राम
All Satsangs

What Does it Mean 'Don´t Believe Your Thoughts'? - 27th Sept. 2016

September 27, 20168:08145 views

Saar (Essence)

Ananta explains that while thoughts and actions appear, there is no individual doer or thinker. He suggests that instead of fighting for attention, one should simply withhold belief from thoughts, recognizing life is already divinely governed.

Allow thoughts to come and go, just don't serve them tea.
God is not waiting for our surrender; He has always been running our life.
Surrender is not a doing; it is a recognition of the reality of how this realm plays.

intimate

beliefattentiondoershipsurrenderthoughtsnon-dualityadvaita vedanta

Transcript

This transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.

Ananta

Okay, to questions from Serenity on YouTube: 'Which desires to follow and which to witness? What do you mean when you say don't believe your thoughts? Not act on it?' So let's unravel this a little bit. A thought is only an energy construct which is appearing and disappearing. This we must check first. You must look closely at what thoughts are. How do you perceive your thoughts? What is a thought? Check now. Wait for the next thought to come. And I know that very naturally, as we look at the mind and say 'I'm waiting for thoughts to come,' for most of us, they start to become quiet and not show up at all. But they do come eventually.

Ananta

So as they come, you will find that there are these two forces, as I call them, that can interact with this energy. Firstly, the power of our attention. And that which gets our attention seems to be alive, seems to exist for us. But the thought could say anything. Thought could say 'There is a green apple in my fridge right now.' So attention can go to it: 'There is a green apple in my fridge right now.' But just because attention went to it, are we identified with it? Or you spoke about desire, so let's take a thought like that: 'I want to eat a green apple.' Just because attention went to it, does it automatically become a belief? Does it automatically become our desire, which is nothing but a strongly believed concept?

Ananta

So, 'I want to eat a green apple.' With the interaction of our attention and our belief, depending on how much belief has been given to it, it becomes a desire or not. Now, this is the root of all spiritual practices, because most spiritual practices teach that we must not give these thoughts our attention. You must keep our thoughts on our breath, or must in Hatha Yoga keep the attention on the breath, or keep attention on the body, or keep attention on a mantra, or keep attention, as Maharaj said, on the presence 'I Am,' you see? But I have to speak from my own experience, and I can tell you that here at least, the attempts to just keep attention away were largely unsuccessful. They would happen for some time and then attention would go back to these thoughts. So I cannot tell you that which did not work here, but I can tell you that 'do not give it belief' seemed to be much simpler here.

Ananta

So when the thought comes, it is allowed to just come and go. Even if attention goes to it, it's fine. We are not serving it tea, you see? So when the Zen master said 'Allow thoughts to come and go, just don't serve them tea,' this is all that it could have meant. Because even to say that thoughts come and go needs our attention, you see? Therefore, in the allowing of them to come and go, attention must go on them, but at least we are not giving them our belief. We are not serving them this tea. So this simple allowing is a surrendered life.

Ananta

Now, does this mean that just because we are not believing these thoughts, which are lying and saying that I am this individual entity, does then life have to become boring, vegetative, or irresponsible, reckless? It doesn't have to be either. Is it because that which is running the life now has been always the one running the life? It has been a delusion that I was a doer, because you cannot even find this personalized 'I' that can do something. So that which we cannot find, that does not exist, definitely cannot do anything. That's why I say that God is not waiting for a surrender; He has been running our life. All of this play has been His play. So surrender is not doing; it is a recognition of the reality of how this realm plays.

Read more (1 more paragraphs) ↓
Ananta

So just like I am not the thinker of my thought, I am also not the doer of my actions. Depending on the perspective, this 'I'—when you say 'I am not the thinker or the doer'—I'm talking about a personal 'I'. But if I was to say that I am that I Am, and I am the only doer, and I am the only thinker, only through my will... and if I was to say 'I' is this awareness which witnesses even 'I Am,' then I would say that this 'I' remains as the untouched witness of any of this movement. That is why I say that the only end to this debate about doership and what to do or what not to do is first see who we are. Who would be the doer? Who would be the actor? When you say 'not act on it,' is there an individual there who has the power of action? Or is it another part of this great big seeming, as Guruji says, this great big steaming... I seem to be the thinker, I seem to be the actor, but this 'I' itself doesn't seem to exist at all.

The Thread Continues

These satsangs touch the same silence.