Satsang Is Going From Head to Heart – 12th September 2022

Would you consider yourself a seeker or...

Yes, just through my journey with children, I hope to get my joys by doing something for them. That's just nothing in particular. It was happy for Chandra to say come and partake in this.

The usual reaction of those who come and they haven't really... they've been brought by friends, like you can't generalize, but mostly people say it's too weird, it's too out there. And more common than all of that is that 'we didn't understand what he was saying'. So what you could do is if there's a point where you don't understand, even if it feels like I'm in a flow or something, just stop me. Because many times you feel like, 'Ah, myself.' So many times what happens is the mind creates like a block, and the name of the block is 'I can't understand, it's too difficult for me' or 'I don't have Advaita Vedanta context or history'. So it just puts it in the box of 'not understandable'. And I spotted that many times, you know. So just stop me and say, 'What are you talking about?' and we can really rewind right from scratch.

Because most of them are used to the terminology the way you're speaking. We use words like awareness, consciousness, all of that, but they may sound a bit strange. So let's see if we can deconstruct right from the beginning if you come to a point that you don't understand. I feel so far what I've said is very straightforward. He's been from spirituality before, whatever I've been trying, he's been forcing you. Let's see if we can make it the discovery of God, the so-called attainment of the Self. Let's see if we can make it a real possibility for everyone in this room, independent of whether it's the first satsang or thousandth satsang. There is a young child who will be ten years, this one looks like the youngest in the room is right in front of the green dress, and there are some of you first time today. Let's see if by the end of satsang today everyone can confirm that they found what the spiritual quest is really about. Yes, let's see.

So that is about grace and surrender. It is not an instrument of wish fulfillment. It's not a genie. It's more of a recognition. Because like I keep asking, so what is this? What is this? What is Ananta doing? Raising the hand. Some may say he's saying stop, stop, enough. Some may say he's blessing us like traditional Guruji types, he's blessing everyone, you see. Now inherently what can we say? You know nothing. We can't see. It is the perspective that we bring onto it. It is the perspective that we bring into it that makes all the difference.

So can we look at spirituality, can we look at the truth as something that is universal, independent of whatever perspectives you may have or belief systems you may have, you see? That is the key. So the discovery of God or the discovery of the Self must be the same for everyone, you see. And the way of finding it must also be the same for everyone. Not in the preparatory steps or the other things you did to get to the point of discovery, but the discovery in itself has to be the same, you see.

Okay, let me let me ask a question. If you are looking for something that has no quality, you see, can you as different seekers find two different things? You're looking for Nirguna. He said that the Self is without gunas, without qualities, without attributes. Now is it possible to find it, find two different things as a result of that? Take a moment. Some of you may not be used to exploring in this way. That the truth, everything that you perceive is in the realm of changing. And what is the realm of changing called? It is called Maya or the Leela, you see. So all perceptions, they are changing. It is said that God or Brahman is the unchanging reality.

So let's see if we can find the Brahman now. To find that which is unchanging and therefore not perceivable, because everything perceivable has a quality and it changes, then to find that which is unperceivable, you see, without the quality, can there be two discoveries both without the quality? So if you're looking for something which is beyond perception, yes? Because what have we been told since we were children? All this is Maya, all this is an illusion, all this is coming and going. Everything that you perceive is phenomenal and therefore coming and going. That which witnesses all of this is the real deal. You've been told that which is the sakshi of all of this is the real deal.

How will you know that you found the sakshi? It will be empty of change. It will be empty of all qualities. Now the question is a strange one, I know, because she's not used to satsang like this. It can sound like a strange one. So we're saying that there are so many different spiritual paths. One has done mindfulness, one has done teaching, one has done Kundalini, one has done all of these spiritual practices have been done, you see. But the discovery that which we all spiritual seekers are looking for, you see, is beyond change, beyond quality, you see. So if it is empty of quality, what can differentiate it? You see, I say this one is different from this one, but they have the same, they have everything is the same about them qualitatively, but they are different. What would you say? Too complicated and sounding too academic? Let's go to a different mode.

So we are looking for something without quality because all qualities are in the realm of Maya, in the realm of changing. Yes? Yes. So if you're looking for something which is without quality, you see, how will we distinguish? How can it have a difference? Like can Saurabh come to a different discovery of the Self and she come to a different discovery of the Self? And on what basis will the difference be? The difference can only be on a quality, you know. You can say, 'Ah, the Self that Saurabh found is red,' you see, 'the Self that she found is blue.' But I'm saying it's empty of quality, you see. So no shape, no size, no color, no duration, none of these dimensions that we're used to. That is the discovery that we are trying to come to.

So if it is the qualitative or quantitative distinctions, they can only come from the guna, see, from the differences. So if it is empty of all quality, then there cannot be two of them. There cannot be two Selves or two Atmas, two Paramatmas, you see. It's not possible. Now with what tool can you come to this discovery? What do you have in your arsenal with which you can find this non-qualitative Self? What do you have? What are your perceptions used for? What is sight used for? Yes, and what do you see? You see qualities. You see qualities, you see color, you see shapes, you see. So for the non-qualitative, you cannot use sight. What about hearing? Sound. Sound is also quality. You have a vibration, you hear it. So all of our senses are used to determine that which has qualities. So we cannot use sound senses for our discovery of the non-perceptual, non-phenomenal entity of quality. We cannot use our senses.

And what else do we have? What other tools are available? Imagination. What is imagination? Thinking. Thinking is, in a way, that your images are forming, you're perceiving them. And what are you perceiving about them? Their qualities. Did you imagine a tree or a... would you tell the difference? Because the shape was of a tree, the color was of a tree. So then we cannot use imagination also. Then what else can we use? This cuts to the root of the spiritual problem, you see. I have been exploring, I've been contemplating this topic as to why 99.99% of the seekers never end up finding the truth that they're looking for, you see. And the quest becomes a multi-lifetime sort of thing. According to them, it becomes a multi-lifetime thing. And yet there is no complete satisfaction in the human condition till this, till the Self is attained, you see.

Because everything else is changing and if you tie yourself to that which is changing, what is going to happen? You're going to suffer, you see. So many times I say that to tie yourself to the world and to want peace and stability is like tying yourself to a drunk donkey and saying, 'Why am I not peaceful?' It's not going to be fun. So this is the realm of changing, you see. If you tie yourself to it, what's going to happen? You're going to get battered. So you're looking for stability, and stability is only possible in the unchanging reality of the Self, you see.

Now I want to take this unchanging reality of the Self and I want to make it your direct insight, not just a conceptual... Brahman is everywhere, everybody knows we are... no, everybody is spirit. How can it become your reality, you see? You recognize reality. So that is what satsang is really all about. So it is important first to discover what not to do, and then what to do is very simple, you see. Most spiritual seekers waste their time in doing what not to do in trying to attain the Self, in trying to attain God. And that is why lifetimes upon lifetime may go in the quest for this search.

So what not to do first: don't try to perceive God or perceive the Self as if it's a perception or a perceptual discovery. So all these experiencing bliss chasing, feeling chasing, wanting to feel better, all of that is not truly it. It is in the realm of what the world may call self-help or wanting to feel better and all of that has its place in the world. But satsang like this is like... we call it, maybe it's arrogance, but we call it direct satsang because it's pointing without any of the fluff. It is not for anything else but for Atma Gyan, for the discovery of the Self, for the attainment of the Self, you see. And if as a byproduct other good stuff happens, then as a...

