Contemplation on the Ashtavakra Gita Ch.14 and Q & A - 24th August 2017

So, those two appearing asleep like other men. Don't expect them to have halos. Don't expect them to be, you know, whatever they walk out of the worldly expectations. Don't have any of that. They might have, you know, just as regular as anyone else. He goes to a restaurant, he'll have a group, keeps ordering like everyone else. So they might appear like other men, but because of these three clues that are given here, they are in reality awake. That was the first verse.

'When desire has melted, how can there be wealth or friends or the seduction of senses? What use is scripture and knowledge?' So Janaka is saying now, because I was questioning him, 'Why you still have wealth? How you have all of these things?' So he's saying that they are there, but I have no attachment to them and I'm not desirous of them. Desire is gone. The body is functioning, but there is wealth—it's okay. There is poverty—it's okay. 'How can there be wealth or friends or the seduction of senses?' Because in another place, Ashtavakra is saying with the polish, 'Why is all of this? How can you be a king if you're free?' This is to test his disciple. So he's saying that all of this is dependent on whether there is attachment. If there is no attachment, then how the worldly play is here is completely fine.

Now, Janaka is the excellent role model and a bit of trouble. A bit of trouble why? Because as Guruji says, everybody wants Janaka style. I'm like, you want to be the king also and you want... so you have an expectation then, 'Oh God, if it happens for me, or if it happens for me, please make sure that I have the Janaka style. Oh man, my comforts, my palace, all this is not taken away.' But truly this expectation drops away and then you come to this prayer: 'Yeah, I just want you, my Lord. I just want the Self.' Regardless of how this body is kept after that. And then the palaces remain or don't remain, truly this one is... so some have remained kings like Janaka and some have given up their kingdoms in one way. But nobody has come and said, 'Yes, please Father, take back this freedom, let me have my money.' Nobody has said that. After getting the true taste of this, nobody wants to exchange this, which is eternal, unchanging, for some momentary findings. And as some psychology says, nobody comes to the realization of the Self and regrets, 'I want my old life back.'

Guruji says in life also, he said, 'What use is scripture and knowledge?' Oh, it's ironical because it is part of the scripture. It says this. But what does this mean? That all this scriptural knowledge, all the mental concepts that we might have picked up about spirituality, here we are empty even of that. That's why they say, it's said, Janaka now said, 'Empty the... including too many, many even in satsang.' For many, what they know of spirituality prevents them from becoming open and naked, to give up all concepts. These are the babes which will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. So nobody is asking you to memorize Ashtavakra Gita. He's saying find the clues which are available to you, apply them, empty, use them to empty yourself of conditions. And everything can be kept.

The second point of the concepts of satsang: the point of the pointing in satsang is to remove, is to empty out your basket of concepts, your basket of conditions. But once, I remember when he said that these are thorns that we are using to remove other thorns, and then these also will be thrown away. One of the best examples of the thorn being the question 'Who am I?' which removes everything else, and at the end even that is kept the same. He also said that you use a stick to light the funeral pyre, but we don't keep the stick after that. On the funeral pile, even the stick is thrown away into the fire. So when I think now that I'm untouched by any of this, whatever might come and go, I remain just the solitary witness. Do I need a scripture? Do I need some knowledge? No. Everything is allowed to come and go.

'We have realized the supreme Self, the witness, the one. I am indifferent to bondage and freedom. I have no need for liberation.' When the Self is discovered, we realize that the Self never needed anything. We don't mind bondage. These are not concepts that apply to the truth of what you are, but only that applied to that which you consider yourself to be. Those then saying is it... once you climb the mountain, can you say that there is no mountain? So then Janaka is now speaking from that position where he is able to see that bondage and freedom therefore applied to the reality of what I am only because I considered myself to be limited did I consider that I could ever be bound.

If you have no shape or size, if you cannot be found as a localized object, what can tie you? What can bind you? If you are more spacious than this space in this room, if you have that space in which this space is there, what can bind you? Nothing can even bind this space. Nothing can even bind time. Both are these beautiful products of Consciousness, dimensions, fields. They cannot be bound. So that in which they arise, can it bind them? Therefore, the first thing must be the misunderstanding that I am limited and in some way within this objective dimension, space. Then I can consider myself bound and then I can presume that I need Mukti.

