

Always in service to the sangha.

Always in service to my Master.

Love, love, love you all so very much!

[Namaste] Thank you, Thank you, Thank you

Q: Today I read something from a Master who said something like ‘The character, the general energy will always stay, even after realization’. He said that ‘You just know that there is no-one who is that special way.’ (I hope you get it.) Is that right what he says? Can you say something about it?

A: The character will always stay. Yes, the play of the character will always stay but the sense that ‘I am this’ becomes very light. I have to speak from my experience; the sense that ‘I am this one and not that one’ becomes much lighter. It can happen that you cross somebody on the road and he says ‘Sir, what is the time?’ and you look at the watch and say ‘1 pm’ and you feel like ‘Oh, but this watch could be his also’ so you feel like just taking it off and giving. So, that much still remains here where the watch is not yet always taken out and given. That much sense of individuality still remains here.

For many, even this goes. Many sages have reported in the past that someone comes and says something just like this and they give the whole kingdom. Like that; some stories are there. Someone says ‘Give me some food to eat’ and they say ‘Here, here, you have my kingdom’. So, extreme examples of the loss of this sense that ‘I am this character’ are also available. In the traditional text it is said that in these minute quantities ‘Tanmatra’ always remains. That is why the Sages are not walking into the ocean saying ‘I am one with the ocean’…, from this sense of ‘This one is there’.

In this case [Pointing to himself] I have to say that this is the thing that really changed (if anything did change) that this sense of ‘me and another’ really reduced to a very small quantity; and also continues to reduce. I can see already that even since the sharing of satsang started the sense that ‘I am this verses another is that’ has reduced a lot.

So, I would say that the play of the character continues to play out, and it is Seen, but the sense that ‘I am this character’ starts to dissolve more and more and more. That is the switch (if there is one). That is the dissolution (if there is one). Like that. You see?

Also, what can also happen many times is you don’t recognize your own face in the mirror. You say ‘who is this staring back at me from the mirror. It doesn’t feel like there is a ‘me’ in that. It doesn’t feel like ‘These are my hands which I’m moving; this is my mouth’. When the sharing of satsang starting here I would enjoy coming to the satsang hall, then would wait for this mouth to start speaking and then be hearing this and saying ‘This is good stuff, I wonder where it is coming from’. [Chuckles] So, this sense that ‘I am doing this, I am here as…’ goes, as this thing starts to dissolve a lot more.

So, the play of the character continues as long as the seeming waking state seems to reappear. As Guruji also once said ‘I woke up this morning and Mooji was still there’. You have to realize what that means. You wake up and you see “Oh, this body is here. Okay, this one is Mooji, this body is here, the sense that there is a character called Mooji is still there’. But this sense dissolves in a very big way.

So, you said ‘I read something from a Master who said ‘The character, the general energy will always stay.’ The ‘general energy’…, we have to see what you mean by that but the energy that ‘I am this character’ seems to dissolve in a very, very big way even after realization. Because the realization is what? I am not just that character. I am this no-thing, this unchanging Self.

[You say] ‘He said that you know just that there is no-one who is that special way’.

[Silence] It’s more like there is no-one here at all.

[You say] ‘I was shocked a bit by this statement. I mean, I really reject a lot of this character’.

I feel we should clarify a little bit about ‘rejection’. So, what are we really rejecting? We are not rejecting the movements of this body. We are not rejecting the speech of this body. We are not rejecting what is happening in the world also. In fact, it is opposite of that. It is: that which was resistance is now being replaced with BIG openness. BIG openness is here for the play of this realm; this seeming character and all the other seeming-characters in it.

What is being rejected now is that ‘I am limited in this way. I’m just individualized in some way’. What is being rejected is this sense of separation, the sense of separate identity. Just like if someone comes to you now and starts treating you as if you are an infant (like ‘coochie, coochie, coo…’) you will say ‘But who are you talking to?’ It is rejected; the idea that you are a baby is rejected. And someone comes and says ‘But don’t you go to this school?’ (the school that you went to) and you say ‘No. I reject that because I am no longer there. I went many years ago’. Just in the same way, when the mind comes and says ‘But aren’t you supposed to do this? Aren’t you supposed to be this? Aren’t you supposed to lead your life in this way? Isn’t that one supposed to behave like this with you?’ All of this telling you about something that you are not, that is rejected. But rejected how? Not by saying ‘No, no, you are not welcome.’ Rejected also by the simple allowing…, ‘Then come and speak whatever you like but I know it is not for me, it is not about me. The ‘me’ that I thought I was, was never real. It was just a misunderstanding, just a fallacy.’

So, although a little bit of this remains always, that is why the great sages and Masters have come and also shown that even in their case it remained.

[Chuckles] (Okay, I should not speak this trivial-ly but…) take the example of Ram. How many times has he cried in the Ramayana? Sita is taken away from Him; cried. Lakshman was lying there as if he was dying and Hanuman has gone to get the Sanjeevani; crying. Then He had to let Sita go to the forest after He came back; crying. So, while Avatars themselves are manifest forms of Vishnu, in this realm they play with some conditioning, with some pretense of personhood; but it is momentary. It is part of the play and it is not held onto. Other examples also there. And Jesus saying ‘Father, why have you forsaken me?’ knowing fully well that all of this is just one play of Consciousness. And yet so powerful is this hypnosis, this game, that the best of the best have also (even after realization of who they are) had moments where they got caught up in this play as if it is real.

And why is it like this? Why it had to play like this? It is so beautiful because it shows us that we are not going for some idea of ‘hundred percent’. If we set up for ourselves this constant idea ‘hundred percent’ it is bound to be a set of failures. That is why all these examples have come and we see that momentarily all of them have fallen for the idea that they are individual, that they exist ‘as something

But I can tell you that what changes is that most of your ideas about yourself you will not believe. Most of this mind chatter just comes and goes. And you rarely buy this idea ‘What is in it for me?’ So, although in reality nothing changes, but (relatively speaking) it is a great shift. So, in our full openness, that which is false will just come and go.

Meeting all of you also has been the greatest gift that my Master has given.

I have so much gratitude in my Heart for all of you.

Thank you for being this beautiful Sangha, my beautiful friends and family.

May we all never forget the beautiful grace we have all had in our lives to have the opportunity to be at the feet of Satguru Sri Moojiji.

May his blessings bring all that is auspicious into all of your lives.

May you find that which your Heart is truly longing for.

I am always in service to all of you.

If not in this way then other ways.

So, this was my message in words.

My truest message is You.

Your life has to be this message,

Your Light has to be this message.

Your Presence has to be this Presence.

Satguru Sri Moojiji ki Jai.

So, I want to share some important things (because it’s the second last satsang). [No more online satsangs for an undetermined time after 15^th Dec.]

Just like this, if Grace can bring these simple examples to you in those times, that is my prayer. Some of these examples I’ve really enjoyed over the years, as they’ve come.

First one is the ATM example, which all of you know. So, we are this ‘Anytime Misery Machine’ which is called the mind. For this Anytime Misery Machine to function, and for you to withdraw misery, you have to do two things. First is the ATM card which is ‘Attention To Mind’ …, (some of these things have just been designed for satsang, okay?) [Chuckles] So, you put the ATM card in, which is ‘give attention to mind’ and then put in your PIN, which is ‘Personal Identification’ which is your belief. You give attention to the thought and say ‘Yes, this is meaningful, this applies, this is relevant for me’. This is my identification with the thought. And you have unlimited reserves in this ‘bank’. As long as you want to withdraw, you can keep withdrawing. But KNOW that without doing these steps, the ATM will not function. It is impossible for you to suffer without your attention and belief in your mind.

