Ashtavakra Gita Chapter 17 Commentary and Contemplation - 30th August 2017

So for verses like this, we truly have to see that this discovery of the Self, Atma, which is untouched by any of the tastes, unchanging, the unmoving, the ever-witnessed awareness—this Self, to settle in the taste of this, then you will find that the neem-ness of the desire about worldly details is not so much. And yet, it is not that the taste of the world goes away. We are experiencing this full vibrancy, and yet it does not compare to the taste that you are having of your own Self-recognition. You cannot be bored by the Self. All other tastes might bore you. The best music might bore you, the best food might bore you, the best sensual experience might bore you, but the taste of the Self is never boring. It's never too much. Nobody ever says, 'Oh, there's just too much Self.' Sweet and salty, we can see that, or any other phenomenal experience, we can see that too much or too little, but this Self is never too much or too little.

Rare in the world is one who does not relish past enjoyment or yearn for enjoyments to come. I've spoken about this life being, for most of humanity, being the seeming struggle to run away from pain and to seek pleasure. Many times in spirituality also, we have this similar pleasure-seeking, similar pleasure-seeking where we are concerned more about the bliss of the taste of Self-realization than about Self-realization itself. It is not different. So usually I give the simple answer, which is to say if the truth is Sat-Chit-Ananda, if the Self is Sat-Chit-Ananda, you focus on Sat and Chit. It is truth and the existence. Truth can be, and later Ananda will take care of itself.

But actually, and we are looking at this now, see that the nature of your unassociated presence is an untainted joy itself. What happens is that we end up confusing this joy and we want to convert it into some sort of a personal joy. 'I want to be the claimant to the joy, I want to be the owner of this joy.' The individual 'I' still comes in. Then it can seem like, 'Oh, there is no bliss, where is the bliss?' But if you were to explore your own existence right now, you notice that this joy is beyond any taste of phenomenal joy. It is the joy of existing. All of us are tasting it. Like, this is one of the possible reasons why we say that consciousness or awareness plays this game of existence, of coming into existence, because it gets joy from it.

So you take for granted as you remain with your present motives that this presence is ever empty of joy and empty of bliss, of peace, contentment. But when we make it personal, when we make it an aspect of our report card of freedom—'How much joy am I feeling?'—then I can see my losses. So simply put, through worldly eyes, this joy can seem elusive sometimes. You taste it, sometimes you don't. But through the eyes of your being, being tasting itself, this is a pristine joy. I am that I am, being enjoying its own beingness, its own existence.

So what is the key in this? This is that if you are the source of all joy and all the phenomenal joy is subservient to this pure joy of being, then where must you look for joy? It cannot be in outer objects and cannot be with the eyes of a claimant, cannot be with the eyes of a person. If you remain empty of concepts and taste your own existence right now, without the measuring tape, without the barometer, now existence to just exist without trying to exist as something, and you will find that even for this unassociated presence, you can say that it is the truth, it is presence, and it is joy, with no idea of what joy should be. As you start tasting your own presence in this way, the feverishness for joy from seeming outward objects will start to dissolve. The foolishness will start to dissolve. Found that all desire must go away when the pretension of desire to cause suffering goes.

Those who desire pleasure and those who desire liberation are both common in the world. Those who desire pleasure and those who desire liberation are both common in the world. Where is the great soul who desires neither enjoyment nor liberation? Now you have to have the right ears to hear this. What this is saying is that whether you desire objects or you are looking for freedom, still the cat is chasing its next bowl of milk. And you try to find the bowl of milk in these objects, try to find joy in these objects, and now it's chasing freedom as if it will get something as a cat. So both are common in the world, this craving worldly. If you are chasing this or that, now there is a great soul who desires neither enjoyment and not even freedom.

If you are empty of desire, including the desire that what is should be something else, you cannot suffer. Suffering is the resistance to what is, and a primal desire is that what is should be something else according to my mind's idea of what things should be. If you have no notion about anything at all, those are you. If you are not choosing anything at all, you forget about the concept of the next bowl of milk. Very quickly you will see that you are not a cat. But if I keep saying 'you're not a cat, you're not a cat' and you are still thinking 'I want my milk, I want my milk', then it can seem like the journey seems longer.

