Neither Conceptual, nor Perceptual - 16th April 2019

So this apparent existence is your being. And for those of you who feel it is natural for you to stay with this sense of existence, it is beautiful. But even that is not something which is a prerequisite to freedom. Oops, careful. Even this having the ability to rest our attention on this very essence of existence is, you see, is not a prerequisite because it can occur to you spontaneously that even this sense of existence, you are aware of it. It is not a third-party report, you see. You are aware of it. It is not secondhand information, you see.

Now, this 'you' that is aware of even your existence, what can we say about that? Now don't go spiritual-seeing and don't say, 'Ah, thank you, I'm finding peace. Ah, some joy is coming as I'm looking.' All that can come; it's good, enjoy, but that's fine, don't worry about it, you see. Tell me about this one that is aware of even your existence. And on this question, on this question, if you're making a conclusion, then expose that conclusion. Because that conclusion could be, 'Ah, thank you, thank you, this is what I have to do. Easy, thank you, I found the tools, I'm good.' I came to—no, I'm saying now, I'm not giving any homework. Tell me about this 'I' that is aware of even your existence.

I feel like I'm trying to perceive being.

You're not trying to do anything. Effortlessly, you are aware of your existence. I am just asking about the one that is aware. How do you even call it 'I'? 'I am aware', you see. If you give this to your mind, the mind will give you many, many distractions, seeming answers, but all garbage, you see. Let all the garbage come and go. You speak from your true seeing. This that is aware of your existence, tell me something about it. Or tell me why you call it 'I'? How is it 'I'?

I can give you another tool which is a bit maybe subtler than this, but sometimes it can be effective. Are you aware now? Yes or no?

Yes.

Are you unsure about it? Huh? You see, so this that you confirm 'yes', on what basis did you confirm? Come on, let's go. I say, 'Are you aware now?' You say, 'Yes.' Some may say, 'Of course.' Some obviously will also say, 'I don't know, I'm not sure what your question means,' and all of this stuff. You have to become a little more innocent, you see. You have to become a little more innocent because this is just—you've over-gone to the intellectual gymnasium for too long. So now everything has become intellectual. Just with the innocence of a child. Like if I ask a child, 'Are you holding a piece of candy?' they say yes or no very simply. They're not going to say, 'I don't know. What do you mean by candy? And what would holding be?' you see, all these things.

So, are you aware? This 'yes' is a very strange 'yes'. And tell me if this is not resonating with any of you. It's a very strange 'yes' because if I say, 'Am I sitting on a blue couch?' you say, 'Yes.' Blue what? On what basis you said that? On the basis of perception, isn't it? You had a sensory perception that there is a blue couch, you see. On that basis you said that. Say, 'Did I have satsang yesterday?' 'Yes.' Because you had an experience of that which your seeming repository of experiences is confirming, that which we call memory is confirming. So you say yes.

This big ball that we call the Earth that we're sitting on, is it stationary or moving? On what basis we say that? Conceptual. It is not a perceptual knowledge now, unless you make some correlation with the sun or something like that, you see. So this is a different type of knowledge. First was perceptual; now this is conceptual. Somebody told you, credible sources told you, all the great scientists told you that this Earth is not stationary, it is rotating around its own axis and revolving around the sun. All this we've been told, we said okay. It's experiential also? It's not conceptual? Day and night is changing, that's what I said. Unless you make a relationship with the sun or some other object, just in this sitting in this room without looking at this, it's not a perceptual information. You're not feeling like it's moving so fast. This is what you see. Not like when you're on a jet plane or something like this; even that, after a while, it is not noticed perceptually unless you make a relationship with something perceptual, you see, and draw an inference.

So, this kind of knowledge then: In which city were you born? What type of knowledge is that? Information. Conceptual. You've got the concept from your parents or some other relatives. So both these types of information we have relied on: perceptual and conceptual. And there are many, many, many examples. All of you are smart enough to contemplate this. But when I ask you, 'Are you aware now?' and when you say 'yes', what is the basis of that? Is it perception? Okay, tell me how. Because so many things get seen and heard? Yes, yes, yes. So you are perceiving all of this sensory perception, you see, and you are aware of this perception, you see.