So he's saying, 'I have realized I am the supreme Self, the witness, the one.' Again, truly wherever you look to witness, what is it that witnesses everything, all phenomena? This is the one. One we go to. 'I am indifferent to bondage and freedom.' And indifference not as a mental attitude. The movie is playing, I know it is not hurt, it is not touched. The reality, I realized the supreme Self, the witness, the one. I am indifferent to bondage and freedom. I have no need of liberation.

So this time, up to the break I took when I started in satsang, I said, 'Can we stand in the true perspective, or do you all first again want to pick up the perspective that you are bound and then start the journey again?' How can we be true to the present right now and see in reality if there is any bondage? Can we take that little bit of insight right now and see whether the mask of being an individual entity who is bound and needs freedom is still so attractive for you that you have to pick it up? 'Have to' only happens when you consider yourselves to be less than the supreme Lord, supreme Self. As Consciousness, there is no 'have to.' That's why so often I describe it as a play, as a Leela. The Consciousness is playing with itself. But because it has to, because it is the will of Consciousness, it wants to. The best news is that you only experience reality, but you interpret it as bondage. There is no real experience of bondage. True experience of bondage, suffering, bondage—all of this belongs to that one which you never can truly become: the ego, the identity. It is a minor aspect of your existence which plays out as Consciousness. It might be getting some juice from it, some enjoyment watching this movie, relating to the character as if it is that. Now, as it is, I okayed that play coming out of this individualized play, discovering its nature. What is its true nature?

'I have realized the supreme Self, the witness, the one.' The last verse of this chapter: 'The inner condition of one who is devoid of doubt, yet moves among creatures of illusion, can only be known by those like him.' The inner condition of one who is devoid of doubt, yet moves among creatures of illusion, can only be known by those like him. Because mostly when it is said like that, that you are free right now, what is the most common doubt that comes from the mind? 'It can't be that simple.' That is although it seems like, but the doubt basically is saying, 'But it can't be that. It can't be this obvious.' But this reminded me of Papaji. And the second time what came, and I shared this video with someone... someone came to Papaji and said...

The inner condition of one who is devoid of doubt, yet moves among creatures of illusion, can only be known by those like him. Because mostly when it is said like that—that you are free right now—what is the most common doubt that comes from the mind? 'It can't be that simple.' That is although it seems like... but it's basically saying, 'But it can't be that. It can't be this obvious.' But this reminded me of Papaji. The second time what came, and I shared this video with someone, someone came to Papaji and said, 'Papaji, help me because I don't see God.' Papaji said, 'What is seen by those who don't doubt?' 'I don't know.' 'The "don't" is doubt. How do you see?' 'But I don't see God.' 'What did I just say? Whom teased out? Drop it. And what do you see?' 'I see God.' And it was not this world which shifted in him, where he saw that all that he had seen is only God, and he's been labeling it as object, a thing. Beautiful, such a simple satsang.

He said, 'I don't see God,' and he must have had some openness and innocence. So when Papaji says, 'Don't is doubt. Drop doubt. What do you see?' for one moment it came back, but ego-like: 'What did I see? Who is doubt? What do you see? I see God.' It's that simple. It is that simple. Misinterpreting all that is, is all there is. We have been interpreting it as production. So this is what I meant earlier when I said Jesus said only the children will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Exactly what it means. The mind may come and tell you, 'You know, I know better.' And if you buy the story from the mind that 'I know better,' then why call anyone your Guru in the first place when the mind is the Guru still?

So the mystery of the Master means what? What is the Master? Master is just the voice of your own divine presence, which is the heart itself. That's why I believe in many forms of spirituality, the spiritual journey is known as the journey from the head to the heart. Moving from allegiance to this mind to this intuitive presence, into the voice, into the inner witness. Which is the second one we'll run into where he said, 'If you're looking for power, then give in to the possibility that anything else exists.' I'm paraphrasing a bit. If record is what you want, why do you keep the possibility that there is something else? The possibility that there is something else, which is actually against your most innocent insight right now, is doubt. And we have nourished this doubt, nurtured this doubt every time we have believed the concept of an individual 'me.' We have played the prodigal son every time we have bought the story of the mind.

