Ashtavakra Gita Ch. 1, Vs.1-4 Commentary and Contemplation - 31st July 2017

If you look at this perceptual knowledge, it can seem like it is very straightforward and obvious. Yet even this perceptual knowledge fails at times. How many of us are perceiving that this world, this earth that presumably we are sitting on right now, is moving at a rapid rate? Moving at a rapid rate around the sun and around its own axis, revolving and rotating both. But is this our perception? Have you seen this through our eyes or heard this through our ears? Is there any perception of this? Yet we know this. So there is another type of knowledge which is beyond perceptual knowledge. Which type of knowledge is this? This is conceptual. So we have a concept about what is happening without it necessarily being a direct experience through perceptions.

So what other type of concepts do we know that we don't have a direct experience of? Contemplate a little bit. Where this conceptual—you got the knowledge because you heard it from a credible source, heard it repeated over and over. And even beyond perceptual, which is using the senses, outer perception and conceptual, there is also a perception which is seemingly inward: inner perception, imagination, memory, emotion, the sensation in place there. There is a knowing of these, but it doesn't use these outer senses and doesn't rely on concepts for their appearance, for its appearance. We looked at perceptual knowledge, we looked at conceptual, sensational, inner perception, and this is available to everyone. But like I said, 'How is knowledge to be achieved?' There must be a knowledge which is beyond all these, which is prior to all of these.

So what are the parameters of this kind of knowledge? The parameters are that it must be a direct experience, a direct insight, but also it must be unchanging. The truth is unchanging. True knowledge is unchanging. I can every day be changing the curtains in my house, and somebody asks you outside, 'So what color are the curtains?' You say, 'Yellow.' You look at the clip—oh, it was, or it could have been at some point of time. It's always changing. So you cannot authoritatively say something is true; all you can say is that I had the direct experience of it. But since it's in the realm of change, I cannot authoritatively say that this is true right now and it's always true. So when we are looking at true knowledge, it must pass the parameters of both a direct insight as well as being unchanging. So what is it that you know that is both a direct insight and is unchanging? All of us, like Janaka, are seeking this. He said, 'How is knowledge to be achieved?' So contemplate for just a minute on whether you have knowledge like this that doesn't change, and that which is not just conceptual, but is your direct insight. You see something like this? Then you write it down, and I'll come back to this question and ask you what you can write down immediately, right?

So in the first sentence of the scripture itself is a very deep contemplation. It sounds like a very straightforward question: 'How is knowledge to be achieved?' And also, 'How is detachment acquired?' Detachment means to not be attached to anything in this realm of appearances. So to understand detachment, you must first understand what attachment is. So what is attachment? When I first moved into this house a few years ago, for the first time in my life, there was a garden, a small terrace garden on this house. First time I really felt I had a garden for the first time. So what I did is, in my initial enthusiasm, I planted some seeds, already some plants and things which I planted, some seeds. What's this process? I planted this seed, then what happened is that every day I would wake up and the rest of the garden for some time would be invisible to me. I would run first for these seeds to see what is happening with that, or to the tomato seeds, to those few plants that would also be mature. And yet there was something which was attached to the outcome of these that I had planted.

What is it that makes one set of appearances 'mine' and another set of appearances 'not mine' or 'not as much mine'? So when this play of 'me' is there, one of the strongest legs of this 'me,' one of the strongest support systems of this 'me,' is the idea of 'mine.' Now this idea of 'mine' is very troublesome because what did we just discover about this world of appearances? It's constantly changing. So if it's constantly changing and we are holding on to something as 'mine,' then what's going to happen to it? It's going to be suffering because it's going to change. So this is in this way when we already seem to have something, we call that 'mine,' that becomes an attachment. 'This should not be taken away from me.' In the opposite way, which is to look at something and say, 'This is not mine, I want that. This is not mine, I want that,' that also causes suffering. Attached to the idea of owning something also perpetuates this sense of individuality, the sense of 'me.'

We looked at desire, the opposite of this desire which is aversion. There's another form of attachment in which we say, 'I don't want this to be mine. Don't want me to have pain. This shouldn't happen to me.' So what is it that we attach our identity to? We attach ourselves to in the specific notice that as this realm is a changeful realm, as everything here is constantly changing, notice how the idea that something is 'mine' has a potential to cause so much suffering and has its basis in an individual entity called 'me.' Our identity relies on all of these conditions. King Janaka said, 'Detachment acquire, liberation attain.' So as we go through the first two parts of this question, which is true knowledge of the Self—that which is unchanging—and the toppling of these conditions of attachments, in the end of seeming separation, the end of duality is an obvious byproduct. We recognize who we are and we don't apply all those conditions onto ourselves. So this itself is a beautiful description of freedom, a beautiful description of liberation itself.