This one I really enjoyed. The second one I also really enjoyed very much, which is the conveyor belt. We’re saying ‘What to do?’ Because spirituality can be so confusing. There are so many pointings, directions, here, there; do this, do inquiry; no. you’re not the doer. All of this can get very confusing, isn’t it? So, then what to do? Same way as in this Japanese restaurant (it’s inspired by a Japanese restaurant) where you’re sitting in this restaurant and you’re just sitting at your table and there’s a conveyor belt on which food is coming. Food is coming.

So, the mind is like that. There is a conveyor belt on which thoughts are coming. All that is needed to be done, even if attention is going to the food, is just to allow it to go by. That is surrender. Can surrender be made simpler than this? Just allow this conveyor belt to keep moving. As much as you can, don’t pick up the ‘calories’ of concepts. [Chuckles] You see? Because it is these calories which are conditioning. It is these calories which become tendencies. How to be free of them? Same way as ‘Don’t pull at the leaf of the tree’…, don’t pick up the dish.

But the restaurant is very sneaky. What happens is that if you do pick up the starter, then at least don’t pick up the dessert. Usually what happens is that (if you’re spiritual) you’ll pick up some angry thought about another and it comes and goes; it’s gone. But the ‘dessert’ is the guilt. ‘I should not have done that. I’ve not made any progress at all, I am not worthy of freedom’. You see? All these ‘other courses’ that follow. Even if you did pick up a starter, it came; it was like.., finished. Don’t pick up these heavy, high calorie ones.

So, surrender is as simple as that. Allow this conveyor belt of the mind to come and function, to come and go. You remain concept-free; calorie-free.

Then the cat one. [Parable] A lot of fun we had with it for a long time in satsang. We said that suppose you were born in this world without any mirrors. You were born in this world which had no mirrors, so you did not know who you were. And everybody said that ‘You’re a cat’. So your only job then became to go after your next bowl of milk. They said ‘Get a good education, then you’ll be happy. Get a job, then you’ll be happy. Find the right partner and get married, then you’ll really be happy. Have children and have a fulfilling married life, then you’ll be happy. Make lots of money in the bank; give security to your life and your family, then you’ll be happy’.

So, all these bowls of milk, you had. You say ‘But this lasting peace, lasting joy is just not coming’. So then what happens is that somebody comes and tells this cat that there’s this BIG bowl of milk which is unending. Okay? After you do all this practice, after you do all of this effort, then you might one day get access to this Amrit, this nectar of immortality…, and that will be your final bowl of milk; unending joy.

Then we go to the Sage and say ‘Please, dear sir, can we have this? We were promised; many have said that you have this nectar of freedom. Can you give it to us, this bowl of milk? We have to taste it! What can we do?’

The Sage says ‘I have no bowl of milk. What are you talking about? I have no bowl of milk. But I do have a mirror. Do you want to look? You, who are posing as if you’re a cat; I don’t see a cat at all. I can show you in this mirror’.

Most don’t want that. Most still want the bowl of milk for the cat because the cat is so strongly been believed. There are some who have come to the satsang of these Sages, and some who have come to satsang here over the years and have been unwilling to look openly at this; to look at who they are. And I’m happy to say that you’ve reduced the population of cats to at least some small extent; that it is possible to get out of this trap of this ‘Cat Identity’…, this fallacy that ‘I am this individual’. But it is helped with a lot of openness. If there is some openness, then it can be very simple.

So, I feel some of these examples, some of these stories, can make this very seemingly-complex Advaita, intellectual Advaita, much simpler.

This is a magical universe. [Smiles] So many things moving, grasping for our attention; these objects, all of this, all of this, [Gesturing around him] this body. All is happening. Not just this. Then, so many thoughts; emotions, so much sensation. Then all kinds of variants of emotion mixed with thought; guilt and regret. So much of this activity is going on. And we’ve been playing like this as if we are also an object in this realm of objects. It is a great power that enables That-which-is-not-an-object to play as if it is one. It’s a great power. It is Your own power. This kind of magic only the Divine can do. This divine leela. To say something is mine itself is a great power; the power to play as an object in this world of objects.

How many different types and varieties of energies we’ve experienced, all from that ultimate No-thing-ness, emptiness? We have to (just for some time) enjoy the magnificence this which is going on.

What is it that we are saying fundamentally?

Firstly, that you are not a thing.

That itself is enormous. It is enormous.

Then; that which is not a thing can have the sense that it exists in some way.

How can it come about like this?

That which is No-thing then can have the sense that it exists.

But even that much play is not enough. “I’m just being, I’m just being. I exist.”

Also (I used to say) ‘I exist as if I’m something in this play so that this play can seem so juicy and alive to us. I’m this bundle of energies in this play. I’ve not had enough’. This is deep divine hypnosis.

So, ‘I exist’.

Then ‘I exist as something’.

And then ‘There is so much other than me’.

Now not only is there the sense that ‘I am something’ but also ‘There is another; there are so many others. There’s all of this’.

None of this is ultimately your reality.

Yet it is very compelling. You are a Supreme video game designer. It’s like one of those movies, isn’t it, where the programmer himself gets caught in the program that he has written. You are a game designer which is par excellence. This compelling game we have created and all this magic is happening. First that ‘I exist’ in the sense of existence itself. Then that ‘I exist as something’. Then also the idea that ‘There are other things that exist beside me’. And all this play of enjoyment and suffering; all of this play happens on the basis of these ideas.

If you don’t have this sense that ‘I’m something’ then suffering is not possible. Look at all of our suffering. Such is the magnificence of this play. That No-thing, the Self, the Absolute, then plays as if it exists in this way; and then it plays as if it is this mere bucket of energy, bucket of flesh and blood. Then says ‘All that is appearing in front of Me is not Me. This separation never really happened’.

This one, even now, doesn’t need any spiritual practice to see this. We’ve done a lot of practice to separate, to believe the separation by believing our thoughts, believing our ideas. So every thought is premised on the concept of ‘me…, me, me, me, me, me’.

I’m starting to realize that the ‘spiritual me’ is just as bad (if not worse). [Laughs] It’s so special. It’s so arrogant. It’s so caught up in this so-called journey to freedom. Very, very selfish also at times; very, very. ‘Me, me, me, me.me’. [Laughs] So, it is not as if there’s some specialness in spirituality; it’s very, very selfish, (mostly; I shouldn’t generalize so broadly) …, this ‘me’ who never took birth. Even till the end we avoid looking at ‘Is there really a me?’ Why? Because then it’s ‘game over’.

Somebody is saying, “I put 3 coins in the game machine to play this game.”

And somebody comes and says, “No, no. Leave it.”

“But I’ve put 3 coins in here.” [Laughs] “I want to see where it goes. How does it end? The supreme bliss; the happy ending. Live forever. Happily ever after.”

