Contemplation on the Ashtavakra Gita Ch. 18, Vs. 51-72 - 8th September 2017

So for some time, no phenomenal considerations. They have had their time. They will get their time also in the future. Are you aware now? What is aware of even this awareness? Cannot solve this question. Don't try to solve it. Let the question lead you on its own. Who is aware of awareness? Why are you here? What is true about you that has never changed? And does this awareness also come and go? What would witness the coming and going of this? Does this have a beginning or an end or any form of change? Is there anything to desire, anything to push away? What can come in the world of appearances that can touch this one?

Okay, let's look at verse 51. 'So when one realizes he is neither the actor nor the one who watches, the mind storm is stilled.' Neither the actor nor the perceiver of these actions. This is pointing to the Absolute. Perceiving, acting—all of this is a play of consciousness. What is before 'I am'? Before consciousness? And to come to this recognition, then the mind storm has no power over you. He says that mind could create a tsunami, but what power does it have over the Self? It is all that. No phenomenal appearance touches the Self. All phenomena is just an aspect of the Self. That's why the Sages go as far as to say if the world would burn, every universe to catch fire, I remain untouched. Not because they have some phenomenal superpowers. They are not referring to the 'I' which remains the untouched as the body. The body is part of this world. The 'I' that remains untouched is the same 'I' which is the source of consciousness, that is aware of consciousness itself. And you come to this discovery to find that witnessing that is aware of your perceptions and which is aware of sight, of sound. You can see sight, see objects, but how do you hear hearing? You hear phenomena. How are you aware of hearing? You know, always beautiful pointers. 'When one realizes he is neither the actor or the one who watches, the mind storm is stilled.'

Now don't confuse this 'nor the one who watches' with what the Gita has been saying from the beginning. Don't confuse it with the one solitary witness of all there is. This is why it is very important that we have sections like this, otherwise it might sound like just a bunch of contradictions. But it is spoken of from a different place. What witnesses your perception? One who watches is the perceiver and the will be perceived, which is Sri Ramakrishna: the perceiver itself be perceived. What is your truest position?

Chapter 18, verse 52: 'The actions of the sage, free of pretense and motives, shine like clear light. Not so those of the deluded seeker who affects a peaceful demeanor while remaining firmly attached.' Action with the sage, free of pretense and motive, shine like clear light. Not so those of a deluded seeker who affects a peaceful demeanor while remaining firmly attached. In the aspect of consciousness which is appearing to you as a sage, there has been a recognition. Third time's the charm. In the aspect of consciousness which is appearing to you as a sage, there has been the recognition that there is no doer, no individual doer of action in the way of this world. Actions which seem to emanate from these aspects, that being which is not considering itself to be something separated, something limited. The outward plane, the phenomenal plane—such a being, because it is not coming from the ego, the sense of limitation, action seems pristine. Even when many times we don't seem to understand why a sage is doing what he's doing or she is doing, and we look at it later, we realize one beautiful grace. For although everything is the will of consciousness, entire creation is His grace, and yet it is undeniable that in the presence of a sage, their actions, their presence itself, is much more beautiful grace.

Not so those of the deluded seeker who affects a peaceful demeanor while remaining firmly attached. Any time I come across many in the spiritual journey who outwardly project a different impression, a different demeanor, and yet as we scratch the surface, all this starts to fall apart. Who is still coming from that aspect of consciousness and believing itself to be a limited entity? They proclaim as a seeker. All that comes from the sense of limitation seems to be not as pristine as that which is coming from this outward change, because they're still attached to their identity, the seeker identity.

Verse 53: 'Unbounded, unfettered, untethered of the projections of mind, wise are free to play and enjoy or retire to mountain caves.' Unbounded, unfettered, untethered of the projections of the mind, the wise are free to play and enjoy or retire to mountain caves. So the first part we have spoken of often enough. Simply the series of eating—the mind is complex, let it go. Wise are free to play and enjoy or retire to the mountain. That's why I say that it is said: before enlightenment, chopping wood, fetching water; after enlightenment, chopping wood, fetching water. Which we can add to that, or not, because even that can seem like it has become a condition. It is no 'must' for anything. Anything can play after you come to the recognition of the truth. Whether it is going to the Himalayas and living in caves there, or continuing to live the life of a householder, both can happen completely naturally for the sage. Nothing needs to be escaped, nothing needs to be renounced except your belief in your next thought.

