BOOKS BY ANANTA Welcome to Satsang with Ananta

Q: “Thoughts of body and security.”

Yes. It’s very good to notice this. And then you can ask ‘Whose body is this? If I have seen now that there is no person here, and the presence of Beingness alone is, then this body must belong to this Presence, must belong to this Consciousness, to this God. Therefore, whose body is this? Is it not God’s own body?’

The entire phenomenal universe is God’s body. That is one way to look at it. The entire phenomenal universe is God’s body. So let whose body it is take care of it. That one is taking care of it.

But remember to not’ do’ or ‘not do’. You see? With both the ‘doing’ or the ‘not doing’ we have this false belief of doership. When you decide to ‘not do’, that is also doership. When you decide to ‘do’, that is also doership. So you be constantly in the state of neutrality. And if consciousness feels, then consciousness will see the state of the body or will play it out in such a way, basically, that the body gets whatever it requires. But don’t let any event convince you that you are the body. You be completely neutral. And sometimes if the body requires, then you will find the body walking towards a doctor.

You will see that you’re just the pure witnessing of all of this. There is no ‘you’ here which is the doer of anything at all. So let God take care of the body. It is his body anyway.

Q: “It takes vigilance to not believe any thought.” Yes, it seems that way initially. “But it feels as though thoughts can come and go.”

Exactly, so what’ll happen is that initially it will seem like we have to constantly police. [Ananta mimes thoughts coming, using his hands.] ‘This is coming, I’m not believing. This is coming, I’m not believing it’. It seems like we have to guard this constantly. You see? Then we see that naturally it is happening. It is happening naturally. But there will still be that one in a thousand thoughts which might have some juice, and then the vigilance comes back. You see? And that is where it is beautiful when suffering arises because it shows us that maybe some thought got missed and got picked up; the belief, because of some old conditioning, and this one still has some juice. And then so vigilance goes from being this constant policing to just this simple watching.

If there is some suffering arising, then we see what got believed in and that is let go of. It becomes a very simple process. So it ceases to seem like hard work. And the natural state is completely full of this freedom of not having to police also. So, vigilance starts by becoming this constant seeming-watching to see; realizing that it is our natural state to not pick up any thoughts and all thoughts are coming and going. And then when something seems to be arising with some bite, then we can look again and let it go. So vigilance, which starts off as a seemingly-active doing, actually is seen to be just the natural flow of things.

Namaste everyone, very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

[Mobile phone goes off with a funny tune. Ananta responds to the phone and laughs] It seems to be that kind of day, huh? Alright, so I’m hoping you can hear me now. So if this is your first time in satsang, the way to ask questions is through the chat window. Good. Welcome, welcome, welcome. Good morning. Very good.

We were discussing this morning about how the understanding cannot be a personal understanding. If you’re still believing that there is a person here who has understood anything at all then that is not the understanding. The understanding always only is that this person which I believe myself to be was never real; is just purely imagined. But this mind will try to claim credit for the understanding now. This mind will say that ‘I have understood that I am awareness’ but the mind can never understand that it is awareness, just like the refection in the mirror cannot understand what our life is in reality. In the same way this mind, which is just a play of consciousness, cannot truly understand consciousness or awareness. You see? So what starts off as a personal journey of understanding…, the personal journey of freedom ultimately must end with this person being confronted; this person being seen to be false and our belief getting completely divested from this identity. And this person, this mind, is always in a rush to proclaim its understanding. And even when it says ‘I do not understand anything’ it is usually trying to convey that it has understood everything. So it’s really not in the words actually. And if you see that this is happening then it is nothing to feel guilty about. It has to play out in this way. But my job seems to be to point it out. Because if we end prematurely the search here, with just a personal understanding, then it will not be the end of satsang.

In this seeming journey it must go from person to Presence; from people to being. That’s why we’re not a sangha of people. We’re the sangha of Being. And we can check for the symptoms, isn’t it? If there is still a need to convince or if there’s still a need to impress….

And the need to convince usually comes from the fact that something is doubting our own freedom actually. There is no need to convince the Master. The Master already completely knows that you are free. There is no need to convince the Master. But it is your own doubt; your own self doubt which conveys itself in this way with a need to convince anyone. It could be the Master, it could be your family, it could be all your loved ones. What you truly are is unconcerned. It is unconcerned about freedom also. Your true Self knows that the one who is asking for freedom, needing freedom or even proclaiming freedom is not you. You see?

So when we say that the spiritual ego is trying to convince others actually I feel that it is its own lingering self doubt that it is trying to get over. If you did not doubt your freedom at all…, if you completely did not doubt your freedom at all, then who would you need to convince about it?

Namaste! Namaste everyone.

You have seen now that there was no one here who was bound. There was nobody here who can be bound or could have been bound. And if that one did not exist, then who is the one that is free from bondage? See?

Shinein says, “Is there something…, is there such a thing as a spiritual thought? Sometimes getting through, but seen.”

There is no such thing as a spiritual thought. You see? But if you’re talking about the intuitive voice which has a different qualitative feel about it…and what is the way to differentiate between a thought and this intuitive communion? It is to see that intuition is always accompanied by the presence of love, peace and joy. And a thought is accompanied by a need. Therefore in The Course in Miracles there is a beautiful enquiry, which is to look at what is emerging as a thought and asking ‘What is it for?’ What is this for? See?

Yes. Lonai says, “There is no need to convince anyone about freedom.” Very good. “But there is some sort of urge to share.” Yes. “It is like wow, wow, wow…” Yes “…this is amazing. This is! And in a way, sharing, more veils disappear.”

Yes, yes. So you can smell actually. You can smell where something is coming from. And if it is coming from the place of need or from a place to convince, then it is still smelling of the same guy; the ego. But if it is coming from a pure place of just love then it is beautifully auspicious. And I have no intention of policing this because I know that all of this is the play of consciousness itself. So I have no intention of policing this or even pointing out where something is coming from. It is just for you to check from your own enquiry, to see for yourself.

I am completely certain of only one thing that there is only one true Self and we are that.

Shinein says, “This spiritual thought is always reassuring itself.”  Good. So we’ll look at this.

Zoe says, “Thank you for your gentle grace father.” Very welcome my dear.

You see, so, without a thought, in this moment, right now, all of you are free. In this moment, all of you are free. And you can only pretend to be bound. You can only pretend to be bound by believing a thought.

So let’s experiment with this. See that you are completely free right now. And the pretending of bondage can happen through the belief in the thought which is coming. So with complete integrity, we can do this now to see that there is pure freedom here. And the pretending will start with the next thought that you believe. See for yourself which thought still has this juice to make you pick it up. And if you feel strong enough you can expose it in the chat window; you can expose it in the fire of satsang.

Because freedom, you see, does not require too many words. So what if we were to stop talking now and see that there is full freedom already? And then we give a belief to a thought or to any appearance, and we start playing the game of bondage again. So let’s start from this perspective of freedom, and see which thoughts still have the juice that you’re compelled to believe it.

And before we do that I’ll quickly catch up with the chat.

Ishani says, “Father, talking about sharing. Just until last week there was this energy to share. Now that is gone and everything is just seeming so beautifully ordinary.” Yes. “And there is so much freedom in this seeing.”

Yes. And this energy to share might come back and then it might go again. But the pure seeing that you are is untouched by this energy. So in this way you are enjoying everything that is coming and leaving. And actually, everything that is coming, is leaving anyway. See.

Atma says, “True.”

Ishani says, “Sharing also is not by me in here anymore.”

Yes, yes, yes. It is seen that it is never by this ‘me’. Exactly.

Hans says, “Thoughts have a tendency to bind?”

The question is ‘Thoughts have a tendency to bind?’ Nothing can actually bind us. Nothing can actually bind us, and we have never been bound. We pretend to play this game of person-person when we believe the thoughts which are coming, because all thoughts are meant for the person. You see? So when we believe a thought we are believing the identity of personhood; because a thought is only talking to the person, and without this belief there can be no nurturing of the person idea, and the person idea cannot survive. You see?

Aryev says, “It takes vigilance to not believe any thought.” Yes, it seems that way initially. “But it feels as though thoughts can come and go.”

Exactly, so what’ll happen is that initially it will seem like we have to constantly police. [Ananta mimes thoughts coming, using his hands.] ‘This is coming, I’m not believing. This is coming, I’m not believing it’. It seems like we have to guard this constantly. You see? Then we see that naturally it is happening. It is happening naturally. But there will still be that one in a thousand thoughts which might have some juice, and then the vigilance comes back. You see? And that is where it is beautiful when suffering arises because it shows us that maybe some thought got missed and got picked up; the belief, because of some old conditioning, and this one still has some juice. And then so vigilance goes from being this constant policing to just this simple watching.

If there is some suffering arising, then we see what got believed in and that is let go of. It becomes a very simple process. So it ceases to seem like hard work. And the natural state is completely full of this freedom of not having to police also. So, vigilance starts by becoming this constant seeming-watching to see; realizing that it is our natural state to not pick up any thoughts and all thoughts are coming and going. And then when something seems to be arising with some bite, then we can look again and let it go. So vigilance, which starts off as a seemingly-active doing, actually is seen to be just the natural flow of things. See?

Lonai says, “Thoughts about my children. If they suffer, they all have the juice.”

Yes, but these are now the most primal conditionings; children, close relationships, is the most primal conditioning, isn’t it? And this is being exposed now. And you can trust that everything is consciousness itself. Your children are also consciousness itself, so all will be taken care of. It does not need to rely on a thought. All actions as a mother or a parent will continue in their own auspicious way. The Self does not need to rely on thoughts to be a good parent or a good relationship. But don’t expect it to go the way the mind defines it. Because many will say that ‘You say it will all be auspicious and I was expecting only good things to happen’. So that is still a mind’s expectation that it should go in a particular way. It doesn’t happen that way.

So, Kapil says, “Thoughts related to work and future related; insecurity, judgment about what others said or did to me.”   Very good. Very good.

It’s good to see this, you see; and if you’re able to just let it go, without any belief, then they can be let go of. Now that you have noticed it, that they have some juice, maybe they can be just let go of. But if they seem to reoccur, if they seem to reoccur over and over again, then we can do a little bit of enquiry about it. You can bring this thought in front of you. Say it bothers something when someone is rude to me or behaves badly, and we can ask ‘Who is this me that gets affected by it?’

So in this recurring thought pattern, life is trying to show you some area of attachment which still seems to be strong. It could even be to the concept that everyone should be nice, or nobody should be rude to me, or that I am a good person. You see, all these subtle concepts can still remain, but life will still continue to do its job, especially through these recurring thought patterns. So if you find that something is let go of but it comes back…, it’s let go of and it comes back; if it continues to rotate like this, then you can shine the light of your own Self on this and see what is it that is getting affected? Which concepts are still being believed? And these concepts will be let go of because of this seeing. Very good.

Cornelia says, “Namaste Father. Late today.” No worries.

Ok, let’s see where we are.

Atma says, “It is left before it came, seems like that.”

Yes then it’s just getting released. All these thought patterns, they’re just coming and going; and if it’s not strongly recurring then we don’t need to do anything at all, just let it go.

Lonai says, “It is weird since I was never the one to take care of them anyway, but they are my twig in the sand.”

Yes. If this is clearly seen, then all the juice and bite will quickly, quickly go. In fact we can say it is already gone.

Hans says, “Thank you, Father.” Thank you so much, my dear. Thank you.

Ginger says, “Shame and arrogance still have juice.” And you can look at these specific thought patterns and see what they’re pointing you towards. They’re pointing you to a mis-belief that you still carry about yourself. It could even be something like a mis-belief that you or another was the doer of their action; to presume that somebody exists as a separate person. So we can look at this as a beautiful mirror which is pointing us towards what is still being held onto. Very good.

Shinein says, “When the seeker catches a thought to verify its understanding or is seemingly trying to hold onto knowledge / wisdom, this has juice.”

Yes. If you’re trying to grasp onto some understanding or there’s a need to become a jnani; a need to become a learned master, a need to become a learned person, all this also will be washed away.

You are already completely complete. The whole universe takes birth inside you. You are the one who has defined this whole play which gets projected in the light of consciousness. What knowledge would you require? What must you need to know now? It’s very good that you’re able to spot this and expose it, and you see it is coming from a personal place and it can be let go of.

And is there a more beautiful example than Sri Maharaj Nisargadatta, who was just a simple uneducated man; a simple and uneducated man who used to sell these small cigarettes called bidi in a small shop in Mumbai; completely uneducated. And when he saw the truth for himself, then the words that emerged from his mouth were pure scripture. He did not need to rely on any intellectual knowledge or understanding. The words just emerge on their own, from this intuition itself. And it is seen that this body only becomes an instrument for this intuition to communicate. Very good.

Zoe says, “Let it be that my words and my actions all come from grace, not from an imaginary person construct.”

It is a beautiful prayer. Very good. “Let thy will be done” is a beautiful prayer. Very good.

Jayani says, “Thought related to trying to get it.” Yes. Trying to get it, yes. “But this is just a habit. Also thoughts related to body and children.” Yes. It’s very good that this is seen now. “All are given to you Father.” Thank you so much. It’s very good.

In fact even if you can start with the simple perspective that ‘Right now, in the moment, there is only freedom here. It’s complete freedom here’. Because a thought will convince you that you’re not free and you need to get somewhere to be free, or you need to understand something to become free: that is the trick of the mind.

It is very beautiful.

Aryev says, “So this is what Eckhart Tolle means to be in the present; being in the now – to not pick up the thoughts?” Yes.

I would say yes because otherwise… You know when I was reading, many years ago, The Power of Now, what would happen is there would be a forcible attempt to try and stay in the now. And it seemed like a lot of effort trying to stop thoughts from coming, to try and restrain feeling any emotion, to just being this very stiff state of trying to be in the now. Yes?

But what he is actually referring to is this very natural state of every moment unfolding so beautifully. Inside the ever-present now, all this is unfolding very beautifully. And as we let go of our thoughts, then we are constantly in the now; because it is only the thoughts which are taking us to the past or projecting the future. Yes.

Louise says, “Father, I am noticing most thoughts these days are thoughts offering help to find truth.” Yes. “And these have been given belief to be important thoughts. Noticing that they are just the same thing.” Yes.

All that is coming from the mind-space can be let go of. You see? So if there is a genuine compassion arising from the heart, which means accompanied by the presence of love, with no need to be seen as the one who wants to help… Because if it is coming from the mind then you will see there will be a need around it. The need to help or the need to be seen as the one who wants to help… But if it is coming from the pure perspective of intuition itself, that means then the Satguru has started using the body  /mind which is there as an instrument for itself. So if it is coming from this beautiful space of neutrality then there is nothing wrong. If it is coming with the presence of love, peace and joy then it is completely okay to follow the sense of wanting to help to spread the truth. But if it is coming from a place of needing something, wanting something, wanting to prove something, then it can be very simply let go of.

Okay, my chat is jumping around way too much today. Let’s see.

Jayani says, “Any thought that has juice is a great teacher in revealing where identity is still playing.” Very good, yes, exactly. “So actually very grateful as ego can be very subtle and insidious at times.”

Very beautiful words. Yes, completely, yes. That’s why we say that all that this is emerging is also so much grace. It’s very beautiful.

Louise says, “Noticing the belief in them diminishing.” Yes.

Thoughts, when they’re let go of, with the belief let go of, then even attention to them will start diminishing. It’s very good.

Asylibrum, sorry I’m not pronouncing correctly says, “Thoughts of body and security.”

Yes. It’s very good to notice this. And then you can ask ‘Whose body is this? If I have seen now that there is no person here, and the presence of Beingness alone is, then this body must belong to this Presence, must belong to this Consciousness, to this God. Therefore, whose body is this? Is it not God’s own body?’

The entire phenomenal universe is God’s body. That is one way to look at it. The entire phenomenal universe is God’s body. So let whose body it is take care of it. That one is taking care of it.

But remember to not’ do’ or ‘not do’. You see? With both the ‘doing’ or the ‘not doing’ we have this false belief of doership. When you decide to ‘not do’, that is also doership. When you decide to ‘do’, that is also doership. So you be constantly in the state of neutrality. And if consciousness feels, then consciousness will see the state of the body or will play it out in such a way, basically, that the body gets whatever it requires. But don’t let any event convince you that you are the body. You be completely neutral. And sometimes if the body requires, then you will find the body walking towards a doctor. You will see that you’re just the pure witnessing of all of this. There is no ‘you’ here which is the doer of anything at all. So let God take care of the body. It is his body anyway.

Ginger says, “Recurrence of fear that I will be… <censored>…. I will be something space natural/beautiful. Sharing is followed by shame, as thoughts suggest that I was arrogant. It’s madness. Upon inquiry it is seen that it isn’t for me.”

Yes. It isn’t for you. In reality you can never be arrogant. Can Being ever be arrogant or humble? Can any attribute be attached to you? Can Awareness ever be anything? Any quality, any attribute? So when you say that it is seen that it isn’t for you, that’s completely true. Don’t rely on any mind judgments about you. It is the same thing, the proclamation and the judgment are both the same. Both untrue. You see?

Kapil says, “Thank you.” Thank you, my dear.

Naomi says, “Agreed. Thoughts of children have most juice.” Yes. “And ‘Am I doing things right?’ Bringing this into the fire.”

Yes. Yes. This is most primal conditioning, isn’t it? Thoughts of children, thoughts of family, yes. When you let go, you will find that all is being taken care of. All actions will happen as they are meant to. It is very good.

Shinein, “Thank you.” Thank you.

Aryev says, “For me it’s a feeling of responsibility for ‘nears and dears’, friends, family and even society at large consumes me. When someone is suffering around me, I get consumed by all sorts of worries.”

And the mind will say that ‘Unless you listen to me, you are not helping others’. Firstly understand that the best way to help the world is first to be free from your own suffering completely. And then you will become a light and a beacon that will get the ‘seeming others’ freedom from their suffering. Don’t go with the mind’s presumption that it knows how to help another. How do we know? How do we know whether giving money to another will really help? How do we know even to give emotional support to another will truly help? Maybe they were close to becoming the Buddha? Maybe something in them would have exploded and they would have become the Buddha himself? In the next ten minutes, before we distracted them with our help.

So first see that the mind does not know anything at all, and when this mind is let go of then it is just Consciousness which is completely seen to be doing all the actions anyway. God’s love does not require your intervention, or more specifically, the intervention of your thoughts. God’s love does not require the intervention of your thoughts to take care of itself. So when it is done with this sense of freedom then you will find that either pride for helping another or guilt for not helping another cannot arise. But if you continue to do from the personal perspective, it plays out in the way that you do not escape these monkeys of pride and guilt. You see?

Lonai says, “At Mooji retreat, when person disappeared completely, pneumonia arose” Yes. “Person showed up again. Now, when veils are very thin, severe infection in the mouth has arisen. This also has some juice.”

Yes. So if this is happening then it is exposing whatever little body identity might still be there. But your thoughts will not help you to take care of the instrument called the body. So if you let go of your thoughts you might find that you suddenly find yourself in the doctor’s clinic or in the hospital. And even that is seen. There’ll be no resistance. Also there will not be this concept: for many of you, you have this concept that being spiritually free means that the body now must not get any pain, or no disease should happen. And worse could be that you feel that these are signs that you’re not free. For many of you it might work in this way. So when this body pain, body infection, disease, something shows up, then also no need to rely on any thought. But the mind will say ‘If you don’t rely on any thought then what is going to happen to your body?’ You just see that all actions will unfold exactly how they are meant to. Don’t decide to ‘do’ or to ‘not do’. Don’t decide that I will not go to the doctor because now I am free. You see?

Atma says, “True, Father, all you say is confirmed here in me. Love you, Father.” I love you too my dear. Very good.

Clare says, “Dear Ananta, there is a deathly kind of anti-life feeling that is often there on awaking in the morning. Can I give it to you? And I allow it too. It is already going.”

Very good. Thank you. Yes. All can be given to me. All is my problem. I am happy to take all of this. Very good.

Many of you have actually been reporting these dark feelings, dark energies. Don’t worry. They are all nothing but variants of ‘the same guy’, the same ego. It’s trying to convince you of its reality. But now you are far beyond this. You see that you are completely untouched by this. It’s completely good to say ‘It is my Master’s problem to deal with’. Very good.

Ajnani says, “Also giving you all ideas of trying to do things right.” Very good. “Especially in terms of being a good enough mother. Old patterns of conditioning. But there is no mother or child, only Consciousness.”

Yes, it is seen that only Consciousness is here and yet all roles can continue in their own beautiful way. Very good.

Denan says, “Many recurring thoughts of illness and death. Shining light on attachment to believing I am the body…,” Very good. “…that I want life to go a particular way.” Yes. Very good. “Into the fire!” Very good.

See, you are the Supreme Intelligence. You are the Supreme Intelligence! The trickster is not more intelligent than you. And when it is truly freedom that we want, you’ve had enough of this game, then all the trickster’s tricks can actually point us to our own freedom. So in this way, like you said, the trickster’s trick is to try and keep you deluded as the person, by giving you thoughts about illness, about death, about the body, about wanting life to go in a particular way, but now You / Consciousness as the Supremely Intelligent one are seeing that ‘None of this actually applies to me’. And therefore leading you to the simple looking of your own true Self. And in this way you have tricked the trickster itself in this wonderful game.

Very good. Louise says, “Father, it feels so simple, just lose this trust in the mind.” Yes! It is that simple! Very good.

Ishani says, “Thank you, Father.” Thank you, my dear. Good.

Aria says, “Thank you, Dear Ananta, much appreciated.” Very welcome, my dear.

Jyoti says, “Something I have heard you say, and maybe some other Masters too, is that the body is made up of the food you eat. I find this even hard to believe as I don’t see any evidence of this. My body is much like the dream body and just seems to remain the same, and nothing to do with food or anything.”

Yes. So when a questioner is coming from a belief in the phenomenal world perspective then the answer comes in this way; that you believe that you are the body and you believe that the food is real, the world is real, the objects are real. But then, in this case, the body must be made up only of the food that you eat, from a phenomenal perspective. You see? And just immediately when that is said, something sees that this cannot be true. That I cannot be that which is just made up of this food that I eat.

