BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

Q: Here yesterday, mind was only allocated to only these tasks; work, DBA…,

A: DBA? Database Administration? What DBA? [Chuckles]

Q: …kids and nothing else. Are thoughts pre-ordained? But for whom would they be preordained?

A: Actually, as we find there is only cause, one doer, then the question of preordained or whether consciousness is creating a script and then playing out that script…, or whether he or she is winging it moment to moment has become more irrelevant. Isn’t it? Because even time is born within this Being. So, that which gives birth to time, whether that is subjecting itself to the functioning of time by preordaining the script…, or whether all of this is already happened and we are viewing it later with our attention; or whether everything is so fresh that Consciousness is spontaneously dancing is something that cannot be truly said.

But what you can say is that it has to be that the person has no role in the thoughts. It has no power to create thoughts or not; and it definitely doesn’t have the power to believe them also. If you mean preordained, means they just come from Consciousness, then yes.

But for whom would they be preordained? For Consciousness itself. It is only Consciousness that is here, which is experiencing everything. You see? There is nobody else. If it is Grace playing to watch itself find itself, yes, that’s what is happening. It is Consciousness playing the game of losing itself, deluding itself and now playing the game of finding itself.

Then the belief in thoughts are what? Belief in thoughts is the power with which Consciousness plays this game pretending as if it is a person. That’s why I have said that ‘If you want to see God pretending to be a person, just believe your next thought’.

Q: All of them, I have been writing them down, come for Aparna…,

A: For the pretense.

Q: …but she is not there.

A: Exactly.

Q: Mind is not getting that ‘There is no Aparna’ and it wants a new job.

A: [Chuckles] Yes. The mind is the lawyer, which always will represent the non-existent client, you see. So don’t expect this leopard to change its spots; this lawyer to start changing its objections. It will keep objecting; whatever is appearing in reality, it will keep resisting everything. That is the role of the mind. But if the thoughts don’t get believed, then everything seems much lighter, and then we are not playing the game of pretend/pretend anymore.

It is good. She says ‘Oh, it is not Database Administration. It is Doctor of Business Administration. (I didn’t feel she was technical so) Doctor of Business Administration. Doctor, wow. Doctor of business administration,

Q: So, it is doing it to itself; so I have to do nothing as it is because it is being done.

A: ‘Has to do something or has to do nothing’…, is itself nothing. The ‘I’, which is wondering whether itself it has to do something, or it has to not do anything now, itself is nothing. You see? It is not Consciousness that is asking ‘What should I do now?’

That’s why I say that doer-ship is one of the strongest legs of this ego. It will say ‘Yes, yes, there is no person here, only Consciousness. God is the one doer and I am that which is aware even of this Consciousness. But just, you know, by the way, what should I do now?’

You see? [Laughter] If we let go of this idea, then you will see that there has never been an individual doer. So the ‘I’ that wants to decide what to do or not to do, itself is nothing.

Q: It is all thoughts?

A: Yes, like by default. Yes, yes…, all thoughts. Because thought would mean that Consciousness needs to listen to its own creation to decide what to do next; which itself is implausible, isn’t it? If it is the creator of that thought, then why does it have to create that thought first, and then say ‘So, this is what I have to do or not’. [Chuckles]

So this sense of choosing whether to believe the thought can only come when there is a sense that ‘I must be that one that my thoughts are reporting to’. So this choice (this seeming-choice) is only for the non-existent one. You see? So, as long as it does feel like that choice is there, we must continue to make the choice of not believing. Then one day we come to the Seeing that there was no choice in it. God was just playing with Itself, in this way.

So is very beautiful to be able to just let go of this mind. Otherwise, we will still be evaluating…, whether this one is a practical one or this one is psychological one or this one is spiritual one. We don’t need to make any of these distinctions. Just allow it to go.

[Ananta asks sangha member the question this time]

A: When we say ‘I Am’ what do we really mean?

Q: For me it has been the Being (is what it feels like) because when I contemplate (and I don’t contemplate very much because it is just very difficult for me for some reason. I have a tendency to just surrender right away) but it seems clear. And that’s why I wanted to come, because I want to make sure that my understanding isn’t just intellectual; that it’s really what I’m seeing. And I do see that 9to me) ‘I Am’ is the Being that is the dynamic aspect of Awareness. And that was so strong today when I kept thinking, kept waiting, for something different to happen within the expression here. And little things have happened but not what I expected. And it dawned on me today that maybe Awareness…, maybe this is the expression of Awareness and I think it’s supposed to be different because it feels so familiar. You know? Am I confusing? Because when you say ‘Be yourself’ when I’m exactly, completely comfortable with myself and I feel everything, you know…, there is complete, total relaxation with whatever is going on, that that should be my true Being right there. Right?

A: It’s very good.  Very good. I feel to say to all of you also that there is nobody who does not know the truth. There is no body that doesn’t truly know the truth. Because this knowing is not coming and going. This is constant.

What is happening is that our concepts and ideas about what we know and what we have known have made us feel that we don’t know the truth…, because we know these concepts. But actually in reality, the knowing of concepts are un-know-able unless you were to first know yourself. Because who is that who knows a concept? The non-existent one cannot know anything at all. It is only that conceptual knowing is not the primal truth that we are speaking about. It might be true at some conceptual level. So, in this very ‘I Am’…, the knowing that ‘I exist’ must be present. Isn’t it?

Because this truth is not just conceptual. Concept means ‘that which can argued with’ and based on who has the stronger argument, the concept can change. But there is nobody that cannot say that truth is not true; because it is experienced clearly here.

On the weekend some of you have been messaging me and we have been chatting about ‘There is a sense that ‘I don’t know anything at all’. Even in this ‘not knowing anything at all’ are any of you able to deny your existence? Who doesn’t know that they exist?

So whether something else is known or not, whether there is something mental or not, can we really say that ‘I don’t know what whether I exist or not’? We might say ‘I don’t know whether I exist as something’ or ‘What it is that exists? I don’t know’. We can say these kind of things but to say ‘I’m not sure whether I exist’ itself must happen within your existence. Isn’t it? If you don’t exist, then even that reporting cannot happen.

Q: [Inaudible question from sangha present in the room]

A: That is why I’m saying, same. He says ‘Isn’t this sense of existence the same as the dream character has, that it exists?’ I said ‘Yes, it is exactly the same’.  Then he says ‘Isn’t that an illusion?’ and I say ‘Yes, it is exactly the same’.

Q: [Inaudible question from sangha present in the room]

A: Yes, that is what Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] said, that in this realm, the best we can say is that ‘I Am’ but ultimately, even that is not true. This is exactly what you are reporting. But in this realm, now, as what can you say ‘I am not’? You see? From which perspective, from which position, can we say ‘I am not’?

From which position can we deny even existence? [Laughs] Then, that knowing of existence itself, from that position, if something could be reported, we’d be able to report that ‘Yes, this Knowingness is untouched even by our existence’.

That is why we use two words: ‘I’ and ‘Am’.  Why do we say ‘I Am’? Why does Beingness mean ‘I Am’?  When we speak of most things, we are just those things. (How many are with me?) When we say ‘glass’ we don’t say I ‘glassiness’. No, it is just a glass. When we say ‘Being’ then why do we say ‘I Am’? When we say ‘table’ we don’t say ‘I-table’. But why does ‘Being’ translate into to ‘I Am’?

It’s good now to look like this? What is it that ‘I’ is now added with this attribute ‘Am’? Who is this ‘I’ that has now added this ‘Am-ness’ to it? You see? And who doesn’t know this? Everyone knows this. You see. Even now, for many, the mind might be coming and saying ‘Oh, this has become too abstract; right in the beginning of the week. It is too tough. I’m not getting any of this’. It’s not true! Yes, the mind may not be getting any of this (which is completely fine) but You, the ‘I Am’… You might even say ‘I am here’. To be able to say ‘I am here’ first you have to say ‘I Am’.

So, we are just talking kindergarten stuff actually. Very, very simple. And it may be completely confusing. [Chuckles] But just try to stay with the simplicity of it and don’t try to understand it too much. All of you are able to say ‘I am here’. Nobody says ‘I am not here’. Even if you say ‘I am not here’ you know in your heart that something isn’t right about those words. Something will have to work really hard to say those words. But you are able to say (here in satsang or in our day-to-day life) ‘I am here’.

Okay, ‘here’…, let’s leave that. What is this ‘I Am’?

We say ‘It is Beingness’. But why does this Beingness translate to ‘I Am’? Why not like any other object (like table, computer, chair)? When it is a chair, we don’t say ‘I-chair’ or we don’t say ‘I-computer’. (Ultimately maybe we will get there.) [Chuckles]

Right now: what is this ‘I’ which has this attribute ‘Am’?

[Original] Q: Can I answer that?

A: Yes, my dear. It’s for you.

Q: It feels like it is Awareness announcing itself. Because when I contemplate on Awareness, there is just silence.

A: Yes. So what are you saying? Are you saying this ‘I’ is Awareness?

Q: Yes.

A: The ‘I’ is Awareness. How is this known?

Q: There is no other answer that I can find. When I follow the pointings, when I contemplate, it all leads back to the same thing. It’s the only answer. There is no other answer. I think what gets confusing…, oh, go ahead, I don’t want to interrupt you.

A: So this ‘I’, does it ever change?

Q: No.

A: Is it ever that at one moment it is something else which is ‘Am’ and the next moment it is something else? So, one moment there was void which is now ‘Am’. The next moment there is a white light which is now ‘Am’. And the next moment there is (whatever you might want to put over there) which becomes ‘Am. Is this a changing ‘I’? Is there a change happening at that level?

Q: (I didn’t quite understand that pointing, but) … It doesn’t change.

A: Doesn’t change.

Q:  I can fool myself and get it back into the person role; take things personally and forget. But it doesn’t change. That’s just life.

A: So this ‘I Am’ (I’m saying) doesn’t change, but the attributes after ‘I Am’ like ‘I am this or I am that’ is constantly changing. So, when we say that ‘Change is happening at a personal level’ it must mean that it must be happening after the ‘I Am’. Isn’t it?

Q: Yes.

A: Again, it is a subtle point, so that’s I want to repeat again for all of you. When we say ‘I Am’…, ‘I Am’ which is ‘Am-ing’…, is this ‘I’ changing?

So this ‘I’ that we are referring to, is that changing in anyway? Do we signify different things when we say ‘I Am’?

Could we sometimes be signifying the sense of a void; sometimes the sense of some light, of a body, which is ‘I Am’? Irrespective of any other state (this that we are referring to as ‘I Am’)…, firstly, this ‘I’ that we are referring to, this ‘Am-ing’ (as I say)…, this remains constant. Yes? See this?

Q: [Nods Yes]

A: Yes, yes, so the next step is what? So, if this ‘I’ is unchanging, is this ‘I’ that is changing, is this ‘Am’ also Awareness? This sense of ‘Am-ness’? Is it as constant as the ‘I’? The ‘Am’…

What do you feel?

The question is this: Is this ‘Am-ness’ as changeless as ‘I’ itself?

If it was, then why don’t we just call it ‘I’? Why do we say ‘I Am’? If it was just the same as ‘I’ (changeless) then what would be the distinction? There would be none.

So, you see that this sense ‘I Am’ is not present in [deep] sleep state. It is present in waking, it is present in dream. So we cannot say ‘Being was there’. And yet we cannot say ‘I was not there’. Because ‘I’ was there to see this. But this whole Being was not present.

That which is aware of Being was present. But this ‘I’ (which is aware of the presence or absence of the sense of existence) that remained constant, unchanging. Then we see that this ‘I’ is the ultimate truth.

The light of this waking state, this light of this universe or this realm is Seen, therefore it is an object within this realm. ‘Am’ or Consciousness is coming and going. It is timeless from this perspective as an object within the realm. That aspect of that reality of what we are, even that can go.

Therefore, if there are times where only ‘I’ remains, what can this am be made of? If we have experienced times where only ‘I’ remains, where only this Awareness remains…., therefore this Beingness must be made of what?

Even if it was just a thought (which we will look at) even that must be made of what? Because if only ‘I’ remains, then anything that comes after that must be made of what? This ‘I’ only. Isn’t it?

If there is water in everything (whether ice, or evaporated water, or water itself) it would be made up of water. So, if it is clear that this ‘I’ remains (in that only this is there) then this Being must also be this. As a form of this; just a different qualitative feel of this.

This is the integration of the ‘I Am’. Yet that it is clear that there is a qualitative difference; this I-Awareness which is now appearing in the form of Beingness, ‘I Am’.

This is the substratum for all phenomenal experience. You cannot have an experience without the sense of Being.

Now, when this Being gets together with the power which comes, called attention, then all these objects in the phenomenal realm (whether seemingly- inward or seemingly-outward) seem to appear and disappear.

Did anything change for this ‘I’ with the appearance or disappearance of the phenomenal realm?

[Original] Q: No

A: Doesn’t change. If this is ‘I’…

Q: That is how I knew this; that is ‘I-Itself’ because it doesn’t change. When I let go of everything, completely let go of everything, only thing left is ‘I’.

A: Very good. Therefore also, conversely, when so many things come in our life, so many events happen in this phenomenal experiencing, what happened to this ‘I’?

So you say ‘When I let go of everything, then this ‘I’ remains’. Isn’t it? Now, conversely, things seem to come. Even if they are believed…, even if they are believed to be true, does anything happen to this ‘I’?