Whether honoring the spiritual scholar or God, a holy shrine, whether seeing a desirable woman, a king, or beloved friend, the heart of the sage is unknown. We discuss this often enough: neither desire nor aversion truly get a hold. All the appearances can come and go, but the 'I' remains the same. Verse 54: 'Though his servants, sons, wives, daughters, grandchildren, all his relatives ridicule and despise him, the yogi is undismayed.' So everyone around you—and all of us at some point have had these kind of experiences. I am suddenly reminded of one time I was at work and someone I met, and we happened to be speaking about someone, and they didn't realize that I am into this kind of search for self-intuition, the Self, the quest for self-realization at that time. And he says to me very straight-faced, 'As for those who get caught in this spiritual box, their life is finished.' We've all heard like this. 'Who's a seeker? Their life is finished.' So all of us encounter these kind of things, and we just want to be in this contemplation, the enquiry. Many times you hear this, not just from the mind that is here, but also from those seemingly around us. They think, 'What's wrong with you? Why can't you live your life? Leave all this for old age, then you can do any of this. Finish off the important things.' This kind of thing we've all heard.

So when sons, wives, daughters, grandchildren, all his relatives ridicule and despise him, he is undismayed. He is not pleased, he is not in pleasure nor pain. He does not suffer. This wonderful state is understood only by those like him. We can make a really simple idea of it: there can be pain, but suffering becomes an alien concept. When you don't understand this in the beginning, when you also don't understand they are really like this, the pleasure of that can be there, but the potential for...

When sons, wives, daughters, grandchildren, and all his relatives ridicule and despise him, he is pleased. He is not pleasure, nor pain; he does not suffer. This wonderful state is understood only by those like him. It is a really simple idea. There can be pain, but suffering becomes an alien concept. When you don't understand this in the beginning, you also don't understand that the pleasure of that can be there, but the potential for that to become feverish—so that if it is not there, it leads to some suffering—that goes away. So pain and pleasure can arise in their own natural way, but none of these become something that would have the potential to cause feverishness or suffering. That is where the sage is fully enjoying even the content of the present moment, which is all an aspect of his own, her own. Nothing needs to be renounced in this world except the limited idea of who you are. This wonderful state is understood only by those like him.

The belief in duty creates a relative world for its performance. The wise one knows himself to be formless, timeless, all-pervasive, immaculate, and thus transcends duty and the world. The belief in duty creates a relative world for its performance. The wise one knows himself to be formless, timeless, all-pervasive, immaculate, and thus transcends duty and the world. Unless there is duality, unless there is a sense of separation, we cannot pick up the idea of duty. As this duality is dissolving—and again, it is for all these: formless, timeless, all-pervasive, immaculate—and you find yourself to be this one, then you will find that very much who is an individual doer of anything, the subject-object relationship within this world, starts to dissolve. Therefore, there is nobody now to do anything; nothing to be done.

This is not the talking of doership and picking up of non-doership. You see, the idea that 'I must not do anything because I am not the doer' is the talking of the concept itself. Everything is just happening, including everything moving from this body, this power, these hands. Neither doer nor non-doer. What's the simpler way to see this? If I say you're not a scientist, you become an identity around not being a scientist. Somebody mentions, 'I am sleeping.' 'No, no, I am not a scientist.' Nobody said you were! It's just like that. When I tell you here you are not the doer, we pick up the non-doer identity. And why wouldn't you? 'Put out the garbage.' 'No, I'm not the doer.' And the garbage has to be put out. 'It will be put out. Why don't you inquire?' 'I already follow the sage's pointing; I am not the doer. If it has to happen, it will happen.' This non-doer identity also gets held onto. It is a very common Advaita trap. Either of these positions. And the instruction is heard: I know who you are. And something might follow it, something might not follow it, but you are not picking up the idea of either doing it or not doing it. You see, it's a subtle point. That's why I have been repeating it over and over.

Even doing nothing, the dull one is anxious and distracted. Even amidst great action, the wise one remains still. Even doing nothing, that aspect of consciousness which is pretending as if it is the limited one—see, it is falling in the dull one. Even doing nothing, the dull one is anxious and distracted. Even amidst great action, the wise one remains still. Even in practical life, the wise one remains happy. We didn't say that you have to drop practical life. Even in practical life, there is a gentle undercurrent of contentment, of happiness, because it is this doership and attachment to the outcome of doership which causes all these struggles. So even in practical life, the wise one remains happy. Happy to sit, happy to sleep, happy to move about, happy to speak, happy to eat, because he knows the Self. The wise one is not disrupted by practical life. He is deep and still like a vast lake. He is not like ordinary people; his sorrows have vanished. You know where the seed is coming from, so don't feel that he is being derisive towards ordinary people or something.

