We Are Returning to That Innocence, Where None of These Labels Are So Important – 4th March 2022

Okay. Okay, number one: I will not look for the Self as if it is an object that can be seen. Can you hear me? So that can, can you all hear her very well? And not look for the Self as if it is an object that can be seen.

You can pause on this for a bit. So this is clear to everyone who's here for the first time? Yeah? So if it's not clear, just raise your hand. Raise your physical hand. Not clear? Very good, thank you. I see one hand, so we'll explain it a bit. Okay. The recognition of the search for the Self is a unique sort of endeavor. It is not like the search or the looking for anything else. So if I lost my hand, I would have to go looking for my hand in an objective way, and I would know that I found my hand because I would recognize the attributes of hand. So I would see fingers, I would see a particular shape, and then I would say that, 'Ah, this is my hand.' Now many spiritual seekers are looking for the Self in that way, you see? But the Self is not an objective discovery. You cannot find yourself as an experience, as a phenomenon, you see? Because what does Vedanta tell us? The number one rule of Vedanta is that everything that comes and goes is not real. Everything that changes is not real. And every perception, every phenomenal experience we have, is changeful. Yes?

So the mind trick is to convince the spiritual seeker that the search for the Self is like any other search, and you must find it till you come across an experience which is so beautiful, which is so full of phenomenal something, that that is the end of all seeking. Just like if you thought that you lost your hand, then you come across it and you see that, 'Ah, here it is, I have found it.' So you cannot look for the Self in that way. And that is an important deal for us to make, because I may keep pointing you to the non-phenomenal experience, but you may keep looking for some phenomena instead, and therefore our conversation could be lifetimes long. So it's really very important to assimilate this point: that you must stop looking for the Self as if it is going to be an objective experience. Yes?

So we make this deal, isn't it? And I know what, like we were revising it and I realized that we're sounding a bit like, 'I pledge to,' you know, 'I take the pledge.' Henceforth we will... it's not that serious. We're not going to become cultish about it. We are just saying that these are some follies, these are some errors we make on the search for the Self. And my making these deals is lighthearted; it's just pointers which we are putting across in a lighthearted way. But they are explosive pointers, because if you really follow them, then you cannot waste time actually. Your journey is no longer a journey. You're forced to look at where you already are, and you find that you already are at your destination. So the first deal is this one: that you are not going to search for the Self as if it is an object. Simple enough? Clear? Anyone who still has a question about this, please raise your hand.

And if you like, maybe just to say something on... seemingly like kind of got lost in some thoughts for a bit, then there may come this like, 'Oh,' that you're trying to get out of something or to go back, but then that's also a thought.

Yes, yes. So for a while it might, for a moment or so, it feels like something, and then it's like, 'Uh, but if I know...' So this is where these pointers... and yes, I'm happy to wear that report. So that is just the first pointer, which itself will take off most of your journey on the spiritual path. It will cut off most of the paths in the spiritual path. Okay, what is the next one?

I will not accept something as reality just because it feels real. Maya is designed to seem real. That which is aware of all perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and sensations is your unchanging reality.

I will not accept something as reality just because it feels real. Maya is designed to seem real. That which is aware of all perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and sensations is your unchanging reality. So many times we have beautiful conversations, we may go through the inquiry together, and I hear this report that, 'But Ananta, it still feels so real.' And if you keep accepting that which just feels real as if it is real... and when we say 'feels,' we actually mean 'seems.' So Maya, or the realm of illusion, the realm of the changing, is designed by consciousness in a way that it has juice, it has a bite, it can feel real, it can seem real. So if we keep accepting something as reality just because it feels or seems real, then we are still going to be stuck in the unreal, isn't it?

So what then should we look for when we are looking for reality? That is the whole point of satsang, isn't it? To let go of accepting the false as if it is real and to come to reality, which is beyond accepting or rejecting. So this is the deal. This is the deal. Because if you keep reverting back to the notion that, 'Oh, this sensation feels so real,' or 'That relationship seems so real,' or 'Those words, they feel so real,' then actually we are letting go of reality and just because something seems or feels real, we say, 'Okay, true. Okay, true.' So is there some more clarity required on this pointer, or is it clear? How many feel it's difficult? Difficult? One, two, three, four, six, seven, eight.

Could I say very uncomfortable? Because I'm not very comfortable feeling not very nice. Feels uncomfortable.

Yeah, it's a feeling again. But that one's not... if something goes... yeah, that feels real. See, that feels real. So can we accept firstly that it is meant to feel real, isn't it? Let's accept firstly that the design of Maya, the design of the worldly play or the worldly realm, is designed to feel real. Yes? And just because it does that doesn't mean it actually is. That much we can accept. Then the pointer is: okay, now if this is not real although it feels real, then what is? Clear? And the sages have told us often that that which witnesses, that which is aware of perception and all the perceptions of sensation, of objective visualization, imagination, memory, pain, pleasure—all of these are just perceptions. But that which is aware of this perception, that is the unchanging reality.

So there could be moments, and nothing... none of these deals are meant to make you feel guilty at any point. They're just pointers. So what is the attitude we have to take? Something feels like, 'Oh, what's happening to me? It is like this, like this.' We can go through that. When it's too much, we just go through that anyway. But the minute we spot it, 'Oh, but this is changing, but this is still seen,' you see? What is my reality? To come to the insight about your reality. Time, there is space enough to check. That is the deal. It is not so that you can say, 'Oh, I am a worthy seeker,' or 'I am unworthy,' or 'I am not good enough.' It is not for any of that. It is just to remind ourselves that if it is in the realm of just seeming or feeling real, it doesn't automatically make it real.

See, the masters have told us what reality is, have shown us how to look for that which is here. So to come back to that insight which is constantly being shared with you in satsang, that is the point of this pointer. Clear? Otherwise, if you very easily, even after being in satsang for a long time, continue to say, 'Oh, but it just feels so real,' you know, I will say, but just because it feels so real, how long will we give it the truth value and say, 'Yes, yes'? Because all of this design is meant to feel real. So don't expect that Maya is going to change its colors and stop feeling real. Maybe this is a good pointer as well. Maybe we are just waiting for a time where all this stuff will just become lifeless and not intricate enough, you know, or just like... ah, yes, it's designed to feel real, you see? And God has designed it, consciousness has designed it. So don't expect that it will change in its ways. It is going to continue to play its design very well. So don't expect that to change. You change. Let your attitude change. Become more open, become more empty, and then you will see the unreality of this.

This resonates quite a lot, just to say. Yeah, it's from here, not expecting out here.

Yes, exactly. It's not expecting the world or the realm of perception to change. But how much openness, how much emptiness are we meeting this with moment to moment? And what is openness? What is emptiness? What is openness? Openness means everything is allowed to come. Everything is allowed to come. We are not judging, predicting, or picking, saying, 'Only this should come' or this. And empty: not holding on to anything that comes, you see? It is allowed to go. Everything that comes also goes. So to be open to anything to come at all realms, at all layers of our existence, that is to be open. And to be empty is to not get attached, not hold on to any perception, to allow it to go as well. Yes, exactly. To not... the way to hold on is to draw a conclusion, is to believe an idea that 'I need this' or 'I don't need this.' So to remain empty of interpretation, to be empty of judgment, to be empty of conclusions, is to remain open.

Okay, what's the third deal?

Um, sorry, just to say, I think I have to go. Is it 15 minutes already? Yes, definitely. Thank you very much. Have a good day at work. Thank you.

I will not go with the mind's version of what is appearing. I will see for myself from a place of pure perception. I will meet everything fresh without interpretation.

Thank you. Let's try this. Let's try this. Look around you. Don't force anything at all. Just look around you. Don't be shy. Look around. Notice the tendency of your mind to label, to make sense out of things, to give you a story. Slowly, but all the intelligence that you need in a way, quote-unquote 'need,' is already inherent in the perception. You don't need that additional layer of interpretation. And the beauty of this is that there is no distinction between coming to the insight through neti-neti—'It is not this, not this'—consciousness, and coming to the insight through remaining in pure perception. Because what you are, it is inherently apparent to you even when you are just perceiving and not getting lost in your interpretations. And we have done this experiment a few times where I've taken you all through the neti-neti and come to the discovery of what you are, and this allowing you to remain in pure perception, which is a full openness, a full acceptance. And in both cases, it is fully apparent who you are.

So how is this? How is this feeling? But you know what I mean. How is it intuitively? How is this intuitive to remain just with pure perception? Sometimes it feels like... you use the word... especially when, especially when I look at someone that I'm closer with, but not when I look at you.