And if you play the prodigal son, then it can feel like when we come back home, there's bound to be some guilt. 'How will my Father accept me? Will you treat me badly?' So this guilt, this fear, and then the hope that 'Maybe I can make it as a person.' You think this is the story, isn't it? 'I can still make it.' So he tries and tries and tries. Nobody has ever made it to this eternal contentment by retaining the idea of separation, of separateness. It is only on discovery of the truth. Truth is valuable only because of this. If it could happen that in believing a lie you could have an eternally content life, then what is the value of truth? It must be that something at some point or the other starts to poke you when you're believing something which is not true.

So the chapter is called Tranquility. If you don't doubt, it is impossible to not be at peace. So many things over the years we have heard in satsang. Can you hear something like, 'The universe knows the recipe. It is not making a mistake by putting too much salt in your life. God knows what He is doing.' Without doubt. 'My God, why does it always happen?' I've said this before, that 'Why?' is the favorite question of the mind, you see. And who is the least favorite? Just one alphabet change. 'Why?' is the favorite question of the mind, especially this 'Why me?' including himself. 'My Father, I still suffer.' This one, this scene yesterday, he would think he's freed from all suffering. Just one day, three years, I be part as a God. If you change the question from 'Why me?' to 'Who?' Yeah, I know, Father, nothing is happening to awareness. Father, this 'Why me?' has everything to do with the 'me-ness,' the water damage.

Now, the beautiful satsang by Mooji, which all of you should watch—and I mentioned this recently—where he is sitting with someone and he says, 'If I stick out my finger and I tell you, "Suck my finger," and you come like a child and you do it, the one question you wash his hands to itemize...' He asked, you know, all this kind of thing. And you have that kind of innocence of a child. Doubt is this one. Really, who is ruling? That he can share such this one is... we have some teachers. Emptiness will be recognized. That is your reality, which is so far beyond this one's include you. Only they will continue. In fact, is your will as consciousness immortal? Thank you. You will not feel like your existence is threatened by the play of the world. This is them. Jump to the next chapter. Any questions? But briefly about this inner condition of one who is devoid of doubt, yet moves among creatures of illusion, can only be known by those like him. Secondly, usually, does it mean the creatures of illusion? Which means that that aspect of consciousness which is still playing as if this illusory world is reality, can be known by those like him. Yes, even like him in this inner condition of one who is devoid of doubt and yet moves among creatures of illusion, can only be known by those like him. What if you... and then another question.

You can come, my dear. You want line? You know, I can hear you fine. I play. Okay, so my question: when I ask the question 'Am I aware now?' there's this awareness, I guess, but I always confuse it with a belief about the 'I am.' So then I ask myself—all the thoughts come up—is this my reality, myself, or is this just the 'I am' that's also a presence? I don't know if it's just the presence or if that's the real 'I.' But yeah.

So he says, and correct me if I understood anything wrongly, 'When I ask myself, "Am I aware now?" it was obvious that I'm aware now. Is it my reality, or is this another aspect of the functioning of I am itself?' Is this thing somewhat like what you're asking?

Yeah, it's my question. Is this not a function of I am itself? But is it the I am with... is it I am the pure?

Two things. So mostly know that in either 'I' or 'I am,' the 'I' is the same. Okay? It is not 'I' and you know... it is 'I' and 'I am.' Okay? So whatever it is that I'm experiencing when I ask this question, it's aware and it feels like myself and it's always here.

Yes. And what is then... what is the presence or the I am if I don't know? Like, experience is okay, I don't know what I'm confusing it with.

I can take a few minutes on this. I enjoy this kind of contemplation very much. The point that I was making is that if this hand is 'I' and the emergence of 'am' is like the qualitative appearance of a finger, but there was no... this is 'I.' If you look at this, you will say 'hand.' If you look like this, the hand is still the hand, and yet there is only the qualitative appearance now of fingers. The hand has remained behind. It is only up, and yet now this quality of beingness, 'I am' present, this consciousness is arising. Yet you have... I mean, what you have been, that is why it is only three versions of 'I am.' It is not the emergence of another. So the hand is still the hand.