For the deluded one, even rest is an activity. For the wise, even action bears the fruit of stillness. Exactly what we spoke about. The deluded one, they are doing even the rest, or they have the sense of doership even when there is resting. For the wise, even when there is action, it bears the fruit. The deluded one is often adverse to the things of his life. To one with no thought for the body, attachment and aversion have no meaning. So you can see, the deluded one is often averse to the things of his life. To one with no thought for the body, attachment and aversion have no meaning. So we go on, because we've looked at this many times.

The deluded mind is caught up in thinking and not thinking. The mind of the wise one may think what thoughts come; he is not aware of it. This needs some little bit of clarification. Not that he is not aware of it; basically, he is not concerned by it. The deluded mind is caught up in thinking and not thinking. We take the position, exactly what we are saying, that if we hear thinking is the problem, then we can take the position 'I must not think.' We try to obstruct thoughts. It is to allow them to come and go. You cannot become the thinker unless you identify with the thought, unless you give belief to it. Then, the mind of the wise one may think what thoughts come, which only means thoughts are allowed to come and go. This appearance of thoughts is continuing to happen. He is not aware of this—so, not that he is not aware of it; he cannot claim that anything exists unless there is awareness of it—but he is not concerned by it.

And also, that these thoughts would seem to be so big, so powerful, so noisy. How many, when they first came to satsang, said to me, 'Oh Father, Ananta, my mind is so loud.' It's okay. It's so noisy. It's not the size of the mind; it seems the power is in the thought. These are our attention and our belief; you seem to make them so formidable. In the past, how were you finding it? What do we see? Earlier, we used to see some of these examples—I find them a little bit fun sometimes—I used to say that that which seemed to be this big wrestler able to throw you around, yes, this mind, then becomes like a nagging partner. He is like, tangent again, nagging, knocking partner. Constantly, 'Do this, do that, don't do this, don't do that. Why are you like this? Can you change?' Like that nagging partner, but not the same power as this big wrestler beating you about. Then it becomes like this mosquito. You know that one mosquito in the night trying to sleep, and it comes and buzzes every few minutes? Even the mosquito-ness of the mind starts to fade away. And mostly, whatever it might be saying, whatever ideas of doership or duality it might be trying to sell you, mostly it is allowed to come and go.

So this is how, as we direct our identity, as we die away and start withdrawing from the mind, you see the mind itself seems to become much more powerless in a way. But don't be too quick to proclaim these things. I've had many who've been in satsang with me, and they've been quick to come to this idea that 'I am over the mind now. The mind is now my friend. I want to love it. I want to be nice to it.' And very quickly, it bites back. Don't be so quick. The trickster is also consciousness, you know. But don't be so quick to pick up a friendly attitude towards it. There will come a time where we look at it also as your beautiful child, with no resentment towards it. That is all completely fine. But don't be so quick to get into that position, not to proclaim that kind of mastery over the mind.

Father, can I ask something about it? Yes, my dear. I actually think it is really a question. I felt to come up and say something to it because of a service to something which reaches towards me sometimes. But normally, I say during the day, I would also not say that the experience here is that everything is just happening. This is just not... I don't feel it as an experience here. And sometimes yes, but it's not like that really. But to say that it is, I would say I don't think about it in a practical way. Yes, but I don't think about the things I'm doing. And I'm not sure, you know, there's doubt in it somehow, a subtle doubt where the mind creeps in. Silence sees us as children who are here, or something like that. I don't know if that makes sense, but it's just really because most of the day is just, you know, going in without thinking on doership, what we're doing. Yet I would say it's not the experience, you know, that everything is just happening. I would not say it like this. It's something in the middle of it, you know. I just thought to say that.

