Who Is Recognizing the Truth of Who You Are? - 7th December 2017

This is the power of this now. All that you thought you would have to do to find this freedom is already done for you already. And anything you add to this answer paper, you'll only deduct your marks. You want to add one part over there, something... what is that? Everything is done. It is complete. You are getting full marks, passing with flying colors. But the mind wants to insert its 'I' also. 'I also studied. God has done everything for me, but I want to show that I have also contributed to my freedom.' So many times in satsang, this is what is happening.

No, but when the mind is commenting, 'Are you sure this is the right answer? Because you're not...' this is exactly this. So one day you will see that everything that you mix, anything that you mix with the mind, will quickly come to zero. Zero not in a good way, like zero marks. Now the trouble is that some of you have studied too much, so you are unwilling to accept that all there has to be done is just here. And naturally, then you want to write, 'No, no, I will write the better answer.' It is still not that. That which is naturally available is your own presence, naturally. And it is so apparent to you that you are aware of it. Not a step you have to take, not a letter you have to write.

So when I say don't be attached so much to 'my way,' it is the same as saying don't be so attached to your concepts, your answers. Many of you actually haven't seen most of that; we're trying to figure it out. But it cannot be figured out because you cannot solve this empirically using the insight you have through your senses. You cannot bring your absolute Self; we cannot resolve this as a rationalist. You cannot reason your way to the truth. You can reason your way away from the false to a great extent, and that reasoning is helpful. But to drop this identity of the one that is looking or the one that is reasoning—one's Self is beyond intellect. If coming to freedom was the cost for any of us to do, nobody could do it. If coming to freedom was like a scientific discovery, then nobody would find it. Or it is called a recognition of what is. The answer is already here.

You cannot even see it is blowing in the wind. The wind is blowing in the arms. Did nobody get my work done in there? Getting to work... it is neither too difficult nor too simple. It just is. In this example, to fill in the blank is contrary to the best answer. So what are you going to fill it with? Because the question is 'I am ____.' Okay, you were to fill into this one. The mind will always have an answer for you to say something, some version of something. It might even be saying 'Self, Self, Self' or 'nothing.' Neither of those answers actually, ultimately, because even behind these can lie a concept. The Self that you are is completely apparent. You are not filling the blank with something. The Self that you are, no-thing, is completely apparent when you're not filling the blank with even the 'nothing.'

Often I say that if all that has happened in satsang is that we have replaced the concept 'I am a person' with the concept 'I am aware' or the concept of the 'Self,' then it is not better. Full set, empty of all concepts.

Little bit, Father. Sometimes you take us on a ride of emptiness where even 'I' do not exist. How is that related to what you say now?

I say that when you are empty of all notions, the truth of 'I' is... look, let's take an example. I shared this the other day also with reference to this. Now, this glass has a potential to contain something. So this one contains, to some level, this water, and the rest of it is empty, isn't it? The rest of it here is empty. But does that mean it is nothing? It doesn't make it nothing, because if it were nothing, you don't have the potential to hold something. So although it is filled with nothing, it is still possible to fill something in it. Therefore, it is not that 'nothing.' If it was nothing, it could not hold anything. In nothing, you cannot hold anything.

So as you empty of all your notions, you see that you are no-thing. No thing exists in this. This no-thing still has the potential for this entire play of being and all the appearances that come with it. Who can understand this? For them, saying if it was nothing, then could it ever hold something? If the rest of this glass is nothing, then the question is: why do you say that you are nothing? There is no 'you' or 'I' in this; it is just this. Yes. So either this is something which is being recognized by you, or you are just making it up. And if it is being recognized by you, this is the 'you' that I am talking about, which is no-thing.

You're right that there is no separation. You and I are there, but that's why I said this 'I' is a chameleon; it is used to describe anything. Yes, I am no-thing, that no-thing which contains all things. So do you think 'I' makes an important one? So it is not saying that you are not void, but fullness. Yes, it is that. But many say, many call this ability, this potential to have fullness within itself, they call it the void. I have seen many times in Buddhism what they are saying is exactly what we're saying in Vedanta, but the terminology is different. So some actually say 'void' implying nothingness; some actually say 'void' implying no-thing also. So let me not get too worried about that as long as it is clear that this no-thing which I'm pointing to is not the 'nothing.' And also remember that it is not spatial; I just used the spatial metaphor to explain it to you.

So it's not like an empty glass or interior. It is just that in that no-thing, all things arise, including your very existence. And all of this is apparent in you completely when you are not believing something right now. You are that no-thing. It is not a mystery. All the clues are pointing to this. Sages ask: what witnesses all that is changing, all that is moving? What is aware of your existence? If it were that 'nothing,' how would it be aware? It's nothing. I prefer to use the term 'no-thing' because it is not a thing. Now, you cannot fathom this; you cannot solve it mentally. You cannot compute what I'm saying. This kind of seeing can only happen in your recognition when you have... and even then, you will struggle to find the words to express this because the words are not meant to. It will be created as phenomenal constructs to describe a phenomenal experience.

If you say that this no-thing is not self-aware, then you are still visualizing, because even to see this needs awareness. So if you see that you are no-thing, who is aware that it is not self-aware? That's why I tell you: don't try to compute it, don't try to figure it, don't try to visualize, and don't be so much in a rush to come up with the answer, because you could come to these kind of false conclusions. What you're saying is that 'I am aware that it is not even self-aware,' and so how could he say... better to keep quiet.

That knowingness which I'm speaking of is beyond all the concepts of knowing. You only are speaking of perceptual knowing, conceptual knowing, sensory knowing, sensational moving. What is that which moves all of this? Where does this moving, all this knowing, where does it get the power? But for the first time, it seems that picking up the guitar or not picking up through resistance are both effort. The question comes, and the people... what is your proposition? Something? No. Nothing? No. No position, no reference point. Most large minds, one more overt organs.

That in which all things are possible and yet nothing can hurt you and scratch you—that conceptless reality is yourself. Where all notions are completely... but no notion is you. There is no body, just a set of sensations. There is no mind, just a set of sensations. We have just used notions to define a collective of sensations. You see what I'm saying? 'Body'—when you see, what does it contain? What does the term 'body' contain from your experience? Only this sensation that you experience now, whether they are visual sensations or they are perceived in a different way sensationally. 'Mind'—another set of sensations, a set of sensations which are these energy constructs that we call thoughts and similar ones like imagination, memory. But do they have any real existence? Is there something called the mind really? Is there something called the body really? It's just labels for perceptions, labels for appearances. What is beyond these appearances, beyond these labels? That's why I said, look for that which is not coming and going, because we got so caught up in these labels, these notions of body.

Sensation, a set of sensations which are these energy constructs that we call thoughts, and similar ones like imagination, memory—but do they have any real existence? Is there something called the mind, really? Is there something called the body, really? It's just labels for perceptions, labels for appearances. What is beyond these appearances, beyond these labels? That's why I said, you see, look for that which is not coming and going, because we got so caught up in these labels, these notions of body, which create this false notion of 'me' as the 'me'. Who's the 'me'? Even more abstract than the notion of the body and the mind is the notion of some vague entity which seems to be the owner of this body and this mind. But only this body, my dear? I'm not even a clear idea; it's a terrible idea.

So, who does 'I' represent? How long will it represent just this binary of 'me' and 'you'? Is anything which is real about you? And if there is something which is real about you, now 'I' has to represent that. Is there anything which is timeless about you? Now 'I' has to represent that. Is there anything which witnesses all things and yet itself is not a thing? Now 'I' has to represent that. That is only with the representation. The changing feelings and sensations and pain and pleasure and desire and doing—all of this is the realm of change. And since my experience of body is just knowing of some sensations, this seems very apart, yes. But it is not just knowing itself; it is the knowing mixed with an interpretation of the mind, mixed with the label, mixed with the notion 'body'. If you did not have the notion 'body', then it is just what you see: the knowing of sensations, this natural witnessing of all sensations.

And then it says, 'Better refer to it as "that" as "I" is a comedian.' No, what? Even 'that' is not good to refer to, because many times I've seen in satsang that you could have a very direct insight of the Self and quickly the mind comes and makes it 'that'. Then your next question is, 'Nothing is happening to that, but what about me?' So when you make it 'that', you presume a sense of distance from that. That is the problem with the word 'that'. That's why no word can actually fit this. Could you make it with 'that'? Yes. 'Father, nothing is happening to that, I know you just say that is me, but can you speak about me for a minute?' But what did you just see? That you are that. So very quickly, we pick up the position of the 'me' again, even if you represent it as 'that'. 'That', 'this', 'I'—all these words we can try. You have to come to this wordless recognition, and then for some time you can leave the words to me. Don't be so quick to have the right representation. You get used to remaining motionless.

I know for a while it can feel... many of you are getting used to... an example is coming. Yeah, really, drive a car very, very gently. I don't drive a car, so still when I'm sitting in the front seat, all the passengers in the front seat, any time it happens that there's something like coming in front or something, my leg automatically wants to brake. I don't know if you have this experience. So we've been like this in this passenger seat, actually pretending as if you're driving. 'Which way should I go, left or right?' Because the driver is pretending, you still pretend to brake, pretend to accelerate. So for a while, when we step back and you remain motionless—we step back, no acceleration, no braking—you can feel a bit shaky. You can feel like when events are coming up in life, something you feel like, 'I must pick up my driving again.' But allow yourself to experience that shakiness a little bit. Then you start to enjoy the ride.

Did you keep thinking, 'Okay, now I learned to do this in satsang today, so how does it help me to drive better next year? Can I lead my life in a better direction because now I know something?' No. You allow yourself to be empty. No nowhere to go, no direction, no speeding up, no slowing down. Your gear is in neutral anyway. So just allow this driving. Better you... it's time for... sitting with Guruji, but sorry, expressing our gratitude. That is... you know, do that. Thank you all so much for being in satsang. Pranam. Om Shanti Shanti Shanti.