Ma’rifa - Knowledge of the Heart - 8th October 2025

So when we forget to include the heart, that means that we forget to include that place where the knowledge of presence is found. Then the rest of the knowledge that we have is a complete waste of time. It is the cause of all trouble and to our detriment. No matter how high-sounding we may try to make it or how insightful we may try to make it, to express it in the most high or insightful way does not cure it of the absence of God. That is why conceptual thinking is called fruitless.

To live in God's will, we have to live in His presence.

To acknowledge is to bring us closer to Him in that way, but just empty of ourselves and relying only on how we are moved by His presence is to live in God's will initially, before the will becomes more and more apparent in terms of direction. A loving, humble, patient direction may start appearing to us at some point. But we must not rush into concluding that, because it could also be a mind trick. So as long as we can doubt whether it is the mind or the heart, we must let go. Just keep letting go. And to allow ourselves to live empty in the innocence of a child is also to live in God's will.

So are we seeing how conceptual knowledge is a two-punch? You see, two very detrimental things conceptual knowledge does for us. One is that it negates that which is most important; it forgets about God's presence and that the highest Self, which is pure awareness itself, is never mentioned—or even if it is mentioned, it's mentioned in a retrospective way and not like a fresh aliveness. And secondly, conceptual knowledge is terrible at determining even the content of phenomenal experience. So basically, to put it in non-academic language: forget about God and mess up your idea about what is happening in your life. Both these things it does until we are attached to those notions of what is happening to me. We are caught in the checker guy mode. Then we find it impossible to be empty for God.

So in satsang, although many words may be spoken, maybe they can just be replaced by: just be empty. Just be empty. This love, dislike, love God. Be with God. A worldly seeker is obsessed with their worldly narrative. A spiritual seeker is obsessed with their spiritual narratives. The end of seeking, which is what everyone is seeking—the seeking of seeking—is to let go of all narratives and allow God's presence, God's love, God's light, God's will to determine everything.

Let me continue. There was some beautiful thing also. So knowledge is of two kinds that we spoke about. The latter is recognition, not information. Knowledge of the heart is recognition, not information. This is a short but explosive line. What is our obsession? What does this mean? What is the meaning of my life? Where am I going? What is my purpose? Meaning, meaning is a constant grasping. And we fill in the box of grasping at meaning with conceptual information. So if I said to you that the distance between X and Y is 100 centuries, the distance between point A and point B is 100 years, what happens? It's confusing unless you will say, "Okay, he's talking about light years and not talking about light here."

So the unit of measurement of knowledge has to change from the number of concepts that we have to the silent heart transmission, which is immeasurable. Getting it? So it's a recognition and not information. How do we measure knowledge in the world? You have a geography exam. So in the exam, they will ask you pieces of information and how much you know—the capital of this country, the continents—all of these things are what? Pieces of information. So that has to change. Our grasping at meaning, our grasping at information, then becomes a resting in recognition. Now, we don't have to squeeze information out of recognition. You may try to make an understanding out of it too soon, but it has to flower in its own time, you see.

So when does spiritual frustration come? When we are not able to squeeze information out of recognition, because the mind can bully us by saying, "Okay, suppose all of this is true. Tell me what is it that you've understood? What have you understood? Where have you gotten there?"

When we try to force our recognition and try to make it an understanding in the form of information, we can't squeeze information out.

Yes. Now, how do you do like before you come to is in thising that recognition always the case? Yes. Yes. And how is it done? Yes. So if you can see that you're not understanding, then you're in the place of recognizing. Got it? Then you're not recognizing. No, I'm just messing with you. I'm messing with all of you. So if you're getting a sense, no, when the attempt is not to understand, when the attempt is resting—and the body doesn't have to look yogic in that process—but when we are empty of ourselves, you see, then know that we are in the photo booths of the Atma. When we let ourselves go, then He picks us up whether we like it or not, or whether we can sense it or not, whether we can feel it or not. You see, but when we take control, then He gives us time and says, "Okay, you try your own way first. I'm here when you're ready."

Someone posted something saying that flowers always. Yes. So it is not that newer realms are being created within us. It is that these realms are already there. The heart temple is there, but we are cleaning it up. We are renovating it, so to speak. How? By resting in it. So we rest in the recognition instead of relying on information.

Recognition seems like something perceptual. It's not new perception.

That's what, because language is limited. No, language is not designed for these realms, you see, so we try and find the best words to depict what is being conveyed. So if you want to elaborate, we could say a non-perceptual, non-sensory recognition, which is the heart recognition. We've spoken about modes of knowledge: conceptual knowledge, perceptual knowledge, and intuitive knowledge.

What would you say as an outcome? That seems like a new recognition. Something very...

Yes. But with what instrument is the question, is it? And that can be tricky because silence as love is recognized only purely intuitively. The outpouring of love may be recognized even perceptually, you see. So to remain empty for God, that is called an act of love towards God. But the mind can say, "But I don't feel any love in the process," at least initially before the outpouring happened. So how is it then an act of love? Yes. But beyond even needing to infer it, it is seen as love intuitively in that holy place. Love beyond just the feeling of love allows us to surrender, allows us to be patient in this.

So if you don't try to squeeze information, then we can just rest in the recognition. You see, what is the attempt to squeeze information? Just like to force an understanding by working our intellect. You're familiar with the process. All of us constantly do it. We're trying to resolve a problem. We're trying to figure it out, like trying to solve the spiritual equation, and because we don't find a solution, then that can sound frustrating on the spiritual path. That's what we were saying earlier. And we try to juice information, a set of beliefs, a set of meaning out of our spiritual practices, our spiritual lives.

I want to come to is a serious... you say sometimes that wanting to come to that non-perceptual...

Exactly, because you don't know. You say, "I don't know, but I just had to come to it." And for a non-spiritual truth like, "I think God doesn't love me," you see, we have to think that information. It's never a recognition that God doesn't love me. Like Papaji said, to be happy you don't need anything, but to be unhappy you need at least one thing. That's a very broad way to say something which is very deep. The way it is conveying this is that you need at least one piece of information from your head to be unhappy, but to be happy, what you need? Okay, you can ask.

Can you say more on... can you hear me? Can you say more on the silence and love part, and then the outpouring can be...