It's a beautiful, important question, actually. When we hear that, then you see that everything is just happening. Why doesn't it seem to change? You say you are able to see that 'I'm not thinking about it,' and yet it seems very natural. It's not like, 'Oh, now everything is just happening.' Why? Because everything has always been just happening. So we don't expect this shift in our perception in some way. And yet, when we notice—for example, if you were to notice just how the next words you say come out—you will notice that it is just happening. You see, these words are just appearing. You see? And the perception of these words is also just happening. Just like your eyes are blinking, the heart is beating; all of this is just happening. Your head could be nodding; all of this is just happening. Why doesn't it feel like anything really shifted? Because actually, everything has been always just happening in this way.

The key is what you said: 'I usually don't think about it.' Now, what happens when we do think about it is when we invent the doer. Because when the thinking comes, what is it saying? 'You should not have done that,' or 'What should you do now? I don't know what to do.' You see? And yet, what is to happen or not happen will continue to happen or not happen. Let me use a metaphor, so maybe it's easier to understand. Now, suppose the tree had thoughts. There is a tree in the garden and the tree had thoughts, and the thought was saying that you have to move your branches up and down. The thought was saying you have to move your branches up and down, and every day it was giving the tree a report on how well it did moving its branches.

Now, when we first hear that, the sage comes next to the tree and is able to tell the tree in tree language: 'You are not doing it, because the wind comes and moves your branches.' So then some sense of relief can come. 'I am not moving these branches; it is the wind. This mind has been lying to me.' The movement of the branches, the movement of everything, has been the movement of consciousness. But this is still incomplete, because what the sage will say next is that, 'See that you are not the tree itself.' We see the difference in position? So first, 'I am the tree and I am moving my branches.' Then, 'I am the tree, but God or the wind or some higher force is moving my branches.' And then to see, 'I am not the tree itself.' Because if you get stuck in 'I am the tree and a higher force is moving my branches,' then we can always have the sense of victimization. 'So why does God have to move it this way or that way for me?' And we can have a desire for something about the future: 'I hope tomorrow God moves the branches only through this way, in a particular direction.' So that's why this is important: for the sage to remind us that you are not the tree. Not only are you just not moving the branches, but you are also not the tree. So then you see that, 'Yes, I am that which is entirely free: wind, ground, sage, everything I am.' The third bird is witnessing both the doer and the perceiver. And that primal witnessing, then we come to this. Now the thought is to do completely the opposite thing. The thought is saying, 'Yes, of course you're moving your branches. See, now you decide to bring only the...'

This is important for this age: to remind us that you are not the tree. Not only are you just not moving the branches, but you also are not the tree. So then you see that, yes, I have that which is entirely free. Wind, ground, sage—everything. I am the third bird witnessing both the doer and the perceiver, and that primal witnessing. Then we come to this: now the thought is completely the opposite thing. The thought is saying, 'Yes, of course you're moving your branches. See, now you decide to move.' Only then you claim like that, or something like that. So in that idea that you are moving your fingers, it is selling you the story, basically, that you are the tree.

That's why when you say, 'I don't see, everything is just happening, but I'm not thinking about it,' actually, then without thinking about it, all you see is that all of this is just happening. It is only thought which makes an individual doer out of you. The sensations of movement can still be the same, you see. When you pick up something heavy, it might still seem like it's a sensation of some heavy object being felt in the body. So don't expect all of that to change. We are typing, we are doing, working so hard with the five senses—all of that. You might still find that the body gets tired. That happening does not mean that the phenomenal principles of this world will no longer happen. So you can still, if the body gets strained, feel pain in the body. It is not a superpower that we are finding; we're finding that naturalness of this. All of this is just happening with the power of consciousness, or as my favorite move now: everything is happening with Guru power. God, Guru, and the Self are the same. Everything is moving with Guru power. There is no individual or mover of any of this.

And when you're not thinking about it, that is what your experience is. As the next words flow, the next action happens, this body is there, it is just moving on its own. The one that is claiming to be the doer, the mind, does not know how to do. Have you seen this? This one claims to be doing all of this, but it doesn't know how to move a finger. If you ask the mind, 'So how do you move a finger?' it will say, 'I just decide.' Oh, how do you do it after the thought comes to move the finger? What do you do next? It doesn't know. How does it activate the nervous system of the body which makes this movement happen? All these are phenomenal mechanics. I don't usually get so much into that, but you will realize that it's just like a small baby claiming that, 'Oh, I am making the world go round because I say round and it moves round,' but it is moving on its own.

Thank you, Father. Amil says, 'Father, I am all the birds.' Neeti-neeti means he is just an illusion. You cannot cut yourself to say, 'I am not this.'