Now, what is the see? The sages have said that the absolute reality with the capital 'R' is that which doesn't ever come and go. Okay? Doesn't ever come and go. So in relation to the rest of the world, even this being doesn't come and go. So for the world, this consciousness, this beingness, is the deity, is God. An object? And you can... can you say there is an object? It was not yet. You can never say. Like Guruji calls it the deity of the waking state. This is that which is unchanging as far as the objective appearance is concerned. Anything nominal? The reference point is this consciousness without which nothing remains. There's no phenomenal connection. Okay? But for you, even this am-ness is not a constancy. It comes and goes. That's why I ask you the question: what is it that wakes up?

Yeah, but how does this am-ness come and go? Just... I have... maybe so you can understand me more. I can experience if I look at some object very closely or anything, I can sense that it's the same substance in everything. Like if I look at my guitar and that's it, called this below video, that it has the same substance. And with this substance, the presence. Yeah. And so when I do this, yeah, okay. I'm also a little bit old sometimes.

Okay, I'm going to introduce another term in this conversation. If it becomes confusing, then forget about it, but maybe some clarity can come because of that. Now, when 'I am' comes into play, a lot of forces, a lot of these phenomenal powers come into existence. This is this power of perception. So you perceive objects. This perception happens. So you say, 'When I look at the pillow and I look at the guitar and I look at my hand,' this is sight which is happening, perception. How does perception happen? It is being working in conjunction with attention, which is making perception happen. Now you are aware of this perception, but ultimately perception is also made up of awareness. But perception or no perception, attention or no attention, awareness does not get affected by it.

What can happen many times is that we end up confusing the quality of perception with the quality of awareness itself. Because the quality of perception, which is attention, is very similar to attention, it can feel like this perception is the same as awareness. And why I am saying this to you is because perception is a function of 'I am,' the function of being, part of the function of being. Because in the worldly way, we will be different awareness. We talk about this perception. That's fine. When you can say, 'But what's the big deal about awareness? It's already the functioning of my being. It is this perception which is happening.' When 'I' am there, there is perception, and when 'I' am not there, there is no perception. Then the simple question is very important: so what happened at the time that you woke up? What is it that woke up?

Do I need to wake up? And in this moment to ask that, or can I do this at this moment?

You were able to report that 'When this happens with me, I get confused when I look at this.' Confusing, you see, that effort is also from the past. So either we throw the past away completely—don't use that as a reason to not look at this critically—otherwise what happens with me, and it's happened many times in our satsang on this question, you'll see what ananta that comes this one memory. And what is the value of memory? You know, what's the point? Why you ask? So either we throw memory completely, or use memory also to find everything. Both ways is a tool. Why identification? You can also use it as a tool for freedom. So do you want to use memory? When you use it, both units. If you say, 'Okay, and keep all of that,' then I have to drop. Without memory, mind says, 'Okay, I'm confused because in this past experience...' Throw out of you now. I didn't throw the whole lot with everything that you've experienced in the past, and we stay here fresh. Or if you want to use something in the past, you know, let's also look from the past at what happens when you woke up.

Can I make this multiple choice for you? Okay. First option is that you were awake last night, you see, and there was some light around you, there was a room around you, there was a bed, you see, and suddenly there was a lapse in time and suddenly the time changed. It was morning and there was a room which was much better lit, and actually it was just like that. Suddenly it was 10:30 at night and suddenly it was 6:30. Everything changed like that. Was it like this, option one?

I have to see if I understood what she said. He said you were external clock and as you are in a room and you have this room perception thing going on, and then what I thought right now was, and then you go four hours back and have another perception. And what remains? What do you...