We feel like we can get to this. But the only ones who have gotten to this are the ones who have taken their hands of the game. And then you’ll be surprised to see that the game goes on. It still appears. Left and right, the movements will happen. You took the hands off the joystick but it still is moving. But it seems to become a lot more fun then. All the stress of ‘What to do? Where to go? Am I getting there or not? Am I playing this right?’…, all our unworthiness, all our specialness; all gone.

Because it’s a very simple point: these words are being spoken on their own. It would be foolish to presume that there is one Ananta who is sitting there who is then conceptualizing these words and speaking them. They are just arising. And this true for all words which were are ever spoken by anyone. All actions are happening on their own. There has never been this ‘Me and another’…, just like our thoughts are appearing.

Most of humanity is even feeling guilty about their thoughts.  But who knows how to create a thought? Nobody. What is the raw material for thought? Nobody knows. Not only that; feeling guilty for your thoughts and resentful about another’s thoughts! ‘How can you think this about me?’…, as if everyone is creating the thoughts that are coming. Not just action but also ‘How could you think this about me?’ Most of the trouble in relationships are like that. ‘Oh, so this is what you really think!’

Thoughts are coming, they are appearing. They are appearing and they are disappearing. Speech is appearing and it is disappearing. It happens with us; words come to us. ‘Oh, I don’t know where this came from!’ It happens. Then, the same way with action.

So, this sense of doership is a critical feature of this game called maya or leela. It can feel like there is not only somebody sitting inside this body but that somebody is also doing, thinking, speaking.

That No-thing (which is not the negative nothing; the mind’s one trick is to say ‘Don’t tell me I’m nothing. Tell me anything but don’t tell me I’m nothing’…, because all of this about trying to become something) …, but this No-thing, the mind cannot fathom. It is a very full…, (not even full but we have to use terminology) it is a very full No-thing. It is That from which this entire manifest creation appears; and disappears back into. So, this No-thing (because it wanted to play as something) has created this entire game this way.

First, to have this sense that ‘I exist’. ‘I Am’.

Then, ‘I am something. I am the body, I am the mind, I’m this person’.

Then, not just that ‘I’m something’ but then ‘Everything around me must also be things. Now that I’ve bought into this idea of separation, of duality, therefore now this bundle should operate in a certain way according to how I decide. And those others are operating on the basis of what they are deciding’.

It’s pure myth! There’s no ‘me’ like this, and no ‘you’ like that. There’s only One; the Self.

And because this doership is so strongly ingrained, many times (if you’re just hearing this) you will be wondering ‘But if I just drop [everything] then how do I know my life will not be a mess?’ And the arrogance of the question starts to strike you; as if we’ve done such a good job of it so far. [Chuckles] ‘It’s been so good that if I just leave it to God then it might become a mess’.

There is no individual doer; no individual thinker. There is no individual speaker. Every expression is being played as an expression of Consciousness Itself. But we’ve bought into this idea of duality.

What have we looked at so far now? We’ve looked at doership and duality. But the basis of a lot of trouble is once we buy into the idea of that ‘I’m just this’ [Gesturing towards the body] we restrict ourselves to this idea. Then we also are catering to this idea in so many ways. ‘If I’m just this body or the person who owns this body then what could I want?’ Then we say ‘Okay, I might need so much money in the future, I might need a good partner, I might need this kind of security, that kind of security’.  So, we are just representing this nonexistent one; the owner of this body or this body itself. The body (poor thing) sitting innocently, is not saying ‘I want this’ and ‘What’s happening to my money that’s been demonetized?’ It’s not asking any of that. It’s just sitting. And yet there’s this ‘lawyer’ for the body saying ‘This is what I must have. This is what I must have.’

So, like the cats looking for the next bowl of milk, from bowls of milk to other bowls of milk; till somebody comes and tells us ‘No, no, none of this. It’s all useless’. And we start finding that for ourself. And we say that ‘The final, ultimate nectar of amrit; the bowl of milk of enlightenment, of freedom’. So, then we start looking for that one.

But still what is that for? It is for ‘me’.

So when you come to a place where it is saying ‘But who are you really?!? First, before I decide to give you the next bowl of milk, let me first see if you are clear: What kind of cat are you?’ Then we start looking for the cat. ‘This is uncomfortable. I don’t like it.  Just give me what I’m here for. Why can’t you just do that?’

That’s why many great Sages have also said ‘I give them what they want so that one day they can want what I want to give them’. I’ve not seen it. I’ve not seen it functioning like that because I’ve only seen that desire seems to multiply more and more.

So, this 3D system: Doership, Duality, Desire…, is the basis for all of our suffering. It will be very worthwhile if all of this then led to something that was useful. And we’d say ‘Okay. I worked so hard to pretend that I’m separate. I worked too hard to define these things I want; these are my desires. And I worked so hard to constantly separate myself from another, separate myself from the rest of this existence’. At least, enjoy it.

This is the funny part of this game, that it is played as if it is a game of suffering; these momentary insights into moments of Truth. We create this life, then we want to escape it and go to the mountains, sit in the farm. You want to escape. You want to go to nature. Why?  Because we shut off this mind for some time. But what is the mind speaking about? Just these things. The mahamantra of the mind is ‘What’s in it for me? Me, me, me’.

That’s why (yesterday also I was telling someone) ‘Step out of this me’…, because it’s the big untruth; big made-up, mythical idea. The cat which does not exist is this ‘me’. And see that everything moves on its own. It is not possible (in the waking state) to not to be in some form of action. Even our sitting still is an action. Heart is beating, breath is flowing. Sitting still means we are sitting still. You can have meditators who meditate for tens of hours every day but are full to the brim with doership. ‘I’m doing, doing, doing. I’m meditating, I’m meditating, I’m meditating’. So, this doership is more and more reinforced.

So, (this second-to-the-last satsang) today I just want to say: Let go. Just let go.

Let go of what? Of belief that ‘These are my actions, these are my words, these are my thoughts’.

And in the play you’ll find that it’s beautiful…, where everything just seems to flow on its own. Everything is happening on its own. You are watching this as one play, one movie; including the movement of this character.

Just forget about it. And what is the easiest way? It is to see that in this moment already all is forgotten. In this moment, all is gone…, till we refer back to our thoughts and ‘Okay, is it really gone?’ And the mind will say ‘No, no. I’m still a person’.

But Now again; gone.

Just this.

Just this Now.

Here and Now…, is what is being pointed at.

What are you Right Now without referring to the report from the mind?

To say that ‘You are One’…, even ‘One’ does not apply.

All the Sages have pointed to this.

Shankaracharya said, “Dispose of this mind and be free.”

Ashtavakra said, “The mind is complex. Let it go.”

Same.

What did the sages do? They said ‘The solution for this attack of the ‘me’ is to (either) just surrender this ‘me’ over to God and say ‘Everything is Your problem, God or Satguru’. Then what happens when the salesman for the ‘me’ comes, the lawyer for the ‘me’ comes and says ‘But this is what you must do, this is what you must have, these are the things that are being unfair to you, these are the things which are good in your life, you must keep them’. All these things, they stop mattering to such a One. They know ‘I am in my Father’s care. I have no trouble with any of this’. This is surrender, just the simple allowing is surrender. They also realize that temperamentally some are different; they do not surrender like this. They will be like ‘Is there really a God? Is there really a Master, Satguru? Aren’t these just words? Some are telling that. Here it played out like this many times. So for those, what did they say? ‘Find out really if there is this ‘me’. Who am I?’ Self-inquiry.