Now, perception understood. 'Aware' means you're aware of perception. And in deep sleep, you are aware of no perception. Or just now, if there's visual perception, you're aware of perception. If eyes close, we are aware of no perception. Similarly, all these senses can go one by one, and many of you have had meditative experiences like this where the senses go one by one and yet you are aware of their non-existence. So, this 'aware', how do you confirm this? Yeah, this 'aware'. When we say, 'I'm sitting on a couch,' we know what sitting is and what couch is. 'I'm walking on the street,' we know what walking is and what street is. Now we've come to the point where we are saying, 'I am aware of my perception.' You see, perception is clear—the sensory moving light and sound, all this kind of stuff—perception. But what is 'aware of' mean? What does 'aware of' mean? The first part of the sentence: 'aware of perception'. How are you confirming that, that 'I am aware of perception'?

It's neither conceptual nor perceptual.

It's neither conceptual nor perceptual, she said. It's a very big statement to make, you see. It's a very big statement to make because all the rest of our knowledge, except ourselves, except this awareness, is either conceptual or perceptual. But this self-knowledge, Atma Gyan, is not subject to perception or concept. And therefore we don't have to struggle with any of this product of 'I am', but we have to look at the father of 'I am'. Some of this terminology is strange for you; you've heard some such before. So when I say you have to look at the father of 'I am', you don't take the metaphor too far, you start imagining one bearded father or something. But look at the source, the substratum of even existence, you see. What is your means of confirming that? And does it need this kind of confirmation also?

The ones online can tell me how many are not with me. You can point out. Are you aware? So we have a report. Are you aware? The question is: Are you aware? 'You is consciousness aware' is part of—such—we've gone too far, too far. Come back, come back a bit, you see. This is again conceptual, intellectual knowledge, you see. So we don't need that. Stay with your experience. What is aware of existence? And do we need a scripture to tell us? You see, is anything needed actually at any level of either intellect or perception? How many are with the question itself, the contemplation itself, and how many are just lost when it comes to this, what is being spoken?

I'm lost.

Lost. Do you recall at which point you lost?

I think it's probably the play of words, finding it hard to follow.

It can be like this because it's the first time I see you here, so vocabulary can be a bit different. And more importantly, you see, this is a strange sort of class. If at the end of satsang you are able to tell me ten things that you learned, then I have not done a good job, you see. If you are able to tell me that, 'I thought I knew so much, but now I lost all that concept,' then I feel like today's satsang was good for you, you see. So this feeling of just like this can be good. And actually it is good because that means we are loosening up a bit, you see.

Okay, I'm going to digress for just a moment on why this is good. This house of ego that we have built, you see, is built on everything that we think we know. And that is why it has also been constantly unstable, you see, because now you consider this to be true; five years back you considered something else to be true; ten years back you had a completely different belief system, you see. So all of this is also constantly changing. And with all this change of beliefs, you also had painted a different picture of yourself. Okay, so sometimes your current picture could be that 'I'm very spiritual'; when you were younger you could have had a picture which is 'I was very rebellious', you see.

It has also been constantly unstable, you see, because now you consider this to be true; five years back you considered something else to be true. Ten years back you had a completely different belief system, is it so? All of this is also constantly changing, and with all this change of beliefs, you also had painted a different picture of yourself. Okay, so sometimes your current picture could be that 'I'm very spiritual.' When you were younger, you could have had a picture which is 'I was very rebellious.' You see, all of these things are based on the concepts that we hold and the things that we think are true.