Exactly, exactly what I said. That neeti-neeti is not a pushing away of an aspect of yourself, keeping anything or pushing anything aside. It is just a simple seeing that all attention has gone into this phenomenal claim. But can I just check for a moment or two whether anything else is there? We clarified this a few times. The sage sees nothing being done, even when performed by his hands. So beautiful. It is answering the same question. The sage sees nothing being done, even when performed by his hands. Like a child, he is pure and acts without reason. 'Without reason' should not be taken as acting in an unintelligent way. What supreme intelligence is writing this life, all our lives? So it doesn't pick up ideas like, 'I must do that, I have to do this.' As I said, what's most important is no feverishness or suffering, no dependence on the outcome in the play of life.

You will see that some planning can happen. Some next week, a year ago, you can plan what is the next retreat, of course, as if he is planning. So in the life of the sage, movement, activity, even apparent planning can seem like it is there. But it is here that very 'I am not the tree,' you see? That is the most important. I am not the individual doer. Even planning is witnessed. Blessed indeed is he who knows the Self. Though seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating, he never desires nor changes. Blessed indeed is he who knows the Self. Though I do, because all of these are phenomenal sights, phenomenal sounds, phenomenal tastes, phenomenal smells—all of these are phenomenal. Why does he do? Just the same reason. This explains why. Because although all of this is there, how does one recognize that aspect of consciousness? How does one come to that? Just through this simplicity of seeing what is beyond the phenomenal.

So neeti-neeti means doing is occurring, but it is still phenomenal. Don't settle for that for a moment. Find that which is beyond the play of phenomena. For one who is void and changeless, where is the world and its imaginings? Where is the end? Where is the possibility of fate? For one who is void and changeless, where is the world and its imaginings? Where is the end? What is the possibility of it? So this one that is beyond time and space, beyond all qualities—where is the world for you, the Self? Where is that appearance that we call the world? Where is the set of sensations that we call the body? What is your true position? Are you bound or enclosed by any of these? Where is birth and death? Where is beginning or end? Where is time for the unchanging one? What does time mean?

Glorious indeed is he who, free of desire, embodies bliss itself. He has become absorbed in himself. In short, the great soul who has realized truth is free of desire, enjoyment, and liberation in all of space and time. He is attached to nothing. We have covered all of this many times. And anyone in the future who happens to come to this YouTube video or read this transcript, please start from the beginning. I stop because there is something that I feel requires it, or it can create some confusion if you haven't joined us from the beginning. So if you are watching this verse on YouTube ten years later, whenever you're watching this, please start from the very beginning. Shana has made it easy for you to find it. You can start from the beginning of this; it will become much more clear, especially terms like 'enjoyer,' 'doer,' 'free of desire.' All these have been explained many times as we have followed.

What remains for one who is consciousness itself? What remains for one who is consciousness itself, who sees the non-existence of a phenomenal world created by a mere thought of a name? What remains? One who is consciousness itself, who sees the non-existence of the phenomenal world created by the mere thought. When this 'I am' appears, then 'I am' plays as 'I am something,' 'I am this,' and the play of this phenomenal world and time and the rest of it comes into play. In the absolute, non-phenomenal awareness, there is a rising of being. This being, as it arises, is empty of all conditions, names, and forms. And when it picks up a name, picks up an identity, then the play of the world seems to become real, just becomes meaningful until then.

Peace is natural for one who knows for certain nothing exists, who sees appearances are illusion, to whom the inexpressible is apparent. Peace is natural for one who knows for certain nothing exists, who sees appearances as illusion, to whom the inexpressible is apparent. Now again, that's why I said to join from the beginning is good, because how is reality defined by the sage? Reality is defined as that which is direct experience and also that which is unchanging. So in relation to that, everything that is changing is illusion. It's only in relation to the truth that the appearance of the world is an illusion. If we consider ourselves to be an object within this appearance, then it's better that we don't say the world is an illusion. Only from the perspective of the truth can we speak these words. Only from the perspective of this truth can you say something like, 'Nothing really exists, nothing has ever really happened.'

