Life Is Lived in One of Two Ways: 'God Now' or 'Me-Ow' - 5th February 2018
Saar (Essence)
Ananta explains that while the 'meow' of the egoic identity is a burdensome pretense requiring constant effort, 'God now' is our natural, effortless state of presence that is already fully available without any preconditions.
To pick up the 'me' you need a moment in time, but even without that moment, you just are.
The 'me' is like a fish thirsting for water, unaware it is already composed of what it seeks.
Suffering is not pain itself, but the mental position taken by an imagined 'me' at the center of experience.
intimate
Transcript
This transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.
It occurred to me a little while ago that life is usually lived in one of two ways. It is lived in one of two ways: one is 'God Now'—say, Lord is here, God now—and the second is 'Me-Ow'. That's basically all that we say in Satsang. God itself is playing in one of these two ways: God Now or Me-Ow. And sometimes it feels like it's almost like some of you who practice yoga will know there's a pose called tree pose. So to me, 'Me-Ow' is like me trying to do the tree pose for a while. It feels like 'I can do this, I can balance this body like one,' but it doesn't move. So in the same way, for a while it can feel like, oh, the 'me' can actually work if I try this, if I just be like this, if I get this much wealth, if I just get this relationship, if I get these material objects, or I gain some sort of understanding about something, then I could actually make this work. And the 'Ouch' seems to be postponed a bit. But this is inevitable about the 'me'—that the 'Ouch' always comes and it's all moving on you to Satsang in my wondering what he is on about.
So 'Me-Ow' is something which comes from my example of the cat identity. Say, we'll pick up the concept of 'me' and the suffering, which is the 'Ouch', was bound to follow. Another logical question that all of you can then ask is: Okay, so what do I have to do to not be in this 'Me-Ow' state? How do I come to this 'God Now'? And for this, I have the best news: that there is nothing you have to do. It is naturally what is already present here now. That is why it is 'God Now'. It is never 'Me Now'. The 'Me-Ow' is made up of a set of ideas picked up on the path and projections about the future. And what can happen is that the mind will take this which is presence now, which is present now, and say that that is a 'me'. But this is not true. Your presence, your Atma, your being, is the presence of God in you. So really, 'God Now' for 'me' is a pretense, just an idea. And you know ultimately that it is a lie because you taste the suffering of this lie.
So there is nothing really that needs to be done, but you don't have to do this 'nothing' also. See, many times when I say nothing is to be done, then we try to 'do nothing', but that's not what I'm saying. I think nothing needs to be done, and yet all doing can appear and disappear. There is an openness in allowing of all things to happen. But for God to exist, what precondition can there be? Then we have the idea that only after letting go of certain things, God will be. It means that God's existence is also preconditioned on some state. This God is not worth it. The only God that is worth it is the one that just is, irrespective of what the appearance might be. So actually, the 'Me-Ow' is also happening on the substratum of 'God Now', even when God is playing with the notion of 'me'.
And I was saying the other day that this notion of 'God Now', this idea that consciousness is all there is—one can conceive of it as distant initially, thinking 'I have no experience of this.' And the question could come: 'What is God that you speak of?' Then I could say: just what is, starting from your very presence. Which means, to make it even more direct, just this existence, 'I Am'. This is called Being or Consciousness. This just is. You just are. All the rest is just notional, just ideas. Starting from the idea of separation—that there is a 'me' here that is separate from everything else—it's just right here. You've taken some appearances on things which are seen and made a mental boundary and said, 'This is a me. I am contained in this body. He is contained in that one.' These are just ideas. You find no such tangible separation. You find this one occurrence and you are aware of it. See, all of this is one consciousness and nothing can ever separate consciousness.
So just like there is one ocean but it can appear as if there are separate waves, in the same way, there is one being, one consciousness, one God, although it might appear as if there are separate beings. One of the most fun, but also sometimes seemingly very painful parts of this play, is the 'me' trying to become God or trying to find God. And this is what the sages have referred to as the fish swimming in the water thirsting for water. But actually, it is even one step further than that: it is like water thirsting for water itself. The truth is much simpler than this. As long as you have the idea that you have to meet something, that you have to meet God, meet yourself, you will find only God. Meet yourself without any interpretation or judgment. This is most naturally present. You are not actually doing anything at all. The concept of this meeting itself will dissolve against yourself.