Now when we come to satsang, ultimately what is going to happen—and I'm not sure whether I should say this right now—but what is going to happen is that everything that you're holding on to, that you believe to be true and you are certain about, is going to be taken away from you, you see. And not necessarily in a forceful way, but it's going to be dropped by you, you see. So that is why the words of satsang can also have this sort of effect where you're just like, 'Okay, I understood. He was saying elevator; if you want to go to the top floor, then don't press basement.' I was there. Then he started talking about existence and how when the light of existence comes on, then all of this play starts to happen, but everything in this play is ephemeral, is constantly changing. Okay, there. Then he started talking about that which is aware or prior to even this existence, and at that point, it all started to become a bit fuzzy, isn't it?

It can play like that at that point because I have no way to validate this. And then we started looking at the means of knowledge and looked at, okay, do we have a conceptual knowledge about things—that means an idea about something—or we had a perception that this is true? And then we said, but when I say I'm aware, then Ananta said I can say I'm aware because there is changing perception of various objects, so I can confirm that there is awareness of perception, you see. But I said, okay, perception is understood. And we were talking about how sitting on a couch—sitting is understood, couch is understood. Walking on a street—walking is understood, street is understood. But aware of perception, aware of sight, aware of sound—sight is understood, sound is understood, but what is this 'aware'? You see that? So far, do you lose me somewhere this time also along the way?

So when we say 'aware,' you see, then it sort of becomes to the mind like a black box, you see. Then we start relying again on our conceptual knowledge, but that is not the idea. We can have, we can remember the best scriptures in the world, but they don't help us when suffering comes. It is our own inner insight about this, you see, which becomes the stable ground, you see. So this is the insight that the sages have had which made them, even in the outward appearance, mostly stable in this world. See, anyway, don't bother with that byproduct. You find that which is aware of your existence.

And to find this, I gave two tools, you see. The first tool was to try and stop being. Can you stop being? And it seemed like an absurd question because that being is so apparently here. Beingness is so apparently here. To try and stop it seems like an absurd invitation. So my first tool was to ask you: who is aware of even this being? Tell me about that one. Yes? Is it? Yes, so far? Tell me who is aware of this being without using a conceptual piece of knowledge, without relying on anything you have learned in the past. Check now and tell me something about that one. You say that 'I exist, I am,' and you may even say 'I am aware that I am.' I am asking about this 'I.' What type of experience is it?

She said beautifully, she said, 'But it is not perceptual knowledge nor conceptual knowledge, and yet it is clear to me that I am aware.' So this 'I' that is aware. And then I said, okay, let me give you another tool which seems a bit more direct, is it? Let me give you another tool which seems a bit more direct, and I ask you: are you aware now? This question is super potent, but you may not realize the potency of it yet. Some of you do, of course. It is very unique, this question: are you aware now? Not because of the question itself, but what it invites in you, you see. You say 'yes' without relying on a concept or a percept, you see. If you're really following the inquiry, then your 'yes' is coming from Knowledge with a capital K, which is neither sensory nor is it just intellectual. You are confirming your own self as awareness. This is what you are.

Now you can be at peace with this or you can struggle with this. The way to struggle with this is to try and understand it. This which you're meeting in an open and naked way, if you try to put it in the box of your intellect, you will struggle forever, but you will never be able to do it. That is why in the beautiful Sikh scripture it said, 'Sochai soch na hovai,' which means no matter how much you think about it, even if you think about it a hundred thousand times, you will not capture it in your thinking. Satsang introduces you to a higher place of looking, a deeper place of insight than just the intellect. And satsang is the place we come to for a deconstruction of our conceptual version of life, of reality, of yourself, to come to a true insight about your reality, about the absolute truth—if there is such a thing—a direct insight.

And many times it is not fun because it can feel like the mind will keep telling you, 'But I didn't come for this. I just came to learn more Advaita,' you see, or 'I just came so that I could experience joy all the time,' you see, or something like that. And that is completely fine. In fact, nobody should ever force anyone to come to satsang. But if we are in satsang, then I want to tell you honestly that if you're here for the byproducts, for the side effects, for just for the Ananda part of Sat-Chit-Ananda, then it's not going to work out well. But if you are here for the Sat part, the truth part, and unconcerned with everything else—because truth, Sat, Sat-Chit-Ananda—to come to the company of the truth, of the being with the truth, is what satsang is for. And sometimes as words of reassurance, I tell you that, okay, give the truth a chance, you see, before you start checking for the other byproducts that you are looking for.