These are more very difficult things to like, the act of love being to return to the emptiness. It doesn't mean that every time we return to empty, we immediately experience an outpouring of a felt love. And yet it is an act of love because to be able to meet silence—the silence within, not the absence of sound waves, but the silence within—as love itself is an intuitive sense that we get. It is Atman, Atma. It's knowledge from the spirit itself.

Trying to hold on to that outpouring...

If you don't worry, that's part of the process. The outpouring itself, if you try to hold on to it, with what tool would you hold on to it? Just with attention, isn't it?

I've heard that I have to be conceptually empty.

When you're conceptually empty, then you taste the outpouring of love. For example, then if you say, "I have to hold on to this love," we can hold on to it like in the intuitive sense of the love or try to keep our attention fixed on that love. It should not disappear. I don't know how the mechanics... mechanics is a lot of fear, but it should not disappear. If it disappears, try to bring it back. It's all right.

So, how you pronounce this? Al-Qushayri. All the Sufi experts can tell. Al-Qushayri writes, "Marifa is a light that God casts into the heart of His servant by which he knows God through God." It is a light that God casts into the heart of His servant. What does this servant mean here? Simple. Inner servant, literally meaning that one who wants to follow his Master's will.

The mechanics heard—mechanics is a lot of fear, but it should not disappear. If you disappear, try to bring it back. It's all right. So, how you pronounce this? Al-Qushayri. All the Sufi experts can tell. Al-Qushayri writes, 'Marifa is a light that God casts into the heart of his servant by which he knows God through God.' It is a light that God casts into the heart of his servant. What does this servant mean here? Simple.

Inner servant, literally meaning that one who wants to follow his master's will. So the one who wants to follow God's will.

You see, which is the very definition of being a Muslim is the one who wants to follow God's will. You see, then God casts the knowledge of the heart onto one who wants to cast away his will and live in God's will. We empty ourselves again and again. And empty to—we cannot hold on to our want and be empty at the same time. And because we are, like we were saying, obsessed with doing and what is going to happen and agency, so then it comforts us to know that once we are empty of our will, then God's will comes into operation. Now we are consenting to God's will. We don't want to start that debate again about whether it's always in operation or not, but we are consenting to divine will.

Like you said, we have to do our victory.

Exactly.

In the form of giving consent for the divine to act through us. What happens to the servant?

Um, Marifa is a light that God casts into the heart of his servant. So, what is the type of light this is? It's a silent unperceivable light in the sense that the sages have said that it is a light which is too bright for us to see. Not the absence of light. If suddenly the light of a camera flash or something goes on, then you have to—cuz it's too strong for us. So we turn away; we cannot perceive, we don't have the capacity to perceive that much light, you see. So this light is compared to that. It is not the same, of course. So this is the light of Atma Gyan, Brahman Gyan, Marifa, Atma Darshan, self-knowledge capital S, which is given by God himself, by the Atma itself, in our heart temple. So have we noticed that across all religions, across all traditions, it is always said that in the heart it is received?

Yes.

So a silent unperceivable light, but unmistakably intuitively born as light, casts into the heart of his servant by which he knows God through God. He knows God through God that it is aparoksha. It is direct. God cannot be known through any other medium but himself in the form of his presence, in the form of his Atma, in the form of his spirit. So what have we said so far? He said either we can anchor for information which we think is knowledge, or we remain with this heart knowledge which God casts upon our hearts and he is known through himself. So when the ego is central in our equation, then we want to know more and more about the life of this me. When God becomes truly central, then we just want to be in this light. This is the ontological—what is ontological? Exist?

What exists? What is existence itself? What is the nature of existence? Nature of being.

So the attempt to grasp at being philosophically is where the origin of the word came from. Ontology is the study of being, if it can be studied in that way at all. So this is the ontological reversal at the heart of Marifa which means that we were trying to—okay, let's read it fully. The seeker discovers they were always the sought, temporarily veiled by the illusion of separation. So that famous 'I went looking for God and found myself. I went looking for myself, I found God.' So we went looking for the existence of either ourselves or God and we find that actually there is no distinction, no separation, no duality. Remember that the non-duality is the recognition part, not the information part. The minute non-duality becomes information part, except when it is shared as a pointer, that is where all the trouble will start. No, a safe—what is it called? Seat belt. A safety belt is the famous saying that either I have pride of knowledge or I have knowledge of pride. As long as that is not forgotten, we are okay. So Nun al-Misri describes a stance of the gnostic, and remember that the gnostic in the Sufi way is very different from the Christian gnostic and is definitely very different from the Indian gnostic. So although the words may have the same root, they are not to be confused as the same. The Sufi gnostic is the one who relies on this inner recognition, relies on the heart recognition. I don't know how the word is used across cultures, but different uses across religions and traditions. So when they say the gnostic's outward is with creation but his inward is with the truth. There was another beautiful way of saying this. Did we post on the contemplation grid? Feet are in the world and heart is with the presence. He said it's an addition to 'before enlightenment chopping wood fetching water, after enlightenment chopping wood fetching water.' But I feel like this addition is good to make: that our feet are in the world, therefore outer is participating in the world mostly as if nothing has really changed, but our heart now belongs to the presence itself versus earlier it belonging to the world. So in the Bible it is said that our heart is where our treasure is. So now our heart, our treasure is God. So our heart belongs to God. So what is heart measure? And if our treasure is worldly, know that that is the seed of suffering, and if our treasure is God, then know that that is the seed of this Marifa, self-knowledge, Atma Gyan.

Does the seed of suffering look attractive or repulsive? The tree looks repulsive of course, but the seed usually looks very attractive. Otherwise, how is my work? Is it good?

How do you allow the spider in Maya—the spider that quickly creates the web? Yes, that's what he is talking about, that when we rely on information rather than recognition. You see, when we rely on fresh recognition of God's presence moment after moment after moment, our life is lived in that present, then there's no room for that spider as you called it. You see, that serpent, spider, insect, whatever you want to call it, is that same voice of egotism, of pride, of me, me first. So it has to be washed continuously. We have to wash ourselves inwardly continuously with God's presence, his name, his love, his light.

And that's what we call awareness, deep potential.