And come to the discovery of what you are, and this allowing you to remain in pure perception, which is a full openness of full acceptance. And in both cases, it is fully apparent who you are. So, how is this? How is this husband feeling? But you know what I mean. How is it intuitively? How is this intuitive to remain just with pure perception? Sometimes it feels like you use the word, especially when I look at someone that I'm closer with, but not when I look at you. It doesn't love me. The arising of a perception has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Allow yourself to perceive fully whatever appears. Don't even buy the interpretation that this is fear, that this is constriction, that this should not come. Whatever comes, don't label it as much as possible, as much as possible, as naturally as possible. That's important to say. It's not forcibly, just naturally, right? As much openness, as much pure perception without having to say, 'Ah, this is this, this is that.' Now it may feel a bit wobbly or strange for a bit because you cannot insert anything into a narrative. Then you may spend half the day like this and the mind will come and say, 'But what did you do?' And you can't put it in an analytic. At best, maybe you can say, 'I just spent the whole day open' or something like that. That is the only thing you will miss out on, which is the ability to not insert this—which is impossible to put in your story anyway—into your make-believe stories. Just by remaining in pure perception, just open and empty, allowing yourself to perceive just naturally. And the functioning of life will go on. Which is glass doesn't mean that I need the label to first say, 'Oh, I can drink,' which is another label from this glass to be able to drink from the glass. Just like an infant is empty of labels and yet these natural functions can continue to happen. So we are returning to that innocence, where none of these labels are so important.

So we are not to go with the mind's versions of what is. The mind is constantly telling you a story. Even right now it may be saying, 'Yes, this is important, I have to listen to this carefully,' or 'I've heard this last time, it's not so important, it doesn't work for me, it's too difficult,' or 'Oh, this is very easy.' And you can't predict what's going to come. The mind will just present something to you and many times you just end up buying into this idea. But it could have presented the opposite idea, which you may have bought as willingly as the first one. So in the mind's representation, there is no truth to be found; there are only stories. So meet what is fully, openly, without narration, without storification, without subtitles. So if you have to put it in a narrative, like 'fear comes' is a narrative, instead of that you can replace the narrative with 'Oh, fear is getting released,' because that is more actually accurate. But best is not to say, not to go with the conceptual representation of what is happening. Not to go with a version which is just language, which is this word. In your meeting whatever sensation is arising, that meeting is not going to become better just because you have an idea about what is happening. It will only become worse. So half your attention will go on the story of it, how it makes sense to you, instead of meeting it just for you. You will get distracted. You will just go with your storybook ideas more than the actual meeting, which is everything that you're meeting is a meeting with consciousness. So meet everything fresh and open. It has been wanting to say something, we can go to him.

Um, it has a little bit to do with the second deal because, you know, at the moment in Europe, the news are full of this war thing in Eastern Europe and Ukraine. And it's just covering everything on the news level, on the story level you can say. And this great, I observed that this also created some kind of fear and some kind of feeling pretty uncomfortable. And at the same time, in my pure perception, I noticed there's nothing at all. This is just a story which dissolves completely. It's just a couple of pictures, a story, a couple of thoughts. And in pure perception, in my own silence, it just dissolves. And this somehow creates a little bit of attention because at the same time I say, 'Oh, but there is some reality about it.' But you know, in my true place, it's just only news, just a story which doesn't have a real reality. It's just a story. Yes, you know what I mean?

No, no, it's a very, very good point. Thank you for reminding me. Actually, I told Radha that I'll be speaking about this a bit at the beginning and then we just forgot about it. But thank you for reminding me. So this is something to look at here, but let's see if you can put it in the context of the conversation so far. So you're right that from the level of... okay, firstly it needs a bit of looking at what the term reality means, you see? And then we find that it's just another word actually, which we can determine what it means to us. So some can say everything that I see is real, like people can say seeing is believing, that is reality. For another who's a Vedantin may say, 'But what I see is not reality. Everything that I perceive is not reality,' you see? So if it is seen, then it is not real. But there is nothing inherently special about the word reality. It is just used as a pointer in Satsang till we drop the distinction between reality and unreality as well.

So if our definition of reality provisionally is that which appears, you see, is not real, then as Papaji said, nothing has ever happened. Nothing has ever happened, including the current world events. So that can be a position we maintain, you see. But if we say, 'No, let's be compassionate about this, humanistic about this,' then the perception, then the narrative could be different. Now from that perspective, I want to say that this is an excellent representation—and an unfortunate representation—but an excellent one about what the ego can do. It's about ego. It's really about ego. It's not really about lines in the sand or lines on a map, you see? These lines on the map are just representations of egoic identity. So this causes so much identity creation that brothers and sisters are willing to kill brothers and sisters just because there's a line on some map somewhere and there's a label on both sides of that line which is able to get this one beautiful humanity to say, 'No, no, you are not me, you are not like me, you know, we are different, we are separate.' And so much so that I'm happy to kill you because of my label, because of my land on the map.

So this is how the ego operates with false power, with false identification, with the insatiable need to defend that identity. And this is unfortunately the human condition for many centuries, many centuries. Thankfully in the last few decades it has not been as much, although I feel like there's been a war almost every year, if not every two years there have been these wars. But because of the nuclear deterrent, so to speak, it's not been as much as it used to be in the past. But who can find a way still to create these conflicts to say, 'I have been wronged, I am right, but you are wrong,' and to go to any extent of killing not one or two, but thousands and thousands of beautiful brothers and sisters on either side of that line, on either side of the border. Beautiful Gods are just killing themselves for nonsensical things. And this is the play. This is what can we learn from this? It's just this is the extent to which the ego can go. It's not satisfied with the highest positions, it's not satisfied by huge, huge masses of land. Huge masses of land already there and half of them completely neglected, but we want more. So of course that's one side of the story, I'm sure there are many different perspectives to this, but I don't feel like there's any reason why brothers and sisters should be made to kill each other because of some emotional ideas.

So that is that, the play of the perception, the experience of the physical realm level. But if you were to go to that which aids your self-recognition, then obviously you will suggest the Vedantic approach, which is to say that meet everything fully. And in meeting everything fully, compassion can come, grief can come, tears can come; all of that is also allowed to come. But don't give too much value to the conceptual representations. Especially don't get into debates and also trying to figure out who's right and who's wrong in these kind of situations, except at a very broad level to be able to see that when humanity, which has the power to take itself to be individual, has the power to take itself to be limited in this way, when that tendency grows and grows and grows, there is no limit to its grief, there are no limits to its destructive capabilities.

So I would just advise all of you that nothing... don't take sides. Don't say this is right, this is wrong, but don't accept any conceptual reason for brothers and sisters to be killing each other. I think nothing is worth that. Nothing is justified for that. It's just the ego's play that can make us function. And we have similar situations in India also. Just because there are lines on some map, it's like cousins living across in the same village are now not allowed to meet each other. Families have been cut across because of these silly labels and lines on a map. And the extent of this kind of distinction making is just increasingly going on and on, more and more. So we are making distinctions based on what headgear we may wear, what other symbols or faiths we may have around us, and we are able to separate among each other because of this silly thing which was completely not meant... all this symbolism was not meant to create distinctions and differences. They were meant to just be reminders to look deeper, to find the essence of the God principle. But because of so much communication, so many communication platforms also available, everybody can put their voice out there and a lot of times the mind is very attracted to the more militant sort of voice.

But we have to remember that not just humans, but first we can also see at a human level that in this zoom room today, you see, if you were to start saying, 'No, no, but he is this religion, she is this religion, she's from this country, he's from this country. Okay, so now I will share the reality of what you are only with you because you are like this and not with you,' then that would be the stupidest, the silliest thing. And yet these are the kind of things that are going on in the world. And that spirituality and religion which is meant to unite, which is meant for everyone to see the true reality as one being, that itself is being used by the mind to separate, to make distinctions. So maybe the number one deal we can make today is to not be stupid like that for any reason. So I want to say that in independent there are also a lot of other silliness about sexuality, sexual preferences. There's a lot of discrimination against people who the world may call lesbian or gay, transgender, bisexual. All of these distinctions, they're all nonsense. You must not buy into any idea of separation because of this. Of course, on color, caste, so many religions. Let's not lose ourselves in these kind of egoistic things. This one being, this one reality—these are true. If you cannot accept each other as one being, as one truth, at least let's stop making distinctions within the human condition.

So when it comes to great crises like, let's say, the war situation where you have mass suffering that people we could say are innocent or just caught in one man's ego or a country's ego, is there a perspective, a spiritual perspective? And from consciousness, is there any way to reconcile with the suffering? Is this... is there...

These are true. If you cannot accept each other as one being, as one truth, at least let's stop making distinctions within the human condition.

So when it comes to great crises like, let's say, the war situation where you have mass suffering—that people, we could say, are innocent or just caught in one man's ego or a country's ego—is there a spiritual perspective? From consciousness, is there any way to reconcile with the suffering? Is there a greater moral play where things come to a better outcome, or is it just that one feels empathy but that's just to say that's the way things are?

Just the beauty of what is being pointed out in satsang is that that intuitive presence, that intuitive intelligence, gives you all the guidance that is needed, if it is needed at all, for the phenomenal play as well. So there is, again, like everything else in life, there is no template. There is no template. I mean, I may have provided a kind of a template saying don't be stupid and make distinctions, so one of you may be inspired intuitively to start an anti-war movement or something like that. Another may be inspired to just pray for those who are in pain or have lost loved ones or are suffering for whatever reason. Another may not be inspired to participate at all in any of this. So without judging any of those circumstances, you can just follow your heart, following what is the guidance available to you, and follow that. To not follow the mind's version of even what is happening in the world, to go intuitively with what your heart is pointing you to, is my advice.

