Review of Satsang Basics: Consciousness Recognizing its Source - 4th May 2016

So, then what can happen is that we start letting go, dropping our belief in some thoughts. And those which are still seemingly meaningful to us, those we still pick up. And they could be the spiritual ones now, the glorious-seeming ones. Those could be picked up. Now, the thoughts could also change. It could feel like the mind is now changing and it has become very spiritual actually. It’s giving you very scriptural words, the thoughts are much more well-dressed. Don’t buy them. Because if you buy this one also, it is with the presumption that, 'I have become a very spiritual person' or 'I have become a very special person now because I know this, which is a super-glorious thing to know.' It is of no value actually.

No value actually, why? Because suppose the thought is, 'I am That' or 'I am Awareness.' Then, if it is just a thought and not really a pointer to the real looking or the real checking, if you’re saying that, 'I’m Awareness. I know this. I don’t need to check anymore,' then it just becomes a concept. And when life comes with its seemingly strong situations, when the mind is blasting about various things, what could happen to you and what your life will become, then you insert one more dichotomy into it. So, the mind is saying, 'You’re in big trouble,' and then you are saying, 'Oh, I am Awareness.' 'You’re in big trouble.' 'Oh, I am Awareness.' It’s worse suffering than even believing the thought, 'You’re in big trouble.' No, it’s true.

Although it sounds funny, but the thing is such great dichotomy can happen that your suffering actually seems to intensify when we try to counter one thought with another thought. And this is from my own experience. I remember when I used to 'know' all of these things, and I felt like I knew everything. And then when suffering came, my business was going down the drain. There were fights at home, all of this was happening; none of these concepts were really helping at all, in fact they were making it worse. You are saying, 'If I am That, then what is it that is feeling the pain; what is suffering?' So it was just becoming worse because of this. And ultimately, even that is grace. Because that is when the conceptual framework is seen to be completely useless. Unless it is only a pointer for our inquiry. So the minute we get into this space of, 'I know this now, and therefore I don’t need to look anymore,' we must be wary of such proclamations and saying that, 'We have arrived at this level' or something like that.

So, what did we see? We saw that all suffering is personal, and the person idea has to be continuously nourished with new fodder, with new thoughts, with new nourishment of belief in fresh thoughts. Because we saw that in the ‘right now’ all our prior conditioning is gone. We are free. But if we tug at it, if we give our belief to one branch of the tree, then the entire tree seems to be here. The non-existent person seems to be real because the power of belief is our power to pretend.

And there can be some questions about what is it that... Which thoughts are these that I should drop, and which thoughts should I continue to pick up? And I say that we must not, we don’t need to pick up any thought, for two reasons. One is that all thoughts, even if they’re proclaiming the most glorious truth, are still referring to you as if you are a person, as if you are a separate entity. It cannot fathom the truth of what You are, therefore it has to go with the pretense of what you are. For all thoughts, the premise is the personal ‘I’.

And the second reason is that even if a sense of needing guidance still remains, you will find that with the dropping of allegiance to our mind, you will find that the intuitive sense will become more and more seemingly available to you. It was always there. But now that you’ve dropped allegiance to this energy called the mind, the intuitive Presence, the intuitive energy seems to become more in focus. So, even you will not be left without guidance, or without ‘what to do’. The seeming-identity that still remains will not be without guidance. Your inner Satsang or your outer Satsang will still be available to you, so that you can throw away what little bit still seems to get your belief in spite of the intent not to believe.

So what is important to see here is the sense of not believing our thoughts is not a constricted space. In fact it is a very open space. Like a great Zen master said, 'Both doors are open. All thoughts are allowed to come and go. Just we are not serving them tea.' Now, ‘serving them tea’ could be interpreted in two ways. The first way is that, 'I am not going to look at them. Whatever visitors are coming, I’m just going to hide.' But in that, there seems to be a lot more effort. 'Who came? Not to peek into what came.' And what we are resisting from seeing, that seems to become suddenly very attractive for us to see.

So, the play with attention in this way is not really required. So, 'Not serve them tea' very effortlessly must mean: You just stay where you are. Allow them to come and go. Don’t give them meaning. Don’t give them belief. Don’t make them relevant. Don’t identify. Then we find great openness in the allowing of everything to come and go. And you truly will not be able to say in that moment that, 'I am suffering' or 'Something is happening to me.' This itself, for those who are coming for this urge of Self-discovery, this itself is tremendous; that the seeming burden of suffering can no longer afflict us. In the simple sense of not engaging with the next visitor that comes through the door. Not believing our next thought.

