BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

So, how is the non-conceptual life going? Are there some concepts about it?

Q: [Inaudible]

Arrogance? Without a concept? Even arrogance needs a concept. Someone says that ‘Yesterday, I got into total arrogance’. But even to get…, not even total arrogance, but a little arrogance means I need a concept. ‘I’m special. I am something’. Firstly that I am something, I am separate, and this that is separate is special or something better than the rest. We cannot pick up the idea ‘I am something’ unless we picked up a concept.

So, those who are really trying this, experimenting with this, playing with this, we must come back and report whether these fears of ‘Oh, my life just stopped, and my bills are not being paid’…, whether they are actually coming true. And if that also, if something like this was happening and you were just out on the streets, is that really suffering? Can even this situation, or any event like this…, can it cause what we would call suffering? Or it is also just seen?

Are we playing with this?

Sangha: Yes.

[Reading chat] Bhavari says ‘It would be a hard life, though, Father’.

[Repeats] ‘It would be a hard life, though’. How many concepts are needed to define a hard life? Firstly you need the concept that ‘This is my life’. And then you need all the concepts about how it needs to be. And then you need all the concepts about how it is…, opposed to how it’s supposed to be. And then you can come to the conclusion that it would be a hard life. So, what about if you throw this concept away; about hard life or nice life? Can you hand over…, as Guruji says, can you hand over your existence to existence?

Actually is there something even to hand over, because it is existence already that is running it. Can we find the one that is running this life? So very often I used to say earlier that surrender means…, if there’s a sense of surrendering then it must mean that you are the doer and you are the experiencer. Less than that would be a half-surrender.

So, sometimes it can happen like this that we say ‘You, God or You, Guru are the doer of all things now, but I am still the experiencer of it, so please can you insure that it’s not difficult?’ So this is also half-way there. Because if it is the Guru or God that is the doer, then it is the same one that is the experiencer; because there is only one that is here. There are no two.

Sometimes it can be that…, other examples of half-surrender could be that all the things which we feel that I did which were good, we take credit for those; and all the things which don’t seem as good, then we say ‘Oh, God, why are you doing this to me?’ That is also one example of half-surrender.

Sometimes it is the other way. Those who are inclined towards guilt then say ‘God is running my life overall pretty good, but I still mess up sometimes’. You see? So it can be that this is another variation of it.

There are many ways to surrender in half. But the complete surrender only is that ‘You are the doer and You are also the experiencer’…, because there can be no difference between the two.

This non-conceptual life is the surrendered life. When we see that ‘I don’t need any concepts about myself and life still continues to go on’ then we are free from this mental existence; seemingly mental existence.

What we can do is you can look at this for yourself and say ‘What is it that I am scared of?’ [Silence] ‘If I were completely immersed in my Presence, if I was completely immersed in the truth of who I am, then would it matter, in this appearance, if there was money or no money, relationship or no relationship, healthy body or diseased body, freedom or no freedom?’  None of these four things would matter, you see? And mostly we’re just stuck in these four; one of these four things, or combination of these.

Do we know who was the richest man during Bhagavan’s time? Do we know who had the perfect marriage during Bhagavan’s time? Do we know the Mr. Universe Body Builder during Bhagavan’s time? We don’t know. But we know Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi]. So even phenomenally, it is because of the life of the one who has dropped this identity that has the most beautiful remembrance about it. And as my Master says, there is no one who has discovered the Self who has gone on to regret it and said ‘Oh, I wish I had some money or I wish I had that relationship’. Nobody like that. Nobody. Nobody has actually said that after dropping this conceptual personhood or this conceptual idea of being a person, nobody has said ‘Oh, I wish I had the person back because life is too tough’. That should give us some hope also, isn’t it?

Because I know the mind will play on these fears. Even Guruji talks about this when he says that when this was unfolding for him, the truth was unfolding for him, the mind would paint these fears for him saying that ‘You’ll be like Quasimodo, a hunchback beggar on the streets’. Like this, this fear came. These fears will come. But if you were to actually look, you will find so much beauty.

[Tells story about Ashtavakra and King Janaka]

So, don’t fall for these tricks of the mind. This fear that the one that is running this entire universe cannot pay my bills is completely unfounded actually. That’s why I say ‘As we play with this’ …  Why do I say ‘Just play with this’? Why don’t I say ‘This is a very serious instruction ‘Don’t believe your next thought’ and very seriously you must do this’. Because I don’t want to make a practice out of it really. I want you to just play with this and see that actually the practice is in picking up the thought, the effort is in picking up the thought. Although initially it can seem like it is effort to not pick up, the actual effort is in believing all of these ideas, believing all of these concepts. And the only, only, only trouble is our mis-belief. God’s idea, God’s play with belief in this idea that He is a person. Does something happen to God because of it? No, of course not. Is something happening to God because She is believing that She is a person? No, of course not.

Therefore, in this realm, both opportunities are available; to experience ourself in this imagined identity of person (the entire world is so much, so much filled with that), but it also has this play where this identity, this idea is dissolving. Who is doing it? Only God. For who? Only for Himself/Herself.

And you don’t have to believe this, what I’m saying. You just have to check: Who is here? Is there anything operating, appearing, in this realm which is outside of my Godly Presence? Or isn’t everything just being experienced in the space of my own Being?

What is outside of this ‘I Am’?

Right now, what is outside of this ‘I Am’?

[Silence]

Is the appearance of this one that is speaking now…, is that one outside You?

[Silence] …all the sounds, all the visuals, this body, these hands?

How do you know of the existence of any of this appearance?

Only because it is seen inside of You.

It’s only that the mind has been painting a visual with our boundary collaborating with the sensations of the body which define that I’m within this container. You see? It can seem like I’m inside this container, and even ‘I Am’ is inside this. Why? Because the sensations are experienced like this, and visually we see like that; when we close our eyes the mind will offer up some visuals of the boundary of the body. And where is all of this experienced, all of these sensations? Isn’t it in the same space as you hear the car on the road?

Everything is inside of this space of Being. We are not limited to this container of flesh and bones and blood. You are That which contains everything.

And if this seems confusing, or ‘way out there’, then forget about it. You don’t have to work hard to understand any of this. It can be an actual insight that can come.

The main point is that the appearance of this container called the body, we can grant that ‘yes, it is appearing’. But where is the one that wants life to be a certain way; that wants some money, that wants some relationship…, where is that one? That is the question, you see? And by now we must be able to say that it doesn’t exist, because we have looked and looked and looked and looked. What great hypnosis must it be that after checking so many times and seeing that there is no person, we still cater to this personal voice?

And what is happening? Can we just look at it simply? What is happening? A thought is coming and saying ‘Hello, this is you’. [Bursts out laughing] It’s coming to you and saying ‘Hello, this is you. And this is what you want right now actually’.

So…, if that is you, then who is it talking to?

[Laughs]

Isn’t it the most ridiculous thing?

And yet all of us have fallen for this.

Q: [Inaudible]

[Laughter] ‘Hello, this is you, and you are saying that it’s not that simple’. [Laughter] It’s a wrong number, keep it [the phone] down. Ring, ring. What’s it saying now? [Laughter] What is this you, the pretend you saying? And we keep chasing this guy; and who has found peace, who has found joy in chasing this guy? Just a wrong number.

Or you must say ‘Okay, there are two of me. There is one ‘me’ that speaks like this, and one ‘me’ who listens’. Because it makes no sense otherwise that you have a voice to communicate with yourself.

I’d have to work hard to find some objections. [Laughs] Who is that voice representing? Is it representing our Being? And this Being is that which we say ‘Thy will be done’. It is not struggling in making predictions, saying ‘I want this. I want this. I don’t want this’.

All of this calling can actually be outsourced to Bangalore. [Laughter] So, if all the voices in your head came with an Indian accent, Bangalore call center agent, would you still believe it’s the same? [Laughs] (I claim no credit for these examples.) [Laughs]

In this simple way, we can just see that it’s a joke actually. This voice is saying ‘It is you, It’s you; and this is what you want. It’s I, it’s me, and this is what I want’. Who…?? [Laughter]

So I have said:

Either find who it is representing,

Or tell me who it is speaking to?

…

And which one are You?

And it can come up with anything at all. In the next instant it could say anything. It could say ‘This is the worst satsang ever!’ or it could say ‘It’s the best satsang ever!’ And we’re so used to following that when it says like that, we [shakes his head up and down in yes motion].

We’ve been discovering the beauty of just this non-conceptual life. So, even if there are concepts, they’re just played with. They’re not taken so seriously as if our life depended on it. Just the simplicity of this; not living on the basis of some concepts, but living just as it is. As simple as that.

Very often I’ve said that the power of belief can only be applied to concepts. We cannot believe imagery. A sense of joy can come or a sense of grief can come on watching some appearance, but there is nothing to believe on that. So just contemplate on the nature of belief. And see what it is that can be believed.

Can you believe anything other than a concept? And you’ll find that it’s only ideas, concept, thoughts, (same thing), which can get our belief. And by definition, a thought presumes an existence of a separate entity that I am. Even the most glorious ones, even if they are saying that “You are One”…, you’re presuming that this entity that you believe yourself to be has now become One, or is the One.

So, these conceptual words are just nothing compared to the truth of what is. But it’s been like this here in this realm, that everyone has seemingly relied on these, and it takes some amount of de-addiction through satsang or other spiritual paths that we have to let go of this identity, to let go of these concepts.

Even in satsang, there is the danger that we pick up new concepts. This happened here, also. When I first became spiritual after being an atheist for most of my life, then I felt ‘These are wonderful concepts. I can just use them’. [Laughs] So then this entire conceptual framework was created here. But I realized, when the appearance seemingly became strong, that it was not helping me. Not really anyway. And I’m so grateful to those strong experiences because it helped me open beyond those concepts to see ‘What’s going on? If I know all this spiritual stuff, why is it still that my life is this seemingly up and down; it still continues?’

In that way, we can be grateful to our suffering that happens. It opens us up, it crushes these concepts that we feel are very valuable. And in the spiritual path also, the seeming path also, we can have this sense that ‘I’m learning so much now’. ‘Almost there’ comes from this. The sense of ‘Almost being there…’ comes from this. ‘I’m learning so much now, just a little more and I feel it will be coming; I’m on the edge of the cliff’. [Laughs]

These concepts, and also feelings; if some beautiful feelings start coming to you when you’re in satsang. ‘This is beautiful. Imagine, a little more of this and I will just be a mad man’. You know? ‘…a mad man that I heard about’.  [Laughs] ‘… I’ll be like Rumi and I’ll be writing beautiful poems’. And this glory…, because the feelings can come so beautifully. So you attach the sense of progress to these feelings. And what can happen? Very quickly they can also dissolve. Like all ‘comings and goings’ they are also ‘comings and goings’. And then with that comes some ideas about unworthiness of not getting there, of ‘it’s not happening for me’.

So don’t attach to the concepts or the states or feelings which are arising. Then what is here?

I have this new saying that there is this lump of content, which is fluttering in front of us. But does any of it touch what really Is? And you will find it doesn’t. So how can that which is untouched be found through these concepts or what kind of states are arising or not arising? I’m not saying that we must be adverse to this beautiful bliss that is coming; this beautiful joy is coming, love is coming. We must not be adverse. Accept them as beautiful gifts. But to be attached and to say that ‘This is freedom’ …, that would be a mistake. You see?

So, it starts off with this idea… (and many also teach this in so-called self-help programs): ‘Just think happy thoughts’. It starts off like that. ‘Just think happy thoughts. You’re making yourself unhappy by thinking unhappy thoughts’.

How are you creating your next thought? You see? This is a fallacy. ‘Yeah, I can create it. I’ll tell you what I’m creating’. And then you wait for the thought to come, and you say ‘This is mine. This is going to be nice’. Already it came. [Someone in sangha audience says ‘The Secret’]. The so-called ‘Secret’.

So, don’t worry about the appearance and disappearance of thoughts. Also, who would not want to have happy thoughts? Nothing against happy thoughts. I’m just saying that if you’re dependent then when some painful attack or different defense thoughts come, then again you will come to this conclusion that ‘I haven’t made it. I haven’t got to the freedom that I want’.

So forget about it. Thoughts gone, states gone, body pain gone; everything is allowed to be exactly as it is, and Being is just being. In this state of simple allowing, not resisting anything, Being remains unassociated. This is the fruit of satsang.

To unburden that which can never be burdened seems to be the game we are playing. [Chuckles] Because that is the game; let’s play.

How do we pretend to be burdened? Only by picking up these concepts.

So, I’ve been feeling to say since yesterday about this non-conceptual life. And no concept, no matter how pure, holy, glorious it might be…, it cannot truly define the truth of what you are.

And we can look at some; the popular ones. Very popular in satsang is the concept that ‘I haven’t got it’. So, can we laugh at it now? Can we laugh at the idea ‘I haven’t got it’ because this ‘I’ doesn’t exist to get it? And the ‘I’ that Is, is all there is. There is nothing for It to get. You cannot give anything to the ‘I’. It is not bound also. How will you give it freedom?

