Ashtavakra Gita Chapter 12 Commentary and Contemplation - 22nd August 2017

When Guruji says, 'Meet me naked,' he means not a phenomenal child, but this for sure: 'Becoming first intolerant of action, then of excessive speech.' So that is me. Body is moving on its own, and all of us must experiment with this. The claimant who claims then it knows how to move the body. 'I am moving my hand' is claiming that the voice of this lawyer itself, but it doesn't know how to move that. And say, 'Look, look, I'm doing it.' Just like that is an appearance. 'I'm doing it, I am moving my hand.' Movements see. Now, if you fall for this stuff, you will become the most responsible. You will stop taking care of your children, sleep unbathed, oblivious. It may not happen. Just the same voice of the lawyer which is saying that you exist as an individual entity apart from the rest of this world. And even if God is moving the rest of the world, making these planets go around, all these trillions of worlds, all of the multiple realms, all of these millions of forces that move here, which are moving here—all of that God is doing, but your life, your problems, all of that must be up to you.

We say, 'Who is this I who must take care of it?' 'No, that is not important. It is you.' But you want to know what you should do. That be the basis of everything. Actually, if you want to get somewhere, if you want to do something, if you want to get something, you first know who you are. That is becoming the first assumption: 'I know who I am.' So that's why we come to this funny situation, the play of Consciousness itself, where we are denied. We are constantly in denial of what we are, which is so apparent actually if you look for one instant. And we are constantly in service to that one which we cannot find. This is the mystery of this play. This is Maya, illusion. Could it be that God himself, herself, is posing as this limited entity doing this? What is moving from this body? 'I am doing.' Only that is the character sitting inside this body, remote-controlling it. We are not that, you see, right? Because I have seen that about myself. There is no difference between you and I.

So these words are not borrowed words, not something which I am counting on the sages to say their case. They must have been right, so let's all presume together. I am speaking from my experience, which actually is your own experience. That I ever considered myself to be, or I still sometimes consider myself to be, just the identity. This is your cue because I have seen all of this. Like my Master says, you are not that which you consider yourself to be. You are not the thinker of your thoughts or the doer of your actions. The clear perception we have about ourselves—I said mind doesn't know how to move, moving you. It can claim the returns, but you really—it does not know one neuron it knows how to fire. It is mostly just like a barrage, atmosphere, post-facto words. 'I'm thinking what has to happen, happened.' And this voice coming later when he could do this, we decided, 'Oh, shouldn't have done that.'

If we ask one of the two questions: 'But who are you? Who is saying this to me?' or 'Who is it that you're speaking to?' I thought of this question. There is enough. But mostly we just go about in this blurry zone where we presume the mind is my voice. And who is he talking to? He's talking to me. The poorest situation of all. If it is to be my voice, then what would it be saying? I must already know. Why do I need a voice to talk to myself? A little bit of investigation if we can do. You can check with the mind: 'So who is it that you are representing?' Does it say? Mostly it turns out, move very fast. Was this voice in our heads? How are you representing? You mean what happens if we are asked? Is it that difficult? So much resistance.

Once there's a treat, until these words came up, this is close to lunchtime. So these words came up saying, if there was a speaker in this room like these people, they could devise a speaker where you just gave instructions. 'Yes, you are hungry now. This is what I want for lunch.' Because who's speaking? Suppose this one there, I'm dodging this. 'I don't know why I mean, doesn't came and I need Rajma Chawal sometimes, it is not, and this is what I want now.' This voice has always been there like a speaker here, but it actually feels like that. You saying, 'Yes, even now it's saying yes.' Standing not like the constant commentary through this inner narrative. Now, if it happened in this realm like this, if somebody came and said, 'What I want you to do,' you'd say, 'But who are you to give me orders?' It says, 'It's you.' Switch what? When we learn to question the mind like that, mind says, 'This is what he wants. If you get this, then we will be happy.' You know this. And also not just that, the last two thousand times where you said this to me, it does not work. It's not like there is no track record. One also has a track record of hundreds of things that we will do that. 'If you only got this, you will be forever happy.' As it were like this snake oil salesman selling us this. 'Let me keep my animals.' Why? Because it just happened and it's some sort of a hope there. So far it set me down the garden path, but ultimately gave me to heaven. So by its box or me tickets to a merry-go-round or missing that itself to heaven.

But because I have bought so many times and ultimately one day I was elated. It's like how people who get addicted to buying a lottery ticket. They keep buying, keep buying, and over the year they spend thousands of currency. 'Because now I have invested so much, my odds are better next time.' Mathematical odds remain exactly the same. But this is worse because the lottery ticket that is being sold by the mind, the prize you already have. Whatever it is promising to get you is your eternal nature already. What a claim it is to be real. The one who's sitting on the box and there's treasure inside the box and he's begging for food. Open that box. 'Are you? I've had it forever.' So the invitation to ask, 'Who am I?' is very tough, very abstract actually. We will be asking, 'What's in the box?' We're looking outside for all of these things. But what is inside exactly? What is it that you are before you can tell me what you want? And you introduce yourself with integrity. Is it that you are?