And I would like to feel that most of you now, having been in Satsang for some time, except for momentarily or short periods of time, are not really personally suffering in this way. And yet we find that there is a primal urge to go further into this. The urge for Self-discovery mostly does not come to an end with the end of this seeming personal suffering. And where does it usually go next? Traditionally it has been said that even the greatest of sages, when they first went to their Masters, they went with this question, 'Can you show me God?' Swami Vivekananda also had this question when he went to his Master, 'Can you show me God?' It is natural for this question to come, because we’ve had a concept of God, we’ve had an idea about God. And this urge for Self-discovery mostly brings us to this point next which is, 'What is God? Can you show me God?'

Now, God is a word which has many, many definitions. So, before we look further into it, let’s clarify. When we refer to God here, what is the definition that we are following? So, when we refer to God in Satsang, we are referring to God as Consciousness, which is traditionally how God has been referred to. In various cultures across the world, God has been referred to as this Consciousness. Like it is said in the Bible, 'I Am that I Am.' So, this ‘I Am-ness’, this Beingness, this Consciousness.

There was a long period of time here where it was completely unclear what it means, this Beingness. Often I have said that while I was reading ‘I Am That’ but also I had reading experiences that were happening here. Because Maharaj would keep saying, 'Stay with the sense I Am. Stay with the sense I Am. Just stay with the sense I Am.' He said, 'For three years, just three years, I stayed with the sense I Am and everything was dropped.' And I just couldn’t fathom what is this ‘I Am’. What made it happen? I don’t know. At the end of the day, I have to say, 'I don’t know.' I have to say, 'Grace'.

Because when it became clear what this sense 'I Am' was, I was actually sitting in an auto-rickshaw, what you guys call ‘tuk tuk’, just from here to the office which is just maybe 500 meters away. Sitting there, just sitting in the auto-rickshaw, it was just so clear, 'Oh, This.' 'It has always been here, this sense of being.' 'It’s always been this. This is the sense I Am.' And it was so apparent and obvious, that even at that moment when I looked back and said, 'What was the frustration or confusion?' I couldn’t fathom it. So I have to say that it was Grace; although there was a lot of looking, looking, looking, 'What is this I Am? What is I Am?' I did a lot of film-style fighting with God saying, 'Why can’t you show me? What is this I Am?' All this fancy stuff happened. But then, when it just became apparent, there was not even inquiry which was happening. It was just, like that.

Even at that moment when I looked back and said, 'What was the frustration or confusion?' I couldn’t fathom it. So I have to say that it was Grace; although there was a lot of looking, looking, looking... 'What is this I Am? What is I Am?' I did a lot of film-style fighting with God saying, 'Why can’t you show me? What is this I Am?' All this fancy stuff happened. But then, when it just became apparent, there was not even inquiry which was happening. It was just... like that. So, the feeling, when it comes to express from here, is just a sense that: What would have helped that boy inquire a little better? If this one had an opportunity to go back in time and speak to that one and help him in some way, what is the way in which I would like to communicate with that one?

And my feeling from here is that I would ask that one whether you can stop being now? Instead of trying to search for Being. The inversion of the question I find very useful. But I have no real way of knowing whether even that would have been understood then. But my feeling is that to ask the question in this way, 'Can you stop being now?' would make the inquiry a little more focused, a little more obvious, a little more clear. Instead of saying, 'Can you find your Being?' That is why I offer this question to you. If you say, 'Can you show me God, Consciousness, Being, Atma?' whatever you call it, then I offer you this question: 'Can you stop being?'

And we see the sense that, 'I exist. I am' is here, the Presence is here. You cannot stop being. We don’t need to imagine it. We don’t need to make a picture out of it. It is just this sense of existence. I Am. It is not the thought ‘I am’. It is not the thought ‘I am’. It is only the sense ‘I Am’, the Presence ‘I Am’. I exist. And very naturally, we know this to be true. Because we say, 'I went to sleep. I woke up.' And it’s very natural for us to say, 'I am feeling this way.' 'I am doing this. I am going there.' So this ‘I-ness’, this ‘I Am-ness’, this Beingness is very naturally clear.

But for the mind, it’s completely confusing because the mind itself is a product of this Being. We say, 'My mind is very noisy today.' This ‘my’ is what? 'My outside environment is very frustrating today.' 'My family is being very troublesome today.' 'My life is not going as well as I would like.' 'My story has been one of so much struggle.' 'I am suffering from this, this and this.' Who is this one? Who is this one that even has the ability to attach stories to itself? Everything that we say after ‘I am…’ is a story. Everything that we believe after ‘I am’ is a condition. And all the conditioning is just attributes which have been attached to the sense ‘I Am’.