So there is no truth that is coming in response to a question. You see? We’re just using other thorns to pull out the thorn of misidentification. And then both can be thrown away. So we’re not answering the question actually, we’re answering the questioner more. You see? At times it is not helpful to say…, many times we say when we feel that there’s this resonance in the questioner. But at other times we will say that ‘Yes, body is made of food that you eat, Can you be the body?’ Another time we’ll say ‘In the dream also you have a body, what is the difference between that body and this body?’ And to someone else I might say that ‘None of this has ever happened at all’. It just seems to be part of the play, and seems to operate on the openness or the resonance that exists with the questioner. There is no truth in anything which is being spoken. Very good.

Atma says, “All can be used for freedom. Yes, Father.”  Yes. “Thank you so much” she says. Thank you, too.

Ajani says, “Truly all is grace.” Yes, truly all is grace.

Clare says, “Thank you for taking all this ‘stuff’ from us. I am really grateful and I give you all guilt and fear.” Very good. Very good.

Denan says, “Thank you, Ananta.”

[Video cuts off a bit early before Ananta’s usual ‘Thank you so much for being here in satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai!]

Namaste everyone. A very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

Namaste. Welcome. Welcome. And if this is your first time in satsang, know that the way to ask questions is through the chat window. Very nice to meet all of you like this. Very good. Namaste.

The simple truth is that no suffering, no trouble, no problems exist without belief in thought. I know that all of you have heard it many times before. You’ve heard it many times before. But somehow a thought might come; it still might carry some meaning. But it’s not true. It’s not true. It is saying nothing about you. All it is saying is always only about the imagined one. Never, never, never about you. Even the most glorious thought is not about you.

Ajnani says, “…and without a person”

Actually, even the person is without a thought. There is no concept of a person without a thought. That is why I say that my simplest teaching is: Let go of your next thought.

If you let go of your next thought, then even the personhood cannot survive. All our problems, all the concerns that we have, all the suffering, it’s just because of this interpreter sitting in our head. This imagined interpreter with all its nonsense seems to be sitting in our head and feeding us all of this.

Clare says, “Thank you, Ananta, so much.”    Very welcome.

Atma says, “Yes, I love your simple teaching. Let go of your next thought is all that is needed.”   Very good.

Isabelle, Namaste.

Zoe says, “Daughter Izzy is in satsang today.” Very good. Welcome my dear. [Smile] So happy to see you.

Lonai says, “Personhood seems to be rooted more in an energy contraction than in thought. Thought can exist without personhood also.”   Yes.

So person is always an imagined sense of an imagined self. It is the imagined one. It might seem like an energy contraction, but even that it is not. The energy contraction can be just a feeling, but we assign personhood to it with the belief in separation. With the belief in ‘I’ as a separate entity; this is the root of personhood. But thought will exist. Thought will continue. As long as this phenomenal existence is here, thought will continue to appear. But it’s only that they will not have any power anymore; and without our belief in the thought, the thought cannot reinforce our sense of separation. We cannot conjure up a ‘person identity’ without believing a thought. So thoughts will continue. Don’t believe that freedom means that all thoughts will stop. I have never met a Being for whom all thoughts have stopped. But it is completely possible to withdraw our belief from thoughts.

Lonai says, “But separation is not believed in anymore…, but still felt somehow.”

What you’re saying is that there’s still a feeling that separation which is there, but there is a Witnessing of even this feeling, isn’t it? And this Witnessing is untouched by the content of the feeling. So the content could be of complete love. The content could be complete oneness, but the Witnessing is apart from this love and oneness feeling also. It is beyond even this love. You are aware of love. Love is not aware of you. Love is also seen, that you are the Seeing itself. So don’t wait for confirmation from either your thoughts or your feelings. If you keep waiting for these phenomenal entities to confirm your Freedom then it is an endless wait.

And then you say, “Yes attention can be directed back to awareness witnessing…, then it goes back again.”

Yes. That is why we say, ‘Don’t expect Freedom to be a particular state’. It is Freedom from All states. So attention could be on the most horrendous thoughts, or the most beautiful thoughts, or attention could be resting at home itself. Unmoving. But what you are is always the Awareness of All of this. Untouched by anything that attention is going to. You must see this. Because this seems to be confusing for many, isn’t it? We confuse Enlightenment or Freedom to be a state. But whatever state might be emerging, the Awareness that You Are is untouched by it.

But what happens is that, when the state seems unpleasant, then the mind says ‘Okay then, maybe you’re still separate. Maybe you’re not actually Free’. And then in believing these thoughts again, the personhood is given life again. Don’t believe the interpretation about anything; about any appearance. Is there fear in this? Because immediately the mind will say ‘But what will happen to my life?’ The one who has been living your life will continue living your life. This imagined one will not be then interfering with it.

Lonai says, “I do see this. I do see that no matter how much person is felt, it is an illusion, it doesn’t exist. Also there have been many experiences of I Am, but…”

You didn’t finish that sentence with a ‘but’? Let’s see what else you said. Then you said, “…there is no fear anymore.”  Very good.  “I was never the doer of anything.”

I, as a separate entity, or I, as an ego, was never the doer of anything. But I, as I Am, is the Doer and Experiencer of All Things.

Atma says, “Totally clear that Freedom, Awareness is not a state.” Very good.

Ajnani says, “It was confusing when I started satsang, but not anymore.”  Very good. “Very clear now”

Initially the mind resistance can be strong and it will create all kinds of resistances. It will say that it is too abstract, too difficult. There will be so much doubt initially, for many in satsang. But that’s okay. Just stay in the Holy Fire of satsang, and all that is false will get burnt out.

Atma says, “There is no ‘my life’ Father” Yes. No ‘my’ who can say that this is my life. Yes.  “Only life.”  Very Good. Namaste.

Om says, “Father, when dealing with dark energies it can seem very difficult to stay firm in the understanding that, irrespective of attention’s movement, I am witnessing itself.”

But even when you’re not firm…, even if you were to get completely deluded, Awareness still stays as Awareness. Therefore what you are in reality is completely untouched. So as long as you’re not believing any interpretation about it right now, then it is gone. If you’re believing a conclusion about it, then you seem to be stuck again. And it is always in the now. A person seems to be only the sum total of all the ideas that you’re believing at this moment. A person is only the sum total of all the ideas that you’re believing at this moment. And as you let go of these ideas, you see that the person was never anything real anyway. It is only a bunch of these ideas.

Ustreamer269 says, “Oh, my beloved love”   So much love.

Zoe says, “It is so clear that I am Freedom; and yet identity seems to be arising more strongly than ever…, though it could be that I am just seeing it more clearly.”

Yes. That is why I have given you the simplest pointing. All of you. I’ve given you the simplest pointing. Because if you try to analyze too much, then you try to understand why this is happening. I can give you a lot of mechanics, and we can speak about consciousness and ego and all these big words; but then, ultimately, what is required is, you just need a freedom from this person idea.

And the simplest way is just to let go of your next thought. Just let go of your next thought. And no identity can survive this. The simplest practice. But you will come back, many of you come back and say ‘But in the past, I forgot to let go of my next thought’. That is completely okay. So we’re never concerned about the past. Presume that the past never existed at all. Just from now, all of you who are here, can just let go of your next thought. And show me a problem then. You see?

Om says, “Could you say a little about this? Is it just a matter of seeing through these things without giving the interpreter the belief? ”

All appearances are just a matter of just not giving the interpreter the belief…, any appearance. We’ve made it completely simple.

Lonai says. “When ‘I Am’ is experienced, every sense of ‘I’ disappears, there is only IS.., no identity at all…, so the oscillation is between personhood and nothing.”

And who is aware that there is only IS? Who is aware that there is only IS?

Shanti says, “The fire of satsang is burning everything I am not. Hallelujah!”

Very good. That’s what satsang is there for. Very good.

Louise says, “Father, the knowing of awareness, if not known by the mind and not a state, is it just known as a sense, as a noticing?”

Yes we can say it like that. We can say it like that, but it’s not even a sense actually. There’s nothing phenomenally that we can say about it. This is the only ‘non-phenomenal’ seeing. So when we say that ‘I am Aware that I’m Aware’ was there a sense required to confirm this? I feel that ‘sense’ is a word that gets close. But don’t feel that it is like the sense ‘I Am’ even. Because even the sense ‘I Am’ can be phenomenally experienced, but this Awareness of Awareness itself cannot even be called a sense. It’s just a simple seeing of itself. Just ‘like a noticing’ like you say, yes. Namaste.

Wiebke says, “Melting” Yes.

Hans says, “Am-ness” Yes.

Lonai says, “Awareness is aware there is only IS, but it is not me/my awareness.”

Yes, but what are you now referring to yourself as? You see? What is the distance between you and this Awareness? What is the separation between you and this Awareness, that is even aware of the Isness, or even aware of Itself? Just look and check. So when you say, ‘It is not me/my Awareness’ just check this. Where is Awareness and where are you? What is the distance between the two?

Zoe says, “So beautiful Father, that the person is just the sum total of our beliefs about the person.”

The sum total of all our beliefs actually. We don’t even need to say about the person. All beliefs contribute to ‘identity’. So if you believe nothing…, no person. Yes. Very good.

Lonai says, “There is No Self. It sounds crazy but ‘I’ disappears completely.”

This No Self, this Pure Awareness of this Witnessing Itself, is what You Are. So what you seem to be doing is, you’ve invented a mental picture if ‘I’ or an image of ‘I’ of some sort; maybe even a feeling of ‘I’ or some sense of ‘I’. And then, when you’re faced with your Own True Nature you’re saying that ‘I’ does not exist. When you’re referring to the ‘I’ as this separate visual metaphor, then it does not exist. But is this Pure Awareness not you? And if ‘I’ did not exist then ‘who’ is reporting this happened? When all disappeared…all disappeared…all…everything gone…even the ‘I’ is gone…Then ‘who’ is reporting that everything is gone?

Now you’ll see when Maharaj says, or the title of his book is ‘I Am That’…, this ‘I’, this Pure Awareness, this Witnessing is what I Am.

Zoe says, “Nothing, nothing, nothing. Laughing.”

Yes. Nothing, nothing, nothing.

Ginger says, “This is transcendence, isn’t it? Being able to perceive all as phenomenal. What remains is the seeing, independent of other and of ‘I’. Seeing remains as itself alone.”

Yes, Very beautiful. This is transcendence. Yes. Being able to perceive all as phenomenal; what remains is the seeing, independent of other and I. Yes. Seeing remains as itself alone. Very beautiful words. Very good.

Louise says, “So when awareness does not notice itself. This is the illusion. Even though it is still Awareness itself and untouched by the illusion.”

So when Awareness does not notice itself, this is the illusion. Yes, and we don’t even need to…, like we said in the last satsang, we don’t even need to force the illusion concept. If something is appearing and it seems real, there is no need to debate that. What you say is right. This insight is absolutely true, but we don’t need to reinforce that. So if it is appearing, it is just appearing; but even in this appearance, the person never appears. Therefore suffering cannot appear. Then all is allowed to innocently come and go. But it is very good what you said.

Lonai says, “This pure awareness is before I Am.”

This Pure Awareness is before the sense of Consciousness also. This I Am or Beingness or Consciousness; this Awareness is witnessing even ‘this’.

Lonai says, “Everything is gone, is reported by no-one.” Yes. This is Okay.

Then it is just a matter of semantics. What you are calling ‘no-one’ is what I am calling ‘I’. The ultimate ‘I’, the Absolute. Then it is only a matter of semantics. As long as you can see that this Eternal Witnessing, this Awareness itself, which you can call ‘No-One’ is ever-present, and all arises in front of this, then this is absolutely fine.

Vutronghieu says, “Father, can you say the difference between laziness and receptivity?” Yes. Very good question.

So what happens is many times, many of us hear that the Master is saying that ‘You are not the doer’. Then we decide ‘not to do’ anything. In the pretense itself, all of this is happening in the pretense itself, we decide ‘not to do’. This is actually a ‘doing’ again’. So we decide I’m ‘not the doer’ means I’m just going to sit on a chair and not move, or sit on my bed and not move. All this is also a play of consciousness and this is fine, but we’re talking at a personal level now. So we’re saying a person hears this, and the thought comes ‘I must not do anything because I am not the doer. I need to prove that’. So this becomes a sort of a rigid, closed state. But receptivity means that I have no concepts about anything at all. There is complete openness. There’s complete openness to whatever is appearing. Whatever thoughts are appearing can appear and go. There’s a letting go of all that is happening. This is openness; and in satsang this receptivity, this openness is gold-dust actually.

If you come with a perspective which is not rigid, if you come with no knowledge at all, with just the cup fully empty, then this resonance can happen very quickly. This communion can happen very quickly. Otherwise, most of the time in satsang actually goes in; first emptying your cup. And because you feel that there is so much meaning to what you already know, then there is resistance to this emptying. So it becomes a word confirming what is already in the cup to be true, rather than allowing it to become empty. Because so much investment has gone into this; so many years of sadhana and study has gone into filling up that cup up to a certain point.

That’s why initially when you come to satsang…,now I’m not speaking about you in particular, but for anyone who might be here to hear this, to say that… we come into satsang wanting to confirm that ‘I’ve put so much investment into understanding this, I just want your confirmation of this’. And I would rather you came without anything at all. See? Because without anything at all, in just one glance it is over. That is receptivity or that is openness.

Atma says, “Awareness which is not phenomenal seeing, all being aware of all, but still all is so far away.” Yes, and even distance is born inside this Awareness itself. All sense of time and space is born after the sense of I Amness inside this Witnessing itself.

Atma says, “I am in all, but nothing is touching me.” Yes.

Atma says, “Never felt so…” <censored> “…has nothing to do with the body, with age, nothing. Aliveness is in all and everywhere.” Yes.

Lonai says, “I am no fun.” Yes, exactly. [Laughs.] Good.

Lonai says, “This is how it is felt. Sound is happening, light is happening, activity is happening, from and for no one. And actually only apparently happening.” Yes, that is good enough. Very good.

Ananya says, “Wow, so beautiful.” Yes. Very good.

Ginger says, “Let the bowl be empty now.” Very good.

Ustreamer96 says, “Beloved, I am tired due to searching. But still I cannot stop searching completely for Truth. What can I do? Maybe you will say ‘just be’. But this situation makes me bored. Thanks for your Grace.”   Yes. A very beautiful question. So much honesty and integrity in this, it’s very beautiful. Yes.

So I don’t even say ‘just be’ actually, because there seems to be some doing in the sense of just being with the sense of I Am also, there seems to be a sense of effort in this. And it could become even more tiring sometimes to do this as a practice. It was not meant to be a practice actually. Therefore I have a simple instruction for you; and it will seem too simple to your mind. But this requires some trust. If you want to be free from all your suffering, and you want to find the Truth, I have some simple pointings for you.

The first pointing is: Simply just let go of your next thought. Just let go of your next thought.

And what does ‘let go’ mean? It does not mean that no thought should come. It only means that the thought can come, even attention could go to it; even attention could go to it but just withdraw your belief from it. Don’t believe what it is saying. In this simple pointing is the end of suffering itself. See?

Then you say ‘I have been searching a long time for the Truth’. Therefore your next question should be: Can you show me God?  You say ‘Yes, when I don’t believe my thoughts then there can be no suffering, but still, can you show me God?’ And I say ‘Yes I can’.

The way to see God is to just simply look at the answer to this question in a very childlike, innocent way. The question is: Can you stop being now? Can you stop being now? [Pauses, smiles]. So this being that you cannot stop, this presence of You itself, this presence of I Am is God, is Consciousness.

And even after this, the third simple pointing which is for someone who might say: ‘Yes, but even this Consciousness, is this what I am? I want to experience the Absolute. I want to experience the Ultimate, the Absolute Supreme Self’.

And I say ‘Yes, even that is available right now in the simple pointing: Are you aware now?’ And this is the true Self, the Awareness itself which is aware of itself.

None of these questions or pointings require any use of the mind. And they definitely don’t need to rely on the mind’s confirmation. If you keep waiting for the mind to confirm your freedom then it is going to be many more lifetimes and even then it might not happen because the mind will never confirm, it will always only say ‘almost there’. You have always been free.

Ah, Joshua. Ok. “Thank you very much, Master, my name is Joshua. Now I have to go. Love you from Vietnam.”  I love you, too. Thank you so much for joining in. Very good.

Ajnani says, “Totally open and empty. If there is still imagined resistance.., then into the satsang fire.”   Very good.

Clare says, “Thank you.”   Very welcome. [Gazes lovingly.]

Shanti says, “Everything is so glorious when nothing is here.”   Yes. Good.

Usteamer696 says, “I love you, Ananta, thanks so much.”   I love you too, my dear.

In the simplest pointing ‘Let go of your next thought’ all freedom is available and it is here now.

Ustreamer319 says, “Namaste. Thanks, dear Ananta. I love you. Deya.”  Ah, Deya, Deya, now I see. Good. Very good. Welcome, welcome, welcome.

Lonai says, “In the apparent energy of your presence it all seems so easy. Why is that?”

Yes. It seems to operate this way in this appearance, like you said; in the leela it seems to operate like that, that in the presence of the Master it seems very easy. But it’s good; that’s why, to be in satsang as much as possible so that you know the Master is already in your heart, actually. He is not the one speaking through this mouth. Very good. I am already in your heart actually.

Deya says, “So precious to be here.” I’m so happy you came. Very good.

Shanti says, “All that is left is your pointing. Love you so much, Master.”   Love you too, my dear, so much. Good.

Jayani says, “Fire is burning very strong. Resisted and ran away for so long. This is all apparent but something is open and saying ‘bring it on’, come what may.” Very good. “It feels like a death, like something is literally burning, while it is known to be nothing. Placing it all at your feet.”   Yes. It is very good.

When we throw away all interpretations, when we throw away all thoughts, that is the same as saying ‘I am placing at the Master’s feet’. Just let go of your next thought. It is that simple.

The mind will convince us that this seems to be trivializing what is happening here. And it will convince us that this ‘Just let go of your next thought’ is a basic instruction for beginners. It is not. There are a few rare ones who can understand this instruction because it is too simple. A few rare ones will see that it is the culmination of all spirituality, all parts, all the practices, all yoga; it’s just meant to culminate in this letting go.

Zoe says, “You are always holding my hand, Beloved Anantaji. Thank you, thank you, thank you.”   You are very welcome. Very good.

Lonai says, “That is known. You are in my heart and in my dream and none of it.” Yes. “It seems every construction is immediately dis-constructed.”   Very great. Yes. It just becomes like a game, like a play. Very, very good.

Jayani says, “Yes, it is that simple, Father.” Yes, it is that simple. “Laughter.” Yes, very good.

Much love, Clare, Vivi, thank you, love.

Jayani says, “On my knees, sobbing and laughing.”   Very good. [Smiles.]

And this letting go becomes a natural state. Initially it might seem effortful to some of you, but you see that this letting go is our natural state. Automatically all that is coming is allowed to come and allowed to go, and in this, we do not become tired. It is in the seeming mental effort to discover something that the tiredness comes. Like we had somebody a little earlier saying ‘I have been seeking for a long time and now I’m tired’. Good.

Shanti says, “Maybe sit in silence with you, Father?”   Yes, yes, very good.

Atma says, “Happy for all beings here for their seeing and…” <censored> “…happy.” Good.

So Shanti said ‘Maybe all sit in silence with you, Father’. Yes, unless someone has a burning freedom question, I feel it’ll be good if we all sit in silence together. And if you all sit in silence together, we must then be staying this silence; because I know some of you will start surfing the Internet and browsing for some websites and things like that. So if you all stay in silence together, it is very good. Just stay here, just let go of your next thought.

Kapil says, “Yes, the mind is saying ‘Letting go is not trivial, it is difficult’.”

Yes, even this can be let go of. It is neither simple nor difficult, it is just nothing at all. Don’t make any conclusions about the practice also. A lot of words will emerge from here just so that something is taken hold of. But don’t hold on to any of my words also. Don’t make tattoos out of any words. It is very good to be completely open and free.

Soham says, “I have to leave now, Father. So much love.” So much love to you, too. Very good.

Rolf said something, but the first word got censored and the second was silence. Yes. We’ll start the silence now.

Cornelia says, “Love you so much, Anantaji.” Love you too my dear.

Stay in satsang just with the simple pointing ‘Let go of your next thought’. All is allowed to come and go.

[Gazes at screen lovingly, smiling.]

Om shanti, shanti, shanti.

Thank you all for being in satsang today.  Moojiji ki jai.

Sangha:  Moojiji ki Jai !  Anantaji ki Jai !  Thank you. Love you.

There is so much untruth which can be seen through in every thought.

Q: “No evidence! (smile). Can’t stop laughing! Jai.”

Very good. Then this thought is not for you.

It’s like you got a wrong number on the phone, isn’t it? You got a wrong number on the phone and the voice is saying that you must now do this, you must not do this; it is saying all of this. And you haven’t checked who are you actually speaking to? You’re actually just believing this wrong number and following everything it had to say. And you gave it a direct connection now to speak to you, so it’s constantly speaking, and you’re believing everything it is saying and following this.

So, the Master is now telling you that this is a wrong number. J It is a wrong connection that you have been believing all this life. It is that simple actually. You picked up the phone, and it was a wrong number, but you never bothered to ask who you are talking to.

So now, it seems a little foolish initially because you’ve been listening to this voice for so long; that is why initially the resistance comes. When I say ‘Ask, who is this for?’ you say ‘No, no, no. It must be for me. I’ve been listening to this for so long’. And I say ‘But still, trust me, just ask: Who is this for?’ And then you’ll see it was never for You. You were never in this game at all. And then you can say ‘SORRY, WRONG NUMBER!’

It is used to now speaking to you. So it does not stop talking and tries to convince you ‘No, no, no, it is for you!’ But now you’ve seen that this one that is talking to you is not there at all. It is just a wrong number. It is that simple.

One of the things I feel to talk about today is that:

Even if we are all that is being witnessed, and if we are something specific that is being witnessed…,

If we say that we are this body that is being witnessed, and ultimately even if we say I am this thought which is being witnessed…,

suppose we were to say: ‘All of this phenomenon is completely real, and a part of this is me’…,

even then…, can anyone show me a person?

So we do not have to believe that anything is an illusion. We do not have to believe or force some belief that something is an illusion. If it is a clear insight arising within us, then it is okay to feel that. But to see that the phenomenal world is an illusion is not a pre-requisite to be free from suffering. So even if we give complete reality to this, we give complete reality to the body, even if we give complete reality to the thoughts and emotions, even then…, can you show me this person? Herein lies the root of suffering. In this person idea lies the root of suffering.