Q: No.

A: Nothing happens.

Q: But I can think that something has happened to it. But that is not true.

A: Yes. So, this distinction is very important for us to see; that even when we think something happened to me or even when we believe something happened to me, we are not referring to the true ‘I’ then.

Q: Right.
A: Very good. Who here doesn’t see this? [Silence] (Not saying something because of saying peer pressure?) [Laughter]

This, if you see this, then you see that in reality you cannot suffer; have never suffered. So therefore those words ‘Nothing real can be threatened’ is now becoming your direct experience. Because if nothing happened to this ‘I’…, threat is far beyond something happening. If nothing can touch this ‘I’ then nothing can threaten it.

A: Don’t fear the fear. Let it just come. I am always with you. Nothing can happen to you. What is the worse case scenario of what can happen to us?

Q: Feeling like there are no legs to stand on or something like that.

A: So fly then. [Laughter]

Like I was saying yesterday, in The Course in Miracles it is said very beautifully:

Nothing real can be threatened.

Nothing unreal exists.

Herein lies the peace of God.

So, if nothing real can be threatened, and nothing unreal exists anyway, then what is the worst case scenario for us? Either ‘I am real’ or ‘I am unreal’. If I am real, I cannot be threatened. If I am unreal, then I don’t exist at all. Either way, there is no trouble.

Q: Something is just trying to hold something, to hide. I don’t know, just…

A: The mind can desperately grasp for straws now, you see.

Q: That is what is seeming to happen, Father. It is like something looking for some place to…, some excuse not to fly, kind of thing.

A: Yes. Exactly.

Q: That’s what it is.

A: In satsang, we take away all your excuses to not being free. You have no excuse actually.

You have looked at every aspect of even this human existence and taken away all your excuses. That is why it is important to look at all these things that we look at, because in these things subtly some excuses can hide. But as you shine your light on all of these things, you will find that ‘I cannot be bound. Bondage is not even a concept that can apply to me’. Not even ‘I am that space in which this space is arising and this space can’t be bound’. How can That in which this space is arising, be bound? Impossible.

It is even more than to say that ‘Oh, I had a dream last night and in that, the character was bound up, so now I am feeling constricted’. It is a ludicrous example, but the unreality of bondage is even more ludicrous than this example. Who has been able to bind Awareness?

Don’t fear the dissolution of the identity. You will not lose anything at all. The whole universe is Yours, unless you pretend to be a person.

Q: [Silence] There still seems to be some…, [sighs] just that something that is trying, that is looking to hold on to something really desperately, Father. And also I know there is nothing for me to do; there is nothing to be done. Just I don’t know what to do, Father. Deal with it, please.

A: Yes, it is this…, it’s like the remnant of withdrawal symptoms.

Q: Yes, Father.

A: You are so addicted to the person-identity that although it is seen that this addiction has given nothing but suffering, something was still so habituated to it that just out of habit it goes back to that. So, this will settle more and more.

And just to see this urge, actually, is very auspicious. Because most of humanity, we spend our lives and we don’t see this urge to pick up an idea, to pick up something to make me feel like ‘I am a person’. [To see this urge] is its dissolution.

And what is the approach that we must have towards this? It must not be that ‘Oh, please go away. Please don’t…., I don’t want you anymore’. Not like this fear. It must be more facing it head on saying ‘Okay, what is it that you want? What are you trying to sell to me?’ And to look at it straight up and say ‘I am not interested anymore’.

Q: [Laughter and tears] [Deep sighs] Father, good save.

Q: Hello. I need some help. I don´t know if it is enough to just speak it out, but at least I want to lay this at your feet. It’s about the fear of losing the body. For quite some time, again and again, intense bodily sensations are going on and then this fear comes up; which is actually here also the whole time so it´s still very fresh. That is what I wanted to come up with this; to use it.

I was looking at it but somehow I feel I am stuck in something. I don´t really know if that is true. It is somehow about the idea of death. And this fear is somehow already the death. It is the death; and again this causes fear. I don´t know how to explain it. It goes in circles. It goes on and on and on. It is just always only (at least how it goes on here) the fear of death; the fear of ‘Now I am losing this body. Now the body is going’. This is the losing of the body or something. [Laughing]

A: [Laughing] So, only in Satsang do we talk about death and laugh at the same time.

Q: What also is very clear is, that without the idea that ‘This is my body’ this cannot be there. This really seems to be the ultimate thing here. It´s always about this topic here. It comes always to this point. And at times there is just no space. Maybe you have a question for me?

A: Yes, yes. I was just going to ask you a question. What is the function of this body?

Q: [Laughs] I don´t know. Does it has a function?

A: Okay. Let´s start with that question. [Laughing]

Q: Not really. No, it has no function.  There is no function. [Laughing]

A: So, if it has no function, then what will we lose, if we lose this body?

Q: [Laughing] Nothing. What is happening here, it is just is an energetic resistance. I don´t know what I am saying but….

A: Let´s look at it another way also. There is no body, which is ever been born without at least two of the senses functioning. (I don´t know whether this is true scientifically. My feeling is that it is true.) So, if you were to say that [there is] something called ‘function’…[Inaudible] Suppose phenomenally speaking, if there is something called ‘function’, then the function of  this body is to have this sensory experience of the world.

A: Yes. When we are saying that we don´t want to lose this body, there must be this fear that along with the going of this body will go the sensory experience of this world. Because if there was no sensory experience of the world at all, then we would not feel like this body is here in the first place. Yes?

Q: Yes, and there is an attachment to that.

A: Yes, yes. Okay, so this is what we should look at. So, there must be an attachment to this sensory experiencing, which then translates into the love for the body or the attachment to the body. And yet, every night we have had enough of this experiencing, you see. And we want ‘this’ and we get more concerned about ‘that’ so we experience every day that there is a certain limit to all forms of sensory experience. Even the best ones. That´s why Papaji had this very beautiful example where he said that you could be on your wedding night in the arms of your beloved, but if you have had enough of experiencing then even then you will say ‘Okay, leave me alone. I am going to sleep’. So, there are limits to all sensory experiences.

As long as there is an urge within Consciousness to experience itself in a sensory way, they will be available to us. We are experiencing so many different realms; it creates dreams, it creates all these realms so that it can experience itself in those ways; experience all that sensory experience. So Consciousness is unlimited. We don´t have to worry. If the urge is there in Consciousness to experience in a sensory way, it will create a body for itself. So, it´s really not a concern for our mind because the mind cannot even create sleep, or the mind cannot even wake up. And when the urge for sensory experience dissolves, then this appearance of this body dissolves. And at that point we don´t really know; maybe all of this day is just a dream, the experience we have like this together. We don´t really know these things. We just presume that ‘Okay, I am going to wake up tomorrow morning’. Maybe actually there is some other realm of time in which we experience a trillion years between going to sleep tonight and waking up tomorrow. We don´t know these things. Maybe we never experience this body again. Maybe it is just here in this instant. The mind cannot grapple with these topics at all.

Q: No. But, Father, what is coming up here now is…, the sense of Being will also be gone when the body is gone. Or not?

A: It is usually found that when the sense of Being appears, then the sense of body also appears; this appearance of the body also appears…, most often, I say…, because many have had experiences of ‘out of body’ experiences or other ‘astral travel’ type experiences where they do not have the sense of physical body. Some experiences like this have happened here also, where it felt like, eyes were closed,  and I was sitting somewhere and it felt like without this physical body I was able to travel to any part of the universe. And the appearance became that the entire universe became just a flickering light in front of me. I am not trying to give any specialness to these appearances because they were also just appearances after all. But what I am saying is, there can be the experience of Beingness without it necessarily being attached to the physical body. But mostly it is found that as Being appears, also this sense of body appears.

That which is concerned about the loss of Being Itself is which one?

Q: [Laughing]

A: It is the same one that resists that Being. You see? The same one that is resisting God is saying ‘God should not go away’.

Q:  [Laughing] All just presumed. I can just see all the presuming, of how it would be or … This is the persistent thought, which is coming now, which I can now see that: When this body dies, this Being will also be gone. Or Beingness is not possible without this body. And there is the attachment.

A: And yet this same Beingness also dissolves every night along with this entire realm of appearances. Who is controlling the arising and dissolution of this Being? It is beyond anything that can be fathomed on this realm at all, because this realm is only God’s Presence. You see? At least what I can tell you for sure is that when this Being dissolves the concern about the dissolution of the Being will definitely not be there. Because that concern is only an appearance in the light of the Being itself.

Q: Yes, right. The same as this fear of everything that is going on…, it is actually nothing. It is really nothing; it’s really nothing. I don’t know. I cannot even say that it is energy anymore, some kind of energy anymore, so it is really nothing.

A: That´s why it is very beautiful what happened to Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] as a young child. He feels that ‘I am dying, I am dying’ and then what happened? Some grace happened for him, where he said ‘Okay, now I want to see clearly what happens when you die’. So he just lay down, and said ‘Okay, I am going to die. Let me see what happens’. And what died? Just the sense of the separation, the sense of the identity; that died.

It’s beautiful. It´s a beautiful sharing.

Q: Thank you for reminding me of this story; great. Thank you. Thank you so much!

A: Thank you. Very good.

Q: There’s been a lot of restlessness while I’ve been at home; like restlessness to just sit and ‘be’ without, say, a satsang on in the background or music on in the background. There’s a real kind of resistance to just sit and be quiet with myself.

A: There’s a resistance to do that? And then when you attempt to do it, what happens? It feels like you have like a lot of energetic restlessness?

Q: Yes, and the thoughts will come and then there will be an Awareness of the thought, but they will keep coming, and one will get picked up; and then it’s like I’m off with the thought-stream.

A: And how is it in satsang?

Q: Well, it’s different because yesterday was just completely like ‘wipe out’.

A: Yes.

Q: And then I went back home and I spent quite a lot of time just sorting out the hangout and things like that so there was a lot of mind activity going on.

A: Yes.

Q: And then I woke up this morning and I was just like…, just this restless energy of wanting to move, wanting to do. It was like a moving of energy rather than the space that I know I am, so it feels like identity is being bought again.

A: Yes. The first thing that you have to do before it becomes infectious, is give me this ‘checker guy’…, [Chuckles] the one who’s keeping track of the state.

Q: But it’s not a state, it’s not a state. It’s a clear knowing of when I’m seeing from the Truth, compared to before when I was like ‘It’s all about the love, it’s all about the bliss’. But that’s even seen now as ‘It’s not that, it’s not that’.

A: Very good.

Q: I know when I’m operating from this personal identity now and there’s a resistance to drop it. [Silence] Like now I know I’m identified, I know that there’s identity playing and there’s just kind of this nervousness about dropping it by myself, without you. It’s like can you hold my hand and just help me drop it. [Laughs]

A: [Laughs] The identity actually is always measly compared to the reality of what you are. So even the statement that ‘I know that identity is playing’…, it is that Knowing that is much larger than this play of identity. So you don’t have to feed it with too much concern as to ‘Why is this happening?’ It’s very light.

Sometimes it can be that some conditioning is playing out and the best thing to do about that is just laugh at it. If you make it serious and say ‘Oh, these days it seems like it’s not being dropped so easily’. You see? That’s just adding to it. We just, we look at it and we say ‘Oh, this ‘person’ seems to get some belief, but what is it really?’ It’s just laughable, is it not?

Q: Yes, like when you’re believing your thoughts it’s one thing, but then the feelings are another thing; and if I’m not buying the thoughts then the feelings are there to be bought.

A: Yes, but we are not to resist the feeling in anyway. What can be bought is only the interpretation of the feeling.

Q: Yep, yep.

A: So there is no buying or selling happening; just the attention can go to the feeling or the attention can be pulled back from it. And I have never suggested that we forcefully try and pull our attention away from the feelings. So if it gets our attention, it’s okay to ‘be with that’. Without buying the interpretation of it, it doesn’t really get nourished.

Q: It’s just a recognition that I’m not the feelings, and then it’s just (not even a movement, it’s just) a seeing that I’m not thoughts, I’m not the feelings.

A: Yes.

Q: And then even if they persist, that’s okay as well.

A: The force of this can be so strong, it can seem like a tsunami. So, in that, the best among us sometimes can momentarily get lost in that. But the point is not about what happened then because that is gone. It is always just about the right now. And that is why we have this kind of sanctuary from Monday to Friday, that no matter what might be happening in the seeming day-to-day life, at least for one hour, two hours, if you can come here; and now it’s clearing up. And if something comes, afterward we can come up and we talk. Then it seems to get lighter.

As this sanctuary is available every day, then the thing of all of this past conditioning…, some days it can seem like we get more, some days it seems very light; we can gently allow that to happen. As long as we are coming to satsang, these releases [just come and go]. Like I was telling her ‘Don’t even worry about it. It came and it went, it came and it went’.

Q: I think it’s because there’s been these big openings and ‘Seeings’ in the past and then identity has slowly crept back in.

A: Yes.

Q: And there is this fear of that happening; so I just wanted to bring it to you.

A: So, let that one be my problem.

Q: Yeah.

A: We won’t let it grow. It will either be whacked or dissolved (whatever way it is going to happen) if it tries to come back…, as long as we’re here.

Q: Can I just check as well…?

A: Yes.

Q: So, this identity…, (or, I don’t even know)…, this feeling of being the character right now; I feel like I’m the character…,

A: Okay. [Inaudible]

Q: But there’s awareness of that feeling.