And as I was saying yesterday, when I say let’s burn this concept that ‘I haven’t got it’ into the fire of satsang, then very quickly the mind offers the opposite, which is ‘I have got it’. Which is as laughable as ‘I haven’t got it’. It says ‘Okay, if ‘I haven’t got it’ is not true, then ‘I have got it’ must be true’. Because the mind cannot fathom the neutrality which I speak of. So ‘I have got it’ also must go into the same fire, because it is also rubbish.

There is nothing to get. In this way we can notice the tendency of the mind to swing from opposites but never remain neutral. Actually neutrality means no mind anyway.

In this way all of us can look at our most sacred concepts, our holy concepts. Because some of you might say ‘You say burn all concepts, but here’s there’s the concept that I have this great love for you. I have this great reverence for my Master’. But that which we have, this love and devotion and reverence, is not reliant on your belief in this. Your belief is not creating the devotion. Your belief is definitely not creating the love. Forget about it. Because if it is still…, (and we’ve seen this often in the sangha also)…, if it is still the subject of some thought, then when the content of the thought changes, you feel that the relationship with the Master also changes. You see? Because one day the thought will come ‘Oh, I love him so much and I always want to be with him’ but next day the thought can come ‘No, I feel I’ve had enough. Maybe I need some space to myself’. Something, something… So if our love is just dependent on the content of thought, then it’s not what we are talking about. That’s why I said that our most sacred, our holiest concepts can also be thrown into the fire of satsang; with no fear about what remains if I throw everything away. Because the truth definitely does not need to rely on the crutches of these concepts.

So, like this, the inquiry or self-audit can happen to see that ‘What beliefs am I still, as Consciousness itself, believing, pretending to be real for me? What am I still giving meaning to?

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

So what words can better this silence? And yet we try…

Suppose there was just no capacity for any conceptualizing; to not pick up a concept. Suppose you lost the capacity. What will you lose?

Q: [Inaudible]

Yes, yes, but we have to use concepts. That’s why I said we can’t compete with the silence; and yet we want to use some words because some concepts are there. Same way; the thorn example. So suppose we use this as a thorn today to ask: What if we did not have a single concept? …, including the concept of a concept?

Would ‘What Is’ stop? Just by the dropping of our conceptual understanding, would ‘This that Is’ stop? And if it did, even if it did, who would it matter to? So we must not come to satsang to pick up new concepts. ‘No new concepts’ can be the last concept. [Laughs]

Not even to clarify our concepts. Because many times it can seem like I’m here to clarify some concepts. But if the pointing is not leading to the throwing away of the concept and is just modifying it to something else, then I need to do my job better. So if it is not leading to the throwing away of the concept, but just that it’s giving you the best killer concepts that nobody can argue with, then I’m not doing my job well.

And you know that I love to experiment. So can we say that today we just experiment like this: I will not pick up a single concept. We have allocated some time for this. Anyway, we are here. I don’t want to fix a concept, get any new concept, get the killer concept; all these, forget about for some time. Nothing is going to happen for the next 2 hours. We will not learn anything at all.

There will be energy which offers…, that says ‘I got this fresh one for you’. Usually it’s the recycled stuff. But when we decide to not pick up, usually it tries to tempt you with some fresh idea. So there will be an energy which comes like this, which you call the mind or the ego which comes and says ‘Here, this is brand new, fresh for you today. Fresh out of the oven I have for you to taste’. Let it come, and let it go. Don’t do anything with it. Let the offer come and let the offer go. Don’t push it away, don’t say ‘I don’t want it’…, nothing. Just look. Just watch it.

As I’ve often said, ‘Don’t believe your next thought’ is also a thought. But let it be your final thought. A final believed thought. Thoughts will continue. If you have to believe a thought, then believe this one that says ‘Don’t believe your next thought’.

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

No effort is needed, so if you find yourself making some sort of effort, notice that even that is not needed. In the allowing of all to come and go, it is a resting; it is not effort.

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

Some mundane ideas, some very glorious ideas might be coming. Let them go.

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

Some bliss, or some boredom could be coming. It doesn’t matter; either way.

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

Some of you might be enjoying the naturalness of this, and for some of you it might be becoming unbearable. Both are okay.

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

Something could be saying that ‘I’ve taken out two hours to be in satsang from my busy schedule, and here you’re not saying anything’. [Chuckles] ‘I had to join today’. [Laughs]

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

What concept do we have that beats this?

What idea can be better than the taste of this ‘What Is’?

[Silence; Love, Peace and Joy]

Q: [Inaudible]

He says that ‘There is a sense of peace, or a feeling of peace; who is the experiencer of this peace?’

So usually when I get a question like that, what I ask is ‘What are my options?’ So, tell me who all are here, then I will pick between those.

Q: [Inaudible]

What is here which is not a concept? We’ll say that some peace is experienced. This is a sense, you see? Direct experience. It’s not a concept, it’s not a belief, it’s not based on faith; it just is what is. It is an experience. Then you said ‘Who is it that experiences this also?’ And I said ‘Tell me who is here’. So if you say these three, four or five are here…, then make it multiple choice for me today, I’m being lazy. [Smiles] So, what are the options? Who all are here?

Q: Presence

Presence is here, okay. Who else is here?

Q: Everything else is a concept.

Everything else is a concept. Therefore, then, who must be experiencing this peace? This Consciousness. Only Consciousness is here. You say only Consciousness is here; the rest is just concept. Okay. Then who must be having this direct experience?

Q: [… begins a word, stops short …]

Don’t think about it. You have to check. Where are all experiences being experienced? I can sense that my Presence is here. Being. I Am. Is there anyone else here?

Q: [Inaudible]

Then you’re not giving me the choices to pick from, so I will only pick that one.

Q: Then that’s the direct experience?

Yes. Exactly. Exactly. That’s why when we speak from experience, it’s a lot simpler. When we speak from ideas and concepts that we have, then it becomes all mixed up.

So, directly from your experience now, what would you say? Who is experiencing this peace?

Q: [Silence]

So beautifully you say that only this Presence is here; all else is conceptual. And who is aware of this Presence?

Q: [Silence]

So, presence also has an opposite called ‘absence’. That’s why we use the word ‘presence’. So presence and absence are for who?

Q: [Silence] [Inaudible] … can’t say who…

It’s simpler than that. It’s simpler than that. Who is aware of Presence? Someone else? Is Radha telling you that ‘Hey, your Presence is there’? Or you know it?

Q: Presence is Aware…

You can say like that. But then, how would Presence be aware of absence?

Q: [Inaudible]

So, the space of Presence seems completely united with being aware for you right now, yes?

Q: Yes, … [Inaudible]

This is good enough, this is good enough.

If we stay with the experience of Presence, then we don’t have to bother about anything else. This is the realization of God-Presence.

Who feels that there is something left? Something left to be done, something yet to be seen, some state yet to be realized?

Questioner: “Ego is left.”

Ego is left. But it is seen that you are not the ego.

Q: “Yes.”

Then it’s not ego. You see, ego means the sense that ‘This, that is not me, is me’. When you say that ‘ego is left’ it means you already see it. That means what? That the mind continues to function, and sometimes it gets our belief. Sometimes. But right now, when you look, you say that ego is left. That means, if you see it, you are not it. You see?

Sometimes it just feels like this lump of energy which appears in front of me; and I’m in no way concerned by it. This lump of energy can appear as this body, thoughts, emotions; all of these things. It can seem like that. It’s just moving on its own. Just like these hands are moving on their own. I’m not saying ‘Hand, go like this’. They just move. And this talking is just flowing on its own. I’m just watching all of this. It is the same for all us. And yet this sense of doership, me and mine, gets picked up. Actually, we’re just seeing it as the Witness of it. It’s just being watched. The seeing…, what is the seeing doing?

If we were even to forget about the concept of Consciousness for a minute…, so all is just seen; appearance. Forget about Consciousness for a minute. There is appearance and there is Awareness of the appearance. What is the Awareness doing about anything in the appearance?

Q: “Just witnessing it.”

Just witnessing it. Because even though the taste of it is happening for Consciousness…, when I say ‘Forget about Consciousness’ it means ‘Forget about my dynamic aspect’. I-as-Awareness has this instrument. It’s just like…, (what is a good example?) … suppose I had a special glove which can participate in some other realm. You see? Consciousness is like that. It’s still me, still a part of me, but it’s not the entirety of me. It’s made up of me, and yet it is not the entirety of Me. Just as all it experiences is just a small aspect of me. But this one is feeling, tasting, everything that is there in this realm. But the witness of this, that which sees this, what is happening to that?

Q: “It’s neutral.”

It’s neutral, isn’t it? So, if This is neutral, then what are we working towards? [Silence] Can I ever get out of neutral? Suppose it’s like a gear in the car. [Laughs] Does it ever come to first or second? It’s always in neutral, isn’t it? No matter what the road conditions are, what traffic is there, whether there are bullock carts like in India sometimes, or there are speed trains, it’s always in neutral; unaffected by any of this.

So, then what are we working to fix?

Q: “The ability to identify with that Awareness as you.”

But does that also affect Awareness?

Q: “It doesn’t.”  [Laughs]

Even that…, whether Being is identifying as a person or as Awareness, … Awareness is untouched by it.

So that dynamic aspect; my arm, it’s like the arm is forgetting what it is and thinks it’s a separate arm. Actually it’s still part of the body, isn’t it?

So, at the end, (I know it’s defeating the purpose of satsang itself, but ultimately it has to be said that), even the recognition of the Self-as-Awareness…, to Awareness doesn’t matter. It is only for Consciousness.

So, Consciousness believing itself to be an entity made up of this matter, or recognizing the Source of itself to be this Awareness itself …, that’s the only switching that’s happening, isn’t it?

Nothing is happening for the person, because ‘person’ doesn’t exist.

Being is going from identifying as this non-existent entity to seeing what it truly is.

And for Awareness, nothing ever happened.

So, if it is recognized even for an instant that ‘I Am This Awareness’ then we see that even the play of Consciousness is not relevant for Me.

Q: “But is the play of Consciousness actually happening?”

We can say it is not. For Awareness, nothing is happening. We’re looking at, at best, (when we’re talking from the level of Being which has identified itself to be a person using the power of belief), we’re looking at removing all these misconceptions.

But it is not as if, even by picking up these beliefs, something happened even to Consciousness. You see, deeply identified as it might be, it is not suffering from the identification; it’s only believing that it is suffering. The concept of suffering is only very personal. So once it believes itself to be a person, then it can suffer. How can Consciousness Itself suffer? It’s Being. So when I say ‘Can you stop being?’…, what is found there, the Being, this Presence…, how will we make the Presence suffer?

Nothing can make the Presence suffer.

How can one who is not bound want freedom? Is it possible for one who is free to want freedom?

How do I know that I am free? Do I rely on a mental conclusion? Do I rely on some emotional feeling? If I have a joy or bliss or something like that, is it then?

And all of us have learned here to check on what is prior to all of these appearances. So in the now, there must be full freedom. In every now. So this now, from now, going from here, what we want?  Freedom. Already here. If you are hoping that our power to believe, our power to believe will go away, nobody can do that. Nobody can give you that; take away God’s power to pretend, God’s power to believe. Even the strongest satsang will not take away your power to pretend. But it will just make it overwhelmingly clear that the pretense is just a joke.

If we still continue to delude ourselves, it’s completely your will. So this power to believe will not go, but there will be so much overwhelming evidence which comes again and again from checking and from dropping the belief that it becomes so clear. Even this, the state of delusion, the state of identity, I am really not touched by that. So we must drop this sense that ‘But why do still I feel this way, why do I still pick it up?’ Because this power remains. But predominantly, what is your experience of yourself? And I feel that being in satsang, it must be predominantly clear that ‘I Am this Awareness’.

Once in a while some drama, some situations, some events, something can come; like old memory. So where we are starting from, even before any concepts of starting point…, what is here?

Before we even I can decide that ‘I must get somewhere’ who is watching this decision?

Before we can say that ‘I am going to undertake a journey which will give me peace and joy’ who witnesses this movement towards this journey?

No matter what the undertaking is, (good, bad or ugly), who is aware of it?

Whatever movement might be happening from here or in any appearance, who is aware of it?

What is aware right now?

Before you can say ‘I got it’ or ‘I didn’t get it’…, You Are It.

Who is aware of the mental conclusion of getting it or not getting it?

Who is aware of the effort? You are saying ‘Okay, now he is pointing, now let’s focus, let’s get it’. Who is aware of this?

It’s simple like that. It’s simpler than any effort, simpler than time; simpler than getting it or not getting it. It is too, too, too obvious; and that is why it can seem little confusing.