So one thing is clear: that you are not that which you consider yourself to be. The limited entity is not the doer. Therefore, both action and speech are gone. 'Then of thought itself, I come to be here.' So what have we looked at? Action, movement like this, a movement of speech, then movement which seems to be this movement of thought. None of these belong to me. This is what Janaka sees. 'I am not the doer of my knowledge nor the doer of my action.' This is release. 'Then I came to be here. Neither sounds nor those sense perceptions attract my attention. Even the self is unperceived. The mind is free, undistracted, one-pointed, and here I am.' Neither sound nor sense perceptions attract my attention. Now we have to look at this closely again because again, potential for confusion. Everything is there. So what have we looked at? We've seen that the maha-mantra of the ego or the mind is objects. The mind is constantly asking, 'What is the value that something that I possibly brings from this? What's in it for me?' is the mantra. What is this side? And it flows along with this. It's not just 'What's in it for me?' It's also 'Me first' and 'Better believe me alone.' Also this angle. You see that the Janaka statement...

Look at this closely again because, again, potential for confusion. Everything is there. So what if we looked at—we've seen that the mantra of the ego or the mind is objects. The mind is constantly asking, 'What is the value that something possibly brings from this? What's in it for me?' is the mantra. 'What is this?' And it follows along with this; it's not just 'What's in it for me?' it's also 'Me first' and 'Better believe me alone' also, this angle. You see that statement too many times. The mind will think, 'It's fine if I don't get it as long as nobody else is getting it.' It's very irritating if I am not getting it and others seem to be taking, for the mind, because it wants to be first, it wants to be alone.

So according to the mind, what's happening in satsang is: 'I will get enlightened. Enlightenment is why I am here. What's in it for me? And I want to get it first. I want to win this.' We see these appear in queues, in traffic. How this one can be good, ready for this one? I'm not saying great queue traffic, and you can be at a table, we are all standing in line, and he decides that he's going to go first.

So what I ask you—you told me in India they're not acceptable in my head—which is everyone eventually has to go to the same plane, everything of separation, of illusion, of consciousness. Then why satsang? If the consciousness itself is doing the play of delusion, then why is it satsang?

Because consciousness is doing this. The soldier is coming to the end of the movie, supposedly, also with this, to the joy of self-discovery step by step. Because again, like in the movies, most of us, we don't like endings. Like, how can I get it? Not this anyway. With non-phenomenal, untouched, unloosened, to extract the juice also from this way of the oscillation. I still get stuck. Like, I've been going back to satsang, but I'm stuck, stuck, I'm stuck again. So this play of oscillation is a play of consciousness itself to make the self laugh. One for you to make the sound or sense perception the track, not the engine. Okay, we were talking about this.

So now, once belief in this idea starts to get dropped—'What's in it for me?'—whatever is, is fine. It's just not even fine; it just is. There is openness, there is acceptance of what is. This whole grasping and aversion just drops away. If you don't have that kind of force, tension, you don't have to miss this. This is what it means here. Otherwise, it can sound like intention will just drop away. This is a very, very troublesome concept. Don't pick it up. 'My attention will drop away from the rest of the world and my attention will only be on the Self.' You see, there is no really—there is no attention on the Self. This way of attention is like maybe coming back to see. So attention just comes back. Is this attention with design of it? Nominal content is brought back to us where nothing she goes. Like in deep sleep state, could you say that there is attention? No, yourself, thank you. Yet we know that there is nothing. We know mentally awareness is aware of itself and nothing else, not even its phenomenal creation. There is no dynamic aspect.

So when I am, you also find that there is a good retention now. A long time we have contemplated what comes first, and then you realize that actually roots are prior to time. So that contemplation of what comes first is itself—it's beautiful so that you can come to this conclusion that time is also subject to attention. Effort is required. Effort is required to concentrate a distracted mind superimposed with illusion. Knowing this, I remain here. So that's what we spoke about. Most spiritual practices are trying to get a control over attention, trying to not let it be distracted by this. Fine. What is the distracted mind? Basically, it means attention getting mixed up with the content of the mind. This is the distracted mind.

So if I try to forcefully keep our attention away, just view the appearance. Don't you have that inner design? It's coming like that. What you're trying to—'No, no, no'—like that. So it can feel like so much effort. In knowing this, I keep all of that aside and I remain here. I stay as the witness, untouched by name. In this way, they didn't come. So stay as the witness. Move on. I am not buying the pretense that I am something other than the Self. I'm not buying the idea. So because Ashtavakra has discovered now—because probably because he was a spiritual seeker, a lot of that I thought and came to this trying to—and perceive there is nothing wrong with that. All of these practices also have been shared with beautiful intent. But there comes a point where we all produce the movie modules like that. That was fine for that. I mean, now it's much simpler to even leave my attention free to see that I am the Self.