Thank you, Father. This was very helpful. Thank you very much.

All of my problems, especially spiritual progress, are the Guru's problem. The Master's grace is all there is. Your own divine presence is the Master. So this is an antidote, again, for one of the mind's favorite things that he plays with, which is: 'How much progress am I making? Am I getting better at this?' If the instruction is 'remain open and empty,' the favorite tool of the mind to not keep you open and empty is to say, 'Well, I'm not being open and empty enough. Am I being open and empty? Oh, look at that, I did that; that was not being open. I have to become more empty.' So whatever you may say, if the instruction is just remain as the Self, or just be, or just whatever, find out if you are aware. You just use that as a kind of report card mechanism and say, 'No, no, not good enough, not worthy enough, not deep enough, not devotional enough, not whatever enough.'

Sometimes it also plays the other way, like, 'You're too good. It is too good. If you keep going like this, you're going to be enlightened next week.' Those are there, but mostly I've seen the first variety, so the specialness part is not so rampant. And maybe I prefer the second one. I'm going to make it... there's some cleanup required there as well. But the mind's propensity for guilt and unworthiness and the idea of lack is much more refined. So your spiritual progress—whether you're getting there, if there is something to get to in the first place or not—whose problem is it? It is not your problem. And what is the Master? It is not a body. It is not a representation. It is your own presence. It is your own Atma presence, your own divinity in your heart. God's presence in your heart is the Master.

But don't beat yourself up about this. If you feel like the external form of the Master is the instrument that you feel devoted to, if you feel like you can surrender all your problems to that, there's no shying away from that. You can say, 'Yes, yes, all my problems are now Guruji's. All my problems, all my problems.' Whatever representation appeals to you as the highest, you can safely surrender to that representation. You don't have to worry about it. As long as you surrender, the surrendering is important. To whom you surrender is actually not important at all. You just need in your heart to have the faith that you are taken care of by that divinity. And then your mind cannot play these tricks with you. 'You're not inquiring enough' is the Master's problem. 'You're not devoted enough' is the Master's problem. 'You're not whatever'—take it up with him or her. Don't bother me with this stuff.

What is left? This was what, four? Three: I will not try to fix or change the mind. It's none of my business to fix the mind or to make it more clear or to make it less confused. How many of you have gone through these cycles of clarity? 'This is this, this is that, that's awareness, this is consciousness.' You want to sit alone in your room because you have clarity right now, but it's a very shaky clarity. You don't want to listen to your mind, you don't want to watch any TV, you don't want to talk to your family or friends. You think it's about clarity. There's awareness—awareness, dark empty space there—then consciousness, bright light, bright light coming out from that, you see? And the human condition, oh, just a creature of pleasure. So we hold on to this kind of conceptual clarity, and then something comes. You know, your girlfriend calls and says, 'I didn't like the way you behaved yesterday.' And first you want to Advaita her and say, 'Who is the I who didn't behave well?' Obviously, that won't work. That will only make it worse.

Okay, we lost internet for a minute, hopefully I'm back now. Can you hear me now? Okay. So I was saying that this sort of clarity is shaky. 'Oh, it was so clear till this morning, you know, till my mom called or mother-in-law called and she said, "Beta, you are doing this all along,"' and then it all became all shaken up and things like that. So the clarity that we are speaking of is not the clarity in the mind. Clarity in the mind... do you have to go to the mind to remind yourself that you exist right now, or even that you're sitting? To find the word 'sitting,' maybe, but intuition can give you that representation. So for that which is true, you don't need to go to the mind. The clarity that you're being offered in satsang is not at the level of the mind. Actually, to come to clarity is to not bother with clarity or confusion in the mind.

To give yourself the freedom that the mind can be apparently still or shaky—that is a real clarity. So you don't have to build defenses for a so-called clarity which is nothing but a conceptual framework. Every conceptual framework is just a house of cards waiting to be blown away. Just a house of cards. Whatever representations you will make about this life which you will call a mental clarity—life is too much for that. It is too big for that. It is too everything for that, you see? So don't try to hold on to some conceptual clarity that, 'Oh, this is how life is, this is how it functions,' because all these frameworks come tumbling down in the face of a little bit of pushing. Especially pushing in the four areas of human concern, which are relationships, security (which is about job, money, etc.), the health of the body, and spiritual freedom—notions of freedom itself. These are the four main areas of human concern, and all of these can be pushed. Things can be pushed.

So if you are thinking that you have figured out life enough and that is what you're calling clarity, forget about it. Just forget about it. How many times have we felt in the past that we figured everything out? Many times. Many times. And how many times does all of that come tumbling down? The same number of times. So don't rely on that. Ah, yes, I see the faces. So what is clarity? They say, 'Oh, the sages have so much clarity.' How do they have so much clarity? It's just openness, just accepting. It is not being concerned about mental clarity. If you become formless, then what does it matter what the weighing scale shows? Not as an excuse for not taking care of the body, but if you become formless, then it doesn't matter if the weighing scale is showing a hundred or zero. A simpler one I often use is to say that if you don't have to cross the road, how does it matter how much traffic is there?

So the search for the Self is not objective. Your progress is not your problem. Your mind does not give you valid representations of even your perceptual existence, your manifestation. If you haven't been able to keep up with the deals made here, it's no big deal. Simply go back and re-read the pointers. Be gentle with yourself. I feel like that's very important because even this playful deal-making, the mind can use this in an oppressive way to convince you that you are guilty, that you are sinful, that you are whatever. It's not a big deal. All of you are going to forget about them and you're going to remember them again. You're going to forget about them; it's going to happen often. It's not a big deal. You don't have to live up to some standard of perfection. You don't have to become the perfect spiritual seeker. Be gentle with yourself. Go easy on yourself. That's all. Whose problem? Master's fault.

So I feel like this can become just like the subtext, the context of all satsang, since satsang is just going to be a lot of fun. So don't attempt to solve it in your head. Don't attempt to see it. Then already the Self is apparent with just these two simple pointers: don't attempt to solve it in your head and don't attempt to see it. Is it not apparent who you are? Who's struggling with this? Raise your physical hand. Okay, let's go to this one. We'll come back to some in a moment, but let's go to Sarah first.

Hello. Hi again. Good to see you again.

So there were two points. The first point was: don't attempt to solve it in your head, you see? The second one: don't expect to see the Self. Now, if you keep these two instruments—which are conceptual and perceptual—aside, then are you still there or not?

Yes.

Yes, that is it. That's self-knowledge. That is wordless. It is not that... but that's only the mind saying all that. But that's it. How do you know you're still around? Without needing any perception or without even needing an idea, you still are here now. That 'here' is what we will come to in a moment, but you're still there. You are. I am. This recognition needs no tools. It doesn't need these tools. And the absence of these tools is called intuitive. Now, in the human condition, we are trained to not value this. We are trained to value only that which we think we understand or can explain. 'Can you explain it? What did you find? Can you explain it?' Because you can't explain it, 'No, you've not found it.' That's the human condition.

Many of our families will ask us after satsang today, 'What did you understand?' You say, 'Blah blah blah.' 'Useless. You're useless. You don't understand.' But this cannot be explained, nor can it be understood. How are you still here? Can you understand that? Whose existence is this? Can you ever understand that? You may use a label and say God or consciousness or presence or something, but what does it mean? Nothing. What is the true knowledge accumulated just because you have a label? Is label equal to knowledge? There's just words; anybody can mug up words. So what is knowledge? Whose presence is here now? This is a pointing pointer: whose presence is here? So in your head you may be confused. Whose presence is this? God? Is it individualized God? Is it Paramatma? But really, are you confused besides the mind? Whose presence is that? That is consciousness. That is self-knowledge, not what you make out of it in your head. That's why I do that. Before the sound of the click, you're here. You're here. That is self-knowledge, not the words 'I am here' for the insight. Yes. Now, most of you struggle—and maybe we have to make a deal about this in some way—but most of you struggle to make the insight into something. You want to make it into something understandable, explainable, something perceptual. Don't try to do that. You get what I'm pointing to? It often happens.

That is self-knowledge, not what you make out of it in your head. That's why I do that before the sound of the click. You're here, you're here. That is self-knowledge, not the words 'I am here' for the insight. Yes. Now, most of you struggle, and maybe you have to make a deal about this in some way, but most of you struggle to make the insight into something. You want to make it into something understandable, explainable, something perceptual. Don't try to do that. You get what I'm pointing to? It so often happens because the click always works. Okay, there's never a point... so if I say it is clear to you who you are before the sound of the click, you see, it has worked. Now you will struggle to translate that for your mind and say, 'Mr. Mind, are you understanding this? I found myself. This is how it is.' True, you don't have to do that. Forget about it. These are subtle things, but I'm bringing them out to light so that you save yourself a lot of time.