Just like if I were to tell someone who has been begging for twenty years that ‘You know that you have carried this treasure in your box, in your knapsack’. [And you would say] ‘No, it can’t be!’ Even upon seeing it, there could be sense of disbelief. ‘Is this a dream, is this really happening?’ Just like this, we know the simplicity of what we are, and there is a sense that comes up ‘But this can’t be real because I have trying to find it for so long’.

And in this journey of trying to find it, who has been the companion? The mind which is saying ‘Okay, let’s go here, let’s go to this teacher; this one’ or ‘This one I agree with, this one I don’t agree with, let’s move from here’. All of this constant mental ally has been there. And when this direct experience of the truth is happening, what is this guy saying? ‘Yeah, I have known this, but there is something more. There should be something more’. Or it says ‘But now, you must always stay here. You found this awareness, now don’t leave. Don’t leave. Yeah, yeah, this is my friend, this is good advice, this is good advice’. But instantly your door bell rings; it left, the attention. The attention left, instantly. But where did it go? Did it leave you? Did it start reporting to anybody else? It has always been here; it cannot go.

What do you have to do to hold on to that end of attention? Has anybody contemplated this?

To hold on to this end of attention…, attention is moving outwards but it is always reporting back to me. What am I doing to hold this end of attention? Am I doing something?

What I am saying is clear? So you can see attention moving, moving, moving but it’s reporting back to I, isn’t it? So how am I holding attention from here this end? How am I holding; is it effort?  No, not doing anything at all. So where can it go?

If I am holding on to it effortlessly, then what must I need to do more?

Q: “Not be.”

[Laughs] Not be. So it is attached. Attention is an intimate part of you, just like Consciousness. So we can say…, we can contemplate whether it is a function of Consciousness itself or it arises simultaneously with Consciousness; these kind of fun contemplations we can do.

But we never should feel that I left my attention. How did you leave it? Then when we are talking, we are talking about the other end of attention, in the sense of what it is bringing to my Awareness.

Now just let’s demystify this. If the purpose of attention was just to come back to awareness and rest over there, then why would I create attention? Because Awareness is aware of Itself; it knows Itself very well.

So the purpose of the creation of attention, just like Consciousness, must have been to enjoy the experience of this realm. And without the functioning, the natural functioning of attention, I don’t know of this realm. Because only that where my attention goes exists for me in my experience.

Hypothetically everything can exist; but in direct experience, only that where my attention goes, (that side of my attention goes), only that exists. But it is still reporting here, you see?

So it cannot be about ‘getting a grip on this attention and keeping it with Awareness alone’ because then we would not function in this realm at all. And nobody can actually do it.

Then it must be a question of whether I am believing myself to be an object which my attention is bringing. An object which my attention is bringing to me; the mind is telling me that I am that.  That’s why I say that if we call anything in the appearance ‘me’ or ‘mine’ that is the root of misery.

It cannot be attached to any appearance, including the appearance of ‘I Am’…, including the appearance of ‘I Am’ because we all know that at the end of the day, when we have had enough experiencing, even this we don’t want; we want sleep. And that is why I feel when we check ‘Am I aware now?’…, it’s not that we become aware only upon asking this question. It’s just that we keep everything else aside for an instant, and we see that awareness is here. And who sees this? Awareness itself.

Who else can be a witness to awareness?

Who else would be here to know that I am aware?

Really ask yourself:

Who can it be that can be aware of awareness?

I say ‘I am aware’.

Now this I…, is it separate from awareness itself?

And these are the times where the mind can come up with a lot of distraction. It’s almost as if it’s waiting; and then when it’s really the time to check, it can come up with something, something.

What is happening when I check on whether I am aware or not? What is happening? (We have to use the word ‘happening’…, you know what I mean.)

And see if you can separate yourself. Can you separate yourself into two? Is it possible?…, that there is an I which is separate from the awareness? Is it possible to become dual? This duality; is it possible?

Within Awareness there are no two.

And then check: even after the birth of Being, is it separate from me, from I?

Or does it only appear to be [separate]?

All that is appearing to you now, use it and see where it is experienced.

Is it outside of you? Is anything outside of you?

Even the idea of ‘something outside of me’ is inside of you.

All of this is appearing inside you.

Can there be anything outside of me, outside of I?

Like this we see that there are no two.

Advaita = non-dual [not two]. That is why it is said that the separation never happened.

The pretense of personhood will become more and more incredible to all of you. If it is picked up momentarily, very soon you will laugh and say ‘How did I pick up this idea that I could be that which comes and goes?’

Who is witnessing the coming and going? Is it somebody else?

Every one of us have seen that this appearance, and everything in this appearance, is coming and going.  Who tells you this? Does someone else come and tell you ‘Hey, you went away. Now you came back.’?

The objects in front of us, the body, the thoughts…, who is aware of this thought coming and going? It cannot be the thought which knows of its own going. There must be something which is steady which watches all of this come and go, isn’t it?

Your emotion…, you say ‘I got angry and I was feeling better the next day’. So anger came and anger left. All emotions, like this, come and go. What stays? What is that which is steady? And all of this is the content of the state that right now we are calling the waking state.

But who is aware of this waking and sleeping? Who is aware that ‘I woke up and I went to sleep’? Is that one, the steady one, touched by the content of the any of these states; waking state, dream, turiya, whatever states you might want to say?

So if it is not even touched by the coming and going of these states, how can it ever be touched by something which is happening within the state?

If the state itself does not touch the I, then how can the content of some state touch the I?

So if this body is an appearance within this waking state, how will it become me? How can it become I? Many, many, many, many bodies like this have come and gone; all seeming so beautiful, so well designed, so real.

You know what? Even if I was this body, what is there for me to do? Even if I was this body then, as it is said in some of the simple, simplistic translation of the Bhagvad Gita: ‘I came empty handed and I will leave empty handed’.

So even in the realm of phenomenality, there is no trouble. There are just appearances. Nothing is happening to me. There is only this Consciousness which is appearing, and its own light, on its own screen; it is playing. This Consciousness.

So yesterday I was asking one of the sangha members ‘How do I experience this Consciousness?’ We were playing yesterday. ‘So how do I experience this consciousness?’ And she said ‘Can you stop being now?’

To see that this Being is present, I Am is here, existence…, is our direct experience of Being.

Let’s take another simple example of how it has nothing to do with body actually. So, suppose, just as I was sharing like this, my body went [puts limp head down toward table]…, like that, it went like that. Now by looking at the body, can anyone tell whether Consciousness was here, or left? But I am aware that although the body went like this, Being was still present. And I am aware that at other times when the body goes like that then even Consciousness could leave; and then I am aware that it comes back. See?

So if someone comes and says ‘Did you fall asleep?’ and you say ‘No, no, I was awake’…, what is the meaning of that? That I am aware that Being was still here.

Is this confusing? No matter what the body might be exhibiting, I am aware of whether Being is here or not. This I that is aware of Being; That which is aware of Being, This One…, can it leave?

Can this One leave?

Who would know of the coming and going of this One?

If this awareness had to leave, who would report on it?

And because This is the all-knowing, ever-present one, the unborn, the unchanging, the undying, I…, this is the extent of what can be spoken from direct experience. The extent of what can be spoken from intuition or direct experience is this.

[Silence]

Everything with any quality, any attribute, is phenomenal; appearing within the non-phenomenal Self.

[Silence]

And hearing this is the reversal of the hypnosis of the mind.

To check on this, to verify for ourselves…, and this is what we check over and over, because the hypnosis has been there for a long time. Just because we have been hypnotized into believing that we are something, can never make it real.

We have used many depictions to make light of the pretend person. We have called it the hungry Martian, we have called it Rajan, we have called it a lawyer, we have called it an insect, we have called it the imagined one. We have said all kind of things. Why? Is it because we have a sense of distain about this movement of Consciousness? No. It’s truly not that. It is just for you to see the distance between yourSelf and this. And no matter what you call it, it cannot mind, because it doesn’t exit.

So we must stop pandering to the hurt feelings of the non-existent one.

Therefore every single time that there is a sense that ‘I am suffering from something’…, that ‘something is happening to me’…, the question to be asked is: ‘Who am I believing myself to be?’

Every single time.

There is a sense that I am suffering from something. YOU cannot suffer, I cannot suffer, in reality. It must be a mis-identification. It must be something in the appearance which I am believing myself to be.

There must be something in the appearance which I believe that I want or I don’t want. But when we check and see, it’s just the content within the waking state; and the state itself does not touch me.

How can any appearance touch Awareness?

We can say it is within Awareness…,

but can it affect Awareness?

Therefore it must be that anytime that I say I am affected by something, I am posing as something other than Awareness…, We have this power to pretend, to pose, to believe.

[Silent communion]

If I say ‘All of you are already free’ then why do I also say ‘You must come to satsang’?

That can get confusing, isn’t it? ‘You say I am already free. And then you also say: Just make sure you keep coming to satsang’. Why is it like that?

It’s only that the whole point of satsang is to point Being toward the truth of what It Is. But Being has capacity for belief, has the capacity for pretense. And we have collected many, many, many, many, many pretenses over millions of years; many subtle or strong identities have been picked up.

So satsang serves as a reminder: Drop this, drop this, drop this, drop this, drop this…

And the Master says ‘Keep coming, because we are dropping this together’.

When instead it is the picking up of the concept…, (Okay, this is a little subtle, so just stay with me)…

When I say that ‘You are free’ it is a pointing so that you look and you check that ‘There is no bondage now. I am free’. That is the purpose of the pointing.

The mis-use of this pointing would be to pick it up conceptually. So if ‘I am free’ becomes a concept that gets picked up, then very quickly the concept ‘Therefore I don’t need to come to satsang’ will also get picked up: ‘Because I am free’. [Laughs]

So, when I say ‘You are free’ it to is point you to see ‘There is no bondage. You are free’. To look. Not to pick up freedom even as a concept.

That’s why I say that the way we define contemplations is different from typically the way the world would define a contemplation. Because the world would define a contemplation as sitting and thinking about something. But we say that a contemplation is just the Seeing of how it is. The direct experience of ‘What Is’ is the most beautiful contemplation.

So, what is happening in satsang is that all of this bag full of identity is being emptied away, emptied away, emptied away. And our strongest identities that seemed to be pushing our buttons, a lot of them got thrown away and we don’t even remember that we carried them.

But our strongest ones can still be in the special relationship; the husband, wife, partner relationship can be one of the strongest. So, when something is pushing our button in that way, you’re not to ‘Advaita’ it away, and say ‘Oh, but I’m free’… and you know… ‘Then therefore they should not bother me’. Because that creates a dichotomy. It will create an inner struggle. Because inwardly we’re experiencing a sense of suffering because of what the wife is doing. And outwardly we are feeling ‘Oh, I must be free, I’m Awareness’…, something like this.

So, instead of that, what we must do is just when something seems to bother us, then we look at that and say ‘Okay, why am I upset at what this (appearance of) woman is saying?’ Why? That must be the reason. If it was not my wife, then it would not bother me. If it was a random stranger on the street saying something, then it doesn’t bother me. Why does it bother here? Because I am ‘the husband’. You see?

So we must then look at ‘this husband’ and say: ‘Where is this husband?’ Is the body ‘the husband’? Who is the husband? And we must really inquire. It can sound funny. ‘Oh, but this is kindergarten stuff’ or something like that. But actually we must look and say ‘Okay. Where is the husband? I’m concerned only because I’m the husband’. And we look and we look and we look and we say ‘Wow. There is no husband here’.

. . .

The good news is that life is constantly now showing us what still needs to be contemplated, what still needs to be inquired into. So rather than looking at those as points of failure to say ‘Look, I failed again. I was doing so well as Awareness. And see, I became a ‘person’ again’. Instead of that, use them as opportunities for inquiry.

If I say ‘All of you are already free’ then why do I also say ‘You must come to satsang’?

That can get confusing, isn’t it? ‘You say I am already free. And then you also say: Just make sure you keep coming to satsang’. Why is it like that?

It’s only that the whole point of satsang is to point Being toward the truth of what It Is. But Being has capacity for belief, has the capacity for pretense. And we have collected many, many, many, many, many pretenses over millions of years; many subtle or strong identities have been picked up.

So satsang serves as a reminder: Drop this, drop this, drop this, drop this, drop this…

And the Master says ‘Keep coming, because we are dropping this together’.

When instead it is the picking up of the concept…, (Okay, this is a little subtle, so just stay with me)…

When I say that ‘You are free’ it is a pointing so that you look and you check that ‘There is no bondage now. I am free’. That is the purpose of the pointing.

The mis-use of this pointing would be to pick it up conceptually. So if ‘I am free’ becomes a concept that gets picked up, then very quickly the concept ‘Therefore I don’t need to come to satsang’ will also get picked up: ‘Because I am free’. [Laughs]

So, when I say ‘You are free’ it to is point you to see ‘There is no bondage. You are free’. To look. Not to pick up freedom even as a concept.

That’s why I say that the way we define contemplations is different from typically the way the world would define a contemplation. Because the world would define a contemplation as sitting and thinking about something. But we say that a contemplation is just the Seeing of how it is. The direct experience of ‘What Is’ is the most beautiful contemplation.