Feeling, chasing, wanting to feel better—all of that is not truly it. It is in the realm of what the world may call self-help or wanting to feel better, and all of that has its place in the world. But satsang like this is like—we call it, maybe it's arrogance, but we call it direct satsang because it's pointing without any of the fluff. It is not for anything else but for Atma Gyan, for the discovery of the Self, for the attainment of the Self, you see? And if as a byproduct other good stuff happens, then as a byproduct it happens.

So, what not to do: don't try to look for the Self as if it's a mobile phone. You see, I lost my mobile phone, so I'm going to look for it. How would you know you found it? I can see it has the shape and the color and the size of it, you see? So, you will not find the Self as an experience. So stop chasing the Self as an experience. You see, many are chasing the Self as if experience is going to come. And this problem is not new. If you read the older scriptures, same thing. If you read the Bhagavad Gita, same thing—that the truth is deathless, it is birthless, without all qualities. All this is coming and going. Discover your reality and you will be free from this fear of death and fear of losing your attachments.

But what does Arjuna say? 'Can I see this?' Lord himself has appeared as his Guru and best friend in front of him. He's seeing him, but he says, 'Show me the special you. Till I see the special you, which is the real you, you see, till then I won't be satisfied.' But the special you, the real you, is not in the realm of change. So the Virat Roop which he saw was also something that came as a vision, you see? He saw him as a perceptual vision and it went away. And was Arjuna free after the conversation? He wasn't real, you see? So this meant—if you look at it even metaphorically, you see—the metaphor of Arjuna is still here today and the metaphor of Krishna as the Guru is still here today, pointing to the same thing and the same conundrum.

So the Guru has appeared, he's pointing you to your reality, but we are looking for an experience, you see? So the quest is different from where the pointing is pointing to, although in your heart you are longing for the same stability of the Self. But because in the world it seems to be so uncommon to look for that which is beyond perception, we can only try to chase the highest experience to say, 'Once I have that experience, see, then I can confirm I found God.' But that's not going to be the way it is. How many of you had spiritual experiences, like fantastic ones? Come on, don't be shy. Okay. Who has not had... traffic light downstairs? That was quite spiritual. Random strangers... you gotta be... I just like actually beaten up? No, no, on this traffic light like four, five years ago, but it was the closest I came to...

So, accept the six, and thank you for your honesty. But except the six, everyone has had a lot of spiritual experiences, and yet you would not claim—and if you are claiming, then you are making a mistake—you would not claim that experience to be the experience of the Self or as Self. You would say that this was a fantastic experience I had along the way, you see, of finding the truth. I had a fantastic spiritual experience. Even if we say that in that experience I found that there is no 'me,' you see, but as long as it's something that came and went, then it's still in the realm of perception because what comes and goes is perceptual. Yes?

Okay, so far so good. With our senses we can't do this. Then what else do we have? Now it's getting more difficult. With our perception senses, we usually in the world—like revising in the world—we may take senses to be this way, but let's take external objects and seeming internal objects to be perceptions through our senses because you're seeing them. You may be hearing a voice; all of that. Let's include all inner objects and outer objects as perceptual experiences, as sense experiences. Because—okay, that's another satsang in itself—but actually the dividing line between inside and outside, we don't know. But we'll come to that. For now, let's just treat all of that as sensory experience. Okay?

So that is not possible. Then what is the other way we can find God? So we can think. We can try and resolve it like, 'I need to find this.' We can try to solve it like an equation, like 54 into 76 equals God. But you cannot do it through thinking. God will not be a product of your thinking. You don't have to take their word for it. Is it anyone that you are devoted to, any of these teachers on the walls, and they said that 'One day I thought so much and I resolved the problem of God in my head'? You cannot do it. You may be a master of thought, but God will never be received as a thought or a product of a thought. Yes?

So what about this? Before we go to the no mind, on the unborn, before that, we are together in this so far? Clear? Remember that you don't have to convince your mind about it. As long as you've heard it, it's fine. You don't have to resolve the doubts that your mind may be putting out now, saying, 'But, but, without me, no time,' you know, whatever it's saying, let it be. You don't have to resolve any of its doubt. It's just important that you've heard it. That's all that's important, you see? Because we will not be able to fix this. That's the whole point. We will not be able to fix the God problem in your head. In your head, God will continue to be a problem because the head is too limited to find that which is unlimited.

So the realm of spiritual seeking then cannot be the perceptual realm of senses and cannot be the conceptual realm of thought. Now what does that leave us? So that is 99.9% of spirituality out, because most people are either thinking about God, trying to come to a conviction about God, come to a deeper belief about God—all of that is in the realm of mind. We don't need any of that in satsang here. You don't have to believe anything I'm saying. I don't need your belief for it. So God, the discovery of God, must be beyond belief because you can only believe a concept. Can you believe something other than a concept? Like, believe this, believe this? You can only believe some notion about it.

Why do I feel like I've lost you? So it is impossible to believe just a perception. You can only believe notions about perceptions, and this is the cause of all the trouble in the world. But that's again another satsang. Okay. Doesn't need belief, doesn't need experience, doesn't need any chakras, doesn't need anything to happen. All of that is fine. I'm not against any spiritual practice. All of that is completely fine and has its use. But for the discovery of God or the discovery of the Self, let's for a moment presume that none of that is relevant. Let's see if there's another more direct way, is it?

So we've taken out all perception, all experience, and we've taken out any thinking or that which is the product of thinking. Now what do we have? What is the spiritual seeker supposed to seek with now? Because these are the two modes of seeking, isn't it? You're seeking knowledge; you can only seek knowledge perceptually or conceptually. But then self-knowledge, the sages have already said, cannot be either of these two. So what is this strange Atma Gyan, self-knowledge thing? How to find? So this is a classical conundrum of spirituality. With the Arjuna problem, all the seekers have gone to the sages. This is the only problem of spirituality: the discovery of God, you see, and the discovery of God with what instrument is the only problem.

And it's so funny. So maybe it's the design of Maya, this Srishti, that rarely anybody talks about this: the instrument. With what can I find God? With what? What in me has the capacity just for self-discovery or to find the truth, capital 'T' Truth? And most are doing stuff in the first two buckets, which is not going to lead to the ultimate discovery—or maybe to the ultimate discovery, but the ultimate discovery will only be this which I am going to now point out.

So she said something beautiful: in the absence of thought, what happened? And everybody's talked about this: the no mind, you see. The unborn. Master Bankei said all things are perfectly resolved in the unborn. He did not say worldly things, he did not say spiritual things; he said all things are perfectly resolved in the unborn. What is the unborn? Just the no mind. If you have the choice, as long as you think you have any choice, make the choice to let go of the stream of thought. Let go of the stream of thought. Kabir Ji said so—I'm going through the lineage, you see—Papaji said, 'Keep quiet.' Was he saying keep quiet like that? No. Listen. Keep quiet. Keep quiet. Guruji said, 'Don't identify.' Don't identify. Here we say, 'Don't believe your next thought.' Don't believe your next thought. So all the masters are pointing to this.

But what happened? Papaji said that to a seeker: that the Self will not be a new attainment. It's not something new that you're going to find. It's not a new achievement, attainment. Only the false has to be given up. So only the dust has to be swiped away. See, only the grass is what... what is this dust? It's the dust of ignorance. And the dust—this is called ignorance, conditioning, vasanas, tendencies, whatever you may want to call them. Empty of that dust, Self is attained, you see? How much time do you say it will take? He's expert. So if ignorance is gone... so the devotees then obviously ask him, 'So how do we do it if our conditioning gets in the way, if our vasanas get in the way, and you are saying to find the Self you only have to be rid of your conditioning? How do we do it?'