A: Exactly.

Q: But if I try and get to something else, that seems ridiculous. So it’s just like…, let this character play with these emotions, feelings and thoughts but know that I’m not that. That’s the checker guy checking. [Laughs]

A: Yes. To see that ‘Yes, no matter what in this play might be happening, That-which-is-Aware of the play remains untouched and unmoved by it’. It’s a beautiful checking. Now, if it seems like the character still has some choice, (if it feels like it wants to do something to be rid of itself in some way) then just make the choice not to buy into your next thought. That’s all that is needed to be done.

And if it feels like there is no choice, then just enjoy the show.

Either it can feel like there is a choice or it can feel like there is no choice at all.

If it feels like there is a choice then make a choice not to believe your next thought. If it feels like there is no choice then, nothing; enjoy the show. [Chuckles]

Q: I think it’s like these feelings that come up in the body, they’re so familiar to a person feeling them that there is like this pull to feel like ‘It’s happening to a ‘me’. But actually these feelings are…, they’re just happening.

A: They’re just happening.

Q: Yeah, okay.

A: Just appearing and disappearing.

It is called ‘recognition’ which means it is a ‘re-cognition’. So it is already here, it is already cognized. Only seems to be forgotten. That’s why we are re-cognizing it. So, as we are re-cognizing it, that this has already been Seen; this has been our truest Seeing anyway.

So, then what happens (like you said) is that the only thing that seems to get in the way is a fear of this dying; this fear of the separation dying actually. Because we have felt like we are this separate entity and all our identity/conditioning has been about this separate entity. So, when it feels like this will dissolve, it can feel like ‘I don’t want to die’.

So, all of our resistance in satsang (it can sound very trivial, but) it’s coming from this fear of death. And as we become open to this dissolution, then you feel that nothing real will die. Only the false is burning and dying. In fact, it is this same fear of death as each of us knowing that ‘It is not helpful for me to believe my thoughts’. It is this very fear of death that comes as this urge to hide behind the concepts which the mind is selling.

We all know now that it is not helpful. And yet many times we do it. Why? Because just this emptiness, this openness feels like it is too raw; it’s too open. And it feels like death is coming, so we want to rush to the thought, somewhere knowing that this is escapism but justifying itself, hiding behind even our spirituality.

All of us are now recognizing the truth of who we are. But it is this conditioning of separation, this conditioning of preservation of this separate identity which will come up as these ideas in our mind. It could be the most innocent sounding idea. It could say ‘But this is too difficult for me yet. I’m just getting started’. It could even be ‘I know all of this. I know all of this. Oh, I know all of this. There is no big deal in this. I know this’. It could be like that. It could be saying ‘No, no, I don’t have that; he’s not talking about me’. It could be like that. You see? All our avoidance; all our escapes.

Let’s do one thing today. Usually I say ‘Don’t visualize anything’. Today let’s visualize that there’s this big, strong fire in front of us; that there’s this big fire, satsang fire, in front of us. And let’s sacrifice in this fire our favorite concepts, our beloved ideas, our biggest attachments…, and experience this burning fully.

Because the coming and going of appearances is independent of our ideas about it. And in this world of appearances, we call something ‘me’ or ‘mine’. That is what is causing the trouble. Nothing is ‘me’ or ‘mine’. We don’t even know who ‘me’ is me is, nor ‘mine, in the world of changing appearances. Whenever we call it ‘mine’ that means ‘I want it’. [Makes fists of holding on tightly] ‘It must stay here’. But nothing is constant in this ever-changing world of maya.

This is the root of trouble, when we say ‘I must have this’ or I resist and say ‘I must not have this’. Either way; it’s the same thing. Desire or aversion is a desire only (but we call it desire or aversion); the desire to have something or to not have something.

So, let’s all create this bonfire right now in satsang, and see if we can throw all our ideas into this fire. The ones cause that cause the most ‘ouch’. [Inaudible] Even the one that says ‘Everything is fine’…, [yet] ‘I’m willing to hand over everything to Existence. Take even those I don’t want to give up’.

So, let’s do one internal audit like this, and we what we might still be refusing to give up.

What are we most fearful about losing?

[Silence]

Is that eternal?

That which we are most fearful about losing…, is it eternal?

[Silence]

No? Then it will be lost one day.

This body itself will cease to appear.

This realm itself will cease to appear.

And what about the objects in this realm?

How can they last forever?

What is it that we refuse to throw into the fire?

[Silence]

It could even be our ideas now. It could even be our idea that ‘I know something about the truth’. And this gives us a lot of trouble actually, the idea that we know something about the truth now. When suffering comes, it adds to the suffering because we say ‘But how could this still be happening to me? I’m supposed to be beyond this. I know so much’. You see? If any concept is like this, it just remains mental; then even these can be thrown away.

[Silence]

This throwing away is true openness.

All these thoughts and ideas will enter through the door and will automatically leave unless we hold something back with our belief.

And as you come to satsang, all your attachments are being pulled away. And that which we might be holding onto, when those are being pulled away then that can seem like the burning, you see, the hand is burning. It cannot be fully open and yet hold onto some concept. It cannot be fully open and suffer for any reasonable period of time. It can only seem momentary.

[Silence]

Q: Fear came of losing my children.

A: Then this fear goes into the fire. And now, let this go into the fire.

That’s what I said, that the idea we have about something doesn’t change the fact of whether that appearance will continue to appear or not.

This is the fear, isn’t it, that ‘If I throw away the idea, what if that stops appearing for me?’ But this play of Consciousness is independent of what we think about it.

This is also what Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] was implying when he said that there are only two things we can do. Either we inquire or we surrender. We speak a lot about the inquiry but what is this surrender? Surrender just means just enjoy the show knowing that it is all God’s problem. Allowing it to happen, exactly. And it is not either/or. At some moment it may seem like you want to inquire a lot:

Who am I?

Really, really, who am I?

I cannot be this thought appearing to me,

I cannot be this emotion because it is also an appearance coming and going.

I am not coming and going.

Who am I?

There is a Presence felt here which is a sense that I exist.

But who is aware even of this?

Is it not I?

Who am I?

We see that we are this pure witnessing and no appearance touches us.

Then what happens? Then we become open to anything coming and going. And the second is, we just give up. [sighs] ‘I really can’t do this.  I just give up. It is all my Father’s problem or God’s problem’.

Then what happens? Same. Openeness. Then openness happens. Then these things they lose their [power]. Because leg of doership of one of the strongest legs, maybe the strongest leg of the ego, and when we drop this doership and just allow ‘Okay, I can’t do this anymore’. Means what? I am no longer the doer. ‘Whatever force that is running this life, let it take care of life’.

Then as doership starts to dissolve, then sense of separate identity also can not last too long.  ‘What do I do? What do I do? What do I do next? What did I do? I should not have done that’. This doing, doing, doing is a lot of identity; is the core of the identity.

‘What’s in it for me?’ You see. Many times this question comes ‘What changes after liberation or freedom?’ The simplest thing that happens is that we don’t walk into every situation chanting the mantra ‘What is in it for me? What’s in it for me? What’s in it for me?’ It is just a simple allowing of everything to come and go. So this ‘D’ (the ‘desire-D’) becomes a lot milder. The second ‘D’ doership ‘What should I do, what should I do?’ also starts to dissolve a lot. So this desire and doership dissolve. [The two D’s: Desire and Doership which Anantaji says are the two legs of the ego identity] And then we come into every situation without the blinkers ‘What’s in it for me?’ but with just a universal openness with whatever is.

Then it becomes lighter. Then we don’t feel like we are so much in a rush. We’re not like ‘Okay, what am I extracting from this situation?’ You see? This one actually is one of the traits of a spiritual seeker also. It is a very strong identity; running from place to place ‘What’s in it for me? What can I get from him? What can I get from him?’ Like that. Then we start enjoying this seeker identity also. Then in our mind we have like report cards, ‘We went to…, yes, yes, I got this from there. Yeah, I got this from there’.

What is that ‘I’ that is getting something from somewhere? That is the seeker identity, the spiritual identity, which even must be looked at:

What am I really?

What is it that I really want?

Is my own Presence not here?

And if my Presence is here,

Is there anything outside of this Presence that I can ever have?

As you start seeing this Presence to be Consciousness, God itself is available for you. Then this sense of ‘What do I need? What should I get? What am I finding here or there’…, that goes. We get so much satisfaction, contentment. Then you find that those things we were chasing (love peace, all of this) you see that we’ve have had it upside down. We are not to chase them, they are in service to Us; not us personally, to God-Presence which is your own Presence.

Then if you put the person hat on, then we can keep running on this treadmill for the rest of our life. But it will always seem like ‘Almost there, almost there, almost got it’. And we might have ideas like ‘Okay, somebody has to push me off the cliff or somebody has to give me an awakening experience’ or something like this. We keep running on this never-ending treadmill.

As we find there is nothing beyond this which is already here, which I can never ‘get’ then we see that there is no lack, there is nothing missing. I don’t want anything for ‘me’ anymore.

Take the example of the cat. Have you heard this from me? Cat. No? Suppose you were born into a world where there were no mirrors so you could not check really who you are; but everybody started telling you that ‘You are a cat’. Your own thoughts are saying ‘You are a cat’. Everything is saying ‘I am a cat’. And as the job of a cat, your only job is to get the next bowl of milk. So it is been said that ‘This is your job now, the next bowl of milk. First study well, get good marks. That is the first bowl of milk, so we chase that, chase that, get that bowl of milk. But has it given us the eternal happiness and contentment we wanted? No.

Then we say ‘Okay, not with this, but with the next bowl of milk (‘Get a good job’) then you can be happy for the rest of your life’. Everybody has been told this. ‘Just get a good job and then you will be fine’. But you get that bowl of milk. There is contentment, momentary, maybe, once in a while. ‘Okay, you say, okay, okay, but still something is missing. Your next bowl of milk is get the perfect relationship. Get the partner. He or she will complete you’. So you chase that bowl of milk. So much, so much, so much, so much drama about relationship. So we get to that relationship. For a while, it seems like ‘Wow, very nice’. And then? ‘If only she was like this a little more’ or ‘If only he was like this little more’. We have enjoyed the differences before we were together; so attractive. And once we are together, then it’s ‘Oh, why couldn’t she be more like me?’ or ‘Why couldn’t he be more like me?’ So we want to change the same differences which were attractive. So this also didn’t work as the next bowl of milk. Then we say ‘Money’. You see? You’re getting the point. All these bowls of milk have been defined.

So then somebody comes and says to you ‘No, no, no. You have been chasing the wrong things. There is no happiness in this. Liberation! Moksha! This is the bowl of milk which will not run out. It is your amrit, your never-ending amrit. [Divine nectar]. You are like ‘This is huge! I will never out. I will be in bliss’. But you are still chasing like the cat, chasing the ultimate bowl of freedom.

Then one day you go to a true sage. Now a true sage will tell you ‘Actually, sorry to break it to you, but I don’t have any such bowl of milk. But what I do have is a mirror. Are you willing to look?’ Then, if there is openness (this is what it means by openness) if there is openness to not be a cat; if you are open to the idea that you are not a person at all, then you can see this mirror. And you will find that what is reflecting is not a cat. So when that happens (that there is no cat) then what do you find? There is no person here. But what is here that is undeniable? The sense that ‘I Am’…, that I exist.

So this ‘I Am’ (although it seems very simple when I ask you): ‘Can you stop being now?’ [You say] ‘No, of course not. What kind of question is that? I am being, being is here’.

This is your introduction to your own atma. This atma. It is the same ‘I Am-ness’. And it means also the same; this sense of existence, Beinginess, existence, Consciousness. You find ‘This is here, and I am aware even of this’. But this one that is aware even of this…, is not a body, is not a thought, is not an emotion. It is something even prior to this sense of being.

So, what is this ‘I’ that is aware of this?

Is it a thing?

It is some empty dark space?

Is it a bright light?

You find out that it is none of these. Because even if it was this, I’d be aware of that! You see? Many times our mind will visualize things and give them to us as solutions. [The thought] ‘Awareness’…, then mind will start visualizing big dark space or something like this. But who is aware even of that? Can we say something about that? We cannot.

That is why it is impossible to mentally grasp this and yet you know it is true. That’s why when we say: ‘Are you aware now?’ then we say ‘Yes’. That means we are aware of our Awareness.

We just don’t have the words to define it or describe it. That’s why you feel like ‘I still haven’t found the Self’ because our idea has been that ‘Once I know a concept of something, only then do I know it’. You see. Like in school, you study; you learn ten concepts ‘The world is round, it goes around the sun, gravity works like this’.., all this. And you feel like I know something about the world. You really don’t. We just know some concepts about the world now.

But this Self is also like this. We can have some concepts about it but that is not the true Knowing. But this true Knowing is possible and it is available, even through a simple question like this: Are you aware now?

To the mind it is a supremely unsatisfactory. ‘Nothing happened. Where is the halo? Where is the bliss, I was promised bliss. Where is any of this?’ But this is the magnificence of this; that I am able to say that ‘I am aware’ without a phenomenal experience of this. And you find that this ‘I’ that is aware it must be this Awareness Itself. Because it is aware of Itself without any visualization, without any conceptualization, without any interpretation. And you find that this discovery is the re-cognition of the Self. It is not that it is something new. It is a re-cognition (recognition).