At which point can we go this far? If we come into even saying that even existence is ultimately not true. It is said very beautifully in these words, so pristine: the only truth that we can speak even in satsang is that 'I am,' and ultimately even that is not true. So at some level, at some point, we consider ourselves to be limited and separate. 'I am' is a beautiful pointer; it is pointing to the truth. But there comes an opening which is even beyond this. We see that which is aware of 'I am.' To that, even the 'I am' is a coming and going and therefore does not meet the criteria for reality, which is that it must be unchanging. Even this 'I am,' the deity of the waking state, this consciousness itself, the light of which is this magnificent creation, ultimately is a coming and going.

That is when, like Guruji, you could say—before 'I am'—all of this. Maharaj, towards the end of his life, started becoming very strong with this kind of pointing where he said all of this trouble is because of the 'I am' infection. 'I am' infection. That which is in this worldly play, who is the divine presence itself with all of this Leela, who can say 'forget about consciousness'? These words can sound completely strange because even forgetting or remembering is a play of consciousness. But there becomes a point where you can even see that you are unconcerned even with being. There's no rush. You don't have to become an Advaita superstar with some words. There is no rush for any of this. You don't need to say this. You will find many who try to become an Advaita superstar and nobody listens to them. Don't rush into any of that proclamation. Don't rush to say, 'I have gone beyond Maharaj' or something like that. Have some reverence towards these beautiful, pristine pointings. Then you'll see it all unfold, and your presence will convey this.

So presence will convey that you are beyond presence. You don't have to speak about what is. These things about us, many times the mind can get ahold of these kind of words: 'I am gone before I am,' 'I am is just an infection for me.' That's when the spiritual ego can take a hold onto these words. And you notice that within yourself very well, how it has been taken. Whether it has been taken in specialness, whether it is being used as wanting to be seen as something special, wanting to get some applause in some way, some recognition, some affirmation. So if these things are arising, you don't go into it. Look at this fellow, find the 'I' where it leads to, and see if there's anything real about that one or is it make-believe. A blue cap which is pretending to be special by coming to the understanding of things. Are these words truly happening within your own presence?

Know that if there is a rush to proclaim something, it is from the mind and associated being. It is not another thing. Peace is natural for one who knows for certain nothing exists. So don't be in a rush to say this. See it for yourself. Be open to this insight for yourself, and your presence will convey this. He who sees appearances are illusion, to whom the inexpressible is apparent. To whom the inexpressible is apparent. What is the inexpressible? The same unseen, non-phenomenal Self. What can we say about the Self? We can say nothing about the Self itself. With this play, it is as if we are pointing to it, but we can't even point to it really. We can just divest as consciousness; we are arresting our attention from other phenomenal things, letting it go of the false. As we divest from phenomena, the insight into the non-phenomenal becomes clearer and clearer.

Why do I say we cannot even point to it? Because to point to it would mean that the Self is in a particular direction, phenomenal in that way. Before you can take a step, it is this. Not even a pointing is needed, but the false has to be divested from. Belief in the false has to go. This openness is here. Who is conduct, detachment, renunciation, asceticism? What are these to one who sees the unreality of things, who is the light of awareness? So this play of worship, what to do, how to behave, what to renounce, whether to be a householder or to...

The point to it would mean that the Self is in a particular direction, phenomenal in that way. Before you can take a step, it means this: that not even a pointing is needed, but the false has to be divested from belief in the false. This openness is here. Who is a conduct? Detachment in renunciation, asceticism—what are these to one who sees the unreality of things, who is the light of awareness? So this play of worship, what to do, how to behave, or to renounce, to believe there's a householder or to live in a cave, to rush to live in the holy place... always you can stay at home. All of this falls away when you come to the recognition of what you are. Because you could have many varieties; you can be a householder seeker, you can be a sadhu seeker. It doesn't really matter. If what is to be found is already there, then the outer expression doesn't matter. Then you see the Self is the Self irrespective of cave or not. You are the Self irrespective of work or not. You are the Self whether you are funny or not. You are the Self irrespective of relationship or not. You are the Self.

Many times wanting to renounce the world is also a corresponding tactic: 'Oh, I will be free only when this and this and this happens.' Nothing needs to happen. It's this moment of insight. What is it that I am? How can there be joy or sorrow, bondage or liberation, for one who perceives non-existence and lights the infinite? How can there be joy or sorrow, bondage or liberation, for one who perceives non-existence and lights the infinite? What a beautiful verse. That which perceives non-existence... when do you perceive non-existence? It's you, by the way. When do you perceive non-existence? You see, there is something called sleep. I went to sleep. You are there. And then, as Papaji used to ask, what wakes up? Existence wakes up. And with existence, the world wakes up. What is that which witnesses existence and non-existence? This absolute awareness, the supreme intelligence which is the light, but without the quality of light, which provides the light for the light of the universe, but itself is empty of any quality. Again, don't try to understand these words; stay with your insight about them.

