'I Know Something' Is Basis for Arrogance - 24th May 2018

So, this concept of anything—what do they need to be something? Or is it real? But you need to be something or attached to anything? Don't make a reference point about yourself. Don't give yourself the center. Refer to 'I' in after insincerity and in feeling as yourself. You want spirituality? Welcome to it. Actually, this idea of something not to be cognizant about yourself—the mind is using an invitation to accept the notion about yourself. You can inquire into the validity of this, let it go, surrender. But isn't it grandiose or inverted, what is called a fox? You can place your attention and try to direct it away from the mental constructs. All of the world becomes the basis of practice or spiritual karma because it is inviting you to check and see that you are. And you almost feel about yourself right now in your presence, without needing presence. If we select the presence of our awareness, our right consciousness, this is mine. You can't see, but this is what I need to do to get freedom, for example. What you see, this is what I need to do. Inquire that. Say, 'Who is the I that is bound?' Because at the center of all these mental motions, it's not me. Inquire into it.

For example, what would the mind say to you? Do this, like we were saying the other day, 'Do this and you will be free.' You see, but you know this is exactly it. So, how is it, how is it, how is it that we presume that there is a bound one sitting there? We haven't found this one. How do we know what wants freedom? Are you the one that is sitting there who is too free? He is super bowl of your freedom. You don't know. Look, how is it that the core condition becomes bondage? Like you say nicely, you say, 'I'm looking for that one that wants freedom.' How complicated! Do we even know this one? I only take the presumption of bondage for granted and we start the search for freedom. Is it important to find? It is the mind which tells us these kinds of things. It says, 'You are not complete, do something to complete yourself.' The body will say it needs food, but this 'you' like you say that needs all of these things—can I tell you something? Nobody ever found this one. Nobody ever found the one that needs anything at all. Nobody has found it because it does not exist. I look, I did not find the one that was incomplete, the one that is limited. It does not exist. Yes, the presumed idea is not anything per se.

What else is there? This is a good checklist. So, he said where to look for this one. Then he said, 'Look there, not in the thoughts, not in anything perceivable.' So, a good search for truth is there. Is there something else which is there about you besides all that is perceivable? Are you just something which is perceivable, or is there something about you which is beyond perception?

Now I'm asking you, must we use this presumption? What's your experience? So, the one that was in the realm of perception was presumed. The one that must be beyond perception is also physical. So, drop both these perceptions and see what you actually find. Possible? Very blessed. So, here's a market box. In fact, it is not in a casino. Good. Why? I said, is there something more than that which is perceivable? That changes everything. Everything that is an object of perception, we call it an appearance. Why do we call it an appearance? Because it is our experience that anything that comes as an object also goes with appearance; they will disappear. But let's say the question is valid: Is everything about you limited to the realm of your perception, or is there something about you which is not in perception? And we use a set of perceptions to investigate the question. In the same way, investigate whether this question is the same question, no matter what it was when we started with or not.

So, two questions. Well, you have to change it. One or the other question, whether they are the same question. There are, you know, theorems in this sense. Are you just a bundle of perception? If there's something about you which is not a perception, it could be. But that's not the question at this point. You know, you don't have to cook this meal, you're not anything. We're figuring out how you will be able to do this.

I am telling you to answer the question. It means that the meal is here; you just have to eat it. No figuring out how to cook this at home. You see, what is the recipe? I'm saying you answer it now. Is there something about you which is not a perception? Let's do one by one. Everything about you, run through it and you'll see. Is the perception here? What we use: perception, perception, perception, perception, perception. So, if the body is there, the body, the thoughts with the body—see the body. So, none of this saw the body. Then who did all the keys to the body? If this is all there is to you—body, thought, feeling, sensation—and moves for the body, but we said these are the aspects of the 'me'. Which part? What means 'you'?

In order to ask me, he said, let's talk about all of the various aspects that you consider yourself to be. You consider yourself to be using body, thought, emotion, sensation, all this. And you said all of this is perception. Then we went one by one and see which one saw the body. Do you see that the body did not see itself? The thought did not see the body. The feeling did not see the body. Did you? And yet it was none of these things. It was none of these perceptions that were the witness to another perception. Then who is aware of these perceptions? This one is what? What can you say about this one? A little bit. If this one is in the amusement park as you defined it earlier... okay, now get rid of this one. The body will do, he will go or it will go. All of the sensations, perceptions are coming in. Only that the experience of them coming in—what? There's usually a lot of doubt, a lot of worth of it. The mind will open up and I've seen that one comes and it gets something to be very happy, to other populations like that. We went on believing for, but without excuse, the same this side that is making this conclusion is the same one that we discovered yourself. So, it's like to come to the Lila palace, there are five different doors. When you get to the Lila palace, why did I take this door? I think that you see it is all pointing to many different things now, all pointing to the same thing using different words. What is always what will sell it? But then what does it mean for me? I found that there is no such 'me'. I found that there is no such 'I'. I found that after I'm changing, finally missing itself, but without that inherently there somewhere by one, without whatever it might even sound very technical. It might sound very technical, but whether question, but actually in there into that is representing again we looked at.