But it is important to see that in actuality, Being is just Being. Nothing really gets attached to it. It is only a pretend, only a belief. So, all the beliefs that we have picked up along the way are pretenses for this pure Being or ‘I Am-ness’. This is what we are in Satsang for: Consciousness coming to the recognition of its Source. And Consciousness letting go of all conditions that it seemingly attached to itself. Therefore Satsang is not for the person, because the person does not even seem to exist apparently. And all conditions apply only to that which seems to be here. And we say, 'I am here.' So, to come to this beautiful recognition: 'I Am that I Am' is God experiencing God Itself... is Consciousness experiencing Consciousness Itself.

And all that Consciousness needs to do to play as a person, to put on the ‘On’ switch of playing this personal game is to say, 'I am… something'. Attach any attribute, any thought, any condition to this, and the personal play seemingly begins. And this, for most, is enough actually. It is already the end of suffering and the realization of Beingness, of Consciousness, Atmasakshatkar as it is called in India. And only some of us will have the true urge to look even further than this, which is to ask, 'Who is aware even of this Being?' Therefore the third and final question in Satsang usually is: What is the absolute truth? What is Awareness? (or that which we refer to).

Now, ‘The Self’ like ‘God’ is used differently. The Buddhists use ‘the self’ actually for the false sense of self, which is ego. So, don’t get confused with terminology. When we use the word ‘Self’ here, we are referring to the absolute truth. And this question can come: What is the absolute truth? Now, I have suggested two ways to look at this. One proceeds from the previous question which is: Who is aware even of Being? Second is: Am I aware now? It’s a very profound and beautiful inquiry. Because it is immediately, even before immediately, known that Awareness is Here. It is Known that Knowingness is Here. And it is Known that it does not look like anything, it does not feel like anything, it is not a subject of time and space, it is not subject to time and space. No words can truly describe it.

And it is Seen that no matter what state is coming or going, this Awareness remains unchanged. There is Awareness of sleep state, and yet Awareness is untouched by sleep state. It is Awareness of waking state, and yet Awareness is untouched by the waking state. Or dream state. Awareness is untouched by dream state. All the glorious meditative states like Turiya, Samadhi… all of these It is aware of, and yet even these, it remains untouched by. And it is our experience in a state like sleep that all that was called Consciousness and the play of Consciousness dissolves back into that which it is ultimately made up of, which is Awareness Itself; and arises from that which it is made up of, which is Awareness Itself.

Then it is Seen that there is nothing outside of This. The Knowing of Knowingness Itself, the Awareness of Awareness Itself is a recognition. But for Who? Did Awareness, which is the Unchanging One, Untouched One, forget Itself? Does Awareness, the ultimate truth, need to have a recognition of Itself to remind Itself of the truth? Are any words needed for Awareness? Can the content of any waking state, including content like Satsang, can it become meaningful to That which is the ultimate truth? Therefore to This Awareness, the content of what is appearing, although all content is made up of its own dynamic aspect called Consciousness, the content is completely meaningless. Therefore, for Awareness, whether it is Satsang or it is a comedy show, it doesn’t really matter.

And once we start to have this recognition for ourself, then the mind starts playing very subtle tricks. The ‘con-artist’ also starts bringing its ‘A-game’ now… because You’re starting to have the recognition of what You are. And what is the trick? The trick could be, 'Oh yes, now you’ve seen that you are Awareness. So, what is the point of Satsang? Why do I need to inquire? But You are Awareness. What is the need for inquiry? What is the point of Satsang? None of this.' And from the point of view of Awareness, all of this is completely true actually. Nothing is ever really needed, and nothing ever happened; completely true.

Then what is it that we are here for? We are here because there is still a sense that, 'I woke up and I went to sleep'. So, this sense 'I Am' is still playing here. Consciousness or God is playing here. And most environments in this play are adding to the conditioning, adding to the belief that Consciousness is a person. 'I am… something. I must become a better person. I must become happy. I am unhappy. I am happy'… all of this conditioning is getting added in most environments in this apparent realm. But also part of the play are these smaller points of light in which Consciousness is coming to the recognition of its Source, which is Awareness. And Consciousness is letting go of all conditions that have been attached to it. All part of the play still. Yes.