So these were the most direct ways to get over this ‘me’ affliction, this disease of ego. But for some these seem too direct. It feels still like ‘I don’t want to be rid of the ‘me’. I just want something for the ‘me’. I want this ‘me’ to have a happy life’. But even the solutions to give a happy life to this ‘me’ or to get us to step out from this idea of individuality, what are the different solutions?

We go do some selfless service; means what? Stop thinking about ‘me’ for some time, go think about somebody else. Basically that is what is happening, isn’t it? When you do seva, you are going and saying ‘Okay, those children need our help. Let us do some actions which are about somebody else so we get out of this ‘me’. In the sangha we do seva for each other. Why? Because we stop thinking about this ‘me, me, me’ constantly and say ‘Okay, what is it that he wants? What does she want?’ One day we should play one game: Don’t ask questions about yourself, ask questions on behalf of one another. What is the question that you feel will help another? Forget about yourself for some time. So seva, selfless service, is to get out of this ‘me’ and focus energy on somebody else. So, seva (for the Master also traditionally) has been prescribed for those on the spiritual path that ‘You must do big, big seva for the Master’. Why? Not because the Master is wanted to be served in that way; just so that the object of attention moves this ‘me’ to Satguru Dev, the external form of the Satguru which is appearing in our life.

Then what are the other things? Do some chanting. Stop thinking about ‘me’…, chant the name of the Lord. Do some meditation. Bring attention to the breathing or to the Presence ‘I Am’ or to the form of the Lord; or to just the activities. The Buddhists called it ‘mindfullness’. Bring it to whatever is happening. The hand is moving, just be with the hand. The breath is moving, just be with the breath. If walking is happening, just be with the feet. Why? To get away from this mahamantra of the mind which is ‘What’s in it for me…me…me…?’

So, the most direct was surrender and Self inquiry and then there were all these other ways that seem to bring some peace, some joy. To step away from this individuality seems to bring so much space and lightness, even if it is done with the intent to help the ‘me’.

So, the letting go is to surrender. And it can only happen NOW. You cannot say ‘Okay, tomorrow I will let go’. Letting go is just Now. Now is the time [where] there is no false conditioning; all the ideas of the past have gone. But this tree of conditioning is very sneaky. You tug at one leaf and the whole tree comes. By one concept about yourself then it seems like the whole person is there. Any small thing which is personal, it seems like the whole person is there. ‘What has my whole spirituality been about?’ you wonder sometimes. ‘What have I done over so many years?’ Because, why? You pulled that one tiny branch of this tree. That is why all this frustration can come.

The main pointings here are very straight-forward I feel; very simple. There are just three or four that I want to recap a bit also.

The first one is this advice: Not to believe your next thought. This simple advice: Don’t believe your next thought. And it came because I can see that in this moment, you are free. I can see that in this moment, you are free. And from here, the only way that you pick up the idea of bondage, you pick up the idea of individuality, is to give belief to the next thought. And some of you know that when I started sharing, I just used to say ‘But just let go of any next thought’ or ‘Let go of your thoughts’. And I am sure I have frustrated many, many. [Chuckles] ‘I am not able to let go Ananta. What are you saying? If it was that easy why would we come to you anyway?’

‘Just let go of your thoughts’ is the same as saying ‘Dispose of your mind’ or ‘The mind is complex; let it go’. So, I said ‘Okay, that seems a bit difficult, I can understand. How about if you let go of our next thought? That is all’. And I felt like ‘I don’t need to say anything after this: Just let go of your next thought’. But then also I realized it got a bit difficult because it felt like attention is going to these thoughts. He is saying ‘Just block them out, just block them out’. But that is not what I was saying, so I clarified it even more and said ‘Even if attention goes to your thoughts, to not believe it, is much simpler’.

And I have to admit that some naivety was in operation here as well, where I just felt like ‘If I say this, it will be so simple for everyone’. But I realized that everyone, all those who have been sharing satsang truly, have been pointing to this, but many times it can just feel like the interest in the conditioning, the pull, the magnetism of the false notion of individuality is so strong that it’s not always easy to not believe our next thought.

That is why coming to satsang regularly helps. Immerse yourself in contemplations of the Masters really helps; all just enabling this simple letting go. The inquiry of cause really helps because of all of the sticky ones which still seem to get our belief. My advice is to just inquire into them, inquire into the identity behind them. Because all our stick thoughts, all our ‘velcro’ thoughts (as Adya calls them) presume a notion of individuality, of an identity; and the spiritual seeker identity can be very prominent in spirituality.

So, for those thoughts which are sticky, or for that identity which is sticky, we put them into our inquiry and say ‘Who wants freedom? Is there somebody here who wants to be free really? Who is this one? Let that one present itself. And you find that there is nobody like that here.

Then when the thought comes ‘Oh I am still not free, I am not getting freedom’ then it doesn’t have the same amount of juice, it doesn’t have the same amount of power. And then not to believe our next thought seems simpler.

Also why not to believe our thought? Because it is not a true representation of what is. Another favorite of mine was (there was a time we used to share about) this interpreter. I used to say ‘The fake interpreter who doesn’t know what he is doing is here’. Where it came from was at Nelson Mandela’s funeral there was Obama’s speech; and Obama was giving this speech but they hired this con man for an interpreter. So, Obama would just say whatever he was speaking very seriously and the interpreter would just go [indicating speaking nonsense and flailing hands] and there was a big outrage. ‘Who was this guy? What was he doing?’ So, just like this. Just ‘What Is’…, is. It is very beautiful, it is very magnificent. Even these labels are not needed. But the mind will always find a way to resist it, to interpret it in a way that makes it very personal, very limited, very mental. So, because it is not an accurate representation of the Truth…, it is just like bad subtitles in a movie. So this mind, the flow of this interpreter is the flow of these bad subtitles in the movie, and believing them will only give you misunderstanding about yourself, about who you are, and eventually lead to suffering and more and more trouble.

So, this simple letting go, this simple surrender is the end of suffering. It is just about this, Right Now. You cannot suffer unless you engage with your next thought, believe your next thought. And as long as it seems like they still have power, use Bhagavan’s [Ramana Maharshi] Self-inquiry to diminish these power of these wrong ideas.

Then your question should be ‘Yes, okay there is no suffering here, but what about God? Can you show me God?’ I don’t like to answer a question with a question but there is a beautiful question which (if you are open to) you can have the direct darshan of Consciousness, of God, the Light of this world, this very moment. It is an innocent sounding question with the possibility of what you can discover with this is truly beautiful.

The question is: Can you stop being now? Can you try to stop being?

With this simple inquiry you come to taste your own Presence, your own sense of existence ‘I Am’. God said ‘I Am That I Am’. This ‘I Am’ is what is spoken about; this Consciousness, this sense of existence in the light of which the world is. When This goes to sleep, when This dissolves within you, the world goes to sleep; there is no phenomenon. All time, space, light, sound…, all of this is nowhere to be found without this Light of Presence. This realm of duality, of me and another, does not exist without first there being ‘I Am’.

This is the fruit of most spiritual paths. Most sadhanas and practices are meant to bring us to this point of recognition of the Atman, of Consciousness, I Am.

