Ashtavakra Gita Chapter 9 Commentary and Contemplation - 16th August 2017

So the sage is very nicely taking us out of our attachment, and then as you are starting to get an aversion—the idea that 'I must be opposed to the world' or in opposition to something—then leave all the opposites behind to be empty of these opposites. 'The greatest heroes, saints, and yogis agree on very little.' This is very true. The greatest heroes, saints, and yogis agree on very little. What is he saying? 'Seeing this, who could not be indifferent to knowledge and become still?' Don't be attached even to your spiritual concepts. As Guruji says, 'Don't make tattoos out of my words.' As Bhagwan said, these are just thorns you are using to remove other thorns; at the end, even these are thrown away.

And what is the clue to discover this? Even the greatest sages don't agree. They don't agree on the path, on what freedom is, or how to get there. Especially the experience of the present, the recognition of the Self, is what the sages seem to agree upon. So very little would be that, but how to get there, what is their path to follow, are there steps or no steps, is there practice or no practice? Is devotion a part of this self-recognition or not? Many, many disagreements can happen even amongst those who have recognized the Atma. So don't allow these contradictions to confuse you. Why? It's all a clue that no pointing actually is the ultimate truth. No pointing is the ultimate truth; that's why it is a pointing. It can only point to the center, to the truth; it cannot itself contain the truth. No path, nothing actually, because what are you being pointed to? That which you already are now.

Suppose you are on a road, you feel you're lost, you ask someone, 'Can you point me the way to myself?' Some will say, 'Go straight, take a left, take another left, take another left, hopefully you'll get to this.' Some will say, 'You are already yourself.' They will give different kinds of directions, but what we all look for—the Self itself—is a big clue. You're not searching for something outside. So the directions could be different, but you stay with this discovery. The sage says, 'Seeing this, who could not be indifferent to knowledge?' So he's talking about detachment. See, the whole chapter is called detachment, and he knows that for spiritual seekers, spiritual knowledge itself can become a big attachment. 'I am attached to my concept because I have invested so much time and energy on something, I must come to a valid conclusion.' You see? It says that even the great sages have not agreed, so even these have little value except as that which points to yourself. Be still. Still means you remain here.

Let's see quickly. 'Opposing forces, duty is done and left undone.' So he's talking about doership, the action and inaction we are attached to as ideas. So he's saying contemplate: when does this end and for whom? Is there ever a 'me' to do it? To consider this, be ever desireless, let go of all things, and to the world turn an indifferent eye. So he was shaking us out of our attachments. What did he talk about? He talked about the 2 Ds. We talked about 3 Ds, didn't we? We talked about the 2 Ds out of these 3: Doership and Desire. Both of these rely on the 'D' of Duality. There must be a sense of separation, of duality, of 'me' to be a separate entity before I can desire something which seemingly is outside of me. See, there is a 'me' who wants to make something 'mine.' That is desire. And when that something seems to have become 'mine,' that becomes an attachment. So this play of 'me' and 'mine' is based on this 'D' of duality.

Then if I have a desire, if there is somewhere to get, something to get, then what to do? The 'D' of doership comes. So he's saying, when and for whom does this end? Things to do, things not to do—and for whom? Which is the important question: who is here which is doing? Considering this, be ever desireless, let go of all things, and to the world turn an indifferent eye. 'Rare and blessed is one whose desire to live, to enjoy, and to know has been extinguished by observing the ways of men.' So when we have this idea that 'I am living my life and I have some control over it, I want these particular experiences, I want to be able to click and choose the content of my experiences'—which is what we talked about yesterday, pain avoidance and pleasure seeking—'I only want pleasure, I don't want pain,' those kind of beliefs give this false idea of control over what is going to show up on this movie screen.

'Desire to live, to enjoy, and to know' means we seem to be climbing a ladder of spiritual concepts to know more and more and more. Ultimately, I would have the best, most powerful answer, which is what I really want, you see? The sage is saying it's not about that kind of knowledge also. 'Extinguished by observing the ways of men.' So who has been able to get only those experiences in life that they wanted? That is not the tale of humanity. So observing the ways of men means to look at humanity and to see that all of this actually is not getting anyone anywhere. So let go of all of this. Again, remember the name of the chapter is detachment.

So we've done nine chapters so far. How in a beautiful way all the truths, all the pointings are looked at, and then there is an invitation to drop it, and then again going back to one of the clues and deeply diving into it and seeing how the identity operates and how you can be free of it. It's actually very practical. Ashtavakra is famous, or infamous actually, for being attractive only for seekers who have been very, very accomplished in some way. But actually, when looked at from this lens and you search for clues as to how do I discover the truth for myself, you will find that it is full of that.

Verse number six in Chapter 9: 'One who through worldly indifference, through serenity and reason, sees his true nature and escapes illusion, is he not a true teacher?' Through worldly indifference, through serenity and reason, he sees his true nature and escapes Maya. Is he not a true teacher? 'In the myriad forms of the universe, see the primal element alone. You will be instantly free and abide in the Self.' Very beautiful. In the myriad forms of the universe, see the primal element alone; you will be instantly free and abide in yourself.

'Desire creates the world, renounce it. Without desires, you renounce the world. Now you may live as you are.' Desire creates the world—this can be understood in two ways. The first way to understand this is that it is often said that there was a primal urge or a primal desire within the Absolute to taste itself, as if it is existent, to taste its own existence. This primal urge, it is said, must have been present in the Self for it to create this manifest phenomenal creation. So it could be pointing to that way, looking very much at the primal aspect of creation—the primal urge came within the heart of awareness of the Self which led to this world. This is the first way.

The second way to understand this is that this duality of 'me' and 'the world,' this idea of 'me' in the world, relies on what I often call the maha-mantra of the ego, which is: 'What's in it for me?' This is the voice of desire. The sense of separation rests very much on this idea, 'What's in it for me?' And once you're free of this idea, you are able to just let go of it. So then this idea of a separate world will cease to exist. All of it will be you; all of it will be an aspect of you. So this verse can also be taken in both these ways.

'Desire creates the world, renounce it. Without desires, you renounce the world. Now you may live as you are.' One misunderstanding that can come because of this verse is that you might want to renounce your job, your life, your partner, your children. That is not what the pointing is about. All you have to do is renounce this voice of the mind. All you have to do is renounce your next thought. Many who have renounced all of those things in the world have still not renounced this. Many who have renounced all of those things in the world still have not renounced the 'What's in it for me?' Why to renounce it? Why to renounce this mantra of 'What's in it for me?' Because it is not referring to the true you. It is referring only to this identity which has been the source of all your suffering. So just renounce this.