And I see a lot of struggle still happening for many from a personal perspective; a personal perspective in trying to understand this which is beyond a person. So to you I want to say: First, show me who is trying to understand. Where is this person who is trying so hard to understand? Is it the body who is trying to understand? Or is it the thought which is trying to understand? Is it an emotion which is trying to understand? What is trying to get this? Who is trying to understand this? You see? So first, let us start from there.

So before trying to understand some content, before trying to gain some new knowledge, can we identify who is this which is trying to get some knowledge or get some understanding? And many times, we create an aversion to this question. But I feel it is an essential question; more essential than trying to understand the content of it. Who is trying to get free?

Very good. So let’s read the chat.

Q: “Where is it? Can’t find anybody here.”  Exactly.

Another Q: “Father, it seems thought is trying to understand.”

Yes. But the thought is just a thought. It is a thought which arrives like words from the mouth, and it has a particular message. But this energy which is carrying this particular message, can it actually understand something? Does it have the potential to understand? So it cannot be a thought which is trying to understand. Can we locate this thought which is trying to understand?

Another Q: “Seeing.”

‘Seeing’ is trying to understand. But the seeing is just pure seeing; the pure witnessing, Awareness. Is it this Awareness trying to understand? Does it have any knowledge at all? Is it concerned with anything at all?

Another Q: “It seems that it is intellectually understood that the person is not here.”

Yes. And it is not bad to intellectually understand; but today what we’re trying to see is to see for ourselves that the person is here or not. I’m not even saying in the beginning that the person is not there. But I’m saying: Okay, give reality to all this phenomenon; suppose all of this is real. Even in this phenomena, show me what or where the person is.

Another Q: “The seeing is just seeing.”  Yes.

Seeing has no interest in any knowledge, in any concept of freedom; of anything at all.

Another Q: “I do not know.”  Yes. It’s good. This ‘do not know’ is much better than presuming that the person is there. To get to the ‘do not know’ stage is very good actually.

Another Q: “For the sake of looking; it seems there is a body / mind / emotion complex…”

Yes, yes. But let’s break it down, yes? So, you say ‘body’, yes. Body is here, and let’s presume it’s real; ‘mind’ in the sense that there are thoughts and similar energies like imagination, memories, they are there; then emotion is there. What makes it a complex? What makes it a complex? What makes it one organism? You see? Where is this complex? Where is it located?

Q: “…not I, but which is a response mechanism. The desire is to ‘undo’ that ‘computer thing’ that seems to act unconsciously.”

Yes. [Laughs]. It seems like that. But today we are seeing through this game completely; we’re seeing through the program completely. Hm? We’re looking through the matrix.

Another Q: “I don’t know either if it is not thought trying.”

Can we find out where the trying is first? Where is the trying?

Q: “A sense of self is trying to understand.”

Yes, that’s what we’re looking for today.

Q: “You asked..(smile).”  Yes, [Laughs]. “I so totally want to see through it.”

Yes, that’s the whole idea. So don’t worry, if you say something and I seem to confront that idea, it is to just see through what is going on. Hm?  Very good.

“Nobody; No-body here, Father. Nobody can be found. Nothing.”

Another Q: “It seems here that my imaginary self imagines a lack of understanding.”

[Laughs]. ‘..my imaginary self imagines a lack of understanding’. Yes. Or, one of the attributes of this imagined one seems to be the lack of understanding. Yes? So you see, you identified something very nice, and we should spend a couple of minutes on this. So, there are two positions for this imagined one. Two positions. One position that it takes is that there is a lack of understanding; that the imagined one has not understood something. The second position it can is that now it has understood. The imagined one will take the position of now it has understood. But the fact is that ultimately either is not true because it is still about the imagined one. That’s why I say if it’s still coming from a personal perspective, then it is not true; because first there must be a person whose perspective this is.

Another Q: “Just pure seeing.”

Another Q: “Something is trying, Father. What is it?”

‘Something is trying, Father. What is it?’ Can we find this that is trying? How can you confirm that something is trying? What does this one that is trying look like? What is seen so that you can report that something is trying? Is there a sense of effort, is there a sense of frustration, is there a sense of some other feeling? And whatever the feeling might be, does it have a person attached to it? Does it have a person attached to it, or is it standing on its own?

Another Q: “It is an old belief, never looked at.”

Yes, exactly, and that’s why it’s very important to look at. It is very important.

Another Q: “Sense is…”

Sense is intuition? Which sense is it? The sense of the ego? No, the sense of the ego is not intuition. But the sense of pure Being, like you say…, just the Beingness sense; the sense of intuition arises from this pure sense of Beingness. The intuition can be said to be the voice of this holy Presence itself.

Another Q: “Standing on its own; thoughts and feelings.”

Yes. And we presume that because this feeling is there of trying to understand, of some frustration, of trying to grasp something, therefore a person must be there. We take that giant leap, which is actually an impossible leap. But in our imagination, we take this giant leap that because thought or frustration is there, hence there must be a person that is frustrated. And that is why we are looking today for this person. And in this looking, there will be so much peace. Because even the spiritual search, even the spiritual search starts with the presumption that it is a personal search. But it is only the spiritual search, when done truly and done with integrity and with faith, which then leads to this moment. In this moment you will see that there has never been a person here. Just like some feelings and some thoughts and the body has been hanging in mid-air, in nothing at all, and we have claimed that nothing to be a person. Do we see this? Who is the thought speaking to? Who is the feeling communicating with? This one…, can you find this one?

And don’t work hard. Don’t work hard. Just simply check ‘Who does this feeling belong to?’ or ‘Who does this thought belong to?’ …, ‘Who is the thought speaking to?’ And I’m not using the word ‘ego’ because we never believe the ego itself, that our ego is like that; which resists the concept that I ever believed myself to be an ego. But when I use the ‘person’ then it is seen that I always believed myself to be a person; and we are looking for this person.

Another Q: “Yes, Father, there is so much peace in this looking and seeing that there is no person here. Thank you.”   Very good.

Another Q: “Yes, I see Beingness. This personhood is more like a strange déjà vu.” 

Yes, very well put. Very good. It’s a very strange idea. It’s a very strange belief. And we wonder where it came from actually.

Can anyone here tell me one thing that is clearly seen about this person; one attribute about this person that is seen. Any one thing…

Another Q: “Father, you make it so simple. (smile).”  Yes.

Another Q: “The sensations of tension and pain in this body are sometimes mistaken for a person, but each time I really look, they are nothing and dissolve into nothingness.”

Yes. And today we’re even taking it a step further. We’re saying that, suppose that the body is real, and the pain in the body is also real; and we don’t even need to say today that we are transcending anything. Suppose that all this tension, the pain, the body, everything is completely real because it appears to be here. You know, that’s the object that we get, you know? …, that it appears to be here so how can we say that it is not real? So let’s say okay, it appears to be here, so it is real. It is appearing, so let’s not argue with that. Now…, where is the person appearing? Where is the person appearing, and what does it look like? Because if it is an appearance, it must have an attribute, isn’t it? It must have at least one attribute. Can you show me an object without any attribute? Can you show me anything in the phenomenal world without any attribute?

Another Q: “Name, form, sensations and senses, and action…, for the sake of looking.”

Yes, so name is there, form is there, sensations are there, senses are there, action seems to happen, yes? But still, the seeming owner of all of this, which we have presumed is a person…, what is that? What does that look like? You see what I’m saying? So, we’re asking for the owner of all of this. Whose name is it? Whose form is this? Whose sensations are these? Whose thoughts are these? Whose imagination is this? Hm? And we have always presumed that it must be a person. So we’re saying: can we find this one who is the claimant to all of this? The one which we presume all of this belongs to, is that a person?

So, actually, these are not the attributes which we are asking for. These are the sort of the symptoms. But what are the attributes of the disease itself?

Another Q: “Nothing, nothing, nothing.”  Good.

Another Q: “It is a beautiful looking. When looking for the person, all I get is something, an image like my face; and something from memory. But it’s more like trying to conjure a person than reality.”

Exactly. So there’s again an image, isn’t it? There’s an image; but that, like any other thought, imagination, is seen like that. Is it really the person to which all of this belongs? See. See for your own self; that even if all of this phenomenal reality was to be completely real, see if you can find a person here.

Another Q: “…as attributes.”   Yes.

Another Q: “Very simple looking and seeing of all of these, but nobody here to be possessor of all this. Clear.”

Yes. So today we’re not calling the world an illusion, because there seems to be a lot of resistance to this; the debate which is never-ending. So forget about that debate. Say that the world, phenomena, everything is appearing, and hence must be real because I see it. No, I’m not arguing with that today. Hm? But even in this, can you show me the person?

Another Q: “Yes, nothing, nothing, nothing…”   Yes. Very good. Very good.

Another Q: “Person seems only a recognition that it never was, and always is ‘am’…”

Yes. But is this ‘am’ or the sense that ‘I am’ …,  is this ‘am’ a person? Does it have any personal attributes? Or is it not just pure Being itself? You see?

Another Q: “Speechless, Father.”   Very good. Good.

Another Q: “Don’t know what to say.”  Exactly. Good.

Another Q: “No person found…, just seeing the looking.”  Yes, very good.

Another Q: “Just empty space with strong sensations sensations and energies arising at the moment, yet they belong to no one.”

Even to say ‘strong’ is an interpretation. Very good. So there are energies and sensations which are arising.

Another Q: “Their relative strength sometimes makes the person seem real…”

That’s why I said that it’s best not to believe an interpretation about it, because in that sense of relativity, they seem to conjure up a sense of a person; which is exactly what you are saying. Yes. Very good. Good.

Another Q: “There’s a thought that appears sometimes, ‘…but everybody believes it’s real!’…, like that should somehow matter. (smile).”

This thought is just another thought. There was a time, like we said the other day in sastang; there was a time that everybody believed that this phenomenal appearance of the world is flat. Everybody believed that. Does that make it true?

Another Q: “The confusion always seems to be ‘Why is Being expressing all this personhood?’ …though don’t really need to know, since not-I.”

Let’s look at this. Why is Being expressing this personhood? [Eyes closed, silence].

Suppose that…, (actually this is seen here), that all time and space are projections of this Being itself; all time and space are projections of this Consciousness itself; everything is arising from this root ‘I Am’. And in this Being, there arose an urge to become a traveler through time and space…, to travel through time and space to have this experience of traveling through time and space. What would it have to do? Can it actually become the time and space traveler? No. Because all time and space is arising within it. So what it does is that it plays this game where it wears this veil of seeming-ignorance, or what we also call ‘the helmet of virtual reality’. So, it wears this veil of personhood, this belief of personhood. It then seems to navigate through this time and space. So this person, which is just a veil with no substance at all, seems to be navigating through this realm of time and space. And in this time and space, all this experiencing does happen. So, Being experiencing itself happens through this Divine game. You see?

But there comes a time where it has been enough of the playing. So, Being itself is saying ‘I’ve had enough’ and then this person idea is dissolving through (we can jokingly say, the last level in the game, where you meet) a Master who says ‘Who are you really? Wake up now. Wake up now. Who are you really?’

The Master himself is also a projection in the same game. It appears within the game of time and space in this way. And it appears this way, but actually its only Being playing this game with Itself, in its own creations called time and space. You see?

Another Q: “Time and space pass through me.”   Yes, exactly. “Hollow space flowing.”   Yes.

Q: “Is emptiness an attribute, Father?”

No. Emptiness is just a way to convey that there are no attributes. You see? Because if emptiness would be an attribute, then it would not be empty anymore. It would ‘own’ emptiness. You see? It is empty of all attributes including emptiness. Emptiness is also just another pointing. Can the seeing be called empty? No. Can it be called full? No. It is just the pure seeing itself.

Can the Being be called empty? No. It is just another pointer. It is just another ‘thorn’ which we are using to remove the older thorn; then both are thrown away.

Q: “Father, can you help here? The question arises ‘Who sees this space?’

Yes. We’ve already answered part of this. So if the mind is creating a picture of space…, you know, the mind offers us a visual metaphor for awareness. It will paint a picture like its just black space …, huge vast expanse of black space. It will offer us this picture and say ‘Hey, this is awareness. I have found it for you’. Isn’t it? Or for someone else, it could conjure up pure white light, pure white light, and say ‘This must be Awareness’. Or for someone else, it could be ‘Just heaven, angels singing; this is the realm of Awareness itself’. So all of these are just mind projections. It is never in the content of what is seen. And if we say ‘space’ or ‘emptiness’ sometimes, it is just as pointings. You see? So it is always the pure witnessing itself, the pure Awareness itself. Don’t buy any picture which the mind is painting. It is trying to be your ally now; it is trying to be your ally now and say ‘Here it is. I can show it to you’. And we see this beautiful image, and say ‘See, this must be it’. And we say ‘It is way more beautiful than anything I could ever see, so therefore this must be it’. But it is not true. It is the witnessing of even this. It is always only the witnessing of even this.

Namaste everyone. A very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

[Namaste] Very good. Welcome, welcome. Very good to have all of you with us. And if this is your very first time in satsang, know that the way to ask questions is through the chat window. And I’ll presume that everything is working well (A/V) unless I hear otherwise. Namaste, Namaste. Amaya says ‘All is well’. Yes. A/V’s okay.

So this week we’ve looked at, so far, the concept of surrender, then yesterday we looked at inquiry. And I have been getting some correspondence about the person concept, about the person idea. So I feel today we can spend a little bit of time just looking at this idea. And if Ian is here then we can also address some of the queries that he had yesterday; and if he’s not, that’s okay, too.

So one of the things I feel to talk about today is that even if we are all that is being witnessed, and if we are something specific that is being witnessed…, so if we say that we are this body that is being witnessed, and ultimately even if we say I am this thought which is being witnessed, all of this phenomenon, suppose we were to say, is completely real, and a part of this is ‘me’, even then, can anyone show me a person?

So we do not have to believe that anything is an illusion. We do not have to believe or force some belief that something is an illusion. If it is a clear insight arising within us, then it is okay to feel that. But to see that the phenomenal world is an illusion is not a pre-requisite to be free from suffering. So even if we give complete reality to this, we give complete reality to the body, even if we give complete reality to the thoughts and emotions, even then…, can you show me this person? Herein lies the root of suffering. In this person idea lies the root of suffering.

And I see a lot of struggle still happening for many from a personal perspective; a personal perspective in trying to understand this which is beyond a person. So to you I want to say: First, show me who is trying to understand. Where is this person who is trying so hard to understand? Is it the body who is trying to understand? Or is it the thought which is trying to understand? Is it an emotion which is trying to understand? What is trying to get this? Who is trying to understand this? You see? So first, let us start from there.

So before trying to understand some content, before trying to gain some new knowledge, can we identify who is this which is trying to get some knowledge or get some understanding? And many times, we create an aversion to this question. But I feel it is an essential question; more essential than trying to understand the content of it. Who is trying to get free?

Very good. So let’s read the chat.

So Atma says, “Where is it? Can’t find anybody here.”  Exactly.

Louise says, “Father, it seems thought is trying to understand.”

Yes. But the thought is just a thought. It is a thought which arrives like words from the mouth, and it has a particular message. But this energy which is carrying this particular message, can it actually understand something? Does it have the potential to understand? So it cannot be a thought which is trying to understand. Can we locate this thought which is trying to understand?

GoldenEagle says, “Seeing.”

‘Seeing’ is trying to understand. But the seeing is just pure seeing; the pure witnessing, Awareness. Is it this Awareness trying to understand? Does it have any knowledge at all? Is it concerned with anything at all?

Kapil says, “It seems that it is intellectually understood that the person is not here.”

Yes. And it is not bad to intellectually understand; but today what we’re trying to see is to see for ourselves that the person is here or not. I’m not even saying in the beginning that the person is not there. But I’m saying: Okay, give reality to all this phenomenon; suppose all of this is real. Even in this phenomena, show me what or where the person is.

GoldenEagle says, “The seeing is just seeing.”  Yes.

Seeing has no interest in any knowledge, in any concept of freedom; of anything at all.

Cornelia says, “I do not know.”  Yes. It’s good. This ‘do not know’ is much better than presuming that the person is there. To get to the ‘do not know’ stage is very good actually.

Amaya says, “For the sake of looking; it seems there is a body / mind / emotion complex…”

Yes, yes. But let’s break it down, yes? So, you say ‘body’, yes. Body is here, and let’s presume it’s real; ‘mind’ in the sense that there are thoughts and similar energies like imagination, memories, they are there; then emotion is there. What makes it a complex? What makes it a complex? What makes it one organism? You see? Where is this complex? Where is it located?

Then she says, “…not I, but which is a response mechanism. The desire is to ‘undo’ that ‘computer thing’ that seems to act unconsciously.”  Yes. [Laughs].

It seems like that. But today we are seeing through this game completely; we’re seeing through the program completely. Hm? We’re looking through the matrix.

Louise says, “I don’t know either if it is not thought trying.”

Can we find out where the trying is first? Where is the trying?

Louise says, “A sense of self is trying to understand.”

Yes, that’s what we’re looking for today.

Amaya says, “You asked..(smile).”  Yes, [Laughs]. “So totally want to see through it.”

Yes, that’s the whole idea. So don’t worry, if you say something and I seem to confront that idea, it is to just see through what is going on. Hm?  Very good.

Atma says, “Nobody; No-body here, Father. Nobody can be found. Nothing.”

Zoe says, “It seems here that my imaginary self imagines a lack of understanding.”

[Laughs]. ‘..my imaginary self imagines a lack of understanding’. Yes. Or, one of the attributes of this imagined one seems to be the lack of understanding. Yes? So you see, you identified something very nice, and we should spend a couple of minutes on this. So, there are two positions for this imagined one. Two positions. One position that it takes is that there is a lack of understanding; that the imagined one has not understood something. The second position it can is that now it has understood. The imagined one will take the position of now it has understood. But the fact is that ultimately either is not true because it is still about the imagined one. That’s why I say if it’s still coming from a personal perspective, then it is not true; because first there must be a person whose perspective this is.

Atma says, “Just pure seeing.”

Louise says, “Something is trying, Father. What is it?”

‘Something is trying, Father. What is it?’ Can we find this that is trying? How can you confirm that something is trying? What does this one that is trying look like? What is seen so that you can report that something is trying? Is there a sense of effort, is there a sense of frustration, is there a sense of some other feeling? And whatever the feeling might be, does it have a person attached to it? Does it have a person attached to it, or is it standing on its own?

Ustreamer535 says, “It is an old belief, never looked at.”

Yes, exactly, and that’s why it’s very important to look at. It is very important.

GoldenEagle says, “Sense is…”

Sense is intuition? Which sense is it? The sense of the ego? No, the sense of the ego is not intuition. But the sense of pure Being, like you say…, just the Beingness sense; the sense of intuition arises from this pure sense of Beingness. The intuition can be said to be the voice of this holy Presence itself.

Ajnani says, “Namaste. Sorry to be late.”   No worries. Good.

Louise says, “Standing on its own; thoughts and feelings.”

Yes. And we presume that because this feeling is there of trying to understand, of some frustration, of trying to grasp something, therefore a person must be there. We take that giant leap, which is actually an impossible leap. But in our imagination, we take this giant leap that because thought or frustration is there, hence there must be a person that is frustrated. And that is why we are looking today for this person. And in this looking, there will be so much peace. Because even the spiritual search, even the spiritual search starts with the presumption that it is a personal search. But it is only the spiritual search, when done truly, and done with integrity and with faith, which then leads to this moment. In this moment you will see that there has never been a person here. Just like some feelings and some thoughts and the body has been hanging in mid-air, in nothing at all, and we have claimed that nothing to be a person. Do we see this? Who is the thought speaking to? Who is the feeling communicating with? This one…, can you find this one?

And don’t work hard. Don’t work hard. Just simply check ‘Who does this feeling belong to?’ or ‘Who does this thought belong to?’ …, ‘Who is the thought speaking to?’ And I’m not using the word ‘ego’ because we never believe the ego itself, that our ego is like that; which resists the concept that I ever believed myself to be an ego. But when I use the ‘person’ then it is seen that I always believed myself to be a person; and we are looking for this person.

Atma says, “Yes, Father, there is so much peace in this looking and seeing that there is no person here. Thank you.”   Very good.

GoldenEagle says, “Yes, I see Beingness. This personhood is more like a strange déjà vu.”

Yes, very well put. Very good. It’s a very strange idea. It’s a very strange belief. And we wonder where it came from actually.

Can anyone here tell me one thing that is clearly seen about this person; one attribute about this person that is seen. Any one thing…

Atma says, “Father, you make it so simple. (smile).”  Yes.

Stacy says, “The sensations of tension and pain in this body are sometimes mistaken for a person, but each time I really look, they are nothing and dissolve into nothingness.”

Yes. And today we’re even taking it a step further. We’re saying that, suppose that the body is real, and the pain in the body is also real; and we don’t even need to say today that we are transcending anything. Suppose that all this tension, the pain, the body, everything is completely real because it appears to be here. You know, that’s the object that we get, you know? …, that it appears to be here so how can we say that it is not real? So let’s say okay, it appears to be here, so it is real. It is appearing, so let’s not argue with that. Now…, where is the person appearing? Where is the person appearing, and what does it look like? Because if it is an appearance, it must have an attribute, isn’t it? It must have at least one attribute. Can you show me an object without any attribute? Can you show me anything in the phenomenal world without any attribute?

Amaya says, “Name, form, sensations and senses, and action…, for the sake of looking.”

Yes, so name is there, form is there, sensations are there, senses are there, action seems to happen, yes? But still, the seeming owner of all of this, which we have presumed is a person…, what is that? What does that look like? You see what I’m saying? So, we’re asking for the owner of all of this. Whose name is it? Whose form is this? Whose sensations are these? Whose thoughts are these? Whose imagination is this? Hm? And we have always presumed that it must be a person. So we’re saying: can we find this one who is the claimant to all of this? The one which we presume all of this belongs to, is that a person?

So, actually, these are not the attributes which we are asking for. These are the sort of the symptoms. But what are the attributes of the disease itself?

Zoe says, “Nothing, nothing, nothing.”  Good.

Lucian says, “It is a beautiful looking. When looking for the person, all I get is something, an image like my face; and something from memory. But it’s more like trying to conjure a person than reality.”

Exactly. So there’s again an image, isn’t it? There’s an image; but that, like any other thought, imagination, is seen like that. Is it really the person to which all of this belongs? See. See for your own self; that even if all of this phenomenal reality was to be completely real, see if you can find a person here.

Amaya says, “…as attributes.”   Yes.

Atma says, “Very simple looking and seeing of all of these, but nobody here to be possessor of all this. Clear.”