So very often I say even like this: 'You are free.' The response I get is, 'Father, when will I be free?' or 'When will I see?' But you are that who sees. Try it now. What do you see about yourself is the truth of what you are, but not what you imagine about yourself, not what you interpret or judge about yourself. What do you really find when you look? That is the truth. And yet, because we might have a preconceived notion of what freedom should be—and the preconceptions can come from anything, from the books, from anything that we've heard about Self-realization—then quickly we turn everything that is heard even in satsang and we start to look at it through our cat lenses, through our individual eyes' lenses. Then we start to look at finding freedom in that way.

So this effortlessness which I have been talking about, effortless allowing, nothing to change, nowhere to go, nothing to find except that recognition of already what is. Get away from the denial of the truth by forcing belief in the false. To see what is, or what is all the examples of this, right? To see that there is no snake in the road, it has just been an idea. To see that all of these ornaments are gold, there is no difference in substance. All it needs is a simple insight into what is, empty of any preconceived ideas or notions. Who is here that has a lack that can desire something? Can that one be found?

So I say that the one who wants better relationships, the one who wants more money in the bank, or wants something, some special powers for his body, or some special kind of health for his body, is the same one who wants freedom. Which one? That non-existent one. Is that one here? Those who desire pleasure and those who desire liberation are both common in the world. Rare is the great soul who desires neither enjoyment nor liberation. Rare is the right-minded person who neither covets nor shuns religion, wealth, pleasure, life, or death. Rare is the right-minded person who neither covets nor shuns religion, wealth, pleasure, life, or death.

So what is this right mind? See, the mind only knows opposites. If I say the right mind is the neutral mind, can the mind come into neutral? Even neutral is a position. So actually, this right mind is the dropping of this mind, the emptying of any concept, because to the mind it only understands specific reference points. So I say go to zero. Sometimes it says this: 'Be natural.' Then we try to be natural, that also becomes a position which is the opposite of natural. So this is simple, simple allowing. Oh, it's not really right-minded in that way. It is not about taking even a right-minded position, but it's more so there's no more coveting. Coveting is desire. Those who are shunning—shunning is aversion. Neither of these, just what is. This is where is this one who neither covets nor shuns religion, wealth, pleasure, life, or death?

The man of knowledge—remember that this knowledge is that capital K knowledge which we use from the beginning, not like mental knowledge—the man of knowledge neither cares for the universe nor desires its dissolution. He lives happily on whatever comes his way. He is blessed. So we've spoken enough about just knowing himself, mind empty and at peace. The sage lives happily seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating. These two simple-sounding words, it captures almost all of satsang, okay? Knowing Self, capital K knowing Self. This recognition is what we are talking about in every satsang. Knowing Self, mind empty and at peace. This emptiness that we are talking about is openness, allowing all thoughts to come and go, not believing them. So basically, knowing Self, mind empty and at peace, just this much. Satsang, what is it? I mean, coming to the knowing of the Self and the mind is empty. The sage lives happily. So happiness arises naturally and all the functioning of seeing, hearing, touching, eating still. The second part is listening before enlightenment.

What we are talking about is energy, satsang. Mind empty—and at least this emptiness that we are talking about is open, meaning allowing all thoughts to come and go, not believing them. Basically, moving self, my name cleared. At least just this much satsang. What is it? I mean, coming to the knowing of the Self, and the mind is empty. The sage lives happily, so happiness arises naturally. And all the functioning of seeing, hearing, touching, eating... still, the second part is listening. Before enlightenment, chopping wood, carrying water. After enlightenment, chopping wood, carrying water. This is really saying: knowing Self, mind empty and at peace.

So, we are not even talking about mind empty as one would say 'Manonasha'—come to the mind which is empty of all thoughts. We are not even setting that target because I noticed that the mind here... it needs to have form. And the minds of most of the sages I've been with, all of the series of masters, they will continue to have forms. So remember, I can't say about those we have never been with in this physical way, so I don't know about that. But I can tell you that from this experience, mind empty only means that the mind is not resisted and is allowed to come and go.

So, is it possible that there is a level of enlightenment which is still not here, or something like that completely? I cannot say. If somebody like the one I said, 'Manonasha'... nobody to deny that. But at least what I can share with you from my living truth is that the mind is not empty. Thoughts still come and go, but they're just allowed to let go ninety-nine point something percent of the time. And even when it gets attention, mostly it is with laughter. As I expect complete integrity, or as complete as possible integrity from myself, I feel it is my duty to share with integrity. So I can only share from what is the living experience here, which is to come to the recognition of the truth.