By the time change, it was morning and there was a room which was much better lit. And actually, it was just like that. Suddenly it was 10:30 at night and suddenly it was 6:30. Everything changed like that. Was it like this? Option one, I have to see if I understood what she said. He said you were looking at the external clock and you are in a room and you have this room perception thing going on. And then what I thought right now was, and then you go four hours back and have another perception. And what remains? What do you have? Another point? What was the point? Yeah, so was it like this where it was 10:30 and suddenly you looked at the clock again and it is 6:30 and the light in the room has changed? Was it like that? That is option one. Once again, that's option one where it's like a time lapse. You see, suddenly 10:30, suddenly 6:30. You don't know what's going on. Nothing was experienced in the middle.

Or was it that at 10:30 the world seemed to fade away and then you went to sleep and then something... there was a sense of waking up and you woke up and there was the perception of the world again? All this, what I think about that is that yes, the world comes into appearance again. Of course, I was there because I'm there and then it comes up. Yes. Now, do we do up this question another way to ask this question? Is sleep your direct experience and you experience me, or it's just something you heard about? Some people regard once it happens to you that you undergo this time lapse, you go to people and say, 'I don't know what happened,' you see? And they say, 'No, no, nothing. It's normal. It's just something called sleep.' But you've never experienced it.

Oh, could you say that again please? Was it that you go to people and say, 'I don't know what happened, suddenly from 10:30 it became 6:30,' and then people have told you of a concept called sleep? 'Hey, don't worry about it,' you see? Julian, don't worry about it. That lapse happens for everyone. You don't know what it is, but it is something called sleep. So, is sleep that kind of label for you? Or you can say, 'No, I went to sleep and I woke up.' See, to a direct experience of this state or sleep? If I understood it correctly, I think I like off for a second fall. It is your direct experience because it is not just two concepts that you picked up. It's not like the concept that the world is round. See, if some credible source came and told you that new scientists have done an exploration and actually the world is pear-shaped, you would not see that because you've seen... you would say that okay, you would believe this. Okay, if you tell me it's pear-shaped, all of this has been a conspiracy theory. So all these images have been gone because I have never seen it round with my own eyes. I can believe you when you say that. But for sleep, if I come and tell you, 'Actually, Julian, there's no such thing as sleep,' you will most likely say, 'But I went to sleep last night and I woke up.'

Okay, this thing was always a bit hard to grasp for me because how I understand it is that... but so hard for you because there's no memory of deep sleep because there's no phenomena at all. It's hard to say anything about that. What I can talk about is maybe that when this wakes up that I don't know. So what's definitely sure for me is that I'm that awareness. On my surface, it's the same when I'm in waking state, when I'm in sleep state. I always... I sometimes have these crazy dreams where I lie in my bed but and it's like my real room, but it's not at all. It's just a dream. So it's just as real as this. So yeah, I'm in the dream and then deep sleep. For me, what I think is that it's the concrete falling to every... even of that, everything that can be perceived is gone. So this is the pure 'I' but I can't really talk about that. I don't know.

It's very good. This is very good. If you go back to your original question now, that 'I'm a bit confused about what is my true self. Is it my being or is it that awareness which is aware even of being? Or even could be that this awareness itself is just a functioning of my existence or being.' So you are confused between very good options. Either of these... either the end of suffering because all suffering is personal, isn't it? As long as you're... it's like an antifreeze. Help me pick between: Am I the Supreme Lord in the light of which this entire universe shines, or am I that Absolute from which even the Supreme Lord comes? These are the two. I would say the second. And I can... oh, it's a crisp when I say 'I' now, there's this awareness and it's aware. But see now, what is causing the trouble is neither that you are the Supreme Soul nor the one that is even higher than that, as you say, the Absolute from which this consciousness comes. The one who is trying to figure out which one of this is true is neither God nor the Absolute. It is the seeker. Yes.

It is like this one: if the rain is going to come to an end if you settle for either beingness or awareness, one is no till you solve this puzzle. Yeah, we find this idea that for freedom, a conclusion about this, then what? Yeah, okay. So this well doesn't... yes, it's a seeker. Like when I, the seeker, struggle with this, 'Where am I? The presence or thing?' Then like a moment before, I was just aware and no problem at all. Like this awareness is always untouched, no problem. And then there comes the seeker trying to understand it. Or I should like... you really swearing and yeah. So it's... and it has the power to keep me from... less and less the power, but still. Like when I'm just aware, there's no problem and it's super satisfying. And when I'm, for example, with another person, I can look at what they're doing, I can sense the awareness that I am, that they are. There's complete love and freedom. It's totally beautiful. And then the comes, 'Ah, this is the final thing, oh, you have to understand it.' And then I'm... so I need courage. Courage to stay with that experience and to allow that to complete.