Just to come to this recognition is very beautiful, even in our phenomenal day-to-day to life. Why? Because when this thought comes and says ‘Oh, this one doesn’t like me so much’ the belief is not so much on that but on recognizing ourselves to be this Awareness. You see? So we switch our idea about ourself, going from ‘I am this person, I am this identity, I am like this and like this’ and we just throw all of this away and we have no idea now about who we are, then when things come as triggers for us in the world, then we feel like somebody is attacking space; like somebody is taking a sword and trying to cut space. We will just laugh at it. But if you imagine ‘yourself’ to be in there, then you will feel like I am being attacked, I am being cut, I am being hurt.

That is why this recognition is very beautiful and it makes what our mind is saying laughable actually. So, I often say this tormentor (which seems like a tormentor) then becomes like a stand up comedian which is available to us for free; no ticket also needed. This is the primary difference between a sage and a so-called normal layman. The sage is enjoying this comedy in the head. That is why they are always smiling and laughing because they are enjoying this comedy that the mind is giving them, and the layman is taking it so seriously and saying [Stern face] ‘Yeah, yeah’.

So, not believing our thoughts, recognition of who we are. All of these are correlated and inter-related.

Q: At an intellectual level or a mental level, a lot of these things are clear to me, but the depth of understanding is not there.

A: We hear this often, that ‘It seems to be intellectual, but how do I experience this as my living truth?’

Q: Too many books have gone to the mind.

A: Too many books have gone to the mind. [Chuckles] Yes.

Q: The contents of my mind have increased; not the depth.

A: So, let’s start with that. Let’s not put it down. Let’s not say it’s a bad thing, to start with. Let’s start with that. So, tell me something which is just intellectual but it is not your experience yet.

Q: I try to carry the conviction that I’m neither the body nor the mind. I am Awareness.

A: Yes. So, this idea that ‘I am Awareness. I am not the body / mind’…, you feel it is just mental?

Q: Yes.

A: Okay. Are you aware now?

Q: Yes.

A: You are aware now. This answer is coming because you saw some visual of Awareness?

Q: No.

A: No. Did you see a thought of Awareness?

Q: No.

A: No. Then where did the ‘yes’ come from?

Q: From Awareness itself.

A: From Awareness. Is this mental?

Q: No.

A: No. Can it be this simple?

Q: But I get caught up.

A: ‘Get caught up’ means what?

Q: Get distracted.

A: So, this Awareness that is here now, does something happen to that?

Q: No. Nothing happens to that. The mind interferes.

A: The mind interferes…

Q: Thoughts happen.

A: Thought happen. Then…?

Q: I get caught up with the thoughts.

A: How do you catch a thought? If a thought just repeats itself, is it enough to catch it? So, if the thought came that ‘He’s wearing a pink shirt’ and kept repeating, will be it caught?

Q: No, unconsciously I don’t pay attention to all the thoughts. There are some thoughts, some feelings of insecurity; those kind of things, they …

A: Sometimes, they get caught.

Q: Yes.

A: I have this old example, which is one of my favorites actually. I don’t know if you’ve heard it. Now, suppose that our problem was the reverse. Our problem was that we have not suffered for a long time; we have not felt any suffering. We’re saying ‘I’m missing suffering’. Suppose we are saying ‘I’m missing suffering. How can I make myself suffer?’ Because if I ask you ‘Right now, in this moment, is there any suffering?’

Q: No.

A: You say ‘No’. Now, to get suffering, what do you have to do? Can you tell? Then I’ll tell my example.

Q: Listen to my thoughts; pay attention to the thoughts.

A: Okay, attention is going. Attention is enough?

Q: Not just attention. Too much of identification.

A: Identification. How do you identify with a thought?

Q: Because it starts.., I don’t know but something starts…

A: Because you believe it. You see?

So the example is this. If we want misery, we have an ATM: ‘Any Time Misery’ machine. We have this ‘Any Time Misery’ machine; which is what? The mind.

Now, if you want to withdraw misery from this ATM machine, first what do you have to do? Put the ‘Attention to Mind’ card: ATM card is ‘Attention to Mind’ card. You see?

But just putting the card in is not enough. It doesn’t give. You also have to put in your ‘Personal Identification’ Number: PIN. Which means what? Your belief.

So, if you go to this mind, give it your ‘Attention to Mind’ card and also put in your belief (Personal Identification) then unlimited amount of misery is available to you.

Now, how we then get rid of this suffering? Because we don’t want this misery actually. Then if it was that straight-forward, we would just say ‘Don’t give attention to the mind’. Problem finished.

But it doesn’t happen like that. Because the nature of attention is that it’s a naughty monkey. You say ‘Don’t go there’ and it goes there. I say ‘Don’t think of an orange’ and very quickly the mind will start giving you a visual of an orange. Isn’t it?

Q: Yes.

A: But I say ‘Don’t believe you’re an orange’…, easier, no? Easier to do?

A: Yes.

Q: So, we can start by working at the level of belief. So, simply, I say that ‘Just don’t believe your next thought. And then show me how you can suffer’.

Then what happens is that, in hearing this pointing itself, you see that a lot of the thoughts are allowed to come and go; just come and go. But some will still get you. Which are these ones that still get you? If I say ‘You are horrible at Olympic-level rifle shooting’…, does it bother you?

Q: No.

A: Doesn’t bother you. Why it doesn’t bother you? Because you’re not interested in that. There’s no identification with that. You see?

Q:  Yes, yes.

A: But if I say ‘You’re hopeless at finding enlightenment. You will not find it!’ Then…? It bothers you, because there is an identity of being ‘A Spiritual Seeker’.

Q: Yes.

A: So, like this, when we know ‘Don’t believe our next thought’ but something still gets our belief; the random ones will mostly just go now, but these ones which still have our identity (it could be relationship, it could be security, it could be health of the body; these kind of identities) then what are we supposed to do?

When we spot that ‘This one still gets to me’ then we pull that into inquiry and say ‘Who is it? Who is this one?’ You see? So, what is one identity that still bothers you?

Q: I don’t understand.

A: Name one identity which still has some juice for you; some strength.

Q: Body identity.

A: Body. So, in this way we can check: Whose body is this? Who is the ‘me’ that owns this body? Many bodies I have experienced. Like we were talking about the dream state; also there is a body which seems to function, experiences pleasure and pain. So, this one: Who is the owner of this body?

You see, the body is just sitting quietly. It is not concerned about the body also. It is definitely not concerned about money in the bank account, not concerned about relationship; also not concerned about freedom. Poor innocent thing, it is just sitting here. [Laughter in the room] It gets a lot of blame actually in spirituality, which is unfair.

So, this body, who is the owner of this body? Can we find this one? The person, or the one who remains that owns this body; can we find this one?

Q: As of now, it’s the mind that owns this body. [Chuckles]

A: The mind is what? The mind is a bundle of thoughts, and similar energy like memory, imagination, like this. So, how can a thought, which is coming and going, own anything? [Pause] You see? So, the thought came; it went. It’s no longer there to own this body. When a thought is there, we call that the mind. When a thought is not there, we call that the no-mind.

So, if the thoughts are going, mind and no-mind is going like this; then this coming and going, can it own even this bundle of atoms and molecules?

Q: No, no.

A: It cannot own them. You see? So, like this we have to deepen our inquiry and say ‘Who is this one?’ And then you find there is nobody like that. There is no separate, individual entity which is the owner of this body.

So, the first pointer is: To be free from your suffering right now, don’t believe your next thought. Those which still get your belief, you pull them into inquiry.

And the more you inquire into them, you will find that those identities become lighter and lighter. And yet, the spontaneity of our life will still flow. You see? Things will not stop. So, that is the first.

Then you might say…, (You’re here only for two days, so I want to give you all the main things that we speak about)…, then you might say ‘Okay, this is fine. But what about what I really want. I want God’. This is fine; suffering is gone. But what about God? (You can say like that.) ‘Can you show me God?’ is a very auspicious question. Even great sages like Swami Vivekananda have asked this question.

A simple way to find God is when I ask you the question ‘Can you stop being now?’

Can you stop being? You have to actually try. Don’t be.

Q: No.

A: You cannot stop being. So, this Being is what?

Q: Is God.

A: Is Consciousness, is God. You see? Your own Being is God-Presence. [I Am that I Am]

Then, you can come to this point. (I’m seeding all of this in you; it will unfold on its own.) And it’s completely fine at this point, with the realization of God-Presence, to just be at peace and be comfortable with the rest of our life. We don’t need to find anything else.

But some of you will come and say ‘But I sense that there is something else also. I sense that there is something which is even more absolute, higher’. And these words might sound blasphemous to some. But you might have this sense that there is something even higher than this God-Presence. ‘Can you show me that?’

So, this simple question: ‘Are you aware now?’ points you to this which is higher than even Presence. Because when you answer ‘Am I aware now?’ it is a very beautiful thing you are doing. Because for everything else, you’re checking something phenomenal.

Q: Yes.

A: Isn’t it? You’re saying ‘There’s a candle here’. If I ask you ‘Is there a candle here?’ you say ‘Yes’.

Q: Yes.

A: Is there a glass here? Checking. But for ‘Am I aware now?’ what is the phenomena you saw?

Q: Nothing.

A: Nothing. And yet you know it is true. If I say ‘You’re not aware’…, I have a lot of credibility with you, but you will fight with me also, saying ‘But I am aware! What do you mean I’m not aware?’ And I say ‘Show me’. You say ‘I can’t show you. But I know I’m aware’. You see? So, this awareness is the only…, (it’s not even an experience, but just to use language we can say) it is your only non-phenomenal experience; which is higher than even the experience of the Presence of God or Consciousness.

So, this is your discovery of your True Self. It is not coming and going, no matter which states come and go; waking, dream, sleep, turiya…, (you call it whatever state you want).

This One is the eternal witnessing of all of this that is coming and going. And it is available to you if you don’t give it to the mind too much but just keep it like pure and raw through the simple question ‘Am I aware now?’

Now, at this point (usually I don’t share so much in the first meeting, but it’s coming now so I will share) the mind can play one subtle trick at this point. It can say ‘Yes, yes. I find this Awareness, and actually to this Awareness nothing is happening, but what about MY life?’ It can play this subtle trick. ‘What about when I leave this satsang hall? When I’m in the day-to-day marketplace of my life, what happens?’

So, what is the mind subtly done? It has quickly come and created a dichotomy between this Awareness, which is Your True Self, and again this imagined ‘me’ has been allowed to take birth; because we believed that idea. So, to inoculate you from this idea, I have one more question for you, which will take you deeper than any phenomenal level, which is:

Who is aware of even this Awareness?

So, you say ‘Am I aware now?’ and you say ‘Yes’.

Now, who is aware even of this Awareness?

What is that?

Now, in this, the mind tricks will fail, because it cannot create that distinction between Awareness and a sense of a separate ‘me’. The sense of separation cannot really take hold if you contemplate this question.

Q: I see.

A: Then, what will happen, as you’ve gone through all of this; not believing the thoughts, exploring Your own Presence…, ‘Can I stop being now?’…, this Being that is here, then looking at who is aware of this Being…, ‘Am I aware now?’…, then you find, with a little bit of contemplation like this, all that you were calling intellectual knowledge is actually your direct living experience. It’s just these simple contemplations.

Now, when you look back at the knowledge you’ve picked up, you will be easily able to correlate. You pick up Ashtavakra Gita, you pick up Ribhu Gita; none of this will seem like it is just mental, because you’ll read a verse, you’ll check…, ‘Yes’. This inner tasting will happen of the Truth. And these words, which seemed so abstract and intellectual and mental, now will seem like your direct living experience. In this way, you will not feel like ‘My entire search has been just mental’.

Q: I’m very happy to meet you.

A: I’m also very happy you came.

Q: I just felt to be on the hot seat. Fire away!

A:  Yes. [Laughter] Very good.

Q: Fire away!

A: Okay, very good. All of us, we gather for what? We gather for the truth, isn’t it? We gather to hear the truth. So, can you tell me something which is true?

Q: Umm, that I am here. I exist. That…

A: Yes, you say that you exist, you exist. Very nice. Now this ‘you’ that exists,

which one is that one?

Q: It is the ‘I’.

A: The ‘I’ …

Q: It is the ‘I’, the Awareness-I.

A: The Awareness-I.

Q: Yeah, I don’t know what you want to call it.

A: That’s good. [chuckles] This is good.

Q: Yeah, it’s definitely not the personality, the person. It is so quickly seen how that just [poof sound] is really not there. As much as it tries to come up and vie for attention.

A: Yes.

Q: It really is not of no consequence. I mean, you know you talk about getting to the place where you are like doubling with laughter. And then it is a frequent occasion.

A: [Laughter] Yes.

Q: And there are sometimes when if you kind of (I call it) loosen the grip a little bit and then go with it, then suffering is right there; especially in times of stress or family issues or things like that. But quickly, very quickly, it is like ‘Oh, oh’.

A: Yes

Q: And that’s pretty much about it.

A: Yes, so when we say ‘exist’…, we say that ‘It is only ‘I’ that exists’…, we can also say that this computer exists or this body exists.

Q: In a way, it exists for the reality of the perceiver. Does that make sense?

A: Same question for you. You say that ‘I exist’. And when we looked at this ‘I’ we said that ‘This ‘I’ is not personal, it is Awareness’. And then I asked you whether ‘Does the computer not exist…, or whatever device is in front of you (computer or iPad or whatever is in front of you)…, can we truly say it doesn’t exist?’