Yes. So today we’re not calling the world an illusion, because there seems to be a lot of resistance to this; the debate which is never-ending. So forget about that debate. Say that the world, phenomena, everything is appearing, and hence must be real because I see it. No, I’m not arguing with that today. Hm? But even in this, can you show me the person?

Amaya says, “Yes, nothing, nothing, nothing…”   Yes. Very good. Very good.

GoldenEagle says, “Person seems only a recognition that it never was, and always is ‘am’…”

Yes. But is this ‘am’ or the sense that ‘I am’ …,  is this ‘am’ a person? Does it have any personal attributes? Or is it not just pure Being itself? You see?

Louise says, “Speechless, Father.”   Very good. Good.

Kapil says “Don’t know what to say.”  Exactly. Good.

Ustreamer113 says, “No person found…, just seeing the looking.”  Yes, very good.

Jayani says, “Just empty space with strong sensations sensations and energies arising at the moment, yet they belong to no one.”

Even to say ‘strong’ is an interpretation. Very good. So there are energies and sensations which are arising.

“Their relative strength sometimes makes the person seem real…”

That’s why I said that it’s best not to believe an interpretation about it, because in that sense of relativity, they seem to conjure up a sense of a person; which is exactly what you are saying. Yes. Very good. Good.

Lucian says, “There’s a thought that appears sometimes, ‘…but everybody believes it’s real!’…, like that should somehow matter. (smile).”

This thought is just another thought. There was a time, like we said the other day in sastang; there was a time that everybody believed that this phenomenal appearance of the world is flat. Everybody believed that. Does that make it true?

Amaya says, “The confusion always seems to be ‘Why is Being expressing all this personhood?’ …though don’t really need to know, since not-I.”

Let’s look at this. Why is Being expressing this personhood? [Eyes closed, silence].

Suppose that…, (actually this is seen here), that all time and space are projections of this Being itself; all time and space are projections of this Consciousness itself; everything is arising from this root ‘I Am’. And in this Being, there arose an urge to become a traveler through time and space…, to travel through time and space to have this experience of traveling through time and space. What would it have to do? Can it actually become the time and space traveler? No. Because all time and space is arising within it. So what it does is that it plays this game where it wears this veil of seeming-ignorance, or what we also call ‘the helmet of virtual reality’. So, it wears this veil of personhood, this belief of personhood. It then seems to navigate through this time and space. So this person, which is just a veil with no substance at all, seems to be navigating through this realm of time and space. And in this time and space, all this experiencing does happen. So, Being experiencing itself happens through this Divine game. You see?

But there comes a time where it has been enough of the playing. So, Being itself is saying ‘I’ve had enough’ and then this person idea is dissolving through (we can jokingly say, the last level in the game, where you meet) a Master who says ‘Who are you really? Wake up now. Wake up now. Who are you really?’

The Master himself is also a projection in the same game. It appears within the game of time and space in this way. And it appears this way, but actually its only Being playing this game with Itself, in its own creations called time and space. You see?

GoldenEagle says, “Time and space pass through me.”   Yes, exactly.

Okay, I missed some [chat]. Let me see…

GoldenEagle said, “Hollow space flowing.”   Yes.

Jayani says, “Is emptiness an attribute, Father?”

No. Emptiness is just a way to convey that there are no attributes. You see? Because if emptiness would be an attribute, then it would not be empty anymore. It would ‘own’ emptiness. You see? It is empty of all attributes including emptiness. Emptiness is also just another pointing. Can the seeing be called empty? No. Can it be called full? No. It is just the pure seeing itself.

Can the Being be called empty? No. It is just another pointer. It is just another ‘thorn’ which we are using to remove the older thorn; then both are thrown away.

Jayani says, “Father, can you help here? The question arises ‘Who sees this space?’

Yes. We’ve already answered part of this. So if the mind is creating a picture of space…, you know, the mind offers us a visual metaphor for awareness. It will paint a picture like its just black space …, huge vast expanse of black space. It will offer us this picture and say ‘Hey, this is awareness. I have found it for you’. Isn’t it? Or for someone else, it could conjure up pure white light, pure white light, and say ‘This must be Awareness’. Or for someone else, it could be ‘Just heaven, angels singing; this is the realm of Awareness itself’. So all of these are just mind projections. It is never in the content of what is seen. And if we say ‘space’ or ‘emptiness’ sometimes, it is just as pointings. You see? So it is always the pure witnessing itself, the pure Awareness itself. Don’t buy any picture which the mind is painting. It is trying to be your ally now; it is trying to be your ally now and say ‘Here it is. I can show it to you’. And we see this beautiful image, and say ‘See, this must be it’. And we say ‘It is way more beautiful than anything I could ever see, so therefore this must be it’. But it is not true. It is the witnessing of even this. It is always only the witnessing of even this.

Hope it’s a little more clear, Jayani. Otherwise you can ask more.

GoldenEagle said, “Time and space pass through me.”  Yes, we read that.

Atma says, “Thank you, Father, for this explanation.”

Ishani says, “Father, To be a person, need to go to past. So in that sense, feels like a single word does not need to be spoken about it.”

Yes. Very good. When the seeing is clear, and we’re completely now in the Now, then we do not need to speak anything at all actually. Satsang could just become this silent satsang, this silent sitting, and ultimately the Presence of the Master is also felt right there. It could also be said that no physical form of satsang is also needed then. Yes.

But there still must be something, some confusion in someone here, who is listening for whom these words are appearing like this; either now or through the recording or some way…, there must be some (news?) (muse?) of these words appearing for someone with the openness, yet still some confusion about personhood.

Otherwise, I have seen usually when I’m in a room of people and I sense no openness…, and it’s not even a conscious-sensing of no openness, no judgment, it’s just there; and you see that this tongue does not move at all, no words come out. So the Satguru which is using this mouth, using this body, does not waste its words. So if the words are coming, must be for something which is getting opened up here.

Lonai says, “Since yesterday it is like everything happens inside [in capitals] ME (which is not person-me), and everything is nothing. But it does not feel like awakening.”

Yes. Have no presumptions about what awakening is. Carry no ideas about what an awakening is. Because this idea of an awakening, or something that should happen, or some fireworks, or completely in a particular way which we’ve always imagined it to be; or read from other people’s experience; don’t presume any of this.

In this moment, you are free, you are awake. The only bondage seems to be the believed bondage of thought, which is never real. You see? So what must happen for you to be completely sure that you are free? What is the event that must happen to convince you of your freedom? Don’t believe your  mind’s ideas about even the awakening.

Then Lonai says, “Every sound, every happening happens inside me, and happens not at all; and I am also inside what is (not) happening.”  Exactly. Very good. Good.

Srikanth says, “Namaste & Love.  Maharaj.”  Namaste. Love to you, too.

Ginger says, “The ‘I’ thought is the last thought, Anantaji?”

We can say it like that. The personal ‘I’ thought can be said to be the last thought; because when that it plucked out, then thoughts will still come. You see? Thoughts will still come. But …Oh, the question was ‘the last thorn’.  Yes. We can say it like that. If this thorn is removed, then no other thorn has a place; because the person idea itself is the ground in which all these thorns can strewn. Yes, you can say like that.

And for those that are new to satsang, don’t feel like you first have to pluck out all the other thorns and then this is the last one. Hm? If you plucked out the person idea itself, then it is all over. It could be in the first satsang itself. It could be in one glance. It could be in one glimpse of the truth that the person idea dissolves.

Atma says, “It is always only the witnessing of all. Yes, yes.”

Cornelia Says, “Yes, to find this person I need to remember the past.”

Or project into the future.

Atma says, “Love you soo much, Father. (smile).”

GoldenEagle says, “Master listening to the Master ..hahahaa.”

Yes. But in this understanding then it is seen that there is no Master at all. It is all One Being Itself. But I get what you’re saying. It’s good.

Ishani says, “Yes, Father, at your feet. Thank you for your Presence that is here only to awaken the truth.”

Very welcome, my dear. And your Presence also, thank you for your Presence also.

Jayani says, “Somehow’ the same guy’ always wants clarification. There is only this emptiness, which is neither full nor empty. It is just Here.”

Yes. It is very beautiful. And it is okay. If ‘the same guy’ also wants this clarification in satsang, it’s good; because maybe even this guy is sort of tired now, and is waiting with baited breath for its own head to be cut off. So it’s good that you bring this guy here and expose it. It’s very good. You should never be shy to expose what is coming up strongly or being revealed in satsang. Never be…

I see all of you as only the Self, irrespective of what the testimony might be. It’s good for all of this to be coming up and to get burnt in the fire of satsang. Very good.

Jayani says, “This guy wants to understand words like awareness, witnessing, seeing; but actually nothing computes. Just here placing all in the fire. All is nothing.”

Yes. So today we are looking for ‘this guy’. Is it real at all? You see? So because there seems to be this pattern to the thoughts that emerge, which are always grasping and trying to understand these concepts…, so the thought will say ‘I have now understood awareness’. Or a thought will say ‘I can never understand awareness’. Both of them mean nothing. And just because the thought is there doesn’t mean that there’s a ‘guy’ whose thought it is. Yeah? So that is the presumption that is made, because the ‘voice’ is there, hence there must be a mouth which is speaking also. This mouth actually is non-existent, in this case. Very good.

Atma says, “There is no Master, only One Being Itself. Yesssss.”  Very good.

Jayani says, “No, not at all. Really funny.”

Denan says, “Yes, something still feels that a person is here, even though one can’t be found…, putting into the fire.”   Very good.

So don’t presume to operate from the person idea until you find some evidence of this person. And the minute you find any evidence of this person, you send me an email, you send me a message; do something, and we’ll look at it together. But until you find some evidence do not operate from the personal idea.

But then the ‘person’ will say, or the ‘person’ will seem to say ‘What will happen to the life of this person?’ Don’t worry about even this; and you will see that everything is flowing so auspiciously. Don’t operate from the space of this imagined one…, or, you tell me that ‘I see it is not imagined’. It must be one of the two. So that is what I am imploring you to do in some sense today. Hm? Not really imploring, because I know all of this is just a game, but that is what I’m imploring all of you to do right now today. Until you find some evidence of this person, do not operate as a person; don’t operate from the personal perspective. You see?

Ginger says, “Exposing shame and arrogance rising in satsang.”

Very good, very, very good. Because it takes integrity and honesty to expose like that; in a seeming-room full of 30 people, so say that there is shame and also there is arrogance. And this power of honesty and integrity, I can say that freedom is here. Freedom is here. Your light is shining now on all that seems to be hidden. You have given some space to some concepts to hide, and now you’re shining your own light in it, and in the shining of this light itself, it is enough. Because the darkness cannot actually survive the presence of light; and you see that darkness never existed at all. That’s very good. Very happy to read this.

Zoe says, “Am beginning to appreciate the beauty of knowing nothing, nothing, nothing. Thank you, beloved Father. (smile).”  Very good.  Thank you, too, my child.

Ginger says, “They dance a terrible dance.”

Let them dance whatever they’re dancing. You hold my hand and stay here. Nothing will happen. You see? The Satguru is holding your hand already. You and this Satguru are the same actually. So let all this arrogance, shame, desire, concept…, any concept, let them dance whatever they’re dancing. Nothing will touch you now.

Atma says, “hahaahaha for sending a mail.”

Yes! Don’t operate from this personal idea, and whenever you feel you have evidence that ‘I am this person’ you send me a message. All of you, this is open for all of you.

Ginger says, “I know this is illusion. It is habit; conditioning. Just exposing it in the light of this love!”

Very good. Exactly what we said; when you expose it in the light, then it will not last.

Lonai says, “Also You, Ananta, is inside ME. (Smile)”    Of course.   “It does not feel like awakening, it feels like a direct seeing of everything.”

Just drop any idea of awakening. Don’t have any concept of awakening. Suppose you never heard the word before. There is no awakening. Suppose you never heard the word awakening. Then…?

Jayani says, “This ‘guy’ doesn’t exist for this seeming ‘girl’.”  Yes. [Laughs]. Very good.

Ustreamer113 says, “Beautiful, thank you, Father.”  Very welcome, my dear. This is Stacy, she says “So beautiful, thank you, Father.”   Very welcome, my dear. Very good.

Jayani says, “Father, please put your foot on ‘my’ head and crush it. Even this is an illusory request.”

Yes. In the game, it seems to play like this. Very good. [Long silence]. Very nice.

Louise says, “Father, I don’t think I can go to work now. lol”

Just stop at ‘I don’t think’.  [Laughs] And then let whatever has to unfold, unfold. You see? And ‘I don’t think’ means ‘I don’t give my belief to any thought’.

Naomi says, “Beautiful. Letting go of all thoughts and concepts of self. Just presence. Thank you.”  Very welcome, my dear. Very good.

Jayani says, “THANK YOU.”   Very welcome.

Kapil says, “The person here is assuming ‘that will mean loss of interest in life’.

We said: Before you take on the personal perspective on anything, no matter what it is saying… Thoughts are always assuming that you are operating from a personal perspective. So before you believe any thought, send me the evidence which you have about being a person. Send me any evidence that you might have that you are the one that this thought is speaking about. There are so many presumptions, so many lies in every thought.

If you look at this one, it says ‘it will mean the loss of interest in life’ as if life depended on a person’s interest to live itself. Also that it will presume a loss, which itself is a lie. There is so much untruth which can be seen through in every thought.

Kapil says, “No evidence! (smile). Can’t stop laughing! J .”     Very good. Then this thought is not for you.

It’s like you got a wrong number on the phone, isn’t it? You got a wrong number on the phone and the voice is saying that you must now do this, you must not do this; it is saying all of this. And you haven’t checked who are you actually speaking to? You’re actually just believing this wrong number and following everything it had to say. And you gave it a direct connection now to speak to you, so it’s constantly speaking, and you’re believing everything it is saying and following this.

So, the Master is now telling you that this is a wrong number. J It is a wrong connection that you have been believing all this life. It is that simple actually. You picked up the phone, and it was a wrong number, but you never bothered to ask who you are talking to.

So now, it seems a little foolish initially because you’ve been listening to this voice for so long; that is why initially the resistance comes. When I say ‘Ask, who is this for?’ you say ‘No, no, no. It must be for me. I’ve been listening to this for so long’. And I say ‘But still, trust me, just ask: Who is this for?’ And then you’ll see it was never for You. You were never in this game at all. And then you can say ‘SORRY, WRONG NUMBER!’

It is used to now speaking to you. So it does not stop talking and tries to convince you ‘No, no, no, it is for you!’ But now you’ve seen that this one that is talking to you is not there at all. It is just a wrong number. It is that simple.

Stacy says, “This was a beautiful looking today. Feel that with strong sensations continue to seemingly pull me into illusion of person.”   Seeming is good. As long as it is ‘seemingly’ it is good.   “Will continue looking today for who are these sensations arising.”

Yes, very good. Just to quickly just confirm; just quickly confirm. It is good. Every time something seems to be strong, just confirm. It’s simple.

Jyoti says, “I like this phone analogy! J  Wrong number.”  Yes, yes. [Laughs]. It is actually the wrong number.

Amaya says, “All arises and subsides in awareness seeing. Surrendering whatever gets annoyed that the person idea is still operating…”    Yes. Very good you’re surrendering this. Very good.   “… and having to live with effects of  ‘unreal’.”   Yes. I’m very happy to read this. Good to see that you’re surrendering all of this. Very good.  “Thank you for taking it all.”   Very welcome. That’s my job. Very good.

[Lots of chat messages saying:  “Hahaha. Wrong number.]

Wrong number, yes. [Laughs]. It’s completely the wrong number, and we never asked before satsang ‘Who are you talking to’. I like this example as well. Very nice.

Ginger says, “The wrong number…, such good news!!!”

Yes, the best news! It was never about me. All that this voice has been saying, through thoughts; all that it has been saying has never been about me. And there is no better news than this. Very good. [Moments of silence and smiling into the camera]. All illusion has been this ‘wrong number’.

Jayani says, “Father, I just feel to expose that there seems to still be an interest in this play, but the person who is interested doesn’t exist. Just giving it all to you, Father.”

Yes, so interest is there. It can be there with a sense of wonder, to see how it is going to unfold. In this way we say that life becomes this game, this fun movie. There’s a wonder to see how it’s going to unfold. So much wonder in every moment. But when it becomes a personal interest, then it becomes fear, then it becomes regret, it becomes pride, it becomes anger. You know?

So when we look at it, there can be this interest with a sense of wonder. That’s why I feel there has been no interest in any sort of Yogic siddhis’ here. You know what they are, these super-powers that are supposed to accompany so-called enlightenment? … that you will get to know what the future is, you will get to know everything about everything. There is no interest here to find any of that out; no interest. Because there is so much wonder here, so much amazement at how such beauty is unfolding every single moment. And this is Experiencing experiencing itself. You see?

So nothing wrong with any of this sense of wonder, any of this interest, as long as there is no person involved. And if there is no person involved, there can be no fear and anticipation; any of these.

[Laughs to read]: Jyoti says, “Wrong number on the phantom phone. Hehehe.”  Yes, completely.

Ishani says, “Love you, Father. Feel blessed to have your kind Presence as myself.”

You, too, my child. Very good.

Amaya says, “Thank you so much. Love you, Father, and sangha.”  Love you, too.

Stacy says, “I love you, Father”   I love you, too.  “Thank you for guiding us home where we never actually left.”   Yes. You are home. You are home. Very good.

Atma says, “Jai, jai, jai.”

Stacy says, “Hehehe.  It’s all been one phantom phone conversation.”   Yes. [Laughs].

Louise says, “So much love, Father. Nothing else to say.” Very good.

Thank you all so very much [Namaste] for a beautiful satsang today.

Moojiji ki Jai!

So much love to all of you.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Reading chat coming in]:

Rolf says, “Beautiful to share / receive satsang in this interactive way, Ananta. This is right number.”  [Laughs]. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Sangha: Moojiji ki Jai!  Anantaji ki Jai!  Thank you. Love you.

Namaste, everyone. A very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

[Namaste] Thank you all so much for joining in. We also have Shiva from Tiru with us today who is in Bangalore. Say hi Shiva. [Turns the camera to show Shiva who waves and says ‘Hi’].

Shiva says, “I’m so happy to be here.”      And I’m also very happy.

So what shall we speak about today? Namaste, Namaste. We had a beautiful satsang yesterday about surrender. There was a feeling here to speak about surrender. It was very beautiful. And today there’s some feeling to speak a little bit about inquiry. Hm? Because the word ‘inquiry’ gets used a lot. Especially in satsang, we hear the word ‘inquiry’ a lot so there was a feeling to speak about inquiry.

Rashmi says, “Who’s with you Father?”

So, again we can get Shiva to say hi. This is Shiva, an old friend of ours from Tiruvannamalai and Rishikesh. All of us love him. Mooji loves him, [laughter from Anantaji as Shiva puts hands together in greeting]. Shiva is coming right now from Tiru but he is going back up north to Dharmashala now. Okay, we have a question.

Lonai says, “I have been contemplating on surrendering, and it seems that full surrendering is merging into one with the one.”

Yes. We can look at this. [Repeats question] So we’ll look at this for a while today. Also, you can have a look at the recording of yesterday’s satsang because the entire satsang was mostly about surrender. You can look at that.

What I want to say is that: Remember that surrender is not an action; surrender is only a realization that there was never a person here anyway even to surrender. So, surrender is not an action waiting to happen, it is a simple realization that this ego never existed, and it cannot do anything. It cannot even surrender. But, until that is completely seen, it is good to say ‘Let thy will be done’. Hm? Whatever you believe in, be it God, be it Master it is good to say ‘Let thy will be done’. And then, as you keep saying ‘Let thy will be done’ you will see that it was always the Guru’s will, always God’s will which was happening anyway. And that realization is the complete realization of surrender.

So while it is felt that a ‘person’ still exists, it is okay to say that ‘I am now surrendering to you’. And in this process itself, the person idea will dissolve. It will get completely washed out in this surrender itself, and you will see that it is only Grace which has been doing everything; including the idea of surrendering.

So, I felt today we can speak a little bit about inquiry as well. Maybe we can take some of these terms, which we use so often, and look at them closely, at what they really imply. I see many of these terms, and that’s why I felt to speak about surrender yesterday. I feel that with many of these terms now, there is still a lot of misconception about what it means. That’s why we looked at surrender yesterday, and today for awhile I feel we can look at inquiry also.

Self Inquiry:

So, when we say ‘Self Inquiry’ what is it that we are really saying?

What is the inquiry really about?

What is it that we want to find out?  Ultimately, what we are looking for is an answer to the root question.

We start off by looking for an answer to the root question which is ‘Who am I?’

We can say ‘Who am I?’ or even we can say ‘What am I?’

So, the inquiry starts off with this simple question.

And it is greatly auspicious in this play when there is openness towards the simple question ‘Who am I?’

There must already be some seeing, isn’t there?

There must be some seeing that ‘I cannot be this person’.

Only then can there be an openness to this question.

If there is total conviction in the belief of being an ego, total conviction in the belief of being a person, then the question will face so much resistance.

And because this question faces so much resistance, it is good to have a Master who you have faith in, who you trust, who you love. Because if the question is asked by somebody that you trust, that you love, then this trust and this love will help in overcoming the resistance coming from your own mind.

The Inquiry is just a simple questioning about our true nature: ‘What am I in reality?’

And, initially there seems to be a process prescribed as to how this inquiry can be done and this aligns very well with the ancient Indian process called ‘Neti-Neti’ which means ‘Not that-Not that’.

So, basically what we are saying is that whatever is clearly not me, that, we are keeping aside.

So we say ‘This world which is appearing through my senses, this world of objects and phenomena is ever changing, but I am here witnessing this change.

So I am the constant in this, but this world is ever-changing.

Therefore, I cannot be this.’

We say ‘Not that.’

In one swoop we have thrown out all the phenomenal existence of the world saying ‘I am not that.’

Then we turn inward and we see ‘What else could I be?

What else could I be if I am not an object in the world?’

And also, when we look at the body, we see that ‘I cannot be just the sum of what I seem to have eaten. I cannot be just made up of the food that has been consumed. There is something more to me than that. This body is also constantly changing and I am the witness of this change also.

This body is changing all the time, but I am looking at this and I don’t seem to be changing. Therefore, I cannot be this body.’

So we say ‘not the world and not the body also, which is part of the appearance.’

‘Then, what else can I be?’