And even with this question I feel like the mistake or the error that can be made is that we can try to come to a mental resolution to this, like mentally answer ‘Can I stop being?’ and come to some mental conclusion: ‘No of course not, I can’t.’ But these questions are not meant for the mind to answer. They are meant to invite and to provoke your own inner looking; very deep checking. And there are many tools which we have provided over the years to deeply inquire into this. Like when I ask you ‘What time did you wake up? What woke up at that time? What changed between sleep and waking up?’ It is to directly introduce you to this Divine Consciousness which seems to say ‘Let there be Light’ when It wakes up.

And as you marinate in your own Being, when you taste your own Presence, for some of you an even deeper inquiry might emerge which is to say ‘Even this sense of existence seems to come and go. Although it is the Lord of the waking state, what is here which is even prior to this ‘I Am’?  What is here which is before ‘I Am’? What is aware even of this sense of Presence?

For this also we have a simple inquiry which is: Are you aware now?

How is this known? Because you did not see Awareness as an object, you did not see Awareness as a phenomenon. It is quite clear that this Awareness is the unchanging, the backdrop to the appearance and the dissolution even of Consciousness. This, with no attributes, no size, shape, no age, this primal Witnessing which does not come and go.

Those who are longing for this recognition of the Absolute Truth will find meaning more than any other phenomenal discovery because it is seen that all phenomena comes and goes; nothing here lasts, everything is changing. Therefore, that which we must be looking for truly is the Unchanging.

What is the Unchanging Truth? It cannot be a thing, it cannot be an object, it cannot be space, cannot be light, cannot be sound; beyond all mental conceptions, beyond pure, beyond innocent, beyond life and death.

It has brought great joy to this expression [Ananta] to see that some of you have actually found yourself in this way.

But even with this, sometimes I found that the mind can be so tricky that it creates dichotomy even here. And the dichotomy is what? Guess. [Chuckles] ‘Nothing is happening to Awareness. I see it. Awareness remains untouched’. And in that statement itself, I can sense that what is being unsaid. What is being left unsaid is that ‘Yeah, but what about me?’

Therefore I felt like this was the final question and I needed to ask you, which is: Who is aware even of this Awareness?

I feel that any of you who really inquire using this question ‘Who is aware even of Awareness?  Who is aware of Awareness?’ that this dichotomy of ‘I and Awareness’ will dissolve and you will see that ‘I am the Self.’ This ‘I’ is the ‘I’ that remains.

As Bhagavan said ‘I remove the I and yet remain the I’. It sounds like a big puzzle initially. It will become so clear. And this real Self, the reality of ‘I’ is unchanging. You will realize that; to See that ‘I am Awareness’ and even to say that ‘I am Awareness’ is not arrogance.

It is actually arrogance to say ‘I am a person’…, to presume that some separation could actually have happened here, that God could be separated, is arrogance.

So, this I feel is the gist of what has been shared from here over the years; the gist of what Advaita Vedanta really is trying to convey. It has been a great gift in this life here.

And meeting all of you also has been the greatest gift that my Master has given.

I am the Self.

There is no one or two.

No Advaita, no Dvaita.

No Supreme, no small.

No light, no darkness.

No past, present or future.

Neither this, nor that.

In Me, there is neither stillness nor movement.

In the play of objects, play of sensations, thoughts and emotions,

play of existence and non-existence is not for Me.

I have neither come, nor I go.

I am all there is.

No time, no space.

No sound, no light.

I am neither touched nor untouched.

No words, no silence.

Neither that, nor this.

No transmission, no transference.

Neither concern, nor un-concern.

I am Knowingness.

Neither pure, nor impure.

Not in the mind, not outside of mind

Not in the intellect, yet the intellect is ‘I’.

I am Awareness.

Nothing to witness, nothing to drop.

No recognition, no conditioning.

Neither free nor bound am I.

I am not in the Silence, not in the expression.

Yet ‘I’ is all there is.

I am never lost.

Neither thing, nor no-thing.

Not full or empty.

I am neither this, nor that.

I am Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

Yet none of the gods am I.

I will not be understood, nor mis-understood.

Neither conscious, nor unconscious.

I don’t exist, yet all existence is ‘I’

I am not one, we are not two.

I am the Self.

I am Knowingness.

I am the ‘I’ before Being.

I am the Self.

If I say ‘I lost my shoes’ can you give me an idea, give me a suggestion about where I can find them? ‘I lost my shoes. Do you have an idea where they could be?’ [You might say] ‘Where did you see them last? On the feet? Or there [Points to where he usually leaves his shoes in the room] or the shelf?’

So, what are we doing here? We are presumably trying to find the Self. Where must we look? If I say ‘I lost my Self’ where shall I look?’

Q: Where did you see it last?

A: Where did you see it last? [Chuckles] Where should I look? I come to you and say ‘You look like a smart guy. Can you give me some advice? Where should I look for my Self?’ But if I was to say ‘I lost my body. Can you help me out, to find it?’ then what would you say? You will say ‘But I see it, the body is here. Where did you lose it?’

Why is this not true for the Self? Why would you not say ‘Who are you then? But you are the Self? How can you not be the Self? How can you lose your Self?’ you would say.

So, if the body is more obvious…, that which is the Self, is it less or more obvious? And for a while it can seem like it is less obvious. It can feel like ‘I have lost the Self and I am trying to find it. I am trying to find my Self’. And also, for so many centuries sages have said ‘Know thyself’. But…, I know my Self. Who doesn’t know themselves? We could just tickle you and when you’re laughing say ‘There. When you laugh, you are your Self’. [Smiles]

Then would it be fair for me to say ‘Okay, if you lost your Self, then who are you right now? What are you representing right now?’ And you might say ‘I am the sum of all of these things in my life; my relationships, my body, my ideas, my money, my interests, my hobbies’. But then if I were to say ‘What if all of these started to dissolve?’ Money gone (suppose the Prime Minister said money is illegal from tomorrow; everybody will just barter) so, money gone. Relationships vanish. We realize our rubbish, so gone. Do you go along with any of this? Body; every cell is changed…, every few years this body has nothing in common with the body that was born out of my mother’s womb. Not a cell is the same. So, body also constantly changing.

What is that at the center of this? And even if it is an idea of me, whose idea is it? Can an idea rest on itself? You can say ‘At the center there is an idea of me’. But can that idea exist independently, or does it need something to support it?

‘Can you have an idea without you?’ is the question. Isn’t it? Is it possible? So, what is that which is prior to the idea? That’s worth looking at isn’t it? Where does all of this rest?

I gave some exercises for all of you to do. You are supposed to contemplate on attention, belief. Whose forces are they? Where do all of these come from?

Q: They arise.

A: Out of nothing.

Is there any distinction between this nothing and the empty nothing which is in the space, for example (even if air was not there)? You can say that ‘The nothing in this room is the absence of phenomena’ (or if there is some phenomena, there is air; but let’s ignore that for now).

This nothing is the absence of phenomena. So, that from where this arises, from where all phenomena arise, is it the same nothing?

Is there any difference between the nothing from which time and space comes, and the nothing which appears within space?

A: This is an interesting question. [Reads from chat]

Q: ‘Father the very moment I go for experience, Truth is gone.”