Now this is where the trouble starts. He said, 'It already is so.' He said, 'It already is so.' Then you may say that if it already is so, then why did you say the first part? Because you have to do it, you have to be empty of your conditioning. So you have to read the answer in a different way. Like, how do we do it? He's saying it already is so. Can you start this moment with mind? And instead of no mind, let's go have a mind. Okay, one, two, three. Mind cannot start this moment in the throes of the mind, you see? So it already is so. Now the mind will propose all this you've heard over ten, eleven years very often. It's very common mind response. It is saying all of that, you see. Now, okay, is it too much? We can take a break if it's too much. Should we keep going? What is confusing so far? Anything confusing so far? Straightforward?

You're not translating for Mama? He's presuming she won't be interested. She's listening very intently. He's getting... you ask a question. What? Any question? Any doubt about whatever? Anything. You don't have to be new to ask. Anyone have a question about this?

But that is like, I don't know, it's still... yeah, so 'no mind' is the term. It's just like saying, right? It's a term, but you can't really point to it. Yeah, even I've heard that 'no mind,' I've heard it like maybe for ten years.

So I'm pointing you to the no mind, you see now. The no mind is the mode of the discovery of the no mind. So the no mind—are you on that? Okay. So, not possible perceptually, not possible conceptually. You need to find something which is beyond perception. How do we do that? That is the question. With the mind we cannot do it. We may think and think and we may become the best thinker in the world. We may even memorize all the scriptures. You may know everything, you know, you may know like across all cultures in the world, you may become a spiritual encyclopedia, but that will not help you with the discovery of the Self. Yes?

So then the clue that all the masters have given us is that: don't identify. Now the mind will say, 'I can't do it.' Yes, it can't do it. So let it say what it is saying. Okay. Now this part is like really important. Like, what would be the opposite of no mind? But the mind or thinking is not the appearance of thoughts. The mere appearance of thoughts is not thinking. Where are you? Yes, yes. This is a very important point. Just the mere appearance of thoughts is not thinking. Because then what also many spiritual seekers are trying to do is: 'Shut up, shut up!'

It can't do, so let it say what it is saying. Okay, now this part is like really important. Like, what would be the opposite of no-mind? But the mind or thinking is not the appearance of thoughts. The mere appearance of thoughts is not thinking. Where are you? Yes, yes, this is a very important point. Just the mere appearance of thoughts is not thinking because then what also many spiritual seekers are trying to do is check, shut up, shut up. Once you hear that the mind causes all the trouble and you have to get to the no-mind, then the mind itself will play that game. Who do you feel is saying 'shut up'? The mind itself. You see, when the thief dresses up as the policeman, you see, pretending to help you catch the thief. And that is the checker guy, or the other devious one who is trying to confuse you, is trying to distract you. So you say, 'Why?' See, that is the mind itself which is posing like that, saying, 'I'm not the mind, I'm your friend, I'm helping you, I'm a spiritual guide, inner spiritual kind of.' He was helping you, and can you speak like that?

So, I'm making light of it, but actually it's a very important point. Many times we feel like the spiritual concepts that we have or the things we've heard in satsang, that is actually something other than the mind, that is our intuition. We feel that that is it, it is so, but it is not. The spiritual mind is still the spiritual mind. And the progress of the spiritual mind, the attainment of the spiritual mind, is the attainment of the spiritual seeker, which is to become a spiritual ego and not an enlightened one or a free one. It's a very, very important point which will save you maybe a lot of time, maybe a lot of trouble also. You're not trying to understand. Remember, you're not trying to do this stuff because with all of that, you will just become like Ravana. He knew everything, very great spiritual sadhaka himself, he knew all of spirituality, but he took it conceptually. He said, 'Why should I bow down? I am God, He is also God, I am also God.' Maybe he quoted some Upanishads also to make it, to prove his point.

So, with conceptual understanding, with remembering, with belief, you will only give power to your spiritual egos. With true insight, it will not progress into that. So the emptiness or the discovery of Brahman itself only happens in the intuitive mode. So what is the intuitive mode? Same as the no-mind. I know, so now the trouble is how to stay in this no-mind. So I already said that just by the mere appearance of thought does not mean mind or thinking. It also needs something else. What does it mean? And this is the master key to everything I've said so far. Thoughts appear, they are seen. Most spiritual sadhanas have to try and get attention away from thought into something else. You see, focus on your breath. What are you not doing then? Your attention is limited, so it cannot go to thought at the same time. So you feel like you can fixate your attention. Many spiritual paths will say make it one-pointed, make your attention one. What happens then? You cannot fall for the mind because your attention is limited.

So whether you're doing breath or you're doing chanting, what do you see? With full heart, no, full heart, full attention, you see. Do it really. Because when you're walking, walk; when you're chopping a vegetable, chop. You've heard all these things in spirituality: stay in the moment. All of this thing is to try and keep attention away from thought, you see, to try and come to the no-mind through not using thought. Now the problem is that I was terrible at this, so I cannot give you any advice as to how to do this part. This part of it, I was terrible at. Like, my attention used to run. I used to be terrible. One day pranayama, one day chanting, did this one, did that one. Like, I was all over the place as a spiritual seeker. So I was never able to keep my attention one-pointed at something for a very long time. So I'm not going to propose that to any of you because that would be hypocrisy. So I won't want to propose something I was not able to do. Why should I tell you what to do?

But there's a simpler way, and that simpler way, like another way to look at the simple way: surrender. But what actually happens in surrender or letting go? Let's not even say surrender because it brings elements of devotion and things into it which we don't even need at this point. They may be helpful at a later point, we will talk about that. But right now, you see, we're just looking at what we can do with thought. So can we do this? So try and do it. What all can you do with the thought? What all can we do with the thought? So I've said already that I'm not telling any of you to try and control your attention, try to be in a no-mind state, don't move. I'm not saying any of that, okay. So but there's something else you can do or not do. Can you explore with your own thoughts? What all can you do? What is attention? What is belief? How do you identify? Show me the process.

The thought comes. Thought comes: 'I want to eat a mango.' Attention means attention is already on it, otherwise perception is not possible. Attention is the only light of perception. So now you perceive the thought 'I want to eat the mango.' Now what will you do with it besides attention?

Then exactly, go in super slow motion replay. I'll try. What happens different if I see as a witness?

No, no, just regularly what happens. And everyone do this, just really slow. Any thought comes, attention has already gone to it, that's why you can report this thought is there. Now what do you do? I intend to do it. Energy, I experience I'm going towards it. 'I want to eat mango.' Now what else is going? Consciousness is going. Now how do you see this? Just this little bit of subtleties if you notice once. No, today I feel like all the spiritual thing will get resolved. Don't presume anything, just dive in. Just five, ten more minutes, the base construct of self-discovery will be clear.

This is perceived either like we're hearing it or you're seeing some message, something like this. But the message has come through my mind: 'I want to eat a mango.' With our attention, now what else will you do?

Observe the attention again. Although with thought it was very difficult to decipher in what way we perceive it.