‘Can I be the thoughts? A thought would come and a thought could go. It is constantly coming and going. It is coming and it is going and there seems to be a witnessing of these thoughts. I seem to be the witness of these thoughts. I don’t seem to be the content of it.

Therefore even this thought, I am not.

And the mind appears to be only a bundle of these thoughts. These thoughts: including thoughts of past which is called memory, thoughts like imagination; all these are also witnessed by me but I don’t seem to be any of them.

So I am not that also.

Then, who am I? I am not the world. I am not the body. I am not the thoughts.’

‘Then, who am I?’

‘What else is there?

Can I be my emotions? One minute there is anger, second minute there is joy, another time there is frustration, and another time there is peace. I am aware of all of this and I seem to be the witnessing of these. It does not seem like I am any of these changing emotions also.

Therefore, I am not that. Then, who am I? Not these emotions also.’

‘Then, who am I?’

‘Then I see that prior to all of this, prior to all of this, there appears to be the sense that I am.

And only when I am, all these other phenomena come into play.

It seems like I am ‘Being’.

That there is a Being here.

This Being seems to have a beautiful presence, pure innocence unassociated with any other concept; just the pure Beingness itself, just the sense that I Am.’

It is not the thought ‘I am’.

Many of us mistake the sense I Am to be the thought ‘I am’.

This Being is prior to thought.

In the simplest way, to become aware of this Being is to ask ‘Can I stop Being now?’

And there can be a time when there is no thought, but I am still Being. Isn’t it?

‘I am still Being.’

So this Being is ever-present. In the waking states and the dream state this Being is always present.

But even then we ask: ‘Is there is something which is aware of even this pure Being?’

This pure Consciousness itself; there is awareness of it. Isn’t it? And even this Consciousness seems to come and go.

When I am asleep, then even this presence ‘I Am’ is not there.

But I am aware of its presence and absence also.

I am able to report that ‘in deep sleep, it was not there’.

So I am not even this Consciousness.’

‘Then, who am I?’

What seems to be left now is only the pure Witnessing of all of this.

There is a witnessing of all of this.

And it is the Witnessing itself which is witnessing itself.

Therefore in the simple question ‘Are you aware now?’ we see that Awareness is aware of itself.

And, this Awareness seems to be all there is: the unmoving, untouched witnessing to all that exists.

‘I am this which no words can accurately describe’.

And this simple seeing is the fruit of the Self Inquiry.

Very good.

Om, Shanti, Shanti, Shanti.

So, we see that the inquiry starts off with a question, but if all that you have at the end of the inquiry is a verbal answer…, the smart answer is not the end of the inquiry.

It is just the simple seeing that ‘I am this pure Witnessing itself.

I am this pure Awareness itself’.

In this simple seeing there is no room left for a personal identity.

No person can exist here at all.

Okay, let’s look at the questions.

Let’s start with Cornelia who says, “Is it possible that I am not even the ‘I’?”    Yes. As long as we’re referring to the ‘I’ as a personal identity or an entity, it is possible.

[Cornelia], “This Being is Consciousness, the feeling I am?”

This Being, the Beingness is Consciousness itself, the presence ‘I Am’. Not the thought ‘I am’.

Ginger says, “So being is synonymous with aliveness/life in this body?”

Yes. So when we’re referring to ourselves as Consciousness, we can say that ‘I am life itself’. But ultimately we have seen that we are the Awareness even of this life.

So in this inquiry ‘What am I?’ it is clearly seen that I cannot be the ego, I cannot be a person at all. I am this pure Awareness itself. It’s clear?

Any questions about the Inquiry? Do you get stuck somewhere, you feel? You can ask any questions about it. Or if there are any other burning questions, we can look at those as well.

Om says, “Father, Stacy says [she can’t get onto Ustream right now] that she’s in satsang and she’s happy to be here.”      Very good. Welcome back Stacy.

Aryev says, “Yes. Thank you, Ananta.”

Cornelia says, “Clear.”

Kapil says, “Should this inquiry be done like a regular meditation practice? Or would that increase the doer-ship feeling?”

That’s a very good question. So my suggestion is don’t make a practice out of it. Once it is seen that this is what I am, then does it need to be practiced? Does practice make it better? We could only practice that which makes something better. But initially it is okay to confirm.

We keep taking this example: If we always believe that the sun rises from the west, and the Master comes and says ‘No, no, no! It actually rises from the east’, because you trust and love the Master you say ‘Okay, I will check’. So the Master is actually saying ‘You are not this person. You are this pure Awareness itself’ and because you love and trust the Master, you’re willing to check. Through the inquiry you’ll check and see ‘Yes. This seems to be true’. But it does seem initially that the conviction was very strong that the sun rises from the west. Any time we are suffering…, so suffering is, as my Master says, God’s alarm clock. So, when suffering comes we know that we are believing the sun is rising from the west; when I am believing that I am a person. Very quickly, this question ‘Who am I?’ can cut through all of that.

Why I am saying ‘Don’t make a practice out of it’ is because some of us try to use it like a band aid. We go about our own way believing every egoic thought, and then when the suffering becomes too much, we want to sit and say ‘Who am I, who am I?’ So, rather than that, I would say just let go of every thought. Simply put: Let go of your next thought. Just let go of your next thought.

Now that the true seeing has happened of yourself as this Awareness itself, then you don’t necessarily need to go through the whole process of ‘Not that, not that, not that’. It’s very simple. In a moment you’re back to seeing your own true reality, and the confusion about misbelief can be dropped.

In the simplest question ‘Are you aware now?’ there is a lot of potency to just cut through all the misbelief. But any time you feel ‘there is suffering here’ or there is something you want to do then the Inquiry is a beautiful thing to do.

Ginger says, “Anantaji, is it okay to ask, ‘Who sees this?’ or ‘Who is the see-er?’ rather than ‘Who am I?’”

Yes, yes. It’s a good thing to ask as well ‘Who sees this?’ Because if it is clear to you that ‘I cannot be that which is seen, that I must be the witnessing itself’ then it is also simple to ask ‘Who sees this?’

There are many versions of this inquiry. Isn’t it? We can say ‘Who sees this?’ or we can say ‘Who is suffering from this?’ when there is suffering. We can say ‘Who is believing this?’ That is fine as well.

Ustreamer986 says, “Is it so simple, Father, this before I am?”     Yes.

The mind will try to tell you that it is not simple, that there are few rare beings who see this. The mind will say ‘It is one in a billion’. But you, right now, when I ask you ‘Are you aware now?’…, and if you are not playing with the mind, you will say ‘Yes’. With a child like innocence, you will just say ‘Yes. I am aware now’.

And, then I ask you ‘What is seen that you are able to confirm this?’ Is there an object that was seen? Is there a phenomenon that was seen that you’re able to confirm that ‘I am aware’? No. It is just Awareness is aware of itself. In the simplest possible way.

But, if we keep waiting for the mind’s confirmation that ‘Yes, yes this is it’…, if you’re waiting for the mind to say that, it will not say that. It will always say ‘Almost there. A little bit more. Just one more satsang. One more season with Mooji.’ You know? Something like that it will say. But, you are aware right now.

What is aware? It is Awareness itself which knows awareness. You did not see an object to answer this question, and no object saw Awareness to confirm this answer. It is just Awareness being aware of Awareness itself.

Don’t give these words to the mind. The mind will always say ‘This is too abstract, too confusing’. The question is very simple: ‘Are you aware now?’ The answer always comes with a momentary clarification inside that ‘Yes’. So, it is as simple as that.

Cornelia asks a very good question. She says, “Who is doing the inquiry?”      Very good.

There is only one doer of all actions. There is only one doer of all actions. And, this ‘one doer’ is Consciousness itself. So it is Consciousness itself which deluded itself to believe that it is a person, and it is Consciousness itself which comes in the form of the Master and says ‘No, but you are not a person’ and this is the Divine Lila. The one Consciousness plays the role of the deluded and the one who is pointing towards freedom from delusion. It is the same doer, the one doer and the one experiencer, who also does the inquiry to rid itself of the misbelief that it is a person.

In the play it seemed like this Consciousness has become addicted to the idea of person- hood. That is why the Master routinely says that satsang is rehab for God himself. God, in the play, seems to have deluded Himself into believing the idea of person-hood. God himself is coming as the Master and saying that ‘You were never this person’. So it is actually a monologue that Consciousness is having with itself. If the person never existed then that which never existed can never do anything at all.

Ian says, “Ananta, I still find ‘awareness being self aware’ not my truth. If this was the case, would we not have been aware before birth, like many hope to be after death?”

Okay, so we’ll talk about the birth and death. Can you tell me ‘Are you aware now?’ Just look and tell me if you are aware now.     Then Ian says, “Sorry. Same old guy I guess.”      No. no. I’ve been waiting to complete this conversation. It’s very good.

So Ian says, “I can say only Consciousness now. I need Consciousness to answer this.”

So what is this ‘I’ that needs Consciousness to answer this? We seem to be making it more difficult than it is because we’re relying on something we know about Consciousness. To be aware now, to answer whether you are aware now or not, what is needed? You only need to answer in ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.

Just pretend as if you are on the witness stand. [Laughing] You’re on the witness stand and you’re only allowed to give a ‘yes’ and ‘no’ answer to this question ‘Are you aware now?’ No other facts or knowledge is required

Ian says, “But without Consciousness does not everything go? This is my sense.”

Yes. So, we’ll look at that but, first let’s be in the now and answer. See, I cannot have this conversation with you when you are asleep. Isn’t it? So we’ll start from this waking state and then you’ll see whether you are aware now or not; and then we can talk about what could be happening when Consciousness is not present.

Ian says, “Hmm, yes or no answer: I would not know in this sense what it means to be aware.”

Is there a witnessing here now? Forget about the content of what is being witnessed. We’re not talking about the content. So, we’re not talking about whether I Am is witnessed. We’re not talking about whether the body is witnessed or the external world is witnessed. But can you really deny the existence of this witnessing here now, which is perceiving the entire play?

Then you say, “In meditation when all objects go (very rare for me)…”  Yes, me too.     “…awareness seems to go. Things just disappear.”

What about now? Is the witnessing absent now?

Then you say, “Actually awareness does not go, but awareness of awareness goes.”

[Laughing] But, what about now? [Looking very lovingly and with compassion at screen]

[Ian says], “I can say I am witnessing, yes.”      Very good.

What was seen to confirm that you are witnessing, to report that ‘I am witnessing now’? What was seen? You will see that there is a witnessing here that is seen. But is it seen as an object? Is it seen even as a sense ‘I Am’? We can never deny that the witnessing is here, or that ‘I am aware now’. But what is seen to confirm it?

[Shiva begins to laugh, softly at first then more joyously and continues while Anantaji smiles brightly and nods in his direction. Then crying starts after a few minutes. Ananta watches this with hands folded in a Namaste gesture, and continues to smile while Shiva is expressing himself. When Anantaji turns the computer to show Shiva, we see him sitting with hands together, in silence, radiantly blissful. Anantaji asks him to come to him and embraces Shiva while he expresses further tears of grace. There is more sobbing or laughter as Shiva bows down at Ananta’s feet. Anantaji offers Shiva some water then Shiva returns to his seat as before. Each gives the other Namaste. Anantaji is looking at Shiva with so much love.]

Shiva says, “I love your company. That’s what brought me here. I am so thankful.” [Looking at camera]

All the master’s grace. All Mooji’s grace.

[Shiva’s tears continue to flow]      “Thank you so much.”

You’re very welcome. You’re more than welcome.

[Shiva looks very peaceful and sighs as Anantaji gazes lovingly toward him]

Shiva says, “Nothing to speak. Nothing to say. Only joy.”

Look at that! [Big smile on Anantaji’s face as Shiva cries more tears of joy]

Shiva says, “No words.”

I’m very happy, very happy. Very good.

He says, “Now I know why I come all the way from Namalia. Now I know why I came…,” [Shiva is smiling and nodding toward the computer] “…what brought me here. Thank you.” [Namaste]

Very good. I also find no word left to say now. So we will just be in silence for the few minutes we have left.

Om Namah Shivaya. Thank you all so much for being in satsang today.

Moojiji ki Jai!      [Namaste]

Sangha: Moojiji ki Jai! Ananta ki Jai! Thank you. Love you. Love to Shiva.

So, when we say ‘Self Inquiry’ what is it that we are really saying? What is the inquiry really about? What is it that we want to find out?

Ultimately, what we are looking for is an answer to the root question. We start off by looking for an answer to the root question which is ‘Who am I?’ We can say ‘Who am I?’ or even we can say ‘What am I?’ So, the inquiry starts off with this simple question. And it is greatly auspicious, in this play, when there is openness towards the simple question ‘Who am I?’ There must already be some seeing, isn’t there? There must be some seeing that ‘I cannot be this person’. Only then can there be an openness to this question.

If there is total conviction in the belief of being an ego, total conviction in the belief of being a ‘person’, then the question will face so much resistance. And because this question faces so much resistance, it is good to have a Master who you have faith in, who you trust, who you love. Because if the question is asked by somebody that you trust, that you love, then this trust and this love will help in overcoming the resistance coming from your own mind.

The Inquiry is just a simple questioning about our true nature: ‘What am I in reality?’

Initially there seems to be a process prescribed as to how this inquiry can be done, and this aligns very well with the ancient Indian process called ‘Neti-Neti’ which means ‘Not that-Not that’. So, basically what we are saying is that whatever is clearly not me, that, we are keeping aside. So, we say ‘This world which is appearing through my senses, this world of objects and phenomena, is ever changing but I am here witnessing this change. So, I am the constant in this, but this world is ever-changing. Therefore, I cannot be this.’ We say, ‘Not that.’

In one swoop we have thrown out all the phenomenal existence of the world saying ‘I am not that.’ Then we turn inward and we see ‘What else could I be?

What else could I be if I am not an object in the world?’

And also, when we look at the body, we see that ‘I cannot be just the sum of what I seem to have eaten. I cannot be just made up of the food that has been consumed. There is something more to me than that. This body is also constantly changing and I am the witness of this change also. This body is changing all the time, but I am looking at this and I don’t seem to be changing. Therefore, I cannot be this body.’ So we say ‘not the world and not the body also, which is part of the appearance.’

‘Then, what else can I be?’

‘Can I be the thoughts? A thought would come and a thought could go. It is constantly coming and going. It is coming and it is going and there seems to be a witnessing of these thoughts. I seem to be the witness of these thoughts. I don’t seem to be the content of it. Therefore even this thought, I am not. And the mind appears to be only a bundle of these thoughts. These thoughts: including thoughts of past which is called memory, thoughts like imagination; all these are also witnessed by me, but I don’t seem to be any of them. So I am not that also. Then, who am I? I am not the world. I am not the body. I am not the thoughts.’

‘Then, who am I?’

‘What else is there? Can I be my emotions? One minute there is anger, second minute there is joy, another time there is frustration, and another time there is peace. I am aware of all of this and I seem to be the witness of these. It does not seem like I am any of these changing emotions also. Therefore, I am not that. Then, who am I? Not these emotions also.’

‘Then, who am I?’

‘Then I see that prior to all of this, prior to all of this, there appears to be the sense that I am. And only when I am, all these other phenomena come into play. It seems like I am ‘Being’. That there is a Being here. This Being seems to have a beautiful presence, pure innocence unassociated with any other concept; just the pure Beingness itself, just the sense that I Am.’

It is not the thought ‘I am’. Many of us mistake the sense I Am to be the thought ‘I am’. This Being is prior to thought.

In the simplest way, to become aware of this Being is to ask ‘Can I stop Being now?’

And there can be a time when there is no thought, but I am still Being. Isn’t it? ‘I am still Being.’

So this Being is ever-present. In the waking states and the dream state this Being is always present.

But even then we ask: ‘Is there is something which is aware of even this pure Being?’

This pure Consciousness itself, there is awareness of it. Isn’t it? And even this Consciousness seems to come and go. When I am asleep, then even this presence ‘I Am’ is not there. But I am aware of its presence and absence also. I am able to report that in deep sleep, it was not there. So, I am not even this Consciousness.’

‘Then, who am I?’

What seems to be left now is only the pure Witnessing of all of this. There is a witnessing of all of this. And it is the Witnessing itself which is witnessing itself.

Therefore in the simple question ‘Are you aware now?’ we see that Awareness is aware of itself.

And, this Awareness seems to be all there is: the unmoving, untouched witnessing to all that exists.

‘I am this which no words can accurately describe’.

And this simple seeing is the fruit of the Self Inquiry.

Very good. Om, Shanti, Shanti, Shanti.

So, we see that the inquiry starts off with a question, but if all that you have at the end of the inquiry is a verbal answer…, the smart answer is not the end of the inquiry.

It is just the simple seeing that ‘I am this pure Witnessing itself.

I am this pure Awareness itself’.

In this simple seeing there is no room left for a personal identity.

No person can exist here at all.

Namaste everyone. A very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

If this is your first time in satsang the way to ask questions is in the chat window. My apologies for being late, somehow I thought that I was already broadcasting but I couldn’t see any chat, so I was not sure; so we had to reconnect. Welcome, welcome. So let me just confirm once more, the audio and video are working fine now? Ok, Amrita says that the AV is good. Very good. Welcome all of you once again.

And today the feeling here is to speak about surrender. It’s very funny how the universe operates; that most of the questions in the last few days I have received are somehow inter-linked with the topic of surrender. Therefore I felt to speak; with a discussion around surrender, and look at what surrender actually is. Yes. Of course, if there are any burning questions that any of you have, you are welcome to type them out as well, and we will come to them as well.

So let’s look at surrender. Firstly I feel that if we can understand that the surrender is only a realization. Surrender is only a realization, it is not an action. It is the realization that I have always been surrendered. All that is happening is through consciousness or God or Guru or whatever label you want to put on it; all that is happening is happening through this consciousness itself. So firstly we can remember that surrender is not a doing, it is a realization. We realize that there was no individual person here ever to do anything, including the surrender itself. Because as long as we are surrendering from a personal perspective it is still with the concept that ‘There is a need here that is going to be fulfilled’. There is a personal need-fulfillment which accompanies a lot of surrender, and that is what we referred to as half-surrender.

So we look at surrender as two parts, as one of the ancient Indian scriptures has said. It is said ‘Tvam Karta, Tvam Bhogta’ which means ‘Thou art the doer and Thou art the experiencer’. But very often what happens is we have this half-surrender, and half- surrender means ‘You are the doer, but I am still the experiencer’. So when we are surrendering we are saying ‘Okay, I agree to surrender to you, but make sure that my life is still going well’. You see this? Then it is not surrender; then it is actually deal making. So this is one variety of half-surrender which is that ‘You are the doer but I am still the experiencer’. So it is not complete. The complete realization is that the doer and the experiencer are one; and ultimately I am the pure witness of all of this. I am the pure witness of the doing and the experiencing.

So this was one variety of half-surrender that ‘You are now the doer, great God, great Master, (whatever you want to say), but I am still the experiencer so take care of me’. And it can start off like that. It is not bad also if it starts off like that, because quickly the realization will also come, when doership is taken away then the realization will also come that ‘Who is the experiencer here?’ as well. Is it not the same consciousness which is doing and experiencing also? Yes. So this is one variety.

A second variety is to say that all the good actions are happening to me because I did the right things. Many of us have this victim belief which means that ‘All the good happening in my life is because I am doing it, and all the bad happening is God’s doing or Guru’s doing’. So we never ask God in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’, do we? We never say in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’ This is too good. We only say, when we feel that we are suffering ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’ So this is also half-surrender; which means that all the good I take credit for, but all that seems to be causing suffering we give the blame to God. This is another type of half-surrender.

Another type of illusory surrender is to say that ‘I surrender something to you, but in the expectation that it will get sorted out according to my mind’. So it is not really surrender anyway, is it? It is very specific sort of surrender saying ‘I surrender this problem to you, but please make sure it goes in a certain way’. Then that is not surrender at all, isn’t it? It is only because we have run out of moves; but we are still holding on to the concept of how things should be, or how life should be, that we made this kind of offering.

A better prayer would be to say that ‘I surrender this to you, and whatever Thy will is, may that be done’. So another beautiful line that denotes surrender is ‘Let Thy will be done’. With this simple statement alone, ‘Let Thy will be done’, freedom cannot be far; because then we stop resisting all the appearances which are appearing. And ego is another name for resistance. So another name for surrender could be complete acceptance. Let Thy will be done.

All understood so far? Very good. Namaste, namaste everyone. Namaste.

Ginger says, “I surrender this to you, and whatever your will is, let it be done.” Very good.

Shanti says, “The grace that brought me here will bring me home.”   Very good.

Zoe says, “Yes, yes, let thy will be done.”  Very good.

Amaya says, “The question here is, when ego can act like a jerk, that is consciousness seeing it, and saying sorry?”   Yes yes.   “Showing us its unreality? These acts have kept the feeling of ‘not yet free’, of needing to take responsibility.”

Yes. This is a very subtle point, because even Mooji discussed this in satsang yesterday, and many teachers have talked about this, which is that very quickly the ego itself can hold onto the concept of freedom, to say that ‘I as a person’ am free now, and hence that makes me special’. So when Adya [Adyashanti] said ‘You are acting like a jerk now’ [In a talk], then what he is saying is that ‘You are operating out of this personal sense of specialness’. That’s why many teachers caution us against the premature end to the inquiry. And that is why Papaji also said ‘Vigilance to the dying breath’.

And we can smell it actually. As consciousness we know very well where something is coming from. Is it coming from the smell of personhood? Does it have the aroma of pure Presence, or does it have the stink of an ego? So if we are vigilant, if we are open to this, then it is simply seen. Because pure Presence is accompanied by the Presence of love, peace, and joy; and what is personal is always accompanied with the sense of need or a sense of specialness.

Of course, ultimately it is Consciousness itself which is playing all this. All this role- playing is playing in Consciousness itself. Yes? Even the spiritual ego is acted out in the play of Consciousness itself as part of this divine play. So it seems like Consciousness itself has taken on the role of the spiritual ego, and it says that ‘I am special’. And again the Master has to whack this special sense of ego; and that is also a play of Consciousness. And it is true ultimately that Consciousness is untouched by all of this play, and witnessing is far from all of this; but those seem to be the designated roles that Consciousness has given to itself, and it will play out in this way. So if it is clear that ‘I am this Beingness itself’ or even that ‘This Beingness arises from within me’ then no specialness can actually come. So in the role of the Master, how it gets played out, is anytime there is the smell of something special then there is bound to be a whack which chops it away. But all is Consciousness, that’s right.