So the seeming-teacher in the play is the point of light of unassociated Being, which is opening us up to the same possibility or the same truth, actually… being clear, being real for ourselves. Therefore, like I say, Satsang is not for the person because not even in this phenomenal play does a person really come into existence. And Satsang is not for Awareness because Awareness cannot be bound or free; it cannot be deluded or illuminated. Satsang for Awareness is as meaningless as any other part of this play. Therefore, Satsang is for what? It is for the dynamic aspect of Awareness Itself called Consciousness… which has been playing as if it is a separate individual entity and is now coming to the recognition that, 'I am made up of this Awareness, therefore I am Awareness Itself.' And coming to the dissolution of all personal conditioning.

So, now it has become very popular to negate this Consciousness or Beingness. It has become very popular to say, 'Let’s not even make a distinction between Awareness and Consciousness because ultimately all is Awareness.' But what usually happens... Of course, some of you might have this insight that, 'All is Awareness, and nothing has really happened.' And if it’s true insight and if it is that strong an insight that comes along with the dropping of all millions of years of conditioning, then nothing is needed for You; no Satsang also is needed, nothing at all. Because the play of Consciousness will seem like a small grain of sand twittering about. It means nothing at all to You. Not even that, maybe. Not even a pin-prick, this entire play of Consciousness, because in the totality of Awareness, in the non-phenomenality of Awareness, this phenomenal play is nothing at all.

But as long as it is not that, and you must have this integrity to look. Is there really no difference for me, the sleep state and the waking state? Is this entire play of Consciousness with all its drama of relationships and money and health of the body and freedom… in all of this drama there’s really nothing for me; not even a grain of sand? Then let me say these holy words: Nothing has ever really happened. If this is not our experience, with integrity, then don’t be so quick to jump to these conclusions because then they are only mental. Just because the play of Consciousness is not apparent, don’t be so quick to dismiss it and just go with the concept that there is no Consciousness.

I know; I have been there. For three years I tried to figure out what this ‘I Am’ was. And I can understand how attractive It must be to say, 'There is no Being. Maharaj is wrong. What is the reason to come to this? Bhagavan with the 'I-I'. All the sages have talked about Being and Consciousness and Atma. There was no need for any of this.' It can be very compelling to come to these conclusions, because there is frustration there at not discovering, 'What is this Being? So, let me use a concept like I’ve done in the past to hide my fear. Let me close myself up to the inquiry because I know Awareness is all there is, so what needs to be looked at now?'

Don’t fall into this, my beloved ones. Because from experience I’m telling you that it is not the end of suffering; in fact, it is the intensification of suffering to buy into these ideas. Because ideas fighting ideas will not lead to the end of suffering; only to the increase in the intensity of it. The sense that ‘I exist’ is primal to this existence, even a child says, 'I woke up and I went to sleep'. If animals could speak, they would also say, 'I woke up and I went to sleep'. Even before the mind comes, a child would have the sense that, 'I woke up' and 'I was asleep'. They will not be able to report it in words but the Presence or absence of this sense of existence is primal, is primordial.

In fact, this ‘I Am-ness’, this ‘Om’, this Consciousness, is the primordial, Immaculate Conception. And you will see that it is the light on its own screen. It is that which plays as all the actors. And it is my blessing that there may be a time for all of us that this entire phenomenal play will seem like nothing but a tiny grain of sand. Even smaller than that.

They will not be able to report it in words, but the presence or absence of this sense of existence is primal, is primordial. In fact, this ‘I Am-ness’, this ‘Om’, this Consciousness, is the primordial, Immaculate Conception. And you will see that it is the light on its own screen. It is that which plays as all the actors. And it is my blessing that there may be a time for all of us that this entire phenomenal play will seem like nothing but a tiny grain of sand. Even smaller than that. And then, may we all be able to say with full integrity: All is Awareness, and nothing has ever really happened.

From here, the concept of believing a thought or not is meaningless. From here, and here alone, the concept of Satsang, or the sharing of This, is meaningless. From here, this entire play is meaningless. Desire is meaningless. Aversion has no meaning. Freedom is nothing. Bondage does not exist. But if these are still just thoughts, still just ideas, and you know in your heart that there is a lot of belief in the person... and you know for yourself that we are filled to the brim with desire... if it is seen that something is not done with the play, then don’t be so quick to pick up the ultimate-sounding ideas just as ideas. If you must, then use them for your inquiry. Say that, 'If this is the truth, how can I see this for myself?' If it is just another thought, 'I am God' or 'I am Awareness', it is not in service to the truth. No thought is in service to the truth, unless it is used to remove all other thoughts.