That which is aware even of this presence, of this light which is imperceptible, that which is aware even of attention or the movement of attention, that is awareness. Yes, that is the third word, the witness in which is unchanged no matter what the content of the story is. See, even untouched by the second bird, which is this consciously being and perceiving. The first bird presence—

Is the consciousness, the conscious one. Which of these could be the Jiva? Do you think that would say the second bird or a sort of—depending on the way we narrate the story, depending, it could be like a body part aspect of the second bird or the second.

So if you look at the entirety of consciousness as the second bird, then a part of that is what we define as the conceptual separation between the Paramatma and the Jivatma. Note that it's a conceptual separation, but this is—is it too much? When this conceptual separation happens, and at some level it remains for all of us, that in that minute quantity, the tanmatra of it always remains, which is why servitude is the only safety for the Jivatma who doesn't actually exist. So it's all round and round, I know, but our job is to remain safe in his love and light, you see. So when a conceptual separation can then be replaced by a conceptual oneness, it is still not oneness. So we have to be very careful of that pride which can come as a result of a conceptual oneness. So look at it this way: that the entirety of the separation dissolves except one grain-worth of separation remains, and that grain is kept safe by keeping it in servitude. Otherwise, that grain can become the seed of a new identity and a new spiritual identity, or a spiritual achiever or a spiritual finder identity. So only it is said only Narayan is Maya-free, which means that only God himself is fully free from Maya. That is why it's good to remember that the seed, the grain of pride, will always be with us. If we water it even with our spiritual conceptual understanding, that will become spiritual ego, and spiritual ego is the worst ego. It is the worst ego because if you look at Ravana, if you look at Hiranyakashipu, if you look at all the worst ones, then what are they afflicted by? Spiritual ego. They are claiming conceptually a oneness with God, not a heart oneness. 'I am special because I am God.'

They ask for those boons that this one can't kill me, that means they want to keep their identity, feel eternal.

Exactly, like they want that, they want—

The ego wants what? To become as godlike as possible or fully God if possible, which means immortality and the power and everything.

Immortality and to be worshipped. You see, so if you look at both Ravana and Hiranyakashipu, they wanted their people to only worship them. So if God's name was taken, they would get very upset. You see, you want to be adored like you want everyone to do through force. The mark of the gnostic is that he is rich without gold, strong without soldiers, and safe without fortresses. Up to this point, effort is needed, discipline, patience, trust, so many other things that we've spoken about in Satsang. But Marifa is never taken; it is only received. What does this mean? That even if you are the most disciplined, the most patient, the most trusting, the most faithful, it can never become something that we can demand. In any case, if you were demanding, then we're not all of these. But there is no eligibility criteria that you say, 'Okay, now once I've met it, I am entitled to it.' You see, that is it exactly. It arrives when there is nothing left in you that could resist it. So even the expectation of getting should not be there. That is when it arrives.

Just trying to get rid of yourself, and it's not on the expectation of getting God. It's just like suicidal or hatred of yourself somewhere. What is that? Need some new conceptual getting to be empty?

He doesn't need to—we don't need to be suicidal because we're not getting rid of life. We're getting rid of that which gets in the way of life. See, we're getting rid of our pride. We're getting rid of our reliance on conceptual information which seems to blunt the light of our life. So we're not getting rid of life. We're allowing life to shine and getting rid of all the impediment by being empty. That is why to be empty is actually the most natural, not the most unnatural. Like this, what is naturally here? Allow that. Don't add on anything. Don't add on anything. Don't add anything at all. Just allow yourself to rest in this which is naturally present. Don't add any understanding. Don't add any doing. Just empty. Basically, don't add any identity.

And just follow instead of like—can we only follow once we understand it, right?

This following is different. Mostly in the world we can only follow once we understand. This following is instant. Instant. Don't wait to understand. Just follow.

Is it like instinct or not?

I don't know. I'm not sure. Could be. I feel like at least in my case, Alan is always—even if you call him, he's always evaluating all his options. Have one treat in his hand, one piece of tissue paper to tear up there on something else, so he looks at all his options then says, 'Okay.' Before I had him, I would have wholeheartedly agreed; now that I see him in operation, it's not wholehearted. But when you're saying don't wait to understand, what I'm understanding is don't try to understand what it means to be empty without like how to jump, which foot goes first, am I jumping, am I so—just he said very nicely that recognition, not information.

The paper to tear up there on something else, so he looks at all his options then says, 'Okay.' Before I had him, I would have wholeheartedly agreed. Now that I see him in operation, it's not wholehearted.

But when you're saying don't wait to understand this, what are you trying to—I mean, what I'm understanding is don't try to understand what it means to be entered into without like how to jump, which foot goes first, am I jumping?

Am I? So, he said very nicely that recognition, not information. But what is that? You see, then, that grasping for information.

What about just trying to follow without knowing how to do it?

But that trial was called that—whatever you can do before the click, you have that much time. Do whatever you want right now. I have to write 'time out.' Then the mind says, 'Impossible. Impossible.' And but impossible—but what about me? So remember that the grasping for information is about me. The resting in recognition is about God. Rumi said the knower is not he who speaks of God, but he in whom God speaks. So the knower is what? The gnostic—in this case, the Atma Gyani or the Jivan Mukta, whatever you want to call them—is not just one who merely speaks of God. He or she is the one in whom God speaks.

I want to hear a conversation between—that was before the hot seat—between Baba and this one. There seems to be nothing. No common ground, no common bandwidth. That's why it's still there somewhere. So before we try and answer that, this last few minutes is the point of buy everything else for share. So what is the difference? So suppose that we spend—so we spent about what, maybe we spent about an hour talking. So suppose that we spend that hour in gossiping or just talking about some worldly thing. Then would the gift of these last few minutes have been received? Most likely not. And sometimes when the spirit arrests us, then maybe she—but most likely it doesn't happen that way.

So this is what is called the eating part, or what I'm calling the eating part. The first part of the cooking and some eating happens during the cooking also, like the chef is cooking and tasting at the same time. So we become quiet when we hear something over that. This, whether it happens in Satsang time or post-Satsang, is the actual tasting of the spiritual truths that have been discussed. So what happens is what we talked about: the hearing or the reading, and then the sort of reflecting, the juicing out of what is heard, the juicing out of the aphorisms or the words provided by the sages. So we juice them, we make them more consumable, and then we have to realize somewhere—it doesn't have to be like a conscious recognition—that I can't get this by myself.