This always works. The instant you ask yourself 'Who am I?', the answer is there. Not here, listen, but here. It's always there, even before asking. But the point is, the question is meant to allow you to go to the right instrument. You see, the question is not going to create an answer over there where the answer already is; it is just allowing you to, like, discard the wrong instrument because you have tried now for maybe decades to try and solve 'Who am I?' with your head. That doesn't work. So there must come a point where you try a different way. You try to find yourself in time for so long that now I give you, like that, you see, a different way. And so, who vanishes during the click? The real one doesn't. Even if you say 'I vanish,' so you are taking yourself to be the timeful one, not the timeless one. See?

So whether it is the inquiry, whether it is a question like 'Are you aware now?', 'Can you stop being?', whether it is before the sound of a click, whether it is 'What do you know when you know nothing?'—all of these pointers, it is not that the pointers don't work. Any pointer, you could say 'blah blah blah,' as long as it takes you to the right instrument, it works. That's why his inquiry works; it takes you out of your head. So just living out of your head is freedom, and seeing what truly is, absent of perception or independent of perception and concept, is self-recognition or self-knowledge. So don't try to squeeze it into your head. You can only struggle with that. And hundred percent of the time that you're struggling, you're struggling only with your head.

Can you struggle with just perception? Just pure perception without your head? Okay, Salah will go along with us in this experiment. All of you, just struggle just by perceiving. Don't interpret, don't judge, don't label, but stop. Try your best. Keep your mind aside and struggle just with perceptions. Including, like Gurdjieff was saying, let anything come. With shaking legs, don't call it fear, don't call it anything. Just let it. Let the body shake, let the emotion shake, let the world shake, let your thoughts shake, let everything... but don't struggle without trying to fix anything into your head, without trying to understand anything, without trying to make a story. See if you can struggle just in perception, no matter what the perception is. No matter what the perception is.

Now you have identified that there is no suffering or struggle except in the head. Now, now what? What would make it worthwhile to try and solve non-existent problems? The non-existent reward? The promise of the non-existent reward? Now, is it that important for us to have a story? The reward is what? Only story. Is it that important for us to have a story that we are willing to suffer? That is the fundamental question of suffering. Are you willing to give up on your narrative, as close to the finale as it may seem? Everybody's narrative is always at a point that the big finale is coming. 'I can't give up now, I'm just about to get fully enlightened, just about to start announcing Satsang, just when people are starting to see the light in me, they come and ask me questions, and now Father is saying stop everything.'

I promise you that there is nothing of value that comes from any story. How much, how much more do you want to suffer because you want a story to be alive? And if you are secretly making a deal with yourselves, then at least accept that you are making a deal with yourself, saying, 'Okay, I want to go for this story and for this I'm willing to suffer.' That would be integrity then. But to say, you know, 'I don't want a story, I want to be done with all stories,' you see? 'I want to be done with all my stories, I just want to be done with all my stories so that my enlightenment starts.' Like, why do you want to be done with all these stories? Even to say 'so that I don't suffer anymore' is to insert it in the story. Is it not enough to, like, go over the stories because they're not true? Can we ever find a protagonist? Can we ever find the protagonist of those?

Now, how will you trouble yourselves? Okay, what was the original question that we started with? It was... I mean, if you don't remember, it's fine.

I remember you asked... without trying to solve it in your head.

Yeah, without trying to see it. Can I... I don't know if it's not apparent to you. So, independent of head and sensory perception, are you lost? Are you not here? And don't worry about 'here.' Yes. See, what tells you that? Because you said independent of mind and perception, whatever shows you that? Who shows you that? What shows you that? What else do you have besides mind and perception? What else do you have?

It's a different type of... feels like it's not a perceptualized life.

Yes. Tell me if it is my stuff. So you confirm yourself is what you say, like 'I confirm myself.' And this 'I' confirming itself is what we call intuition, intuitive insight. How do you recognize your presence? Even that which is, which is like the manifest aspect of yourself, how do you recognize it? In the same way. In the same way, intuitively. How do you experience love? Like, is love just in the mind, like concepts of love? Is that love? It doesn't seem like that. 'Oh, this is love, this is anger, this is love.' Is it like that? It's also intuitive. So anything that we can truly put some value to in the human condition is intuitive. Maybe the best things in life are free, but what they really mean is that it cannot be... the best things in life are not, cannot be gauged through the mind, cannot be gauged through other perceptions.

So what shows you that you are? You may say, like some may say that, 'But I can perceive the presence of being, like I can taste it like a primordial vibration.' See, the being is there, but what tells you it's your being? That it is you that is being? The mind will get fully confused now. Okay, but you stay with me now. There is a being. If it just showed up, a being showed up, I would say, 'Hey,' if it seemed friendly I would say, 'Oh, this is like Casper the friendly ghost or something.' Why would I say, 'This is my being'? There must be an intuitive intelligence which is showing that it is my own presence. This 'me,' this 'I,' is which one? Which is independent of human presence and absence. How many feel like you lost me here?

So you may feel that, 'Okay, now I can confirm my presence because there is a vibration.' Is that how you confirm your presence? Because this is like a subtle vibration or the primordial sense of being 'I am' like that? But that is just the sense of being, like 'am-ing.' What concludes, what confirms the 'I' part of it? Don't, don't let your mind frustrate you here. You can experience the presence of a being. See, like the present aspect of the being can be tasted as the primordial vibration. You can taste 'I am.' When I say 'Can you stop being?', then this vibration is still there. You cannot stop it. The being is still there, you see. But how does this 'am' become 'I am'? What confirms the 'I' part of this 'am'?

How would you confirm the 'I'? Why not 'some being'? I wake up and there's a being here. People say like that. We say 'I wake up.' Whose being is this? Whose being is it? Who is confused that this is not my being? So not sure whether to run or to pray to it or what to do with it. Who's confused that it's not my being? It's clear, no? It's 'I am.' Don't try to become clear in your head again. What I am telling you is very, very straightforward in your heart, but if you try to make it mental knowledge... so 'I am,' so 'am' you confirming with the primordial vibration of being. 'I,' how are we confirming?

I am that which is aware of even this vibration is the same. How do we confirm that? Just like that? Or because we know? But this knowing is not how we refer to usually. We usually refer to a conceptual idea of me. But just this that is aware, what is aware of all perception? Is it your neighbor? Is it your auntie? Who is aware of all perceptions? You are. How do you know? You perceive the one that is aware of all perceptions? Is it just because you heard it in Satsang that you are? Is it just like that? Is it a conceptual agreement then?

So if this intelligence can point you to the highest, and what it is pointing you to conforms with all the scriptural insights that the greatest sages have given us, would you not rely on that same intelligence to run our life? Why would you go to a tinier intelligence which can't even tell you who you really are, only has labels for you? No sense. And I've been repeating often that it is the same intelligence that is growing the plants, that is making light and sound happen, that is making your heart beat. All the millions and trillions of things that show up in this universe and seem to have an inherent intelligence—whose intelligence is that? Whose? It's all yours. All yours.

The bad news is, or actually good news but it'll sound like bad news, it's all yours but you can't use it personally. Because you can't dance. You can't put one foot in the person and one foot in your reality. Many try to do that with this absurd nonsense about manifestation. 'Let me be the person and I know very well what should show up in my life. How to access that? Oh, let me go to spirituality for that.' So what is spirituality? To go to God or go to the higher divinity. 'So let me keep one foot in my personal desire and keep the other foot with God and therefore get God to do what I want.' Is that not what manipulation is?

If you trusted God enough, then why would you not trust God's manifestation already? Like this personal idea of manifesting is, 'I know better than what God is going to give me.' Because the one that is foolish obviously, 'I know.' And to rely on that same source of knowledge is what's got us there to that suffering that we are trying to escape by manifesting. You know, I am ranting on manifestation certainly, which is one of the absurd things. 'Let me imagine, imagine what I really want, then that will show up.' That's what got you in the trouble in the first place. Imagining what you want instead of trusting what God gives us today.

Today we are ranting. We are ranting about war, about discrimination. What is the intelligence that we can trust? How many times have we got what we wanted and been unhappy? Every time. Most times, not even every time. Maybe some momentarily we feel like the freedom from the desire, which is like a knot, like something has knotted up inside and that is like a desire and comes and comes. So that knot gets released for some time, you may feel like, 'Oh, this feels nice.' But how long does it last? Not long. And that very same thing that we desire tomorrow becomes problematic. So don't go with your mind's ideas about what is showing up and also what should show up. If you should add that, not the mind version of what is, but also what should be.

What are you without your mind? The mind will say you're a vegetable, but without that, what are you? Who are you without your mind? Your intelligence? How do you know what to want? I don't know what to want for the real deal. Like, it is more about the second one. The second one is not so much like a desire, it's more like a movement. But it is... there seems to be an intention to forgive me. That is a product of intention or desire, but movement.