So, what is happening in satsang is that all of this bag full of identity is being emptied away, emptied away, emptied away. And our strongest identities that seemed to be pushing our buttons, a lot of them got thrown away and we don’t even remember that we carried them.

But our strongest ones can still be in the special relationship; the husband, wife, partner relationship can be one of the strongest. So, when something is pushing our button in that way, you’re not to ‘Advaita’ it away, and say ‘Oh, but I’m free’… and you know… ‘Then therefore they should not bother me’. Because that creates a dichotomy. It will create an inner struggle. Because inwardly we’re experiencing a sense of suffering because of what the wife is doing. And outwardly we are feeling ‘Oh, I must be free, I’m Awareness’…, something like this.

So, instead of that, what we must do is just when something seems to bother us, then we look at that and say ‘Okay, why am I upset at what this (appearance of) woman is saying?’ Why? That must be the reason. If it was not my wife, then it would not bother me. If it was a random stranger on the street saying something, then it doesn’t bother me. Why does it bother here? Because I am ‘the husband’. You see?

So we must then look at ‘this husband’ and say: ‘Where is this husband?’ Is the body ‘the husband’? Who is the husband? And we must really inquire. It can sound funny. ‘Oh, but this is kindergarten stuff’ or something like that. But actually we must look and say ‘Okay. Where is the husband? I’m concerned only because I’m the husband’. And we look and we look and we look and we say ‘Wow. There is no husband here’.

. . .

The good news is that life is constantly now showing us what still needs to be contemplated, what still needs to be inquired into. So rather than looking at those as points of failure to say ‘Look, I failed again. I was doing so well as Awareness. And see, I became a ‘person’ again’. Instead of that, use them as opportunities for inquiry.

Q: I know I am aware, but something else. There is the just the sense that there is something else. I don’t know.

Yes, so presume that there is something else. Then it would still need this ‘I’ to be aware of it.

Okay, so this is not necessarily for you, but, it is very easy to say that something is prior to Awareness. We can say. I can say that ‘There is a special pot of gold, which exists prior to Awareness and only the truest seeker will find it’. Is there any way that that can be disputed? No.

Q: It’s not conceptual…it’s just …

A:  No, I am just saying that to talk about that which is prior to Awareness, I can say anything. I can say like ‘You have heard of a mythical pot at the end of a rainbow, which is full of gold. That is there. It is prior to Awareness. And truest one, find it’.

You can say ‘Yes, I see it’s there’. And once you get to this place then you will also see that ‘Now there is no way anyone can dispute that’.

I am not saying this just for you; because it’s popular sometimes to say that prior to Awareness something is, or something like this. But let’s just look and see.

Whatever that something might be, is there any way to know of the existence of this something without the awareness of it?

So, there can be the most sublime sense, sublime sense, the most beautiful…, but unless there is awareness of it, it is still nothing.

And there is much beauty that emerges from this simple thread of Being, simple thread of Being. Much beauty can emerge. And it can seem like it is the most primal thing. In fact the ‘I Am-ness’ or the ‘Om’ is called the primordial vibration from which everything arises, isn’t it? So there is great beauty, great sanctity, great innocence, great purity in this.

But it has to be said that even for this to exist, there has to be awareness of it. So that something, whatever it might be, for it to exist there must be an awareness of it.

Like we said, we will keep contemplating this. And I’m not ever coming to you with the perspective that ‘I know, and I want you to refer to what I know’. You see?

I want you to keep this open contemplation and dive into this together; and I am completely open if you say ‘Ananta, this is the way you must look, to find this something which is prior to Awareness’.

Q:  I don’t know. That’s why I said the last few times…, at best I can say, it’s a conviction, I don’t know whether it is a …

A:  One thing that can also happen is that when we find the Truth of ourselves,

then Awareness doesn’t seem like a good enough way to describe it. You see because it’s not ‘just aware’. There is something indescribable about it. That’s why I call it ‘the un-label-able’. Maybe that’s what the feeling is. That the word that we use, either Awareness or Knowingness, or the witnessing or the pure perceiving; whatever word you want to use, it doesn’t seem enough. You see, it doesn’t seem enough. So that is different.

So that’s why I say the best way to describe it is to say that ‘You cannot describe. It is not label-able’. This word also came up in satsang like this only: The un-label-able one.

Q: The part I feel tricky is that; the un-label-able ‘one’. And then when you say Awareness…, it is a demonstration of it, it’s not necessarily the one, it’s just sensory, it can’t be that one…, there is a sense that the un-label-able one, that there is a one somewhere there.

A:  Yes, there is this one. ‘I’, is that one. Yes, yes.

One more confusion which is becoming clear to me is that it’s easy to mix up Awareness with the phenomenal perceiving. So this sense of seeing is there, and it seems very primal to us. It seems like this is Awareness itself.

But the sensory seeing is not Awareness. There is Awareness even of sensory seeing.

But the world uses awareness to denote the perceiving through the senses like this.

Q: Can I ask for clarification of that?

A:  Sure, please, of course.

Q: When you say ‘It’s different than the sensory seeing’, can I say that seeing which is different is the same as seeing and hearing and all of that?

A:  Yes, yes. All that is collected through the senses and phenomenally perceived, there is awareness of even this. So Awareness is prior even to this.

That which knows that this is also that. This is also phenomenal. Phenomenal means phenomenal. Only in the Presence of Being it happens. But that Awareness which we speak of, or the Knowingness, or the pure Seeing that we talk about is not referring to this phenomenal sensory perception.

It is good you brought up this point. Because we use the words Awareness and the Seeing; it can be confused to be that we are talking about this phenomenal dual form, which is limited also.

Q: The way I differentiate as multiple senses, the one that knows, or the one that sees that.

A:  Exactly. And this one is the same.

Q: Yes, the same. So I don’t know what to do. It’s a joy.

A:  Yes, yes. Even this ‘I’ which seems like a little bit of doer or ‘what to do, what not to do’…, this is dissolving into your true seeing. It’s very good.

Thank you so much, thank you.

With simple integrity, what is the truest introduction you can give for yourself?

Q:  [Inaudible]… There are times when there’s so much contentment, when I’m not in the mind. So that’s seen. [Inaudible]…

Is Awareness, or is the real I, concerned even with Presence? It is unconcerned even about Presence, isn’t it? Presence being apparent or dissolved.

Q:  It feels so nice. [Laughs]

It feels nice, until it stops feeling nice and some other feelings come. [Laughs] But it is very natural also. As we are coming to this space of un-associated Being, then it’s very natural for it to be accompanied with peace and love and joy. And nothing wrong with that. It’s just that…, the trouble can only be if we attached to it. If you are concerned whether this nice feeling is there or not. So it can be that it’s just neutral to this.

Q:  Yes, I can see there’s enjoyment of it, but then comes the identification with it.

Yes, but the enjoyment of it is not identification with it. Okay, this is very good point because sometimes this confusion can be there that ‘Ah, there is so much beautiful love here and peace here’. It can be experienced; and there’s a great joy which can be enjoyment of it. It can be like swimming in it, drowning in it, swimming in…, it can be like that. Then the mind will come and judge it. ‘See, now you are enjoying the enjoyment’. But it’s not like that.

To attach, to identify means that there is this feverishness about it not going, or it staying just like this. That is attachment. But purely, it’s just wonderfully seen and felt. Nothing wrong with that. But as Awareness, which is unconcerned even with Presence or not-Presence, then it is definitely not concerned with any feeling, no matter how sublimely beautiful it might be.

And it is found usually…, (that’s why I don’t say this much, because sometimes it might become like an expectation or benchmark like this), but it is found usually that those who are not concerned with anything which is arising, then all of these feelings and these beautiful chocolate-flavored things, they seem to chase those [ones]. And those who are chasing these things, then these energies seems to be running from them.

Q:  And I don’t feel there is chasing; it just comes.

Yes. It comes. It just comes naturally. And there is a great trust in Being also. That means… [Inaudible] …how much to give. I used to say this earlier also, remember? God knows exactly how much to put in this recipe; how much spice, how much salt. So then we are not attaching to the mind and saying ‘You could mess it up. I want more sugar, more chocolate’. So like this, then we know that That which is the creator of all of this knows exactly what to do.

Q:  Yes, and it’s not even a desire for it anymore. It’s just clear Seeing…, that it’s sort of in experience. [Inaudible]… But it comes very strong… [Inaudible]. But there’s one thing I wanted to discuss with you, when I’m just sitting quietly and just looking, then there’s really looking and confirming, then it’s just so clear. But somehow, experience of that clarity is different than… [Inaudible] …that when I’m moving through the day, it’s not always this clear; even though there’s not any belief in what’s there.

It becomes like this, yes. I feel this is important to clarify for all of you:

Freedom is not a state where attention completely rests only in Awareness.

It’s important to know this. Because there can be this expectation that ‘Once I am free or a sage or something like that, then my attention will only be in Awareness itself’. Then if that was what it was, if that was God’s will, then God would not project this world at all. So if this waking state is happening, a natural flow of attention which is moving to objects and to other things will flow. And when attention is there, then it doesn’t seem like Awareness is just aware of itself; because other phenomenal things are coming which have our attention. You see?

But the good news is that the attention is reporting back to the same Being, which ultimately is the same Awareness.

Attention is reporting to who?

We can look at this. So we say ‘Attention is going’. But is it going completely? Because then I would not be able to call it ‘my attention’ at all. It’s gone. [Laughs]

Q:  I feel like it’s coming more…, less now; like it just goes… [Inaudible]

What happens is it becomes less of a mind riddle. It becomes less of a mind riddle, and this fogginess, the sense of fogginess reduces.

And how does the fogginess come? Have we contemplated this? Sometimes we try to bring your attention to your mind, thoughts, and to the world. And suddenly everything becomes blurry. Because attention is limited, when you try to put attention on two things at the same time everything seems to blur. You see? This computer will be blurry when my attention is on a thought. But blurriness reduces because we are not that mind-riddling.

So, it is almost like the Buddhist practice of mindfulness; we are completely with what is Seen. So it is Seen very clear. And it is seen in This.

Because there are not as many pulls and pulls to our attention because our mind is not as magnetic as it was. Then you find that life seems to have a lot more clarity and space. Our vision seems much more global, just accepting.

Regular people in the world, especially in the work place, are always like this, like this [makes fast, frantic movements]…, they are not ‘there’. They’re just confused between the external world and the mind, and what’s going on; like this.

Now what’s happening is that it’s just settling. Whatever is appearing, attention can go to that. We see it’s not going anywhere, you see, because it’s still My attention. It’s reporting back to Me-as-Being. And this Being is ultimately made up of Awareness alone. So it can never lose touch with the Awareness that It Is.

It’s like I was saying the other day, it’s like a dog on a leash which is not going anywhere. But if the purpose of it was just for the dog to stay home, then you would not take it out for a walk at all. You see?

So if the purpose of it was just for Awareness to be aware of Itself, then it would not create this world, this manifest world.

I had the feeling we should do some self-inquiry today. Just with some focus, with one at a time. You want to come first?

Q: [Asks a question about ‘subject and object’].

Just follow me. We’ll answer the question after that.

So right now, what is here?

Q: [sigh] [Inaudible]

Now is here? Awareness is here?

Q: Yes.

And…? [Silence] Just whatever it is. Don’t worry about the right answer. With full integrity, whatever you feel is true, that you must say. [Silence]

Awareness is here. And this ‘I’, is it also here, or no?

Is there something apart from Awareness?

Q: This is here.

Yes. And ‘I’ is there? Or no? Is ‘I’ there?

Q: Witnessing is there.

Is Witnessing separate from Awareness? When you are saying ‘Witnessing’ are you speaking about…?

Q: It’s only a concept, conceptual…, when I say…, it’s not my…, immediately, it is a concept.

Yes. So leave all concepts aside. When we say ‘Awareness’ that’s not a concept, no?

Q:  I am Aware. [Inaudible]

You are Aware. And this ‘I’ that is aware, this ‘I’, is it separate from Awareness?

Q: [Inaudible]

No, what do you see? What do you see? Don’t go to any concept. You say ‘I am aware’. So now, just check: This ‘I’ that is aware, is it separate from this awareness, or is it one with it?

Q: I only know Awareness.

You only know Awareness. ‘I only know awareness’. [Laughs]  I don’t know any ‘I’…, I only know Awareness’. This ‘I’ that knows Awareness is what?

There is a knowingness of awareness. Can we say like that?

Q: There is something here that knows that.

Something. Now, this something, is it separate from Awareness Itself?

Q: [sigh] … [silence] …

So, you’re clear that Awareness is here; but the ‘I’ you cannot find? Can you find an ‘I’?

Q: [Inaudible]

Yet, ‘I know Awareness’. It is directly known, isn’t it? Directly known. Therefore my proposition to you then is that this ‘I’ is Awareness Itself.