And I'm seeing the recognition of the truth, the realization that the mind is not meaningful as far as the truth of what I am is concerned. Therefore, the belief in this mind becomes more and more difficult. So the recognition aids in allowing this mind to just come and go. And allowing the mind to just come and go provides more space for this inner intuitive resolution. Knowing Self, mind empty and at peace, the sage lives happily. Seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating, there is no attachment or non-attachment for one in whom the ocean of the world has dried up. His look is vacant, senses still, his actions have no purpose.

'Vacant' usually has a negative connotation in the English language. Oh, he had a very vacant look. But when we look at the photo of the one, we look at Mooji's photo, you know that there is clear... there is no conditioning mixed into the looking. You don't usually use the word 'vacant,' but it is empty of conditioning. I could sometimes ask: who is looking from behind those eyes? Is there a real entity who is looking from behind those eyes? What is it mixed up with? A 'what's in it for me' idea? Until this is conditioned, there is no attachment or non-attachment for whom the ocean of the world is dried up. His look is vacant, senses still, actions have no purpose.

This also we understand, isn't it? It's not that 'I'm doing it because I want this, because I want my life to go this way.' Actions are continuing, but they're not driven by that kind of personal ego, personal ambition. And yet, action continues to happen. The sage is neither asleep nor awake. He neither closes nor opens his eyes. For the liberated soul, everywhere there is only this. The sage, he knows that for reality there is no difference between the sleep state, dreamless sleep state, and waking state. He is beyond these dreams. He is in the Zen. He's pointing you also to that—that you are beyond these things. That is the important thing.

So we don't have to worry so much about the sage's state, only as a pointer to make this recognition for yourself. So these are all rules for us. They are not just descriptions of the sleep, which is beautiful in that way, but this is all for us. Find that which is beyond the state of waking and sleep. What witness is a king? You, the substance, it is beyond these states. He neither closes nor opens his eyes. He is not the doer of any of these actions. He sees that all of this is a happening in the phenomenal play of consciousness. Thus, for the liberated soul, everywhere there is only this. There is only one. All ornaments are made up only of gold. All appearances are just appearances within consciousness, made up of the light of consciousness projected on the screen of consciousness.

The liberated soul abides in Self alone and is pure of heart. He lives always and everywhere free of desire. 'Abides in Self alone' means doesn't give value to the pretense of separation. It is not like an effortful trying to abide. This is the source of a lot of confusion for many of us because many of the great sages have said, 'Abide only as the Self.' If you are the Self, but you can only be the Self, how do I abide? We have the full satsang transcript on this, if I'm not mistaken. If you can only be the Self, then what is the instruction? Abiding in the Self only means don't pick up the pretense of the non-self. Don't pick up the pretense of your individuality.

There's only the play of abiding. It is not even this idea that my attention should only be at home, not arise, not doing any phenomenal content. Consciousness is done with the play of phenomenal content; it itself dissolves and moves into deep sleep. So it is not that form of aversion to phenomenal perception. We have sleep for that. In sleep, there is no anything outside of the Self. When the Self is done playing with the apparent appearance of the phenomenal world, it will be done with it. It won't even appear. The job of attention seems to be to bring this phenomenal creation to life. So attention can also go. We don't have to force our attention in that way.

In the moment of self-recognition, when the master asks you a question or points you in a direction, automatically attention knows how to follow that. We don't have to force our attention here. In inquiry, the questions will do that job for us. No wholesome applying to stay or not trying to... that is not allowing to function. Often I have spoken about attention in this way: that it is like the dog on the leash. Sometimes I call attention like this arm. It's always attached here to the shoulder. Whatever content it might be bringing from outside, you don't have to be concerned. Where is this arm going? It might leave me. No, it is this reporting back to the source. It cannot leave. It cannot leave you. So you don't have to try and control your attention in that case, unless you learn some meditation practice or yoga practice which you find is very helpful.

The liberated soul abides in Self alone and is pure of heart. He lives always and everywhere free of desire. This 'pure of heart' here just means the phenomenal byproducts of this discovery. And the usual phenomenal byproducts... what it means, pure heart? The true Heart with a capital H is always pure, so we don't have to worry about purifying that. Here, what would be implied is the end of grievances and the end of remorse. All of these ideas... what are these? These are like some emotions mixed with concepts. If you look at guilt, what is it? Is it a pure thought? Is it an emotional truth? What is it? A pure emotion? No, it is also mixed with the thought 'I should not have done this.'