I would add that not the mind version of what is, but also what should be. What are you without your mind? The mind will say you're a vegetable, but without that, what are you? Who are you without your mind, your intelligence? How do you know what to want? I don't know what to want for the real deal. Like, it is more about the second one. The second one is not so much like a desire; it's more like a movement. But there seems to be an intention—forgive me, that is a product of intention or desire—but movement is just the waking state. The waking state arising is the state of movement. So in that, it happened so often. I used to say like this, I don't know whether you've heard me, so I was to say: what is the difference between this and a cloud moving in the sky? What is the difference? There's no difference, you see.

But usually in the world, if you were to ask this question, you say, 'But you are moving your hand; the cloud is just moving in the sky.' So then you say, 'Okay, now you may say both are just happening.' You may say both are just happening because now you realize that there is no such thing as individual volition or choice-making. And like often I say, I just am hearing these words as they're coming out, and there's no individual here that is speaking them. In the same way, there is no individual here that is moving this hand. So both are just happening in the light of consciousness.

Now, if I told you that there is no such thing as space or time, then what happens to the idea of happening? Can we? So it is only from this place then he can clearly make the instruction, Papaji's pointer, that nothing has ever really happened. But if you take time and space to be real, of course, things—it's a big happening. But without the notions, without emotional time, emotional space, what does movement mean? What is happening? So what happens is, in the first one, you realize that there is no individual doer. So then you find something else to blame, which is God, or to give credit to, which is Ram. But mostly, so God is doing everything. God is doing everything and you just have to accept it, you see, because we're still obsessed with the notion of doing. So we need to find, if doing is real, then there has to be a doer. What is doing without a doer? How can there be doing? Can there? It's the first time I'm asking this question, so I don't know what the answer is, but it's coming up. So can there be doing without a doer? So the notion of the agent, the notion of an agent, is inherent in the human condition. There has to be somebody who is responsible.

Your question was: how do you know which 'you' that's perceiving? So we have... even that exercise introduces, you know, a non-phenomenal sense of 'I.' Yeah, not is, because not the traditional... not our traditional means of knowing. Our traditional means of knowing are conceptual and perception, but this is not that. So, I'm one with this, but then the question is, when you say that, is anything happening in consciousness? Okay, let's go slowly because if the first part is true, you see, so meet yourself in this way, this 'I' non-phenomenally. Okay, now what can remain from that place without taking on a false notion of 'me' again? Can you have a conceptual... I mean, from a confusion of pure awareness, it's a dimension removed from the perception, yes?

Okay, so let's say I come into the dimension of being, of manifestation.

Okay, just be. And now have a confusion. So you say, 'Okay, that's nice.' If you were to make a qualitative distinction, you say, 'Okay, yes, I, absent of all attributes, pure awareness, then I manifest as I am, this being.' Okay, now from being 'I am,' tell me what is the confusion?

There is this perception, being this perception.

Yes, perception. Good, good. Then what is the confusion?

So it feels like there's activity.

Okay, we are getting to the 'feels like' level. Okay, but let's buy that also. Then how was the confusion?

So it feels confusing to say that nothing is happening.

So wait, wait. So confusing where? So right now, your being and your perception... and we got you allowed one label, which is calling the apparent movement 'activity.' Okay, so where is the confusion in any of this? Yes, but the 'nothing happening' notion was not yet introduced, isn't it? So that 'nothing happening' notion is to eat up the other notion, not to try and make a sort of happy marriage with 'nothing happening' in that which seems to be happening. So it is meant to bring you to a conceptual emptiness. But you can't have the concept of like a waking state activity, being, all of that, and reconcile the 'nothing has ever happened' thing. As the Master said, 'nothing has ever happened' can only be concluded when we let go of the notion of time and space. And the minute we take them to be real, then it's just obviously confusing to the mind because time and space is the realm of change.

So it's actually going into the 'I,' the pure at the level of the 'I'?

Exactly. And can be used in various ways. Find that aspect of yourself where nothing has ever happened. It can be used as a point of view. The Master is there, and a great Master like Papaji says, 'nothing has ever happened.' So how will you check for yourselves whether that is true for yourself in any way? You know, in the mind, of course, so much has happened in the world, so much is happening and has happened; we've talked about a lot of that today. But is there another aspect of you where nothing has ever happened? And the way the Master said it, 'nothing has really ever happened,' he's saying that is the real aspect of you. He's pointed us so completely in that one simple statement. So let's find that about yourself, that nothing has ever happened. Unchanging reality is another way to put that nothing has ever happened. Now, only take that to be real because in reality nothing has ever happened. So the realms in which things are happening are illusory.

Can you stop being then? So just to clarify for everyone because this is a common question I get, I say there's a qualitative distinction between the two questions: 'Can you stop being now?' and 'Are you aware now?' So are they the same? Are they different? Then the question is asked, 'Can you stop being?' Qualitatively different, yes? Okay, so we are talking about the being aspect now. Okay, it's okay.

It feels like being is also a happening.

Yes, yes, that's a beautiful one. Like, again, I'm elaborating, so she said it feels like being also is the happening. That's true. But it's beautiful to consider this contemplation, saying: is there time before being? Is there space before being? And you can see very clearly that time and space are products of being. So in which time does being come? My heart is clear that nothing can be created, like it's just not possible. Are you trying to reconcile heart knowledge with head knowledge? Check on that. But I just want to tell you that you cannot marry a weighing scale and a thermometer; both are reading completely different things. It actually depends on the definition that we take to be real for the word 'happen.' Like if you mean that there's perceptual cognition or something like that, then whether there is personal identity or not, which is a happening. But if you mean that it is like 'happening to me' is only what happening is, then of course, without them, what has happened? So because the perception is independent of what you take yourself to be, so that's why pure perception works. But in that label 'happening,' if you're there, 'happening which I take to be happening to me' equals 'happening,' then that is... then of course there's no... in pure perception, nothing has ever really happened.

If you say this perception itself is happening, is the definition happening? All this is being perceived. Once I saw that there was nothing.

Yeah, but you were there to see it.

I was there, yes.

Again, oh, so you and Divine Mother were there, but there was nothing. Let's stay at this point. This is very good. And don't be bothered with my jokes; sometimes I just make them inappropriately. But the point is very important, right? So you say there was something, right? So let's not bother with what that something was. And then there was nothing, right? And this is from direct experience, isn't it? Therefore, you were there to have that experience, but not as Chanda or this body or that. Now, has that... as no thing, but you were there in the sense you were not a thing. But to observe nothing, you still have to be there, you see. So this 'you,' has it changed or is it not here now? This 'you' that saw that there was nothing, has that changed in any way, or is it... has it gone away? Is it not here now? That which is aware of both being and not being, of existence and non-existence, of phenomena and no phenomena—that eternal witnessing is you.

So you saw that there was nothing, not even the nothing which is the absence of something. Like, I don't know if you're talking about like a big empty space or blank space—not even that, right? So there was nothing, like a deep sleep state where there's nothing. But you saw that there was nothing, so you must be that which is beyond the play of somethingness and nothingness. You, because you are confirming, but yeah, you know.

Yes, Father, yes, yes.

How are you saying yes? Because I saw it, I saw that there was nothing, you see. But it was not sight, you see, because I can only bring you phenomenal presence or absence, you see. But you saw something which is beyond the... like you were aware of the nothingness, but you were aware. So even if I say, 'So how do you know I was there but there was nothing?' No, there was nothing. Then how are you there? As that nothing in principle, as that pure awareness. This is self-confident, self-recognize. It's an experience, but empty of attributes. Is it the non-phenomenal experience? Like I say, are you aware now? You meet yourself in a non-phenomenal way. Am I aware? Because 'I' is aware. But you don't see awareness as a black empty room or a shining light or nothing like that, and yet you can confirm it is 'I' that is aware. Like, what is the quality of this? Without any quality, and yet it can be confirmed. Otherwise, what is the point of all the sages saying? If it could never be confirmed, then it is conceptual, like the moon has some seven children around it. It could just be some emotional thing. But because you can confirm for yourselves that you are this absolute Self, that is why it takes away all the false identification, to see that for yourself.

So that which can be aware of something and nothing, that is beyond somethingness and nothingness, is your true nature. The feeling of completeness, like this being is whole, is infinite and whole, complete. But it comes from that which is whole by itself. But it is the only one which can give birth, like the whole gives birth to the whole and yet remains full. See, awareness gives birth to the manifest consciousness, which is all in itself, but it is fully full before that and it's fully full after as well. So it's like a beautiful string. So you may say in worldly terms, you may say there can be potential energy or there can be manifest in whatever form you eat, like whatever, right? But this is the beauty of this, that this potential energy gives birth to an entirety but doesn't lose any of its fullness. How magnificent is that? Beyond all worldly physical laws and things, the whole gives birth to the whole and yet remains of it. And this is W-H-O-L-E. So you are small... your reality is so far removed from what the mind takes you to be. That one which is beyond the states, beyond the way of manifestation, that is what you are.