Yeah, so if that thought comes, any other tool of observation or perception rather than attention? And these are often unexplored, so let's explore these today. Like everybody has these. We could get somebody from the street and say, 'Okay, thought comes, what happens?' You see, if they're open to looking, then they could look. So now we've said that attention is on it, that's how we can say we are perceiving thought. Now when you say observing, is it something else other than attention? What are the forces that consciousness has at its disposal? We've identified attention, what else?

So, you know, if you take the thought, take the phrase 'I want to eat a mango,' yes, and then you parse it. The first thing is 'I.' Then you have to, you know, there's a thing 'I want to eat mango.' Yes, there are four different things happening. So first thing is you have to believe that there is an 'I' and which is then you have to associate this body, this body wants, this body's 'I,' you know, then you have to buy.

So you as consciousness have the ability to give thought attention and, I like what you said, to see as true that which is just a notion. Yes, so that is the power of belief.

Yes, I am still identification and belief. I still see there is life as long as it is a thought. Yes, it started that a thought just pop up like 'I want to eat mango.' Up to that, I am not there. The only thought is there. Exactly. The moment I, without my realization, that identification goes there because...

The most common type of satsang in the world is teachers speaking to disciples, teachers speaking to disciples. Now when we say satsang like this, we say it is consciousness speaking with consciousness. So if we are going to presume that there is a person there, there is a disciple there and there is a master here, you see, then to the master you may say as a disciple, 'I can't help you, something has happened and I am already identified.' But now as consciousness speaking with consciousness, it's like God completely saying, 'This happens to me.' So which, so is this a utopian paradigm of consciousness speaking with consciousness or could it be real? Like what is far-fetched in this: master speaking to disciples or consciousness speaking with consciousness? I know to the mind obviously the second one, but what is true? Because if you are consciousness and consciousness is just reminding itself, if you come to why it happens, so if it is consciousness speaking with consciousness, then that realm of 'it just happens, I can't help you'—God is never held hostage by a minor mind.

So if for a moment we were to presume that this is so, that it is consciousness which is coming to the discovery of itself and consciousness as the alarm clock in its own dream is reminding itself, then if I were to say, 'Okay, really slow it down and say when the thought comes, I am just, I just happen to identify, I can't really help it.' When this thought comes, see if you, consciousness, are held hostage to it or do you have the power to let it go? And that is the distinction between satsang like this and other satsang where in satsang like this I am already presuming you are God. You see, I am already presuming you are God. We are starting in that mode because it is Advaita, there are no two, it is non-duality. But if we take that which is unreal to be real and allow that to create conceptual obstacles to that which is not true, then to that which is true, then we are going to keep solving this from a human perspective for the rest of our life.

Okay, if you say, 'But I'm stuck, I can't help you,' then what happens is that the mind has actually presented this proposition to us and we have bought it. You see, we as consciousness, consciousness bought it. But see that you have the power. No thought has that much power that it can force you as the consciousness that is perceiving it. What is the consciousness? The consciousness is perceiving the thought in itself, of course, but it is perceiving it. See if any thought can have that kind of power. Because I've heard this from thousands over the years, but you say, 'Don't identify, don't believe, you know, don't believe, don't take its notion to be reality.' But I can't help it, it just happened. See if this is true. Because if this is true, then I have to retire. I have wasted like 10, 11 years just sharing stuff. It was like there was a quirk here that I saw that it's, you know, like that, but actually it's not. It's not possible.

But if you tell the mind to watch the thoughts, then no thoughts come.

But that can't be for the long time. Slowly, that's why I'm saying that the quantity of the thought is not important, even what it is saying is not important. As I said, the appearance of thought is not thinking, does not get in the way of the no-mind, does not get in the way of being in the present moment, none of that, you see. But it is this other thing that we're talking about: identification, which is belief. It is same as belief. That then once you take a thought to be true, a true representative of reality—like a thought is proposing something—when we take its notion to be a true representative of what is, you see, what do we take ourselves to be? Even if you believe a harmless sounding thought like 'I want to eat a mango,' there is nothing wrong with eating, but if we take, what do we take ourselves to be in that? What do we think ourselves to be? We take ourselves to be the body-mind. We take ourselves to be the body-mind.

So just like the video game came on and the narrative in the game starts that you're James Bond and your mission is to rescue this princess from this castle or whatever—I don't know which James Bond I've watched—but that is your mission. Then if you buy the narrator, only then the game is relatable. This Maya has fans only when this narrator is valuable without.

What do we think ourselves to be? Do we take ourselves to be the body-mind? We take ourselves to be the body-mind. So just like the video game came on and the narrative in the game starts that you're James Bond and your mission is to rescue this princess from this castle or whatever—I don't know which James Bond I've watched—but that is your mission. Then, if you buy the narrator, only then the game is relatable. This Maya has fans only when this narrator is valuable. Without that, what is all of this? Is this a dream or reality? It could be very much, especially the way this conversation is going. We could be having this conversation in our dream, you see. You could wake up right now in this strange place, this strange man wearing a Black Panther t-shirt talking about changing from my own—it sounds more dream-like than so. You could wake up from this and say, 'I had the strangest dream.' But because the narrator is telling you that this is who you are, he's saying you like this, you're understanding this, or you don't like this, you're not understanding this—any of these conclusions it may be making—then you're in this mode of taking yourself to be just this body-mind. Without that, it's very... because the mind will create problems which are non-existent, let's say.

But all these masters are telling you don't identify, but I can't help it. Do you like, you know, you either do it or you let go. So there are two things. Like you said, you know, you got a thought of eating a mango. So, according to me, it's like I go eat the mango or I let go of that. That's what it just brings in peace in you. Otherwise, you're going on like you don't know where to do, what to do. So how do you go about like everything, like you know, thought process? How do you go about it? Like, yes, you either do it or you let go. Yes, is there any other way?

Yes, yes, there is another one. We'll come to that in a moment. We'll just... I'm just solving the thing, the minor problem of self-discovery, and then we will talk about the second problem of how to lead our life. So there are three main problems. What is true? See, that's the first problem. What is true? What is real? Second problem is: what is the way to know it? You see? The third problem is ethics and how do we live? What is the right way to live? How do we do things or not? So first we are coming to what is true and resolving the second one also in the same way. The teachers will tell you that these are the three main branches of philosophy. What are they? Epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. These are three main philosophical problems or questions in the world. That's basically it. Everything else is a subset of this. So what is true or real? Because why is there something instead of nothing? All of this stuff, you see. What is true knowledge, which is epistemology? How can truth be known, if it can be known? What is real is metaphysics. How can it be known is epistemology. And ethics is: how do I live? What is the right way to live? What should I do? So we look at the first one and the third one will become easier.

So you're with me so far? In terms of the thought comes, 'I want to eat a mango.' You cannot... before you do it or not do it, you have the choice to believe it or not believe it. No, you can just let it go, say, 'Yeah, I want to eat a mango.' So these are the two. Whether the doing happens will come.

Wrong way choice ten percent. When I'm only conscious I can have the choice as a power, as you will already see. I have more problems. I did it many times now to ask you another question. How do you know this? Because mind subsides. I also see that kind of size. So what are you telling me with the ninety percent, ten percent? In person is... so what is this intuition? If we put a new word in there, we haven't come to this.