Read more (9 more paragraphs) ↓Show less ↑
So we can say recognize yourself, or those who meet yourself, but all these terms—recognize, find—for me, they are dissolved because you will see that there is only the Self. You are seeing you. To become the 'me', to pick up the 'me', you need at least a moment in time to refer to some thought as yourself. But even without that moment in time, we just are. Therefore, it is this 'me' which is effortful, which is dependent on time, because it's not you. If there is a God, God is here. If there is a Self, Self is here as your own very own presence, as your own reality. You don't have to take even one step. You are there. And what you're finding about yourself is beyond all inferences you can make, even beyond the idea of whether you 'got it' or not.
You see, the 'me' is used to owning things, so now it wants to own God. 'I'm God. Did I really find it? Please confirm to me.' Yes, it is not like that. It is your very existence, which means it is what you are made up of. Where does the drop of water which is in the ocean have to go to find the ocean? And the funny thing is that there is no drop of water, actually; it is all just ocean. Now, in the design of this Leela, this play, it will feel like when you identify yourself just as a wave—this is what we are calling the 'me'—'I am just this wave,' then it can feel like a lot of turbulence. Sometimes very high, sometimes very low. All these what we call the ups and downs of life. But that is only when you identify yourself as a limited object. You see, it is only the aeroplane which is facing the turbulence. The space is not saying, 'Oh, this is too turbulent for me.' Only when we identify ourselves as a limited object can it feel like something is happening to me.
Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi invited all of us to the first-class inquiry: 'Who am I?' As he knew that when truly inquired and truly we look, you don't find this 'me'. You only find the Self, whether you call it Self or God or Satguru. And that's where Bhagavan himself said if there is a choice to be made, make the choice not to go with the thought stream. And then you will see that even this choice was just the play of Grace itself. To refer to yourself as 'me', you need a thought. To just be, to remain as consciousness itself, no conditions are needed. Therefore, what is more natural? To say it is natural would seem a bit forced.
So there is some—one of the greatest things about having a living master is that a living master is a representation of how natural it is to just be. Otherwise, these can just seem like fancy ideas. We got so used to identifying as names and forms that it can seem like we needed something in the realm of name and form itself to come and show us this immense possibility. So one that appears in name and form is pointing to your own presence, your own Satguru, which is in your own heart as the true Satguru. The other point, a very important thing about having a living master, is then we can tell you: 'I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt.' So even the 'me' wanting to become 'God Now' is just an invitation to more planning and strategy. No approach, no position, no reference point can get you to this. This way, no number of steps are needed for you to be exactly where you are now.
What is also important is that when I'm referring to the 'Ow' or 'Ouch', I'm not talking about pain. I'm talking about that which is called suffering. So you must not feel that if there is an appearance of something, there must be a 'me'. God is playing with this universe in all flavors and tastes. Pain and pleasure are both part of the sugar and spice of this. When you take a position with regards to this, then you invent this idea of a limited 'me', the limited sufferer or the doer or the desirer. Then the play can seem a lot more burdensome. That is what is called suffering. Just filled with grievances, resentment, specialness—all these are just various words for suffering because all of them have a 'me' at the center of it. And this 'me' is just an idea, just a notion.
Okay, I don't feel like I have to say much more than yesterday. There are some questions which are on fire, which are alive. When they are traveled, they're not necessarily here as intellectual or domestic; it's something you truly experience in each business, very alive for you. We can look at a couple of these.
How does everything function, especially the financial aspect of it?
Economically, we've seen this. Good news has been that we've not had much economic need. This house, this place is available to us. This here, speaking of the center which is Guru, the reason that we are all part of that which is—you can say the center of that is in Portugal, Lisbon, there's a Sangha with Sahaja. So that's complicated. But now we have small centers all over the world. And this is me informally. This one place is what this place was already available to me, so I use it for Satsang. It's a valid question because many times they create a sense of wonder about how everything functions, especially the financial aspect of it. But the good news is that here we have not had much. It's like there is no need for donations. Sometimes, of course, like some Sangha members will get together, they buy something little that I need. That's the best part about what is here is when that He's not given these requirements or means to you, it doesn't complicate matters in the neighbors. Right now they are not complaining after years, right? You see?
So it was in different ways, different especially when you know to ask that. It's very good that you asked your question. I don't want to create an environment where things are not supposed to be asked, like 'that's not an appropriate question.' That should never happen. My partner at work has taken on most of the work that I used to do. He manages most of it. He just calls me for some advice once in a while. The time here is going in Satsang now, but on people at least.