I am not changing, you know. Attention brings lots of objects. It doesn't really matter. It doesn't really matter what objects are being drawn because I am not believing myself to be contained within this objective world. I'm not buying the interpretation from the mind. So I don't need to run away from the mind. Many times it can seem like the effort is to run away, to push away the mind. Mind is like—and it comes, your opportunities that you give it to come, then it will come like a weak monster or something like that. Now I'm going to do—you see, we will try to attention also. My recommendation is just let it be true. Don't try to force it. The queries which I'm giving you, the questions which I'm asking you, they—consciousness must know how to treat those. You don't have to force your attention. Nothing to reject, nothing to accept. No joy, no sorrow. God, God, I am here.

This whole play of oppositions and duality is talk to you. With that, even in spirituality, we can take positions. Sometimes we will talk to Nadia—she's here today—but she was sharing that when I heard in satsang that I have to be open, then I decided that I am going to be open and I will put myself. And then I saw that something is happening in my life, some strong events have started to come, and there is some trepidation and some fear about what is going to come. Paraphrasing, but this was the feeling of the question. Because even openness, it can be a position which is the opposite of closedness. You see, we're not acceptance. That's what I was saying. Idea: I'm saying I accept everything, I am forgiving the entire world. See, what is the 'I' in that? There is also this position of a limited entity which may be feeling very glorious getting out of this duality and accepting it for what it is and accepting within this world. This yin and yang will constantly be, she will constantly be on. Then whatever position is outward, planes taking time.

So we're not giving you new positions to take. We're not giving you new concepts to hold down to. If all that happens as a result of satsang is that you replace the concept 'I am'—put your name there—we have this person gets replaced with an awareness, this concept to me, then I failed at my job. In the clear for my topic, there is such a thing as to point to you that you cannot apply a label to. Until all positions empty of all reference points, and do you have any conclusion about yourself? Nothing to reject, nothing to accept, no joy, no sorrow. God, God, I am here.

The four stages of life, life without stages, invitation, renunciation, objects of mind—nothing but distractions. It's not an attack. It can sound like an attack. 'Come to lay down, take me offline or rotation practicing.' But look at it; it all is outgrowing. We're looking beyond. It's like with my daughter. She did not—is not ignorant. Matthew, so there's a point where you tell her to do single-digit addition. Agitation. So after the point, she started to have it every time. Now she had outgrown that. Now they move. If she was still doing single-digit addition, that—so it had its purpose, served a purpose. So some of you, this is the stand of methodology. This one, you've basically outgrown the idea that 'If I do something, I will get that.' They've come into the scene that you already are it. It might not be settled in on solution, might still be happening, but what is striking you as true in your heart is that what I've been looking for is what I have always been. You have never left the destination.

Because I like to see if this is ringing for you, then automatically you will see that something is not so attracted now to that in central soul. That is what is happening. So not saying—and it sounds like he's saying there negative in something—could basically be saying, so seeing that I have now what I am thinking about myself now, but at all these, all stages of life and all these practices and rituals, all the meditation, all of that, it is something to do which claimed that will get easier, but I am already that. So creative doing and not doing both arise from ignorance. I know this and I am here. Very, very weak. And not doing, it's too quiet to the sides of the same coin. So very important for everyone who is in modern-day here. So often we hear that you are not the doer. You must also hear it that often you are neither the non-doer. Neither doing nor non-doing apply to you.

Because most often it is heard, then we take the opposite position: 'Though I considered myself to be the doer, I am not the doer.' And yet in the 'I' they can hide this limited notion of our self again. 'I, the body-mind, I considered to be the doer. Now I am discovering that I am the body-mind, but this body-mind is not the doer.' See, this is also ignorance. The point is that you are not the body now. So it is not just that the body-mind is not the doer; it is more importantly that you are not the body-mind. Because otherwise we're just changing like a switch, like a more, like a belief about the body-mind itself, but the consideration about what we are continues to be that limited entity. So that's why this verse is very important to a visible doing and not doing both arise from ignorance. I know this, I am here. So even this position we cannot do. 'I am not doing anything.' Either doer or not a non-doer. The words are confusing, don't worry. Just keep them aside. Stay with your question, stay with your enquiry about who you are, that they will very soon, they will start sounding like common sense.