A: What does it mean when I am saying ‘Direct experience’? It is the same as when I say ‘Are you Aware now?’

‘Experience’…, I see where you are coming from because ‘experience’ usually is used to describe a phenomenal tasting (or something) for that which we are checking now. When we check for the unchanging, it is not really this kind of phenomenal experiencing but it is a deeper Knowing of Itself. Knowing, this kind of knowledge, is what we are speaking of; not phenomenal tasting. We are using experience of the phenomenal as a pointer back to the root of that experience, the Source of the experience. Who is tasting sweetness? It is tasted in my Presence, in my Being.

What is That which is aware of this?

Why I have to say ‘Direct experience’ is because it is not a conceptual idea, not a mental knowing. It is directly Known. Maybe ‘Knowingness’ is a better term than ‘experiencing’.

If we are contemplating together, you might be coming to this point where automatically this which is called ‘neti – neti’ is happening; [Neti neti means] ‘not this, not this’. Because we said ‘All that is changing is not It’…, so therefore ‘not this’ [Pointing to indicate things] ‘not this’.

What is that for which we can NOT say ‘Not this’?

What is it for which we can NOT say ‘Not this’?

So, if we use what she was saying as an example to say ‘Okay, everything I experience is not the Truth’…., when we look for this ‘I’ and we say:

This world is an experience; every experience is constantly changing, is totally untrue: not this.

This body is changing: not this

These thoughts are coming and going, changing constantly: not this.

Emotions, sensations of pain are changing, not constant: not this.

The sense of Existence, the sense I Am, is constant (as far as my experience goes, as far as my phenomenal experience goes). Not only does it seem like it, but also it seems like there is never an experience without this back drop of Existence; I Am.

There is never another, there is never something outside apparently, without first there being this sense that I Exist. Therefore this Presence, this sense of Existence, is revered. In all traditions, in all religions, this Consciousness, this Presence, Being, Atman (whatever you call it) is the unchanging light and the backdrop on which this entire play that we call the waking state happens.

And some of us will feel very comfortable to stop at this point, which is enough actually; to See that my Presence, this sense of Existence, Consciousness, is the unchanging reality as long as I Am.

This is the beautiful discovery that ‘I Am That I Am’.

But some of you might ask: Why is it ‘I Am’?

If ‘I Am’ is ‘I’, then why is there ‘I Am’? Why don’t we just say ‘I’?

Is there an ‘I’ which is even before ‘I Am’?

In the same way that we checked ‘Who is this ‘I’ who is aware of these objects, this world and everything else which is phenomenal?’…, some of us even might ask:

Who is the ‘I’ which is aware that I Am, that I Exist?

What knows this?

A very important question is: What is Reality? What is the Truth?’

It’s very good to contemplate this. One way to look at it also is that if it is not directly clear that this is the Reality or the Truth, then we can start by looking at: What do we mean by false? That day someone was saying that ‘We come to Satsang to be free from the false’ …, drop the illusion, drop the false. So, if we can at least identify all that is false or all that is unreal.

Now this definition of Reality is very important for us to know. What is it that we mean by Reality? Is that which is apparent (apparently appearing now) do we call that Reality?

Or is there something which is unchanging?

What is of value? What is it that we are looking for? So we must come to a definition that satisfies us because Reality is of value, Truth is of value. Here in Satsang, if it is a constant, it must be an unchanging Reality. So, if this appeals to us, then it makes it very simple. Then the realm of the changing doesn’t seem to have so much power over us.

Why does it appeal here? I will tell you why. Because for many years it was this sense of trying to get something in this realm, but it was seen that everything in this realm was constantly changing. Everything is constantly changing; nothing stays constant. We try to make it constant, we try to make it stick but it doesn’t happen that way. We have seen this in our relationships, in our material possessions, in the state of our body; in all of these aspects we have seen that this is constantly changing. And when we attach to that which is constantly changing, it is bound to lead to suffering.

Even if the world is not constantly changing, our mind is constantly changing. We want something really badly; and suppose we get it? Then after a while our mind changes about that and says ‘I wish it was like this or wish this was another way’. So, even if we find some little bit of constancy in the world, this mind doesn’t stay constant. Because many of our desires that we have had in the past have actually been fulfilled also. Many have been fulfilled. But did they lead to the constant fulfillment? Because our mind also changed about it. Our belief system is constantly changing.

So, can we really find something which is unchanging? In that, must be the unchanging peace. In that, must be the unchanging sense of contentment. The end of suffering can come when we recognize this unchanging. That is living experience. Even the Buddha has said that the world is suffering, which means that this realm, this changing realm, is a constant source of suffering for everyone. If we attach to this, then we see that it is a set-up for failure. Nothing can be really held on to. Because the instrument through which we experience the world itself will not last. So, that which is presumably-perceived through this instrument? How can we presume that will last?

Is there any possibility of that which is unchanging? Because That is of value. If there is such a thing, then it is important for us to give some attention to that. What could it be that remains unchanged? What is it that is Real? What is the Truth?

So, one attribute we have described: That which does not come and go, that which does not change. If I tell you ‘There is something, Awareness, which is unchanging’ …, but just by telling you this, is it enough? Doesn’t help. I can say anything. I can say ‘There is a heaven at the end of this world which remains unchanging’. I can say ‘There is no hope; there is only hell awaiting us’. But all these are only conceptual. ‘There is this Awareness which is unchanging’ …, it doesn’t help. Why? Because it has to be directly verifiable as a Truth.

So, Truth has to be experienced as the Truth; as our direct living experience. Otherwise it becomes another concept. Most religions are a set of concepts. But here what we are talking about is that true spirituality is to directly experience that which religions are pointing to. If there is a God, then it is of value. Otherwise we have seen that it only becomes a battle of concepts, a struggle to keep some individuality alive by trying to keep a hold of what we feel are the best concepts.

That which is unchanging and That which is directly verifiable.

I feel like if we can at least agree that these two attributes must be there in that which we call the Truth or Reality, then it will help us a great deal. At least that is the reality which we are talking about or sharing in satsang; always ever-present, unchanging and directly experienced, directly verifiable.

Then, for a while, can we keep aside all that is changing. States are changing, people are changing, the body is changing. So, in our definition, if we can say that ‘This is unreal because it is changing’ …, that is how traditionally in Advaita it is defined: That which is changing is maya; that which can be measured is maya. They have defined it as an illusion.

Now, we’ll come to that; whether that which is appearing, that which is changing is inherently different from that which is unchanging. The final answer is ‘No’. It is also That. But you can come to that. Because that which is appearing is attractive to the attention. So, the point of labeling it as unreal, labeling it as maya, is only so that, for some time, can we take our attention away from that, and see whether there is something? Can I find something which does not change?

So, this is how we look at what is the Truth. What is that Truth?

Let’s explore a few things together like:

What are attachments?

[Silence]

What is desire?

[Silence]

What do we mean by surrender?

[Silence]

And what is the nature of Reality?

[Silence]

And do these desires and attachments, do they apply to that which is real?

Or that which is unreal?

[Silence]

Then I want you to contemplate a few things now which is:

What is attention?

[Silence]

Belief?

[Silence]

What are attention and belief?

[Silence]

What are the different phenomenon to the attention can go to?

[Silence]

Which phenomenon can be given belief?

[Silence]

What is identity?