So now, no mind. You see, in no mind, everybody is clear with me on the no mind stuff. Then you're letting go of the traffic. It's like the Zen masters have said: keep your front door and back door open. Thoughts are visitors; let them come and go. Don't serve them tea. That is the main mantra. Yes, yes. So the thoughts will propose options: go left or go right. You believe a thought and you call that a decision. What other decision is there? See, sometimes you can give it attention and you can give it... these are the two keys of the locker. Both have to be done, both have to be turned for the misery to come out of the lock. Without that, not possible.

So I have a metaphor for this which some of you may like, which is the ATM machine. Suppose you are in upside-down world. You wanted... there's too much peace, there's too much joy, everybody is super happy. Now you say, 'I'm too bored of this. Everybody's too good. It's too nervous. Things are too nice. I want some misery.' Then you come to misery Satsang to get misery with the master sitting over there. You want misery? All you have to do is go to the ATM machine. Yes, Anytime Misery machine, which is this. Anytime it is the mind. You say, 'Ah, mind, what do I do with the mind?' So the first is you put the ATM card in. See, what is the ATM card? Attention to Mind. You see? ATM: Attention to Mind card. First you put that. But just by putting the ATM card in, the misery will not come. What else you have to do is personal identification. Personal identification. How to give that personal identification? With our belief that this thought is true, it is relevant, it is meaningful, it is defining my construct, my reality in some true way, an accurate way. But how it is defining you is as if you are this body-mind. So what happens is you put the ATM card, Attention to Mind card, in, but you also have to put the PIN, which is Personal Identification. And any amount of misery you want is available to you. So this is how this ATM goes.

Now, without doing this in the ATM machine, can anyone show me misery? This is not possible. That's why Papaji said, my master's master, he said: to be happy you need nothing, but to be unhappy you need to have at least one thing. And that 'have one thing' means have one thought, one belief. The natural state is happiness—much more than happiness, but you can settle for happiness. Natural state is happiness. To be unhappy you need to go to the ATM machine, the mind, Anytime Misery machine. Put the attention to mind and your personal identification. No amount... you can... your unlimited bank balance, pick up as much as you like. I love these two, they're the ones who enjoyed this metaphor the most in so many years of them usually like, 'Oh, the same.' So this is the basic mechanics of the human condition. It's so funny that we have not explored this. We did not explore this, and this is the cause of all suffering and the absence.

So remember what Bhagavan says. He said in the absence of mental conditioning, the Self is apparent to you. It is not an attainment. Okay, so what happens in the absence? When you're in this what I call open and empty. Open means everything can come; you don't have a position about anything at all. Everything can come. Perception can come. Thoughts are also perceptions; they can come. And empty means you're not grasping, trying to hold on to anything. You're not gathering. You don't have a position. Everything can go. And that is this nature. Everything that comes, its very nature is to go. So open and empty. It's another way of saying no mind, but it has the instruction booklet of no mind included in the instruction. The way no mind can seem like an aspiration that we get to, open and empty is the instruction and the goal. It is helpful in that way that it not only tells you what you have to be like, but it tells you how to see. Let's just be open and empty, which means everything can appear. All the roads, all the traffic can go on the road, but you don't have to cross. Everything can come through this. Okay? Like we have these two doors, everything can come through this, but we are not to serve tea.

Now, as you are open and empty, I'm going to propose something radical to you. See if it is true or not. As you're open and empty, who you are as the pure unqualitative witnessing of all of these is apparent to you already. Don't just take my word for it. What you are as a pure witnessing of all of this is apparent to you already as you are open and empty. I can ask this in another way, which is to say: when you are open and empty in this way, are there only perceptions or is there something beyond perception? Let me go a step further. Do you recognize only perception or do you also recognize something—not a thing by definition—which is beyond perception? It's not dark empty space, because some of you may be visualizing a dark empty space. It's okay. Ask yourself: what witnesses that? Who is aware even of that? As you are open and empty, are there only perceptions? If your mind is coming in your way saying, 'Too early, I'm not ready,' all of that, don't bother with it. Let it come and go. If it's saying, 'I got enough in the first part, now we're going too far,' don't bother with it. The question is very simple. It may seem very difficult. The mind may try to confuse you at this point. Some of you will stop hearing me also at this point, so I speak louder.

As you are open and empty, do you recognize only perceptions or do you recognize something beyond perception? The clue, of course, is what witnesses all of these perceptions. Are there only perceptions? Are you making this up? It's not imagination. It doesn't have a quality, shape, size. It's that simple. The mind will have a hundred 'buts.' 'But I'm aware of this, I've been at this a long time.' But at least meet me here. Like, we'll deal with the bugs in a moment. At least let's meet here for a few moments. There you are in recognition of that which is beyond perception.

No, I can't say no, I can't say yes. I can't find anything beyond perception because everybody else is...

So don't worry, just be true to yourself. Are there only perceptions here, or no? That which is witnessing this perception, that is you. Is that you? That is now. That you that is witnessing, is that a perception? Can that be perceived? You don't perceive it, isn't it? But you don't perceive it, isn't it? Yeah, you don't perceive it. Yes. So this 'I' in what we are, you recognizing... are you using... yes, the 'I' is yes. So this simple realization, as we call what we call intuitive insight. So we are not using the head, not using that, we're not using our senses, and yet we can confirm that I am aware. I am aware even of perception. I am aware of sight. Are you seeing sight? Are you hearing sight? Getting really subtle, stay with me. You're all doing very well. Are you seeing sight? Are you hearing it? So what are you doing with it? There is like... it's just known that... no one... but is it like a conceptual bone? This is intuitive. Can neither seeing sight nor hearing sight, you're just aware of sight. So it is not some senses that you're applying on the senses. If you're going too far, don't worry, this part you can ignore it. This is really subtle stuff, right?

So awareness cannot be categorized, you know. You just are. You just are aware. It cannot be categorized as sight, taste, smelling, hearing—none of these things. Just how is this that I am aware? How is this known? Do you have to think about it? Do you have to perceive something? Isn't that what we were looking for? So it was right under our nose all the time. Not even under. This is the Self. This is the only way, no matter what tradition you come from, this is the only way you will ever meet this Self. Colorless, tasteless, shapeless, sizeless, independent of what you may be thinking. But when you identify, what happens is it's like the dust comes in your eyes. What do you take yourself to be? And you see that you are this pure witnessing. What do you take yourself to be? Slowly, I'm saying fast, first try it slowly. When you recognize that you are this pure witnessing as you are open and empty, what do you take yourself to be? Where is your boundary? Do these sensations that we call the body, do they define you now or contain you now, or are they experienced as just another set of perceptions? Yes. No boundary, no time. As you are in the... I use...

When it comes in your eyes, what do you take yourself to be? And you see that you are this pure witnessing. What do you take yourself to be? Slowly, I'm saying. Fast first, then try it slowly. When you recognize that you are this pure witnessing as you are open and empty, what do you take yourself to be? Where is your boundary? Do these sensations that we call the body, do they define you now or contain you now? Or are they experienced as just another set of perceptions? No boundary. No time. As you are in the—I use the word apparently, tell me if it's confusing—as you are in the apparency of your reality in this way, do you have age, time? Do any of these apply to you? As you're open and empty in this way, and that you are this pure witnessing is apparent to you, do you have an age or a birthday? What do you take yourself to be now without having to think? Without having to think, what do you take yourself to be just now? Anything? Nothing? Neither anything nor nothing. Just easy.