Pointing to many different things now, all pointing to the same thing using different, different... what is always what will sell it. But then what does it mean for me? I found that there is no such 'me'. I found that there is no such... I found that after I'm changing, family missing itself, but without that inherently there somewhere by one... without whatever it might even sound very technical. It might sound very technical, but whether question... but actually in there into that is representing again. We looked at everything possible. Did you find one? I said I also looked identifying now, so that everybody is looking, nobody is found. We occur at one time, that is in critical assumption, that is because we haven't talked. So it is enjoyed the freshness over to see. So where does it leave you?

Listen, I am... a couple days ago I was asking you whether, because the censorship is so strong, whether it's worth paying a bit more attention to this identity because it's so sticky. And I recognize that it's the traits really, the troublemaker, because there have been moments when there's that distance between... that I can see it, distance between me and this sense of doership. And then there's a lot more space, then I can start really... then the clarity starts coming in because this is producing a lot of fog. And so I was asking you whether it's worth having like, pay more attention to this because it feels like when I'm remaining motionless, it's like the doer comes in through the back door. Very often in stories, he's still coming into the back door while I'm just like, remaining motionless. That's nice, like it's just still sneaking in the back door.

Remain motionless. There's no back. The back door is always emotion. Take an example of the back door. Okay, things have to move. The back door without enough... the only possible back door is that the idea of remaining motionless itself. Yeah, because the same token, Satsang itself, well, sadhana...

I said, is it worth having a look at, like paying a bit more attention to this one? And you said, 'Is it giving you more peace?' And I was like, well, sometimes it just feels like it's even noisier. And then like, what? No, just worried. And you said, you told me just to stay more in that space and then that's... and then these layers like, 'No, I will not give it.' One will go. And then I've noticed now if I pay more... I don't know, it's like I'm asking who's trying to do it. And then when these thoughts of doership come, it's like I'm observing them. And then it's like, I don't know, I guess after this thing, after having been here for a couple months now, and so I would do this again, it feels like it is actually less strong and they are losing power. And is that like looking for it when I'm doing that? Is that looking for the closed eye? Is that... is that looking for the doer?

Let me ask for the meaning of the question for the team. You tell me the duration for which you want to do this. Finally, to you, direct this picture. Sorry, say you tell me the duration that we want to seek for to come to the truth. You do to create a prescription. You want something that you can do for a year, five years, ten years, ten minutes? One more time, it was wrong. Yes, you are feeling this is true for every moment in Satsang, outside Satsang, in Hong Kong, you blow into English anyway. There is no moment in which you can be bound. Always we are free. We are free right now. What is endless? Oh, here, do this, this. I don't know you, you.

But then if I don't adjust this question with you, I'm going to go back and on the bike, should I show that for the paying attention? Okay, so what prescription for what you use? Another modification. Either you want answer in time... let's resume what is going to happen. We make all these presumptions first and you want to answer them all on that basis, or you want to be cleaner?

We now spirited Houston to live. You said, 'I want Katrina.' I say, 'Are you Bob?' You said there's no moment in which we can't have that. Why do you want to solve it for a moment in everything? Within every moment you are, and the mind is ready to support any time you feel. See people who live a life when they're having a weak me-experience because it's a facepalm moment. That message won't say what? There's something besides freedom. Like you want, I know you. Well then, leave one who are different nice place because somebody couldn't even book that you were exactly. But this guy came and here in these baskets the party, somebody ran over there. You're here. You see that there is nobody that is bound. This is moving like that. There is need to be there too, or I exist.

You see your true nature and you're absolutely right to leave it easy. But there is no way to not leave it. Over the idea that what you could then do is in contradiction or in opposition to what we have seen is also just an idea. Is it so? Neither can you be that, neither you can also either in the play of the coconut not be there. Is a matter in a line when you are in opposition to right this, then become life. It wanted you. This recognition that we cannot really take a position morally, although outwardly we might be saying none of this is applicable to reality, you can never truly represent those. But no wave is ever truly in opposition to go deeper. This answer though, it's always like how they see it. It is not even like something that has to resolve itself over time and in entirety. Then you see that it is fine, not even like that. Never a moment to moment can a wave represent the ocean truly, and never in any moment is it in opposition to it.