[Silence]

What type of phenomenon is the ego?

[Silence]

For some of you, beautiful unfoldings are happening. Beautiful experiences of Grace are happening; that which we call miracles. Actually, miracles are just in service to your Being. As you are coming to your unassociated Being, you’ll find a lot of things (which the mind could never even fathom) have been playing out in our life. So, it is this emptiness which is playing now. A dream full of Grace.

And our mind wants to use even these situations as opportunities to bring us back into the idea of personhood, into the idea of separation, into the idea of presuming to know what I want; which is the opposite of surrender. Surrender is ‘Let Thy Will be done’. ‘Handing our existence over to existence, as Guruji [Mooji] says.

And the mind wants to use even these opportunities (where the Supreme Will is unfolding so beautifully) it wants to use these opportunities to bring back the pretense of my will, my desire, my individual foolish notion that ‘I know what is good for me; I know what is needed to be experienced here’.

So just like this, allow all of these concepts to come and go as much as you can. And if some idea is picked up (like ‘I want to see my other two grandchildren’) then remember that the idea in itself is not as bad as the second punch from the mind which is the guilt…, ‘Oh, you should not have done that’. Now you are falling into the trap. ‘If you have the salad, don’t have the desert’. [Chuckles] All these are ideas of the conditioning. And it’s very natural for some of these ideas to be picked up. Some of them will last momentarily and some of them can last a little longer, but if you pick up the second punch ideas of guilt, resentment, remorse, then those seem to have a more lasting effect.

So, just as you are doing (it is very beautiful) allow everything to just unfold as it has been doing; including allowing the thoughts to just come and go.

So, in one way we can say that desire is the opposite of surrender, isn’t it? [Silence] It is a reinforcement of our pretend individual existence.

And very good that you brought it up actually, the next point which we had to contemplate today, which is: What is attachment?

What is attachment? To see this world of objects, there are millions and billions and billions of objects that we have experienced. How does something become an attachment?

So in the same way we can see: When did it start? No attachment has always been there. You can see that existence continued to exist, even prior to this sense of attachment.

To look and to see:  What is it that I call an attachment?

That’s why the question was: What is it that I am unwilling to give up?

Even if it means that I suffer; even if it means that there is misery…, is it something in the world of objects? Is it an idea about myself? What are my attachments?

And looking more deeply, what is it that we call an attachment?

Also note that I’m not giving any answers. Whatever is coming up, I’m just contemplating along with you. And there are no right and wrong answers really. But it is important not to shy away from these things, to look at these forces, to look at these topics.

[Silence]

Q: Father, I know what came up strong was that I’ve said (more than a couple times) that I’d give up everything; that I would give up everything for freedom. And it feels like the mind is trying to use this as like the ultimate test. You know? [Laughs] So that’s where the pull is strongest; right there.

A: Yes.

Q: Am I really willing to let go and give up this attachment? I was before, when I didn’t have a chance…, but now that they’re showing up. You know? I’m just going to lay it at your feet and give to you and let it be what it’s going to be, because I can’t do anything else. So, if you’ll just take it for me please?

A: Yes. To surrender it is a very worthy attitude to have. And also here, what we’re doing is not pushing anything away. We’re not saying you should not have this or you must not have that; that this is good or this is bad. We’re just shinning our light on it. And in the shinning our light on it itself, some resistance could be coming up for some of you. We can just look at that as well.

Just like in your case, you can look and say ‘There are so many millions of children in the world, what makes these three my grandchildren?’

How is it that we can call something mine? In this phenomenal realm, what makes it mine? What is the ‘mine’? What is the meaning of ‘mine’?

And once we’ve looked at the meaning of ‘mine’ it will lead us to what we mean by ‘me’. If you are to say that attachment means that something is ‘mine’ let’s look at what makes something mine…, ‘My children, my grandchildren, my family, my life’.

It’s beautiful to be able to look at these things. And we’re looking without judgment; we’re looking without conclusions.

I’ve shared this example many times. When I moved into this house, there was a small garden outside which already had some plants and trees. So one day, I planted some seeds in the ground just to see how they would come up. And I noticed that from the next day onwards, first I would want to check on those; because those were mine. You see? [Chuckles] So, what is that made them mine? What is it that makes things mine (my relationship, my security, my money, my Master, my freedom, my ideas) that which we call an attachment? How is it that something can become mine? Why is everything not mine? Or why is nothing mine, not mine?

[Silence]

If all is just appearing and disappearing in this realm, how is it that something is mine and something is not mine? How does it become mine? How did it become yours?

[Silence]

These two questions about desire and attachment are leading to two very important questions. Look at the nature of attachment.

Be true to your experience; have complete integrity in your looking for yourself. Don’t fall into that trick of getting into some sort of an Advaita denial. Only when you’re looking, you get into Advaita denial; the rest of your life seems to be flowing in this flow of desires and attachments.

So, the least you can do for yourself is look. Look at these things.

[Silence]

And if there truly is nothing, then just remain empty.

All of this is a fulfillment of Consciousness’ urge to experience itself. We are not talking about that. I feel you know that also. Isn’t it? Empty of what life is giving you in this moment, is there something more you want? That is the question. Are you listening? Life is playing like life is playing, life is experiencing itself the way it wants to experience itself. Besides ‘What Is’ is there something that you want? That is the question.

Q: I would again take a very practical example (not just talk in words) that suppose there comes a very strong pain, a sensation, in the body which becomes unbearable, then it comes to get rid of that pain or to be free from that pain. So, how is that in contradiction with…?

A: So, life is not wanting to experience that pain then? Something else is doing that to life?

Q: You mean to say that the movement away from pain is not life wanting that movement?

A: Everything is life wanting that, everything is life wanting; everything that’s happening in the play is life wanting it. If this is clear to you, then what desire can you have? That is surrender; to see that everything is the movement of life. You are saying that..,

Q: I am also saying that desire is also a movement of life.

A: Yes, it is ultimately. And this (looking at what a desire is) is not a movement of life? [Smiles]. So, this is exactly what I meant when I have spoken about ‘Advaita denial’…, because we have understood that everything is a movement of life except when we are asked to look at something. So, what is fighting it? The concept is fighting it; the looking. If you were empty of that concept, won’t it become lighter? Easier? Which is all ultimately happening in the one movement of life. Nobody is denying that. But in the play, it plays in this way; that we hold onto a particular concept. And I didn’t even say ‘Throw away your desires’. I said ‘Can we look at them?’

Q: This statement, that ‘Desire is the opposite of surrender’…, I didn’t feel to agree with that at all.

A: Yes, yes. Because?

Q: Because I feel that’s not true.

A: So once we surrender and say ‘Everything is yours. You do what you like. You experience what you like’. This is surrender. And then say ‘Oh, but I want this’. Is it not opposed to it?

Q: It’s not opposed to it when you see that that wanting is also God’s wanting to experience that experience at that moment.