So if it's a spiritual truth, know that only spirit can teach it to us. So when that helplessness comes, then we must become prayerful inwardly at least, even if we don't say an outer prayer. And then if we can fall into contemplation, or what in India is called meditation—but that Nididhyasana is very important, otherwise the conceptual seed, which is the pointer, will never become the spiritual fruit. So what is the way to convert what you call the bouncer into something which is met? You see, it will not happen necessarily through a greater understanding of the words, but in an innocent, helpless, prayerful, full patience, sitting inwardly.

So then the question can be asked saying, 'If the sitting inwardly is all that is needed here, then why do you have to speak about all of this?' Because as you notice, without this fuel, the spiritual fuel provided in the words of the sages, we may find it very difficult to just sit. So the way to really learn spirituality is in the just sitting part, the eating part. But we notice that once it is propelled by the fuel of the words of the sages that we're reading, or any sages that you may be reading, then it allows you to dive deep into your heart and stay there for a longer time till you become very seasoned at it. Till you become very practiced at it where you just close your eyes and everything dissolves. Till then, we need the reinforcement of Satsang. So take an example of a bouncer. So what are you finding is a bounce?

I won't use it at all.

Yeah. So take an example of what—what is a bounce for information is about me. Resting in God.

So let's take this: that grasping for information is about me. The resting in recognition is about God.

You see, now in what way can it be met? Have the recognition. You can have, or you can say, 'Okay, now when I'm trying to grasp at even the meaning of this, then who is it really about?' You see? And when I'm just testing whether now or when—whatever I may remember of resting—then there is no need really to put the focus on in that resting in recognition. So you may reflect on this line in this way. You see, and even after reflection, if you understood it, then it's gone to waste. Even after reflection, it must remain at some level a mystery, and that instead of becoming a frustration, must become a prayer saying that, 'I can't get this with my mind or intellect, but somewhere I'm attracted to these words, somewhere they feel they ring true. God, please reveal the truth of these words to me.' And then they may be met in that deep place.

So we have to get that this is the spiritual project. We have to become empty either through inquiry or through prayer, or these contemplative conversations. But some way to meet spirituality which appeals to us the most in our hearts, we must follow that, because that is where the truth will be met as a recognition. It's very meta in a way that this line is a practical project as well as encapsulates the essence of what is the attempt to try and communicate. Yes. But that in a way is the point: that just by the hearing of it, it won't be met, and therefore the juice is still alive in it. If the juice is not alive, then you would have discarded it, you know, as everything else, like there may be so many other things which somebody else would have resonated with. So they may have juice in something else. This has some juice for you. So use that till it becomes more and more apparent in your heart. Because if you were just to understand it, then it's really gone to waste.

Even after the prayer that remains is—you don't try to get rid of it.

Can't get rid of it.

That remains.

Yes. In the sense that it propels and propels us into Nididhyasana. In Nididhyasana, we empty of everything and of all ideas, empty of even prayer, everything. But when we become helpless, that means we've let go of our devices, you see, and surrendered. We laid down our arms, so to speak. Then we get rest in—or in contemplation, meditation, whatever you want to call the next part—effortlessness, till after that we cannot go. After that we cannot go. We can only attempt to go. We can attempt to remain empty. Like we can consent. What is the attempt to remain empty? We can consent to remain empty. But you can't force yourselves to—I mean, you can force yourself to keep your eyes closed, but you can't really go within with force.

So what gets you to that? Does inquiry do it? Does prayer do it? Does nothing do it? It's all right. Even nothingness, we are all waiting. Does Bhajan do it? Whatever does it? Like say that when I used to post the poll, you were saying that you're praying more than four hours. So what was that? Was that ADS or was that inquiry?

Okay, so was there no—what we're calling eating—happening in that? Essential new perceptions.

It's like completely non-perception.

So for four hours there's always something going on.

Why don't you experiment with this and tell me next time? It would be very difficult for the full four hours there was something or the other going on. Are you all getting a sense of what? And how to check on these things? Like try to notice more and don't go with your mind's reports usually, because the mind's reports are designed to deepen our spirituality or make us run. We used to always say that the thief will not say, 'Come catch me, I'm the thief.' He'll always throw some stones over there, make some noise there saying, 'See, the problem is with that, it is not with me.' So try to notice tomorrow, or whenever you get the chance to pray, and from the noticing see what you are able to report with minimal mind interference. With this mask, I can't tell what your expression is, just imagining a big smile is wide. I want to come. You can come.

Yeah. Namaste, Father. Um, Father, for me, there's no too much distinction between eating and cooking. That's what I wanted to ask you. Because when the cooking is happening, when the ADS is going or the chanting is going, and then there'll be silence for ten minutes, and then there'll be some gratitude and tears, and then I notice mind comes in to distract. So then I again start with the chanting and the ADS. It's like interspersed, and that's what I wanted to ask you, Father, because I cannot report yet that I have done half an hour of cooking and half an hour of eating because it's so mixed. And the moment I feel that if I'm sitting with a gratitude, with the tears, and sometimes just silence, then mind doesn't stay quiet as well, Father, and it just takes away the attention very quickly.

But when there is chanting going on or when there is ADS going on, then the mind is somehow quiet, Father. How does that—exactly, exactly. So in a way, the point of the chanting or the sharing of spiritual truths, whether it's God's name or we talk about some truth about God, both for those who are spiritually inclined will have the effect of taking us beyond the mind into deeper spiritual. But also what happens with chanting is that the attention gets—like the trunk of the elephant is given a stick to hold on to, so it doesn't create havoc in the marketplace. You must have heard that example. So the mantra, the chanting, can serve that purpose as well, which is helpful.

