You Don’t Have To Determine the Nature of Anything - 22nd February 2021

There's so many examples we've taken in the past, like the what is it called, the amputee phantom limb, the rubber glove. The rubber glove experiment where the subject of the experiment, they were asked to keep their hands at a distance like this, and then there was a false hand that was put there and that other hand was blocked, your real hand. It was just put there. Then for a while, what you do is you stimulate both hands with some feather or brush or something together, and then what happens is that this false rubber hand is poked with a pin and you can feel the sensation of the pin although that which you called your hand was never poked.

So our consciousness has the ability to experience whatever sensation, but the causative idea that comes from the body cannot be verified, you see. And we don't have to dispute it, but at least it makes it doubtable. And to make it doubtable is enough, you see. It is our convictions, it is our beliefs which keep us caught up in the limited idea about ourselves. So empty of that which needs belief and of that which needs conviction, what is it that is apparent to you? Oh, come on, a lovely sari as always. What does he mean? Thank you, I love this stuff. Good to see you within, what, a year now? And you'll notice that, you'll notice that I'm not saying anything new since the last time you killed me.

So one asked the question: 'Is knowing that I am aware a case of knowing too much?' Yes, you see. So when we see knowing that 'I am aware,' so I am putting 'I am aware' in quotes, you see. So in quotes means that we make a notion out of it. But without that, you see, what is there? Is it expressible? We may point to it as awareness, we may point to it as 'I am aware,' but does it really contain the truth in the way we think it means? You can look at this like, what is the difference between self-knowledge and the notion that I am aware? In self-knowledge also it is clear that I am aware, I am this awareness itself, but those words don't really, yeah, they don't really serve the purpose at best, as pointers or if we need to communicate what the discovery is.

So, yes, so there's an idea. Let's take a simpler idea. We say that 'I exist,' but you exist independent of the idea 'I exist.' There is 'I existness' to you which is independent of the notion 'I exist.' Like suppose you did not understand any language or, say, speak any language, you would not be able to say 'I exist' and yet it will be clear that you exist. Yes? So that innocent intelligence, you see, which, I don't know, I say this sometimes, a child is not born, 'Oh, it's time for me to cry, so let me start crying.' No, it's just born. 'Okay, I'm hungry, I want milk.' You see, it just happened. So all these activities, so all these natural activities, what intelligence drives that? The same intelligence which is beating our hearts, which is making our pure glands function, same intelligence.

So that intelligence makes the whole world function. Now, in human arrogance, what has happened is that we have taken our notional intelligence, or what we think is true in our heads, and we have given that primacy over that natural intelligence. So Satsang is nothing but returning to that innocence, that innocent intelligence which, by the way, is the driving force of this holy moses, the guiding light as well as the screen. And our conceptual knowledgeability just gets in our way. This gets in our way of that recognition. That is why the irony is that the words of Satsang like this can sound like, 'I don't think I can really understand this stuff,' you see. 'What is he talking about? What do you know when you know nothing? What kind of thing is that?' It can sound very confusing to the mind and yet it's so apparent in our hearts.

So the attempt is to do a mind bypass, as Guruji says. The attempt is to do a... so this recognition is the greatest gift that you can give to yourself. Greatest gift that anyone can give to themselves, the gift of that which always is. Sounds strange. Next one says, 'Knowing too much means that it is a thought or a belief of an I that knows.' Yes, thoughts can come and go, you see, but to know conceptually means to believe. Next one says, 'Everything that appeared after or to I is in time and it also seems I giving birth to all knowing is the only knowing that is not in time but that gives birth to time.' Yes, but don't know this. So what have we learned? What is independent of all learning, independent of anything that you can learn?

Hmm, so simple. Simple but not easy. We don't need to, maybe it's easier. If we are attached to egoic identity, it can seem very difficult. It can seem very difficult if you are unattached to ego space. Attachment to ego means attached to an idea about yourself, an idea about the world, some piece of knowledge which you feel like you have to hold on to, either to exist or to do well in life or to make this play go around. Right now, in the realm of your existence, what needs effort? Remember to remember anything? You need to remember anything to go to the mind? Now let's say, what vital functions are not happening by themselves?

And what has happened is that by habit we seem to have made thinking a vital function, but it is just trying to decipher the narrative of the story of love, trying to give meaning to that which is too broad for meaning. Trying to own life in a way which is the thinking process. 'What does this mean? What does this mean?' But our constant attempt is to answer this. So because it is fundamental to 'what's in it for me' that we come to an understanding of what is, what does this mean? Because without meaning you cannot make a meaning. And every moment of your waking state is beyond your capacity to make meaning, and yet we have taken so many years of an apparent experience of this waking state and made a meaning out of it, a story out of it.

When that story dissolves, what dissolves? And what it means when the story dissolves, what dissolves and what remains? And every story dissolves, who remains? That may also be history. What is investigating? What does it mean to exist? Does that 'be' ever not be? To be or not to be? Does that 'to be' which is existing ever not be? And is that contrast also emotional? Is the notion of contrast with self emotional? How many have I lost? Who's stuck with this tendency? Oh God is held hostage to tendency. Is there anything else besides God? Anyone else besides God? Yes, it can feel like there is a habit, there's a impulse, there's a tendency to revert back to a conceptual way of living, a storified way of living. But it is just, that's why we call it, we rather call it a play of consciousness rather than to feel like there is actual hostile situation happening. There's nothing can hold blood positivity.

So the symptoms are good. What are the symptoms of divesting from the story? That you find yourself in Satsang. That's one. It doesn't have to be this kind of, any part of the aspect of the play when you're removing these, removing that, any of the stories is Satsang in one way or the other. So what I've described to you now is simply encapsulated in open and empty. Because the mind will keep saying, 'So okay, now I get this, so what do I do?' Just remain open. Open means everything can come, everything, every perception, sensation and thought, everything you see. Anything that comes, fundamentally the perception, but we don't even have to categorize what type of perception. All perception can come, everything can come, you see.

And empty means nothing can stay. So something comes, how do you make it stay? Correct, and hold on to what? What can we hold on to? Just an idea. You cannot actually hold on to a perception because you have no tool like that. You may try to do it with attention, you see, but can't do it. Everything that comes goes. So we hold on to our idea or something should stay or this should not come, with or without identification with the thought. So empty means we remain conceptually empty, not resisting anything, not grasping at anything, not trying to put anything in our pocket, not even trying to discard anything. That discarding happens on its own.

That opening empty is the unborn. Is your notion, this existence, how to suffer here? How to suffer? Maharaja, you are not experiencing suffering, you are suffering your experience. It means no suffering is inherent in any experience. How to make this juice, how to make this suffering juice out of experience? You have to make it. Firstly, it's not part of the raw material to squeeze out. It sounds strange, that's why I'm belaboring the point. You may feel like the experience or anything inherently brings suffering along with it, but that is not the case. Okay, let's try the reverse experiment. If you try it hard enough, is there any experience that you cannot suffer from? It's a good flip, no? Is there any experience you cannot suffer from? You'll find a way to suffer very quickly too. Who's with me? You see that, isn't it? That if you work with your mind, it can make every perceptual moment, every perceptual experience into a suffering experience. You see, I said Guruji said there is no inherent meaning in a...

Along with it, but that is not the cure. Okay, let's try the reverse experiment. If you try it hard enough, is there any experience that you cannot suffer from? It's a good flip, no? Is there any experience you cannot suffer from? You'll find a way to suffer very quickly, too. Who's with me? You see that, isn't it? That if you work with your mind, it can make every perceptual moment, every perceptual experience, into a suffering experience. You see, I said Guruji said there is no inherent meaning in anything in the world; it is always the perspective that we bring to it. It's an explosive statement, you see, because our whole endeavor has been to look at the realm of perception and say, 'What does this mean? What does this mean? What does this mean?' And the central character, the protagonist of this meaning-making, has always been the 'me'.

So I would have the Zen story of the elephant again; it's my favorite story, probably. Is this defining scene? What is the inherent meaning even in words? If I was to say 'time', what is the thing in itself? So satsang is where you come to let go of that which you are hugging tightly because you think it is helping you. You are coming to release all of that so that you can become free. It's like the deconstructive antidote to all the construction exercises you've been doing all your life. And in that questioning, you realize that actually I know none of this. As I say, what do you know? What do we know? What do we know, really? What does 'to know' even mean? Is there such a thing as to know? Who knows? Who can know? Can that be known? And yet all of this is about self-knowledge.

What is the Vasistha? Do you have it easy? I love that it came across, it came here on Facebook or something, and I found it very, very straightforward. When the notion of an external knowable has been removed, self-knowledge arises. That's it. And the notion of an external knowable is removed, self-knowledge arises. And what is an external knowable? Anything. Anything that we have traditionally taken to be knowledgeable perception, you know, the perception, meaning-making of perception into conceptual knowledge, you see. So the four goals actually is contained in that one statement. The exercise of the four goals is contained in this one statement: when the notion of an external knowable is removed, self-knowledge arises. No concept of person, no person presence, no presence becomes irrelevant, becomes relevant, and that it becomes irrelevant also becomes available, you see.

Otherwise, we can rest, we can find a new resting place in the negation. Because let the negations also be provisional, isn't it? The axe is used to chop everything, but then you don't become axe-worshipers. Throw the axe. Otherwise, we can just go from this: 'Oh, this was the meaning,' and now we can get to know that this is meaningless. But meaninglessness is also a meaning that we make to define the conceptually unknown, you see. And the intellect has these boundaries like meaning or meaningless, up or down, left or right, higher or lower, highest to lowest. So all of these boundaries are actually where the notion of trapped entry is. So you will not go from bondage to freedom because both ideas are just in the intellect. You will transcend both ideas.

It's symbiotic in the way that these ideas hang on to 'me' and 'me' hangs on to these ideas. Nothing survives without the 'me'. The 'me' is made up of ideas and ideas need the 'me' as the board on which you can hang the pin-up notes or whatever. So let's even look at this exercise. So why does it happen like this? How is it? Blah, blah, blah, blah, like a conceptual gap. Wow. So there are a few ways in which the intellect, the mind, works. Probably 'why' and 'what' are the two most popular. But 'why', you see, and it comes just after I said, 'But what do we actually know?' Do we know anyone? Why anything? Give me a good answer to why anything. Why you exist? That's the substratum, that's the basis for the rising of every other 'why'. Because it sleeps there. There's no 'why'. Why you exist must be the primal 'why' we must ask. Why do you exist? Nobody knows.

So we give provisional answers like, 'It suddenly somehow had a desire to experience itself as the manifest and manifest.' All of those, if you really look, are not just nonsensical reasons, but it's just a way to shut the intellect, to give you answers. So why anything? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. That may be better than any other answer because you can't make much out of it. You can still make something. Why not? Yes, no, yesterday, tomorrow, past, future. So we can take all of this and everything in the middle and throw it in the river. Yeah, it will go because each thought is being not true, not to be verified if there is no landing ground. Okay, think of a hungry mongoose. Now forget about it. Ready to do mongooses. So that which never came, where will it go? That which is just a bundle of thoughts, where is its house?

Hello, Father. Hello. Um, Father, there is this recognition of identity with the doer, the doership, and it seems to be a—I don't know, it just feels as if lifetimes of doership that keeps coming up and finding it very sticky. Rather, it's just that conditioned in a way of having been brought up in this life also with the concept of becoming something and doing. And then it's so insidious, it just catches up so subtly, Father. And I just wanted to, like, this full recognition that the trap happens and there is a sudden flick of identity and then the doership just becomes so heavy. And as you were saying today in satsang, that you know, it's just about being. And there is frustration, Father, which is seen around this also now. Why is the identity and the doership so sticky that it's—I'm just wondering.

So the question is, what should we do about it?

Yes, Father, I just want to like—

You didn't get my joke. Yeah, I know, because the doership is so heavy right now that the joke is also so heavy. What can we do? Yeah, nothing, isn't it? And that either to do something or to not do anything is also doership. How do you know it is heavy? There is sensation in the body that comes with the thought of not wanting it. When that comes up, how many kilograms is the sensation? Not that heavy. It's not that heavy. But yeah, if heaviness or strongness is too-muchness, it must need first a definition of how big or small you are. So if you have a boundary which is this much by this much, then if something comes this much, then you can say, 'This is small for me' or 'This is big for me.' For the boundaryless, what is too much or too little, you see?

So sometimes the mind plays this trick. Sorry, I'm just stretching my hand because I feel a bit of a pull, but it plays this trick where it can feel like we still have something to do, something is left to be done because my notion of doership is not yet done. You see? But we don't realize or recognize that that doership itself is getting amplified in this notion of devotion, in this notion of 'What do I do?' Give me a few minutes, my dear, I'll just be back. I'm just going to turn the video off and stretch my... all right, sorry about that, I'm back. So what we were exploring is this nature of this affliction which you feel like is so real. Are you certain about that?

Only when—no, it's very doubtable. At least we can say that, no? Yes, very doubtable. And primarily because the one who is afflicted by it, what can we say about that one? Unreal. Doesn't exist.

So quick, I love it. Now then, what is it? If the sufferer is unreal, whose problem are we solving?

But it's just this memory of an identity, Father, that comes up every now and then. And it's a memory because the moment you put the light of awareness on it, it's like a ghost, it's like a shadow. It's a shadow self.

What is the memory? Something which has a claim as if it represents the past, but actually only happens in the future. So this is the nature of the human condition where actually the device that we have to make claims about what is and what is true is not up to the task at all. This is the device being the mind. The intellect is able to say, 'Ah, this is like this, this is actually how this works, this is how this happened.' Once we start really looking at it, you notice that it's just garbage. We can't say anything. All past is only in the future. So can we say fundamentally, if I was to propose to you that to suffer you have to know something, and that knowing could be spiritual knowledge as well, what would you say about that?

It's a concept that you suffer. Yes, that you suffer with that concept, and that type of concept could be what we call worldly or spiritual.

Yeah, didn't think of it like that. Like spiritual seekers are suffering from trying to get rid of the notion of doership as much as people in the world may be suffering from guilt and pride. Maybe more. The last time we almost feel like saying 'guilty of that', but that's again a... so our spiritual stethoscope, which I was talking about last time, you see, is loaded, is pre-loaded with all of these concepts. And then these tiny, tiny things, you see, they come and they go in the play of existence, and the nature of the mind is to grasp onto that and say, 'See, that is still there. You are not free enough.' You see? But this 'you' is nobody. And that space in which all appearances come and go is never bound by any appearance. And that which is aware of that space of existence, there is no question of bondage or freedom for that one because the entirety of existence is just the manifest aspect of its own self.

So crystal clear with your guidance, Father. It's so crystal clear. It's just that there's an eclipse that comes once in a while and yeah, I can see that also now.

One strange request I will make to you—it may sound strange. Only if you have clarity will it be eclipsed. No legs to stand on, no branch to hang from. See, otherwise what will happen is we will limit this insight into a notional clarity, and tomorrow when the other notion comes, it will seem to attack that notion of clarity and then we say, 'I got eclipsed again.' So don't make anything into anything. Otherwise it can feel like there's another treasure of clarity that I have to guard. And then the mind comes, and the mind comes with this, and it is so strong. 'Ah, see, I got caught. I was so clear when I was talking to Ananta and look now again.' If you had no label to capture this experience, then could it be attacked? Not at all.

No. Thank you, Father. Thank you so much. Just wanted to expose this sense of... it's not heavy anymore. Thank you.

Okay, then I see Loni, but I remember her as Vijaya. It's been a long time. I can't hear you, my dear. Are you saying something? Okay, we don't hear or see you, so we'll come back to you in a moment. You want to try now? We still don't...

Namaste. So it felt auspicious and good to come today in front of you. This last day, somehow it feels like something opens and then closes or resists a little bit to this recognition, but at the same time it's very clear that this is not the truth, no? And I just wanted to expose and lay this at your feet. And if you feel any guidance, and to live here and to come into this heart that it's beyond any movement, it will be very beautiful. Thank you.

Thank you. So I feel very good. I feel very good about what you're saying. But just to help everyone, what is open without any notion? Yes, it is awareness. What is awareness without any notion? Yes, this, without any notion. Yes, it's good. We are just communicating, so we have to use some word, but you get the idea, isn't it? That if we make an idea of 'open to the truth' or 'closed to the truth', and anytime we are open to what we think is happening is openness to the truth, it can be attacked by the mind with the idea of 'closed to the truth', you see. Just like I was telling you earlier, that if we get an idea that I...

Yes, it is awareness. What is awareness without any notion? Yes, yes, this, without any notion. Yes, it's good, we are just communicating so we have to use some word, but you get the idea, isn't it? That and if we make an idea of open to the truth or close to the truth, and anytime we are open to what we think is happening is openness to the truth, it can be attacked by the mind with the idea of close to the truth, you see. Just like I was telling you earlier that if we get an idea that I came to Satsang and then speaking to Ananta there was such clarity, you see, that is already like a flag saying commitment, you know. We don't see it because we feel like, okay, this I got this, or that's just an open invitation to the mind which comes and says, 'Clarity? I'll give you cloudiness, blurriness,' you see. So anything that we can define will be attacked, okay? So many times we get into this kind of play of the opposite: 'I'm so open when I'm in Satsang that when I go to the marketplace of the world I become close again.' Really? Do we actually know any of this? At best they're kind of pointers, but who are they talking about, you see? So don't judge yourself on these parameters. In fact, don't judge yourself, you see. Don't judge any spirit, don't judge yourselves, just open and empty. That, okay, good point. So the open that I'm talking about is not something that can come and go. Open beyond the notion of opening. Like the minute you try to be open and empty, you're still in a position. You're sitting like this—I'm just representing to make the point—now somebody says, 'What are you doing?' 'Oh, Ananta said be open and empty.' If open is like a state, then we have to be more open than that. To be open is not to be open. You have to add it to these. Who's with me? If you're being open, then you're no longer being open. It's like Guruji jokes, no? He talks about 'be natural.' If you're being natural or you're trying to be natural, you can't be, you see. That's why I talk about the power of now. Like everyone knows in the now there is no problem, you see. All of us have read this beautiful pointing that right now there is no problem. So to be free from suffering, just be in the now, finish. What's the problem? The attempt to be in the now is not in the now. So it can become another mental expedition: 'All I have to do is be in the now,' and it's gone. So it's not a state or an absence of this.

Father, and it feels here like some attachment, like to the perfume of the Self. Like when somehow, or to experience, like somehow when the experience changes then something like uses that to bring again this notion of a person that can come or go out from this, no? Or like an attachment to the openness or the peace that comes with awareness.

Yeah, and that's it. If you notice it, that's it, you see. Because if you make a position with regards to it, which is then 'I am afflicted with this attachment,' you see, then there's no solution to that attachment. So some things will just naturally come into your attention, into your focus, and they'll be spotted and that's it. The mistake we make is that we think that, 'Oh, but really I have this problem which is still left, now what do I do about it? How do I fix it? And what medicine will you send to remove this attachment?' Nothing. You don't have anything like that. So just your noticing is enough. Just noticing, you know? But now that you've noticed it and now you exposed it, forget about it, you see. Otherwise you'll just become like that pretend patient: 'I have this condition.' 'What is the condition?' 'I'm attached to my condition.' But this is the being of the spiritual seeker: 'I am now attached to everything that is supposed to rid me of my attachments.' This is how you define a spiritual seeker. We have this conversation: 'But if I don't even do this stuff now, then what am I going to do? Isn't this supposed to free me from all attachment?' I'm saying yes, let go. But if I let go, then who is it? You're doing well right here. You're doing well. All is good. Okay, I see Jyoti. Well, I don't actually see her.

No, no, I'm here. Sorry, it just got me by surprise. Yeah, it's okay. Winter is coming, I'm dying finally. It's very cold. So you see, not crying. Thumbs up. Not crying yet. Yet, I don't know. Just like, I had the feeling like to somehow to show my face and I can't really see the face so well but again, no. Maybe let me change angle. Oh my god, okay. Still not crying, that's something. For the one who's dying from thirst in the past, but this may be the most absurd. Well, I was thinking to myself that maybe I'm going crazy but oh well, I'd rather be crazy but free.

But so any notion you want to discard as you come up today? It's a tricky question.

No, like I would like to say that maybe there is this another one, but then it's going back. I don't know. It's fine if there's nothing, it's fine. You don't have to wait. No, it's something. It's like, I guess for everyone, this narrative of my story which is like, is it really mine? Who is there to have it? And all those questions. And somehow it gets answered in the heart time and time again, but time and time again something like very strong comes. God knows where. Where is it coming from? Am I creating it all this time?

Ah, so what about the notion of time itself? No, there's no time, it's only in the head. Exactly. So when you say time and time again, we can just give up on the idea of time.

True, yes. So true and yes. And so much today, somehow gratitude. I'm so grateful for even those like doom and gloom days, you know? It's like, I don't know, I know that maybe my mind's plan, it's not like it doesn't like what is happening, but in the somehow the trust in God and its plan, it's just greater, way greater. And even so, like it feels like even to say that I'm grateful, it's such a like maybe a nice feeling to have, but as well as kind of seem quite like an egoic as well. Like I don't know, even such a beautiful feeling is gratitude, to still like, you know, feels like I need to leave it.

So okay, this is beautiful. So this is a very good point. So even the idea of gratitude, is it egoic? Do I have to leave it? Am I being personal when I say that? You see, now if the gratitude is dependent on your idea that you are grateful, then it can be left, you see. And that which can be left should be left. But that which remains, you see, just naturally, that is the only thing which is of any value. So if then we are just referring to, for the sake of communication, that which remains when everything that can be left is left, you see, and calling that gratitude, then that is beautiful. So this is the key: nothing useful is left when you leave everything. And for that which remains when everything has been left, if you need to use some term, some words to communicate that, then we can use the words. There's no trouble with that.

So there's something else I want to say but I'm not really sure yet. Sorry. No, maybe I won't pick up anything. I really don't know what's happening. So maybe it's a good thing, maybe I don't know. It feels like the mind is all over the place like...

Isn't that fun? Let's change all the paradigms. This is fun. The mind is all over the place, it's running around like a crazy monkey. Is that bad news? No, it's fun. Okay, no, this is good.

You reminded me like, let's say if there is like a bad feeling, yeah? It's just like, as I understand, it's not necessarily that it's just something, maybe not even something, right? And like I maybe mentioned before that I find sometimes a feeling of enjoying not the state itself but I don't know, and then I'm like, what is this? Am I like, where does this enjoyment... yeah, I don't know. This is very confusing.

The good news I have for you is that you don't have to determine the nature of anything. Oh my god, this is so... oh okay. I just want to talk to her today, you know? She's just like, yeah, my pointers are just going there, exploding on landing, which is so nice for a change. No, because I feel like each other is so somehow like, like I always keep you at an arm's length somehow, I don't know just...

You're determining the nature of that. Is it how you keep me, you know? No? Oh no, okay. In fact, the theme of today's Satsang has been the whole mind attempt to determine what something is. What does this mean? What is this? It's not equipped for that kind of question. It is not equipped for any of this question concerning reality. So all it offers you is propositions which are very limiting propositions. And then as those propositions are taken to be true, then it can feel like that consciousness which took them to be true itself can feel like it is limiting itself. So that is the whole game of the mind assistant we put on them. So what is the quickest way to be open and empty? This, of course. But slower than this: don't determine the nature of anything. Ah, what is that? You see, and sometimes what happens is that these very simple words like big and small, strong and weak, using these very basic primitive words, they can actually seem to play a part in the role of this sort of limiting expression, limiting consciousness. And because they're so primitive, we leave them uninvestigated or uninquired. So even our simple determination that something is very big or strong, or it's not so strong, it's quite open, you see, or it's closed or weak. We talked about with all the questions today, we're looking at various ways in which we are able to determine what is, but none of those are truly determined. It's just uninquired. Uninquired because these seem to be quite straightforward, like, 'Father, there's a big resistance today,' or 'There's so much openness.' Can we really determine either of these? We're getting to very subtle layers of how we limit ourselves even in these spiritual vocabulary. So you have only one job left, which is to quit the job of determining the nature of anything. I seem to be very pleased with myself for saying that. I'm not getting that reaction. Oh, do you really know that you cannot know, you see, what anything is? You cannot know conceptually what anything is. And to know what is is, you see, you cannot not know it. So although you can never know it conceptually, you can never not know it in reality. It now only depends on what we take to be the valid representative. Something has taken over this voice today which is only speaking like this. It's because I was reading Zen stuff last night, it's not my fault. Even that conceptual knowledge is built on the truth only, you see. Like the base, the substratum. Like 'I am going here,' you know? So 'going here,' all that could be false, but even to be able to make a claim of falsity, first there has to be a claim of truth, isn't it? So you and your existence are the substratum for all lies. So what happens is the lies have to be chopped off till only the truth remains. Same thing or different? Let's see. Yes, it's only a medicine for those who are afflicted with the disease. Even the idea of intuitive knowing is a conceptual idea. Yes, assertion and negation would also be in the realm of conceptual. The idea of intuitive knowledge is conceptual, but the experience... yes, yeah. But the thing is, the minute you define it, it becomes conceptual. Defined by definition means to limit. Like, what is the intuitive knowledge right now, you see? But even that is a definition. Like, the intuitive knowledge is not 'I exist, I exist, I exist, I exist.' So we don't go down there and we catch this 'I exist,' you see. You know what I mean? Like, it is a translation of the discovery for the means of communication. Like this, I've never spoken the truth. Exactly. Good, good, good. Very good. Thank you. Okay, Sita was there, I don't see her now. You can come back when you're ready. Etienne and Niranjan, you put your hand back up or is it from last time? I'll put it down. Okay, Atma here, yeah.

The intuitive knowledge is not 'I exist, I exist, I exist, I exist.' So we don't go down there and we catch this 'I exist,' you see? You know what I mean? Like, it is a translation of the discovery for the means of communication. Like this, I've never spoken the truth. Exactly. Good, good, good. Very good. Thank you. Okay, Sita was there; I don't see her now. You can come back when you're ready. Etienne and Niranjan, you put your hand back up, or is it from last time? I'll put it down. Okay, Atma here.

Yeah, I wanted to try to speak, although I'm just fascinated by the fact that we just let go of everything. So it's a kind of contradictory movement of trying to express something about the letting go of getting hold of things. I remember you told us recently—we were looking at the fact that grasping something is already some suffering, some constriction. I stayed with that quite a lot, and I recognize it today in what we are looking at. It's a vast opening, and so I try to find my way in what I've been just... so yeah, I've already said quite a lot actually. Because the contradiction of trying to grasp the fact that we let go is actually saying much for me, because I'm just looking more deeply than before how much this appearing of 'I' and 'I' grasping and labeling—or as you just said, determining the nature of anything—is just the whole process. In itself, it is the whole process of the world and of the mind. And so I don't want to freeze this vision.

Yeah, and it can't be, then.

And yet I need to share it out loud, or to share it in order even to freeze it less. Because when I keep it by myself, I will try to remind it, you know? All these same movements of the suffering he is describing, I mean, in his statement. So I just see how my whole experience is actually described in his words, and how much the so-called stuckness, which is another definition, is a label on myself and on my inability to grasp or drop and let go. Because whenever I grasp, I don't let go, and so on. So I'm suffering these experiences just as it is said. It's so obvious, and I'm happy I can express it because, yeah, so it's just the flow. I don't have to hold it. So yeah, I just needed to do that. And if you feel to say something to put more fire or more flow or whatever, as you said before, it's correct, but don't know it.

Yeah, so I'm so grateful for you. It's very good, and I'm very happy with your contemplations. Very good, you're going very well. But I'm sorry, I'm struggling today because the clarity of the sound—the level of the sound is good, but the clarity is... I don't know what's happening. Anyway, it goes well with the theme of satsang today. Yeah, quite funny. Don't lie, don't get hold of it, don't hold on to any spiritual concepts. So yeah, you can't hear them well; there's nothing to hold on to. They are unclear anyway and are not true anyway. Yeah, so thank you so much and let's flow. But yes, no grasping at flowing. Okay? That's right. I've made it a few times now because then it can become another thing, and then what can happen is that we get stuck in flow without realizing that it's actually stuckness. All right, thank you, thank you, thank you. Okay, Sita can come.

Hello, hello, my dear. I cannot see you, Father. I want to see you. Yes, okay, now I can see you. I don't know, I just wanted to come up because I'm a little bit tired and I was just wondering, you know, like, what is mind attack? I don't have any mind attack, you know, like I was thinking etc., but I had no mind attack. And yesterday it comes, and I saw what it is, and I couldn't sleep at all. And actually, that's why I wanted to meet you, because I am still like this.

Okay, so let's make a representation of this mind attack thing. So any proposal from the mind is like sniper firing, you know? One man with the rifle or one woman with a rifle firing a sniper. So any proposal—whatever the proposal may be—is like that. Now, when it seems to happen with the area which we have nourished in the past with belief, you see, with a lot of belief or identification, it comes like... then it no longer feels like sniper firing. It can feel like an all-out attack, like, 'You're like this, you're guilty, you haven't done this well,' whatever, whatever, whatever, you see? So then it can feel like it's a mind attack. Now, what can often happen is that I used to call this Donkey Kong Level Two. Like in Level One or Level Two, there's only coconuts; one level there are only barrels; then Level Three there are both coconuts and barrels. So there's like some sensation, and the mind is saying, 'See, see how close you are and how you're feeling,' and you know, all of this. So then it uses the perceptions which by themselves are very innocent, but the mind can pick on these and say, 'Ah, this is what's happening to you.' But the good news is that actually the mind can only speak one proposal at a time, you see?

Father, may you please... another useful proposal? I don't know what this progression is like. Any idea that it could be... yes, yes, I need to do this tomorrow.

Yeah, I mean, it was around some past events. It can be any proposal which seems to offer you a version of what is, you see? This is how it is. In the sense that it may use the term 'was,' but it is giving you a version of reality—so-called reality—but it is completely doubtable, you see? So it can say, for example, that how you behaved with that man five days ago was not good. Exactly, whatever the idea may be, it can propose that. Now, what is the problem with this proposal? The biggest problem is that the 'you' that is represented in that—which one is another set of perceptions that we call the body-mind—it is not really you, isn't it? You see? So this is not Advaita excuses, which it can be used like that, but I'm saying that even if it was 'you behaved very well with that person five days ago,' even in that, the representation of you is not true. It is not valid. It is still taking yourself to be this limited entity, you see? So then what happens is once you buy that proposal to be true, then you continue to take these proposals of yourself being a body-mind to be true, and you judge yourself on the basis of these perceptions, which could be words coming out of your mouth, actions happening through your limbs, and saying, 'Ah, this is good, this is bad, I am doing well, I am doing badly,' you see?

Just kind of... actually, yeah, it went just so extreme that I started to not believe in my mind, you know? Whatever it's saying, it's not true at all. And okay, like there is a starting point which can be okay, actually yes, there is something, but it just went so extreme that it's like, you know, whatever you say, it's not true at all. And yeah, very good, that's good. Still, headache is here all night.

Sometimes it'll use sensations and perceptions to convince you of the story of your limitation. Yes, that's right. Also, I want to ask: if you follow today's pointing, which is that you don't need to determine what anything is or the nature of anything at all, then how is that? How is that as a pointing for you?

May you repeat, Father? My attention was elsewhere.

It's okay. So I said today's main pointing has been that you don't need to determine the nature of anything.

Yeah, it was just so too easy for me, actually.

But you determined that! Don't determine that also, my dear. Don't determine that.

Oh, okay. Maybe I couldn't understand your story.

So what can happen is that just like we were talking about clarity earlier, in the same way, if you make it 'easy,' then 'easy' is another flag that can be attacked tomorrow with the notion of 'difficult.' Just as clarity can be attacked by the notion of blurriness or cloudiness.

May I say obvious? No, in the sense that no determination. Okay, okay. You see, that is the only way to not suffer, because any determination we make today, even if it seems like a positive statement, it can be attacked. It will be attacked. That is the true nature of what I mean by open and empty.

Father, may I add something? Also, one day I experienced something which was very... there is something. Like, one day I was outside and someone called me stupid, you know? And stupid—yeah, some stranger told me stupid. And I was like... there was no feeling, but not a certain feeling. I was like, 'What should I feel now? How should I interpret?' Like, all this thing was there, but I couldn't... like, there was no reaction. But I was, you know, like, 'I have to give a reaction, I have to have a certain feeling about this, I have to have a certain interpretation about this.' And this was what makes me confused, you know? Like, and this one is also very similar to that. Like some opinions, something I have to cling on about, something like, 'I need some clarity.' It just works like this. And actually, I'm so happy that I had such an experience because I could clearly see how the mind just goes like this. And yeah, I couldn't do anything, actually.

Yes. So the best antidote to 'should' is 'is,' you see? What should have been? Whatever is. What should you have done? Whatever it is. What could you have done? Whatever it is. So in that way, like the Americans say, all this 'shoulda, coulda' stuff goes away because it traps us in this imaginary version of past and future. When you say, 'I should have done this,' then we are just trying to replace what we think happened with another representation. I think Byron Katie says—no, don't argue with what is it? I always forget it. Always when I start saying it, I remember, but then I forget. 'Don't argue with reality; it only wins 100% of the time.' Something like that. And I've made a hash of it, sorry Byron. So let's say that your only job is to not determine anything. How's that? So change from having to determine everything to not determine anything. And what is it? Simply like you have no job, basically. Let God run this world. You fire yourself. Then no possibility of attack or defense, no mind attack, no nothing.

The attack was about something the mind cannot figure out, and it wants to figure out and it cannot.

Yeah, yeah. You see, what is worth figuring out? Truth or lies? None. I like that. But the mind is not the right tool for that.

Father, may I say that I don't know, but it's like I just want to turn all my being to what is, you know? And this kind of thing was in me before, like attention was always outside. And it's like at work—no, my first job was with a company called IBM, and what one of our trainers told us that if a sale is closed, then don't open it again. So when the... you know what I'm saying? So like longing for my heart is... and done. I just want to say that's just... I love you so much.

Okay. Just give me a moment. Can you hear me, my dear? Hey there. Yes, am I audible well to you? Yeah, how are you? Same here. I mean, what to say? You even said, 'Don't reopen the sale.' Yes, it's closed. Maybe, maybe let's play some flipped classroom. It's been quite a while. No, no, no. Flip means you ask the question and I pretend to answer that. It's reverse. Maybe next time. I'm feeling a bit tired in the body to do it, so not so much energy. Yeah, sure, Father, no problem. I used to enjoy that; I used to enjoy that very much. I'm happy to see you. We'll play, we'll play the game next time. It's up to you. No, the conversation is up to you. I mean, all my love, all.

Yes, it's closed. Maybe, maybe let's play some flipped classroom. It's been quite a while. All right. No, no, no. Flip means you ask the question and I pretend to answer that. It's reverse. Maybe next time. I'm feeling a bit tired in the body to do it, so not so much energy. Yeah, sure. Is your Father, no problem. And I used to enjoy that. I used to enjoy that very much. I'm happy to see you. We'll play, we'll play the game next time. It's up to you. No, the conversation is up to you. I mean, all my love, all my blessings.

Thank you, Father. Thank you so much. Hello, hello. I just wanted to connect with you face to face here. And everything in the satsang has answered everything that I was questioning today. So we're definitely all one in the sangha, and every question and every answer is all of our question and all of our answers. Anything else is just an excuse to connect with you, really. And it's just more about the concepts that we use to remain conceptless. Yeah, yeah. And like, remain open and empty is one that kind of appears for me most of the time. And knowing when to discard even those concepts, I guess, is like, is it good to use them if they come up organically? Or is it even better to just not to even discard those concepts? Does that make sense?

Yes, yes. So, suppose you're using the notion of the concept of open and empty. 'Remain open and empty' as the pointer that reminds you to actually remain open and empty. So, the question that I'm hearing is: so when do I know whether it is time to discard even this notion of open and empty and just actually just remain open and empty without even the notion of remaining open and empty? This happens very organically. You cannot, there is no decision there. There is no decision there. It just happens organically in your heart. As long as you find it helpful to be reminded this way, the pointer is available to you. And when it has itself no further purpose, it doesn't help in the process anymore, it will just be discarded very, very, very naturally. Not like a decision, 'Okay, now I don't need the pointer open and empty.' It won't seem like that.

That's a good thing because that's good to emphasize, because sometimes I say that if complete emptiness seems too scary and you feel like you're just lost completely, then you can hold one stick, like one branch. But you can pick one, and it's important to emphasize that you don't need to determine when to leave that one because that pointing itself will take care of itself.

Okay, yes. That's clear. That's clear. And on behalf of the sangha too, I'd like to just say that we, you know, give you our blessings too for whatever you're feeling and the discomfort in the body.

I feel completely fine in the hand, but I do feel some, the body not being as full of energy as it may be. So I'll get some good rest tonight. It should be fine. Well, thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you. Yes, I love you.

I love you too. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, Madalina. I want to bring into your light some doubt about who I am and my openness.

Why was the first one 'who I am'?

Yes, who am I? Or who... sometimes...

Okay, so let that be the important thing. So let's pause there and then we come to openness. So what are you doubting about who you are? What are you doubting?

I'm doubting my clear seeing, the clarity of my seeing.

Okay. If it was clear, what would you have seen? Are you doubting that you are now? Then what you're doubting could be what you are. Yes, yes. Now this is the primary doubt. The primary doubt we feel that all these sages could be telling us the truth that I am the Self that does not come and go, but the mind is designed to doubt that by representing ourselves to be this collection of perceptions called the body-mind.

Yes, to the nature of the doubt. I think the nature of the doubt is more like a thought which I probably never inquired properly. But whenever you or my sisters said, 'You see openness,' a thought came and said, 'Oh, am I open?' And I'm going to say probably the most stupid things I think I ever said. Even when you said to remain with my discovery, I think my mind put up a thought that, 'What's my discovery?' And I'd rather trust you instead of my mind, and I don't want this doubt to flourish in my mind, so I thought I better bring it up.

So this is a good determination to make provisionally, which is that I would rather trust what the masters are pointing me to rather than what my mind is seeing. But to go to the mind to find out the reality about myself or to even confirm, 'Oh, master said this, is this true?' It's like saying that I give you a wet wipe like this and I say to you, 'Use this wet wipe to bathe the elephant.' Can you do it? You say, 'No, it's too small.' What do you mean you're too small? In the same way, your mind is too small to determine the nature of your reality.

I know, I heard this before.

Yes. What did you say? Don't give this to your mind. But mind equals doubt, is it? Now, without the mind, try doubt. Without something, without your mind, there is nothing to be doubted. Without your mind, is there nothing or something? Without your mind, where are you now? You don't have to determine the nature of anything. Yeah, that's the point of today's satsang, apparently. I don't know what the nature of today's satsang is, but no, I'm kidding.

There was a thought in my mind that it's funny how... what if you were not enamored by the thought in your mind? Yeah, that's a good point. See, because sometimes it can happen, there can come a phase where we start to recognize that the mind is not offering us any truth or any reality. Reality is not coming from the mind. Or as I like to say, we are looking for tomatoes, then we don't need to go digging under the ground, you see? So we realize that the mind is not going to offer, but maybe the last sort of strand of hope that maybe one day it will come up with the tomato is there. So we say, 'Now this is what it's saying, now this is what it says, now this is what it's not even offering me the truth, it's just offering one of the attachments and it's speaking on that.' And is this true? I don't know. I don't have to determine the nature, so I can drop it. Yeah, forget about it.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Truth cannot be determined in time and the mind needs time. Before the sound is a click, clear, it is clear. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Okay, last one. Georgina. There's quite a bit of fear to come in front of you today. Can you hear me okay?

Why? What mischief have you been up to? Sorry, what naughtiness have you been up to that you're scared today?

Right, this is my seeing. So, good question. Yeah, thank you for that. Yeah, the, I guess the sniper has been quite busy here lately. The so-called from every which way. And I noticed yesterday that yeah, there's a pressure to overcome it right away as soon as it comes. There is an identity with the one fighting the mind.

Yeah, it's just the next bullet of the sniper itself. It fires the warning shot, and the next bullet is this warning shot should not come, it should go away. Yeah, it's like the one-two punch combination where the first punch is just the setup and the uppercut is coming after that. It is from this same sniper guy. Yes. So the idea that this should go away is also too much of a determination of the nature of something.

Then can I just be play devil's advocate for a second after that? But okay, then yeah, then comes the... sorry, there's a little bit of noise so I just forgot what you just said, but I think what I was about to say was that then there's the idea reinforced that something should overcome this.

Yeah, if you don't know about 'overcome,' then nothing. Yeah, it can sound too simplistic to the mind, but what? Forget about it. If you didn't overcome, you don't have to overcome it. Only once you know 'overcome,' then you feel like that's what I have to do with it, I have to overcome it. It's insane. Either I am crazy or it is truly absurd.

Something wants to ask for like for a tool to actually just let it play or what? When it comes, something like this is coming.

Option one: let it play. Option two: give it to me. That's the same thing. Three: inquire. That is too much, I think. You can let it play only if you trust that it cannot hurt you, you see? Which means to surrender it to me. We cannot allow anything to just play if you feel like, 'But this can actually hurt me,' you see? So surrendering it to the divinity or to the master's grace only means that 'I am not hurt by this because my master is taking care of it.' And only then can we really let it go.

So the fear has to be divested from that, you see? Otherwise it can just become a lip service like, 'I'm trying to let it go away,' but if it's still like, 'Oh, what is it? Is it hurting me?' So whether with our surrender or with our inquiry, we see that what is appearing cannot actually touch me or scratch me or dent me in any way, then we can let it go. This is like if you go to a forest and there are snakes in the flowers. Then you're just watching every step: 'Is that a snake? Is there a snake?' Then if somebody comes and tells you, 'Don't worry about it,' you say, 'What do you mean? There's the snakes, I have to worry about it.' Then someone says, 'But in the whole continent there are no poisonous snakes,' you see? Then the fear is gone from it. Then you let it go.

In the same way, when we surrender it, using that it's my Father's business to take care of it and He's doing His job well, and the fear of that is gone. Or when you inquire into yourself and see that there is truly... your reality cannot be hurt because it is beyond all phenomena, then what is there to fear? Yeah.

So, who wants freedom?

Yes, she doesn't exist.

How much shall we serve her? Or be...

And if you're not in service to her, what are we going to do with our time? And that is what freedom looks like. Whether the intention of our identity is material or it is spiritual, it is still a tyranny. It is still an operation. Thank you, thank you, my dear. Thank you.

Not much. Hand is up now again, or is it from last time? Let's see again.

If it's okay, of course. But the lights went out. I don't know what is happening with...

Good! That is the whole point of satsang today. What is happening? Then you really know what is happening. If you do know what is happening, then you don't know what is happening.

But I have to ask a very stupid question. This, please transcribe with the hand movements. Very, very stupid question. That's okay. Is it okay not to know what a person or the mind, what I am?

Yes. It is not just okay, it is very important to not know. In fact, it is just a recognition that I have never known. It is only an admitting that I have never known. Here we go to yourself. Yes. What the heck? What does it mean? And I was so proud of myself, no tears today. Meaning of tears. What does it mean? What is the nature of those tears? So it's okay not to know anything.

Yeah, it is also important to not know whether it's okay or not okay. I have to stop. Please don't. Okay, I won't keep you. Thank you, Father, again. I'm enjoying this. So this, you see what I was implying in the sense that 'then it's okay to not know' can become a fresh position, you see? Now don't even know whether you know or don't know. This is what deconstruction looks like. But you don't have to know that. I'm just saying some nonsense things. So much for the Nautilus business. Yeah, thanks a lot. Thanks for nothing. It will be.

I have to stop. Please don't... okay, I won't keep you. Thank you, Father, again. I'm enjoying this.

So this, you see, what I was implying in the sense that then it's okay to not know can become a fresh position, you see? Now don't even know whether you know or don't know. This is what deconstruction looks like, but you don't have to know that. I'm just saying some nonsense things.

So much for the nautilus business. Yeah, thanks a lot. Thanks for nothing.

It will be taken as a compliment. It's okay if we just end the broadcast today without bhajans. I feel to rest the body a bit. Okay, thank you. Thank you. I'm just going to take a look at all of your ones. Thank you all so much for being in satsang today. Satguru Moorti.