Then the sage speaks. Ashtavakra said, 'To be free, shun the experiences of the senses like poison.' A bit strong in those days. Not only free, 'shun the experiences of the senses like poison.' We don't have to go that far if we don't want to. At least what we saw already is that there is something beyond a sensory experience. So if for some time, at least during the time in which we're in Satsang, we're in the reading of the scripture, keep these experiences on one side and see what else is there besides our sensory perception. They may involve a recognition which is beyond sensory experience. Then he says, 'Turn your attention to forgiveness, sincerity, kindness, simplicity, and truth.' And you know, the first time I remember when we took the commentary on the Ashtavakra, I just ignored this paragraph. I said, 'Let's move to the real stuff, this is the real talk.' So it's not so much that came up to see this, but I feel today that it's very beautiful. In each of these statements, in each of these pointings, we create space for the recognition of the Self. Let's explore for a minute how that could happen. He says, 'Turn your attention to forgiveness.' What is the meaning of forgiveness?

Simplicity and truth. And you know, the first time I remember when we took the commentary on the Ashtavakra, I just ignored this paragraph. I said, 'Let's move to the real stuff.' This is the real stuff. So it's not so much that I came up to see this, but I feel today that it's very beautiful. In each of these statements, in each of these pointings, we create space for the recognition of the Self. Let's explore for a minute how that could happen. He says, 'Turn your attention to forgiveness.' What is the meaning of forgiveness? What is the opposite of forgiveness? It is to hold a grievance. Holding a grievance. What is the idea that is waiting for perpetuity? The idea is that there is a 'me' again, there is another, and therefore I am right, and right in holding a grievance against this one. So it is a virtuous circle where the recognition of the Self results in the dropping of grievances, and it is the dropping of grievances that creates more space for the recognition of the Self. It operates like this.

So satsang is like communing to do this recognition. And we will find that anytime you will come into satsang, a lot of you might have just had a fight with someone or something like this. It might seem like it's such an important thing, and yet by the time you come, you might feel, 'Okay, maybe he was having a bad day.' So that feeling has got to be you because you came into the presence. So that's how you came into the presence of the recognition of this. Turn your attention to forgiveness, sincerity. Sincerity means not to be in false, you know, not to begin with this lack of integrity and, you know, first in any way are in denial about something or the other. That's why Mooji used to keep stressing for me to keep saying, 'If you have integrity, if you have integrity, everything will open.' If you have integrity. And this I could never really understand when he used to say, when I used to read. And it's weird, I am that now, that is all about this. Are we reporting from direct insight? Are we reporting from something which is just conceptual, this diluted Eastern influence?

So if you think of it, sincerity is integrity, not denying. The question is asked to you: what is it that you... I mean, you're not reporting from an inference of or your... the word has aligned to the experience as possible. And we are not getting into any sort of hypocrisy. You know, you come into a form of hypocrisy where we've heard the term that you are the Self or you are awareness, then actually they're still believing a lot about themselves. A lot of suffering is being experienced, and yet when the conversation happens, if you see people, 'There's nobody here to suffer, this is awareness.' And just the words of... not this fellow. So many times we come into these kinds of just intellectually, the sort of hypocrisy. So many times the words of these... are the words of this direct path itself become very beautiful ways to defend the ego because we refuse to go beyond the words of it. And if you feel like in the words, insight is available. All the words that we stop on, turn to the insight. Use the words as tools, let them lead you to your discovery of the Self. No words are true. Mooji again, he used to say that the only truth I speak is that I am not. Even that is not true.

Forgiveness, sincerity, kindness. Kindness, often I've said that true spirituality meets the world, byproducts is kindness. Kindness doesn't mean that we are just using kind words, just your speech sounds like... many of the sages were very strong in their words, but in their heart, they were compassionate. Their heart, because what is best for who they are engaging with is always a servant belonging to your longing for the truth. Words are seemingly kindest from this same discovery that we have had. So kindness, simplicity. Simplicity of consciousness. The truth is simple, but the mind is very complex. The complexity comes when we are empty of experience and we're full of concepts. Many times it can become very complex. So we stay more and more with our direct insight, direct discovery for ourselves. I know that I exist. What does this mean? How do I know that I exist? Being straightforward. In some people who doesn't know of their existence, you might not have the concept of it. This is not required. You might not have the best words to articulate, but everyone is always the Self. This Self, my... I mean, even these words, if you could give it to the mind, what happens? It makes complex spiritual ideas out of them. So more and more people towards simplicity.