Now, what is the mind shouting? 'How can I stay like this? How can I stay like this?' How can you know? How can you notice? By going to the ATM machine? Any other way? There is no other way. So if you don't go to the ATM machine, you are like this one. What will happen is—the only trouble is—that this may seem too much. But if you have personal desire, you see, then it will pull you. The mind will pull you. If you don't have desire, what will it tempt you with? It can only tempt you with ideas. Something will become better like this, this. If you do this, you will get this. It will only tempt you with what appeals to you.

So if I'm speaking to a room of spiritual seekers and if I say, 'You do this and then you'll be fully free, fully free instantly,' what did you say then? But if I'm in a room full of Olympian runners, and I say, 'If you do this you will become like the Buddha,' they will say, 'No, no, do you have any tips on running fast?' You see? So it's not in the thing itself. So that thought which maybe attracts you will not necessarily attract her, and the same for everyone. So it's not in the content of the thought itself. Not in the content of the thought itself, but the tree of thoughts that we've nourished in the past, that's what seems to give it magnetism, you see.

So for most of you, like spiritual seekers, the spiritual thoughts will be more magnetic. Others who are more interested in something else, those thoughts will be more related. So the tree of conditioning that you've nurtured in the past, that itself, then the thought comes to add to that, that can seem compelling. I used to say this many years ago: if you got the thought 'You're a terrible mother,' but if somebody who has no kids had that thought, they would think, 'That's rather odd.' But for a mother, 'You're a terrible mother.' So the suffering is not inherent in the content of the thought; it is inherent in our believing. And what we believed in the past seems to be more attractive, and that becomes... and what happens is when we target a leaf, then it seems that the whole tree is back. Actually, you don't have to chop the whole tree. The whole tree is gone. No mind is here. Mano nasha is here. You don't have to do anything. But when you want to hold on to at least one idea, even if the idea is about God, even if the idea is about God, you will hold on to a tree of conditioning because of that idea.

Good news is that God doesn't need your ideas. So you're not giving up on God by giving up on your idea of God; you're coming to a true meeting with God. Everybody's got ideas about God. So this is self-knowledge. This is the coming to the truth. And whatever the other things we may do or not do, the self, the revealing of the self-knowledge, will only be this. You will only find yourself in this way. Now, whether it is accompanied by fireworks and other things or not, it's completely fine either way. Those are the byproducts. They are not the darshan of the truth. The byproducts are of the darshan of the truth; the byproducts are not the darshan of the truth. That's very important to understand. If there is joy coming, then there is joy coming. There is no difference. If there's a certain lightness of being, the lightness of being. But don't make the byproduct a benchmark which you will then later beat yourself up with.

So these thoughts are the main way. My attention actually isn't going anywhere in a sense because actually it's also... it doesn't have any... it's not saying this is good or bad. Just your attention is just what it's seeing without any... yeah. So at that moment, I was feeling that there's something which is not changing at all, which whichever way something may come over, that is not getting either affected by what's coming up, nor does it change or move or laugh. Now, then I'm thinking: is that attention?

You know, attention is perception. Awareness is that which is aware of perception. So if all perceptions go away—sight was to go away, hearing, taste, smell, everything vanished—you're still aware. And if they came on one by one, you would still be aware. You may be looking at this hand, but if you're just like daydreaming or something, you may not see it because your attention is not on it. And attention is a limited quantity, whereas awareness is... because all of you are also pulling at it. So attention is limited. We've done this so often, no? Yes, I know. So now imagine a tree and look at the hand. You can, but both cannot be clear. Yeah, because it's limited. You may be not able to imagine an unclear tree and see the hand clearly. So if attention was unlimited, you could imagine a fully beautiful tree in your head and perceive a hand fully and listen to three children talking at the same time. Doesn't happen. But your awareness, you never run out of awareness. You run out of this ability to perceive called attention.

Yeah, because only... that's why I say attention is like the phenomenal twin of awareness. Although it's quite quality-less, colorless, tasteless, you can't even say how there it is or not, and yet you recognize it when you run out of it. And with that which can recognize it exactly between your manifesto, the second part, the PIN number is also important. With attention to the mind, you can perceive them thinking. Thinking is attention plus PIN, attention plus belief. The appearance of thought is not thinking. Okay, clear? So no mind doesn't mean there's no mind. No mind doesn't mean there's no thought. No mind means this is the simplicity of coming to the recognition of the truth, the absence of ego, the absence of conditioning. We discussed all of that.

Now coming to the question about, 'Okay, now okay, this is apparent. I can see that—see, quote-unquote see—that in my reality I have no boundaries, I have no time, I was not born.' All of these things are apparent, you see. Now let's see if the question comes: 'So how do I live this life?' Now my submission to all of you is that where you know the truth about yourself, all guidance as to how to live your life is also available. It is from there. So I often take this example, which is that I saw on Discovery or National Geographic or something, one bird was born—they didn't show what happened to the parents—so the mother wasn't shown. It was born. It lived in a place till the season changed. It was living alone. I don't know, it was eating some worms or something. Season was changing, and it started flying in the direction where they're supposed to migrate. Alone. Not in a flock, nothing. Because it's questionable also how does the flock know? But suppose that okay, we say with the flock they would know. This alone bird doesn't know what north is, south is, nothing. Doesn't know what seasons are, doesn't know what season changing means. Just something starts.

Now that's fine. So some intelligence does that. Master takes many of these examples. This is a tree growing; it's about to fruit. Sure, it's not thinking, saying, 'Now this branch is this strong, only one kg fruit it can handle, so let me grow one kg fruit on this.' It's not thinking any of that, yet perfectly it is formed. All of this. There are millions of processes, billions of processes happening in the body. Trillions of processes happening in this apparent world around us. Electricity, magnetism, gravitation, so much stuff. You know, so much stuff. No committee has sat and done all of this. No committee, no round table of humans sat and did all of this, said, 'The gravitational constant K is... let's make it equal to this.' So it's not that. Yet there is an underlying intelligence to all of you.

Now if that intelligence can move this entire universe and everything, then isn't it just human arrogance to believe that it cannot run our life? It can run the lives of all the... and isn't it like the first element of human arrogance is the idea that the humans are the greatest ever? That is the stupidest kind of idea. So, and mixed with that is this thing, this whole notion that, 'No, God cannot run my life.' Or even if you don't believe in God, you'll say, 'But nature does all of it.' So what is nature? The same one as I'm calling God. So that intelligence which is running this universe can also run our life, is also running our life. Now your heart is beating right now. How are you doing it? You don't know how to move a finger. You don't know how to move a finger. I say move a finger. Can you do it? You say, 'Yeah, I can do it.' I say, 'How do you do it?' You see, 'Oh, some neurons fire in my brain.' So okay, fire one neuron. Can you fire a neuron? Anyone knows how to fire a neuron? Nobody knows.

So which is taking the mind's version of individual doers to be true? And then what happens is we feel like without that we are lost. We feel like open and empty without the ATM machine we are lost. But it's not true. Yesterday this child sent me some Lesson 8 of A Course in Miracles. He said, 'I haven't read this before but it's so beautiful. It's very much like satsang.' At the same time, I was reading a book, and you'll be amazed, it's called Super Traders. I was reading a book about stock market trading and in that book—I sent her a screenshot just then—this guy says, 'I have been... I was reading at that point of time in the course, A Course in Miracles,' that he sent me a message from the Course in Miracles, Lesson 8. Yeah. And as I was reading these books at almost the same time, I saw this thing where this one is writing, 'I read the Course in Miracles for the first time.' And by the way, what did he say? He said that that course taught me that what I take to be reality is an illusion.