Now, you have to try and prove me wrong. Can you find a separate ‘I’ from this Awareness?

[Silence]

Finding any ‘I’ which is separate from this Awareness?

Q: There’s only Awareness.

There’s only Awareness. Okay.

Now, if there is only Awareness, without picking up a concept, can you become [their name]? Without picking up a concept, how will you become [their name]?

Q: The body is seen in Awareness.

Body is seen. Is the body you?

Q: It’s only an instrument. [Inaudible]

The body is aware of you? Or you are aware of the body?

Q: I am aware of the body.

Ah. [Silence]

Q: [Inaudible]

Don’t believe the label. Labeling means what? ‘I am the body’. Can you believe that now? From the place of looking now, with this appearance of the body, do you find that really it has that much pull, the thought that ‘I am the body’…, as we’re seeing clearly that only Awareness is here, and all these appearances are coming, including the body, does it have that much juice, ‘I am the body’?

Q: [Inaudible]

Okay, so what you must do is not be scared of this concept. Because the fear is coming that ‘oh, later I will become body-identified’ or something.

Try to become body-identified. Just become the body; don’t be the Awareness. Just be the body. [Silence] Can you do it?

Q: [Inaudible]

You can never do it. It can only seem like it can happen like that, but it never truly happens.

And don’t say ‘This should not come, that should not come, and I should not have tendencies’. All of this is rubbish. Throw it out.

But that is what the mind is using. That ‘My tendencies are not gone yet. Why do I still have this, why do I still have that?’ [Silence]

Say something about your true Self. You say ‘Only Awareness is here’. Say something about that.

Q: [Silence] Nothing…, [Inaudible]

Anything happening to it? Anything happening to Awareness?

Q: [Inaudible] Mind comes and tries to claim…

Mind comes and tries to claim. The false one will come and claim.

Q: [Inaudible]

Don’t believe this guy. Whatever the mind is saying, let it come and let it go. As simple as that.

Q: [Inaudible sentences]

Once there is clarity about these definitions then these words will also not bother you. If you were asking about ‘subject and object’…, what’s the difficulty? All that is appearing is object, phenomenal. The subject is not phenomenal. And the subjective Awareness of Itself is not an objective experience. Straight-forward. So all that is phenomenal, you call that object. All that you are, the non-phenomenal Awareness, that is the subject. And the subject knows Itself, but not objectively, not as an object.

Once there is clarity about who you are, then the jargon and play of words will not bother you so much. It only bothers those who are trying to play at some sort of mental understanding, or trying to prove to themselves that ‘I know this’ or something like this.

I don’t try to remember anything. When something comes like that, then we look together. And in the direct looking of the truth, then I don’t feel anything which is truthful can escape you. So, you don’t have to bother yourself with learning this, and knowing something. We’re not trying to make intellectuals out of you. It would be a complete waste. If after coming to satsang for so long, you became an intellectual, it would be a complete waste. You see?

If you are to call something valuable, it must be only that which is here. So any term, any definition…,

Are you here? You just have to check back with what is here.

If it resonates in here. And if it doesn’t resonate, then just say ‘I don’t understand what you’re saying’. No need to wrestle with anything. I am not giving you anything to learn also.

What do you see yourself to be? You want to be Awareness, AND a certain type of person? Or the nothingness of Awareness is enough for you?

Q: Nothing.

Then nothing can make you suffer. [Silence] If your emptiness is fine by you, then what suffering can there be? Because suffering can only be phenomenal. Only phenomena attacks phenomena. Only phenomena defends against phenomena. That which is no-thing cannot be attacked nor defended.

So, if you’re okay being nothing, if you see yourself as this ‘no-thing’, then how can you suffer?

Q: Yeah. It’s so easy.

So any time we find that there is a grievance or there is some suffering or something egoic coming up, find out: What phenomena I’m attaching to, or identifying with?

And then, when you inquire, you see that ‘I am no thing; I am this emptiness, I am this Awareness. Then I cannot be hurt by this phenomena; either by its coming or its going’.

Q: So, still stuck with this jargon initially.

Just don’t pick it up. How to drop the story? Just don’t pick it up now.

Q: : [Inaudible]

Even forget about that. Then you come back and report whether the play continued or not. Because there can be some fear of losing the play, or some fear that this play will continue; either way, we’re not to be bothered about it.

Q: [Inaudible sentences]

You could go to sleep and not wake up.

Q: It’s like that.

Nothing to save.

Q: So, you shut down existence? There’s no existence for you?

No, I’m saying that there’s complete for it to come or to not come. Nothing to predict. [Silence]

Supposing we go to sleep tonight, we go to sleep for a million years, and when we wake up tomorrow, we feel it’s just the next day. Who can say these things?

As Awareness, are you concerned about the play?

Q: [Inaudible]

Who is?

Q: ‘I’ doesn’t want to lose itself.

The false ‘I’, the fake ‘I’ which doesn’t exist, never existed, that one says ‘I don’t want to lose myself’. I say: Where are you?…. ‘I don’t know’. You see, it doesn’t exist. It’s just being represented through this voice, of the mind. The one who doesn’t exist is being represented through a voice. All evidence that we have of this one is only this voice. ‘I, I, I’. Who is it representing?

So, we’ve been using this lawyer example. So, you ask the lawyer ‘Who are you representing?’…. ‘Oh, my client couldn’t be in court today because he’s not well’. …’And will he come tomorrow?’…..’No, he never comes’…

The one who is being represented by this voice never comes. And yet, we go on believing in the existence of such a one.

That’s all there is to it. [Silence]

So, can you drop it now? Whatever this voice might be saying, can you drop it?

Q: I want to…

Drop this also. Drop it means what? I will not believe my next thought. [Silence]

What’s so difficult? Do you want to believe your next thought, or you don’t want to believe it?

Q: I need permanency.

‘I need’. So drop this first. ‘I need permanency’. Who needs? Which ‘I’?

Q: I see this habit, this stupid habit.

So, you see it. Then you drop it.

So you see there is no ‘I’ here that needs permancy? Yes or no?

Q: Yes, yes.

Then, forget about ‘I need permanency’. For what [their name]?

Okay, what next? What else you want?

Q: [Laughs]

See, it’s all rubbish, because we’re still representing the one that doesn’t exist. And the one that IS here is ever-permanent, ever-present: Awareness Itself.

[Silence]

Something still feels…, ‘I still don’t get it 100%’ or something.

Q: [Inaudible]

Which part? You don’t get that you are Awareness?

[Silence]

Or you don’t get that the person doesn’t exist?

[Silence]

Q: I’m sure that is it. It’s just ….

What else can it be besides these two? Either it’s something personal, or it’s about Awareness.

Q: This conditioning .., that something magical must happen…

The story. This is personal. The ‘I’ that wants something euphoric is who? The ‘I’ that wants something magical is who?

Q: He’s the person.

Where is he? Where is he?

Q: [Laughs] Non-existent.

Non-existent. You yourself say ‘non-existent’. Then forget it!

And if it’s sticky like this, then keep contemplating: Who is the ‘I’ that wants experience?

You want enlightenment? Or the enlightenment experience?

Q: This conditioning…

Just leave it. It’s nothing for you. As Awareness, conditioning is nothing. What is it for Awareness? Nothing.

If you keep believing ‘It’s something, and I have to fight it, I have to change it’ then it becomes something. With our belief, it gets energized.

Q: [Inaudible]

You are only That. You cannot not be That.

Q: It’s coming into the Heart; Being.

You want all of that? Or you want to be free?

Q: I just want to be free.

Forget it.

Q: So [inaudible]…, this is all gymnastics.

Forget it. ForGet It! Those are just terms we use sometimes. In satsang, we can use terms. Just for different expressions, we use different terms.

When you come into the truth of what you are, there’s nothing to be. There’s nothing to be. Forget it. Because it’s still personal. The person wants to become broad, the person wants to become ‘Being’, the person wants to become the Heart. Forget it. Whatever you want to become, forget it.

Whatever you want to become, forget about it. It’s not in the becoming. It’s the recognition of what is. And no one can escape this recognition.

I’m telling you what you are. Your mind is saying ‘But I want to become something’. And I’m saying ‘But you ARE That’. …., ‘But I want to become that!’

Q: [inaudible] is gone, but … verification…

[Silence, looking at each other]

Q: The emotions are a distraction, actually.

If you believe the story about them. Otherwise, they are nothing. Just another appearance.

[Silence, looking at each other]

[Ananta nods]  Good.

Don’t pick up any story now. Just don’t pick it up.

And if you pick it up, you drop it.

Q: [Is in tears regarding mistreatment of dogs and working in dog rescue.]

There can be this beautiful, Universal Love which can express Itself in this beautiful way, in terms of our caring; for dogs, and all other beautiful creatures can be taken care of. But it’s also accompanied now with a sense of trust in What Is.

So it can seem like it’s expressing itself very specifically, but actually it’s the Universal Love which is expressing Itself.

And also, it’s this trust that ‘Whatever be Thy will…’

Q: Yes…, [Inaudible]…just ‘Thy will be done’…

And also, it can be, if something is seen and the energy is there, the life-force is there to make some change about it, to take some steps, by all means it must be followed.

The accepting is not a passive state. Love and surrender and accepting God’s will is not a passive state.

So, if you find that there’s energy for some work to be done, the movement happens through this body, even that is accepted. So it can be that you’re completely accepting, completely surrendered, and yet very active with any of this movement. It’s completely fine. That is not identification or attachment, because you’re allowing it to flow, just naturally.

But if you say ‘I am on a mission! I will do this. And I…’   I’m not saying you, but there are many like this who are in [Inaudible] which have this ‘I, I, I’ which is a special arrogance of being something special because ‘I’m helping the world’. Only then it’s trouble.

Q: Sometimes, just tears will come, because they’re my ‘kids’. Also that comes simultaneously with trust. Even if I’m Seeing…, there can be Seeing, but I might be seeing it personally also or… [Inaudible]

What it means to say ‘I’m seeing it personally’ is only that ‘There could be moments when I’m believing my thoughts’. And although we use this terminology in satsang sometimes, [Inaudible], it’s just defining that. Have I picked up some belief? Now, they’re gone. Nothing to worry about. Everyone does. Even the sages pick up some beliefs here and there.

Q: Thank you.

Some of you might be new to satsang so I will share a little bit about what I mean by ‘your true non-phenomenal nature’.

What do I mean? And at any point in this that I am sharing.., don’t let your mind convince you that it’s something difficult or abstract or you don’t see it. Actually if you feel that, then you come up and say ‘I don’t see. Can you walk through with me?’ Like this.

So when I ask you this question: ‘Are you aware now?’…, very naturally for all you it is seen ‘Yes, I am aware’.

Don’t add anything to it. Don’t say ‘I am aware of content, I am aware mentally’ or ‘it’s just an intellectual concept’. No. It’s a simple question: ‘Are you aware now? Are you witnessing now?’

[Silence]

And it is seen that ‘Yes, I am’.

What is this aware? When did we learn about this awareness?

Hasn’t it been primal to us, primary even before any concept was learned?

Am I aware?

[Silence]

And this I that is aware, is it different from awareness itself?

Therefore the question ‘Am I aware?’ leads us to the seeing that I am awareness.

And yet if you give this to your mind, the mind will say ‘nothing was seen’. And yet you are AWARE that nothing was seen.

Am I aware?

[Silence]

Is this ‘aware’…, is it a phenomenal experience for you?

[Silence]

And if it’s not tasted phenomenally, then how do you know that you are aware?

There must be something here which is prior to phenomena or non-phenomena; completely empty of all concepts, all qualities, all attributes. It just IS.

[Silence]

Then when I ask you: ‘What is the distance between you and this awareness?’ what must you try and do?

Try and separate yourself from this awareness, keep it aside.

[Silence]

Who can do it?

[Silence]

Who can keep awareness aside even for an instant?

Don’t be aware.

Even if you are aware of nothing, you are still aware that there is no-thing.

You find that ‘I cannot separate because It IS Me, it is another name for Me, for this I.

So, if ‘I’ is a label which is pointing, then the truest place for this ‘I’ to point is Awareness.

And this awareness is not going anywhere.

It is not born, it doesn’t die.

There is nothing God can even do about it.

It is the only constant.

And whether you like it or not, You are That.

As much as you would like to be a person,

You are Awareness.

So, when we first come to This [that we truly are], the attention moves to the depth of what we are, the unlimitedness of what we are, the eternity of what we are. Then a lot of this [strong feelings] can come. So when it is said: ‘Can you bear your own emptiness?’ it is that when we are coming to terms with the Awareness that we are, which is unlimited, beyond time and space, the mind will immediately come saying ‘Oh, this is too scary’ or ‘This is too empty. I don’t know what to do now. I’m confused’. All of this is resistance will come.