Then at the end, he says, 'Turn your attention to forgiveness, sincerity, kindness, simplicity, and truth.' Is this the truth which is seen, which is experienced, which is witnessed? The truth which is without change. The definition of an appearance is that it is changing. So how is it that we can come to this, this truth, with the aid of these virtues and self-enquiry and being in satsang? First of all, this paragraph is given some very practical advice on how to create more space for this recognition. And because Ashtavakra is a very, very direct teacher, he doesn't spend too much time on this. He goes straight to the root of it. In the next verse, he says clearly, 'You are not earth, water, fire, or air. You are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space.' This is very important. In India, these are referred to as the five elements. So you're not... you are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space.

So if we look at the content which was brought to us through our senses, we find that everything that is perceived is made up of these elements. And then we hear we are not this, we feel like there's some kind of space. And we use the word space also in satsang. Yes, I keep saying that it's not a spacious space. It is not space in the form of length, width, and height. That's why we retrieve the Self. This, after saying you're not earth, water, fire, or air, what are you? Empty space? So the mind's trick is anything this which it works, which is this blank space. And this is the Self? But does that have a length? Does it have a size? Can I perceive it as big or small? As having... he says, 'You are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space.' So then my question to you is, if you are not earth, water, fire, or air, and we are not even space, what must you be? What is it that you are which is beyond this? And you have to speak from your direct insight. And that, before I close today, I will come and ask you for your answers. What is it that you are that is none of these elements, not even this space in which these seemingly appear?

Something which is the future liberation is to know yourself as awareness alone, the witness of these. So saying that Ashtavakra doesn't beat around the bush. Usually, one preparatory verse is... many scriptures spend many chapters on describing the qualities and how... one verse is enough. He said all that he had to about the virtues. What are the qualities to him? Talking straight, he goes to this: none of this perceptual world, you're not even the space in which they seem to appear. You are the awareness alone which is the witness of these. He's given the answer. And also to find out, because otherwise the words 'you are awareness alone' can seem like they're just words. So now for two minutes, check on that witness. Is there something like this witness? Don't resist any phenomena if it is coming up. Through phenomena, you check. What witness witnesses that? Is that also a phenomenon? Is that also changing? Is that made up of five elements or space? If your mind is coming with a report, check on who witnesses that. What is the witness made up of? You are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space. Liberation is to know yourself as awareness alone, witness of things.

The sage says, 'Abide in awareness. Abide in awareness with no illusion of person. You will be instantly free and at peace.' Abide in awareness, no illusion of person. So good. How to... when the question, when the pointing is heard, 'Abide in awareness,' the question can immediately come, 'How do I abide in awareness?' He says, 'No illusion of person.' This is just one statement given as a very important point. It is only the false that must not be picked up. To abide in the truth is not that you have to go towards the truth and stay. You are the truth. You are always there. To abide means the false identity, the illusion of person, is not picked up. Right now, you are awareness and abiding in it. But you have your dynamic play as consciousness, the power to pick up the illusion that you are a person. To pick up the illusion in the pretense that you are something limited. With no illusion of person, you will be instantly free and at peace. He's talking about you.

My favorite things to do is to, when somebody is confused about 'abide in awareness,' my favorite things to do is to ask you to leave it. That can make it very clear what the sage is trying to say. Just leave awareness alone for three seconds. In these three seconds, don't be aware. One, two, three. Did it? Did you become unaware for an instant? Even to say 'I was unaware,' you mean that there is awareness of a particular state which you might be calling unawareness. It is impossible for you not to be the Self. You are always the awareness alone, always the same. Why the sage says 'abide in awareness' only means to not pick up the false identity, the illusion, the delusion of limitation, which is false knowledge. It's not the truth about you. Just as also all attachments, this idea of 'me.' See how he's answering the question. Janaka asked how knowledge is to be attained and detachment to be found. Seeing that you are this witness of this entire phenomenal play, and to see that you are this awareness, there is no individual 'me.' This illusion of 'me' is picked up. All of you, I now know how this illusion gets picked up. Consciousness plays as if it is limited, as if it is individualized, using the power of our attention and giving ourselves to belief to this mind. Its job is to convince you that you are a limited entity. That is also the power, the design of consciousness.

So now it has played the game of individuality, and now the exit from the game also it wants. Let's track the juice from this play of exiting this. That is why it creates for itself this play of satsang, which is nothing but consciousness speaking with consciousness. Try not to abide in awareness. Then you see that to abide in awareness, you feel like this... as a time-limited... even better, we are actually abiding in awareness. Would you pick up this seeming illusion of suffering, of individuality, this illusion of duality and desire? Worship all these things. Okay, good enough for the reading for today. This is the word, five verses, but I feel they're very, very strong, very powerful forces.