What is pride? Is it a pure thought? No. Is it a pure emotion? It is a mixture of emotions and thoughts, the play of these two, which the mind has made into a pattern. It feels like, 'Yes, so good that I did that.' There is something of something... even joy could be there, but it mixes that with some idea: 'This was so good, such a good job.' Or some feeling of some frustration, you regret... some actual sensation-type input becoming mixed with 'I should not have become.' So you look at all of these grievances, pride, remorse... they all fall away because the basis for all of this is the idea of an individual 'me.' Then that can be a pure heart.

We often distinguish between thought and thinking. Exactly. The appearance of the thought, in the way we use the term 'thinking,' is not thinking. Thinking is the appearance, attention, and belief. What is the product of attention? What is the product of thought mixed with attention? Entities, people's identity. Duty says: do not identify. Seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating, taking, speaking, walking... the liberated soul exerts neither effort nor non-effort. He is truly free. Neither effort nor non-effort. So this is exactly what I was saying. If you are moving from making effort to try and be effortless, then that is also another position. Even openness... many times I say just remain open, and many times we can hear that report that 'I am staying open, but I'm worried that something might go wrong. I am staying open.'

So even that 'open' can become a position. It is not like that, that 'I am now doing the open thing.' It is this: the dropping of all positions. The dropping of both 'open' and 'not open' is openness. The dropping of both effort and non-effort is true effortlessness. The mind can get frustrated with these instructions, like, 'Just tell me what to do.' Even telling you what to do would be to get you to take a position. I can tell you this: become a loose end, like a giant something like that. But even that can become a resistance. So it has to be allowed to get home. These words... don't try to interpret them into fitting some framework that you have of your spirituality. They have enough power to get home on their own. In fact, you trying to manage them can seem to cause confusion about them.

The translation can be: 'Father, you are not leaving me with a coherent spiritual framework.' Yes, guilty as charged. Without anything of you, I'm not leaving you with a coherent, traditional framework because my job is to keep that... to demolish language enough. Coherent spiritual frameworks are everywhere. Have they led to the end of suffering? Then the beauty of this is when you're empty of any mental spiritual framework, you will discover the beauty of this and it will seem completely coherent. Like now, you no longer make effort. Nothing is illogical, even that for me now. So it is not that you will not discover the beautiful synchronicity, in a way, the beautiful symphonic nature of these pointings.

So even the words of satsang, which might seem initially confusing to the mind, then you will start to appreciate from your place and see the symphony, which might have very different notes, but you will see that they have a particular purpose at that point of time. The liberated soul does not blame or praise, give or take, rejoice or become angry. He is everywhere unattached and free. So the liberated soul does not blame or praise, give or take, rejoice or become angry. Not attached to any of these. He sees the play of the outward functioning doing all of this, and he remains unattached. So you say the rejoicing can happen, but the idea that 'I have to rejoice' is not there. Anger can come, but the resentment is not there.

The great soul remains poised and undisturbed whether in the presence of a passionate woman or observing the approach of his death. He is truly free. The great soul remains poised and undisturbed in the presence of a passionate woman or observing the approach of his death. In the world, this is simple seeing, empty of feverishness, empty of this 'what's in it for me.' Or observing the approach of his death... we'll see how that one goes. I'm not sure. He is clearly free. The sage sees no difference between happiness and misery, man and woman, adversity and success. Everything is seen to be the same. And this is important again, because this can again lead to some confusion when he says he sees no difference between...

Observing the approach of his death in the world, thus improving the quality of simple seeing, empty of feverishness, empty of this 'person it for me' or observing the approach of his death. We'll see how that one goes. I'm not sure which is clearly three. This sage knows no difference between happiness and misery, man and woman, adversity and success. Everything is seen to be the same. And this is important again because this can again lead to some confusion. He says the sage knows no difference between happiness and misery, man and woman, adversity and success; everything is seen to be the same. So some have this idea that 'If I am able to still see a difference, does that mean that I am still coming from my ego?'

Now you have to look at this closely. It is not that the sage cannot distinguish between red and blue. It is not that the sage becomes colorblind. Red is still red, you see? What Ashtavakra is saying here is that whether it is red or blue, there is no concern about that. It's a subtle point and it might seem trivial, but it is very important when we see our lives. You will see that you get caught up in a lot of guilty ideas. If you see someone shouting at you and you were able to see that this one is coming from an angry place, you see this. If you see someone who in their words is smelling of the pure fragrance of being, that is tasted differently. If you see someone where the words are just sugary words, seem to be dipped in honey, that is tasted differently. But because the tastes are different, the sage is not saying, 'This should not be. I don't want this experience; I want only that experience.' So in that way, it does not make a difference.

