In Every Assertion Is the Tale of the Negation - 15th July 2019

So there is, I seem to be more relaxed.

So relaxed is better? What if all these opposites had their own place and you had to do nothing with them? What if all the opposites were just complementary to each other and you didn't have to deal with them? Anything I do with it, if it's stress, that's constriction. Constriction or open, open, relaxed, relaxed. Suppose it is just coming and going. Now, if either of that has nothing to do with you, then what would life be like? But imagine if there was something that was quite interesting or appealing, there would be energy. So then you have to be cryptic. Something like many times you want to be a good person. Now I realize that the reason I used to want it was the connotation of being powerless or something that they don't want. It should be so cool that everything has its own place and therefore nothing had its place. Anytime you say 'everything,' then 'nothing' is automatically implied, you see? It's like God is everywhere, you see? Then that assertion itself is not needed. In God, then all there is is God. Like we say in spirituality, Guru Kripa Kevalam, you see? So what is it defining? It is saying don't worry, don't worry, and just know that you are taken care of. But then our idea of not being taken care of is not God? That is also God. So in every assertion is the tale of the negation, and we have bound ourselves in these waves. And that is all through part of this that which is. So that's why I keep saying that it has to be worth it just for its own sake, just because it is true, not because something will happen to me because of it. Suppose you found the ultimate reality right now—and you do actually—but it meant nothing for the idea you have about yourselves. Would that not be enough? Now the idea you have about yourselves wants to be rid of the idea about yourselves. How to solve that problem? The idea is hanging on for dear life using this idea itself. That is the plight of the spiritual seeker: rid me of the 'me.' Rid me of the 'me.' Suppose nothing had to be done or not done. Suppose it is not capturable by thought, not mobile to you, what you are. Let's put it more precisely: suppose it will not be mobile to your conceptual mind, but it is completely clear to you. So let's use a metaphor, just a metaphor. Suppose there's a layer within you where it is completely clear, your reality, but there seems to be something that's floating around on the surface. And this is what? Conceptual dust, ideas, the notion of 'me.' So all that the master is doing is clearing up that surface level. That's where you get to see that it's so beyond simple, you see? Beyond clear. Because when you see clearer than thought, then I can feel it, but I'm still a bit hazy. But it is beyond this sort of haze and clarity. Just, I feel that 'apparent' is a very good word. What is most apparent to you? Really look at this question. What is most apparent to you? Say it. Let's hear. What is most apparent?

This.

This is what you say. This is most apparent. Yeah, very good. So it is not making this distinction between witnessing and witnessed. The only reason we keep emphasizing that is because that which is witnessed seems to be the favorite child, you see? That which is witnessed seems to avoid all the focus and attention. So to look beyond that. And what happens is just giving attention to one aspect of ourselves, you got identified as just that. So when it is said 'not this, not this,' maybe a better way, especially in today's world, is to say 'what else?' World, or the emotion, thought, perception, sensation, all this, then being, and what else? So what is it? So let's not say 'not this.' Totally hate to see the future, but suppose we say 'what else?' What is God? Which aspect of your existence has got the least amount of focus from you? The witnessed part? The witnessing? Why? It's worth asking more so if all the sages have recommended that we look at this. You see, what happens? Sri Ramana Maharshi or they said, 'Can the perceiver be perceived?' or 'Who is aware of this world?' Any of these pointers. If most of the masters have recommended looking like this, why is it that we continue to focus on that which is witnessed predominantly? I'm not saying get into some resistance to that, but why the affection, the feeling, the inclination still to that which is witnessed? Seems like good luck. I've been noticing with you, it's like a habit. So let's use the easier word. So in a way, saying it's like a habit. Okay, so then we are stuck? You know, we have this habit that our attention obviously goes only to certain manifest things. So then, is there no way out? And for this, I have given you a master key. But these are going in the master key: attention without judgment, without belief, without interpretation is not a problem at all. It is not a problem at all. So if the habit is, and it seems like that the waking state is here, so attention will go to that which is manifest. And many can try over and over for long, long periods of time trying to control this attention and keep it at some place. But what if I tell you that not even that is needed? Just don't conclude. Don't conclude. So what happens to you when you don't conclude? Look what happens when you leave yourself free from this burden of judgment or interpretation. What's the trouble? And on the other side, what is the benefit of judgment? Let's do the reverse now. Judgment, conclusion. What's the benefit of conclusion?