Now if you've been listening, you may ask a rational question which is, 'Okay, you said so much about truth, truth, is it? How do I know what is true?' And the sages have given the answer: truth is that which does not change, that which does not come and go, that which has no boundary, that which is not an object of your perception, that which cannot be conceptually understood. All of these clues are available to us. Use any one of them. Find out that which is unchanging. Where will you look to look for that which is unchanging? In which direction to look?

Okay, for Anil, now this is the last warning. If you type anymore, you're going to be out. It's been a long time coming. And others same. So, in which direction to look if you want to look for that which is the unchanging? Some reports are coming about this and I'll read the earlier reports a bit later. 'Father, I feel I recognize the aware part, but it loses my focus as the attention on objects and ego gets louder now.' Okay, this is very good. So you say yes, that which attention is reporting to, that is always the substratum. Everything that perception is bringing is reporting back to my this awareness which remains untouched. But what happens is that my attention gets fixated on something phenomenal, you see.

So you say as the attention on objects and ego gets louder, you see. So now what I want you to do is let attention be completely free and go anywhere. Once you have seen that the source or the substratum is this unchanging awareness, then you don't have to force your attention to stay in a particular way. Let your attention be free. But there is a distinction between object and ego, you see. You say attention goes on objects and ego. So objects is what we call this just pure perception. Actually, there are not even objects in pure perception; even that is a label. But let's for a moment see. So these are objects. Now, what is ego? Is that ever perceived? See, so the ego is never perceived. It is made up. It is only inferred. The limited self is not a perception.

Even right now you may say, 'But my ego is this, this is how I define it,' you see. But if I ask you that what is this, you say it's a set of perceptions, sensations. Now, where are the sensations occurring? Within you or outside you? Within you. You may not be able to define what this 'you' is; it's okay. So within you all these sensations are happening, you see. Now, this within which this is happening—and just as a tool you can use also this voice—where is this voice happening? Where is it perceived? Within which space? See, within you, you see. Now, this you within which all of these sensations and perceptions are there, what is the boundary of that one?

So you can use anything. Use the sound of the traffic, use this voice, use the pain if there is in the body. Look at all of it and see: what is that space? And I will provisionally call it the space of existence. What is this space of existence, space of being, in which all of these perceptions are occurring? And does this have any boundary, you see? Now I want to ask you: are you also an object within this space of being? Are you also a perception? Are you also contained in this space of being? And this is where we started: what is aware of even this being, of this existence?

So let's say everything that is appearing in your existence is objective in the way that it is limited by time and space. It was born, it will die, it has duration, you see. It has attributes, it has shape, it has size. Yes, everything that is perceived is an object in time and space, isn't it? Now that which witnesses this perception, does that have any attributes? Is it not you that is witnessing this? That statement is... but look, of course all the statements are, you see, but statements are like the road sign saying 'look here, don't look there,' you see. They are not the goal in themselves. See, yes.

And Kalima says, 'No direction.' Yes, because actually when we come to this point, all distinctions—up, down, left, right, this side of being, that side of being—all these we see were just provisional things. But don't rush into that. That is her insight at the moment; let her stay with that. All of you continue to look in the way which is resonating the most for you, you see. So yes, you will see that all of these distinctions, actually they start to fade away and the idea of direction itself falls away, see. So, no directions. It's a good report.

Then another says, 'I feel like it is all happening in me.' Sometimes it feels like it is all happening in me. Yes, so all is happening within your existence, within your being, in the very light of your—like Bhagavan said—in the light of your Consciousness, on the screen of your Consciousness, is it? So there is all of this is just Consciousness itself. But you have to taste it like this. You have to move beyond the statements and let this become your own insight. So happening within you.