Whether the coming of any phenomena, even if frustration is coming, anger is coming, does it change the quality of awareness? Yeah, that's the point. Because in turmoil, it can tell you that it's tough and it can tell you, 'Oh, now it's gone.' But if you really look and stay to the experience, no, it's still there even if you just would... yeah, I wanted to say even if you just think about it intellectually, it wouldn't make sense because this anger stuff coming up is also evidence for 'I', for the beingness. Oh, I just dropped a lot of milk on my bed. Okay, okay.

So what I'm saying, the problem here is actually... there's never one problem. I would say is this checker guy. You have this clock checker. That the checker guy is the one who is making the report card about you. And any report card can never be about that which is unlimited. The report card is always about one who is limited. And because we have used this checker guy in various aspects of life, like in schools as a report card, in college there is a report card, in relationships the girlfriend is always giving you a report card. So everywhere we got used to this report card. So even now in spirituality, we take a report. 'How much peace is there? How much joy is there?' Something which is limited. The unlimited has everything; there is no report possible about it. See, all aspects will come and go. Yes, the seeker identity is getting activated when we believe ideas about having to check about whether we are free or not, or 'Have I come to the ultimate discovery or not?'

Even for most spiritual paths, even to come to beingness is the end of the spiritual journey. Most spiritual points and some actually say very beautifully that your job is to come to being. Whether after that there is an Absolute or whether you can stay as the Absolute, nothing to do. All of that, it's no problem anymore. The only problem is for the seeker guy to awake to presence. Yeah, okay. It's not happy with the 'E', it wants the 'E plus'. Great. And what I experienced is currently that the interest in this seeker, following the report guy or what, yeah, it becomes less and less because it always ends in suffering. It always ends in, 'I don't know, me sitting in my bed eating, smoking cigarettes.' And why should I do that if I'm just... am I aware and so much love and freedom? So the choice is easier and easier. Yeah, so it's... I maybe it's like for some part it's very good that I'm the seeker here, so I want Absolute truth to go deep and really don't be satisfied too early, quickly or something. But now I really feel like I should just drop that and just be aware and that's it. Just be and don't use any phenomenal appearance to make a report about yourself.

Which sound okay? Report is true. Okay, so you can report of person satsang. I'm happy to hear your report. But observe this for yourself, that this checker guy will come and say, 'Today peace 50%, frustration with your not being.' It has to be seen as what it is. And then it's like, no, but be independent of even like something seems to go wrong or right. All this, all of it is your children. Everything is a product of... yeah, just really stay to the actual thing through what's really now. Stay at this. Don't know philosophy about it or not philosophically. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You love philosophy. Just stay with watching ripples. It really is. And yeah, and it's so satisfying when I stand as this total happiness, total love. Then your inspiration problem and motivation... yeah, in life it's so beautiful. So why?

Yeah, for some time focus on that which you said before, 'I am,' and let that which you said after take care of itself. Before was just to see that you are aware, you see? After, and it happens because of that. So for some time don't be concerned because of that what happened. I didn't acoustically understand what she said. He said, um, what I say it is you made a beautiful statement. It had two parts. The first part was you're just going to stay with the recognition of who you are. Yes. The second part was that when I stay with the recognition of what I am, then there's so much peace, then there's all of this. So I'm saying for some time don't bother about the second or the... don't bother about the peace and what's coming after that. Just stay with it. Just stay with the experience. Stay with your recognition. Yeah, okay. What is the byproduct? Okay, yeah. Because that's also then... I don't know, maybe it's a bit of a trap because with expectation, like, 'I now total this,' and then something comes up. And so really just stay with what's with that and see how things go. Because when staying at that, where's the problem? Yeah, yeah. Thank you.