That you're sure of something.

Yes, so misplaced or misplaced? What is misplaced confidence called? Arrogance. The base itself, the true understanding, is missing from our conclusions, you see? Because we take ourselves to be something very different from our true nature. This means this non-existent limited one, we restrict ourselves to that perspective. It's basically just a perspective in a confusion. So this very popularity that 'my interpretations, my judgments, my notions are helping me in some way' has to really be looked at. And what is the best way to look? To look at the 'me.' And who is this 'me' who is being helped? Because this disease continues in satsang: this 'me' wanting to be helped instead of seeing through. You can continue even in spirituality. Nobody like that is there. It reminds me that we heard the term 'con job' or the full form of 'con.' It's confidence. It is confidence. So this non-existent 'me' can confidently assert its existence, but it is a con job. There is no such entity. And this lens, this is like contact lenses. Take it off. Because trying to fit your life into this lens of this limited perspective is what is called suffering. And we have involved all our relationships, all our aspects of existence, and a master and God in this. It is the same old thing, isn't it? Same old, same old paradigms. 'This is what I must do for them, this is what they must do for me.' Same old business. So you look beyond this limited language and you see the absolute foolishness of this. You have never, never gotten anything. You have never given anything. All these are just ideas, like children play doctor-doctor. 'I'll be the doctor, you be the patient.' And then we are projecting all of this as we are seemingly growing up. But empty of this limited idea of yourselves, what is there? If you don't apply the lens of this 'me' wanting something, wanting to be outside, judging things, knowing what is right and wrong, what is there? Are you free now? No, of course not, because that is seen through. The one who could be bound or free, so these terms don't apply to you. So all that we think we know from the basis of our arrogance or misplaced confidence, now upon hearing this, don't know. New things that happened, so misguided it is. It is so silly, you know? We wouldn't really know this. Just attempts to grasp onto something. It's just an attempt to, 'Okay, now I see, I don't actually know anything.' You know that. So let yourself be without this ground, without any chance to handhold. This is to be empty of the 'I' thought. All of us, at some level, have read about it and you all write, 'You must be empty of the I-thought.' And upon reading that, we suggest that is the final, 'I will do it.' But what is it? It is super simple. Just don't refer to 'I' with any reference, at least seriously. Don't take—let me put it another way—don't take any reference to the 'I' suggested. Now, mind will play many tricks on you. It'll say, 'So then what's happening to you now?' That's a reference to 'I.' Forget about it. 'Are you really getting this?' No, of course not. Forget about this. The references to 'I' that you cannot just let go is called attachment. So notice if there is some reference which you want to keep with you even crossing this seeming doorway to freedom. And that could be the most pristine idea you have about yourself, like 'I'm the sweetest person in the world' or 'nicest guy.' Or it could be for some of you your guilt and unworthiness. Even if you like, 'How will I live without them?' You have done for so long, you can be either. But it's the same stuff. Once you see that this is garbage, you don't have to post-mortem this. 'Good garbage of mine, bad garbage.' You don't have to see. Even recycle will be on its head. Good mental garbage, it's all recycling. So what is it that we're holding on to with dear life? And if there is a better—which there isn't—but if there is a better 'I,' you will be better off without this bubble. These ideas, these judgments, these interpretations, these are the false idols. I have read the false idol because they are the ones representing, claiming to represent reality while not having anything to do with reality. So what's your—

Carpet, you don't have to see. Even recycle will on his head, good mental garbage. It's all recycling. So what is it that we're holding on to with dear life? And if there is a better—which there isn't—but if there is a better item, you will be better off without this bubble. These ideas, these judgments, these interpretations—these are the false idols. I have read the false idol because they are the ones representing, claiming to represent reality, while not having anything to do with reality. So what's your favorite idea about yourself? Is it that is now the favorite idea, that 'I don't have a favorite idea'?