Kapil says, “Yes thank you for discussing this today.”  Very welcome.

Denan says, “Yes, let thy will be done.”

Amaya says, “Thy will be done even, if it is that stuff. (smile).”

Yes, yes. And the instant it is recognized that it is all a play of Consciousness, then the specialness cannot survive anyway.

Ananya says, “Is that the same as spiritual ego, Father?” Yes.

Soham is losing connection.

Amaya says, “But that is the question. Since Consciousness is doing always, yet it seems to act out before ‘I’ can stop it, how not to just say ‘That is just Consciousness doing it, and my regret is Consciousness experiencing’?”

Yes, but as long as this ‘my’ is not a person, as long as the ‘I’ in this is not a person, then it is absolutely fine. Otherwise we are just paying testimony to Consciousness, we are saying ‘Consciousness is doing and Consciousness is experiencing’ but the smell in it still conveys the smell of a personal ‘I’. So it is just using Consciousness as a concept; and when the Master detects that it is just being used as a concept, actually as an ego defense, then he will not let that situation continue. But if he can sense that it is coming from the pure space of Consciousness itself…., because usually you will see that when the ‘Advaita police’ type people are using these sentences that ‘All is Consciousness’ and ‘Who is giving satsang? Who is the student? Who is the teacher?’…, usually you can smell the arrogance on it, you feel that there is a person there who is pretending to have understood something.

But when there is pure love flowing through the same sentence, through the same phrases, you can smell that it is dipped in love and peace. Then you know that Presence itself is speaking, without the contamination of ego stuff.

Amaya says, “About that…”

I hope it is clearer now. We can look at this some more because, you know if…, maybe Amaya, I don’t know if I remember correctly, but you have also been a student of A Course in Miracles, isn’t it? So what happens, there is a beautiful term in that called ‘level confusion’. This term ‘level confusion’ means that the ego takes it on at a personal level, but actually what is being spoken about is Consciousness itself.

Amaya says, “Surrendering the whole subject. (smile).”  Yes.  “It is not about being whacked. That’s fine.”

No, so there was no whacking in this for anyone. It is just that I was taking the Adyashanti example, when he said to the person [who was claiming being awakened] ‘Do you know that you are acting like a jerk?’ So that must have been a very strong whack. So that’s what we were referring to.

So you say, “It’s not about being whacked, that’s fine. It’s about trying to transcend an ego that is seen, but not caught. Just feel like we are responsible…”

Yes. It is the game of Consciousness itself. So it is Consciousness itself saying to Consciousness ‘Why do you still pretend to be a person?’ You understand? So it is not two people who are responsible; one for communicating this message and the other person responsible for receiving this message. It is just pure Consciousness itself which is speaking to another part of itself saying ‘Why do you continue to delude yourself in this way? Isn’t the game over now?’ It’s all part of the game. Yes.

Atma says, “Yes, pure love and peace.”

Kapil says, “So, the guilt feeling about something not going right in life, it is also from ego?”

Yes, completely. It first presumes that ‘I must be a separate individual’ and then presumes that this separate individual has the power to do something or not. So this presumption that ‘I must be a separate individual’ itself is ego. You see? So ego, when we call it ego, it seems like it is something that is far, or ‘I don’t have an ego’, you know? But the minute we say that it is ‘the sense of being a person’, then it is seen that there is some ego in all. Even in the great awakened ones, the ego is left behind like a burnt rope.

[Kapil], “Is that also half-surrender?”

Yes. I feel in this, I don’t see the surrender at all. Guilt feeling, something not going right in life, is complete non-surrender, isn’t it?

Atma says, “Clear Father.”

Amaya says, “…or irresponsible if simply say ‘it’s all Consciousness’.”

And when we say this, we know through our vigilance where this is coming from. Whether it is coming from a personal defense of the ego itself, or it is coming from pure Consciousness itself which is just uttering these words without any concept of these words also. It’s good. It is Consciousness speaking to Consciousness, so these words will settle in and they will sprout on their own.

Amaya says, “Very good thank you.”   Very welcome my dear.

[Amaya], “I know this, but if it still comes, want to hear from you, and surrender.”   Yes, yes always, that is what I am here for.

[Amaya], “Seen doesn’t mean gone, in this reality, so far.”    It is absolutely fine. That’s what satsang is for.

Atma says, “Love you, heart is dancing right now.”   Very good.

Ginger says, “Surrender is the same as ‘yes’? That is my experience. Like yes! Yes is what I am. And you are saying surrender is what I am. Is this correct seeing?”

So the Master says ‘Just say ‘yes’ to reality. Just say ‘yes’ to the truth. Have this big ‘yes’ inside’. So yes, in that way, it can be said that this ‘yes’ is the same as surrender. Because in this ‘yes’ there is acceptance of what is. There is an acceptance of what is. So this ‘yes’, when we say this, means it is a dropping of all the resistances, it is a dropping of all the ‘shoulds’ and the ‘coulds’ and the ‘no’s’ which are gone with this ‘yes’. Yes. This is surrender.

‘Are you are saying ‘Surrender is what I am’?’ No. I am not saying ‘Surrender is what you are’. I am saying that what you are is this Consciousness itself; and ultimately the pure awareness even of this Consciousness is what you are. And surrender is just a realization that this Consciousness itself is doing everything, that this Consciousness is the one doer and the one experiencer.

So surrender is this understanding that all is being done by Consciousness to consciousness, and what you are is this consciousness itself; and ultimately even this is not true, what you are is the awareness even of this. I hope this is clearer now.

Atma says, “You are my salvation.”   Very good.

Ginger says, “Like true surrender is resting as I am.”  Yes.  “So, so, so beautiful.”

Yes. In the true state of surrender there is no resistance, and the Presence of ‘I am’ is completely perceived; if it is also seen that ‘I am beyond this ‘I am’ as well’. Before ‘I am’, isn’t it?

Jayani says, “Father, here the experience is that this person does not exist.” Very good. “Only an emptiness here that seems to take the form of a body.” Yes. “Words like awareness, witnessing, etc. don’t compute here. Only this.”

The words are not important, the words are not important. As long as it is seen that ‘This body and this entire phenomenal world is only an appearance, and I am not in this, all this comes from me, and yet I am not in this’ it is enough. Without any labels.

Jayani says, “All is just happening, yet a seeming-happening.” Yes. “Can’t really put it into words because then it is the mind.” Yes, it’s good. “The seeming person often tries to understand awareness. Giving this to you.”  Very good.

The mind tries to grasp on to this awareness, and many times it actually succeeds because it paints a picture of awareness for you. It paints a picture that ‘I am some blank space, or some white space’ or it paints a picture of heaven or something, saying ‘This is what you are’. So this is another fallacy. It cannot be understood; awareness cannot be understood phenomenally. It has no qualities and no attributes. It is the pure seeing and yet it is unseen phenomenally. Yet it is ever-present because Awareness is ever-aware of awareness. [Laughs]. Not sure who can understand these words. Very good.

Shanti says, “Let all be burnt as soon as it is seen.”  Yes. Very good.

So this is one aspect of surrender that we discussed. The other aspect which I am feeling to discuss, so that it is a more complete discussion on surrender, is to say that many times surrender gets confused with passivity; gets confused with non-doing. So, this is a little subtle, so stay with me.

So when the ego hears, in a manner of speaking…., when the ego hears that ‘I am not the doer’ and it says ‘Okay, if that is the true understanding, I will not do anything now. I will not do anything now’ and it says ‘I will remain passive, and no matter what comes, I will not get up from my bed’. You see what is happening? So there is a doing of non-doing which is happening in this. There is a doing of sitting on the bed; even that is a doing.

So the ego’s idea of both ‘doing’ and ‘non-doing’ is actually doership, actually just perpetuating doership. You see this? So both the ideas of doing something and not doing something arrive from, still, this belief in doership. Either that there is a doer here who is doing something; or there is a doer here but it has decided not to do something. But this doer does not exist as a separate entity. No person is the doer of anything at all. You see? So this is one misconception which many egos take on and say ‘Okay, so I have heard that I am not the doer so let me just sit in bed’.

The other misconception is that we go around…, like Adya was saying that day…, we go around just behaving very badly and then saying that ‘It is all Consciousness’ doing’. And the words are true, that ‘It is still Consciousness which is doing all of this’. So ultimately it is a game, at that level. But then what happens is it is the person who says that ‘I have understood that I am not the doer, hence I am free to do anything at all’. You see? It is a little subtle, and there is a huge potential for level confusion here. So just stay with me.

So what we are talking about is the ‘person’ who comes to satsang; and the full realization that they are pure Beingness or pure Awareness has not dawned on them. So this person takes on the idea of the passivity, or the recklessness of doing anything and blaming consciousness. You see? So their words will still smell of personhood. All of this is using Advaitic concepts from a personal perspective to defend the ego itself. See?

That’s why we say: have a beautiful neutrality towards everything; neither doing nor not- doing, just let everything unfold. And that is why in the instruction ‘Let go of your next thought’ it is already captured. Because both this egoic doing, or not-doing, cannot happen without our belief in some thought. So it is simple to see whether it is coming from a thought place, or it is just unfolding spontaneously. See?

Shanti said, “Let all be burnt as soon as it is seen.” Yes.

Amaya said,  “Already surrendered’ is just ‘not the idea of person’, is that right?”

Yes, so when we are saying ‘already surrendered’ or ‘I have never been not surrendered’ this is saying that from a personal perspective there has never been a person here to have done anything at all. Yes.

Then she says, “Surrendered, also idea of person, and do again and always. Please take it. And thank you.”   Very welcome, my dear.

That is why I feel that, although we are getting in to the depths of surrender today, that the pointing is still simple. The pointing is still to let go of your next thought. It’s that simple. So don’t feel you have to become an expert on the topic of surrender; it’s just that some of these words might open up something inside you, and that is why they are being spoken; but let them just be heard through Being itself. Don’t feel that you have to understand something very specifically, or there will be an exam on surrender tomorrow or something like that. [Laughs]. Yes? Very good.

Cornelia says, “Yes a doing of non-doing. This is very nice to see.”

These are all the tricks of the mind. You can say ‘I am not-doing’ and that itself is the doing. It’s like my Master jokes and says ‘We say be natural, so you try to be natural’. When we say be natural, immediately there is a sense of being conscious, and the naturalness automatically goes. This is the same as this non-doing idea.

Ah, Amaya says…, very good question; she says, “So no person is the doer. That is why it feels so crazy when you say ‘it smells like a person’ or whatever.”

Excellent question. Excellent question, yes. So when we say that ‘I see that this box of tissues is in front’ [holds a box of tissues in front of him]…, so we say that this box of tissues is there, but ultimately we know that this box of tissues is a projection of Consciousness, you see? So what happens is that when we are operating in the phenomenal world we will see that I see this table, I see this computer; but it is true that all of it is a projection of Consciousness. So when you smell something…, suppose some food was there and you smell it, and you say ‘wow, nice aroma’, no? So in the same way we say ‘It smells like a person’. We know that ultimately all is a projection of Consciousness itself, there is no doubt about that; but in the phenomenal world, the way it is playing out, it is Consciousness itself which is playing out like the ego, and it is Consciousness itself which is playing out as a Master which is saying ‘it is still smelling from a personal place’. See?

Zoe says, “I had a period of consciousness-sponsored bad behavior.”

Yes, yes. [Laughs]. That’s why I’m questioning all of this. We can be vigilant against all of these tendencies, isn’t it? So we spoke about various varieties of the ego using the surrender concept as a half-surrender in some way, and also misusing the concept of non-doership. It’s good that we are able to see it like that. Here also, for many years actually, for a very long time, when I used to be a student of Ramesh actually, there was a lot of consciousness-sponsored bad behavior. I was a huge jerk for a long, long time. But life slapped that jerk-ness right out of me.

Amaya says, “Surrendering this confusion as the main thing in the way.”  Yes, thank you. Yeah? I feel it is becoming clearer for you. It will become very clear.

Then you say, “Surrendering is all that can do.” Yes, yes.

Shanti says, “Soham says sorry he cannot join satsang because his tablet is phasing.” No worries, he is in my heart.

Atma says, “Let go of your next thought is more than enough, Father.” Yes.

And all this understanding actually…, whatever is seeping through will make it very easy to let go of all our thoughts. Because some still seem to carry some juice, some attraction. Then we can say ‘Okay, this is just ego pretending to be the non-doer or ego pretending to be Consciousness doing things in a certain way’ then we are able to easily let go. Yes? But ultimately if there is a letting go happening of all these thoughts then no other instruction is required.

Atma says, “So resting always in the now.” Very good.

Amaya, much love. Very good.

Warrenballa says, “Hi. I always think ‘Just be the one we are’. Does it mean something?”

It is good. It is good. So when we say ‘Just be what you are’ or ‘Just be the one that you are’ is like saying ‘Just be the Self’. And how to be this? Does it require a doing of some sort to be the one we are? Because we are already that. Then what effort is required to be this one? Is it not just the letting go of effort itself? You see?

So if there is effort in just being the one we are, then maybe we are trying to be like a picture of what we should be. But yes, initially it can seem like effort to not pick up any thoughts; but actually the effort is in the picking up of the thoughts initially, because we are so conditioned to picking up thoughts it can seem like effort to let go of thoughts. So this seeming-effort is okay, because it will be seen that it was pure effortlessness itself. It is the ending of effort actually. And when all thoughts are let go, then it is clearly seen that ‘I am the pure witnessing of all that is emerging anyway, and this is the one that I am’.

Ginger says, “Sometimes I feel like I live in the rotting belly of a <censored> stinky. Hiding out in misunderstanding. Surrender.”

Just let go of all of this concept also. All of these concepts can also be let go of now. I know that you are the Self Itself. All of you are the Self Itself. We are all the Self Itself. So like Amaya has been saying, it has all being played out in different ways; it doesn’t mean that you actually become that. Just because we are playing the role of the ego, just because Consciousness is playing the role of the ego doesn’t mean it actually becomes the ego. But when these roles are being played out, then there will be one [the Master] who says that ‘the ego is being played out’, and there will be the one which is playing out the ego. You see? This is the play of Maya itself. So let go of any guilt about any concept that you have carried. That is the only thing that you can do, is let go of it now.

Amaya says, “Guess that is the thing. Your jerk story with Ramesh. Doesn’t feel like I do anything, it just comes.”   It’s true.   “A jerk moment acts out.”

Exactly. It’s exactly that. It’s true. That Consciousness itself is acting like the ego, and it is seen that it acted like the ego and it did this, that’s all.

Shanti says, “Cannot believe you were ever a jerk, Father. It seems so impossible. If that is true then anything is possible for anyone.” [Laughs].

Yes. Before I met Mooji, there was a lot of spiritual ego. I must say. All Master’s grace and life itself which wiped out all of this.

Amaya says, “…because ‘Let go of next thought’ after an acting-out latent-tendency is seen; but still feel like need to say ‘sorry’, give it up, etc. Otherwise ‘Consciousness is the doer’ idea IS the jerk.”

Yes. It depends from where we are speaking. If we are speaking as Consciousness itself then it is okay to say ‘All of this was a play’. And if we are speaking from a personal perspective, then we can say that ‘The jerk got acted out’ or ‘I was being a jerk in those days’. You see? Yes. So when we are speaking ultimately, it is clear that all was just happening on its own, even the spiritual ego. Yes.

Amaya says, “But ‘person-I’ is not purposely doing it; isn’t doing it either. So very tricky.”   Completely, yes, yes, yes. Absolutely.

[She says], “So rare it happens but so painful, since even in that, Awareness/witnessing is always here.”  Yes. Witnessing and Awareness is ever-present.

Amaya says, “So, so close to being free; and really want to be free totally.”

In the right now, we are completely free.

Jayani says, “Father, is there anything to understand? All is just grace.”

No. If we say that ‘All is just grace’ then nothing else is required to be understood. That itself is the most beautiful understanding.

[Jayani], “Nothing that ‘I the person’ can really do to undo myself, but say ‘yes’.”

This ‘yes’ is enough.  [She says], “But even that seems untrue. Don’t know if it makes sense.”

Yes, this is the theme for satsang today, isn’t it? So let’s look at it very logically. The Being itself carries the person idea, and the manifestation of this comes into satsang. This manifestation of this Being, which carries the person idea, says that ‘I want to be free from my suffering’. And the Master gives a set of instructions which take away the person idea. But it is helpful, while the person idea is there, for the sake of understanding, to refer to the person as ‘the person’ sometimes. And it is said that ‘You must do this, you must let go of your thoughts’…, because immediately, if we say that ‘You are Consciousness itself’ maybe it will not be understood. Yes, it is only Consciousness which is not understanding; but in the roles that we are playing it seems to play out in this way, that it might not be understood that way. Therefore the words that seem to emerge are addressing the person as a person for a while, until there is complete openness and we say that ‘you are Consciousness itself, or you are Awareness itself’.

So when the switch-over of power is happening between the person idea and the clarity of Beingness then, in the middle sometimes, this ‘level confusion’ can seem a little irritating. But you will all come to a point where you will see no dichotomy in this; because it will be seen that what is being referred to, to decondition the Being from the personal idea, and what is addressing Being is Being itself. There will not be any confusion about this. You see?

Atma says, “Play of maya itself. Yes, Father, very clear.”   Very good, my dear.

Amaya says, “Thank you so much, beloved Father.”   Very welcome.

Shanti says, “Thank you, Father, for pointing out the subtle differences between personal surrendering, and natural surrender of ‘seeing what is’ without taking personal responsibility.”   Very welcome, my dear.

I feel that we have captured now many of the important concepts around surrender, which could be very useful actually.

Jayani says, “Was just clarifying.” Yes, yes, yes. Very good, thank you, very good.

It’s very good, even when you clarify like this, it’s very good because I know that if some words are emerging, then it’s not necessarily just for the questioner, isn’t it? It could be somebody else who is in satsang. So somebody would be there definitely who feels like ‘This answer was just for me’. It’s very good that you ask. It could even be in the recording, you see. It could even be that somebody watches this recording a hundred years later, and these words were spoken just for them. You see? This is how the play acts out, isn’t it?

Amrit Gaurav says, “My spiritual ego burnt in daily satsang.”  Very good. “Everything is so fresh and new now.” Very, very good.  “Thank you so much.”  Thank you. Very good.

Lucian says, “Even if I don’t have a burning question, there is some longing, some neediness that wants to be noticed.”   It’s completely fine. You are always in my heart. Very good.

Jayani says, “To be honest, don’t know where the question came from.”   Yes. It’s completely fine.

Cornelia says, “Thank you so much.”   Very welcome, my dear.

Lucian says, “Just exposing this.”  Yes.

Atma says, “A hundred years later”. Yes.

Jayani says, “So happy to be here, Father, thank you.” I am also so happy you are here. Very good.

Amaya says, “Yes just exposing here also, all that.., and if it’s ‘the same guy’ for any others.”   Very good, very good.

Shanti says, “So glad to wake up for this satsang.”   Yes, yes. You are attending satsang in the morning, very good. Our morning. I know it is late night for you, yes.

Denan says, “I realize I have been using surrender as a doing, when stuck in inquiry, overwhelmed, uncertain. Now there is confusion, but just saying ‘yes’ to all that arrives.”

Yes. This is a very good point, because it seems like when we let go of the doing and the non-doing, and the concept of surrender itself is let go of, then it seems a little unsteady for a while. It seems like we have no legs to stand on, everything has become a little shaky. Because we seem to have hung on to concepts for a long time, when we let go of them we feel like we are just floating. But if you can get used to this unsteadiness for a while, you will see that it is your natural state of freedom itself which is un-relying on any concept, and there is nowhere that you can fall. You are All There Is, so nothing will happen. So let all these fears get released, hand them over. All will be well.

Shanti says, “Very beautiful and important message today.”   Yes, thank you.

Atma says, “So much love Father, so much.”  So much love to you, too.

Thank you all so very much for being in satsang today. [Namaste].

Moojiji ki Jai. [Blows a kiss].

Naomi says, “Something so nice about the dropping of the ego before sleep.”  Yes. “So nice to be here.”  Very welcome.

Good. Ian is also here. Very good.

Denan says, “Thank you so much. I didn’t know what I was asking but you just clarified. Thank you.” Very welcome.

Thank you.  [Waves].

Sangha:  Moojiji ki Jai! Anantaji ki Jai!  Thank you. Love you.

Another beautiful line that denotes surrender is ‘Let Thy will be done’.

With this simple statement alone, ‘Let Thy will be done’, freedom cannot be far; because then we stop resisting all the appearances which are appearing. And ego is another name for resistance.

So another name for surrender could be complete acceptance.

Let Thy will be done.

So this is one aspect of surrender that we discussed. The other aspect which I am feeling to discuss, so that it is a more complete discussion on surrender, is to say that many times surrender gets confused with passivity; gets confused with non-doing. So, this is a little subtle, so stay with me.

So when the ego hears, (in a manner of speaking), when the ego hears that ‘I am not the doer’ and it says ‘Okay, if that is the true understanding, I will not do anything now. I will not do anything now’ and it says ‘I will remain passive, and no matter what comes, I will not get up from my bed’. You see what is happening? So there is a doing of non-doing which is happening in this. There is a doing of sitting on the bed; even that is a doing.

So the ego’s idea of both ‘doing’ and ‘non-doing’ is actually doership, actually just perpetuating doership. You see this? So both the ideas of doing something and not doing something arrive from, still, this belief in doership. Either that there is a doer here who is doing something; or there is a doer here but it has decided not to do something. But this doer does not exist as a separate entity. No person is the doer of anything at all. You see? So this is one misconception which many egos take on and say ‘Okay, so I have heard that I am not the doer so let me just sit in bed’.

The other misconception is that we go around…, (like Adya was saying that day), we go around just behaving very badly and then saying that ‘It is all Consciousness’ doing’. And the words are true that ‘It is still Consciousness which is doing all of this’. So ultimately it is a game, at that level. But then what happens is it is the person who says that ‘I have understood that I am not the doer, hence I am free to do anything at all’. You see? It is a little subtle, and there is a huge potential for level confusion here. So just stay with me.

So what we are talking about is the ‘person’ who comes to satsang; and the full realization that they are pure Beingness or pure Awareness has not dawned on them. So this person takes on the idea of the passivity, or the recklessness of doing anything and blaming Consciousness. You see? So their words will still smell of personhood. All of this is using Advaitic concepts from a personal perspective to defend the ego itself. See?