I mean, especially those in relationships have come to me with this question and they've said, 'Father, I still find my partner and I see that he's being so egoistic. Does that mean that I am being egoistic?' I say, well, that depends. If you are just spotting that he is being egoistic or she's being egoistic, you see, and that is not met with a resistance, if the freedom is there, yes, the world is allowed to be as they are. But if we say, 'Why my partner has to be so egoistic? I wish it was not like this,' then what is that? This 'I' is again what? Ego. So this spotting of an appearance which seems to be coming from the place of individuality is not the trouble. It is what we believe about ourself as a result of that. As the world, we claim all this anyway. So you will be able to spot the difference in colors, the entire spectrum. The same way, you will be able to spot the difference in all the various expressions, but you will not make a judgment about it. You will not leave a conclusion about anyone based on that appearance in the moment. In this way, you remain open.

I'll continue to perceive all the flavors. A sage perceives this very well. Otherwise, how is he able to come to a resonance with what is being shared and give an answer based on them? Everything is seen to be the same does not imply that everything becomes now one color, does not become a single color, something like that. It will see, it is seen to be the same. What do you think is seen? As consciousness itself. And there is acceptance for all the flavors of consciousness. In the sage, there is neither vulgar violence nor mercy, arrogance nor humility, anxiety nor wonder. His worldly life is exhausted. He has transcended his role as a person.

The last line is important. So whatever is personal, I'll give you some ideas: grievances, remorse, reserved hopes, which is specialness, humility—false humility is as bad as arrogance—anxiety. Anxiety means again not just fluttering, but also resistance to it, to say that this should not happen. 'Oh, I'm so scared.' Mixing up ideas, feelings, sensations. The liberated one neither avoids experience nor craves it. He does, the liberated one, right? There are words, expressions. Neither craves it, he enjoys what comes and what goes. Neither avoidance nor craving. The sage is not conflicted by states of stillness and thought. This is very good. His mind is empty, his home is the Absolute.

So now this paragraph confirms very well with the definition that we shared earlier. He said even if stillness is there or thoughts are there, his mind is empty. So then it must conform to what we are saying, that it is empty of the belief, empty of identification. Because he's saying that even if thoughts are there, mind can be empty. The sage is not conflicted by states of stillness and thought. His mind is empty, his home is the Absolute. So whether the state is that of Turiya, where you just feel that there's a sliver of existence that is here but there is no world, there is no body, there is no breath, there is no movement of any sort, and yet it is not sleep; or whether you are experiencing sleep, or whether you are experiencing the dream, or whether you are experiencing this waking state, you know that the Self remains unconcerned, untouched by any of these four aspects of experiencing. In fact, it is these four aspects which are contained within you. You are the substratum for all of this. You are not contained in one of these. His home is the Absolute. So Absolute itself means not affected by states. The relative can have states; the coming and going can have states. The Absolute is state-less.

Though he may perform actions, the man of knowledge does not act. Very good. We explained this earlier many times. Though he may perform actions means the functioning, the natural functioning of the body-mind continues. The man of knowledge does not act. He knows his true place is beyond this doing and non-doing. Desires extinguished, free of thoughts of 'I' and 'mine', or 'me' and 'mine'. Desires extinguished, free of thoughts of 'I' and 'mine'. He knows with absolute certainty that nothing exists. Desires extinguished, free of thoughts of 'I' and 'mine'. This duality itself stops playing. See that there are two ways to really look at this. Nothing in reality exists. We can go back to our definition of reality here, that which does not come and go. But another bit of wordplay with this is: it is 'no-thing' that exists. The Self, which is now claimed, this existent nature.

The sage is free, his empty mind no longer projects delusion, dreaming, darkness. This state is indescribable. You see, we start to notice some of these things. Don't make any of them a benchmark. And you already will see that a few years ago, or maybe before you started to come to satsang, notice how many times you would say to yourself, 'I am bored.' At peace with yourself, if you're happy to be with yourself, you can never be bored. Don't make that a benchmark. And notice that truly, find that if you are left alone, you are comfortable. You don't need to be surrounded by people. Why? Because we recognize that peace is the very nature of our existence and all things emerge from there. We are never separated from our source. All these thin feelings of delusion, dreaming, darkness, you will not find yourself so daydreaming as often as you used to be. You are so present. Even the content of the present experience seems so vibrant. This state is indescribable. The sage is free, his empty mind no longer projects delusion, dreaming, darkness. This state is indescribable. So let's not try to describe it. So that was Chapter 17.