Thinking of the unthinkable one—and it's capital—thinking of the unthinkable one, unavoidably on the spot. Thinking of the unthinkable one, unavoidably on the spot. I choose no thought and remain here. What is the same? Don't become one of those ones who are parroting or mentally holding on to concepts of the one, the concepts of the Self. Exactly what we were talking all to hear when I said if I leave you with just the concept 'I am awareness' is the thought 'you are awareness,' then it is not the point of satsang. Now, letting go of art when a simple openness, we come to the insight about this. The realization, the recognition, which means we doesn't need the proclamation 'I am the Self' for the recognition. These are just pointers which are shared in satsang to point you in that direction.

That's why more and more these days I have started pushing you through, walking you to share from your insight and not from your influence. Because many are inferring, you see. Many are making conclusions based on what you've heard about awareness. You must share. Integrity means to share from our insight and not from our influence. All these paraphrases or be sure they greatly is based on the insight and not influence in name, in infinity. The mirage is to speak of—oh this, not like a worldly sort of honesty—speaking of what is it that you are truly finding. To keep all influences aside, all judgments, concepts aside. You are—it's like another in we can add to that. It's like Guruji's invitation. What did he say? Keep it aside, past, future. It is conceptual. If you were to go beyond all of this, what is it that you are? Can you come, as he says, come to this simple business? This is independent of which you find yourself to be. So if you also—it depends on our terminology. Do you consider him to be phenomenal? I like to collect the time on the immaculate conception because every—

Concepts aside, all judgments aside, you are. It's like another invitation we can add to that; it's like Guruji's invitation. What did he say? Keep it aside, past and future. It is conceptual. If you were to go beyond all of this, what is it that you are? Can you come to do as he says? Come to this simple business. This is independent of which you find yourself to be. So, if you also... it depends on our terminology. Do you consider him to be phenomenal? I like to call it the immaculate conception because everything else is a product of being. The being itself does not have a beginning because everything else is because I exist. I cannot have an experience unless I exist. Not based on its ego, I exist. But this being, does it have any phenomenal origin? Does it come from somewhere? So, this is like the food is phenomenal, clay stands. 'I am' is whether we call it the primal or the primordial vibration. It does not come from anything which can be described even as 'I am' could. So, when we leave all influences aside, then there is Nirguna Brahman itself and its dynamic aspect which is consciousness. And consciousness not associated with anything that it is phenomenal, that is leading to itself as Brahman.

And the best news is that all of this is your natural state in this moment. Otherwise, it can sound like I have something to do to get here. You are that now. This one, before you can pick up an idea about yourself, you are the Self. Of course, even after you picked up an idea about yourself, you are the Self only—the Self posing as if you are an individual. Thinking of the unthinkable one, unavoidably on this thought, I choose no thought. And I mean here what we say as well. For some of you, I try to get you away from this habit of thinking about it. Just use one or two key pointers that you hear in satsang and apply them. You see where they take you. That which is a product of just thinking will always be a smelly news. That which is a product of just thinking will always be smelling. That which is a product of your own direct seeing inside, that will have the fragrance of love, of peace, of joy.

Simple example is that, I mean, through the door, you've not seen the little library we have here. So now, if you keep getting cues about this, I say it is on the right. Somebody says it is very beautiful. Somebody says there's a photo of Guruji there. Once, right there, only a photo with Ananta was there. Somebody says, 'Oh, the full Ramayana is there.' All these clues you get, and then you're thinking about it and trying to conjure up the imagery of the concepts of what it is. And you speak from there. No matter how good a job you've done, no matter how many cues you've gotten, it will not smell of the truth, you see, what you say about it. So, the invitation has to be to step in, to walk in. Then once you see for yourselves, it is of a different quality of memory. So, the Self is not something that you have to think about and then come to a conclusion about. The Self is your discovery now. This is what all the pointers in satsang are for.

Blessed is he who attains this by effort, and blessed is he who is such by nature. Then it takes away all this hierarchy that 'my way is the best.' For some, whichever way you come to this recognition... I know at some time it feels like effort to leave the mind behind to come to the truth of who you are. Then make that effort. Come to the self-recognition now. Another time you say, 'Why am I making effort? You already are.' Both are qualities of pointing at different times for different sentiments. So, but whatever way we come, whether it was making effort or whether it was naturally so, all the experience will be had in the center. 'I'm going to come to this with very solid self-inquiry effort' and some very naturally. Please come to one of the search engines. Effortless, I bring that idea in. 'Why is this one doing so much hard work when it's so natural?' So, this verse, it takes away from this sort of benchmarking, checking here, looking, cruising the boat, which way is the best. I think, 'Blessed is he who attains this by effort, and blessed is he who is such by nature.' It doesn't matter which route is taken because the discovery is that which is already here. So, if it felt like for some they had to take three left turns and come to this, and for some they go straight, both people can come to the Self. Some who discovered this, it doesn't matter, because the point is to see this, the truth about yourself.