That’s why we say: have a beautiful neutrality towards everything; neither doing nor not- doing, just let everything unfold. And that is why in the instruction ‘Let go of your next thought’ it is already captured. Because both this egoic doing, or not-doing, cannot happen without our belief in some thought. So it is simple to see whether it is coming from a thought place, or it is just unfolding spontaneously. See?

Firstly I feel that if we can understand that the surrender is only a realization. Surrender is only a realization, it is not an action. It is the realization that I have always been surrendered. All that is happening is through Consciousness or God or Guru or whatever label you want to put on it; all that is happening is happening through this Consciousness itself.

So firstly we can remember that surrender is not a doing, it is a realization. We realize that there was no individual person here ever to do anything, including the surrender itself. Because as long as we are surrendering from a personal perspective it is still with the concept that ‘There is a need here that is going to be fulfilled’. There is a personal need-fulfillment which accompanies a lot of surrender, and that is what we referred to as half-surrender.

So we look at surrender as two parts. As one of the ancient Indian scriptures has said; it is said ‘Tvam Karta, Tvam Bhogta’ which means ‘Thou art the doer and Thou art the experiencer’.

But very often what happens is we have this half-surrender, and half- surrender means ‘You are the doer, but I am still the experiencer’. So when we are surrendering we are saying ‘Okay, I agree to surrender to you, but make sure that my life is still going well’. You see this? Then it is not surrender; then it is actually deal making.

So this is one variety of half-surrender which is that ‘You are the doer but I am still the experiencer’. So it is not complete. The complete realization is that the doer and the experiencer are one; and ultimately I am the pure witness of all of this. I am the pure witness of the doing and the experiencing.

So this was one variety of half-surrender that ‘You are now the doer, great God, great Master, (whatever you want to say), but I am still the experiencer so take care of me’. And it can start off like that. It is not bad also if it starts off like that, because quickly the realization will also come, when doership is taken away then the realization will also come that ‘Who is the experiencer here?’ as well. Is it not the same Consciousness which is doing and experiencing also? Yes. So this is one variety.

A second variety is to say that all the good actions are happening to me because I did the right things. Many of us have this victim belief which means that ‘All the good happening in my life is because I am doing it, and all the bad happening is God’s doing or Guru’s doing’. So we never ask God in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’ Do we? We never say in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me? This is too good’. We only say, when we feel that we are suffering ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’

So this is also half-surrender; which means that all the good I take credit for, but all that seems to be causing suffering we give the blame to God. This is another type of half-surrender.

Another type of illusory surrender is to say that ‘I surrender something to you, but in the expectation that it will get sorted out according to my mind’. So it is not really surrender anyway, is it? It is very specific sort of surrender saying ‘I surrender this problem to you, but please make sure it goes in a certain way’. Then that is not surrender at all, isn’t it? It is only because we have run out of moves; but we are still holding on to the concept of how things should be, or how life should be, that we made this kind of offering.

A better prayer would be to say that ‘I surrender this to you, and whatever Thy will is, may that be done’. So another beautiful line that denotes surrender is ‘Let Thy will be done’. With this simple statement alone, ‘Let Thy will be done’, freedom cannot be far; because then we stop resisting all the appearances which are appearing. And ego is another name for resistance. So another name for surrender could be complete acceptance. Let Thy will be done.

Firstly I feel that if we can understand that the surrender is only a realization. Surrender is only a realization, it is not an action. It is the realization that I have always been surrendered. All that is happening is through Consciousness or God or Guru or whatever label you want to put on it; all that is happening is happening through this Consciousness itself.

So firstly we can remember that surrender is not a doing, it is a realization. We realize that there was no individual person here ever to do anything, including the surrender itself. Because as long as we are surrendering from a personal perspective it is still with the concept that ‘There is a need here that is going to be fulfilled’. There is a personal need-fulfillment which accompanies a lot of surrender, and that is what we referred to as half-surrender.

So we look at surrender as two parts. As one of the ancient Indian scriptures has said; it is said ‘Tvam Karta, Tvam Bhogta’ which means ‘Thou art the doer and Thou art the experiencer’.

But very often what happens is we have this half-surrender, and half- surrender means ‘You are the doer, but I am still the experiencer’. So when we are surrendering we are saying ‘Okay, I agree to surrender to you, but make sure that my life is still going well’. You see this? Then it is not surrender; then it is actually deal making.

So this is one variety of half-surrender which is that ‘You are the doer but I am still the experiencer’. So it is not complete. The complete realization is that the doer and the experiencer are one; and ultimately I am the pure witness of all of this. I am the pure witness of the doing and the experiencing.

So this was one variety of half-surrender that ‘You are now the doer, great God, great Master, (whatever you want to say), but I am still the experiencer so take care of me’. And it can start off like that. It is not bad also if it starts off like that, because quickly the realization will also come, when doership is taken away then the realization will also come that ‘Who is the experiencer here?’ as well. Is it not the same Consciousness which is doing and experiencing also? Yes. So this is one variety.

A second variety is to say that all the good actions are happening to me because I did the right things. Many of us have this victim belief which means that ‘All the good happening in my life is because I am doing it, and all the bad happening is God’s doing or Guru’s doing’. So we never ask God in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’ Do we? We never say in the good times ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me? This is too good’. We only say, when we feel that we are suffering ‘Oh God, why are you doing this to me?’

So this is also half-surrender; which means that all the good I take credit for, but all that seems to be causing suffering we give the blame to God. This is another type of half-surrender.

Another type of illusory surrender is to say that ‘I surrender something to you, but in the expectation that it will get sorted out according to my mind’. So it is not really surrender anyway, is it? It is very specific sort of surrender saying ‘I surrender this problem to you, but please make sure it goes in a certain way’. Then that is not surrender at all, isn’t it? It is only because we have run out of moves; but we are still holding on to the concept of how things should be, or how life should be, that we made this kind of offering.

A better prayer would be to say that ‘I surrender this to you, and whatever Thy will is, may that be done’. So another beautiful line that denotes surrender is ‘Let Thy will be done’. With this simple statement alone, ‘Let Thy will be done’, freedom cannot be far; because then we stop resisting all the appearances which are appearing. And ego is another name for resistance. So another name for surrender could be complete acceptance. Let Thy will be done.

Namaste everyone, a very warm welcome to satsang today. Moojiji ki Jai.

[Namaste] Thank you all for joining in and if this is your first time in satsang, the way to ask questions is through the chat window. Welcome, welcome, Namaste.

Ajnani says, “Namaste everyone, I was with you for two days but because of the chat window problem I could not write.”

Rashmi is also here with us today. So if she has any questions she can ask as well.

So what would you like to speak about today?

No questions? [Laughs]. Rashmi [Inaudible]. [Rashmi’s husband, Samik, enters the room to become the second in-house guest].

Samik says, “I have a question. So we discussed about the detachment from the result of the action. So I am just wondering whether that affects the motivation.”

That is a good question. So the question is that, we speak about letting life unfold on its own and not be attached to what comes as a result of the action. So the question is ‘Does that affect our motivation? Does this make us less productive?’ All these questions can come. But this is presuming that for us to do what is required we need this motivation.

So let’s look at what is motivation.

Motivation is the belief in the thought that ‘I need to make sure I get to this point by this time. I need to make sure that I am here on this particular level, I need to make sure that this is my roadmap, and this is what actually will work out’. And it presumes that ‘Once I believe in this, then I am taking all the actions which are necessary to get me there’. So that is the root belief of motivation.

But if you look back at our lives, you will see that life unfolded the way it had to, irrespective of what our plans were. And sometimes we are happy that our plans didn’t work out, because we had some plans.., like when I was in school, I wanted to join the Merchant Navy. Because somebody has told me that ‘You will make tons of money if you join the Merchant Navy’. So a classmate had told me that ‘If you join the Merchant Navy then in a month you can buy a Maruti’. In those days buying a Maruti was a big deal. So fortunately life has other plans. So not all that we can plan actually works out well. The funny thing is that even when it does work out the way that we wanted, we are never saying ‘Okay, now I am truly satisfied’. We are always saying ‘Just that little more. I could have done that little bit more’ or you know, ‘Others around me are not supportive’…, or and all kinds of things it will say. So if we are ultimately looking for satisfaction and happiness, will it ever come from any of the thought beliefs?

The second thing it presumes is that ‘I must be an individual entity who is the doer of some action’. So this is a little more…, I don’t usually use the word ‘deeper’ but just for conversation…, to evaluate that I have a separate existence as a person, only then does it make sense for me to have an individual doership, which requires to be constantly motivated and reinforced with thought, isn’t it? But when we look for this person, this person is not to be found actually. So for me, the first step…, I don’t even tell you that ‘The person is not there’ for now. I say: If you want to do something for someone, first mustn’t we to find out who that someone is? So first we keep catering to this mythical someone, without really zeroing in on ‘Okay, this is the one I am catering to’. So I say ‘Okay, I invented the belief that I am a person, and this person should achieve all of these things’. Can we not first get to the root of what this person is? Too far out?

Samik says, “Yes”

[Ananta laughs]. Okay, the mind will always resist this question when it hears it first, because it is a deeply held belief. So it is like when…, was it Galilio, or who was it that said the world is round? I’m not sure…, somebody said it; and that person was treated like he was the worst creature, biggest offender, because the idea was too radical. Everybody believed that the world is flat. ‘I can see it. It is flat. So how can you say that the world is round?’ And people said that this is going against God and this is blasphemy.

So in the same way, usually when we say that this person actually does not exist, the first reaction you are met with is ‘What are you saying? It’s clear, I am here, I am this person’. Then I say ‘Okay, tell me about this I, tell me about this person? What are you really sure about when it comes to this person?’

I can tell you what I discovered when I looked, and you can see if that tallies in. When I looked, I found that there were just a bunch of ideas. It’s a bunch of ideas that something is believing. We have not been able to identify what is believing those ideas. We have just assigned a label called ‘me’. So let’s not assign a label to anything until we see what is clear. So that is the spirit of scientific inquiry. So let’s not label anything until we actually see it.

So there was this belief that ‘I should be in the Merchant Navy’, so that became part of me. There could be a belief that ‘I want to be a scientist’, there could be a belief that ‘I want to be a great software developer’, there can be any belief that can comes. And then we see that the personality develops towards that. We seem to start taking all the actions towards that. We start believing that ‘I belong in the Army, I belong in the Merchant Navy’ or whatever. So this idea came. Did we create it?

Samik, “I think ‘yes’.”

So, tell me what your next idea is going to be? If we are the creator of our idea, then we must know that ‘I am going to create this idea’. But if you were to look, you will see that it just pops up. It actually just pops up.

Samik says, “Yes, the ideas do just pop up.”

Yes. Any thought actually;  any thought just pops up and then we say ‘It is my thought’. Who is this ‘my’ whose thought it is? Is it the body’s thought?

Samik [Inaudible].

It’s clearly not the body’s thought. So, that’s good. Then who is this ‘my’ whose thought this is?

Stay with me. I know the mind will start saying ‘It’s too abstract, its too difficult’…, all these resistances will come. But these are also thoughts, which will come to retain the superiority of the thoughts themselves. So it’s like the mind has got this belief, and this strong superiority; but when you start looking at it, then it starts saying ‘Okay, this is not for me, this is only for Rashmi. I am just here accompanying’. All this will come. It will say all kinds of things, it will say ‘It’s crazy talk’. But we can argue about that. If you tell me anything that does not sound scientific or rational so far, we can look at it together. I am happy to be wrong. If you can prove me wrong, it is good. So I have complete openness to whatever you ask.

So what we have got to so far is that: A thought comes, and once this thought is believed in then it becomes part of this person that I believe myself to be. Isn’t it? Now if this thought did not come, then this would not be part of my persona, personality, whatever you want to call it. We also see that as time goes along, some older thoughts get discarded, and newer thought keep being put in. So the person seems to be this malleable entity. So ten years ago if I were to say ‘What are your beliefs? What are you truly about? Tell me.’…, you would tell me ‘I believe this, and this is the way life is, and this is what it should be like’. Today I talk to you; maybe some of them still survive but many of them would have gone, and new ones would have come.

Therefore we cannot find anything but a set of ideas about this person. And these ideas also keep changing. So it becomes a very unreliable thing to bank on this person. Tomorrow, you could wake up and say, “What am I doing? What is this life? I should be riding a Harley Davidson, there should be some babes around me. I have wasted my life so far’. This could come. And if these thoughts come and belief is given to them, then in a span of a few months your life would look completely different. Isn’t it? So to rely on this identity of personhood is nothing but asking for suffering, because it is constantly changing.

Samik says, “Okay so you say that this is kind of asking for suffering. On the other hand Vivekananda says that you can be what you think.”

Did he actually say that?

Rashmi says, “That one I stayed away from, because my thoughts really scared me. So, I used to think ‘this is not for me’. Because a lot of people say…, even Buddha says something like ‘You become what your thoughts are’ and it freaked me out.”

So it is not that you in reality become; but we have seen exactly what the discussion that we have been having that ‘The concept of me, the concept of the person that I believe myself to be, is only made up of the thoughts’. Isn’t it? So if I believe that’ I should be focusing more on business’, if this thought will come, then my persona becomes more business oriented. So that is what they are referring to most likely. That what we believe ourselves be becomes, as a result of what we have thought about, as true to us. So a thought came that ‘I should be like this’ and that becomes me.

Rashmi says, “So why do they stress so much on thought?”

Maybe it’s not that they really stressed so much on this. Maybe more that the people who were listening, at that point of time…, not so much video and not so much…, so they understood this aspect of what they were saying.

Samik says, “So context might be important here, because at that time there was the freedom struggle, etc.”

So that becomes very important. Also sometimes what emerges from here is based on the readiness of the questioner also. If I am talking to different people, I may use a different sort of language. Like the way I am speaking to you now may be different compared to the way I have spoken to many online. So they might say ‘What is he saying? This is contradictory to what he said yesterday, isn’t it?’ So we are not just answering the question, we are answering the questioner actually. So it is not with a conscious attempt to take it that way, it just emerges that way.

But so far what we have see that is that the person entity is not clearly defined. It seems to be made up of a certain set of ideas which exist. We also said in a satsang few days ago…, we said that people change. What that means is that the concepts that we have about ourselves is constantly changing. I can guarantee you that if I were to not see you  in the next ten years, and I meet you again in ten years, it would be a very different, the  person that I would meet. So when we are reliant on this entity… So not only that we do this so much for ourselves but we want other person to be stable. ‘This is what you promised, this is what you believed, this is what you agreed’.

So we want complete freedom for ourselves, but we are not willing to give freedom to the world. So we say ‘I should be completely free, free, free, but the world should be according to my whims and fancies’. Not so clearly, but we want that stability that everyone around should be according to my projections of what that relationship is. Isn’t it? But that again is bound to cause suffering because the person is a constantly changing entity. So when we rely on someone to be exactly the same way as they were or as was agreed…, you know in relationships we have these pacts, right? We’ll be like this, you be like this. We have these pacts, but that is constantly changing. That is why relationships are a very fertile ground for a lot of misery, isn’t it? Sorry [laughs]. I think it is a known fact, right? So it’s a very fertile ground for all of this misery, because we want stability and we don’t want that person to change at all. But the nature of personhood is constant change. This much is fine so far?

So then the question comes: Can we find something that does not change? Because if we want stability, then can we find that which does not change? Because this constantly changing thing is becoming very difficult to keep up with. I cannot even rely on myself because I am also constantly changing. So what is that we can rely on to never change? This idea is worth contemplating. Because in this there could be a lot of peace and happiness which is what we are looking for.

So since our birth to now, what has been constant? Our bodies, every few years every cell gets replaced; so what that body was, which was born, is not this body. So that is not constant. Our thoughts are constantly changing, so thoughts are not. Emotions are constantly changing, so emotions are not. So what has been constant? Can you find that which has been ever-constant?

Samik says, “The sense of I, which was there for a small time; in fact for a long time.”

Very good. In fact that is the constant thread between the baby that was born and the person sitting here today, the sense that ‘I am’ or ‘I exist’. The I-ness we can call it, right? So this is very beautiful. Is there ever a time…, we don’t constantly maybe pay attention to it…, but is there a time where this feeling that ‘I exist’ is not there?

Samik says, “No…”

It is always present, at least in the waking state. So we won’t confuse by talking about other states. At least when we are awake this sense that ‘I am’ is always present, isn’t it?…, that ‘I exist’. Now just stay with me for one more step. Who knows or who witnesses or who sees even this sense of ‘I am’?

It’s good. But there is something that knows even this, isn’t it? The ‘I am’ is there, you are able to report that this ‘I am’ is there. But you are saying ‘I am not this I AM. This I AM-ness am present’. So there is a seeing of even this ‘I am’.

It is not a phenomenal seeing necessarily. You don’t see it as an object, but the same one that is aware of this external world, like the seeing of this computer, this same one is aware even of this sense of ‘I am’. In the beginning, if you feel that ‘I AM this I AM’…, even that is a very, very beautiful point to get to. In fact most spiritual paths get you to this point of understanding that ‘I must be this pure presence I AM itself’. Unblemished so far that the sense of I am the body, the sense that I am a person, the sense that I am a man, the sense that I am a husband…, just the pure unblemished ‘I am-ness’ is a very, very beautiful point to get to. In fact, in most traditions, that is what is called as self-realization actually. It is that simple actually.

But I don’t settle even for that. Because I know that there is a simple…, just a simple thing. The very simple thing is that the one who is seeing all of this also sees that ‘This presence I AM exists, and I seem to be that one who sees even this sense of I AM. I seem to be that pure awareness which is aware even of this sense of I AM’.

And this pure awareness is completely stable. This witnessing is constantly present, isn’t it? The witnessing is constantly witnessing. We’re witnessing the external objects, and when we close our eyes, then we can witness internal objects like thoughts, memories, imaginations, emotion. They appear differently but the seeing is the same.

I know that is a lot, in ten minutes we have thrown a lot at you, but I feel there is some assimilation which is going on, so it’s good. So the seeing of the external world is the same as the seeing of the internal world of thought memories imagination, emotion. The content is changing constantly but the witnessing is not changing. And I seem to be fully placed as this witnessing itself. Even of the sense that ‘I am’. And why I say that this is completely stable is that even in deep sleep states, or in states of deep meditation, in states like Turiya or whatever you call it, even the sense of ‘I am’ dissolves and there doesn’t seem to be an individual entity here at all. Then this witnessing still exists. And once we see that this is what I truly am, and not the ideas I had about myself which are constantly changing, then this is complete stability. Then appearances cannot shake us. And there is a time where this switching over of identification is happening, so it may seem like appearances shake us even more. But once the stability gets more and more that ‘I am only this witnessing, and all of these appearances are actually not touching me at all’ then this life becomes a happy one.

Samik guest says, “I would like to bring back my original question. So the motivation aspect of the doership that we have been talking about, right? So we are saying that this constant that we have, which is this awareness which is constant; so how do I relate that to the doership?”

So what are the conclusions that we can draw from this, right? Especially in relation to doership.

So, now what we have seen is that it must be more viable that ‘I must be this pure awareness itself. Maybe it will take sometime to settle in but it seems more viable that ‘I must be this pure awareness itself than this idea of a person’. Now what we say is that ‘Okay, I have seen that I cannot be just this bunch of ideas. But what must this bunch of ideas do?’ Emphatically, that is what we are saying. So ‘I have seen that no person exists’ is what we are actually saying, ‘but what must this person do?’ Which is logically incorrect, isn’t it? If something does not exist, then obviously it cannot do anything.

Then we can check and see. When I put up my hand, is there a person who is taking this action? I know it can feel like it was twilight zone, and suddenly it has become crazy stuff but I had the same reaction when I heard all of this the first time. But that is why I say ‘validate. Don’t take my word for it, just check’. Who is the doer of action? Isn’t it the same who is the thinker of thought? So is the person the doer of action and the thinker of thought? So, so far we demolished the easy one. The easy one to demolish was that ‘I am not creating my thought. As a person, I did not create it, it just comes’. The same you will be able to say, if you come for a few satang, you will be able to say the same about actions also; that actions are also appearances just like thoughts themselves.

I know it becomes a little radical but let me seed it in you, and then see where it goes. But ultimately or very simply put, if the person does not exist, then who must be the doer of these actions? Or we can find the person. These two alternatives are there.

Either we find whose question ‘What must I do?’ is, by finding ‘Who is this I?’

Or we say ‘If it does not exist then it is not the doer of action’.

And then what makes us feel better is to see that there is this entire universe with unfathomable space, unfathomable forces like electricity, gravitation. There are so many beings, they are all breathing, their hearts beating. So much is happening. There are many, many realms like this; multi verses actually. And there is something has designed this, isn’t it? There is no committee that has sat down and said ‘What is the value of gravity’. Isn’t it? Or ‘Lets keep this constant as the value of gravity’. Nobody has said that electricity or light should be moving at this particular speed. So who decided all those constants? So there seems to be, even if you don’t use the word God, there seems to be some supreme intelligence which seems to have created this whole thing, isn’t it? It is not like a group of humans got together and said ‘This is how things will operate’. So this One, if this can do all of this, and run so many planets and it’s making our hearts beat and our breath function…, this One can also take care of the bills and take care of running our life. So I would much rather rely on this One rather than rely on something that I cannot find to be true.

Samik says, [Inaudible but seems to mention the word surrender].

Yeah, don’t even worry. I’m just saying what makes sense, what makes more sense to me. The words or the labels are not important, whether we call it surrender or God; whatever that is, is not important. But I am just trying to come to a logical discussion on what I feel is going on.

So we said that the person idea seems to be just a group of these ideas that are constantly changing and I cannot find who can say ‘I am the person’. On the other hand, in the phenomenal universe there seems to be all of this going on, and it seems to be happening in a beautiful pattern, in evolution. Who keeps track of evolution? Who says that a human’s brain should be bigger in the next generation? How do the people who live in the wild, how do their skin colors become adaptive to the environment that they live in? Who is keeping track? There is no committee who is keeping track and saying ‘Change this like this’. Isn’t it?

So there is seems to be a Supreme Intelligence which is driving all of this, somewhere. So, this One I cannot deny in the phenomenal world. So, the ‘person’ I’m able to deny, but this One I’m not able to deny. And I get that there’s no person that is beating my heart also. Who has decided it needs to be 70 beats per minute or something like that? It seems to be happening constantly, isn’t it? So this one I would be more reliant on to run my life also. And I see that because I cannot find the person who made those decisions, I cannot find the person who gives belief to the thought also. No?