So I want to talk about the eating part a bit more. So this is the cooking part: we are chanting or we are listening to Satsang, and then we may be praying, we may be reflecting, we may be praying. So in the eating part—now don't get more confused, okay, we can keep talking about this for the next few weeks till it becomes more clear—in the eating part, it can seem like there are two parts, you see, where one is we are feeding ourselves, which means that we are trying to keep a weight on our faculties so they remain inward-facing. Can you relate to that? Like if I say remain inward-facing now, you can attempt to do it, isn't it? You close your eyes and then you will do something; attention will go inwards, but it's not just attention, something just actively tries to go within.

Yeah.

So that is like we are feeding ourselves; that is the eating part where we are deliberately trying to keep our faculties inward-facing. And then there's an eating which God himself, or God as the Mother herself, is feeding us, where it seems like I don't need to put the weight anymore. Something has gotten hold of all my faculties and is pulling them into my heart. You see? So then that becomes a great gift because God himself is then doing the eating for us or feeding us the spiritual beauty, the spiritual food. So can you all notice just within—and if not now, at least at home when you try—that when you actively try to remain inward-facing, there's like a—you know, it's like you put a slight weight upon your faculty so they go inward, you see? And then there's a point where you just effortlessly, you see, something is—huh? Can you all—how many can relate to what I'm saying? And don't just say so that then I can share properly. You can all relate? Not relate? What about Zoom? How many can relate to what I'm saying? Thank you. Thank you. So, okay, we'll get to this point.

When you try that, when you actively try to remain inward facing, there's like a—you know, it's like you put a slight weight upon your faculty so they go inward, you see? And then there's a point where you just effortlessly, you see, something is... Huh? Can you all... how many can relate to what I'm saying? And don't just say so, so that then I can share properly. You can all relate? Not relate? What about Zoom? How many can relate to what I'm saying? Thank you. Thank you.

So, okay, we'll get to this point. So, at least we can relate to the first part where when I say, 'Okay, go inward now,' it's not completely helpless. You can say, 'Okay, close eyes first.' You can notice that there's a deliberate attempt to remaining facing with our attention, and we don't want to have any taste of any phenomenal experience. So this part you can experiment with, and the next part is just by God's grace. And you will find that you may not even notice where it became light, where God himself has now pulled you away and it is natural to stay like that. You don't find any effort towards turning your faculties inward. It's just a gift of God.

So suppose all of you tell me, or some of you tell me, that the first part itself seems too difficult. You see, the first part itself seems too difficult. Then that's all right. But don't leave your active cooking, the chanting, the prayer, the inquiry without at least trying it for a minute or two. See, because in a way it is like building a spiritual muscle within us. The more we practice, the more the muscle memory kicks in and we deepen every time we practice, even though there may be distractions which come over and over.

Did you mean don't go to chanting without trying to—

Don't leave the bed or whatever chair on which you were chanting. Don't leave the prayer till you try this at least for the—just like that. Even if it feels effortful and a lot of distractions happen, treat them as gifts. When you see yourself caught up in a distraction, then you notice, then you can return; and every time you return, it is turning towards God one more time. You see? So it's a beautiful gift that you're giving to yourself, that you may use your distractions in this beautiful way: that if a hundred distractions come, you can turn to God a hundred more times than if no distractions came.

You see, so in the deliberate part of our recollection, in us collecting our faculties and remaining inward facing, we may find that distractions are coming and there's nothing to feel bad about. As long as your intention is to be with God, just keep returning to God. So the subtlest returning is just returning with intent and attention. So that's like a glance, that we change our glance towards God again. Then if this—and you don't have to be egotistical about being super subtle. Okay? There is no extra points given if you turn towards God just in the most subtle way. So if you find that it's difficult, then use God's name. So if you're using Ram, then just say Ram inwardly or outwardly.

The point of using the name of God and to continue to use it in our prayer is that it gets more and more spiritually charged. And by spiritually charged, it means that it allows us to return to our hearts. Then if in our honesty we notice that one Ram is not enough, then we say it seven times. If you find that is also not working, then say it along with your breaths. In-breath is Ram and out-breath is Ram. If you find even that doesn't work, then use your full prayer. So return to the cooking for as long as it takes till you find that you're able to go within your heart. Are you getting a sense? It takes some getting used to. It takes some practice.

And why is this so important? Why can't we just hear such, you see? Why can't we just do the prayer? Why can't we just inquire, 'Who am I? Who am I? Who am I? Who am I? Who am I? Who am I?' Or even sincerely, 'Who am I? Who am I? Who am I?' You see, but if we don't go within, where will the answer be revealed? You see, then what you'll end up doing, because you'll get frustrated after a long time of even inquiry, you'll say, 'Who am I?' Then when the mind says, 'I am awareness,' you will say, 'Yes,' and you'll think that you received the answer from God. But till you learn to go within your intuitive center, your heart temple, until you learn to hear the wordless heart transmission of knowledge, that 'I am awareness' will never translate into the recognition that I am awareness, you know.

So what else you'll end up doing is you'll start imagining a dark empty place and you'll say, 'Yes, I am that. That is where I'm witnessing from,' because you're frustrated. No, you need answers. How long can you go on? So you say, 'Okay,' somewhere you make a deal with yourself saying, 'Okay, even if I'm fooling myself, at least I can live as if I'm getting somewhere,' you see. So don't fall into those traps. Learn to come to this place even if it feels like effort for a few weeks. Then this gift is irreplaceable. Once you learn this, then whether it is prayer, inquiry, contemplative reading, contemplative listening, listening to bhajan, you know that it's all about getting you here because that is where true Atma Darshan will happen. God's presence will only be met here. It will not be met here. No matter what you do, you see, you can squeeze everything possible in your head, you will not meet your Atma in your head.

Whether this deliberate attempt to go inwards is saying deliberate attempt to be empty?

Yes, exactly.

Suppose I start with inquiry over ideas and then we leave the—

Excellent. That's a very excellent point. Thank you. So the deliberate attempt to go inward is the same as the deliberate attempt to be empty. That is a very important point. So what you may find is that you are just letting your thoughts come and go. You're reminding yourself to be open and empty. And naturally you will fall into the same place. And even if you don't fall into the same place, although they may seem different, they are actually the same place where you are absent of conceptualization. You're not fooling yourself in visualization, not relying on these outer faculties for anything at all, fully dependent on the light of the heart itself. So this is very important. So if you allow yourself to just remain empty, you come to the same place. It is not, you know, it's not a place when you come into the same state of being.

