Whether We Inquire or Pray, It Brings Us to the Holy Presence in Our Heart - 31 July 2024

Very good. So, in both of these realms, actually, there is a guide. Is there a guide? Can you identify the guide of the outer realm of Maya? The narrator, the subtitler of this movie. But more importantly, identify the guide to an inner journey. Is there a voice which is qualitatively different from the voice in our heads? Is there another source of guidance which can then lead us on our inner exploration, on our inner journey? Try to identify the push and pull between both these forces. Let's look at our lives and see where we are spending most of our time, in the guidance of which narrator, which guide, which teacher.

So, as you look now for the next few minutes, see if you can identify both of these and the distinguishing qualities of both. And again, be careful of the idea that 'I know this already, I've concluded something.' Start as beginners. Every contemplation just fresh and alive, because what you think you know is completely irrelevant. Just to get a sense of all those who are listening, how many of you feel like you conceptually know that there are two guides like this, but you can testify truly to only one, or none, or both? So, how many say that 'I don't understand at all what either of these voices are'? Anyone feels neither? 'I don't know what you're saying.' How many of you feel that it is very clear? The one narrator, the one guide is very clear; I identify its voice, I can see its pointing constantly. How many feel one is clear? Only one? Very good, very good.

And how many feel that both these guides, the inner and the outer, are apparent to us? That we can be guided by both? How many feel both? Both? You're not thinking, no? Not thinking that you know both; it's alive. Very good, very good.

I don't know how to put this. It doesn't seem verbal, though we're saying 'know the guidance.' As it is saying it is, for me it's completely non-verbal.

So, let's use the next few minutes to really contemplate this, then we'll take the reports at the end. So, contemplate the different nature of both of these voices and then we'll take some reports. So, what we may like to do is the first five things you hear from the outer guide, you can make a note of that to start with, and then see how the inner one is different from this one.

What is the smell? What is the smell of the outer guide? Contemplate. What is the... there's a fearfulness, unsureness, trying to grasp at something. Because then what will happen is that we will get biased by the answer that we hear. So, just for yourself, identify the smell—we can't call it a fragrance—but the smell of the narrator in our heads, and recognize the scent clearly, okay? For noticing.

You can report now.

This exercise is revealing how many things I've bought in for so long that now it's becoming so clear and so easily also. Most of it is suggestions of something that I'm supposed to get, suggestions of something that I'm supposed to get, have to be like this. And I don't know, so there's a fear around that. I don't know what to do, fear around that. Anger and frustration, confusion, just a lot of unsureness and grasping at something to hold on to something to get.

Like the grasping nature of it, the concluding nature of it, the resolving nature of it, is it? The narrative nature of it, in the sense it's proposing a truth, notice it. But it's not proposing a fragrance of love, compassion, belongingness. It wants to make a conclusion of separation and it has the stink of the absence of love, if not clearly hate. For it is the voice of resistance, and not resistance in a good way. Can we all notice this? Not nice, yes. Sensory driven, yes, exactly. Wanting to grasp on worldly things, yes. And the stink of it is more and more recognized when you allow yourself to meet the other one, the Holy One. Like, nobody can ever call the voice in our head holy.

So, the attempt is to come to that one's voice, come to that one's presence, come to that one's discipleship. And you can't have two teachers at the same time in this way. Not in a worldly... you're not starting that debate. They're saying that we cannot have allegiance to our head and the Holy One at the same time. So, for the next few minutes, try to remain inward facing. Whether the presence of the holy place, the Holy One, is palpable or not, allow all temptations from the narrator of the world, the subtitler of Maya, to come and go. And if there's something that the mind is offering you which seems so clearly true that it is undeniable, then make a note of that and we can share that.

Is it easy to let go of this voice? Sometimes it seems easy, sometimes it seems to be the only truth. If you spent your entire life in the hypnosis or the belief of this outer voice and never came to the Holy One, the loving one, what would you consider that life to be? How many of us are living in that horror movie right now? Half, half? 90/10? We took some survey that day, 95/5. If you spent your whole life like this, what would you consider it? Would you not consider it a waste? What are the reasons why your complete focus is not on the recognition and living in the presence of the inner voice, the Holy One? Contemplate this question. What are the main things that block you from your sadhana, to the attempt to come to the Holy One and live in its presence for yourself?

Where does your spiritual knowledge reside in your case? What do you refer to when you are spiritual? Which voice is your guide? It's good to look, very good to look. So, the teacher said that to come to the end of knowledge is to come to the end of time. What kind of knowledge is he talking about? The freedom from the known is to come to true freedom. What is that knowledge, especially spiritual knowledge, which you keep in your head, which you take to be real, which you take to be true?

It seems like a spiritual knowledge that I'm carrying in my head. It's been there for a while and I don't know why I'm not asked this question is that whether that ratio is 90/10 or higher. Or in that realm, there is this thing in the head that is saying, if all this is happening, which is wonderful, that horror movie is way lesser than before. This being interacting in this environment should be a lot more alive. Alive not meaning excited or, you know, like just engaged with the richness of life, celebrating life. You know, those types of words are there in the head and they come up when, for example, somebody may tell me, 'Oh, you look a bit detached nowadays' or 'You look a bit aloof these days.' And I don't know if that's always a good thing or a bad thing. And so what's being carried in the head is, 'No, I should be alive if I am living in God. God can't be detached and bored and aloof and like rejecting the world,' which I'm not doing, but sometimes I'm told that. So that's... but it's all coming from the head, it's very clear.

So, what makes us, what compels us to rely on conceptual understanding even about spirituality? If you capture that, if you get a sense of that, then it may be easier to recognize what compels us to rely on conceptual understanding even for our spirituality. Take your time, take five minutes, and then you repeat. Let me make it simpler: write down one thing that you know without your head to start with. Don't reveal it, because then everyone will feel like that's their answer. One thing that you know without your head, and this answer should not come from your head.

How many of you have an answer? Have an answer? Have you have an answer? You want to say something?

Being. Head knowledge, yeah, there's just isness.

And where do you know that? So, let's look at this. That you said something very beautiful: 'Without using my head, there is just isness.' So, what you're saying is that without using my head, I still know that there is just isness. That is still true. So, if it is still true and you know it, what is the source of that knowledge? Take it, take it. And the rest of you can continue in that exercise. Is there just isness? Even isness is gone, huh? I'm looking at the source of... yes, but is it true that there is just isness? There's a sense of being. How you know that? Because this is verbalizable, isn't it? You said that everything that I know from the inner space is actually non-verbal. And when I said, 'What is the one thing that you know without your head?' you said that in one way or the other, you're saying that 'I know that I am,' isn't it? Whether we call it sense of being or presence, isness will come to in a moment. But so, this knowledge is coming from where? How many are still with me in the question? Huh? Still here? How many don't understand what I'm asking? Anyone? I can repeat.

Okay, so the question was: tell me one thing that you know without your head. That's clear? Yes. So, that one thing, if you found that one thing, then where is that known from if it is not from the head? And we don't have to use our head and say, 'I know it's from my heart, it's intuitive.' We know all the answers in our head. The attempt is to truly meet this. Where do I know about love, about being, about presence, about awareness?

Where do you know that you are, that I am, that love is? You see, where do you see God? Give the mind... when you stop the self-talk. So actually, I find him at the end of my mind, my self-talk, my planning, and it stops. Yes.

Yeah, yes. So, you're not relying anymore in that moment on that what you're calling self-talk, but actually is the mind-talk. Yeah, you see, there's no real self involved there, but...

The attempt is to truly meet this. Where do I know about love, about being, about presence, about awareness? Where do you know that you are, that I am, that love is? You see? Where do you see God? Give the mind... when you stop the self-talk, so actually...

So I find him at the end of my mind, my self-talk, my planning, and it stops. Yes.

Yeah, yes. So you're not relying anymore in that moment on that what you're calling self-talk, but actually is the mind talk. Yeah. You see, there's no real self involved there, but the world calls it self-talk. So when we come to the silence of this, or the not grasping at this, then you said something very beautiful. You said you meet God.

I said I see God. You see God. And I don't meet and I don't see me. I see God and I don't see me.

Through which eyes? This is something I had to tell you. So happy to use me that...

No, no, it's good.

So I'm asking even further that I come to the end of my mind. I come to the no-mind, open and empty. No-mind, prayer, whatever inquiry we want to call it, we come to that point where there is no narrative in the mind. We come to the end of the story. At this point, something very beautiful you said. You say, "I see God," and in the light of God, there is no separate one, there is no me. So I want to introduce you to the eyes through which you have this seeing, because this seeing is not like sensory, isn't it? So to take those eyes to be your true eyes is to be facing inward. So when the sages say inward-facing always happy, inward-facing always peaceful, this is that inward-facing. So familiarize yourself with this. We have to use the word "place," which is at the end of the mind, like she said. Beyond the mind, beyond what the mind can tell you, can conceptualize. Familiarize yourself now with the scent of this place.

This question seems valid. It is from the mind, but with what tool do I identify mind as mind? The one that can identify the presence of love, the presence of being, that also can identify the presence of mind. Because the mind also, of course, sometimes will report and say that, "Just the mind, don't go with the mind." The spiritual mind will try to say that, but somewhere deeper, you know where you're going.

But often we forget. So what I want you to do is refer to those characteristics of the mind's voice, and then you notice yourself going there. Just return to the holy place. You observe presence. The one that knows presence knows the mind. Yes, of course, it knows everything. So don't go with the mind's reports on what is mind. Are you able to see both these realms, both these ways of life, the push-pull of either? So are you getting a sense of what it means to be inward-facing, facing the temple, the altar of God in your heart?

Yeah. Is it the absence of knowledge? Because we said earlier that the freedom from the known gives us true freedom. But here there's a knowledge of a different quality, a different texture, a different fragrance.

It cannot make us proud. Can heart knowledge make you proud? Anything you know in your head and you have concluded for yourself, even spiritual sounding, will make you proud and closed. Make you think that, "Oh, but I already know this." But heart knowledge you can never have your fill. It is sipping from a holy river, and it is the most fragrant, most full of love and light. So true knowledge, Atma Gyan, self-knowledge, comes from here. That's why the simple question that I was asking was: Where do you know that you are? If you stay where you know that you are, all that needs to be known is known to you because you are in the presence of God. So the spiritual tools, all the spiritual sadhanas, no matter what is said in the modern world about them, if they're truly spiritual sadhanas, they're like the drilling machine. You see, they drill through all these outer layers that we think exist and bring us to this heart temple, this presence of God, this no-mind, this open and empty. So whether it is to remain just open, empty, whether it is to inquire, whether it is to pray, all of it, all of it transcends all the layers of our existence and brings us to the holy presence in our heart. So let's spend the last few minutes, maybe another five, six minutes, just exploring how... try to use your prayer or inquiry, whatever spiritual method you're following, to see how it anchors you in the true place and prevents you from going to the realm of Maya.

Very good. Good. I can see for most of you. So how much time should we be with the false and how much with the truth? Twenty minutes a day with the truth, you know, twenty minutes a day with the false? That is why the sages have told us that a prayer... this is prayer. To be inward-facing is prayer, no matter which tools we are using. Clear now? So this inward-facing must be unceasing, must be nirantar. Except dropping our false stories, we don't give up on anything. Yes, but write down your "main yes buts." "What about..." dot, dot, dot. Write down your main two, three things which the mind uses to pull you out. It sends you the bait with the fishing line, you grab it often, and you pull yourself out from the holy place to this hellish realm. Which is not... the appearance of the world is not a hellish realm, but mixed up with the narrative of the mind, it is the hell. What can Maya tempt you with? So I'm staying in the inner place, then the mind comes and says, "Ah, what about this? He did this or she did this." The memory. Then the images come. Yeah. Notice whether any appearance of any images by themselves can pull you out, or do they have to be mixed up with the narrative? It's very important to notice that. So meet any image, don't buy into any narrative, and then meet the same image with your favorite story about it. What is the favorite? That which we've fed so much, that we've nurtured so much. It's more of a fear, and anger is nothing but a defense against that. Okay? So where that wobbly wobbliness that you... yeah. So like, "Ah, this is satsang happening, this is the teacher, this is the student, this is you know..." So then you feel, "Ah," you see? But that "ah" is the most dangerous because that is what buying into the false seems like. It provides a temporary seeming relief, but we have then bottled up this vastness, you see, inner and outer being one, non-separate, into a very primitive narrative. It's like a kindergarten coloring book and we think that that is our life. "This one did this to me, this one said this to me, this one is happy, this one is unhappy." All of these narratives. But we feel like we're making sense of the world now, just to escape the fear of not knowing, not understanding, which prevents us from coming to true understanding.

I'm just asking your guidance.

So try it out. Try it out. Don't understand anything. Remain inward-facing, facing God's light in your heart, and don't understand anything at all. Tell me what your time limit is for... time limit done? Understood something or still empty?

Oh, understood, dropped it. Understood, dropped it. It's okay.

So as you transcend this fear, it won't last. It's nothing, just some peanuts and popcorn, nothing. Then as you transcend it, you'll meet such a holy love within your heart, the infinite love which is not grasping. Contentment, an absence of feverishness. Just like this, we have to go through that like a withdrawal symptom. So that is why the anchors of our prayer then take care of all of this. You see, he eats up our mind. It dissolves everything in the prayer, in the inquiry, in the love. Just eats it up. At what point should we give up? What is the right point to give up? It's like too much fear, too much wobbliness. For how many minutes, days, hours, weeks? "No, no, I'm not meant for this, cut out for this." At what point should we give up? Okay, at what point do we give up and how many seconds, minutes, hours do we give up? We give up on God in return for a narrative, in return for a story. How long does it take on average? So we're like the... if it was like that, then we would be like that Jerry mouse who doesn't need to smell the cheese, who doesn't need to see the cheese, just the idea of cheese and it's out. It's in Tom's hands just with the idea of cheese. So this, if you take Tom to be the representative of hell, which is our hellish life when lived in Maya, is it so? What does it take? Just he sends the idea of cheese to us. Doesn't need to lay a trap, doesn't need to... the cheese doesn't have to be smelled and tempt us, nothing. Just...

That's the mind. That's the mind exactly. That's the mind.

And this temptation is not at all fragrant when you noticed how you are when you're consuming the mind. Have you noticed the quality of that? You had that exercise: write down what is the smell of that, the stench of that. So at which point do we come to that? We feel like, "Okay, now enough in satsang also." Yeah, 5:30, 6:00, 6:30, 7:00. At which point do we say, "No, no, now enough, return to normal"? What? There's some part of us that feels claustrophobic after a point, just wants to escape to some normal waters. "No, enough now." It is definitely... but we fall for it when we buy into the temptation saying, "Okay, good enough for today, I've learned enough. I know what to do now, it's in my book. Let me just indulge in the mind again." So notice this when this resistance starts to come in the form of boredom, in the form of absence of attention, whatever form it takes. And the warning is that this kind of satsang is going to be very boring to your mind. Already seeing that. Notice the texture of that one and don't fall for its tricks.

You said that one knows the mind as the mind, the one who knows the presence. This tricking, how does that happen? What suddenly, what happens to it? Why can't it identify? Yeah, so how does the tricking happen? He said that as we perceive everything, nothing happens. So what is the process of tricking ourselves or itself?

You've seen this. The mind is presenting a notion. Sometimes I put some a toy in front of Aslan, a new baby or new pet dog. So I put a toy in front of him. So you know what he does? He just looks at it for some time and then pounces. Have you noticed this? At least I... the first time I'm living closely, so closely with this kind of being. So I noticed this characteristic, you see. So what is that that happens with us in the same way? Thought presents itself. In its presentation, you see, how many repetitions does it take? What is the texture of that? We just latch on like that. And what is that ability to latch on? Only gone now. But what are the paws with which we grab at it? Just... so it's coming. The temptation is in front of you. Suppose it's sensory in that way, you see. But in pure perception, there's no temptation, nothing like that. The body may be responding, of course. The body may be responding. Correct, correct. So now then what happens that we want to grab it, that we become feverish? You have to believe a thought. So those are the paws. The paws of belief, the paws of identification. You notice this very primal power that belongs to your being. You see, attention just flows freely if you let it flow freely. But belief, you apply it. It is work, isn't there?

That loss of that ability to identify the mind as mind when you do that, or is it...?

It's not as mind in the sense that you don't have to label it the mind. Maybe that ability is gone, or in the moment when you're empty, you're not calling the mind the mind, but you still know the mind. Just like you know the presence, you know sight, you know hearing. You don't have to use the word sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell. What is the trick? The trick is it's not mind, it seems. That is the trick. It presents itself as not mind, or is it something else? It presents a proposition in the form of a truth, but is never the truth. Just contemplate this for a few minutes and then we'll read. It presents a proposition in the form of the truth, but it is actually never the truth.

Really, most of satsang has been about the one question which is one of my favorites is: What do you know when you know nothing?

So when we are an un-knowing, knowing nothing, you know, just knowing... knowing nothing is not knowing. It's not nothing. I think it's just knowing the source.

Nothing. The source. Where do you know that?

But it is never the truth. Just contemplate this. And then we read and it presents a proposition in the form of the truths, but it is actually never the truth. For really, most of satsang has been about the one question, which is one of my favorites: What do you know when you know nothing?

So when we are knowing nothing, you know, just knowing... knowing nothing is not knowing it's not nothing. I think it's just knowing the source.

Nothing. The source. Where do you know that? There, only there. That, where do you know it? You just know it. It's not a thought. It's just you know that everything is appearing in there. So the thing is that you just have to be careful of the process of translation. Are you all noticing that? That how heart inside is just mostly ineffable? Can't really convey. And yet in satsang we attempt to convey, but the attempt to convey must be fully led by the heart itself. Because if the attempt to convey becomes intellectual, then again it takes on the shape of the spiritual knowledge, spiritual understanding. So just, you're all doing well. Just allow yourself to remain there and if anything has to come from there, let it come. Don't dip into it and say, 'Ah, this is water molecule, this is what it looks like, it's hydrogen, oxygen,' you know, all this stuff. If that is just happening from your heart organically, it is fine. But be careful of this process of translation because the truth actually will get lost in translation. Although the words may ring true still, but the fragrance will go missing. You all, you all trying this? You just... and it only needs a deepening of faith because it is very scary for us to look foolish, to not know in which way we are articulating, what are we going to say next. So we rely on our ability to conceptualize to keep us safe in that way, is it? Instead of that, just let go. Allow it to be truly heartfelt. This is very, very different from many people who say, 'Oh, I just let go and I just speak whatever comes to me.' It may be the opposite of that, actually. So it is not that, it is not spontaneity in that way. It is fully soaked in love, fully soaked in presence, very, very heartfelt. So meet everything from here and share everything from here. Don't be scared.

Before we go to the reading of the Ramacharitmanas, it is coming like this. There's another project for the Sangha which is brewing here, which has been brewing for quite some time, but we'll see what the timeline is for that, how we, how that unfolds. But I want to share the links with you so you can start diving in a little bit. Maybe I give you a bit of a taste. So these are the Saloks of Sheikh Farid from the Guru Granth Sahib. This is a nice rendition because it has translation as well. So one of the satsangs, or a few satsangs, like we did Ashtavakra Gita a few years ago, maybe we can just dive into this. So today I'm just sharing the translation with you. Maybe I play it for a few minutes to give you a sense.

So these are the words of the holy sage, Sheikh Farid Ji. And it's beautiful that, you know, where we find these words in the Sikh scripture of the Guru Granth Sahib. So it just tells you about how beautiful all sages, all seekers of God, were considered at one point where these boundaries of religion etc. didn't apply. And so a beautiful Sheikh, which you would call him from the Sufi tradition or the religion of Islam, is found... all his words at least in India are found in the Sikh holy scripture called the Guru Granth Sahib Ji. But all of them are just sung in 16 minutes, so maybe one satsang we can just go through all and contemplate deeply. They are very, very beautiful. Okay.