Then we were talking about the ego, yes. Now within all of these perceptions, there's a certain set of sensations and perceptions which we call 'me.' You see how that happens? How did that separation come about? How is it that all the perceptions are happening, you see, and in all of the perceptions there's a set of perceptions which I want to call 'me' and every other perception I want to say 'outside me'? But is this reality? And it was not even natural to us as children; we were taught this distinction, is it? So this idea of 'me,' this idea of separation within this one existence, is the idea of ego or the idea of duality. That is why this is Advaita, which means non-duality, no distinction, no two. Although the ego is never perceived, the mind uses—the mind is also a set of perceptions, ego energy constructs—which is convincing you, that is convincing Consciousness itself, that it has now broken itself up into a 'me' and another. That duality is real. That is why Bhagavan...

As children, we were taught this distinction. Is it so? This idea of 'me,' this idea of separation within this one existence, is the idea of ego or the idea of duality. That is why this is Advaita, which means non-duality—no distinction, no two. So, although the ego is never perceived, the mind uses a set of perceptions, ego energy constructs, which is convincing Consciousness itself that it has now broken itself up into a 'me' and 'another.' That duality is real. That is why Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi said that 'I am' is no trouble, but when 'I am' takes itself to be 'I am something,' when it attaches itself to any limitation, that is the root of all suffering. For ego, there needs to be an idea, a notion. 'Me' itself is the idea. When 'I' is taken to be, or confused with, the 'I-thought,' that is the root of all suffering. He said the dissolution of the I-thought is what is needed. So this means that 'I' no longer holds any limited reference. Understand that any reference that you make will be a limited reference.

Who has heard me so far? I-thought means that 'I' being referred to as something, including the highest, is still a limited reference. But empty of this limited reference, your unlimitedness is apparent to you. I feel to challenge all of you of lifetimes and keep having the same conversation, you see. Empty of a notional idea of yourself, your unlimited truth is apparent to you now. Fight with me on this; I'm open, because this is what I find. If you are not limiting yourself using any thought construct, this that is sometimes called the ultimate truth is completely clear to you. And hardly anyone fights with me on this. What you fight with me on is: 'But, but this notion feels so true. It's too attractive. I keep believing.' You see, that is what the fight is about. I don't feel like any of you are really arguing with me on the nature of reality, which is the unchanging, which is just here, therefore must be here, you see. You're usually saying, 'But I wanted some fireworks. But I wanted... where's my bliss?' You see? But something, something, you see. But what about what I'm saying?

Let me invoke the Buddhists if that helps. They said Buddha-nature is never concealed. What it means is it's apparent, no? So what is apparent to you now? Is it Buddha-nature? Sages said truth is unchanging; it neither comes nor goes, you see. So do you have to wait for something to come to confirm that? It cannot be. Where must it be? That is why I say the Master's number one role initially is to tell you where not to go. I'm just telling you two simple places where not to go: don't go to any idea and don't go to any perception. Simple. Now, what is left? Huh? Who said addiction? Huh? Addiction to the idea is left? Is it left? Truth is left. Truth is left, you see. But even addiction is not left, because even for addiction you have to think about it. Even for addiction you have to think about it. What is left now? Now, now, before the click. Don't conclude anything with your mind. I'm not looking for an answer; I'm just looking for you looking. I'm just looking for you looking without concluding. It is my challenge to you that without you holding a notion about anything, the complete and certain truth is apparent to you. You tell me how it is.

Okay, a question is coming. Our experience is pain or pleasure in this body and mind. I experience and not others being in pleasure, so it appears that I am different because I cannot deny my experience.