And this very emptiness is a pointing which says ‘It’s okay. Let it be wobbly for some time. I’m with you. Let the fear come. Nothing will happen, you’re in a secure place’. And actually then the perspective starts to shift. And then we go from something that feels like ‘Oh, it will drown in that’ to that It IS That, I Am That. The fear of drowning then dissolves, and you realize ‘There’s nothing for me to drown in. This entire manifest universe is drowning inside Me’.

And then, (like she’s saying), once you see that all of this is just a play happening inside Me, then how can you not love it? But even if we don’t have to go that far and say ‘How can you not love it?’… how can you have a grievance against it? How can you oppose it? And then all is seen as just what it is, and I Am That un-label-able One. Un-label-able. And we see that all labels, all this play of name and form is happening inside of Me.

And then, as we come to this, then there will be many times where there’s too much joy, too much love. Sometimes I’ve said that it seems so tangible, I wish I could just cut it into pieces and give you as Prasad. But there’s no dependence on even this, the joy, the love; it’s not a dependent relationship. They come for their joy. Inside Me, they play. But I am not attached.

Because otherwise what can happen is very quickly the mind can come and say ‘Now, because this peace and joy and love are here, therefore now I must be free’. It may also go. It’s not a constant state. They go, they come; they go, they come. They play like children, they get tired and go to sleep, then wake up and play. But if we were to attach to that, then again it can be this sense of finding it and losing it, finding it and losing it.

So if we stay with our emptiness… What does it mean: Emptiness? It’s not a negative thing. Because the words…, we have to use these words. But emptiness is not a negative emptiness. This no-thing-ness is not the negative nothingness. It is we are coming to our realization of the non-phenomenality that we are; the understanding that ‘I am not phenomenal, predominately. Although the phenomenal arises within me, I am not phenomenal’.

So, as that which is non-phenomenal, I can have no story, I can have no attachments. In this realization, this settling into what we are can be accompanied by such strong experiences that you don’t know whether to laugh or cry, or are laughing and crying at the same time, or it could be very peaceful: ‘This is what it always was’. And sometimes it can feel like the biggest joke that has ever been played. The idea ‘I was lost and confused myself to be a phenomenal entity’ then sounds completely silly. How could I ever…? (you know, many report this after an awakening experience)…, how did I ever get confused to be just in this? And you can go anywhere from there. It could be that it settles like this and it stays. ‘I can never believe myself to be a person again’. Or very quickly, in 3 days you could come back and say ‘I’m suffering so much in my relationships’.

But my feeling, and my blessing actually, is that you cannot go all the way back to the delusion of believing yourself to be a person. And this sense of personhood dissolving is what is happening in satsang over and over, more and more as we go along. And I see that it’s happening for all of us.

Because if there is not this common path then satsang will become very tiring after two or three times. ‘This one is not for me. It’s too difficult. I’m not getting it.’ …, whatever the resistance might be. If it is still something personal that we want, then we’ll not resonate with satsang for long. Then we’ll see that when you start to get glimpses of what you truly are, somewhere in there is an urge that ‘I don’t want to fool myself anymore. I am done with this game’. Then satsang will resonate more and more.

And it is happening for many of you, when you come and say, after a long time of being in satsang you will come and say ‘Today I feel like for the first time I’m hearing you’. And yet the words have always been similar. Yet it can feel like ‘Today is the first time I’m here’. Why? Because something just settles into the Seeing. And the person is getting dropped.

So, you see, initially, even in satsang, we take the personal perspective, and say ‘Yes, this is making sense to me, this is not making sense to me, I agree with this’. We have this personal sense that ‘I am not seeing this’. And then as we come more and more and more into our true nature, then it’s just so obvious what is being spoken.

Then the question can come, and you can maybe even question me and say ‘Why do you keep saying this every day? It’s so simple!’ [Laughs] And I would typically say ‘NOW you are saying simple’. [Laughs] Isn’t it?

So in this realization of what is just here, it is seen that ‘It’s always been here! And I’ve always known this! I don’t know why I was pretending’. It will always come like this. ‘I don’t know why I was pretending. Must be some divine maya, some divine hypnosis’. So, the personal pretense then is laughed at.

~ ~ ~

When we learn to live our lives without dependence on these thoughts, such immeasurable beauty is there, without even the need for sensations. Just in the space of Beingness, in the Now.

So, let’s come back to this simple question: Can we bear our own emptiness?

All the energy, all the grace in satsang is there to support; [about] this irrational fear that we have of our own Self, of our own true magnificence, of our own true enormity.

[Silence]

So, very simply speaking, we are speaking about that which is just here, always present; always just here. Right now it is what You Are. For This, to become This, is impossible. To become the Self is impossible. To not be the Self is also impossible. You are just That, already. The most natural state.

That’s all we are saying if you take out all the jargon, all the terminology which can become a new set of concepts and a new conceptual framework. Just very simply, what is here right now is what We Are. And we don’t need any idea about it, we don’t need any concept to reinforce it, we don’t need any thoughts to understand it. Prior to all of these, We Are.

And when I’m saying this, I’m talking about Your experience. It’s not a special experience. It is the most natural experience for a child, and for a grown up. Nothing to get. No experience. Originally, this is our natural state, and it continues to be.

Q: [Inaudible] (the awakening experience)

The awakening experience is only a sudden burst of what I am saying. So, if there is a lot of pretense which is carried, and that suddenly drops, and you see ‘There’s no separation actually’, then in the body a lot of things can come up, a lot of bliss can come, a lot of grief can also come; it’s like a dam which can explode. But that is not the point, really. It is just a by-product.

So the mistake could be, for some, that if you feel that the awakening experience is the goal; no. It is just a by-product. It’s like when the drop falls into the ocean, it could be a lot of ripples or it could be very gently falling. That doesn’t matter. The point is this. And it’s not even falling actually; it’s just the realization that ‘I’ve always been the ocean’.

Q: [Inaudible] (Awakening experience which went away).

See, so this is what I’ve been saying; that if we rely on the content of what is appearing, it could be the most beautiful content, but it will not last, even an awakening experience. So, even that which was so beautiful, and thoughts just seem to be these tiny ripples, is just an appearance. The Witnessing of that is the same as the Witnessing of this. What witnessed that is the same Witnessing. You see?

Because you say ‘I saw that and now I’m only seeing this. I want to only see that’. This is the voice of the mind which wants only a particular experience to confirm that I’m free.

Q: [Inaudible] (Masters)

No, no. ‘What is’ for a Master is always ‘what is’ for you. It’s just that we’ve given up pretending. What do I mean by that? Right now, you are only the ocean. You are only the Awareness right now.

Q: [Inaudible]

Effortlessly, what are you? Forget the space, it’s not important. Just effortlessly right now, what are you?

You say ‘It still seems like effort to become the Self” so let’s find out: Without effort, who are you?

Q: [Inaudible]

Before you can make the effort to be free, You are free. It’s only about now. It’s not an experience. How do You get mixed up with the content?

Q: [Inaudible]

Because emotions by themselves also are just experience. When there’s no interpretation about them, it’s okay.

Q: [Inaudible]

There is absolutely no need for the idea of freedom.

Q: It’s a good idea.

Let’s say it was. [Laughs] It’s not bad as far as ideas go. But now we’ve gone beyond ideas.

How are you bound? Don’t talk about any experience, because that is not bondage. That you don’t have an experience right now is not bondage. Show me how you are bound? Because we must only offer freedom to those who are bound, isn’t it? So show me the jail cell, then I’ll tell you how to break it open.

Q: Mostly, you know, it’s only the story.

Mostly, you know, only the story, [Laughs] about how it should be a certain way. That’s a resistance to ‘what is’. So, once it is seen, can it be dropped? Or not? ‘It’s only a story’ means we can drop the story or not. Please do. No more time is needed to drop.

Q: [Inaudible]

That is a story…, whatever is after the ‘but’ is only a story. ‘But, but, but the story will come back’.

Q: [Inaudible]

Then what happens? How do you get bound?

Q: [Inaudible]

So, these are the pretend ways to get bound.

The Awareness that is here, is it ever bound by any identity? What You Are, very naturally here, how would be bind that, even if there is a story that is being believed?

It is impossible to bind You. Therefore freedom must only mean the dropping of the story; including the story that ‘I’ve found freedom’ or ‘I’m not finding freedom’.

To live in resistance to the world, or to live in resistance to anything in the world, is a terrible way to live actually. What do I mean by giving resistance to the world? It could mean a judgmental attitude, or something like this coming. Or it could be life full of grievances. When we examine things like grievances, we see that there is so much ‘specialness’ there. There is so much arrogance there. ‘I’m right, he’s wrong. I’m a good person. Why is the world so bad?’ The victim mindset also, full of arrogance. The victim is full of arrogance. So much specialness in this victimhood.

The most beautiful way to experience this game, this realm, is to leave it completely free, including what comes from our own (seemingly our own) bodies. Because actually this is our true position anyway. We’re only pretending to take on the doership position, and pretending to make another the doer also. So can we allow the world to be exactly as it is?

And with this, there must be the sense that the One who is running this world must have a more Supreme Intelligence than our personal mind. Because to say that ‘This should not be’ is to question the will of God.

Very quickly the mind takes on this approach that I’m saying ‘You be passive’. I’m not saying that. I’m saying that whatever is appearing spontaneously, let that also appear. Just be the witness of that.So, if you sense that something is wrong, if you see somebody’s being mugged on the street, I’m not saying acceptance means ‘Yes, yes, yes’. Not like that, no. It is that somebody is being mugged on the street. Accept both of our reactions which are happening on their own. The one reaction could be that we run and we go help the situation. Second reaction could be that we feel scared of this situation and we run the other way. Both are completely possible. To have either pride or guilt about what just appeared in that moment, that would be the folly.

So there is no black and white in terms of how this game should be played. I also earlier used the example of in India, when you come to a street light, usually you will find some people who will come beg for money. So sometimes there will be so much compassion, and I will feel actually to give them some bananas or a biscuit, (not give them money because they might spend it on alcohol or something). So like this, sometimes this compassion can come. Sometimes just this feeling ‘No, stay away. Something doesn’t feel right’. So I’ve seen people guilty about ‘Why didn’t I give something to them?’

What happened just happened. It was just witnessed. Because there is no individual doer of any of those actions. So, either we can say there is no doer; like this. Or we can say that all happens through God’s will. Both are the same.

So this, what happens, is great freedom. Great freedom. Then everything is full of wonder and joy. ‘Oh, this is how it’s unfolding’. Then you enjoy the movie in this way.

So one authority figure of the ego is the lawyer, Rajan. And the other authority is the judge, Rajan; sitting and judging everything. ‘This is right, this is not’. Everything; judging, judging, judging.

Can we just be open? So this giving freedom to the world is closely interlinked with the openness which I speak about. We cannot be open and attached to a certain outcome in this way. And right now, we must be able to check: What grievances am I still holding? Isn’t there doership at the core of that? Because either we are believing ourself to be the doer, or another to be the doer. What was it? Just another appearance.

And we can hold grievances against God. ‘Why did you create a world like this?’ That is the ultimate grievance, isn’t it? Because there is some knowledge there, that everything is done by God. At least that much is there. But then that becomes like a victim specialness: ‘The world is there and the world is happening to me’. If God created the world, then it must be God who is experiencing all of it. So, where is the victim? Because this openness then becomes so natural.

If we go with the judge or the one who finds grievances, then everywhere we look we find something to build a grievance about. See?

It was very revealing to me when I heard this phrase: ‘Love holds no grievances’ the first time in the Course in Miracles so many years ago.

And then I said, ‘No grievances. Okay, let me check’. And every single one that I knew, I had a grievance against. Some small, some big; but everyone I had some grievance against. [Inaudible] It is a very business transaction relationship. ‘I like this about them, I don’t like this about them, I wish they would change this way, that way’. See, where is the love in that? Love must be acceptance of what is.

So with this, I found it was very useful. I found this pointing very useful, because it was quite revealing to me. Because before that, the idea still here was ‘I’m such a nice guy, I don’t hold a grudge or anything’. And I started looking: ‘This one? Yeah. I have this grievance, and this grievance’. So many grievances. It was very beautiful to see. But it’s all centered around individual specialness, individual doership; this idea that ‘I know what is right and what is wrong. I know how the world should behave’.

And when we let go of this, we give the world the freedom that we want for ourselves. Give the world the freedom that we want for ourselves. Then what am I … [inaudible] in this simple openness. Not resisting, not judging.

So we could be sitting here, something like this, and somebody says ‘I’m really …’ [inaudible], which is like completely contrary to satsang. But that is also accepted that this is being said. The reaction from here, which could be strong or light or whatever, has also been accepted. But there’s no grudge ‘How could they be like this? How could this one be doing this?’