Now what are the mathematical odds of that? They're humongous, like crazy. And these things happen so often in our lives, you see. So I call those moments God saying hello. God saying, 'Hi there, my honor.' We've come across so many incidents where the mathematical odds of them happening are so... that intelligence which is doing all of this can easily analyze. So should I do it or not? The heart will tell you. Your heart will tell you. So what am I saying? Let me make that clear. Mostly as you are open and empty, life will be effortless and easy, you see. There'll be nothing to like 90% of the things that you're... no, this you have to decide. Are you going to do this or not? No, what to do with that? Give it to your intuition. The same power that is able to recognize your reality can also guide you about these things. So some may call it the Satguru presence within, some may call it Atma, some may call it the intuition, some may call it whatever—the Holy Spirit as it's called in the Course. It doesn't matter. But there is a higher guidance, higher than the mind, which is available to us, which is allowing us to run life.

When we look back at so many things in our life, we are able to say, 'Isn't it? Ah, for some reason I just happened to be there, just there. You know, I was not planning this, but it just happened. This happened.' So what is that intelligence which is running all of that? It is the same intelligence which is beating your heart, making your kidneys function. All of that is making your brain function. Apparently all these things exist. So that same intelligence can be trusted to...

Which is allowing us to run alive. When we look back at so many things in our life, we are able to say, 'Isn't it? For some reason, I just happened to be there, just there.' You know, I was not planning this, but it just happened. This happened. So what is that intelligence which is running all of that? It is the same intelligence which is beating your heart, making your kidneys function. All of that is making your brain function. Apparently, all these things exist, so that same intelligence can be trusted to run our life much more than our human mind, which is about me and you, and wanting and taking. You know, all of these things: separation and ownership and desire and worship and duality. So I call this ego the '3D ego': duality, leadership, and desire. This is what it is made up of. So the voice of this 3D ego is not a good enough guide as our inner Satguru presence is. So it has guided us. All of us have had an experience or two at least in our lives where we found this in our diary.

You see, how to distinguish? Okay, I'm going very fast, but so far, clear? Now I know what the question will be, so I'm already answering it. How to distinguish between the mind and this intuitive guidance? That is the question that you would ask, or you may ask. And this is a fair question because the mind is a master of disguise. But I'll give you a foolproof solution. When who you are, you see, when who you are is apparent to you—the way I've shown you as your open and empty—who you are is apparent to you. Whatever flows from this instrument is intuitive. You see, you may hear it as guidance, you may not. You may just find your feet are moving somewhere. You may just find that somebody called the family you wanted to fight with them, or maybe the other way around, you say, 'Stop it, don't.' So don't feel like intuitive guidance only means it's an external position of open and empty. It's not that you have to sit like this. Inwardly you are opening; outwardly you may be firing or not. It doesn't matter how your outward expression unravels. It is up to consciousness how it unravels it. But inwardly, as you are open and empty, whatever question, whatever decision you need to make, you can hand it over to that.

You see what I'm saying? You will find that you yourself will find yourself needing guidance a lot less because you will find that life is just so gracious. It is taking care of everything so beautifully, especially if I don't have an opinion about where it should go. This is the first thing we spoke about today. If I don't have an opinion about where it should go, life cannot oppress me. It's only when I do have an opinion, when I say, 'It should be like this,' then I know better, my mind knows better than God's will—you invite suffering. So ego is another name for this resistance. I know I have packed in a lot of stuff in a quick conversation, but I feel like we should make a recording available also of this conversation because we've captured most of what is shared in Satsang.

So what is true? That which is the unchanging reality. How can it be known? I've shown you. How to live? In the same way where you find your unchanging reality, where you find the truth about yourself, you also find the truth about how to live, what to do, what not to do. So you don't have to compartmentalize any spiritual secrecy. No, no, for practical purposes I go to the mind, but for spirituality I go to the heart. You don't need to live in compartments like this, you see? Because how would you figure? How would you figure moment to moment, you know? So just try it out. See that living in the intelligence of the heart is being empty, and you can trust this one. Because I'm a householder. You saw one of my children. I have work, so work happens. I do work on the stock market, so there's trading happening. So there's all of this happening. So don't feel like, 'Oh, what would he know? He doesn't have my manager to deal with,' you know, this kind of stuff. So all of life can unfold from the heart and you just have to allow it. You just have to experiment with it. Try it. I'm happy to hear reports.

What is the truth? What is self-realization, self-discovery? What is the only way to know it, no matter what tradition you may be following? And then how should life unfold? Which actually, the third question should not be relevant after the first two come, because once you see that you are not this body-mind, then it loses a lot of its power. But I've seen that it still retains a lot of it; it pushes a lot of buttons because the identification as the body-mind still may be there. So it usually uses this instead. So what we're doing is all things are perfectly resolved in the unborn. All things are perfectly resolved. So as far as the self-resolution is needed, he was obviously talking about the manifest as well. So you can take that guarantee if mind is not enough. This one sounds like one of my many retirements.

Remember that you don't have to resolve it in your head, because this what I've shared with you today you will not be able to fathom in your head. It has to be met in the heart. It has to be deeper than the head. So the mind is poking about, 'What about this? But they say like that.' You're not becoming the most spiritual person in the world. Enlightenment is not to become the most spiritual person in the world. So you're not here to garner spiritual knowledge. We have a Vedanta library with hundreds of books if you want to garner spiritual knowledge. But you're here to taste the fruit. What is that of the Vedanta? You can put a perspective on it and you can even have... yeah. So there are teachers who are sharing from Vedanta, which means what is the Vedanta? The Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras, and the Bhagavad Gita. These three main texts make something called the Vedanta, you know? Because there are so many scriptures, you can put your own perspective on it and share in whichever way that you want. There are even places where you can see that Shankara is forcing the words of a particular Upanishad and sharing it in one way, and the same way other teachers can force the words into it and share it. It is said that they were thousands, but now they are 108, or 1008 or something, which... no, we know some of the popular ones.

Now what we are sharing, these sages have already shared in some way. Now it's called Vedanta because 'anta' means the end of something. So at the end of the Vedas were these kind of like almost obscure sort of scriptures called the Upanishads. The meaning of the Upanishads was to say that this is shared in secret. Upanishad means to sit close. So they're not for everyone. They have to be shared in secret because the kind of stuff that is talked about, everyone is not understanding. So this was it. Then there was like a teacher's training manual called the Brahma Sutras, which nobody can understand because everything in Vedanta is covered in the Brahma Sutras in small aphorisms. So if you read that and if you don't have like either a history of reading a lot of Vedanta or being in Satsang like this, you will not get it, like what is being said. So that is the Brahma Sutras, mainly meant as pointers for teachers themselves.

Then there is the Bhagavad Gita, which Bhagavan, Lord, had mercy on everyone and said, 'Hey, the Upanishads are too crazy for everyone to handle, so let me distill it into a simpler way and provide guidance to everyone as the Bhagavad Gita.' So that is... you will find something appealing over there to find. And because the world is so attached to doership, that's why the Bhagavad Gita is often misunderstood to be just a manual about Karma Yoga. But it's not, you see? That became very popular. Now just keep doing your action, then don't worry about the fruit of the action. Don't worry about how... there's just an element in the Bhagavad Gita which appeals to this branch. But because the world is so attached to doership, then it's like an injustice to the Bhagavad Gita to say that it's only about this. In fact, there are many, many... it's called Atma Vidya. It is that universal knowledge which you can verify with your intuition.