Okay, tonight we go to sleep, yes? A so-called dream appears. In that dream, you're a farmer who's working hard all day on his fields. And there are others, rich people who come and steal this farmer's produce. And this one is feeling all kinds of pain: body pain, emotional pain, victimhood, everything, you see. Who are you? You see, if you still make that boundary and you even take this instruction as the farmer, then obviously the poor farmer is going to say, 'But how can I confirm to you that I am all there is? Look at these people; they've taken all my whatever I toiled so hard to make,' and all of these things, you see. So first drop this idea, because God pretending to be a person trying to find God will never work, you see. It never works. Many try it.

See, Bhagavan Rishi was asked once, 'Once one finds self-realization, how do they deal with others?' And he said, 'There are no others,' you see. If you start putting the filter of duality first and say, 'But I experience my own sensation and my own pain but not others,' we've already given birth to 'me' and 'another.' How you know it is from this body? You see, even amputees experience this phantom limb. Also, there's the rubber glove experiment: you put a rubber glove here and hide your hand, and put sensation on your hand and rub the rubber glove at the same time. Very soon you will start feeling that the rubber glove is your hand, and if it is poked by a pin, you will cry out in pain. Whose sensation is that? Yours or another's? You see, if we start drawing the boundaries based on these perceptual appearances, then already we have got into this nature of duality. Then with that lens of being a wave—'I'm just a poor little wave'—then how will we reconcile with a saying, 'You are that which the arcs of the universes, they come and go'? Then it is too far from each other, you see.

Now, I'm not saying you have to pick up that position. I'm saying drop this wave position for a moment. Now I want to give all of you good news, which you've heard every day before, which is that without an idea you cannot become dual. You cannot take yourself to be separate without a notion. This is such a simple pointing. Unless this also we give to the mind and say, 'What do you think about this?' He's going to say, 'But I'm stuck. I'm habituated,' like she was saying, 'I'm addicted.' You see, the mind will only give these reports. But it is never true that God is addicted to the mind. Only God is here. Only God is here, but it does feel like that. It does feel like that. That is why satsang is like the rehab—rehab for God, by God.

Then the report was not complete. Then it was said, 'Moreover, realize Master also, when called by his name, responds.'

You see, the whole perspective has to be switched back a bit, you see, because there is no name for the real life Master. Okay, let me tell—maybe it's confusing. Adi Shankara one time, he was sitting with a group of devotees, something like this only. He was sitting around talking about the illusory nature of the world. 'This whole world is Maya; nothing is real.' In that, a tiger comes. That which we call Shankara, the body, was the first to run. Tiger! So he was the first to run, and then the other devotees also followed. They all climbed trees. They all climbed trees and they were waiting over there. They waited for the tiger to go. The tiger went away and then Shankara came back down. He's sitting on a couch, probably, and people were around him. They were laughing at him, caught you like this, kind of snickering at you. 'What's going on? Why are you all behaving like this?' He said, 'Just before the tiger came, you said all of this is Maya, it is illusion, it is not real. You see all of this stuff? A tiger came and you were the first to run!'

You see, the coming of the tiger, my saying all of that, the coming of the tiger, the running—all of this is part of the same illusion. Now, this we cannot understand if we keep the construct that that body is Shankara. I can give you only this much clue, okay? If we still feel like, 'Okay, the realized Master is that object,' where everything is saying is that 'I am not this object,' you see. And not just this object, but if we still identify, and the depth of our body conditioning is so deep that even in spite of hearing all of this, we still feel like, 'Okay, there is a separate realized Master and he's sitting only in this body,' then this is not Advaita. Then this is still duality. So God is calling, God is responding, God is playing this whole game. God is the tiger, God is running, God is the space, God is time, God is all of this. So although we are deeply reverential to that form which is playing as the instrument, that expression which is serving as the instrument to the Satguru, to the Supreme Lord, you see, we are not to forget that the Master's pointing is that this body is just another part of the appearance. If you still take the Master to be the body, then obviously this confusion will be there—why this one ran or why he responds when a name is called.