Q: In deep sleep, it doesn’t exist. But I’m still…, there is still the ‘I’.

A: Yeah. Is it that it doesn’t exist in deep sleep? Or is it just that you just are not cognizant of it, that you just can’t see it?

Q: Well, you know, I really don’t know. I don’t know. [Laughter]

A: [Laughter] It is very good.

Q: I don’t know. Because the mind wants to come in and say it exists, because somebody else over the other side of the world is awake and they’re on a computer, you know, so it must exist. Yeah, that is just a mind thing. So I had no idea. I don’t know.

A: Has there been an experience of some other realms which seem just as real, but now in this waking state we feel to say that they don’t exist really?

Q: Yes, yes, like a dream, for instance, in a dream.

A: Yes, yes. Does the dream exist without your existence?

Q: No.

A: Is there any qualitative difference in the experience of the dream and the experience of this waking state?

Q: No, no. [Laughter]

A: It is experienced exactly in the same way. Therefore if we were to say that ‘In all the realms that have been experienced here, in this waking state, it seems clear to me that the entire dream was a projection within this Consciousness’. Therefore we see that Consciousness has this infinite ability to project time, to project space, to project all the characters possible on the screen of what we call life. You see? So, this entire play (in terms of its tangibility) seems exactly the same. Would that be…, would that resonate with your experience?

Q: Yes. Yes, it would.

A: Many times when I ask this question, many times we feel like ‘But here, I have a memory of yesterday. In a dream, it just starts in the middle’. So, that is one difference. But when we look at that, we also find that the dream doesn’t start with saying ‘Oh, where am I? Who am I? Who are these people?’ We don’t start a dream with amnesia, do we? We recognize those people. Sometimes they feel like family to us. So there must be the same functioning of memory, the same functioning of past, ideas about past, which also must be available there.

Q: Yes.

A: Isn’t it?

Q: Yes, it is so clear.

A: And even in the direct experience of this waking state, we have never experienced this world without first the sense of existence, ‘I exist’ being there. Isn’t it? The world only exists for me. You see? Is there ever an experience of the world without there being this sense of existence ‘I Am’? There never is, in our experience. As [sangha member] said ‘In our experience, at least, all that exists in this phenomenal realm relies first on the fact that I must exist’. Isn’t it?

Q: Yes, yes. [Chuckles]

A: Very good. So, is there ever this experience that even the sense that ‘I exist’ is not present?

Q: In deep sleep. I don’t say that in deep sleep. It just is.

A: Yes, would you then say this is the fundamental difference between the [deep] sleep state and the waking state?

Q: Yes.

A: [Chuckles and a warm gaze] Now, that which is able to discern or is the witness of both of these…

Because what are we saying? We’re saying that suddenly it is like this this camera got covered and it becomes all black [Covers laptop camera with hands] and then suddenly there is light. [Hand removed from camera] If there wasn’t a witness of that blackness, would we be able to report that suddenly it becomes black?

Q: Yes

A: You see? So, there needs to be a witness even of that…, there is nothing there. And yet at the same time, we see that sleep state means that there is nothing; no-thing.

Therefore, what is it that I must be if there is nothing that exists in [deep] sleep state and yet I am the witness of that?

Q: Can you please repeat that last bit one more time?

A: Yes, yes. We said that sleep state seems like camera is covered. And then suddenly there is the waking state and this entire world of appearances is back. But to be able to report that there was nothing in sleep, there must be a witnessing. What is that?

There was nothing, yes? Isn’t it? Now what is it that is even beyond this ‘thing’ and ‘nothing’ which must be the witness of this distinction between ‘nothing’ and ‘something’?

Q: It just Is. It is just no thing. It’s everything, no-thing. It just Is.

A: Yes. [Chuckles] Yes, yes.

Q: But that is the ‘I’. That is the True-I.

A: Yes. Very good, very good. Now what can happen in the waking or dream state that can actually hurt this I?

Q: Nothing. [Laughter]

A: Okay. So, you say that ‘I am this which stays unhurt’. It is not threatened. Like in ‘The Course in Miracles’ we say:

Nothing real can be threatened

Nothing unreal exists

Herein lies the peace of God

Isn’t it?  So, our discovery seems to be similar to that. Because if this ‘I’ is real then it cannot be threatened, you see?

Very good. So, if I am this ‘I’ but I want to play the game of suffering, what must I do now to make myself suffer?

Q: I have to believe my thoughts.

A: [Laughter] Yes, but right now I am just this ‘I’.

Q: Oh, oh. Nothing.

A:  There are certain steps that must need to happen first, before even the thoughts can appear.

Q: There is no suffering. Because it would be nothing; actually just be nothing. [Laughter]

A: [Chuckles] So, this ‘something’ that appears, [Waved arms to point to the room] this something that appears, is that not I?

Q: Phenomenally it is I. But only because I can see it. So, it is the sort of the same question but in a different way. [Laughs]

A: Yes. [Laughter] She is like ‘Got you there’.

Q: [Laughter] It is only there if it is seen. If I see it, it is there; otherwise [Waves hands in a crossing-out motion]. The magnitude of that is breathtaking. It is like when we spoke about conceptually knowing about the ‘I’. And I feel that there was some of that there. And that this whole questioning has really like just… [Pounds fist gently] Because you know… [Chuckles]  Yeah.

A: Yes, yes, very good.

Q: Because you know, there is a slogan in the west that says ‘The mind is a terrible thing to waste’. It should be the opposite; the mind should be a thing to waste. [Both Laugh]

[Sighs] And the freshness just keeps growing and growing; it’s just brighter and brighter. Like today after silent satsang, you talked about shining our own light. And it really, it really made an impact. And so, you know, there was space for that this morning. There was just space for sitting, just sitting. And, of course the daily routine of mom and householder and all these things…, but there was so much freshness about it, literally like it was being done for the very first time. And I have had little bits of that, but this…, it was seen that it was felt very deep.

And it is interesting how when sitting and shining that light, all these things try to come up; it’s like a show in your mind. It’s like ‘Oh, what about this recipe you want to try, or what about this’. Even all the beautiful things that people experience, whether it is colors or it is just distraction; because that mind doesn’t want you to see it. It just doesn’t. And it is comical. I was laughing (pffft). I was laughing. But this satsang of having the questions put to us has just been…, I can’t even put it into words.

A: I also feel that it has been very helpful. Very helpful.

Q: Thank you, thank you so much. And everybody for their honesty and just frankness, it is so beautiful. Thank you.

Q: I remember a week ago you had this satsang about deep sleep. I never really gave it that much thought until it came (the contemplation) until that satsang. So, what is it that is aware during deep sleep? And what is aware that you are coming out of sleep or going into sleep?

To me it felt that it’s ego [cognizing]. (Maybe not cognizing, I don’t know if cognizing is the right word but the way I feel, it is.) So, when I wake up in the body-sense and I see that this is flower and this color is orange, and this is this; this is that cognizing ability to differentiate things. So, based on that, in deep sleep also this turiya experience that we have; it’s an experience. Okay? So, I feel it’s the cognizing ego that gives too much importance to all this and which actually divides that ‘This is deep sleep, this is awake, this is waking up’…, and something like that.

A: Yes, so the mental division, or the conceptual division, of course, is at the level of concept. But for the ego to cognize, we must look at what we mean by ‘ego’ in the first place. You see? So what is ego? What do you mean by ego?

Q: What I mean by ‘ego’ is something that consistently persists to confirm something. When it’s not the ego, it just is an insight that comes and just leaves. It doesn’t have the push. Whereas ego is something that subtly or over a period of time, just consistently wants to push things.

A: Take an example, illustration of this; what does it mean ‘Consistently wants to push something’?

Q: Okay. I don’t know why this example is coming to my mind right now (but) Paryushan is going on right now. Are you aware about Paryushan? It’s a Jain festival. So, there is this fasting that we do. And so one day I was fasting. The body was fasting (because now I know the difference between fasting). So, I was cutting something with the knife and I ended up cutting my thumb. So after watching it (physically watching it) for a few minutes, just to see how the blood flows and everything…, I don’t know I was just very curious.

A: [Laughs] You sound like me actually.

Q: [Laughs] And then a natural response was just to put that thumb in the mouth, sucking it just to drink. Now, I am Jain. I have been born in a Jain family, vegetarian. And I drank the blood and I was fasting. So, did I break my fast? [Laughter in the room]

So, it just came like that and there was this absolute clarity of insight which said (not said but just insight which says) that fasting is for senses that reach out; not for the natural responses. I asked this to my mom, she said ‘You didn’t do it intentionally, it’s okay, nobody cares’. So, that’s how we are showing love and everything. But for me that insight was enough to know that fasting is not something that I am doing. It’s for the senses. You know? Just to bring yourself to a center. Probably just taking this in was just a natural response and I didn’t feel guilty about it at all. And I shared it with a friend and she was like ‘Probably you are the first Jain vampire. [Laughs] So, I think for me that is the insight. But if I probably would have held onto it, the mind would still bring up all these stories, you know; some stories from Mahavir’s life, all the story that we grew up listening to and you know, different, different things; a lot of other things.

So, I think that is (I would say) the cognizing ego which is trying to pull you consistently. Whereas insight is ‘Okay, this is it’ and it is gone. It doesn’t care whether you agree or not, don’t agree or what happens. So, for me, that’s the cognizing ego. Does it make sense?

A: Let’s look and dig a bit deeper into this. It’s very good. So, when we are linking it back to what the ego is…, let’s use one of your sentences. You say that ‘I might be the first Jain vampire’. So this ‘I’ is which one?

Q: This ‘I’ is the one that the world has perceived me to be, to be a Jain and a vampire. Okay, I am not Jain or vampire.

[Laughter in the room]

A: Yeah, that’s good. So, Jain is an identity, vampire is an identity; both can be kept aside. You see? So, all this collection of identities, collection of beliefs…, you see already, isn’t it? … that you can’t identify as if you are something unless you believe a thought about it. Do you see this?

Q: Yes, very clearly.

A: So, all of our identities which are constantly changing any way from time to time; from 5 years ago, there could be a different set of belief systems, different set of identities which we believe ourselves to be. You know ‘I am like this, I am rebellious, I work in this way, I am truthful, I am honest’. All these ideas we have about ourselves, they keep changing over periods of time. So, if for a moment we keep all of these identities aside (you say that ‘I am neither of these; I am neither Jain nor vampire’) is there something which you ARE, which is undeniable?

Q: I can’t define it.

A: You have a sense of it but you are not able to put it in language, is that the problem? Or is it that you can’t find it?

Q: I can’t put it in language.

A: Can’t put it in language; which is not actually such a big problem. Actually it is a good thing.

Q: If you remember (I think in the Heart Altar [group] I had mentioned once) that there was this whole chaos that was going on. I don’t remember if you recollect it right now.

A: I do, yes, yes.

Q: And during that chaos when those inquiries arose, and even to type that word ‘Knowingness’ I just couldn’t bring anything else. You know? But I had to write it because I had to somehow get it out of my system. But I think the problem is holding on or Being that Knowingness.

A: Okay, so now what have we discovered so far in our conversation? That there is a set of identities which can be held onto; when we talked about the religious identity or some sort of phenomenal functioning identity which can be held onto. And we also said that these identities are a function of our beliefs. So, that which is a function of our beliefs and comes and goes with our belief in it, does that have any cognizing ability?

Q: It feels to me, no.

A: Yes, so this bundle of beliefs, this baggage of identity itself inherently is nothing but concepts which have been given belief. You see? So that in itself…, these concepts obviously cannot have any abilities to cognize.

Now, what is it that has the power of belief then? Is it an identity?

Q: Yes, I think we could say it is an identity. But it feels more like something that draws attention there. Maybe it is identity. Maybe identity is the word I would give it.

A: Let’s look closer at this. Because if identity itself relies on belief, then for there to be identity first, there must be the power of belief. So, belief must be prior to identity. Isn’t it?

Can there be identity without belief?

There cannot be. Isn’t it?

Therefore belief cannot be a functioning of identity itself because for identity to exist, there first must be a belief.

Q: Yes.

A: Yes. You see? So, we have already come to a very beautiful point where we see that belief seems to be a more primal power that any ego or identity can have.

Now, you are seeing that the ego can neither cognize, these identities can neither cognize, not do they have any power, including the power of belief.

That which itself is a belief cannot have the power of belief. You see?

So, identity itself is a belief and therefore just belief cannot have a power. If I believe that I am a Martian or a vampire (like you said) then that vampire cannot have a power, you see, because that vampire itself is a belief, or the Martian itself is a belief.

So, that which is just conceptual can have no power even in this phenomenal realm.

Now…, we find that in the sleep state there is nothing like ‘belief’ or ‘not belief’. Only in the waking state these powers come; attention, belief.

So, what is it that changes between sleep state and waking state?

Q: [Silence] I don’t know.

A: It’s very good to look. So, if I ask you ‘What time did you wake up this morning?’

Q: 7:00

A: You woke up at 7:00 am. So what is it that woke up at 7:00? [Silence] You have always said ‘I woke up’. You see? But already you said that ‘There is awareness of sleep and there is awareness of waking’. So, if awareness is the constant, then what is that which woke up at 7:00?

Q: [Silence] I think attention woke up at 7:00 to look at the clock and say 7:00.