What is it that we take ourselves... is it's like a mocktail. What thing is this light? It was just the below and there was just the awareness of being somewhere.

Like whether you call it pillar or like light of consciousness or light or being, you are aware of that. And that 'you' that is aware, is it dependent even on that light? This is beautiful. Everything emerges from that light of consciousness, everything you see, but you...

Beyond the states, beyond the way of manifestation, that is what you are. What is it that we take ourselves to be? It's like a mocktail. What thing is this light? It was just the below and there was just the awareness of being somewhere. Like whether you call it pillar or like light of consciousness or light of being, you are aware of that. And that 'you' that is aware, is it dependent even on that light? This is beautiful. Everything emerges from that light of consciousness, everything you see. But you that is aware even of that light is independent even of that, isn't it? You are aware of it; it is not aware of you. You are the primal. I think that nothing... what is this? Oh hello, you guys going to sleep? Yes? Okay, let's go to Sanjukta.

Hi. I'm sorry, I want people to come on me too. Yeah, so a couple of questions I had. So the first thing is about the second deal we made: that whatever seems to be real, don't take it to be real, right? But what about love? Love in a relationship seems to be so real. It seems to be like coming from your heart and it's difficult to believe that it's not real. And you get fooled each time it comes to you. You know, I know that I'm witnessing it, so it can't be real. I know that I'm able to see it, so it's not real. But somewhere I get fooled each time because it seems to be very real.

So when we see love, actually there are different types of love. So it's just like one example to take would be to look at the notion of Ananda. See, so I may say, for example, this is very nice. So that Ananda is dependent on the objective taste of something. Yes? Because... so just keep telling me if you're with me because I can't see you anyway, so you can say, 'Ah, yes, yes, yes.' The same way you may feel like, 'Oh, love is in the presence of the beloved.' He comes and I just feel like, 'Ah,' like that, you see? That's one type of love and that's one type of Ananda. The second type of Ananda, naturally you will experience love, peace, joy, and that joy part and that love is the love.

Beyond even this, which is in the present, the natural outpouring in the presence of divinity, all of this is that pure awareness which is aware even of this presence. Now here in this awareness, all notion of separation dissolves. Now we call this awareness the Brahman, and that is called Brahman. So in this Brahman is Ananda. It is love. It is all that is beautiful is inherent in this, but it is inherent in an inexplicable way. How is there love in Brahman which is empty of all qualities? You know, somebody asked an intellectual question like that and said, 'I don't know.' How can you call it Brahman? And yet everybody wants to go to sleep at night. Say Papaji, you could be in the arms of your beloved on your wedding night, but when you're done with the experiencing of this world, you want to go to sleep. So they create Ananda in your Self itself. There's a great love of non-separation, non-duality in Brahman itself, in your Self itself.

So the love is such a broad word. So you could be using it for the objective sort of love which is like about interpersonal relationships, you see, which is a part of the coming and going because every taste comes and goes, every emotion comes and goes. So if it's a combination of emotion and some feelings and some sensation like that, that is what we mean by love, then it's as unreal as everything else in the phenomenal play. Is the love which is an actual occurrence—let's use the word occurrence—in the presence of the divinity of your own being? Sometimes I just feel like my being is so much love here, nobody should ever feel like they don't have love. There's so much love, yeah, I can make 100 kgs and give to everyone in this universe and it will not run out in the presence of being. So this is a different kind of love. It is not personal. It doesn't depend on who's in front of me or who's not. It is the love which is beyond comprehension, see? The love of the Self itself where no distinctions are ever possible. That is the truest love. So when you are talking about a love which feels true and seems true but comes and goes, then that is most likely like an objective sort of love that you are referring to.

Yes, that makes sense. Another thing I want to ask you: so you know there are some things, some impressions some of us know which is a little bit more deep. So, you know, becoming a witness, you're in the awareness and you're just watching, you know, the person, watching all these tendencies. But sometimes it just tips you off and yeah, so what do we do then? Do we give it more time and observe it more or how do we deal with that?

See, those 'sometimes' will always be there and they have always been there for everyone, including the greatest sages. And even the Avatars who have taken birth in this human condition have fallen prey to some or the other condition, you see? You look at anybody's life—Krishna's life, Jesus's life, anybody's life—you have those momentum examples of when they took the play to be real. So don't worry about those 'sometimes' and don't worry about that you have to come to those 100% only then you are free. Because what will happen otherwise is the mind will use that as a trick to keep poking you and see, 'You're not free, you are not.' Yeah, so when those times happen, forget about those times. You return back to your reality without worrying about that.

Okay. Sometimes I feel an enthusiasm. I'm a very kind of emotional person, so that happens quite often, you know, those turbulences. So then I feel that okay, I have to get my balance somewhere. So that's where I felt I'll ask you, how do I deal with that?

Very good, thank you for asking. So it's not the emotion which is the problem, actually. In pure perception, all is allowed to appear. Just don't insert it into any story. Just don't insert it into any narrative, including the narrative that 'I'm a very emotional person' or 'this is not good' or 'this is good.' Don't bucket yourself in any sort of category. Don't label yourself as anything. Let everything come and go at all layers of your existence. And what I mean by that is in front of your eyes, this apparent world which is not outside of you in any way, but it seems like it is outside of you—let everything appear. What has to appear, let it come and go. In your body, let everything come and go. In your emotions, let everything come and go. In your thoughts especially, let everything come and go. Then you start reaching a place where it cannot come in, like your being cannot come and go. But there's an intuitive recognition that even that comes and goes, even that comes and goes. But who is aware of the coming and going even of being? See if that can go.

Yes, yes, makes sense.

And if you are to identify, identify with that. But actually the simpler way is to not identify with anything at all and you are naturally going to be identified with it. Yes, you take yourself to be... when you don't take yourself to be anything, and yet in that nothing there's actually the 'new thing' of pure awareness, right? So nothing appearing and disappearing is a problem. It is just problem and solution is only in our narrative. So it's actually the mind itself which is getting stuck in the narrative, right? The person is getting stuck. It's not anything because we want that perfection.

Exactly. So the mind sets you up for failure because it tells you that this is the goal, the end, the dissolution of the mind is the goal. The mind itself will tell you, then it gives you things to say, 'Oh, this is not helping the dissolution of the mind, this is not helping, you're not doing this right,' you see? So it is a trickster in that way. It sets up goals and then it sets you up to fail and then you keep running through the mind for solutions and problem solving. Independent of your mind right now, what are you?

Nothing.

Nothing. Vanished by nothing? What do you mean? Are you not there?

Just a pure awareness of... just because you know it's the right answer, no, no, no. I mean I've also kind of had my share of experience of that, so I'm saying it from there.

Very good. Any reason to leave that?

Yeah, so like I said, right, the mind is believing that okay, I'm not there yet. Okay, this, you know, a lot of turbulences. It's set a benchmark for itself and it's kind of trying to be there and it wants to get rid of itself. And it's such a funny thing. I feel like you used a metaphor for this: he said it is the thief which is dressed up with the policeman pretending to catch the thief. Yeah, he also said it's like the dog chasing its own tail. Yeah, so that's where I feel I'm getting caught, you know, I am trying for that perfection.

Any mind trick, including perfection. Perfection is also a notion. So don't pick either perfection or imperfection. Don't pick right or wrong, good or bad. You'll notice that every proposal from the mind inherently has the notion of better and worse. Then we're trying to make things better without recognizing the perfection of what already is.

Yeah, so another... there's no point in putting our hand in all this mess, right? Just it's better, it's better to just stay as a witness and not like dwell into all of this. Just not analyze this too much. That's what I feel I get stuck, you know, when I try to analyze these things and I kind of jump into it. Yeah, but yeah, from whatever you said so far, it's better not to have any business with it, just to be there.

Yes, yes. It's like saying, 'I don't want to feel giddy, but I keep riding the roller coaster.' Yeah, it would be true like you would say, 'But what about what I'll miss out on because I don't ride the roller coaster?' But you'll not miss out on anything and that is where trust comes in. That is where trust comes in. 'Oh, but without the mind I'm going to...' Like even for Guruji, he takes... he says that when this, let's call it process, was happening to him, his mind would come to him and say, 'But you will be a hunchback beggar on the streets of Brixton like Quasimodo. You can't do without me.' So the mind creates these stories, these narratives where we feel like, you know, we can't do without it. But try, try for a few days, like try till Friday and come back and report: 'Without the mind, it was so terrible, what have you told me to do?'

Yeah, I have been doing this for quite some time and I'm so tired, that's what I'm telling you. Yeah, the 'I' being which one? And I meant to say that, you know, like getting into the mind and you know, roller coaster, basically riding the roller coaster.