At least you see that I told some idea. What is your biggest grievance in the world? Maybe that do that feuded idea: the world is suffering. The world—what does it have to do with you now? Asking like if you were an alien on this planet, would you still be upset about it? I'm not saying you don't bother looking, I am just asking that at the center of this, is there a 'me' who's saying 'this is my world'? And that's part of the why. Eventually the forest is on fire; your husband eventually can't, because my house is my house. Usually it isn't, because this is one of the things I hear sometimes and I say there are four things that trouble you: body, relationship, money, and freedom. You know, 'I'm really troubled by the suffering of the world.' But inside investigating that, we see there it all boils down because it is my world. Something affects me, I had to see it. And if you want to help to be rid of itself, what's the first thing to do? I mean, it is suffering. That's better, yes. First you stop. Sometimes other ways to suffer about the world, something is adding to world something. 'I'm really suffering because the world is suffering.' Is that reducing the world? This is the warped logic of the mind. This is the kind of propositions it has for us. It says, 'How can you be happy? The whole world is suffering.' So by me being unhappy, you're solving the problem of making, adding to this gravity. And this is very much there in there, of course. But in the Western culture also, it's made—let's be sad because there are people who are suffering. But then you want to add to suffering in the world? Make one smile instead of having this morose idea of the world suffering and you suffering as a result of it and putting everybody down with you. So if you want to do something about it, make one person smile. That's enough of a miracle for me.

If you are speaking world leader, oops, also that I know will be socially appropriate and stuff like that. But like when someone passes away, right, I don't usually feel sad. Oh, but I see people around me, they are sad and like, 'Oh, if I am happy, if I'm happy now, it's gonna be a problem.' It's not that should I have one in LA for some estrogen? I don't feel as mad all the time to like that.

I remember you very young, I must be into a cremation ceremony of a friend's father. And everybody was very loved and more than one of the boys, one of my friends, we just started laughing. Yeah, we said, 'What's happening to you? Why are we laughing? Let's go outside.' But he said, 'I just couldn't help it.' Do you such in such a pensive sort of did when this laughter come? But maybe you had this feeling that I feel like a grief can be quite strong, of course. But also the mind is suffering from the guilt of not feeling grief, like, 'Wow, shouldn't I be feeling much worse?' And this can happen. The worst of things, sometimes we are so feeling so relaxed and free and alive, and the worst of the calamities, seeming calamity, we... and then you must come, but you're supposed to be, supposed to be sad. But insensitive, this kind... all over the pretext of all of this is like, 'I'm a good person and also have to have the stupid suffering, so let me suffer with it.' Everybody thinks that.

So the world is suffering, let's presume that that is true. And what doesn't? So let's give it some. Then what should we do about it? Is the value that I am assigning to somebody's tears? If I am labeling it as suffering, and that's actually the problem. The labeling is the problem rather than actually the event itself. The event could be a very therapeutic experience for the other person; we don't know that for sure. So our goods and bads are very primitive views. 'Why are you crying? Don't cry. No, it's not good to cry.' How we know? Maybe that's exactly what... because suffering itself is a label. Of course, it's truer than you can even imagine. Erica, for disagree, labeling me suffering, please put it that. Suffering itself is a label. It's one of the labels. To label is to suffer. Guilt idea is your assumed rule you have to clear. Well, example: Krishna told Arjuna, 'You are a Kshatriya protecting the country, so get up and fight with her.' So this is the favorite part that everyone has from the Gita. But how many lines in the Gita? Linda will speak, 'I'll do a Jamaican and a movie on broadcast.' Where is polka? Yeah, the Lord in the manifest form of the Lord, the Lord is standing in front of him as his master, as his friend. He had the closest proximity in the world, which is the metaphor for this world. His master was the most intimate, and it was the Lord Himself now. And he's pointing continuously to address this nature, to reality, that which never born, never dies. Nobody was ever born. All of this is part of the dream called Maya. All of these things were being said. But what is the urgency after hearing about at least ten chapters? How many chapters? So then he says, 'Show me a greater experience.' So he had the experience of having the Lord as his best friend. He had... he was being pointed to that which is beyond experience, but it is the material of the mind to say, 'But I want better experience. I want a different...'