And he defined a beautiful method called Neti Neti, which means that even the Vedantic approach is the approach of negation, which we may attach more to the Zen tradition. Nothing like that. Of course, Neti Neti is very popular in the Vedantic tradition also. But even the other approach which is shared in the Vedanta is very, very much like this: it is replacing the dominant concept with a broader concept and then chopping that other concept as well, leaving you in that open and empty state. So I have often used this example—I should find some more examples—but it is said somewhere that you consider yourself to be having two arms and two legs. No, actually you have millions of arms. That is your reality. So what happens there? Because it comes from the scripture, you say, 'Ah, this is the voice of the truth.' So you follow that and say, 'I'm not just this. In my reality, I have millions of arms.' Then later, as you continue reading, it says, 'Arms and legs, you are not that. You are beyond all quality.' So what happened? It replaced a strongly held belief that 'I am the body' with a broader belief or a newer business which is a little more palatable, you see? A little more palatable, because formless is not palatable to the mind at all. So a little more palatable and vast and everywhere like that. And then, 'Vast everywhere, all those are nothing to you. All those are nothing to you. In your reality, none of this applies.' Because to take the leap from first to the last is very difficult.

So I often used to say that if I said, 'Sorry Rajesh, I know someone who could be your best friend. She's so cool, you'll love her, you'll get along so well with her. She could be your best friend.' Or you say, 'Who could be your best friend? I feel like she will get along with her so well, she's super cool, has similar interests.' Then what will you say? 'Sure, show me.' What can you say? Then today's world is like, 'At least can we get on Zoom together?' Like, 'No, no Zoom.' 'Because you can have a photo?' 'No, no photo.' 'Can I actually talk to her on the phone?' 'No, you can't talk. She doesn't speak.' What are you telling me? So if I tell you God is like that same thing—formless—that's what we started Satsang with, beyond perception. But because we are so used to name and form, we feel like that kind of God is unapproachable to us. You would rather have a God who is a secretary. You say, 'Oh, my work is not going well, please God,' you know, 'Oh, my girlfriend is fighting a lot,' you know. So we're looking for a God who serves us rather than a God who is the unchanging reality of ourselves.

So the leap of going from that world of form and relating only with form to going to the formless seems so large that we need to provide some provisional thing. And in most traditions, the guru forms that provisional step. The guru forms the provisional step. You bow down to the body, the form of the guru. You can relate to the form of the guru. But all the gurus are constantly saying that, 'I'm only provisionally here. I'm just pointing you to that unchanging reality. My true presence is in your heart itself.' But the leap for going from relating with form to formless seems too much. And that is why, at least in my experience, I've only found those who have a guru to have taken that leap. Because I've seen, of course, in consciousness all things are possible, but I would say better odds are in having a guru because it forms the step. To go from form to formless is next to impossible. That's why you will see that even in traditions which believe in a formless reality, you see, they will have like the Christians or the Muslims, they will have pictures of Mecca or words from the Holy Quran, you know, the beautiful things they'll put up. These are home reminders in form to remind them of the formless. Same way in the church, you will have a cross, you will have Christ, you have Mother Mary. You will have images of forms which will then take you to the formless reality. So in the human condition, it's very rare to take the leap from... it's like God is formless, God is everywhere. She's really happy that's where...

Whether it is the Christians or the Muslims, you will see they will have pictures of Makkah or words from the holy Quran, you know, the beautiful things they'll put up. This is home reminders in form to remind them of the formless. Same way in the church, you will have a cross, you will have Christ, you have Mother Mary. You will have images of forms which will then take you to the formless reality. So in the human condition, it is very rare to take the leap from... it's like God is formless, God is everywhere. She's really happy, that's where the whole experience chasing comes. Arjuna is saying, 'Show me the true,' like a beautiful form. There our truth comes.

So in the Vedas, you say they go from the most gross to the most subtle? So like the most gross and then to like individual, maybe to you have a thousand arms?

Subtle. It's not as straight a line as that, no. In the sense, there are some parts even in the beginning of the Vedas which are very beautiful and pointing to like an ultimate reality, but predominantly it has a lot to do with how to do the pujas, how to live life, how to do a lot of things. So you could say that generally speaking. So that's where the end, you're just like anybody who comes, 'Come to me, I take refuge.' In Swami Chinmayananda, there's words about it. It is like somebody in his tradition told him, 'Why are you sharing so openly? You're not supposed to share this openly.' That it's all okay. Those who are not ready to hear, they fall asleep. Try to be like... Bhakti is so beautiful.

So what is the end goal then? The goal is to be empty of story, open and empty. The provisional goal many times is to change the central protagonist of the story because, like I said many times, to drop the whole story is very difficult. So it is helpful sometimes to say, oh, you know, it is said about Mirabai that everything she would say is Krishna. What happened with Krishna? Krishna did this and Krishna... everything was Krishna, Krishna.

What is the other thing I said in satsang? So I was saying to another one also who was finding... I felt like was resisting and finding a lot of difficulty in satsang, no, because he was finding it impossible to squeeze satsang into his like narrative about his life and all of that. So I said to him, replace the central character in your story and replace it with any God, Guru, anything that you're devoted to, but don't be obsessed with 'me'. And that would be a good provisional step to tell you. In fact, in one of his talks, he said that if you feel you're more inclined towards Advaita Vedanta, my whole job is to confuse you. Because if I don't confuse you, then you'll start relying on your knowledgeability. In fact, all of satsang today has been about that.

But then I can see now, Father, I'm taking a position which I'm also taking right now. At least the awareness comes soon, that's the position.

Okay, I want to give you this tip which is, I feel, helpful for everyone. Which is that if you are recognizing that open and empty brings you into your intuitive insight, and that intuitive insight contains Atma Gyan as well as any guidance you may apparently need for the running of this life, so the dominance is changing from the head to the heart. Which is poetically many people said, 'What is satsang? Going from head to heart.' I felt like it was just a romantic notion, very silly, but I didn't realize it's that clear then. Now, to go from head to heart, whose report will we take, you see, as a guide in this process?

So when we say, 'This is something that happens to me,' you see, and I ask, 'How do you know?' many of you say that, 'I notice it.' But it is not true. It is the thief distracting you in the garb of the policeman. Your problem right now is this: the same guy. So I'm using all these metaphors because metaphors are easily understood. And you're catching a thief, running after a thief, you see. Many times the thief will pick up a stone and throw it and try to make some noise in another direction, so you change your direction. So on this spiritual... it's a non-path path. So you have to be very, very careful about what guidance you are taking along the spiritual path. And many times you're just taking your mind.

What many of you are doing... are you listening to satsang beautifully? I'm an optimist, so listen to satsang beautifully. You go back down wherever you stay, wherever, and there you are trying to distill what you heard with your mind. And then you go with mental conclusions about what your gaps are, what your blind spots are, what you need to work on, what you need to do more of, all of these things. And if you go to the thief about its address, what do you think it is going to tell you? So this question is very important: How do you know? How do you know? I know I've irritated all of you. 'How do I know? I don't know.' I know I've irritated all of you a lot with this question over the last couple of weeks, but I feel like this question is now central to my pointings as well. How do you know? Because many times I hear reports from you about you, you see, and I can just smell that you are taking a mind report to be true about you. Why will the thief give up its address that easily?