A: Not bad. [Chuckles] This is very good. This is the first time I have heard this answer [Chuckles] and you are right. But even attention…, even for attention to exist, don’t YOU have to exist first? Is there ever the experience of attention without the sense that ‘I exist’?

Q: Yes.

A: Actually, you touched on a very beautiful point, which is that for many years I have actually said that attention, belief, all of these are products of our existence, our Being. But as we look at it more and more, we realize that the birth of attention and Being is almost like the birth of twins. Both are like co-joined twins. So, this existence, wasn’t it there in the sleep state?

Q: [Silence] You know, what comes to me right now is the mind (or so far, what has been my belief of Beingness or Presence) is what I relate to as existence. And maybe that’s why I am not in a position to know of the existence in the form of sleep state.

A: Yes, very good. So, if I offer you this question: ‘Can you stop being now?’…, (and you actually have to try to physically stop being)…

Q: Not possible.

A: [Laughs] Not possible. So this Being…, is it present in sleep state? [Silence]

So, let’s do it this way; that if I give you a proposition that ‘At 7 o’clock, what woke up was this sense of Being…, (although awareness of Being or not-being remain constant) …, can you check on this and see whether this is the case or not?

Q: I don’t know. I don’t feel to check. [Chuckles]

A: [Laughs] You don’t feel like checking?

Q: No.

A: [Laughs] Why? Why don’t you feel like checking? That’s very good. [Laughs and laughter in the room] It’s very good that she is able to expose that.

Q: [Laughs] So, why don’t I feel like checking?

A: Can we check on that at least? [Laughs]

Q: Yes, that feels okay. So…, it feels like what I discover might be the end of the journey.

A: Yes, yes. You will see this. This is very, very important. I am very, very happy that you expose this. Because the minute it feels like ‘Okay, this might be the end’ then something feels like ‘No, no, no. This is too much fun right now, let’s not go too quickly’. Something can feel like that.

Q: And after, probably 15-20 minutes after the Satsang is over, it will say ‘Oh, you had a chance and you missed it!’

A: This is the 1-2 punch. This is the 1-2 punch of the mind, you see. Also it can happen is that sometimes it can be like this ‘No, no, no. The journey is too much fun but it will come to an end’. But the fun will not end. It’s not like I am one lifeless robot. It’s not like that. The fun doesn’t end.

The second thing could be that (for many) when we are exploring like this at this level, very directly, moving away from conceptual ideas, then it can feel like a subtle fear of death can come or a subtle fear of something ending can come.

So, for some it can be light like this and it can feel like ‘It’s no fun, it will end the journey’. And for some there can be a stronger resistance; like we had this recently where one felt like she had to leave the room, she could not sit. She just had to leave because it felt like a strong fear or something was coming up in that checking.

But it’s not bad. We have already looked at lot of beautiful insights. And this is the reason why we actually have Satsang so frequently, Monday to Friday’ because I know sometimes, we can come to a point and can feel like ‘Okay, enough. Let me marinate in this for now and then I will build some more spiritual stamina and come back to this deeper looking’ …., which is absolutely fine. So the intent here is not to push you into it. Already, I feel we have clarified a lot of insights today and are more directly….

Q: Please push me. I know myself too well. I may not come again anytime soon. Please push me.

A: [Laughs] That is why. Because this can also feel like…, this can seem very real. ‘I might not come back’. And that is why I find that one of my Master’s blessings or the Guru’s blessings is that ‘Those who are my children in the sangha, they love me too much to not come back’. You see? So you might not trust yourself to come back or not; but I know that there is something already there. Because something is saying ‘Push me’ and the same one is saying ‘Don’t push me’. You see? This ‘Push me/don’t push me’ is going on. [Laughs]

And already the question which is pushing you is there with you; which is that ‘What is it that wakes up when I wake up at 7:00? It is a very, very primal question. And if you can look at this (at your own pace, comfortably) then you will find that something will reveal itself to you.

I have also given you the question: ‘Can you stop being?’ And I have said that this question is correlated with this waking state. So, what is this being that cannot be stopped? And yet we have direct experience of something called sleep where even this Being is not present.

This question: ‘Can you stop being?’ is a response to a prayer which is: ‘Can you show me God?’ So, to come face to face with God is to explore this question: ‘Can I stop being?’

What is this Being?

This that is here, is it personal?

Does it have desires and aversions?

Does it have likes and dislikes?

Without the light of this Being, does anything exist?

All these forces of gravity, light, sound, electricity, all these senses of touch, taste, smell, sight, hearing, all of these…, can any of these exist without YOU being first?

Therefore, what must be this Being?

And ultimately, for whom is this Being (which seems to be the light of this universe) also coming and going?

This is the exploration we are doing together. And it’s a wonderful, joyous, journey. It’s a wonderful, joyous looking. And some fears can come, some resistance can come; sometimes lethargy can come. And it’s okay. I am not going to leave you so easily.

Q: Thank you.

For the last couple of days, we’ve been trying something new. The feeling here was that there’s been sharing happening from here for about three years now, and almost non-stop. So, for a while it feels like we don’t want to do the same typical, the same question and answer format; where we bring all the questions and I do all the work [Chuckles] basically. So, I’ve been working very hard the last three years contemplating all the topics. So now I feel like for a while, I can ask the questions. And it’s been very nice the last couple of days when I’ve been asking the questions.

For the new ones, of course, when the question is there for someone who is new to satsang, I’m happy to answer. But mostly, for most of you who have been with me for a while, it’s been very good. Because when you’re put into that ‘hot seat’ of answering the question, a lot of concepts, a lot of ideas get looked at; and they get thrown away.

Like yesterday, we saw that because we’ve been in satsang, it’s very natural for us to create an idea about Awareness; a visual replica of Awareness. And we see when the rubber hits the road, when the day-to-day life and the seeming problems of day-to-day life come, then it seems like the concept of Awareness is not really helpful. And in fact it can be even more troublesome. Because when the feeling of suffering, the feeling of anxiety, the feeling of fear is coming and we’re trying to hold on to the concept ‘No, no. I’m Awareness. I’m not this’…, when it is only conceptual, it doesn’t really help.
So, in the light of this questioning, we’re shining our own light on ‘What is it that I really am experiencing? What am I really Seeing?’

Because ours is not the kind of Advaita which says that ‘Yes, yes, even suffering is fine because suffering is also part of the play. So, let suffering happen. It is okay’. You see, because that is a big fallacy. That is just mental.

It cannot be that we come to the discovery of who we Are and for there to be this sense of suffering that still continues. Because once we see that ‘I Am this Awareness’ you also see that it is untouched by any phenomena in this world.

So, if there is suffering, there is a false belief.

So no matter what Advaitic concept we know, this basic fact still remains. So, this is not that type of Advaita satsang where we say that ‘Yes, but there’s nothing I can do; there’s no doer’. It’s all true. [Chuckles] But here, if most of you are not becoming free of your suffering, you’re not coming to a point where the ideas which make you suffer are not becoming more and more laughable, then I must say that I might not be doing my job properly. [Chuckles] Because I don’t want to give you with some sense of mental Advaita. I don’t want to make you a sage in your mind.

And as you’re discovering your true light, you will find that not only is it becoming impossible for you to suffer, but all those who come into your Presence, your Light, will start laughing at their ideas of suffering. This is the Light that will be ignited in satsang.

So, suffering for us is an opportunity to inquire.

Mental conception, mental interpretation, can not help us be rid of our suffering on a consistent basis. And therefore suffering is not something to be looked down upon but it is a great opportunity, it is great grace to inquire into that which we are still believing. It is the provocation, it is the invitation, to open up. And the more we resist our suffering, the more we say ‘Yes, yes, suffering is here but I’m not experiencing it’ …, these are just mental Advaita.

If you are truly open, if you find that you are not a person, you cannot show me a way to suffer.

And remember that I’m not speaking about pain here. I’m speaking about that which we call suffering. If your fist is open, you cannot hold on to suffering. So suffering is an indicator of how open we are. And if it is still experienced, then use that as an invitation to inquire and to See ‘What is still being held onto which is false?’ And don’t try to push it under the carpet.

(I said I won’t speak but so many words are coming out [Chuckles] and there’s nothing I can do about them.)

This denial of suffering…, Advaita can be the best excuses, the best way to deny what is our living experience, what is our living truth. So better not to be in denial of these things. Because as we shine our light on them, then it’s like I like to say ‘Sunlight is the best dis-infectant’.

My feeling to ask more questions is also my feeling to get you to shine your own Light onto your beliefs and onto your own life so that there is no dependency here on you continuing to carry the Arjuna perspective. I want you all to carry the Krishna Light.

A: Let’s start by you telling me something which is undeniable.

Q: This is appearing.

A: This is appearing; implying what? What is appearing?

Q: There’s what I might call the Now, the Now-ness, and a whole array of appearances, forms. Different energies, subtle and gross.

A: Does this appearance have any reliability? And if you want me to elaborate on the question, I can.

Q: What do you mean by reliability?

A: The other day we saw one video which is called ‘The McGurk Effect’. Remember that one? Actually he was saying ‘Bah, bah, bah, bah’ but because his lips were moving ‘Fah, fah, fah, fah’ then you were hearing ‘Fah, fah, fah’. So if fundamentally we cannot trust our senses to report on this appearance, then can we say that there is any solid, tangible reliability to anything that appears? Because if exceptions like this can come, then we can question every single phenomenal appearance, isn’t it? And all of you must watch this video. It’s about the McGurk effect. And it really shows you how our senses are so easily fooled. Along with all the optical illusions, there is audio illusion. There are many optical illusions. This one is an audio illusion, actually hearing something that he’s not saying. It’s because…, okay, you should watch it. [Laughter] Therefore if there is no reliability to anything appearing in this, then is this truly undeniable in that way? Can we really say it is appearing in the first place?

Q: I would say that I only know of it through perception. And I can’t guarantee that my perception is reliable, but I can’t deny that it’s appearing, so I would say that the appearance is reliable.

A: Yes. Very good. So, you said something very beautiful, which was ‘I cannot be sure that my perception is reliable’. So all that is perceived in this way, if we keep it aside, then what remains?

You and I can just share a few things. So if we can see that our sight is unreliable (in that video we see our hearing is unreliable, our touch and taste) all of us have had experiences where they have been unreliable, then we can say that at least the perception of this outward-seeming realm seems to be unreliable because I cannot even trust my senses. So, if this is left as unreliable and therefore (beautifully you say) not to be in denial of the appearance, but on the reliability of what is appearing; so that if we keep aside the unreliable, then is there something else which can be relied upon?

Q: It feels like there is a sense of perception which doesn’t rely on any senses, and it’s empty of content, somehow. It’s empty of perception, somehow.

A: Take an example. What do you mean sense of perception?

Q: It’s not a sound, it’s got no image, it’s got no color, it’s got no size. It’s that upon which the senses appear. The sense of vibrations.

A: What about imagination?

Q: Yeah, also.

A: Any sense of perception, which can bring memories, imagination, thought, sensations of the body. But we have seen that memories are very, very unreliable. Our thoughts are supremely unreliable…, and blatantly lying anyway! [Laughter] So, memory is gone, imagination is just imagination and therefore by definition unreliable. So, is there anything you can rely on, even in this seemingly inner perception?

Q: Only the sense that it’s there. Because it seems like the sense that it’s there…, it’s not reliable in that way because it’s empty.

A: Yes.

Q: Does that make sense?

A: Elaborate a little more.

Q: Because it’s not presenting anything.

A: What is not, this inner perception?

Q: This sense of perception.

A: Yes.

Q: That upon which everything else appears; imaginations, senses, memory. It’s perceived, or known, independent of everything which appears on it. So, it’s not presenting anything which could be labeled reliable or unreliable; it feels like it’s outside of those categories. Because reliable means ‘Am I perceiving things as they are?’ or maybe as another would perceive them. But it’s earlier than that.

A: So, would you say that this inner perceiving, phenomenal perception (although it is inward) is reliant on anything at all?

Q: Yes. Me.

A: So, you mean that you have to exist, for this to exist?

Q: Yes, and I’m just trying to see if they’re the same thing. It felt almost as though I could just See, and then attention started… [Makes fluttering sound]

A: What you’re really contemplating is because I perceive…, ‘I perceive, therefore I am’. Is that what you’re saying?

Q: Yeah, is that upon which all of these things appear the sense ‘I Am’ itself? Or is it just a screen of perception which couldn’t exist without the sense ‘I Am’? [Pause] I think it’s different.

A: Does it have any correlation with what I call the twin of Being, which is attention? This perception, whether outward or inward, isn’t it directly correlated with that which we call attention also?

Q: Is what correlated with attention?

A: This inward perception.

Q: It is, but I’m struggling to see what the relationship is.

A: Is it possible to perceive without getting some attention?

Q: No, but it’s also possible to perceive attention.

A: Yes. How do we perceive attention? Is it the same quality of inward perception that perceives attention?

Q: [Immediately] No.

A: Okay, that was quick! [Chuckles] So, you must have the answer then.

Q: Attention is prior to any perception, yet attention can fall on this.

A: Yes. So, the perceiving of attention, how is this different from the perceiving of a phenomenon, whether inward or outward?

Q: Because it seems that attention can’t find attention. And yet if I try and bring my attention to my attention, it seems to dissolve back into a deeper… It can’t be seen, but it knows attention. But it also feels phenomenal.