So whose story is this? This is about a man two thousand years ago? About us. Your own divine presence is telling you the truth. It is pointing you to your distress reality. But what is it that you are interested in?

Next one said there is an idea of selfishness that seems to be a favorite grievance for me, in quotes, 'my selfishness.' That is, less worried about others and more about me.

These are also all variations. Some are worried about others and less about... I mean, 'How can I get what I want, we need, etcetera?' So these are the desserts of the mind. The starters are okay: 'I want a nice house' or 'I want to be free' or whatever 'I want' is. The dessert is now that we understood spirituality, 'How could I be so selfish? I'm so unworthy for wanting.' And we see this gradation in a way. As you have grown up children, first, yeah, absolutely no sin, absolutely fine, no concept of want, not one. Then this worldly knowledge is taught to them and then they say, 'I want this, I want this.' Then they keep insisting, but they're not yet risen. Gaetti and you know, by for one patient, you just want that one cricket bat. In heaven there's no... 'How could you want a cricket bat?' 'I just want this.' Simple like that. Now as we go, you want to do this Emerson toast. When we come to this point where we know things about whether it is good to want or bad to want, and which way is good to be and bad to be, then we can feel it's for these ideas about how we're supposed to be. In a way, this is what you say. It's like not to selfishness itself is the same. 'I want this' and 'I want that' is the same as 'I'm feeling so guilty or bad about my own selfishness.' And is that total self-insurance? But this is the thing now. Empty of policies, there is no such burden that we have to carry. No such burden. You don't have to be any which way. You aren't any. You don't have to carry any of this.

And what we are speaking of is just one blip on a radar. This one, this... it's so intimate and ever-present. This body, just a blip on a radar. It is here now. You don't know how long it'll be. So we don't have to figure out the contours of this blip on the radar. What is the radar? Who is aware of this blip? On which screen is all of this happening? So idea after idea, the protagonist is the blip. Even when the idea is that 'I must come to freedom' or 'I must not be selfish,' who are we talking about there? Just that one little... is that one thing on the screen, tiny object? To that, if this is the reference point, is a man that one, the norm tics poised nor... it is not about what you are doing or not doing. And by doing and not doing, I mean it is not about that activity which is being expressed through this body-mind. It is just about what you are taking yourself to be. Don't take yourself to be anything at all. Don't take yourself to be anything, including the one, the Absolute, Self, Atma, Father, nothing. Don't even take yourself to be nothing, because that is one nice idea we can have. He seemed not even one money, not even Atma or Nirguna Brahman. All of this, 'I might is nothing.' No, of course not. That's also just an idea. It's not impossible. If your mind understands, 'mule is impossible.' It is very natural that we were taught this nonsense. This was not natural to us. To take ourselves to be something was not natural to us.

All the ones, oh, those who stopped taking themselves to be something. And we come in close to Guru Purnima tomorrow. What are we celebrating? Celebrating this, a celebrity these of this one voice into the voice in all this business manifold education which is constantly reminding us that we are not that which we think we are. We are not the body, not the mind, we are not in time, not in space, all these arenas. So what's the best Guru Purnima gift for the master? Tell the run at least one day, stop. Very good, I'll accept this gift with full heart. At least for one minute in that one day, don't identify. Don't take yourself to be something. And the property is in one second, one-tenth of a second. So this for one tiny part of the deal, you can come to the pre-pre-apple, Adam and Eve, pre-knowledge, pretty good and bad. Listen to the time.