And in today’s interconnected world anyway, because of social media and things like this, every day we’re exposed to even more that people are doing. Because they post it on Facebook, post it somewhere. So if we sit with that attitude of judging everything then we’ll become completely lost in it. So just to allow it, just to allow …, this is how it happened, this is how this is unfolding, this is how [inaudible] …

The beauty, one of the most beautiful aspects of this world is that it rarely ever goes to plan; rarely ever goes to plan. Because it would be so boring if it always just went [according] to plan. ‘I thought this should happen, this is how it should be’. Where is the fun in that? See, it rarely happens according to plan. That is the fun, too.

But if you attach duality of how it should be, then we are in this constant state of resistance, which is very egoic. So allow. Allow everything to be exactly where it is, including the reactions that come from here. It is not a state of passivity. It is not an aggressive state. It is just neutrality.

And I know that this pointing of openness also is experienced at different levels, because that’s how it happened here. Because when I first heard like this ‘Be open, accepting’ it felt like a personal strategy, a good way to lead a life or something. Then one day, it just appeared to me, this openness. This resistance had just fallen off. This judge had just taken a break, or something like this. Which was open. This is open. Just flowing, everything is just flowing. However we are experiencing it, it’s beautiful, this openness.

All our grievances can be allowed, too. Because very often what happens, because we hear satsang, we hear about non-doership, we say ‘Yes, yes, I am not the doer’. But also remember that no one is the doer. Then there can be no individual one that exists. If I don’t exist personally then no other one exists; therefore nobody is personally the doer.

All is being done in this play of maya by God. When this is seen, when this is realized, then can we hold a grievance? Can we hold a grievance? We can’t, you see? Because we have seen that God is all there is. Then who is holding a grievance against whom?

And just now there may be something coming. ‘Yes, everything I can drop, but that one! That guy, he did this to me’ or ‘she did this to me! That one!’ Then that one you must bring into inquiry. If something is resisting, then that one [who is resisting], you must bring to inquiry and find out: ‘Who did what to whom’. Isn’t there duality in that? Isn’t there some sense of individual personhood?

Q: [Inaudible] (specialness)…

Specialness means that I have the sense that there is something which is only individually present here. Why that is a fallacy is because there is no individual present here. Therefore nothing can be individually present.

All we’re doing is just checking into what is here now. That’s all we’re doing, just checking into what is here now. Because why would we be interested in something which is not here? If something is not here, then by definition it would mean that it is coming and going. It’s only an appearance. So if there is a task to do, it is only to check: What is present here? Simple.

So in this simple simplicity, the truth can be found. If there is waiting, and there is a sense that ‘I will find out the now if I go to the next retreat’ [Laughs], how can that be? There can be the sense of allowing ourself to just be here now. And what is experienced by us, undeniably experienced, is the Presence of God, of Consciousness (whatever terminology we want to use). It cannot be denied. If we check what is here now, it cannot be denied that God is found, undeniably.

So what is it that we want beyond God? If we’re saying that ‘This is not satisfactory for me’ then either there must be a sense that ‘This cannot be God’ or ‘I want something more than God’. When we check into what is here now, we find that there’s a sense of existence, the sense of Presence, that I exist. And this is the only Presence that you’re truly experiencing; Your own Presence.

Of course, it can feel like, when you come into the energy field of satsang in the human embodiment of Masters, it can seem like something gets amplified. But what is really happening is that all the other mental, emotional energies are settling and you come face to face with your own Presence more clearly.

So then you can say ‘Oh, I feel the Master’s Presence very strong’. But this Master is your inner Satguru. It’s not that you’re experiencing the physical body called Ananta, that Presence. It’s just that in the energy field of one who has realized the truth, you will find that your own Presence gets amplified.

When we say Satguru or Atma or Consciousness or Being or ‘I Am’ or God, it’s all being used inter-changeably here. I have no trouble with the definition. If you want to call it something else, that’s also fine. But what’s unmistakable is that I exist. In fact, it is so natural that we miss it. It is so natural that we miss it.

So instead of asking ‘How do I find God?’ you tell me how you are not God right now? Which God is missing from the right now?

So, we can check like this: In the right now, can I deny the Presence of my own Being? Can I say I am not here?

The mind will say ‘Yes, yes, I am here, but I’m looking for God’. This ‘I Am’ Itself is the only God you will find.

This sense of the Presence of Being is the only God there is. This is Consciousness. This is the only Consciousness I know, and you will know.

All other glorious stories which the mind is painting are just distractions. Who can say ‘I am not’ right now; ‘I don’t exist’?

I sense something is saying ‘I exist, but it doesn’t fully make sense yet’. This can be a trick of the mind. That’s why I ask: ‘Can you stop being?’ And the simplicity of the question sometimes camouflages what is revealed in this question.

So if you were to ask ‘Can I stop being now? How can I stop being?’…, this Being is what? Whose Being is it, whose Presence is it? It is a personal Presence? Does it have personal preferences? If inherently it had some personal preferences, then you would not need thought to have desires and aversions. You would not need thought to have likes and dislikes. But can you have a like and dislike without first believing a thought? Or interpreting an emotion?

Q: The body has likes and dislikes, likes some foods and not others.

Yes, but good and bad taste is also based on interpretation. Because when it is tasted, it is just what it is. You see, it is the mind that comes and says ‘Never again, I will never eat karela again’ because it is an interpretation of the mind. What is, just is.

Q: [Inaudible]

It can be that biologically there are two different categories of food, but what I’m talking about are these inferred concepts which are personality oriented; that ‘I’m like this, I like this, I don’t like this, I like being around happy people, I don’t like being around people who are sad’. All these inferences can come.

Q: The body has its own emotions and its own… [Inaudible].

Yes, so the natural functioning is happening the way the natural functioning is happening, but you cannot say that this aversion or this desire exists here, (besides these very spontaneous arisings and callings), you cannot have this personal sense of liking or disliking something without buying a thought about it. So you can say ‘Ananta doesn’t agree with me, so I won’t come to [inaudible]’. For example, this thought can come. Unless you buy that that, then that aversion is not created. Those are the kind of things I’m talking about; the personality based ones.

So, see ‘What exists here? What is present here?’ without employing any labels, without employing any interpretation. And you might come to the conclusion that the ‘I’ that I believed myself to be, this one I cannot find. I can only find the Presence of this Consciousness, this ‘I Am-ness’.

So the question is: Is there any tangibility to this person that I believe myself to be? Is there any evidence of this person? …, (which is not circumstantial, which is direct?)

So, if we can’t find the person, is there something to do to get rid of the person?

Although in satsang, I many times might say [‘person’]. But in the truest looking, do we find the ego? And if we don’t find the ego, then what must we ‘kill’?  ‘Kill the ego’. What must we kill? Just the idea that there could be an ego here.

To kill an idea is to just not give it belief. That’s the only way to kill an idea.

There is one more way, but it’s more difficult; which is not to give it our attention. And most of the world sadhana is based on not giving attention to thoughts.

But I find it much simpler just to withdraw belief. And very naturally, our existence is here. Very spontaneously, very naturally, everything can come and go.

So let’s read her question. She says, “Father, when you say ‘I-as-Awareness’…, ‘I Am’ has the non-phenomenal Beingness, empty save [except] itself…, But I am Awareness; is there an ‘I’ here at all?…, as in our only identity, as One before all?”

Let me read this again. “Father, when you say ‘I-as-Awareness’…, ‘I Am’ has a non-phenomenal Beingness’…”

As you know, usually what I say is ‘I-as-the Awareness’ is the non-phenomenal. ‘I Am’ is the root phenomenon of Beingness. And why do we say the root phenomenon? Because although no identity is here yet, but all the forces of this phenomenal manifestation, including the forces of belief, relating to identity, are present now. Okay? So that’s why we call this ‘I Am-ness’ or ‘Om’ the primordial vibration or the root phenomenon.

Then you say: “empty save [except] itself’…”

Yes, I-as-Awareness is empty, save itself. Perfect, perfect.

[She said]: “But I-Am –Awareness; is there an ‘I’ here at all?…, as in our only identity, as One before all?”

This Awareness is undeniably ‘I’. But not in the way that we’ve used ‘I’ in the past. Why is it undeniably ‘I’? Because there is the existence of this ‘I’, the existence of this Awareness, which is not separate from What I Am.

Prior to…, (I know you have the ears to hear this, so we’ll say like this), prior even to the birth of Being, …, even prior to the sense ‘I Am’… Awareness is what I Am. You see? Prior even to the sense of ‘I Am’ Awareness is what I am.

Because sleep is my experience. So we can say this is what I am, impersonally. But it is ‘I’ that is ‘This’. So as Bhagavan said, this ‘I’ when we say ‘I’ it is Awareness itself. And when it becomes the ‘I-I’ that means the dynamic aspect of it; or the ‘I-I’ and the ‘I Am’ are the same.

So it is not ‘I’ in the sense of nothing to do with identity. No attribute, no quality at all. And yet undeniably ‘I’.

I hope I’m making some sense. [Laughs]

[She had also asked]: “Or …, just Awareness aware?”

Yes, just awareness aware. But this Awareness is What I Am. We might as well say ‘I’ instead of ‘Awareness’.

[She said]: “No location obviously, but sense of I Am Aware.”

Yes. With the ‘I’ here, we can say this. The ‘I’ that I Am is Awareness. So as Bhagavan said, ‘Awareness is another name for You’. This ‘You’, what does he mean? This ‘I’.

[Laughs] I’m just laughing because if I’d heard words like this 15 years ago, I would have said ‘what is he talking about?!’ [Laughs]

[Reads her words silently]: “Thank you. Great.”

Thank you, my dear, thank you. I’m glad it is making some sense.

The true ‘I’ is synonymous with Awareness. So when we say ‘Awareness’ we are talking about the true ‘I’.

Over the years I have heard many resistances. Also I have had many resistances before I met Guruji, to the simple truth, the simple pointing. One of the biggest resistances has been ‘It can’t be just this, it must be something else’. You hear this very often. When we say ‘this simple awareness is what you are’ then something inside wants to fight that because this is too just simple, easy. There is no story we can paint around that.

The mind says ‘There must be something because all throughout our spiritual journey we have heard about the glory of this self-realisation. The glorious divinity of the liberation of one. And here, to find ‘But I have always been this. It’s always been at the root of what is here, prior to all appearances. I have only been this’. And then when we discover this is what.., when we discover that… Especially when I speak I say you don’t even have to try to ‘Be That’ because you cannot leave that. At least this pointing was there, where someone says ‘Be That’ or ‘Abide in the Self’. Even Bhagavan said ‘Abide in Self’. But this is a simpler time maybe [Laughs]. It’s been made even simpler. A simpler time maybe. We say ‘Okay, leave That and show me…’ So that’s why I said that abidance at best must have meant ‘Don’t pretend to be something you are not’. What else is there to abide in? Because the truth is the truth. It’s not leaving; by definition the truth is not leaving, it is not coming and going. So what else is there to abide in, except that we keep our power of belief in our pocket, you don’t pretend to be this or that.

And what can we pretend to be? We can only pretend to be something that is appearing, only pretend to be something that is appearing. And if something is appearing, it is disappearing. This is root of all suffering because we pretend to be something that is appearing, then when it is disappearing we want to make this, which that appears and disappears, this which comes and goes, we wanted it to be permanent. But this can never be. But in wanting to make the appearance permanent, we pretend as if we have forgotten what we truly are, which is the permanence itself.

So when it is seen that ‘I cannot be that which comes and goes, I have always been here through all my delusions’ then something says ‘But what’s so great about this?’ Initially the mind can say like that: ‘So what’s so great about this? There must be a level forward, a level next’. And it can be like that. ‘So, maybe Ananta has not found it, because he is a regular guy, he wears regular clothes, he does not have swami or something like this in front of his name. So maybe there is something. He’s a well-meaning guy. Maybe he has not discovered it’.

And in contemplating this, we say that what could be another experience which has been missed. But for that experience to happen, doesn’t there first need to be the awareness of it? To discover the level next, wouldn’t first awareness need to be there of that level? So this is at the root, and we have seen that no matter what the state is, this awareness remains untouched.

So even intellectually if we were to look into this and ask ‘So what should be the nature of the true self?’ We say:

It must be Invincible.

It must be Immortal.

It must not be coming and going.

It must not be attacked or hurt.

It cannot suffer.

This must be the nature of the true self.

Even intellectually, if we were to contemplate…, and this awareness fits in perfectly with all of this definition. It is not coming and going through any state, through anything time and space is bringing. There is no way that this pure witnessing can be attacked by anything phenomenal. It cannot be made full by anything phenomenal. There’s always infiniteness within it. It is the immortal one; through all the appearance it remains.

So when we hear like this we say ‘Ah, okay. I like those attributes, immortal, invincible, so maybe this is the truth, the Supreme’. Like that. We have to use these words sometimes, just so that you can accept the truth of who you are. But actually no labels suffices, because we can say supremely magnificient and also say supremely nothing.

There is nothing phenomenally, and nothing definitely in language that can be used to describe the truth of what we are.