A: Very good. So see if you can wrap this up now. What have you discovered in this?

Q: Being. [Laughs]

A: You see that all phenomenal perception needs attention, but how is attention itself perceived? You say it is not perceived in that same way, but it is Known. This Knowingness, awareness of attention… [Pause] Can you take it forward from this?

Q: It feels like that is the feeling ‘I Am’.

A: It’s okay, we’re looking together. How is the ‘I Am’ known?

Q: Just intuitively, without needing to be seen. It’s just…, it is. I Am.

A: How is it different from how attention is known?

Q: It feels more like a lack of attention.

[Sangha member makes exclamation noise]

A: She’s shouting ‘Eureka! Eureka!’ before he’s even said the discovery. [Laughs]

For attention to be perceived or Known (let’s use Known as a better word, actually) we don’t need attention, you say. And yet for any phenomenal perceiving, we need attention.

Q: Yes.

A: So, are you saying that you’re innately aware of this attention…, in some way?

Q: Yes. It just feels like in order to enter that dimension of perceptions, it’s felt that…, so when there’s the question ‘Can I stop being?’ or ‘Can you bring your attention to your attention?’ it’s like something dissolves back into this Being. Now, to then re-enter, to come back somehow, or to bring focus back into the dimension of perception, it feels that something starts to move from the pure Being, and in order to single out a certain perception (like a sound maybe) something contracts. But it’s a very natural contraction. But that movement of attention can’t find Beingness, it can only dissolve back into Beingness.

A: Is there ever the experience or the Knowing of attention when there was no sense that I exist, or Being?

Q: No.

A: So, there must be Being for there to be attention.

Q: Yes.

A: Is there ever the experience of Beingness without there being any attention?

Q: Yes. Well, it’s like a potential for attention is always there, but it’s not required.

A: Very good. Therefore now, if I was to say something like ‘For phenomenal perceiving to happen, there needs to be the sense of existence working in consonance with this play of attention. Both are prerequisites for any phenomenal perceiving’.

Q: Yeah.

A: Versus, for Awareness to be aware of itself…, would you say that this is a part of this perception?

Q: No.

A: Very good. To see this is very important. And as I was saying yesterday, much too often phenomenal perceiving is getting mixed up with Awareness itself.

Q: So, this Beingness then; prior to perception, not dependent on attention, felt but not perceived in that way, not seen or not really tangible in any way other than ‘There it is! The backdrop’.

A: And yet (as you said) we cannot truly say that attention is not at play there. Because it seems like it’s there but it’s not moving in the phenomenal realm. Isn’t it?

Q: It’s like attention reaches for a specific; and Being isn’t specific.

A: And yet there have been instructions from the sages which said ‘Keep your attention on Being itself’. What must then be implied is: See, if possible; keep your attention at home, umoving, unchanging, along with the phenomenal content of the world.

Q: And it’s very restful. It’s almost like that is home for attention, but it’s maybe just so used to going out. And it needs to go out, as well. I mean, it needs to go out to hear these words, to cross the road or something, but… [Silence]

A: Yes. But That which is aware is un-reliant on attention or Being in any way. Isn’t it?

Q: Yeah, that’s just… phew!

A: Yes. [Laughs]

Q: I have to be honest and say that to try and somehow go beyond this Beingness seems like there’s just a habit to pick it up with the mind and try to understand it. So I feel like it’s enough: Just Knowingly be the Beingness. It’s enough.

A: Yes. It’s more than enough!

Q: It’s so beautiful.

A: It is Knowing God. What can be not enough about it? [Laughs]

Q: It’s so spacious.

[Long silence]

Q: All those who say that there is nothing which exists outside of my perception, or outside of my awareness. So I’d just like to…

A: Is there a difference between perception and awareness?

Q: Like, I said it in a more…. [Laughter]

A: Yeah, but am I asking you now. [Laughter]

Q: Yes, of course there is a difference between perception and awareness. Perception is kind of like, you need some medium. Okay, there is an awareness of perception, of perceiving.

A: Yes, yes.

Q: And that makes a difference.

A: Very good. So coming back to that same question, [Ananta touches a flower nearby] so the touching of the flower is there a distinction between saying ‘I’m aware of the flower’ and a distinction between I’m aware of the touch of the flower?

Q: [Silence]

Q: So, there is a difference between saying that ‘I’m aware of the flower’ and I’m aware of the touch of the flower. So, fundamentally Awareness or Knowing, knows nothing but Knowing. For example, in this experience of touching of flower what does knowing know? Knowing knows the touch of a flower as Knowing.

A: What does this mean?

Q: It means, (I don’t know how to describe it but) it means that Awareness is only aware of awareness.

A: It’s very beautiful, I want to prod you a little more.

Q: It means Awareness sees nothing but awareness.

A: So, there is no difference between sleep and waking?

Q: [Silence]

A: You see? Because if you realize the implication of what you are saying, then you’re truly saying that the creation never happened.

Q: No, I didn’t say that.

A: I’m saying that if all that Awareness fundamentally Knows is Itself, is Knowingness of Itself, (Knowing Knowing itself), then what is the point of any creation?

Q: Even while the creation happened, the split didn’t happen. So, I also wanted to insert this question into the contemplations that were going on earlier: ‘Did we ever have an unreal experience?’ Or in other words, does anyone ever have…, [has anyone] ever experienced an unreal experience? And according to my contemplations, I would say that I never had an experience which was unreal; including the dream experiences.

A: Yes, but that’s because the definition itself is that ‘If it is an experience, then it is real for you’.

Q: Yes, yes, of course. And that from that perspective, that even though in the waking, and in the dream, and in the sleep, there seems to be a changing appearance. But if you look from the perspective of the Knowing, of the Awareness of it…, (Okay, I am sorry…)

A: Let’s look deeper into this. This is a very beautiful contemplation because I have noticed that it’s popular sometimes to confuse that which is the functioning of Consciousness (which is the phenomenal perceiving) with the primal Awareness itself. And although fundamentally the phenomenal perceiving is also made up of Awareness (as with everything else) but in the play it does appear differently. That’s why the question of ‘To be aware of the flower, aware of the existence of the flower in front of me is different from to be aware of the touch of the flower’. To be aware of the seeing of the flower is qualitatively different from the touching of the flower. Not for Awareness, but in the play of Consciousness. So there is, along with the other forces, there are these sensory abilities that come which belong to Consciousness; which is also, like you said, the split never happened but there is this primal Awareness which is aware of the phenomenal perceiving, and which remains untouched.

So, we must be able to look into these things also.

Q: I feel it is very much true to say that…, like the most fundamental experience, like my hand…, (so I think [Laughing] it would be mad to say this but) I feel myself, that in my experience. I could say that my hand is like made up of Awareness.

A: Yes, yes. Why is it mad? And why is it not mad?

Q: [Laughter] It is mad because like for obvious reasons [Laughter], like ‘Are you crazy?’ [Laughter] ‘It is made up of flesh and bones, and experiences, and sensations’. And I would say that ‘All of those things are made up of what?’

A: Of what?

Q: So, like if we go on unraveling, deepening, then at the base of it, at the base of any experience, we find that there is Awareness. And that’s the bottom of the ocean below which we can’t go.

A: Yes, very beautiful.

Okay, so just to wrap up some things; many, many threads have been opened today. So what are we saying?

We’re saying that there is this Awareness which is unmoving, untouched; non-phenomenal. Even to say that ‘I exist’ at that point will seem like a fallacy because even the existence of existence is not there yet. It is just this ‘I’ that remains, with no qualities, no attributes.

And things like suffering, problems, in all of this we cannot suffer in our sleep state. You see? So, in deep sleep there is no concept of anything at all.

Then what happens? For some unexplained reason (although many can give many reasons but let’s say for unverifiable reasons) within this Awareness (and therefore made up of Awareness Itself) there is a sense of existence, ‘I Am’. This ‘I Am’, Consciousness, God’s Presence, Satguru, (whatever you like to call it) Beingness, appears. The Atma, the Presence of this Atma and the Light of this Atma, (we can say) the one cause of all creation or we can say in the Light of this Presence ‘I Am’.

So, we go from Atma to atom. [The word atom] which is also derived from this, you see? Atom; which was like the fundamental building block according to the ones who named it like that. So, in the light of this Presence comes the world of atoms and molecules and all the other forces which are the phenomenal experience.

So, Awareness presenting itself qualitatively as Consciousness and yet unchanged in Itself, then projecting upon itself (Consciousness projecting upon itself) this world of atoms and molecules and light and fire and belief and identity and attention; all of this phenomenal perceiving of sight and hearing and taste; all of this is born.

Even now there is no suffering, no trouble, no problems.

So we’ve gone from Awareness playing as Consciousness projecting onto Itself this entire realm of this world, of this universe.

But what happens is that the power of belief, its power to pretend…

So, when these thoughts come and belief is going to it, then this Atma Itself is now pretending to play as if it is a person. And with the imagined creation of this personal identity come all the problems, suffering, trouble, ideas. You see? Ideas about how life should be. The resistance to what is. All of this is personal.

So most are involved in just this personal trouble. Even the seeker identity is an attribute of the person itself.

So, this person; and then there is the sense of ‘Not only am I a person but everyone around me is also a person; society and population and government and how should the world function’. Those kind of problems, which also are fundamentally personal but seem like collectively personal.

So, we’ve gone from One Undivided Awareness playing as ‘I Am Presence’ projecting this world of atoms and molecules and then using its own power to pretend or believe; pretending as if it’s one of the objects which is found here, leading to what is called the ego or the personal identity. And then maybe in the final, most distracting trick of the mind itself, of the separate identity itself, is to presume that ‘Not only am I a separate person but all these other beings which seemingly appear also are individual persons in themselves’. You see?

Actually, the feeling that is here now is that I’ve been sharing for almost 3 years now, and almost every day. So there must be 500-600 satsangs somewhere. Also there are 7 books out now thanks to Amaya and the seva team. So you must be tired of hearing my voice now. [Chuckles]

What I was feeling to say was that I feel like there may be enough of questions now. What can happen is that it can just feel like a bit of spoon-feeding, the question and the answer; although it is very good because it dissolves our conditioning. But sometimes it can feel like I’m just available to you like a machine. You put a question in, and the answer comes out. And maybe sometimes it gets in the way of our deeper contemplation…, sometimes.

So, maybe I also ask you a lot of questions now, and see what is actually your own direct experience and you speak from there. And then we can look at things together more in this way; especially for those who have been in satsang for some time.

And also I feel like questioning your answers. Because many times I feel like we’ve heard all the answers now. We feel like we know the right answers. But for many of you, when the rubber hits the road, it’s gone straight out the window. I’ve been seeing some of that as well.

So, for some time, at least, I won’t be like a ‘satsang juke-box’. [Chuckles] You put the question coin in and out the answer comes. Hmmm? I’d like it very much, especially for those who have been in the sangha for some time to also tell me when they ask a question, what the [contemplation of the] question is. Then the question is really on fire because you’ve contemplated it; you’ve looked at it, and it’s burning with the fire of that contemplation. Then when it’s brought up, we can have an inquiry together.

It’s good?

Q: [Inaudible]

A: He says: Sometimes we don’t even know what our next contemplation should be. Can we then come up and you say ‘Can you contemplate this?’

Yes. Very happy to.

Truly the intent here has never been to create [followers]. It’s not been the sense that I want to create a dependency, and we have a group of people who are dependent on the answers coming from here or something like this.

All of you are shining very beautifully with your own light, and I want to put some more ‘ghee’ in that light. [Chuckles]

Q: Father there was the question that I wanted to ask…

A: No, I’m not doing any work today. [Laughs]

Q: You were saying that outside my perception nothing exists, and to say that it exists would be a belief, would be an assumption. So, it’s just an 8^th class aspirant question, like a childish question that I would like to ask; that I can’t see ultraviolet light, does it mean that ultraviolet light doesn’t exist?

Sangha Member: Is it your experience though?

Q: Yeah. So, experientially I cannot see ultraviolet light, means I can’t feel it? I can’t see it.

A: Yes…,

Sangha member: So it’s just an idea then?

A: Yes, so you mean to say…

Sangha member: Is it a concept? Or you’ve heard of it? Just like world is round? Do you actually know that? Have you been to outer space?

Q: So, at best I can say that I don’t know. But I cannot claim that I know for sure that it doesn’t exist only because I don’t experience it.

Sangha Member: No, but we are not talking about… [Inaudible] We are talking about your direct experience. That is all we are ever doing here. That’s why there’s no room for concepts here.  That’s the only thing we ever do here. [Laughs]

A: But you yourself started by saying that ‘Nothing exists outside of my perception’.

Q: It’s like no different…, [Inaudible] point of view.

A: Yes, yes, yes.

Q: That no one ever experienced…, like experientially, I can’t feel ultraviolet light, I can’t see ultraviolet light, but scientifically we know that ultraviolet light exists.

Sangha member: You’re talking about the content of experience. But it’s not really what we are talking about.

A: Can we look at this for just a minute so we really see. [Silence] For those who know a lot of concepts, they can be called intellectual. I am not putting down the intellectual understanding. You could say that many who know a lot of things (scientists, intellectuals) they bring some value when they appear; completely fine. Those who have had direct experience of that which they’re speaking about, those can be called wise.