Beautiful passage from Talks with Ramana Maharshi that somebody posted on Facebook the other day. It was the one that said: 'With which light do you see this object?' Somebody says, 'I see this object by the light of the sun.' 'With what light do you see the light of the sun?' Somebody said, 'I see it through the light of my sight, my eyes.' 'With which light do you see the light of your sight?' All this was covered. Then, 'Which light do you see the light of sight?' Now, in this, the definition of mind was a better one, so they said, 'Through the light of the mind.' 'But with which light do you see this light of the mind?' 'The light of my being, with the light of my presence.' 'With what light do you see the light of your being? What is aware of your presence?' And do you see that our definitions of light run away after that? Can you truly ask with what light do you see the light of that which lights up light? We cannot. The mind will say, 'Oh, this is possible to have an infinite regress,' but if you are following along with your insight, you will see that in this Absolute, in the Self, it stops. There is no regress because, empty of phenomena, there is nothing further to go back into. What light do you witness the light of your presence with? Does this light have any quality? Is it bright or dim? Is it dark?

One who perceives non-existence and lights the infinite... how can there be joy or sorrow, bondage or liberation for one who perceives non-existence and lights the infinite? Let's stop at this one. That is why sages through the centuries have said all of this—waking state, sleep state, dream state, transcendental—really all of these states are just comings and goings. Who you are is the witnessing of them. If you are beyond the waking state, you are beyond the waking state. Can you find yourself in an object within the waking state? All these are very important. Use this theme of satsang today: if you are that which witnesses the coming and going of the entire waking universe, and it resolves to be left as nothing, and then another universe appears as the dream universe... millions of these universes can appear and disappear. If you are the constant witnessing, can you find yourself inside one of these realms? If you were, then when that goes, then you would go. But you don't. This waking state will go to be replaced by sleep. You are still there. Sleep state is superimposed with the next, that which we call dream now, but when it appears it seems just like this waking state. Another family, another set of people, another life. It seems as you can appear. That also comes and goes. So many infinite experiences can be had in all of these fields. Is your truth to be found inside one of them? It cannot be. It must only be that the dreams are at best aspects of you, but you are not an aspect of them because you are the coming and going, you are the unchanging witness. How can there be joy or sorrow, bondage or liberation for one who perceives non-existence and lights the infinite?

I'm just going to read one of his messages. He says, 'No to opposition, Father. Mirror I look in, I am that. In the mirror of awareness, I am absolute. In the mirror of consciousness, I am.' Satsang is for this mirror of pretense. Awareness is always awareness. Consciousness is always consciousness. Nothing happens in reality to these truths. If something really happened to the truth, then the whole premise of finding the truth would be pointless. So what is satsang for? In life, there are two games which are being played. One is the game of consciousness picking up more and more identity, more and more pretense. And one is the game of consciousness dropping identity and pretense. So satsang is the second game, just to drop identity and pretense. It's still a game, of course. Nothing in reality is changing because it's another appearance in the waking state. But the rules of this game are that if you come into this game, if you want to be a part of this game, then it will be a dropping of the pretense completely, truly, that nothing matters in reality. But if you come into this game and keep saying, 'But can I keep my pretense because it is just a pretense after all?' then why are you in this game? You see, you come into the football field and want to play basketball, and obviously we say, 'What is the game you're playing?' The game of satsang is where we come and we empty ourselves from all pretenses. Then we can truly say that the 'I' is the greatest pretense. I know it sounds round and round. You might have the idea and then some insight into the pretense of the 'I' quite clearly, but until you drop the pretense of the 'I' quite clearly, you cannot clearly see it's just a pretense. Just like until you climb the top of the mountain, you cannot truly say there is no mountain. There is no mountain you cannot escape until you climb and go. So much for being in satsang today. Satguru Sri Moojiji Ki Jai.

What's that? Someone's feeling bad today because of my children? My grumpy? You have a computer in satsang tomorrow. What is grumpy? Oh, tomorrow is a holiday. We're saying, 'Please Father, not now, don't start.' How can there be starting to recover?