So that matter said that that love, there's some kind of—I thought that was, is there some movement in that?

Yes. Not necessarily. If you notice the anchor of love, if you notice some love is arising as an outpouring and it seems natural to stay with that, then that becomes a beautiful anchor which will provide relief from mental distraction. So you can hang on to that, or if you feel like by remembering God's name or by taking His name there's an active love—you see, it seems like an active love that we can produce—and that is a beautiful anchor as well.

That's not—well, when you say very difficult to decipher whether because sometimes to me also it seemed like a movement, that sensation—

Yeah, but I can't—this your heart itself has to tell you, you see, whether it is some sensational thing which is trying to distract you or whether it is through heart transmission. That unfortunately is beyond my pay grade also. I can't tell you, you see, but stay there and it'll reveal itself. When our intent is to be with God more and more, then falseness cannot last for too long. Don't worry about it.

Somebody says it. I say, 'Wow. Thank you. Keep my attention breath also right inside.' Many times I find myself doing this where after the words seem too gross of the prayers, and for a while some attention goes to the breath before the attention leaves even breath. So attention of breath actually not to buy thoughts. Exactly. Just attention on breath, then there's no attention left both muscle.

Yes.

I have to confess something. Um, you know when like when you do like the ads prayer and it like helps you to not like get distracted by thoughts. Sometimes what I find is that I just like if I see that I haven't like gone to that holy place and I'm still—if I find that I haven't been pinging, the Holy Spirit hasn't pinged my faculties in, I just after I cheat some, I just somehow in that I just say, I just start saying sorry or something like that, like 'I'm sorry.' I always feel like maybe I've done something wrong. Um, that's why it's taking like a while to like do. So when I say that, I find out something like softens up and immediately, like almost immediately sometimes, like I start to like feel that transmission happening and I'm like, 'Thank you.' Something happens like that.

Well, these are these are inward relationships that we are forming with God in some way. So we just have to keep experimenting like this and seeing, but you're experimenting correctly. Whatever you feel pulls you in deeper, you feel free to try that. So if it feels like, you know, you feel that—like sometimes I may say that, 'I'm so sorry God, today I have forgotten you for so long,' you see, and that's why I'm not feeling that deep connection with you. So sometimes it comes from my heart to say like that and that softens something up. It's true. It happens here also. But these things just happen from heart to heart. We can't pre-plan. It's not a strategy.

This flows in that organic way as we let go of this realm of Maya and we go to the inner realm. It's like we are meeting our beloved again and the conversation sometimes seems to start where it left off the previous time, you see, or it can start like a new conversation. So yes, these are all beautiful constructs of this holy relationship which is being formed. But just make sure that it doesn't become like a tactic or a strategy. It just comes, you know, heart to heart. It just happens like that.

I see that when after like saying the prayer and 'I'm sorry,' I feel like I've modified the prayer in the sense I've added more saints or sages in it, the ones that I feel like are always with me somehow. So I call all of them because I feel like if maybe one person is sleeping in heaven, that person is going to hear what I'm saying. I just saying like that. Um, so when you have—in that I feel like because it also shows me like it sort of highlighted in a very deep intuitive way of where I've not been with God, where I've actively actually left God because of maybe a habit or a conditioning. And so that's why something is in a repentant mode, but it's not—it's just like very childlike I would say in that sense, and so I just speak to God like that. And so this is why I thought also to check because when you say like to be empty for God, something that has changed like the first time when actually the first song that I heard from you. It was very like—it's like nothing, everything, like even this thing about relationship wasn't there. It's like I was just—I don't even know, like it's only by God's grace I was able to stay given how rigid I was like back then and I don't know, it's only like the grace of God that allowed me to be able to stay and maybe the yearning in my heart. But the is different like and that's why I—because sometimes like even that they speaking to us to like tell like 'Please empty me of myself' or something like that so I can be with you. It's not there. It's like and the reality of that only God is truly here is revealed in that moment. That is there's only that that is actually here compared to when it feels like I am tasting the spirit of God, I'm one with the spirit of God. And these are things I thought just check because you said that it's very important to be empty for the truth. But this—it doesn't happen like by my own like intentional wanting to for it to happen like that where I'm only wanting to be moved by the spirit.

It's like the reality of that only God is truly here is revealed in that moment. That is there's only that that is actually here compared to when it feels like I am tasting the spirit of God, I'm one with the spirit of God. And these are things I thought I'd just check because you said that it's very important to be empty for the truth. But this doesn't happen by my own intentional wanting for it to happen like that, where I'm only wanting to be moved by the spirit. It very rarely happens like that. That's why I was saying like sometimes it's like I'm not there; I'm pulled out somehow. Although I'm still conscious, it's just like there's just consciousness here compared to when it feels like I'm connected to the truth like that. So I'm saying that these are two ways.

When we are conceptually empty—empty of the identity, empty of ego—then our insides, our soul, our Antahkarana also then has an expression of its relationship with its beloved. Because the relationship of love and ultimately of union and oneness—whether that is in the form of a merging or a union or a recognition of the oneness—both are ultimately the same with different narratives that we may provide. But the soul has its own language of communication with the spirit. The Antahkarana has its own language of communication with the Atma. So you'll get a sense of that loving communication being very different from the crude and gross communication which happens in the head. So that heart communication doesn't get in the way of your being empty of conceptual knowledge. That innocence of the child is the best indicator of that because our head is never innocent like that. The head has always got a different sort of grossness to it. So you can trust this. You can keep reporting from time to time so we can make sure that it's not going in some other direction.

I find that the quality of that is very clear. It's like you speak about; it's like the light that allows the recognition of the present is brighter when I'm here somehow compared to when I'm not here and the consciousness seems—I don't know if this is the right word—it seems more personalized, and here is more impersonal somehow.

Yes.

And that's why the sense of connection is happening. And I'm seeing all of the movements happening, but it's how it is. I actually have no control. I can just only offer yourself and just go into that and just be there and just be open. I begin to see that more and more.