A beautiful…, something I was reading on the weekend by Kahlil Gibran, and he says that ‘One morning I woke up and I forgot to put on any of my seven masks’. Very beautiful, you know? He says ‘I have seven masks that I put on, and one morning I woke up and I forgot to put on any of my seven masks’. (I am paraphrasing anyways). ‘And this was the first time I experienced the truth’.

So the identity, the personhood; this is what he would mean by masks. So if, when the waking happens, the presence of I Am is there but we don’t then put on any masks after that, what is missing in this? Nothing is missing in this. So this mask of identity, this mask of ideas about who we are. And as Consciousness it is completely in our power to not put them on. Just like it is in our power to put them on, to give them our belief or not. Because sometimes, many of us I see falling into this Adviata trap; ‘You say there is no identity, therefore who should not believe?’ But this ‘Don’t believe your thoughts, don’t believe your next thought’ are not the pointer for the identity.

Why would I waste my time by telling the identity to do something when it doesn’t exist?

This pointing is just a monologue that Consciousness is having with Itself. So here it is recognizing that there is this power of belief, the power to pretend to be a person. Therefore it is speaking to itself saying ‘It is only leading to identity, to a person’. And then immediately we have got to the ‘right now’.

There is nothing ever wrong with the right now. It is neither right nor wrong, it is just what it is.

Maybe it was Shakespeare who said something like this: ‘Nothing is ever right or wrong except when we think about it’.

So all these tools have been around forever, just now ‘Who am I? Without my stories, without my ideas, who am I?’ If the truth is true then it must be present here, right now. Stop all waiting, stop all waiting for mental confirmation and just report from the right now. It cannot escape you. Don’t believe any ideas that I am still not there yet or something like this.

The truth cannot escape you because You are It. Don’t try to become the truth.

[Silence]

Before you can decide what to do to get freedom, you are free. Before you can take one step toward freedom, you are free.

But the identity can never be free. And if you’re going to be frustrated about the fact that the identity is not free, then it’s going to be a long, long frustration. The infinite frustration will be this one. This is maya, you see. This is delusion that we even have to say this. That we even have to say that ‘The identity cannot be free’ gives us a clue as to why this is such a big delusion. Why? Because identity does not exist. Identity is just a set of ideas, it does not exist. Therefore so simply it is seen that it cannot be free. It does not exist. And yet, this is the power of our belief. Because we have believed and believed in the existence of this non-existent one, that’s why we want to make it free. Such is the power of this play.

And it’s completely possible in 5 years, we could be at another level in the play. I don’t know if you track the technology news but Facebook has this device called ‘Occulus Rift’ (which we have spoken about in the past as well). Now it’s available for sale; the first models of ‘Occulus Rift’. You put on this headset and you’re transported into a different world. I haven’t experienced it yet, this is what I’ve heard. You’re transported into this different reality and it seems very real. You see? So it could be [Laughs] that five years later there’s an Ananta inside the ‘Occulus Rift’ sharing satsang over there trying to convince you that this world that you’re in, the ‘Occulus Rift’, is just a virtual world. That’s all that’s going on.

And what would I say? Just discover who you are. What were you prior to this appearance, before all of this starts coming? The trouble is that you are attaching to something that is appearing here. Just go beyond that.

Inside this virtual reality system also this would be exactly the same; because actually it is exactly the same. So we don’t know at what level of this play, what iteration of this play we are in right now.

Okay, so let’s take this example a little bit further. We put on this headset. What part of you do you carry into this game? Really contemplate. What part of the originality of you do you carry into this game? Has the Being changed? The Being is the same. The identity could be different. The body is obviously different because you’re in this virtual reality and you have this computer body. But the Being is the same; is constant. Isn’t it? And the Awareness? The content is changing but the Awareness remains the same. So this remains unchanging; Consciousness and Awareness; Awareness Itself.

And even in this realm, we have seen that this content here is coming and going. We cannot attach to it; emotions, external objects, people, relationships, money. That is why in this game I feel the questions: ‘Can you stop being now?’ and ‘Am I aware now?’ are very right. Because these two questions take you beyond the world of appearances.

So do we want help for this character that is coming and going? Or it is something more primal than that. Is this urge for freedom more than the quest which is personal? This is what I mean when I ask, (because I know this question can cause some confusion); when I ask: ‘Are you done playing now?’ this is what I mean.

Is this urge for freedom more than just a personal desire? Because if it is just a personal desire, then it will not be fulfilled.

How to check this? That’s an interesting question. [Laughs] That’s a very interesting contemplation. But in a sense we’ve checked that in every satsang. Because nothing personal is offered here, in what we continue to be. And every day, more or less, I repeat that I have nothing here to offer for the identity. There’s nothing I can do for you personally.

So let me read out your question. Niranjan asks, “Namaste, Anantaji.

You ask: Can you stop being now? But I do not know what it is to be in Being.”

It’s simpler than that. It’s simpler than that. It’s just Right Now You Are.

Can you not be? Can you say ‘I am not’? You Are.

‘You are what?’ is a different question, so we are not concerned with that for now.

And then you say, ‘Yes, I am’.

Yes, this ‘I am’, this sense ‘I am. I exist’, this Being is Consciousness.

Q: I understand what you say, that I am. I cannot deny that fact. I do exist. We can take that only, that I am, simply I am, nothing more than that. And then the question comes: Then, who is angry? Who is doing all of these things? I am doing my job, family, … [Inaudible]… And then I don’t have any reference. Who is doing this life?

A: So, already we say, ‘Yes, I Am’. So this ‘I Am’ this Being, ‘am-ness’ this is the only one, isn’t it? This is the only one here. Is there another ‘I Am-ness’…, and Niranjan? And, if there is Niranjan, then where is he?

Q: [Inaudible]…only a belief?

A: Yes, only a belief, only an idea. An idea cannot do anything. Only that which is here must be the do-er. Isn’t it? A mental construct, can it just do something? No. It’s just an idea. So if Niranjan is just an idea, a concept which caught your belief, then can it actually do something? It’s like imagining that there is someone sitting next to me and when we say to that one ‘Can you give me a glass of water?’ can it give it to you? No, it was just an idea. That which IS must be the do-er, isn’t it?

Q: [Inaudible]…

A: Exactly, exactly. This ‘I Am’ is the do-er. This ‘I Am-ness’. There is no Niranjan, so it cannot be the do-er. And this ‘I Am-ness’ is doing everything. When this ‘I Am’ is not, like in deep sleep state, there is nothing. This ‘I Am’ appears, and this whole phenomenal play appears.

You know? And it’s not only this phenomenal play. It’s other phenomenal plays, like dreams. Or that which we call dreams in that waking state; this might be a dream for this waking state. Because in the Presence of this ‘I Am-ness’ all this phenomenal play happens. Therefore we can say that there is only one do-er and one experiencer, which is Being Itself. And there is no Niranjan.

Q: And then the thoughts that come that I have to do my job and …[Inaudible]…

A: See, these thoughts have no meaning, because they are all referring to you as Niranjan. Consciousness is doing all of this on Its own, naturally. Consciousness is not dependent on anybody to run this Universe. Which thought is making gravity function? Which thought is making your heart beat? Which thought is making your breathing happen? It’s the mind which takes credit, saying ‘I am doing this. I am doing, I am sitting here’. But this is referring to ‘I’ which is Niranjan which doesn’t exist. Now the mind is saying ‘without me, nothing will happen’ but that is not your experience. Activity still happens.

Q: It looks like I don’t decide that I have to do something, [Inaudible]… then it will not happen.

A: It only appears like that. Mind experiences us. Right now, your hand is moving. Have you decided to move it?

Q:  No.

A: No, it is moving. Who is moving that?

Q: [Inaudible]…that I cannot say.

A: Yes, it must be the do-er of it, because that is the only ‘I Am-ness’ that is here. Consciousness, Being, I Am, God…, whatever word you want to use, it’s fine. But nobody else is here.

Q: That creates trouble, that concept. It creates trouble..,. [Inaudible]…that commentary.

A: Commentary will always create trouble. The mind is only a trouble-maker.

Q: [Inaudible]…

A: The root point of reference for the mind is that you are a person. Everything is dependent on this lie, you see? And this lie is so prevalent that [only] a rare one looks at it, and asks ‘Who are you talking about?’ And it says ‘You are a fantastic person’. Who? We cannot find. So, it’s still a lie, whether it’s good or bad.

Q: The one that troubles me the most…[Inaudible, life story]…but why did I believe these things? I don’t understand that. [Laughs]

A: It’s a habit which has been inculcated ever since we were little. When we were 2, 3-1/2 years old then these thoughts started coming. You see? And they were coming authoritatively, so our parents were also saying the same thing, ‘You must be a good boy. You must go to school. You are like this. You are like that.’ All of this is filled with identity. This realm is full of that.

A few of us come to this point where we see, ‘Yes, but this one that they are referring to, I can’t seem to find this one. Who are we talking about? Because the body is not a good boy, it’s just an instrument; with nothing good or bad about it inherently. So, who are they talking about?’

And once this kind of inquiry starts, then this whole delusion of personhood starts to dissolve.

And there are just 3 or 4 of these key areas. So one was about relationships; special relationships, close relationships. Second one is about this work, abilities, security; all of this money-related thing. Third is about the health of the body and how good the body is. And fourth is about this search for freedom itself. So around these 3-4 key identities, we keep moving.

But when you ask ‘Who is this bothering? Who is suffering from this? Who wants any of this?’ then very quickly you see that there is nobody like that which is here. The body doesn’t even want a good body; the body is just here. So, the one who wants or doesn’t want, who is that one? It is the non-existent, not-even-imagined-properly one. [Laughs] And freedom from delusion is freedom from this idea.

So, then you will see that ‘Oh, thoughts are appearing and disappearing, in the same way reactions are appearing and disappearing’. There is nobody to take credit or blame. Everything is moving on its own.

Q: So, I don’t have to be. I Am.

A: Exactly, exactly. You already Are.

Q: But, as what?

A: As ‘I Am-ness’ itself. As ‘I Am-ness’ itself. As Being, itself.

[So, the question is]: “Who is the one which is aware? Is it not Being?”

So what is the distance between the sleep state and the waking state?

Who had the experience of sleep?

Nobody has to tell you that you slept, and you had the direct experience of waking up. So [what is] the change between sleep and waking up? In sleep there was no sense of Being; in waking there is the sense of Being. So there must be an awareness which is aware that Being was not there, and now Being is there. This Awareness remains unmoved through all of the states which might come and go. Isn’t it?

So I don’t have to tell you that you went to sleep last night.

You know you went to sleep, isn’t it?

Q: Yes. It’s so simple.

A: Yes. It’s too simple. For the mind, it’s too simple. [Laughs]

Q: In any case, I’m always aware.

A: Yes.

Q: Who wakes me …[Inaudible]… I am aware of that sense of Being.

A: Most will report that there was nothing in sleep.

Q: [inaudible]..so that’s retrospectively?

A: It must be. It has to be reported retrospectively, but you can’t sleep retrospectively. The reporting is retrospective because the Presence of Being is required for this phenomenal reporting. But the sleep is not retrospective. That’s what first I asked you if somebody else has to tell you that you went to sleep or not? Or you know directly?

Q: That’s a direct experience.

A: Of whose direct experience is it? Of this Awareness alone? Who knows your sleep, and waking? It’s Knowingness alone, Awareness alone.

Q: Maybe I am looking for a location in Awareness, or maybe I am trying to find out…, some quality that ‘this is Awareness’.

A: Let me tell you something about this, which is that it will not happen exactly because time and space are toys which belong to Being. They are born after the world of Being; time and space. So then, if time and space are not there, how can you find a quality or a location for Awareness?

Q: [Inaudible]… If there is no Being, there is no question of time or location.

A: Exactly.

Q: But, is it my intellectual understanding?

A: No, it’s a direct experience.

Q: [Inaudible].. I am using mind, let’s say for example it’s a concept…

A: Which part is a concept?

Q:  [Inaudible]..

A: What is your direct experience?

Q: [Laughs] [Inaudible]

A: Don’t let the mind come in. It is your direct experience.

Q: [Inaudible] [Laughing]

A: The realization of what we are is a ‘facepalm’ moment.

Q: This is so simple, guys. This is so simple! [Laughing] And the mind…. [Inaudible]

A: It cannot take anything.

Q: [Inaudible].. when we believe a thought….

A: Yes, it becomes a pretense. But in reality, nothing changed; but we are pretending to be a person checking on whether it was intellectual or real. That pretense is completely your power. Whether you want to play or not is your power.

Q: [Inaudible]

A: [Laughs]

Q: That means that I have to drop those concepts that I am my name, I am my body. But I don’t … [Inaudible]. I need to have a good laugh.

A: [Laughs]

Q: I’m going to go home and [Inaudible] … laugh.

A: Oh, this is great.

Q: [Inaudible]

A: Yes. [Laughs] ‘I’m having an awakening experience in the office. Where do I go?’

Q: What more can I say? Thank you. What more can I say?

A: You’re welcome, my dear. Always welcome.