There Is No Fear of Contradiction Here - 24th October 2018

Okay, but then we go on. Suppose you bought the presumption it is an uncomfortable feeling. You're suggesting to... because it automatically gets bought and then it... I don't know why it gets caught.

What? Yeah, you know, when you buy it and... okay, look again, you know? Just like look and maybe kind of... it's more like scientists, you know, like examining. Okay, what is that like? Open mind. So that the judgment is also there because that's what we've learned in a way. It's like you're just bringing us back again to kind of ease of it. The judgment is quite radically resting on what? But know what my rights have in a way. We said that I just found myself more and more without conclusions. And actually, once he's done, when you look at that statement, it feels very... yeah. See, without conclusions, could we see what all has been a conclusion? Actually, we start looking right that actually have a no waiting. Are you looking at all of this and say it would be really no good, bad, this way, that way? Because once we take a position about what something is, then already there is an impulse to pick up opposition with regards to them. If we say 'this is this,' then what should my posture be with regards to that? I mean, that possibly limit ourselves from all there is to just then easy. So I know it can sound very far out at times or to that it or something like that, but actually it is not impossible to most feel liver unlivable life. You see, I'm saying those three because I don't want you to start judging yourself as how much percent. So it is possible even with these sensations, emotions, feelings, these seemingly out there events, the expressions appearing out of this very body, to leave all of this under is... is the possibility which I'm inviting all of you. Because the minute we defined something and say 'this is what this is,' even the truth, then the truth is not the truth anymore. Because the truth then is not all-inclusive. If it can be defined in opposition to something which is false, then how can it be all there is? And the thing is that the minute we define something, we inadvertently almost define ourselves. Because when we say something is not nice, then who is it not nice for? It couldn't be then talking about God or all there is ourselves like... so like this game that we play sometime. We can say instead of saying 'I,' say 'God did you like God had this unpleasant feeling.' This is that one consciousness, one being. Any of these games and experiments with there's a disk in some way, childish almost to try them. You try playing with it for a bit. You see that this identity here is you, and you change the levels of that identity. Change it from the usual labels. You'll find we've been expecting. Instead of anger, I say potato. [Music] And then when that becomes too jaded, that labels, and we say into something else. It sound like, 'What is this? Like 40 CC?' But is really the art of not a lot. But all of our conditions are based on the term you use: 'This is like this. I know this to be this way.' And it completely apply to everything coming out of this also about it, you see? In the rest, this is not the gospel truth being spoken because it completely applies even to this. Even this explanation does not hold up to any true standard of truth. And there is no fear of contradiction. ABC, XYZ, left, right, left, right. So this is a good example. The example that come right now and I know what that is, it's jamming. It is so in a way when we come to this not home, a lot of it is this house of cardsism. The minute we start saying we know what is happening to us... know what is happening to us. If anyone actually knew what is happening to them, they would have figured it out by now. You see, all of the best response to that is that we don't know. We have these imagery that keeps coming up. So-called memory says this is what it was, you know? All of this play of sensations, perceptions. And for the mind, it is of all a bit too much. Even your current sensational view, whatever you're perceiving sensationally, perceptually, is too much for the mind to profile. So what do... what does it say about this right now? Your present experience. Say something that the mind can say about this present experience. Is that all there is in your present experience? Is that all? So there's been in the belly of vasana, you see? Both are kind of... yeah. But is there something you can say which really accurately defined all of this in his job? Sorry to... well, exactly, that's what I'm saying. So because you cannot capture it, you see? You cannot capture in a conceptual way, even though in the present experience in a way. So imagine how we try to capture what happened in the past, what is... what should happen in the future. Very tiny device. Just like we cannot encapsulate even the phenomenal aspect of this experience. Imagine if I said that describe both the phenomenal and the non-phenomenal present experience now. Like you say that about it, but there is nothing to scale that is about one hit. Nothing. What does that tell you about it? There is nothing to say about it. It cannot become salutely. So at best, the mind makes a game attempt to capture an aspect before a phenomenal experience. But gonna make me say it, okay, but included it. Don't even exclude the space. Don't even exclude the space in which all of this appearance will happen. Then don't even exclude the witnessing this. Then let me start to include everything and you see that this including everything is actually naturally present here now. It's including everything. It's just I could say, 'Okay, good. Everybody that you see, don't label them as... don't make those tables you put everyone and don't have a service also know of this.' Then you say, 'Okay, but why relieve the objects are supposed non-living things?' So the rabbit was the seating, the couch, my computer. Include everything. Then you say, 'Okay, what about all of this?' They say, 'Okay, include all the sensations, perceptions, area feelings, so-called inwardly. Include that also.' They say, 'Okay, then include this space in which they seem to happen and the space in which this space seems to appear.' Because this space is also an object of perception which appears within your inner space, to use the term. At this space, God, the pier, no see? But that space in which this appears, it's always there. So through that also and say, 'Okay, now I included everything. Everything.' You say, 'Okay, but what about the fourth dimension of time? Include everything. What happened previously, whatever memory has in store, and whatever our ideas of future you might have. Include that also.' Say, 'What you left out? Something very important. We left out that which witnesses all of this.' So I include that for now. After all of these terms to come to this sort of place, you see what this was already just actually. Then I didn't have to go step one, step two, step three, step four. Although a useful exercise, especially the last one, which is what I call including the... inviting the elephant to the truth, the non-phenomenal aspect of yourselves. But we don't really... I really have to go in that way. It is just naturally like that always.