So inner light, our inner love, our inner communication, our intuitive insights, our intuitive love for God and God's love for us—which is the same—has a lot of parallels with worldly light. So it is often found that when we are sitting together in a group like this in a Sangha, in a Satsang, then all the light seems to get amplified exponentially, just like when there are candles together in the world, the light seems to be amplified. So that is the gift that God has given us of spiritual company. You see, the spiritual company is very valuable. So when we have spiritual company, Sage Tulsidas Ji tells us that the company of saints and the company of the Sangha can take away all that afflicts us, all our suffering, because the light just amplifies so much when we collectively sit in love for God, sit in remembrance of Ram.

Please come. You can just come. You don't have to raise your hand.

Hi, Father. I don't have a particular question now. I was just some kind of like, mind feel, and I could not even follow Satsang.

Yes, that was good. If it was, if it is a "was," then we're okay. You can always watch a recording. I personally felt it was quite a beautiful sharing that we had today, so maybe it's worthwhile to catch the recording. But it's all right; we have thousands of Satsangs, it's fine.

Yeah, of course. It's not a big problem to not be following the Satsang now.

What can happen is that after a while you may not need spiritual truths, words about God to contemplate. You may see, like I was seeing the changing of the light on your screen on your camera, and that itself can be a reminder of God and take us to a deep contemplative place. So then as we deepen in this, the world and even our activities in the world can become ways of reminders of God's presence for us to go within. There's a lot of beauty that we see every day that we have normalized in our mental narrative. But there will come a point where you may be just having a shower or something and you may see a small ray of light coming through a window, and that itself may bring you into a deep Samadhi, a deep contemplative state. So as long as we remain open to meeting God, the opportunities will be provided many, many more than needed. Sangha Rebecca.

Hi, Ananta. I'm so happy to be able to speak with you like this again. I just hope it's okay for you because, as you said, a lot of hands went to their—a lot of eyes went to their watches.

Let's hear quickly before they throw me out of the room.

Yes. Please take care. Continue because isn't that power for me now? So if I tell them it's my prerogative when to leave, they don't listen. They just pick me up and throw me out. You know, since you posted the—but maybe I just present, Rebecca. I don't know if you have—

Hello. Hello, my dear. Eric, you're always welcome here. Just feel at home. Feel at home.

I do. Thank you. Very good. So Father, when you posted on this heart contemplation about the infused prayer and the deliberate prayer, something was a bit triggered there looking, and it stayed with me. I wanted to find a space to just free flow a little bit. First of all, do you feel it's important to make this distinction when we are deliberately eating and when God is eating, like you said, for us? Do you feel it's important to have that sense, or can it blur and it's fine?

It's a spectrum, actually. It's a spectrum. And the point of—like many people used to ask St. Teresa also the same question: if after the prayer of recollection, the prayer of quiet, the prayer of union, the prayer of jubilation, if all of these are infused by God in us, then what is the reason that you tell us these things? Because the seeker identity gets a bit triggered saying, "But you know," for whatever reason, either "I have got it" or "I haven't got it," whatever it wants to conclude because of that. So she said the idea is really not to frustrate or to trouble; the idea is just to keep us inspired that God is giving us so many beautiful gifts. So we must not lose hope. We must keep with our Sadhana. We must keep with our prayer. And what she calls prayer is not what in the modern world we call prayer. In the modern world, we call prayer an activity usually of spoken words to God. You see, that is not what she means by prayer. What she means by prayer is the wonderful states of our being that unfold in us as we are coming to union with God. As we are coming to—whether we say merging or whether we say recognition of "I am that." These are the beautiful gifts of grace that come upon us as this process is unfolding. So in a way, it may attack our spiritual seeker identity or pride in some way, but really the point of sharing it is to just encourage and to tell a child that there's a beautiful gift waiting for you. So don't lose hope, keep at it. Can I see exactly the moment where that which seems like it's a bit deliberate then seems completely natural? No, we cannot identify it so precisely. When the Samadhi states come, after that when it goes to Savikalpa, which is that the world seems to still—the sensations of the world still seem to be heard to a point where everything including the breath may not be noticed. Therefore we can't conclude that they exist anymore. Those points are also spectrums and there could be hundreds of steps along the way which we can't really conceptualize as we go through that entire unfolding.

Let's say I'm just going to free flow and there might be a lot of arrogance beneath whatever I'm saying, but—

As long as you forgive the arrogance in responses also, we're okay.

I'm not sure if it's Nirvikalpa or Savikalpa Samadhi, but one of the most touching points for myself is when there is that seeing, knowing, feeling that there is only awareness even in this what seems to be something—it can be the body or the world. And there are gradual—like you said also, it's a spectrum. It can be more clear, a more complete sense of only awareness, or it can be a bit more mixed with something, but still that deep sense is there. But where I wanted to more bring the looking for now is in this sense that I still feel it's in my power—not in my personal power, but I don't have a sense that it's somewhere in some other, like God in this other way of God there waiting for somebody else than what is deeply here. So it's not me personally, but it's still I impersonally. So somehow there is a bit that sense that it's still natural. It's not if and when some distant God decides to give His grace or something like this. You know what I mean?

Well, okay. Let's dive into it a bit more. So, let's say that the state that you spoke about is Savikalpa Samadhi. Then do you mean that in exertion of whatever powers we have in our faculties right now, you can bring yourself to Savikalpa Samadhi?

It feels like that, yes. Not with using something—using a contemplation, using a guided meditation, using some looking—I feel I can bring myself there.

Yes.

It does. It might be arrogance, but it's—

Let's look at that. So, let's say that when we try to go inwards initially, would you say that it does seem a bit deliberate, that I have to turn my attention in and keep like an inner focus to stay?

Yes.

And after a point, it just seems like I don't have to do any deliberate effort at all.

Yes.

So then what is the difference between the two?

One is more real—the later, where there's no effort and no distinction—that is what is there, that what is here. And the other one still uses some kind of—

Okay, so let me refine the question a little bit more. Can you guarantee that if you spend the same effort or time in the seemingly deliberate inner turning, that the effortless recollection or the effortless inner turning has to appear?

No, no, no.

Because that is also what I mean when I say that that is a gift from God. It is not in our power because if it was in so-called our power, then we should be able to say that this is how I do it. It takes me three and a half minutes and just the kind of effort I put, and then it becomes just organic and natural.