Yes, and it says I always know even if I don't know what happened. I'm out of all options yet I know that I don't know. This knowing this, it means I'm changing. This awareness does not come and do everything else. Right? Even if I don't know who I am. He's of this with the ask question. She said, 'Father, is thinking due to inadvertence only? Even isn't thinking due to inadvertence even in non-sages?' Yes, it's... well, let's define what we mean by thinking. Usually what I say in satsang is that thinking is not the appearance of thoughts because this appearance of thoughts is coming whether sage or non-sage, it doesn't really matter. Thinking is... when we use the term thinking, we are including that belief in the thought, that conditioning, that picking up of the identity. So mostly in humanity, what you see is that it is the standard operating procedure, so to speak, that we seem to follow the voice of this mind and the thoughts, believe most of what it is saying. But for a sage, it is there so in inadvertence in the sense of the rarity of it, that in the sages sometimes take... there are beautiful stories like this. At one time when one being came to Shirdi Sai Baba and he noticed... he also has been coming to you for many years, something is happening to... he's fallen very ill. See, then for like a few moments then he got worried and said, 'No, no, let's go, let's see what's happening here. We call the doctor.' I'm paraphrasing, I wasn't there.

It is there. So, in that sense, in the sense of the rarity of it, there are beautiful stories like this. At one time, one being came to Shirdi Sai Baba and said, 'You know this devotee? He also has been coming to you for many years. Something is happening to him; he’s fallen very ill.' Then, for a few moments, he got worried and said, 'No, no, let’s go. Let’s see what’s happening here. We will call the doctor.' I’m paraphrasing; I wasn’t there. But within a few moments, then he came back and said, 'He’ll be fine. Everything is taken care of. Nothing is wrong.' So, even though the Guru says for some time—for example, he says when I meditated with someone, I want them to come right then, because if they take two minutes and the irritation is gone, I don’t know what to get. Something is picked up even in the lives of sages, and this has always been a very helpful aspect of this for me.

Because, you know, if there was an exhibit—and I don’t actually like it when books and stories convey it as very like hundred percent, somebody was there who was just hundred percent something, you see. Because in reading all this and hearing all this, the freedom which was so obvious became more and more unapproachable here. For a long time, the seeking continued because the benchmark was this hundred percent ideal that you must come to this. And when you start to hear stories like this, when you notice that, what is this hundred percent true for anyone? That’s why they’ve done a great service to all of us by putting those moments in the lives of all the great ones, you see.

That’s why the part of Ramayana which is very enjoyable for me is that Ram also cried from grief when Sita was taken away. He also considered himself to be a husband for a few moments. Jesus also had a tantrum with God when he said, 'Father, oh Father, have you forsaken me?' on the cross. In the face of so much phenomenal stimulus, especially of pain, it is very natural for a moment or two to buy into the idea that you are a limited object, you see. So the benchmark is not that hundred percent. So this is what makes this beautiful.

There are some new ones also here today, both in the room and on the hangout. So can we run through the clues that we found in the Ashtavakra Gita so far? This is for you to take as your contemplation. Actually, what happened is that one day, one night just before I was going to sleep, I had this feeling that I wanted to demystify the Ashtavakra Gita a bit more. Because what it is, is a series of verses which can sound like a conversation about freedom, but every verse is actually giving us a pointer tool for self-inquiry. So this feeling came that I want to make it even simpler, even clearer for those who are in satsang. So before going to sleep, some typing happened and some ten or eleven clues got typed out. And you don’t have to make a very big imprint of all eleven clues; just one or two, whatever appeals to you the most, use that. Use it for your contemplation and you will quickly see what Ashtavakra is pointing to.

They actually labeled the folder 'Submissions College.' How many files in this today? Timaeus and Japanese and Krishna and some juice and policy... which one is there? Thoroughness. And so the first clue was very, very early on in Ashtavakra, which is: that which is the witness of all things. This is a clue. And the verses in Ashtavakra which correspond to this are verses like: 'You are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space.' It’s very beautiful. And if it’s a bit confusing, you can go through the transcript of the recording of this; we’ve spent a lot of time discussing this one. 'You are not earth, water, fire, or air, nor are you empty space. Liberation is to know yourself as awareness alone, the witness of these.' