Who Is Aware of Everything and Nothing? - 13th Sept. 2016

So that which is aware of the black hole, is that also black? No, you see? So black hole also is seen. That which is aware of this where everything seems to be moving about, dancing, or this big black space—let's go to that which is aware even of this. What is the color of this one?

There is no, there is no color here.

If there is no color, is there a size? Is there a shape? Is it a void? Is it a thing?

No, it's nothing. This no-thing.

Where are you in relation to this one?

Somehow there's a certain shyness to say that I'm truly that, I'm truly actually that. It's, it's like it's although... but yeah, there is a sense of, of look, of localness somewhere that, like, it seems like I'm switching. Either I am looking at it or I'm actually looking from it at what I believe to be me.

Try to look from a localized me. Try to look from there and tell me who is aware of that. Okay, localized me. Who's aware? Yes, first you try to look from this localized sense of me and then see whether that which is aware of this localized sense of me is actually enclosed locally somewhere.

No.

You see? Because what could be really looked from that localized me? You cannot really, cannot believe it. You see, your mind is giving you some visuals to convince you that the painting of the truth or the painting of awareness... first it gives you some big black space; for some they see some white light. You see? So the mind is trying to fulfill your requests right now, saying that these pictures will show you the truth of who you are. But the mind cannot win in this because that which is aware of these pictures—can we make a picture out of that one? No, cannot make a picture of that, you see. So it's painting all kinds of paintings, might even give you many interpretations, but there is awareness of all of this movement which in itself you cannot paint or describe, isn't it? No, you see? So this, if it cannot be seen like this, if it cannot be found through logic also, you see, then how is... how do you know of its existence?

Well, if I cannot experience it, I must, I must, I must be it.

Well, you can't experience the moon—or let's say you can't experience Pluto—does that make you Pluto?

Come again? If I could not experience a... no, that's true. But let's say, let's say... but I mean there is a... like it exists, but it doesn't exist as an experience.

Yes, this is it. Yes.

But there is some, I mean there's a... and a tremendous certain... I mean there's a living certainty that it exists. Not a record, not an intellectual certainty. It's like everything that would know something is penetrated by that. I don't know.

Yes, put it very good, very good. So therefore when you check 'Am I aware now?' on what basis is this answered? What basis? Yes, I'm presuming you would say yes. So on what basis do you say yes?

Um, well that it seems so like it is unescapable in a way. There is no, there is nothing apart of, of that. Uh, that I'm... I could not not be aware. That's what I mean.

Yes, yes, yes. So and yet it is not seen as an experience. It's not experienced phenomenally, isn't it? I just want to make sure that you're not going with some visual again.

Yeah, yeah, no, it's not seen as an experience. Very good. And still certain states come up for, for the dynamic consciousness when attention moves to that point, uh, to the, this pointless... I mean like a sense of vastness of all these sensations come up and I see that sometimes I kind of mistake awareness for a sensation, for a kind of spiritual sensation which has led me back to the person many times before. Yes, because there were some very beautiful spiritual sensations and they were kind of... and in everyday life they are not present sometimes. There's very earthly sensations and then there's a... the thought comes 'Okay, you're not in it anymore.' But how? That's such a... that's very limited thought actually.

Yes. So now speaking from the perspective of this awareness, where are these sensations in relation to you?

Well, they... I'm aware of their beginning and I'm aware of their ending. They... so they, they are with... I'm beyond them. Yes, but they are part of... they come from me. They are not separate from me.

Yes. Is there a sense of a primary sensation which seems like the basis for all other sensations?

Yes, it's a... it's not a very concrete sensation. It's not a sensation with a lot of attributes, but it is like... yes, there is. So there is some kind of primary sensation that says that, that it's like a reference point for the other sensations. What I perceive comes, is reported to this, similar as attention, but also attention reports to, to this sense of, of presence.

Very good, very good. So can you find a point of intersection between awareness and presence? Is there a point at which they meet?

Well, I don't, I don't know how they cannot meet. I don't know if there's a point where they do not meet. They are completely, uh, they're... it's, it's like... I don't know. I can give some pictures but I feel they, they are very... this awareness was there before the sense of presence was there.

Yes. Yeah. And yet they are not two now, isn't it? Although the sense of presence is there, yes, it is still one with awareness. Yes, it is still made of this awareness.

Yes. Now there is some very strong sensations, some very, um, like space expansion, all those things coming up. But I, I see I don't need to, to, to prioritize them to this neutral seeing. They're not... not because they are stronger they are more significant. It feels like, like I'm still, I st... the, the most beautiful is that still I, I just... there's I, that's all just being seen.

Yes. And from the perspective of this seeing, is there something as strong or weak?

Not, not really. No, I, I see how still something is reporting strength and weakness. Something is still measuring, something is still, uh...

Yes. So this form of interpretation, this one is the one I call the checker guy. So you leave this guy with me today because this checker guy will give you a lot of trouble otherwise, you see? Keep checking how much is this, how what percentage of awareness are you, how free are you—he'll keep checking all of this and just keep evaluating the different experiences that you have, the spiritual experiences also, and it will try to keep giving your report card, you see? But it is also the same guy operating as the checker and reporter which you have to make sure you leave here today. There is a lot of identity connected to that.

Yes, yes, yes.

Because vigilance has been confused to be this checking, which it is not, you see? What is vigilance? Vigilance is just remaining open. And once there's a sense of some prick, this sense of a pinprick or suffering or something, we're not to be in denial of that, but just to remain open and check: What is it? What rotten fruit have I put in my basket again? See which belief have I got in my basket again? To look like that and throw it away—that is vigilance. Vigilance is not a constricted state of constantly, you know, checking, checking, you see? It's like constantly we're checking what is what—it's not like that. Yes, yes. It's just this simple remaining open, but not to be in denial of something. If something feels like there is a suffering, then we check: What is the misbelief? What is the identity I have picked up in my basket again? And we look at that and we throw it away. That is vigilance, you see? Many have confused that to mean some sort of a constricted state of constantly just checking as if you're a scared soldier in a war zone or something like that, you see? Yeah, but it's not like that. There's no fear in that.

There is no fear. Yes, there is no fear in the vigilance. This is very good, very good way to put it. It is just a simple open allowing and just a simple checking with this with no, no, no, I want it to be this way, I hope no identity comes. It is not all of that.

Yes, yes. It's good news. I don't need that checker because that cannot be freedom. If you constantly just, you're fully checking it for everything, that cannot be freedom, you see? So freedom must mean allowing everything, all states to come, but openly looking. Not to be in some sort of Advaita denial of things, just check: What is the experience here? And we know that if there is a sense of suffering, in the sense of 'ouch' or kind of thing, then we know that we picked up the wrong idea. So to openly look for that bad apple and to throw it out—this is simply, you see? Because the suffering will announce itself. It will.

Yes, no need to... yes.

And our sensitivity will become so much. Our sensitivity becomes so much that the slightest pinch of suffering now is experienced. So unless we try to repress it or push it under the carpet or just, you know, fight with it saying 'I am awareness, I am awareness, I cannot suffer,' you see? But just to be open and to look and say, 'No, there is this belief here, there is this identity here. Who is it? Who am I?' You see? To then use the inquiry to throw away these rotten beliefs is simply vigilance. But we don't have to be constantly just in this fearful state.

Yeah, it will announce itself like you said very beautifully. Very good. I'm so happy this is possible. Thank you very, very much for sharing the satsang like that.

Thank you so much, my dear. I'm also very, very happy to see you. Thank you. Okay, so you...