We don't have to look at the entire lifecycle of the wheel and then what a bad thing to see. But I'm saying like in this moment, neither can a phenomenal appearance represent the Absolute, would you not do anything to be in opposition to it? Like the same plane that is beautiful unburdening which many can then they got who deferred. I have to live like that. Tell me one thing you can do. What is the one thing you can do and what can effect though? Can you make anything new? Something that can make a scratch or a ten-pound Absolute? So then this life becomes more for movie and you, rather than taking yourself to be a movie character, then you start to see that you are about to light up this movie with the source, very existence, a sense of the movie, and ultimately even that you are the witness.

Can I ask you a thing to our conversation who you are, where you asked me to watch Satsang again and saying, 'I feel the fundamental point to be missed.' I would invite you to look at this episode again. Look at the concept of answer, understanding, and knowing. Can you say something to it that I hadn't yet? If you mean I have say a little bit because I feel like this contemplation, as frustrating as it might seem, but it is important to go through the acts frustration. And I was inviting that way for you to look at because you feeling a bit frustrated that okay, the question sometimes is X but the answer seems to be masculine. It's not the same vocabulary at all. So pinky like, but the question... so when I was saying that look at the concept of answer, look at the concept of understanding and knowing, you see how things are looking.

Suppose the answer was perfect. The answer was both A, you heard something which really ate it to your understanding and you knew. Or the answer is now how something is something you do it perfectly because also then read that and it's because it comes from credible source, then it becomes an important part of you understanding. And that is the last thing I want to be. That is the last thing I want to do. I don't want to add to your understanding at all because this kind of understanding, the right answer, the right knowing, is only there all along actually. There is no such thing. So I don't want to replace one understanding with new understanding and it can feel like, 'Oh, I have better understanding now.' So what would the answer be? One. So that is the concept now especially, and I do this with some of you who have been in Satsang long enough with me to kill me in this way, that if I give it an answer, it will just become one knock-sir.

If you have a concept and I give you another concept and it is a way to the better boxer, so I don't want to answer the question because it will give you an understanding, confuse you, confound you, frustrate you. This entire endeavor you feel like you can never know anything at all. What you meet over there people know. So we were talking about spiritual avoidance, spiritual bypassing, and are saying that avoidance will actually to put a label on something and pretend became or meet it as a label is to avoid leaving it as it is now. To the mind, this not labeling sounds like it is bypassing this trend or world meeting it completely, but empty of the presumption, the fourth presumption, that I know what it is.

We have never experienced this thing that we call tree. What the label stands for is a set, is maybe one aspect of an emotion. We never experienced the same in those also twice when we meet it as something. And this applies to only room you're going to save man, I'm eating a lot. The experience has been unique and they're making a cab. So the avoidance is to use a label and presume that I know what this is. So with that led to even do more guru of contemplation on what it means to know himself. The question on spiritual avoidance or bypassing led to a beautiful contemplation in what we mean by know, what we mean by an answer, what we mean by understanding that the best mate with a few of these photocopy of life, this unsub to when you need lightning to defenseless in concept, even concept like spiritual concepts.

One thing should be like sometime I'll play the game with you where you give you answers which seem to remove the concept that you might have in your life. You like the speakers mentioned back then, that is fine. But ultimately this idea that something can be known in self has to be confronted with exactly what he found: arrogance. But 'I can know' or in some cases 'I know better' or 'I have seen the truth', that becomes the basis for arrogance, that becomes the basis for separation. Anything that we think we know, even the domination of our planet inside envy sensitively because I have seen this, I have like this is a book, it's a sense of separation. The sense, the idea of affinity, limitation as we know avoidance of business organs or forties tells you that you have to meet life, you have to work it out in your head, you have to relearn what is happening to you, come to a position that is right.

A minute with these newcomers and you are invited to talk on concepts about and self-experience. From here we go to the concept itself which was an ordinance of this fear of the unknown. Then if you're left without crutches of constant, a true is a happy tuner is not for the naturals is a habit we are in to hold on to some concept. The words are my heart, my studio idea, it's that's fine. Wow, this not me is the best. What is telling people a long time needed and somebody asked me what ends up somehow always in 9:00 and 11:30. Thank you all so much.