So, we are going from intellectually knowing a lot of things to having a direct experience of what is being spoken about; which is not restrictive. We can still say that ‘Intellectually I know about the existence of this, and the existence of that, but it is not my direct experience’. But those who speak of what they have experienced directly without just relying on just intellectual concepts or otherwise, and those who have come to this Knowing of Knowingness itself, Awareness of Awareness itself (which is the fundamental starting point for everyone actually) [Laughs] but when the Being (and all of this is part of the play) when the Being is coming to the recognition that it is made up of this Awareness, the Knowing of this Knowingness, then those can be called the Sages, because you come to the fundamental workings of this Universe.

So we go from intellectual, conceptual knowing to relying on more and more our direct experience, and then fundamentally coming to this Awareness of Awareness, which we cannot even call an experience actually because there is no word to describe it. We can it’s a non- phenomenal experience when we come to this non-phenomenal experiencing of our Self.

So, what both of you said is not wrong but you’re talking at different levels. So, there can be a conceptual understanding that something exists; there is gravity, there are oxygen molecules and carbon molecules in the air. We can know these things intellectually, so those that can be part of our intellectual understanding.

Then we are moving to our direct experience of what is Seen. Because coming to the direct experience is what brings clarity. You see?

And then when we go beyond even experience.

I feel the final experience that we can really talk about is available through the question ‘Can you stop Being?’

You can experience your own Presence, your own Being. There is nothing (at least that I have found) that is more primal than that. And yet when we ask ‘Are you Aware now?’ or ‘Who is Aware of Awareness’…, this recognition; we can call it non-phenomenal experience but it’s not really even an experience. Isn’t it? You see?

For most of us, to know something has meant that we have a concept about something.

To illustrate…

If a credible source tells us that the Universe has 100 billion stars, we feel that we now know something about the Universe.

But is this really true? Tomorrow an even more enlightened source might say that there are only 75 billion stars. And we feel ‘Now I really know something about this Universe’. Still not true.

Therefore, to know the truth about the real number, we must have a way to check, and since most of us don’t have any device of this nature, it’s better to say that ‘The truth about this is unknowable at the present time’.

Now to the main point…

Sages and philosophers over centuries have said that it is most important to ‘Know Thyself’. This presents a problem because most did not say how this must be done, they did not clarify the means by which I can truly know myself.

Therefore most of us take the usual route. We start collecting the best-sounding concepts from the most credible sources.

Some of the most popular ones, which have survived hundreds of years, are about where we will end up and not about who we are: ‘If you are righteous, heaven awaits you. If you are a sinner, you will burn in hell’.

Many believe these concepts, but do we really know them to be true?

Other concepts seem more helpful: ‘I Am That I Am. God is Everywhere’.

But has belief in these concepts really helped us in becoming free from suffering? More importantly, have they helped us discover who we really are?

Is a bundle of spiritual concepts what separates a Jnani (Sage) from the rest of humanity? Clearly, the answer must be ‘No’.

This is seen by some and they (wisely) give up on concepts about the Self. But some settle instead for another larger concept that ‘The Truth is unknowable’. ‘Just like the number of stars in the sky, I have no device to check ‘Who Am I?’ therefore, let me find comfort in saying it was all one big trick. I is unknowable’.

Can it be that all the wise ones were fooling us with their imploration ‘Know Thyself’, just so that one day we would come to this conclusion that ‘The Truth about the Self is unknowable’?

If this was true, why didn’t they just say so? Why couldn’t they just say ‘Drop all ideas and forget about the Self’?

Could it be that there is more to this pointing ‘Know Thyself’ than to just to come to the negative conclusion: ‘Impossible!’?

There certainly is.

The Realization of the Self is completely possible. The Self is completely Knowable. But not in the way we think.

Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi’s repeated advice to inquire ‘Who Am I?’ and Nisargadatta Maharaj’s guidance to stay with the sense ‘I Am’ was not so that one day they could say ‘Fooled you!’

There is a big clue in the phrase ‘Know Thyself’. The clue is to look at this Knowing itself.

This Knowing is the true Knowing. It is not conceptual, interpretive, creative or imaginative. It is not the mental replica of phenomena; it is neither description, nor visualization.

This Knowing is Awareness. It is the Knowing of our Existence.

Do I need a thought to Know that I Am?

This Knowing is not separate from Existence, just like the Ocean is not separate from the movements on its surface and gold is not separate from the ornaments made out of it. This Knowing is the noumenal from which the phenomenal appears; and yet it remains untouched.

To even report conclusively ‘That there is no Knowing’ then this would need to be Known, unless it is just a conceptual report.

If Awareness was just a functioning within existence, how is this known? How is the absence of Awareness known? Or is the absence of Awareness just another concept? Have we just replaced old troublesome concepts with new ones? Or are we truly reporting from what is Known directly?

The recognition the Self is the recognition of this Knowing. I-That-Am is this Knowing in Existence. All states, waking, dream and sleep, are Known by this Knowing.

Knowing Knows Itself, Awareness is Aware of Itself.

Are you Aware now? What Knows this? Is this Awareness just an idea?

Who is Aware of this Awareness? Is it not I?

It is the I which remains when all ideas about the false I are removed.

This is the Self Knowing Itself.

This recognition is the point of the inquiry ‘Who Am I?’ and the True gift of Knowing.

A: Without the belief going to these energies called thoughts, it is possible to pretend as if I am a part of the changeful realm?

Q: Part of the changeful…

A: Part of the changeful appearances? Or do I See it, that my position is truly this untouched, unmoving witnessing?

Q: I see it, I feel it at times. But very fast or even after a lapse of time, I get caught up, before I even know…, (I wouldn’t say before I know it). I think I get (in some ways) disconnected from this and I move into this not only pretending that I am these thoughts and I am the mother, a wife and I am this person called [her name]. I just play the role and am so in it that I don’t even remember it at the time.

A: So, first there is good news. The good news is that in reality, you are not changing your position, you see. Awareness remains awareness, no matter what appearance is showing up. Even if there is a deeply identified one seen in the appearance, if there is one character that is deeply identified (it does not have the space between thoughts and what is acting out), even then this ‘I’ which you really are in truth…, this is not changing. You see?

What is happening in satsang is two things. First is the recognition of this. When we check together like this, we are recognizing, isn’t it, that this is my reality.

Now what happens is that (and this is a common misconception) once I come to the first recognition of Self, it will automatically be the end of all conditioning. But it doesn’t usually work out like that; in only rare cases it works out like that.

Q: Even now, what I realized was when I am opening my eyes, I am caught up in the world. It is there, right now. I have the sense of the ‘I’. And actually yesterday also I was thinking (after satsang or maybe a few days back) thoughts are there; and this is what I was thinking, that these thoughts that are there are even in these times when I say ‘I got disconnected from…’ was wondering ‘What am I saying? I am disconnected from me, the real me?’ I am the one who is realizing and am giving more importance to this ‘I’ actually, the appearing ‘I’.  I am giving the appearing ‘I’ more power. And then also thinking and understanding came like this. Whenever I close my eyes, one realm of seeing is gone; no seeing. If I totally plug my ears. Suppose one is blind and deaf? These two itself would be so wonderful in a way as then I don’t see all that.

I was thinking what if someone was born like that, then how nice. They wouldn’t be stuck to different material things because they can’t see. They won’t be hurt or disturbed by what they hear because they can’t hear. And if they never heard, they won’t be able to talk so that is the third sense gone. And then I realized ‘But if a pleasant breeze blows or it’s very hot then I’d feel’. Then I just thought and understood that it is the sensors that are swaying us, swaying me.

A: Not just the senses, but we have this sense of being able to perceive other constructs like memory, imagination, thoughts, feelings, emotions. So all of these are also perceived and they are also a part of the changeful realm. As long as we are attaching through the power of belief to anything in this changing realm…

We even attach to our emotion. If one day, someone comes and feels a lot of bliss in satsang, they get attached to it because ‘I feel this bliss’. You see? We take ownership of that. And then everything that is coming is also going. So, the next day when we come or the week after that, if they don’t feel the bliss, they feel that something is going wrong, that ‘I am not that focused’. All these ideas come.

Q: Attachment to satsang.

A: Attachment to the feelings experienced. ‘One time we were there’. You see? Anything we take ownership of is bound to give us trouble because it is the changeful realm.  As we know, everything is coming and going. So to cling on to something hoping it will not go is a fallacy, isn’t it?

As I was saying, the first aspect of this is the region we are coming to and this primal witnessing that witnesses everything, including the sense of existence itself. This one is the recognition we are coming to. But because we have fed this tree of conditioning for a long time with our beliefs about the false ‘me’, that is why this tree of conditioning doesn’t automatically drop off.

But there is a simple way. The simple way is to always start with right now, and to see that the next thought that comes and goes, I am just going to allow it to come and go. Because right now, the tree of conditioning has no power, unless I give it power through my beliefs. The next thought comes and as we pull at this branch, then the entire tree of conditioning seems to be back again. That is what we call the person, or ‘The person is back’ or ‘The person is here’. As we let it come and go and we see that there is no conditioning to be found, (what is just is), there is a sense of existence here; but even that, ultimately, I am the witness of.

Because this one has no past or future and it is unchanging, not moving, it cannot be hurt by anything. Everything is coming and going within it, but it itself is not coming or going. Yes.

Q: So, how do we live our lives day-to-day when things that happen, big or small? Like misunderstandings; like someone blames you or accuses you of things that you didn’t do at all and there is separation and stuff. How do you relate to that person when you see them again? How do I do that?

A: You will find that everything will be allowed to move spontaneously. Being spiritual doesn’t mean one has to become goody-goody nice and outwardly loving towards others. It means whatever is appearing spontaneously is allowed, without a presumption that there is a ‘me’ that is controlling the actions and reactions.  Just like this conversation is happening, words are flowing; they are seen as just happening. We are not planning our next move. You see? ‘How do I relate to this one?’ or ‘How do I answer the question that is coming?’…, just flows. If you start enjoying this, you realize ‘I was carrying the needless burden trying to be the doer and control life, but I don’t find the instrument with which I am controlling this realm of appearance’. You see? Sometimes I say ‘It is like trying to control the flow of the river with a twig, but even this twig we don’t find’…, this idea that ‘I am doing this action, I am speaking these words, I could have done this, he could have done this’.

Q: Because I am at a point in my life right now where I have read, I have learned and I have been in a group also that talks about letting go. We are not the doers. To be in the present moment and not be caught up in the past with what happened. And now I am in a situation where I have to meet this person who has been talking and behaving in that way. And I don’t know. And my sisters tell me that I am wrong; I just jump into the fire and get burned literally. So I don’t know what is right. I think ‘You are not even taking care of yourself’ because I have been emotionally not okay for a long time and they tell me (after this whole fiasco that happened, they tell me) with the blame and accusations. I had a very bad nervous breakdown that was last year in August and again a relapse in October. And I know they are coming from a place of caring when they are advising me but I don’t know what is right as I am confused.

Yes, it is many times that we are in these positions and we seem to run out of moves. We truly are coming to this revelation of Self-discovery. As more and more we look together at the reality of who you are, then less and less what is happening in the life of the presumed-one will seem that relevant. All of this will become more of a leela, a game. You see? And you will realize that (not in an arrogant way, but you will realize that) your position in the game is that of the God- Presence itself, but your truest position is that in which even this God-Presence is born.

So, all of these problems that belong to [this identity] will lose weight as [the identity itself] is losing weight. That is the point of the recognition. The point of the recognition is ultimately not to make things better for [this identity]. There are many places in the world where you can know what to do for her, but here we are losing this idea of ‘her’.

It doesn’t mean that naturalness will be lost from life, because natural day-to-day life can still continue. The Self continues to play all the roles. It is the only one that knows how to play them and is the only one that has been doing it anyway. So, you see, if you need to be in a position where you have to play a particular role, just spontaneously you will marvel at how it is happening on its own. But you are not there as this imagined non-existent entity. You are just there as a witness of the entire play.

Q: I look forward to being in this place.

A: The words that are spoken from here are completely experienced here, you see. I don’t say things that are just mentally understood. Only what is directly experienced here is spoken from. If it is possible here, it is possible everywhere.

More and more, this openness will reveal its gifts to you. Because openness seems like a very simple pointing. To the mind, it seems like ‘Can openness really be at the core of these pointings which are about Awareness and Consciousness?’ But it is very much. Because this openness, acceptance…, this openness, surrender; we cannot surrender if we have concepts about how things should be. If we are closed to what should appear or should not appear then that is not a surrender. You see?

As we allow ourselves to remain open, then we start to realize the true meaning of acceptance, surrender. And all the gifts; all of these are not far behind. As long we are not hanging on to those things which are the by-products, then you will find there is nowhere else for them to go. They are only in service to you. Love is waiting to serve your unassociated Presence, devotion is waiting to wash your feet; but not the feet of an idea about who you are.

In this openness is the recognition of your unlimited-ness, boundary-less-ness. You know these simple pointings:

Are you aware now?

Who is aware of Awareness?

They are introducing yourself to your Being. You are coming to your recognition.

Don’t undervalue this. Because we are now jaded with the words ‘Awareness’ and ‘Consciousness’. Truly, you are discovering now that all of this play of time and space are just like toys you bought to entertain yourself.

See for yourself what is being spoken. Don’t just put it in a mental drawer to be used in Advaita discussions.

What are we saying is there is no person. There is no person. Even that should be enough to let us explode right now. There is no person. There is no person. You see? THERE IS NO PERSON.

No separation ever happened. There is no person.