Other what is called by the term heart and Newton certain. So it is here as I use it, I refer to it as the essence or the core of our being, the light through which all this play of consciousness seems to be played out and perceived, the center of our existence. So if it is not apparent, because many this term of course can be confused with a physical heart. Many also confuse it with like an emotional state. You see, some will say, 'I have more heart than mind,' but they're being completely minded. You should be saying that is it that they referring to themselves as more emotional than conceptual? But it is the interpretation of emotion which is all mind. So this heart is a confusing term, that's why I rarely use it. This heart which of one mystery forgives the light of this very existence, this source of the universe, the light of the waking state, it can seem to be centered around this heart, but it has nothing to do with physical heart. And some of you will feel like this is a pattern to some of you will feel like, 'What is this? It's face change.' And either is okay. In fact, it was Nisargadatta Maharaj at one point said that the only point of difference I have with Bhagavan's pointing is this whole idea of the heart, right side of the heart and then not me same time. Maybe about another teacher was told about this, there's some teachers are saying, 'What is this heart thing?' Then Bhagavan said, 'When it hits you, you realize you don't have to.' Either way, we don't bother with it. If it is apparent, fine, nothing is special. If it is not apparent, then don't worry. It's part of please acquisitive precondition. It is just refer to it as the light of consciousness, the core of our very being, light which makes up the first thing that makes up the waking state.

Remember that life is not a problem to be solved. That nothing in life is a problem of disorder, especially this freedom, non-existent problem. How do you make a non-existent problem feel as real as possible? By trying to solve it. The only way, making it the only way that we is seeming to make bondage real is we're trying to fix it, but there is none. So yeah, so many schools of idling, so-called healing, and that used to happen. I was also involved with that for quite some time and I had the sense that I...

Your life is not a problem to be solved. Nothing in life is a problem of disorder, especially this non-existent problem of freedom. How do you make a non-existent problem feel as real as possible? By trying to solve it. The only way that we are seeming to make bondage real is that we're trying to fix it, but there is none.

So, yeah, so many schools of healing, so-called healing. That used to happen; I was also involved with that for quite some time. I had the sense that I had this confusion in this, you know, is this really something that's necessary or even relevant? Because what am I terming as a dis-ease in another? How do I know if it was helping that person, or if it is there, or if it is not meant to be there? So this whole healing thing, I understand all the states as possible in consciousness, but is that relevant, this whole healing?

Well, all relevance is based on context. Now, it all depends on what you take yourself to be. So I have a simpler litmus test for all of us, because these kind of questions can be very confusing—shall we do this or not, do we do that or not? I have a simple recommendation. This recommendation will be: Anytime anything you do and you find yourself more open and empty of conditioning, it is satsang. Anything you do in which you find yourself feeling more heavy, special, greater, and more worthy—any of these things—is new conditioning, is new egotism. And it is never really about the thing in itself. One could go to a Reiki session or something and come back so empty and open, and another could come feeling so special and arrogant, saying that, 'Oh, I discovered now the superpower and ability, and I'm a level 25 grandmaster of this and that.' So it is not in itself, not in anything in itself, but what conditions we started attaching to ourselves as a result of that. That is what it is about.

And that's the magnificent beauty and innocence of this form. It is because nothing is decipherable this way or that way; that's why I said even this litmus test will go at the end. My second advice was: Don't bother with anything. In a way, don't have an attitude of being attached to anything outwardly. Everything can play out as it will. And when I say don't bother, it is not like nonchalance or an indifference. I'm saying not even that is meant to be heard like that. You see, this is it. It's a thankless life. There is no meaning in anything. You will notice that all these statements are full of so much meaning. 'It's such a meaningless life'—what a big, meaningful statement to make! So don't get attached to this kind of intellectual sort of opposites. It is not in that. Neither this way nor that way. You don't have to be anyway. You don't have to have strong convictions about anything. You don't have to conclude on things. Interpretations are not your friend.