I think like we're onto something in that question. So if there's like 'I' who feel like, 'Okay, now I am going to the mind,' so I am not going to the mind, you see? You have to make sure that you are not picking up any layers on top of I-am-ness as the 'I', see? So what does that mean? What I mean by that is just remain in the open and empty. Remain in the unborn. So don't take a position of... okay, let me tell you, let me expand on this because this is an important and subtle point. If you are trying to be open and empty, then you're not being open and empty. If you're trying to just be, then you're not just being because there's already a position, isn't it? 'I'm trying to be open.' But this is not freedom, this is already a position. Okay, I have to explain this in words. The minute you take any concept to be true and you try to apply it, you're already taking yourself to be that which you're not, see? So something has to be more direct than that, more empty than that. Perception doesn't stop, but you are not trying to just be anymore. You're not even trying to be in the unborn or trying to be in the open and empty because the minute you try to be in that one, it's no longer the unborn. There's already a 'you' position that you've taken who's attempting this. The unborn is what you can't attempt. Opening the empty is not something you can do; it is your naturalness, you see? But because we are so used to taking positions, it can feel very confusing when I'm trying to push you beyond the opposites. What is he...

We are not trying to just be anymore. You're not even trying to be in the unborn or trying to be in the open empty because the minute you try to be in that one, it's no longer the unborn. There's already a 'you' position that you've taken who's attempting this. The unborn is what you can't attempt. Opening the empty is not something you can do; it is your naturalness, you see. But because we are so used to taking positions, it can feel very confusing when I'm trying to push you beyond the opposites. What is he saying now? What am I supposed to do? What am I supposed to do? Like, don't do? Then should I sit like that? No, that would be still doing the sitting like that. So don't take any position, and that is your immediate reality, like right now. Now, right now, what is your position? Right now, right now, you don't even have a name. Right now, you need time for identity. For freedom, you don't need that. Are you able to meet me here? Yes, yes, it's fully, fully empty of references, just natural. Don't try to resolve anything.

I'm just noticing in the chat somebody asked me to repeat this, but that was about a few minutes back. So can you just remind me of the topic, my dear, in the chat? Also, the recording is there just in case we don't come together. Okay, so that's gone. All right, thank you. Okay, let's go to Marin. We'll come to you in a moment, Vikram. Very happy to see you dancing here.

Yeah, actually even pressing the raise hand button is already like stepping in a fire. It's very strong in a way, and I really welcome it fully. Yeah, yeah, I'm just feeling now if what made me press that button a little while back, if it's alive really or if it's just gone. Yeah, what is the burning right now? Whatever feels like a bit of burning is there. What is that? Yeah, it's just these, I mean, it's some sensation in the body or in my... is it like a normal thing like you have to speak in front of an audience, like that thing? Or um, no, it's, I would say it's different in a way. Yeah, it comes up especially for you and also with... I remember also when being in Sahaja Yoga and this feeling of raising hand, you know, with Babaji. It's very specific to that, I would say, in my experience.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with this one from whatever this one. So what can happen is, you know, sometimes when we start satsang, we're looking at everyone like that, so just some sort of fear can come. It's just some sort of like fear of, right, if you have to put labels to it, we can say fear of being exposed or something that understands. I'm glad you're up here.

Me too, yeah. Actually, and actually Zoom kicked me out for a moment and then I had to also reconsider like, nice, click again, you know? So it's like this. I just, I mean, I just fully delight, you know, in being at your feet and being in Babaji's feet and being so blessed and somehow being granted this life that's in the light of satsang and the truth. It's, I don't know, I remember Guruji, I think Rohini mentioned at some point there's like three blessed signs or three blessings of the universe: one is a human birth, and a second is a call for freedom in your heart, and then third is to have a living master present in your life. And it's just, yeah.

Yeah, I would say that if you find yourself in a position of having the human birth, then the other two are blessed because I don't feel like there is some specialness between humanity and a plant or a dog or a cat or something. So I feel like the humans always feel like human birth is like the special one, but once a cat or a dog confirms that, then I get to help one of them. Otherwise, it could just be another form of human marriage. Like at the moment, they are not presenting a good picture of themselves in the world, and I don't feel like they are good marketing for being the highest species. No, we can edit that part.

Yeah, actually what made me raise my hand earlier, it's coming up now, is you spoke... yeah, so pure, there's the pure awareness which is actually formless, shapeless, no thing, and it gave birth to being. And it just struck me like, or what... this is the question: how does nothing give birth to something? It's just a complete mystery. And actually, like, so in the past minutes, it... yeah, this was with me somehow. And I also I see that there's no way my mind or my understanding or my intellect or something can ever come close to even, you know, catching that or even having a glimpse at that. So it's actually a beautiful mystery and I can just appreciate the mystery and contemplate it. Still, I don't know, maybe that's the question: like, is there a fruit, you know, in contemplating questions like that, or is it just to abide in nothing?

Thank you, thank you. That's a good one. So if you look at this realm of human contemplation, there's one field that really studies that, no? That is the field of philosophy. Now philosophy has three main aspects, isn't it? So the first question of philosophy, actually very similar to what you asked, the first question of philosophy is: why is there something instead of nothing? Similar to what you asked. So how does this no-thing go to this one thing? It is something related to this question. This is the second question, and you indulge me, allow me to be academic. The second question is: what is knowing and what does it mean to actually know something? Epistemology. So that is the field of trying to understand knowledge and the theory of knowledge. And the third is how to live and what is the best way.

Now philosophy as a field has been there for centuries, centuries, but none of these three questions have been answered, answered conceptually. And I would say that the only available answers to any of these—like why is there somethingness and how does it emerge from the no-thingness, and then what does it mean to actually know something, what is knowledge, and thirdly what is the right way to live and what to do either moment to moment or in a life as an aggregate—all of these answers are available in spirituality. And when I say spirituality, I don't mean like a written spirituality or a learned spirituality; I mean in spirit, in the presence of divinity. That intelligence shows us how is creation or why is there creation. It is not a conceptualizable answer, but you can meet this at the end of the intellect. You can meet your intuition when none of these confusions are meaningful. The answer is absent; every answer is present here. The only problem is that these answers cannot be squeezed into our head and therefore cannot be expressed as words.

So what is true knowledge? You would say something like self-knowledge, which is true knowledge. That's just another set of words, right? To itself and knowledge, it doesn't really carry anything inherently. But self-knowledge truly, the intuitive insight, has all the other forms of knowledge contained within it, and you can only see that from the space of insight. Especially the question of ethics and what to do, especially in these times: what to do? What is the right way to behave? Basically, people have been trying to say, 'Okay, now you have to be categorically following the imperative of telling the truth,' or 'You have to be utilitarian and benefit as many people as you can.' But there are no conclusions that are possible in their ethics also, and how to live. You just have to follow your intuition moment to moment.

Yeah, thank you. So keep your heart alone. These answers are available. And the Buddha used to say the fifth... I was telling a child yesterday, she asked me a question and I just said the fifth because they're familiar with that terminology. So there are some answers which cannot be answered in the realms of the intellect. So if the four manners of the intellect are: the first being true, something is true; the second corner is something is false; the third corner is both true and false; and the fourth corner is neither true nor false. You see, this is as far as the intellect can go. But when the Buddha was asked some questions which are beyond the intellect, he would say the fifth, where the intellect cannot even fathom what that corner would contain or not.

So some of these questions about how creation happened, because there's no time—time is a product of creation, space is the product—but creation implies causation, cause and effect. So these answers are not possible in the realm of the intellect. It's like a Zen koan for you. Although the Zen koan is meant to take you beyond the intellect into that intuitive insight which is beyond that. Useful, good. So you ask whether it's useful to contemplate. Yes, it is useful to contemplate questions like this because it serves the extinguishing power over the belief that our intellect can answer everything for us. So why is this Zen koan very useful? In fact, you would do it for decades sometimes. It's because you lose your dependence on your intellect and your search for a greater intuition. So it is useful if you feel like you refer to your intellect for a lot of answers. But if you can just follow the master's direction and say, 'Leave that playground, go to the deeper intelligence,' then not so useful. Yep, thank you.

Thank you. You know, when you spoke on ethics, actually, yes, I'd like to share it. So this past Sunday, one of my family members shared... we have like a WhatsApp group with my close family and shared there was some calls happening for gathering physical things like stuff for those for the war in Ukraine, and a truck would drive out there to support. And immediately response came from my father and my mother and my sister. And it was a very interesting day for me because I read it and I felt it, but I didn't feel a response to that in that moment to actually in that moment like commit something to the truck. But also like, you know, judgment came like, 'How am I so selfish?' or at least it's like something... you know, this kind of pressure came. And yeah, but I sat with it and sat also with my partner in the evening, that's also like a satsang sister, and we just... yeah, it was beautiful. I just really felt that you were just sharing like the heart is beyond these realms of what's right and wrong. And it's very strong now in also in our territories here, like what's right and wrong in this aspect. But it took quite some discernment, you know, to really feel and then not to move with a stream or something of what is supposed to be right and to really sit with it and feel deeper into it somehow.

Yeah, let's follow your heart. Thank you. Yeah, may all of beings be in peace and find true, true love in your own heart. Thank you, thank you. Let's go to Jita again now that she's up. Hello.