I wonder if any of this resonates somewhere. And as you find yourself as all this, doubt about yourself will be clear, then all of these stories will become completely clear. So don't struggle with any of these stories if they are not understood. If they're not understood, it's fine. You find what you are; that much is enough. And you will find that the more you know, the more you will struggle, you see. Because everybody is willing to hand over everything which they think is bad: 'Oh Master, take my greed, take my lust, take my addictions, take my falsehood,' you see. But hardly anyone makes their prayer: 'Take all my joy, take my peace, take everything is yours, take my truths,' you see. So when we say, 'I surrender everything,' we only say, 'Okay, I'm going to give my bad stuff.' But you have to give everything. And give everything means Master doesn't want anything; give everything that you think you are right about, you see. Come back to the innocence of a child, and then you will understand what Jesus meant when he said, 'Only the babes, only the children will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.' Because if you meet it through your intellectual filter, if you meet it through your conceptual understanding, this truth can seem so far away.

It's time to go. Good, good. Yes, you will never meet the truth through the filter of your learned knowledge, even if it seems like spiritual knowledge. And when it comes to this directness, this now, now, now, you will see that the mind, which is trying to play your friend inside your head—in fact, trying to play your master inside your head—you only resist this simple. When I look now, I see the attention flowing towards your statements and then some responses arising in me. All this is watched. There is an aliveness which is tough to put in words. It is not just tough; it is impossible. See, even your manifest aliveness, beingness, is impossible to put in words, forget about trying to put in words that which is its very source. In fact, we are stepping back from this tyranny of words. Words have oppressed us. Ego without words is non-existent. Even if it feels a bit energetic, 'I have this energetic separation,' that is like an empty glass, you see, just so fragile. Just one glance from the Master can blow it away. But when it is reinforced by the scaffolding of words of knowledge, mental knowledge, then it seems impenetrable.

The question is about words in my head. Yeah, but I can have a heart voice in my head?

Heart? Yes. Yeah, yes. If that is clear to you, then you can follow that guidance. Um, so a heart can also speak? Yes. How can you differentiate between... then you forget it. Then you forget, you see. Because when you said that there is mind voice and there is heart voice, that's why I asked you if you're able to distinguish: 'Ah, this is my heart, this is my divine intuitive Satguru voice,' you see. And I can give you a lot of clues, but if it is not clear to you, drop it. If it is not clear to you, drop it. Is it okay? Just, I feel to give you an answer also. So the mind's voice, the voice of separation, is always grasping. It's always grasping; it wants something, and usually it wants it fast. It's in a rush. That 'I want, and I want now,' you see, like this—that is the mind's voice. The voice of the Satguru within, or the heart's voice, or this voice of this divine presence, is never wanting, you see. It's never grasping, never clinging, is never saying, you see, like that. So, but you don't try to force all of this. You are in satsang already, so whatever instruction is needed to you is available to you. Then one day it will become apparent.

It wants something and usually it wants it fast. It's in a rush. It says, 'I want, and I want now.' You see? Like this. That is the mind's voice. The voice of the Satguru within, or the heart's voice, or this voice of this divine presence is never wanting, you see? It's never grasping, never clinging, is never saying, you see, like that. So, but you don't try to force all of this. You are in satsang already, so whatever instruction is needed for you is available to you. Then one day it will become apparent that this is the voice of my inner Satguru; then you can follow that voice. But if there is doubt—is this mind or is this intuition?—forget it. It's fine. One day it will speak so loudly in your heart that you will have no doubt about it, you see? But don't make this now an objective. You are understanding me? Don't make this a goal.

You stay with what is being pointed to you in satsang. Discover what you are. You find what you are. Find yourself, and then all this will become very simple, very easy, you see? If you take this side track and say, 'Okay, now I'm going to spend some time and just figure out: is this heart, is this mind? Is this heart, is this mind?' all the time, you could waste an entire lifetime just trying to figure this out, but it will never happen. Use your time to find yourselves, then all this is very simple. It's okay. Some defrosting happened. Thank you all so much for being in satsang today. Satguru Sri Mooji Baba Ki Jai. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti.