I’m Just Showing You How Much of a Supreme Possibility It Is to Live Open and

Yes. How do we know about the egos wanting? Many times we get in to this mode of explaining 'Aha, this is what the ego wants'; instead of that it will serve you better if you are just pointing or describing. I wonder the difference is clear, the difference between explaining and the difference between describing is a very critical difference, provisionally of course but it is important at this stage of being in Satsang. Because our explanations are very clouded by our notions of what we think to be true. Our descriptions are more innocent, in the sense that when we describing we trying to paint a picture of what is pure perception. I wonder these words are clear? When we are explaining usually, we are saying ‘I know I am feeling lot of fear’ but you don't actually know. But when you describing you may say, ‘I notice that there is a bit of a contraction in the vision of my heart’ or something like that. And to deal with that what you perceive purely is much simpler and makes your job and my job a lot simpler, rather than the Master having to deal with your interpretation of what you think is happening. And you will find that 90% or more, maybe 99.9% of your problems go away, when you move away from explaining to describing because we are lying to ourselves in our explanations. So when you say, for example, ‘The ego wants to be present’ what is the description of that? That is your interpretation of something, I want to know what it is an interpretation of? Because to make this statement, for example, ‘The ego wants to be present’, did you have a perception of the ego? Nobody has ever perceived this ego. Not only is it hard to explain (you say, it is hard to explain) because it is important impossible to explain. Because to say ‘This is what the ego wants’ on what basis are you saying that? It is not even perceptual basis, forget intuitive, it is purely conceptual you see. Because the ego is purely conceptual. How many are with me when I say these things? Because for the intellect they may sound like very intellectual words but actually they are not intellectual at all. I am just simply saying that ‘like this’ (Holding up his hand) - instead of saying this means that today is the fifth day of the month and I had to do these jobs on the fifth day of the month, instead of that if you could simply tell me ‘Oh I see one, two, three, four, five fingers and lump of flesh which seems to hold these fingers together’. You see, then that makes it much simpler for all of us. Because if you start dealing with what you think about what you are perceiving, then there is no solution for that from there. Because what you ‘think about’ what you are perceiving, is so far from even perceiving; to deal with that problem from that level becomes next to impossible. And somebody [referring to the chat] is rightly saying ‘two levels of false perception’. So we super impose - from the Vedantic perspective which is that everything that we perceive comes and goes and therefore is untrue; then we super impose one more layer on this perception itself, which itself is untrue, we impose a layer on top which is ‘this what I think this means’ but we can never think what something means. Whatever you think ‘that something you think it is true about what something means’ just really investigate that and you will see what I am saying. So how to deal with this non-existent problem that ‘This what the ego wants to do’? And when I am saying it's a non-existent problem, I am not putting you down. I am just saying that your claim that ‘this how it is’ is based on which basis? What is the basis for this claim? Is it just purely thought? Is it just purely conceptual? Because you cannot even have a perception of this ego. So how can we even say that the ego wants to be present? And in fact from the presence we can never make this report. So if you are noticing that the ego is there wanting to be present, then you are already not in the present, because to take the ego to be an existent entity you must start believing in time because without a story there is no ego and without time there is no story. I know we are taking very broad strokes here but that's how it's coming up. Because I want just chop it from the root chop this kind of mentation from the root. So it will be really nice if when we are proposing even to ourself that this is our problem - If we can stick to describing and not to explaining then that will be really helpful. And also the one who is pointing the speaker who is speaking in Satsang must also describe as much as possible instead of trying to explain because explanation just become concepts which sit in your head but won't actually free you in any way.