No, definitely not like that. But I know that if I stay there, if I stay there as long as I need—two hours, three hours, sometimes it's quicker, sometimes it's longer—because I know it's there and it's here. It's not a favor in a way. It's what is always here and it's—eventually it does happen. So that, I don't know, from there I have this sense that—

But let's look at it again. So if I was to say to lift this computer is in my power, then I would know that I need to just put one hand and just carry this like this. That was a kind of overestimation, very smooth, but quite predictable in that way, isn't it? That because I'm able to do this, immediately it'll lift. So if I was to say to all of you that I can lift this with my power, now whether it happens in 10 seconds or 3 hours, I can't really tell you, but I'm doing it myself.

But let's look at it again. So if I was to say to lift this computer is in my power, then I would know that I need to just put one hand and just carry this like this. That was a kind of overestimation—very smooth, but quite predictable in that way, isn't it? Because I'm able to do this and immediately it'll lift. So if I was to say to all of you that I can lift this with my power, now whether it happens in 10 seconds or 3 hours, I can't really tell you, but I'm doing it myself. Then would you buy that? Some of you may buy it actually, it's all right, but something seems a bit off, you know? If you were to say it like if it was so much in my power, then 10 seconds to 3 hours is a big difference, you see? Then there's something wrong with my prediction of my power. Then you're getting a sense of what I'm saying, that maybe I'm missing something.

Because also, are you saying that every time you try it does happen? You're asking or you're saying?

No, no, no, I'm asking. I'm asking that.

If I know that—no, not like that, but in almost like I know there's this somehow there's no doubt that, not that if I try now or today, but there's no doubt that it is there, that God is here. And it is also not different than this 'I'. It's more 'I' than 'I' in a way.

Yes, that's undeniable.

That's all I'm saying. So from there, it has a sense that it's in my power that whatever I—in a limited way, like what I do determines that—but that I don't know, it's not up to something else.

Well, okay, this is the point. Yes, we spoke about the other day also with another brother. And his point was a little more forceful when he was saying, 'But why do we have to pray, in a way be devotional and be faithful or ask for God's mercy, when in reality it is I itself?' You see? So then my question to him was, 'Is that I the Lord of the universe? Is everything happening by the will of that, in the light of that?'

Yes.

Yes. And then I said that if I was to use Shuddha Advaita, Kevala Advaita, which is pure non-duality, then we have to say that I am that one fully and there is no distinction whatsoever. You see? So then what I told this brother was that there's a bunch of wires lying in front of you. Just make them dance, because the Lord of the universe is making trillions of planets dance around us. Apparently gravity, electricity, magnetism, light—all of these forces operate on principles which are defined by Him. A bunch of wires starting to move is no big deal. And if in our recognition that 'I am that' we start—so what we're really saying is that I am a part of God and there is no distinction between God and myself. But there's a big difference between saying 'I am God' in that way that there is no distinction, and saying that I am God because then God Himself has created all of this play of the universe with His will versus that even post-recognition that I am that alone, I cannot bring life to that which is without life and I cannot take life from that which has life. I cannot command the Atma to reveal itself to somewhere where it has not been revealed, and I cannot take away the revelation where it has.

And that is why in my expression, in my insight, I have to rely more on one part of Advaita Vedanta in India which is not the most popular because nobody really likes where it is said that we are completely that and yet we are not fully that, or we are fully that and yet we are not fully that—which the intellect hates because then what are we saying, you see? Are we fully that or not fully that? So you see, it is beyond. And that's why the sages who would share like that added a word which was Achintya. Achintya means non-conceptualizable distinction and yet non-distinction. And with this, Father, I'm very easy with this and it also is very beautifully put like this: that the 'I' will never be that totality. I am that, and yet I will never be that.

Yes. Yeah. It is totally, totally beautiful. And by no means I want to imply that the personal 'I' is somehow responsible for any goodness or any insight or anything. It's by seeing through that one. But then it's also—maybe this is where it is—that if that one is seen through, then also the other God is seen through. So God is the other. So then it's neither coming from me personally and neither from somebody else than me. So it's neither that nor that.

It brings us to the same place. If we say both distinct and non-distinct, or we say it's neither distinct nor non-distinct, actually it leaves us without our intellect either way. But nowhere am I meaning to imply any distance or meaning to imply that there is a distant God that we appeal to. The intimacy beyond intimacy, the oneness beyond our notion of oneness, is fully apparent in intuitive insight. So that is not the idea at all.

Yes, I'm sorry. Maybe it's my own still some remnants of this God used in Christianity which has a bit of a distance to it. When the word God is said, it evokes a bit of that distant language. So I'm sure that's not how you mean it.

Neither the insight nor the intention is to convey any distance or any real separation. It is only to convey a sheer oneness and yet a sheer servitude. And maybe that is the part where it can get confusing again: that if there is oneness, how can there be servitude? And if there is servitude, then how can there be oneness? We've spoken a bit about that, and maybe in the next Satsang I can share a bit more again on that aspect of it.

You said that as long as there's a 'me', the highest is to be in service to God. I don't know if you put it in that way, but I feel it in that way.

I also want to add to that that there is nobody, no sage that I've come across or heard about or read about, in whom the 'me' became completely absent. You see, so acceptance of that is very important. And in India it is very clearly said that only God Himself is completely free from Maya. So if it is true for the highest sages that ever lived, we must be very careful. I must be very careful before ever making the presumption that I must be the first one where the 'me' fully went away, which is not true. If I look at my life, I can tell it's not. So the only safe spot, the only refuge for that 'me', is servitude and love and devotion towards God. And the way to make that 'me' into the worst possible 'me' is to make that 'me' an Advaita 'me'. That means the 'me' who knows a lot of conceptual Advaita.

Well, that one is probably here a lot also.

But if you can spot it, then you're doing fine. The danger is for those who can't spot it.

In a way, I also felt it's normal that the 'me' just jumps on whatever because that's where the interest is. That's where the love is. So then also the 'me' will grow there. Whatever it would... Thank you. Sorry, I'm rushing a bit because I feel like the body should...

Yes, please. It's good. I enjoyed this. I feel like this can be quite confusing for many, so I'm happy to reiterate from my insight as much as possible.