I was preempted by the 'why' thing, but that is such a meaningless 'why.' I don't even know when did we start having this idea that life is only meaningful when I know intellectually. Were we born with this? If somebody could decipher the child's crying or infant's crying, I don't feel like they'll ever decipher and say, 'Oh, I'm crying because I don't know anything, I want to learn my ABCs.' No. Usually the time comes to learn. So this is the game plan. Only the children will enter the kingdom of heaven, or return to your beginner's mind. What is this burden that we carry? It's all intellectual. And the strange part is that, full of this intellectual baggage, we let go of the true intelligence—the deeper intelligence which supposedly is running this entire manifest creation. As for what happens when it becomes more reliant on just conceptual knowledge, all our trying and efforts and things like that, what is the maximum they achieved? Have you been able to replicate the color of a fruit or the taste of an apple? So what is this major intelligence?

And many times, you have learned it is now. I used to be for many years, so atheists will say sometimes, 'I don't believe in God, but I believe in nature.' And then you investigate a bit further: 'What is that you believe in? What is nature?' 'Oh, there's like an intelligence or force which is running this natural world.' This is God! What we call God is exactly that. So it's just alright because some are so burdened with this kind of God-conditioning in some cultures. But sometimes they say, 'I don't believe in God, but I do believe that there is a supreme power.' Then you say, 'What are the other options?' You can say, 'I don't believe in God at all, I just believe in myself.' That's what we're saying; there's no escaping it. Because when they believe in 'myself,' they're not talking about a bundle of flesh which is here today and was not here yesterday. To throw away all this false knowledge which we hang on to as if it is helping our existence is to return to the unborn, to come to your motionless existence. And what you're discovering is the very substratum, the very basis. How can you say what the world is, or life is, or what God is, unless you know what 'is' is? What is 'is'? There is so much games about what everything is, but we don't even know what 'is' is, isn't it?

So my advice is just that: Don't take anything like this so seriously. 'This is like this, this is not like this.' Don't take your mental judgments so seriously. And also, I was saying that if you were scared, don't worry, it will be fine. Because many times in the garb of our arrogance, in the garb of our stubbornness, in the garb of our learning which we talk about here, we are just scared. 'What will become of me if I let go?'

But in this life, it seems to me, Father, I feel like we're living in a society where people perform so many roles. If you know, it's just seeing your body will get balanced and polished easily. So do they drop, or it does not matter? I do not think that people basically find peace just by waiting. It's nothing to just, you know, it seems like a leap of faith. And there's just the truth. He said it must be administered. There is no other way for me and a logical way to recognize this, right? That fearlessness in this world seems to be quite possible. That's quite close. That's why both the Gita spoke about it and then also in A Course in Miracles, which I read for some time before, an encouragement for both at almost the same time: 'Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal has ever existed. Herein lies the peace of God.' This is the antidote to fear. I think that quote is excellent. Nothing unreal has ever existed. The official version which insisted there's something which is beyond this veil, which starts becoming more obvious. But it's this trust and this love which is undeniable. And the mind cannot shake it. All that feeling of disorganization, that will only come and go. Thank you.

Thank you all so much for being in satsang today. Satguru Sri Mooji Baba Ki Jai. Guru Kripa Kevalam. Until 'is' is enjoying whatever we are discussing about 'is,' which all it is. Thank you so much.

Father, remember me, that I am not what I think I am. Very grateful to be in your presence. Love you.

Love you too, my dear. Thank you.

Father, have you heard about Meher Baba?

Yes, I have been to Meherabad.