Yeah, I went to sleep, I didn't realize, but I don't know now. There's some interference, the type of sound.

Let me mute everyone and bring you back. Maybe it's coming from me, there's a fireplace next to it. I see it. Okay, okay, it's okay. Yeah.

I don't know, just if you want me to give some report I can give, but otherwise I don't know.

The heart, always welcome from the heart.

Okay, so what happened is suddenly just so like a solid silence and bliss has come on me. Like everything was just incredibly pure and spacious and just so crystal clear, not understanding everything. And suddenly I realized that I cannot listen to you because in listening I was there as the one I take myself as always. It's like it has been broken. It was there, but I... it was like this, and like when I tried to listen to you, it was there. So and I couldn't know what to do with my attention, like I couldn't listen to you and at the same time there is this solid silence. So I somehow went to sleep after that because I couldn't know what to do. Yeah, rights have also gone to sleep and now I sense I... the internet is...

I cannot listen to you because in listening, I was there as the one I take myself as. Always, it's like it has been broken. It was there, but I... it was like this. And when I tried to listen to you, it was there, so I couldn't know what to do with my attention. Like, I couldn't listen to you and at the same time there is this solid silence. So I somehow went to sleep after that because I couldn't know what to do. Yeah, rights have also gone to sleep. And now I sense the internet is all right because we've been actually on the phone hotspot since the whole time at the broadcast, since the lights. Father, I can hear you and I can see you.

Okay, that's good. Yes, yes. So the difficulty is not in the listening. Like when you say that it is in the listening, "I am there," the difficulty could be in the attempt of understanding. So the personal intervention comes in satsang when we feel like, "I have to get involved and understand what is being said." Otherwise, the hearing is happening on its own. Are you actively doing the hearing? No, it is just happening. So there's no impure perception. Like we've been saying, there's no actual individuality born or created. In pure perception, there is no trouble. But if you try to understand and say, "What is he saying? This is like that," that is the job.

I was like, Father, I was in bliss and at the same time, it's like I wasn't listening. Yeah, thoughts came like, "I shouldn't miss what Father says" or something. At the same time, I wanted to... yeah, there is an attempt to catch what you say. Yeah, maybe this has come from there.

Now, what happens in satsang, most of you know, is that satsang will be full of contradictions. And if you try to make sense of it and make an understanding of it, it will be very troublesome. So in a way, if you can just come to satsang and just allow the hearing to happen, but don't try to conceptually understand—let the words do whatever job they have to do on their own—then you're just fine. There's no difference between, like I've been saying, that one ray of light. The realm of perception has all the bliss of the universe. Sorry, so there is no difference between the experience of bliss, you know? In many objective experiences, everything is full of God's light, God's love. So if you were to meet without the mind, without the need to understand, in the no-mind, in the unborn, everything—even one single ray of light—carries the entire bliss and love of the universe. What is this here? Taste this. Taste this. This is this bliss which is there in a single ray of light, in the single drop of water, in the single whisper of sound.

And the children ask me, "Father, how come you love the city so much?"

It's funny you said this because just right now, while we were in silence, I just realized the usual me, my way was speaking. But I was just seeing this, and even it was beautiful to just see that it's there. And even this is not a problem at all. Its existence is not a problem at all.

Yes, exactly. Thank you. Thank you for this purity. Okay, let's go to Pune.

Actually, when you were talking about the position, like, "Don't take the position," then I realized, like, I am stuck with that. I just take the position and then I just get stuck in that, and then I keep struggling with that. You know, I don't want to take the position, but then I keep stuck in that. How to come out of it? I don't know.

Yes, okay. I'll show you how to come out of it. Actually, it's very simple. Don't try to do it, okay? Just allow the words to do the job on themselves. Just let go and fully relax, fully chill. Okay, now, right now, you are empty of all positions. Whether you try to hold it up also doesn't matter. You're empty right now. Empty time. Now, the offer for positions will come, you see? You have to stay like this. Just let it go. Yes, let's do it. That's it. That's how to remain open and empty.

And I feel the contraction in the body. I was going to say, it's going to look at something and it's going to say no, but...

But you see, the "but" is the invitation to the story. The "but" is the invitation to the story. Let there be nobody there to contract, you see? There is nobody there. That is the fear. So whatever fear may come, contraction may come, who's getting contracted? It cannot be God, and nothing is except God.

What is this happening? Actually, continuously it is happening. What is happening even during the satsang? Whenever I join, then I feel like I am not able to grasp. I miss your pointers, I miss the listening. And then next day morning, when I try to listen, then I feel like, now the situation is like I am a totally different person. Yeah, like I'm in a totally different place. I'm listening, then I don't have to put the effort or put so much, you know, "I have to be present to listen." These two contrasts are seen. Like, in the satsang I'm so much on the alert, you know, I don't want to miss anything, and then I miss everything most of the time.

Yes, yes, that's very well spotted actually. The more you try to understand, the less you get satsang. And then you realize, okay, when you let yourself go for your bit, you can be here. Just gentle, with gentle attention. And then it'll all... everything is fully supportive for your bit. But if you get involved in that way, in a sort of personal involvement, trying to understand and get out of it and all of that, then it just mucks it up even more.

But it is happening. Even after seeing and realizing, still I am into that.

No, really, the seeing is good. The noticing is good enough. But if you notice and try to fix it, then you'll come back in that scene. Okay, maybe I'm trying to fix it. Noticing is good enough. How can we fix? We cannot say... I used to joke sometimes and say, you notice it, then after that what you're gonna do? You're gonna send some shovels inside there and say, "Okay, this has to be thrown out"? There's nothing to fix. No, you can't fix it. The fixing, the attempt to fix it, is causing more problems actually. Whatever is coming to your attention, let it come and go. You have no other job. That's it.

Does it feel shaky? Like, suppose I just allow everything to come and go, then why do I feel shaky? Like it's very... it's not stable. It is going to sleep.

That wobbliness is one of the main things that shows you're doing something right.

Okay, then I get disturbed, you know? "I'm doing something wrong, I need to do this thing, I need to do this thing." When you allow yourself to remain open and empty, one of the most common symptoms is the wobbliness.

And I was trying to fix it, you know? "Why am I so shaky?" These lights are not so comfortable for me also, and I feel like I've shared whatever was here to show. When are you coming back, Monday?

Father, I just landed in Bangalore and I just wanted to thank you for everything. And now that you asked me to talk, I'll take two minutes. Something very interesting happened. I've been traveling for quite some time and I was lost, and a lot of triggers were coming up and I couldn't handle it. At some point of time, I was just trying to talk to you. I have not been having a great relationship with my father, and every time I call you Father, it triggers with intensity because I've never had this. I've never spoken, I've never told my father so much that... yeah, I mean, even these words of "Father" being said was very less in my life. And I've been trying to connect with you like having a conversation with an invisible father who's there with me. Like every time I'm there, I'm trying to talk to you, and my mind was telling me, "No, he's not there. He's not your father, and he cannot be a father because he's for everybody. He's like a guru, right? He has so many followers and so many people, right? He's not going to give you the father kind of a love."

At some point of time, I was like, I know the mind was trying to play with me and I had no other hope because I said, "I'm going to hold your hand, I'm not going to go away from you." One night it was very deep, and one night I broke down. I didn't know what to do. And in a dream, I know that I came to your house and I met you offline, not in a sangha situation. And I was like breaking down and I didn't know... and I didn't trust you also. That time also I didn't trust you because you're not my father and I was talking to you and I was telling you something and then I just broke down. And after that, I don't know, a lot of things happened. You know, we were standing, and even that minute when I was talking to you, I didn't trust you because you're not my father but you're a guru, right? And some weird stuff happened and a lot of release happened. And then while going away from the space, I knew that you had done some... rather I wouldn't say that you had done, something happened in the presence. And I knew that it worked for me. I was like very happy because it was a nice... after that I was feeling very light.

Like physically, whenever I came to satsang, I know something was happening. At the end of the day while going, I was feeling a little light, and I still had the fear that I'm moving away from you, right? So this happened, and I didn't want to believe it because the next day when I woke up, I remembered everything. And you also spoke about one of the days that people connect with me in the dreams. I was trying to tell the mind, "You tricked me again, you know? And I'm sure this is not a real experience." And I had let it go, but then somehow something told me that you told me that you come... I said, "I always come to satsang as a seven-year-old," and you said, "No, become a two-year-old or a three-year-old." And I thought I'll share it with you, and I'm feeling good about it, you know? Just sharing this experience. I don't know whether it's true or false, I just felt so nice after that. You will not believe, the whole travel—I've been traveling to multiple cities, I just came back from Chennai—it was very light. I didn't feel the triggers. I don't know, something was happening to me. I was healing faster than I could even imagine. And somehow that subtle hand was there with me. I don't know, it was a very nice experience. Am I making it up? I don't know, but I feel really good, you know? Really good. Yeah, thank you.

Very good. Want to sing something? The trying is better than my worst.