It is very important. We left out that which witnesses all of this, so I include that for now. After all of these terms to come to this sort of place, you see, what this was already just actually, then I didn't have to go step one, step two, step three. First, although a useful exercise, especially the last one, which is what I call including the—inviting the elephant to the truth, the non-phenomenal aspect of yourselves. But we don't really, I don't really have to go in that way. It is just naturally like that, always naturally included with this moment. There is no separation, no division, no data, no novelty actually needed here.

Can I go as far as to say that no duality can actually ever be experienced? At best, it is a seeming experience. It can't. You, as Consciousness, want to play with you as Consciousness. You want to play with that experience. And without that wanting this play, it is completely apparent to you that there is no duality. Advaita is your natural position, and duality is your playtime. And this is actually, in a way, very radical and very simple at the same time. Because it is very radical because it goes contra to many things that we've heard in spirituality. Like many times in spirituality, it is this play: Advaita is the truth, it is unchanging, but you have to do this, this, and this to get to that. But what you're being introduced to now is: Okay, what is apparent to you now? Is this world experience that you are having, is there duality actually here? Or is what we call Advaita, non-duality, actually your natural way?

So one experiment also could be then, other than saying even God—because there can be a sense of identity even around the name Ram—you can say a space. It is not accurate because even space you are not, but it is more spacious than presuming yourself to be a limited, a given object. So what is happening to space in use? Your experience will know spaciousness actually. Like even whatever the sensation might be, you cannot deny that it occurs in this space of your existence. That is just natural for most of us. Now, our opinions are wrong, so to speak, of that space. And we travel to see that, then what is the other pole?

To represent that space in which all of these appearances are coming and going is actually better than representing that mythical entity. Pretty strange, like this. It's just like, it's kind of blank, you know? There's just no way when I can kind of make a concept of how it's space-like, you know? I don't know.

That moves. Then it's confronted with a new sort of sharing. You have to keep it fresh. The mind has made positions about everything that is here. They won't succumb within a day or two. It will have some smart repartee using this which is fresh now. So it is like, by tomorrow... so it's great for it to be out of moves. I'm saying that if you were to represent yourselves as this space of the ring in our perceptions, that would be a more accurate representation than the 'me'. The 'me' is more unbelievable actually, more ludicrous than even this so-called mythical creature. Like saying the Loch Ness Monster. He's responding with, 'Some have seen intuition, there have been some sightings.' Or what about them? But is that not mind? What's more natural? Bigfoot is also on this list. Some people who seem like credible... that's it. Have you seen Bigfoot? Meaning, nobody has ever seen the 'me'.

No. Yes. Father, is it feasible to contemplate or inquire while absorbed in activity? Not believing a next thought seems fine when I'm idle, but ninety percent of the time I have something to do.

When you're actually absorbed in activities, is no thought there? Yeah, yeah. Absorbed in activity, you might feel like you're constantly thinking, but it's not like that. It's that things are so flowing. That is what absorption is. At least when I hear the term 'absorbed in activity', the work could be happening. I mean, these words are being written, I'm talking. So what I'm saying is all these things can also happen just like the breath is functioning, your heart is beating, hearing is happening, the digestion of food is going on. All these complex activities are happening, but you feel like, 'Okay, but my email... God cannot say, God cannot be.' So to be absorbed in activity, which is to just be with whatever is appearing in that moment, or even if it is to be with this content of what is appearing in that moment, needs no further practice or nothing that way.

The Zen master says, 'Before enlightenment, chopping wood, fetching water; after enlightenment, chopping wood, fetching water.' In fact, there is a beautiful story in the life of Dogen where, when he was just starting out with the truth recognition, he met this kitchen monk who was in charge of the kitchen in the monastery. And this one was a very senior monk. So he told him, 'How is it that you can do this for so long? Why do you spend your time on these kind of activities like cooking? Shouldn't you be meditating or swallowing your koan or something like that? Shouldn't you be practicing Zen?' And this old monk said, 'You know nothing about what you're speaking. It's just things that you learned.' So in fact, it was very, very accomplished monks in most of these monasteries who were given charge of activity. To be absorbed in activity was not to be absorbed in the mind.

Oh, this is the fallacy. The fallacy is that if I'm absorbed in activity, I must be using my mind concept, this limited identification. But all of this activity is happening within you. All of this activity—the breeze is flowing within you, the trees are fluttering within you. You take a part of this broad appearance and made that 'your' activity. We have that map which is this boundary, the body boundary. And I keep asking this question: What is it that you are inside this hand which you are not in the space around it? What are you inside this hand which is not in the space around it? Yeah, there's a very primal belief sort of thing, of course, that 'I must be in this hand because only this hand moves with me.' But actually, the space is as much in you as the hand is in you. And you are as much inside the hand as you are in the space. It is just this learnt condition: 'I have the body.' And then when we say 'I am absorbed in activity,' we are talking about just the activity of this body.

Actually, the entire waking state is your activity. All appearances are you, actually. You are the light of this occurrence. All of these sensations are your sensations. Just like the sensational aspect of action. And we know just the other thing what we say, 'my sensation, that other sensation.' There is also a fallacy there. You look at that rubber glove, rubber hand experiment, and the amputee. What is it? Thank you for... what is the term? The phantom limb syndrome. You see, we also looked at other things. We still use the term so clear, 'Yes, this is the sound coming from the computer.' But actually, in the same way, a different sound is coming from the computer. So we don't really know. So all we can say is that all the content of my experience is experienced within the space of my experiencing.

What truly is? If you don't want to say it is just all just this, at least we cannot... we can say that, 'I admit I don't know what truly is.' And we become confusion-less about it. That is enough. The coming to these so-called true conclusions is not a requirement. Like you cannot really say that a body is sitting in front of you and that one has a mouth and these sounds are coming from there. A simple thing is this could be your imagination, your dream. So you don't even have to say this is a dream or Maya or this illusion. You don't have to say these things. At least I admit that we can't be certain what this was. And we are scared of losing that certainty because we feel like it is based on at least these certainties of the hands and feels that I am able to live my life. This is the great fear of death in a way.

How moderns are using... very simple actually. I'm saying for such a long time we lived on the basis of these certainties. You're clearly in for a bit of an experiment like this. No calling so late twenties for a while, and I'm holding my hand for a while. The fear comes, a wobbly feeling. But it's an invitation that not everyone takes. The invitation to allow ourselves to be wobbly, to allow yourself to just play for a moment. I said the other day, when I say one percent of your life so far... you spent a hundred percent of your life so far in these certainties. Remain more and more. Give me one percent. One percent of the time you spend in certainties, spend on not being certain about anything. What is the worst that could happen? But what happens for most of us is that we're looking for more and more certainty in the system. At least our sword in their hand itself. That self which can be captured in any term, including 'Self' or any idea that you might have about yourself, is not the Self.

Followers, how to remain uncertain for a while? You want one conversation and you make that the one thing I need to be certain about, otherwise it's too much. You see, when I say like that, then I won't use 'let it all go,' but don't be too certain about apples. You're weaning yourself away from these positions. And then these questions always sound strange to you. Someone comes and says, 'So what are you doing with your life right now?' 'I don't know.' 'How do you do anything?' As you start losing your certainty, I'm also surprised many times. Oh, where did that come from? This is my guru dakshina: Give me everything that you know, all that you feel right now. Throw it in the bubble. Hello. So good. Works these, especially using this which is here.

Should have cut over. I mean, having parallels are turning in the chat. All the story, all this, 'I went to Peru not for the retreat, for listening parts.' It's all made up mountains. I know you're going to leave all this today. It is this today, tomorrow maybe some other story. Yesterday was another story. Although it is my complete thing that this Grace takes away this oppressive mind and you bit and please me. All are used, not what... I don't have the feeling that all of us, especially those working online, constantly be distracted by these stories, all these tactics, all this smartness, all this, all these positions around my manager. There's one about that one, like this one, like that. They're not the way to your peace. The mind wants to own everything. You see, he'll come out with tactics and say, 'Okay, if I say like that, then I'll get him to dance to my tunes. If I pick up this posture, then the world will start to work in my harmony, love me, respect me.' Too much holding on to this meaning. He's not in service to you. Spirituality is not so that one day you can become some superman enlightened cat.

Thank you all so much for being in satsang today. Satguru Sri Mooji Baba Ki Jai. Ananta Ki Jai.