A:Yes,  but when you say ‘I’m walking left’ and when you say ‘I’m walking right’ (at the same time) ‘I’m walking left, I’m walking right, I’m walking left I’m walking right; everything is being done by God.’ But is it true? Is it coherent? Is it coherent, is it true, when you say one second ‘Everything is yours’ next second ‘I want this’. But that also is yours? You see? It’s very convenient. [Smiles]

Q: So, can you talk in terms of practical examples? Suppose that example of the ice cream desire,

A: Don’t talk about ice cream [The Sangha laughs] for obvious reasons. Let’s say ‘In everything God, dear God, let Thy will be done’. That is the prayer of surrender ‘Let Thy will be done’. And the next is ‘Please make sure I have a job, please make sure I have a girlfriend, please make sure life goes in this particular way, that I have lots of money’. So, which statement is actually true? That is what we have to look at.

Q: I have looked at both and found that both situations are true in such a way that even when you surrender to God or to the higher power then it kind of brings these motivations to guide your life in a betterment.

A: Okay. So, if you feel both are true.., both are equally true?

Q: Okay so one statement/reason how both are equally true would be ‘I surrender completely myself’.’

A: Okay, now we are going in full conceptual direction. What is true for you? You have desire or no?

Q: Right now, I don’t feel there is anything. But it comes up. Maybe when I go out, there is.

A: There is nothing? Then no problem. Why is there this desire to speak all this? That’s why I said if there’s nothing then remain empty. [Smiles] You have a desire to be right?

Q: Yeah, maybe a desire to correct if something wrong is being spoken which is not true.

A: What is that? Who does it belong to?

Q: I think that I can easily let go of the desire to correct. It’s not a very big deal.

A: There is something called ‘The Straw Man Fallacy’. The Straw Man Fallacy is that we take a point and we debate that with a point which is different from that. So, I say ‘India’s a very nice place to live’ and someone says ‘Oh, but India only just got independence 68-70 years ago’. The two have nothing to do with each other.

The exercise was to look at what is the nature of desire. Also I told you that I’m not answering anything, I’m just giving you pointers to look at. So, the straw man fallacy is that ‘Oh, but desire is God’s doing; everything is God’s doing’. If this was your true state of surrender then we would not be having this conversation at all. If you have this acceptance that ‘Everything; all my desires are Yours, all my life is Yours’ then you would not have this aversion to this conversation because you would know what it is meant for…, because you would be able to see that there was a point where there was belief in these concepts that ‘Something could be mine. There’s something that this false non-existent ‘I’ could want’.

[Silence]

Who doesn’t know that everything that moves in this realm is God’s will? Then why come to Satsang, why inquire? Why anything? Nothing; if that is our true experience. You see? It would be different.

So, [this is how we can see that] we use Advaitic concepts just to gloss over, as resistance to look at ‘What is it that still reinforces my sense of separation?’

Pick one of your desires and See:

Was it always there?

Have you always had that?

When did it come about?

What happened that it became a desire?

And you find that nothing has always been there.

When we were babies, we didn’t come out with apparent desires anyway.

What was it that led to this?

An external event led to something?

I don’t want to answer for you. Just look.

Look for yourself. And see:

What is the genesis of a desire?

That which we call desire; or even an aversion?

Where does it come from?

So, if you say ‘freedom’ for example, ‘enlightenment’…,

You said ‘One with the Source’.

Q: Yeah, awakened; One with Source, awakened.

A: So, when we’re a baby, when we were babies, we didn’t have this sense that we wanted to be one with the Source. You see? And yet, babies are more enlightened then all of us. So, how did it come about that this desire for enlightenment or desire for freedom also came?

And each of us can contemplate for a couple of minutes.

Look at any of your desires in your list and see:

What is the genesis of that?

What led to this becoming a desire?

How is it that my desires seem to be different from the desire of another?

So, we are going from ‘What the desires are’ to

‘What is a desire?’ (Including the desire for freedom.)

And what is the purpose of a desire?

What is the promise of a desire?

Allow yourself to look.

If you feel like you have no desire, then allow yourself to remain empty.

If there is an aversion to this kind of contemplation, then use this aversion to look:

Is there a concept that I am holding on to that seems to be the source of such an aversion?

And if it is really empty, then allow yourself to use this opportunity for the next few minutes to just remain empty.

[Long Silence]

Done?

Looked at the nature of desire; the genesis of it and what it is?

If I say either that you exist…, or that you don’t exist…,  who is here that can check this? If I say you exist, what can confirm this? (Then we might say ‘You don’t even exist! What are you talking about?’ This is at a different level of speaking. But who confirms even this?) There must be some, power, some non-thing-thing which is here, which is receiving even these words.

Now many will say that ‘There is nothing. There is nothing receiving these words’. But is that your experience? So, that which is receiving these words, that is aware of the hearing these words, is not a thing.

So, there is a hearing of these words. Undeniable? Isn’t it pretty clear? There is a hearing of these words; and you are aware that there is a hearing of these words? Don’t try to understand, just check. There is a hearing of these words and you are aware that these words are being heard. So, we are pointing directly to that which is aware of the hearing. And you can use any sensory perception; hearing is just one of them. The inner perceptions are there or sensations in the body or some emotions are there. They are being experienced and you are aware of that. What is it that is aware of that?

Sometimes we say that in asking these questions you will not get anything, but actually it is not true. You can say that it is not a question at the phenomenal level, therefore there is nothing in it for you phenomenally …, actually even this is not true; because it is only in this discovery, only in this recognition, that life even in this phenomenal realm seems to become full of ease and peace; the end of suffering, the end of conflict. There is no other phenomena which can bring you to this kind of quietude, can bring you to the end of misery, end of suffering. There is no phenomena actually. [Chuckles] To come to the end of suffering (even in the phenomenal play) we have to come to the discovery of ourselves to be That which is prior to phenomena.

Out of the hundreds of thousands of Beings that I met on this planet, I had the blessings of the Master to meet some who are beyond this suffering. And those have been those who have discovered who they really are.

And those who have not discovered this (whatever their life might be like in terms of relationships, material possessions they do not have) they have not come to this point where they can say that ‘Suffering seems like a strange idea’. I know that sometimes some momentary reactions can come but this idea that I could suffer for prolonged periods of time seems like a strange idea.

And what is it that we are looking for in this phenomenal realm also? Everything that we are searching for, everything that we are doing, is with the intent to find lasting peace, lasting happiness, contentment. So, I’m here to tell you that (from at least what I’ve seen) I’ve found that only those who have come to this true Self-recognition and the dropping of this false conditioning have been able say that ‘I am not suffering. Why do they say ‘Oh, this world is suffering?’ They can understand, of course, but it starts to seem more and more of an alien concept.

So, that’s a ‘carrot’ for you. Don’t feel that it only will help only my life to come to the recognition of the Self. That’s why Guruji [Mooji] says that ‘Nobody who has found the Self, this freedom from the false conditioning has gone on to say ‘No, no, take this away from me. I would rather have a million dollars’ or something like that. Why?  Because when the discovery of the Truth is that ‘I am this non-phenomenal Awareness, prior to all phenomena’ then can a phenomena hurt me? Why must I chase things? Why must I be feverish about anything at all? That’s why it’s called ‘leela’ or a game or a play. It doesn’t mean that the play stops; the play continues but it doesn’t seem to have the same pinch, the same juice, the same bite as it used to earlier.

So, everything is still tasted (outward things are tasted, emotions are tasted) but that which got mixed up with the mind, the identity (that ‘this is happening to me, I should not have done this, they should not have done this to me’) all these mixed up ideas are dropped away. That is why the pointing is in this way.