So is there a person who is saying ‘A thought is coming’? Who is the one who is giving belief to the thought? We say ‘I’, and that ‘I’ is true also, but what does this ‘I’ look like? It is not the body; that we saw, isn’t it? Because most of the things that we give belief to are unconcerned with the body. We discussed this.

So, who needs to get motivated now? This One; the One who is running the entire Universe? Who is motivating this One? Whose motivation is this? And how do we know that because these beliefs in these thought will be there, we become actually more productive? Maybe in the freedom that it’s all happening in, then actions flow more freely. So we truly do not know what the real impact of ambition or motivation is. It’s only because we’re hearing some stories. The stories are made like this always. ‘I had a big dream, and because I dreamed big, I did this.’ No? There’s also a book called ‘Fooled by Randomness’. So see, statistically there will still be some [inaudible] always. And then we focus on their story so much that we believe ‘Okay, that is how it happened’.

Let me just read some of the chat also, otherwise they will feel completely ignored. [Smiles]. Alright. So let’s jump in, in the middle.

NasimaMoti says, “Flow with the flow means going with His will rather than our individual will. How do we go with His will always, and not deviate or get distracted with our will?”

This is a question which is very interesting because it still presumes that there is an individual will, which basically presumes that there is an individual first. So what we are actually searching for, in all satsangs, in all these discussions is: Where is this individual? And, if the individual is only an idea, then does the idea have a will? Does an idea have a will? And when we look in this, we will see very openly that all has ever been this appearance in this Consciousness itself, and when it appeared then I started taking credit for it, like ‘This is my action’ or ‘I did this’ or ‘I did not do this’.

And maybe just for today we can repeat the beautiful example from Francis Lucielle. So it’s like there’s a ride in Universal studios or somewhere, that you get in and you’re supposed to steer this small boat, or whatever you’re sitting in; and you steer it, and if you do a good job, then you get the boat to go in the direction that you’re steering it in, and you will get more points. Yes? So what you do is, the first turn comes and you steer, steer, steer; you steer it hard, and you feel ‘I actually made it’. No? The next time, you’re supposed to turn right, so you turn right, right, right; but it’s still going left, it’s too strong. You say ‘Oh, I should have pushed harder’. Then again you play, right, left; it goes on an on based on what you feel, based on what you decided to do. And then, at the end of the ride, you are told that it is all pre-determined; the ride. It goes on its own, it just flows on its own, and we feel that it is our force which is making it go in this direction or not. And ALL of them that get on the ride buy this idea, that ‘I am controlling this’. So when they hear it the first time, they are shocked. They see on the screen that ‘Okay, it’s always moving this way’. Then they will get it. No?

So, this is our basic nature, that ‘I am the thinker of my thought, I am the doer of my action’. But when asked ‘Can you find this one who is thinking; can you find the one who is doing?’ then we say we are not able to find. But we say ‘It is obvious. Everybody believes it’. But it’s not true. Because everybody believes it does not make it true; because people believed all kinds of nonsense in the past also.

Ustreamer758 says, “Can’t see the other guy.” [The man who is asking questions].

Okay, let me just ask them to say ‘hi’ to you. [Shows Samik and Rashmi sitting in the room via videocam by moving laptop]. [Laughs]. Rashmi has gone into turiya state; she’s not here. So the online satsang, we don’t have the equipment to show you the interaction that way.

GoldenEagle13 says, “Who is speaking about what thought is or not? I see thoughts appear and disappear. ‘I’ is Awareness.”  Yes. “The seeking of truth, as a seeker, is truth itself, is Awareness untouched.”   Yes.

I feel that what you are saying is true, that ‘I am this Awareness itself’. But who speaks these words? These words are a light of the projection of Being itself. When there is the sense ‘I am’ then all phenomenal actions seem to happen in the light of this ‘I am’. Therefore we can say that this Beingness, this Consciousness or God, (whatever label you want to call it), is the doer and the experiencer of all actions, and the experiencer of all phenomenon. It’s only when you refer to yourself as a person; then you become like the ‘Advaita police’ where you say ‘WHO is doing this? WHO is doing that?’ It is clear, it is completely clear. It all depends on what you still believe yourself to be. So if you believe that this ‘I am’, this Beingness, this Consciousness is ever-present here, and taking all of the actions, then you will stop asking like that. Isn’t it?

Aryev says, “Some Masters say ‘Take 100% responsibility of whatever is happening to you’. For example, if something happens ask yourself ‘What did I do to cause this?’ How do we reconcile this with our view, that we have absolutely no control over our lives?”

Yes. If you try to reconcile everything that is being said, then we can come to a reconciliation that everything is nonsense, because no words are true. Anybody can come and say the opposites, and the opposite can also sound completely true. So just remember that none of these words are also the truth; it is just an attempt at pointing you towards your real nature. And different Masters will use different approaches to do that. And many times Masters will say ‘Take 100% responsibility’ because there is this tendency to go for this half-surrender. What is half-surrender? Half-surrender means ‘You are the doer, but I am still the experiencer’. Therefore ‘I have surrendered my life to You, therefore you must take very good care of me’. That is the way in which most surrender happens, isn’t it? It is a half-surrender. So the question that these Masters is probably asking is that ‘If I am the doer, then I must also be the experiencer’. Isn’t it? What is the separation? Or if you feel that you are the doer, then you are the experiencer as well. So either be 100% responsible or be 100% surrendered. This middle path is what gets into trouble usually. So we say ‘Take 100% responsibility for all that is happening’ until you realize that you must be this Consciousness, this Beingness, this God Himself who is able to say this.

Louise says, “So good to hear this. Back to square one.”

GoldenEagle13 says, “It feels spontaneous, though conditioning and dream and memory give an appearance of sameness, even though it is fresh.”

Yes, every moment is a fresh appearance from this light of Consciousness itself.

Hello, William, or Will I Am.

Ustreamer39 says, “Words pointing from Truth to Truth return to emptiness once their mission is complete.”  Yes. “Therefore, they are not to be displayed in the museum of <censored> turning living words into rigid concepts.

Yes, as my Master says, ‘Never make a tattoos out of my words’. And as Bhagavan [Ramana Maharshi] had said, that these concepts are just thorns that we are using to remove some other thorns, and then both thorns are thrown away. We don’t hold on to any of them. The words are not it. No word is the Truth actually.

Jyoti says, “I love your directness and simplicity. So great.”  Thank you.

Atma says, “All is very simple.”  Yes.  “Even beyond simple; beyond the concept of simple.”  Very good.

[Name unsaid], “Subtle vibrations seen as ‘I am’.”

Yes. So let’s look at this a little more. Don’t make a mental picture of what the sense of Being is, or what ‘I am’ is. I ask you a simple question. The simple question is: ‘Can you stop being now?’

The question is: ‘Can you stop being now?’ And your answer will be ‘No’. So, this being which cannot be stopped, this Being is the sense ‘I am’.

Atma says, “I am only this Witnessing. Love you, Father.”  Love you, too.

Aryev says, “Could they be speaking from the reference of Consciousness, not the individual?”

Yes, they could be. That’s what he said, that if you take 100% responsibility it is possible only from the perspective of Beingness, of Consciousness.

Aryev says, “True, that the person cannot be found visually; but could it’s existence be in subtle forms?”

But in any form, can we find…? I’m okay to discuss in any form if we can find a person. Where is this person? If we were to cut the body open, would we find this person? Or is it only in our imagination? We can look. So if you have drawn any conclusions, I am happy to discuss.

Atma says, “Great pointings.”  Thank you.

Vivi says, “Father, there is nothing I can say anymore. Nothing.”  Yes.

Ustreamer13 says, “My example of this is, when we are dreaming, we are like children in a merry-go-round; in cars, bikes, pulling the steering wheel, shouting ‘see me, mom!’ and driving. Only one doer. In the dream, who is driving the car?”   Exactly. Very good.

Thank you all so very much [Reading chat messages]. Thank you, Ustreamer. Thank you, Atma, Prema, thank you.

Cornelia says, “Much needed discussion. Thank you, Father and guests.”   Welcome.

Zoe says, “Bathing in your Presence, beloved Father. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.”

Also feel I must make this point that I have never asked anyone to call me ‘Father’…, so if you’re wondering, [turns to guests in the room], it is something that just happened in some way.

Also for the new ones here in satsang, don’t feel that you’re compelled to call me ‘Father’ or anything. ‘Ananta’ is also just fine. Anything you want is just fine. But I truly value the love that accompanies this word as well, so I’m not saying that you must not call me that. I’m just saying that it is not something that is [inaudible].

Lucian says, “The ‘Take 100% responsibility’ direction is useful so that one stops looking outside or in others. It quiets down to some extent the usual restlessness.”  Yes.

It might be useful in some cases, although I don’t feel I’ve ever given this advise to anyone. But the only one I might look at giving this advice to is someone who is constantly blaming the other seeming-Beings around them. If they are constantly blaming, then I would say ‘Why don’t you take 100% responsibility’. Maybe…, you know? But then very quickly, I would say ‘But who is this one who has 100% responsibility?’

Also, the reverse also happens. We say ‘Okay, I’ve seen that there is no person here. But the people around me are behaving very badly’. You see the joke in that? ‘See, I’ve seen that there’s no person here, and Consciousness is doing all that it is doing, but the people around me are not understanding, or are behaving badly.’ Who are we blaming actually? If there is no person here, there is no person there also. So this is like Consciousness blaming Consciousness. But it is very rampant, that ‘I have understood, but then my family has not understood’ or ‘I have got something, but they don’t understand’. No? Because that means that it’s not fully settled in yet. If it is seen that there is no person here, then it must be seen that there is no person there also. All is a play of Consciousness itself.

Rashmi says, “It’s all a trick, it seems.”   A trick…

Samik says, “So, I’m thinking.., kind of taking into account my original question. So let’s say that I have thought something about my vision; that part is not yet settled. I have to think about it some more. But let’s say I have a team, and I want them to motivate. So is it like I am motivating other Consciousness, or is it… ? You know, I think that they can do better. So, then there is a….”

So, in that also, there an inherent belief that ‘I am a person and they are a person’. And in the middle somewhere it becomes ‘I am not a person, that is seen; but these people need to be sorted out anyway’. But also what we must not do is ‘in the appearance’, what is appearing, then try to be very spiritual about it. Then we become like the ‘Advaita police’. So what we are saying is that actually, (speaking of the work environment), the Self has no trouble playing a manager’s role. The Self has no trouble playing a husband’s role, a partner’s role, like we said, any kind of relationship, a father’s role. All can be played. So you will find that when I’m sitting in front of satsang, I play the teacher’s role, and it happens automatically. It’s not like there’s preparation, there’s thought, ‘I must bring you to the truth’. All these concepts are not there. But automatically some words are flowing.

In the same way, when you are in the work environment, you will find that words are flowing. This only means that you are believing now that ‘Earlier there was a person doing it; now I’ve seen there is no person and hence somebody else will do it’. Earlier also there was no person doing it. So that’s why I was not saying ‘Surrender’ because when you realize what surrender is, we realize that we see that it only means that you are always surrendered. All was always being done by this Consciousness itself, because the individual doer never actually existed at all. So the One that has been doing it so far is the One who will continue to do it. That is the true meaning of surrender. That I’ve seen. I have stopped saying that ‘This is my action’. I have stopped saying that ‘These are my thoughts’.

You know the beauty of all of this? This means this understanding also, the understanding also, is Consciousness speaking to Consciousness; or Consciousness understanding the truth about itself.

Otherwise what that would mean is ‘There was a real individual who was deluded, and is now coming to the point of freedom from the delusion’. But they were never this individual.

So this may be seeming a little strong today, especially for your second time in satsang. But what has happened is that Consciousness itself is playing this game, of being deluded and then becoming free from the delusion. So it is not that something has to switch…, we feel ‘Okay, now, what changes? Because I have understood this now, how do I behave?’ It’s still the person’s voice is asking ‘How do I behave?’

Rashmi says, [not sure of this, slightly inaudible] “This play seem like, once, you’re slowly moving towards the river, that’s still there. But emotions, the body starts changing, I mean. So that’s also a play. It seems like once you know who you are, it flows more smoothly, because you anyways had no role in playing, right? But once you know who you are, and not until you do.., it seems like emotions, somebody doesn’t get angry like before, or upset. That’s also just a drama, right?”

Yes. There is no predicting anything that is going to appear. So the awakening is always in the Now itself. And Adya also said this very beautifully, and I feel it’s completely true about me also, (if there’s me to be said like that), that tomorrow morning, I don’t know what I’m going to be, or what is going to appear here. It could be that I have no interest in satsang. It could be that I just want to work, I don’t want to do anything else. To be in this moment. I am speaking what is true for me in this very moment. Therefore whatever awakening is there or feeling is there, must be here now. But the minute we start saying that ‘I have become awake’ or ‘I am something special’ or ‘I have understood’ it is again the ego’s voice which is saying ‘I’. The real ‘I’ is in this very moment. So even these conclusions we cannot draw about ourself. Who knows what’s going to happen. Because all the appearance.

So it does happen initially that the person wants a sense of something, specialness, or a some benefits in life, you know? My life should at least become…, you know, so much sadhana, so much inquiry has happened; some benefit should be there. But unfortunately, no. As long as the expectation is there, it will not be there. But it is seen from an objective perspective that life has just become a very simple, happy dream. So, what had the ability to phase, does not have the ability to phase me now, in this moment. Who can say about the future. The minute we try to come to some conclusion, that is again a personal conclusion that we are making about the person.

Okay, let me quickly read this. [Looks at chat window].

Ustreamer366 says, “Oh, great soul, in the Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna asked Arjuna to fight. When Arjuna tries to let go and become calm, what is the message on that for us?”

Yes, Krishna’s message was also the same. He says let go of the …

Samik says, “You find a lot of similarities with Bhagavad-Gita …?”

Yes, in fact, any of the scriptures you read now, you will see that it’s sounding like common sense, because you’ve seen it for yourself. So even the Gita, what Krishna is saying is ‘Let go of the concept that you are the attacker or the defender. Let go of all these concepts and let what is unfolding unfold. That has got to unfold anyway’. So that is the message. So it is not that Arjuna tries to become calm and Krishna is telling him to go and kill these people or whatever. He’s just saying that ‘Just let go of these false ideas about yourself and just watch this movie for what it is’. No? That’s why we say that even the way in which the Gita is written, at some point after all the knowledge has been given and seemingly understood, after that Arjuna says ‘Can you show me your real form?’ which the question, (if it really happened that way), must have been really disappointing for Krishna. Because all that he was speaking was to show you that here we are not in this phenomenal appearance at all. So then he must have gotten tired, and said ‘Okay, you want to see a form? Here, take this’. But even with that form, no matter how glorious it is, can never be a true representation of what you are. Isn’t it?

And also it depends on what kind of translations you’re reading; so you have to be careful what translation you are picking up because they are colored by the commentators’ perspective.

Ginger says, “At thy feet, oh, I do bow, oh, God, beautiful.”  Very nice.

William says, “Father of my awakening and clear seeing. Just awareness of Being, and as Awareness, all over the place, too.”   All over the place? Maybe not? Yes, everywhere.

Ustreamer366 says, “And Arjuna is trying to take peace in letting go. Krishna says ‘No, do not yield to unmanliness. Do not degrade yourself’.”

I think you have to change the version; although I’m not degrading whatever version you might be reading. We can look at specific…, if you have some specific stanzas, then we can look at the translation of those and we can interpret them from our perspective of what the truth is. I’ve done for maybe only the first two, three paragraphs of the Gita; we got started but never finished. But maybe this is a good trigger for that. So, look at some of the particular paragraphs that you are talking about, and we will look at what would be another representation from this satsang perspective. Good.

Alright. Okay, everyone. Thank you so much for joining in satsang today.

Moojiji ki Jai ! [Namaste]. So much love to all of you.

Sangha: Moojiji ki Jai ! Anantaji ki Jai !  Thank you. Love you.

So in this game what is going to happen is…This is The Game of Opposites.

Actually Jyoti, in her broadcast yesterday, reminded me of this one, this experiment and…There she comes! Look at that! [Laughs]  Look at that! This one, she reminded me of this experiment which we used to have earlier.

So this experiment is The Game of Opposites. So this game, how it is played is again is…

We close our eyes and we wait for a thought to come. And as a thought comes, for example that, ‘This is very foolish’. A thought could come ‘This is very foolish’. Then immediately we attract the thought, ‘This is very great’. We pull out the opposite. Yes. So this is The Game of Opposites.

So we can start now. Close our eyes. Wait for a thought to come. And whatever the thought is coming, we attract the next thought which is the exact opposite of that thought. Then we let it go.

[Pause]

So with the eyes closed, whenever possible, just wait, be completely open to any thought, and then think the opposite of that thought. And even if no thought is coming, we can say that ‘One thought has come’.

Let all thoughts come. As soon as a thought comes, and is recognized, attract the opposite of that thought, and think the opposite. Very playfully, very gently, just do this for a few minutes.

[Long Pause]

Very good.

[Namaste] Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti.

How do we play this game? What we will do is, we will close our eyes and imagine that there is a batter holding a bat in baseball. This batter can be our image of ourselves, or it can be our favorite baseball player, or it can be anyone that we like. So try it out for a minute. Just visualize a batter taking guard for playing the next ball which will be thrown at him, with a baseball bat in his hand. Yes? This is easy. This much is easy. So all of you with me so far? You understood the instruction?  Very simple. Just visualize a batsman or a batter who’s waiting for the next pitch to be thrown at him. And the visual can be of our own self or of any baseball player that we like or anyone. Yes.

Q: “Can you repeat please? Missed a little.”

So we’re playing this game today. A series of games today. The first one is The Baseball Game. So what we do is we visualize this batsman who has this baseball bat, and he’s waiting for the ball to come, for the pitch to come. Yes?

So all of you can close your eyes. Very good.

Q: “My son Josh is Babe Ruth.”   Very good.

So all of you can close your eyes and visualize this batter. This batter is waiting for the pitcher or the bowler to throw the balls. Now this batter is going to hit out every thought that comes. The balls that will be thrown to him are these thoughts. And this batter will hit every ball that comes out of the park. So you’re all ready to play? Before you close your eyes just say, ‘Yes’, and then we’ll get started. All of you ready to play this first game? Clear?  ‘Yes, Yes’, ‘Okay’, ‘Yes’, ‘Okay’. So everyone seems to be clear, so let’s start.

Visualize a batter who’s waiting for the balls to come. These balls are nothing but thought. So the batter waits. And when the thought comes, visualize that the batter is whacking it out of the park.

If you miss a few, that’s perfectly alright, but you will hit most of them out of the park.

Wait for any thought to come.

And as soon as you recognize a thought, just hit it out of the park.

Very playfully. Very gently.

Whatever the thought might be, just visualize that it is being hit out of the park.

It might be the most glorious thought…., or the most horrid one.

Everything must be hit out.

[Long pause]

No expectations. All thoughts are allowed to come to get whacked by the batter.

[Long pause]

Remember that all that the mind is saying is a thought, and you can hit it out of the park.

[Long pause]

If a thought is coming that, ‘Enough of this game’, then that also can be whacked out.

[Long pause]

[Namaste] Om Shanti, Shanti,  Shanti.

Whenever we feel ready, we can open our eyes.

Visualize that you have three Chinese bowls, like the zen bowls. And if you can’t visualize these bowls, then visualize that you have three small buckets.

And these three bowls or buckets are of three colors.

There is a red bucket or bowl. There is a green one, and there is a blue one.

So in the red one, you will put all the thoughts about the past.

In the green one, you will put all the thoughts about the future.

And in the blue one will be all the thoughts about the present.

Red for past, green for future, and blue for present.

And just wait for the thoughts to come.

You may close your eyes, and when the thought comes, just see whether it’s about the past, future, or present; and put it in the right bucket or bowl, whatever you are visualizing.

Remember; red for past, green for future, and blue for present.

Let all thoughts come now.

If it’s possible, you can close your eyes.

You can start now and I will tell you when to stop.

[About three minutes later] Very good.

Om. Shanti, shanti, shanti.

And if your eyes are closed, you may gently open them.

One more [game]? We’ll see this one and see how it goes. This is very simple actually. This is very simple.

So, every one minute, I will ask you to…, (this game is only for a minute, so in that minute all you have to do is)…, close your eyes, and count the number of thoughts that came.

Just count the number of thoughts that came.

When I say ‘start’ you can start counting the number of thoughts.

Until then, you can close your eyes and be ready for me to say ‘start’.

Until I say ‘stop’ keep counting all your thoughts.

Wait for me to say ‘start’…Start.

And …, [after one minute has passed]…, Stop.

And you can tell us how many thoughts you counted.

And don’t worry, this is not about any grading or any levels based on how many thoughts were there. It’s all just for fun.

So, how many thoughts did you count?

Q: “Filtering the thoughts…”

We’re not only filtering the thoughts, we’re also giving a lot of belief to them, but saying, like she said, ‘We’re giving the belief; we’re saying this is my thought’.

Many of you have heard the ATM example. But since this is a Fun Satsang maybe I can repeat the ATM example, because it is a fun example. Our definition of the mind is ‘Any Time Misery’… ‘ATM’. Any Time Misery. Our definition of the mind is Any Time Misery.

So how do you get misery out of this ATM machine? So you go to the mind, and if you go to the mind (and you must be going from misery obviously), first you put the ATM card, isn’t it? The ATM card means the ‘Attention To Mind’ card: ‘ATM card’.

So you put the ‘Attention To Mind’ card, and just because you put the ‘Attention To Mind’ card, it doesn’t mean that misery is there. You still have to do some more work to get the misery. So what do you do? You give it your Pin Number. You give it your ‘Personal Identification’…, that this is ‘my’ thought, this applies to ‘me’, this is true for ‘me’.

So once you put the ‘Attention To Mind’ card in, and we’ve put in our ‘Personal Identification’, then we have an unlimited supply of misery from this ‘Any Time Misery’ machine.

But without these two steps…, putting the ‘Attention To Mind’ card in and the ‘Personal Identification’ with the thoughts…, it is impossible to get misery.

We go to the ‘Any Time Misery’ machine called mind because we must want some misery, isn’t it? Otherwise, why would we go? Even if the machine seems to come to us, it still needs the ‘Attention To Mind’ and the ‘Personal Identification’ to come.

You see? In that way we actually work hard to get this misery. If we were not to give it our attention and personal identification of belief, then we would not be miserable.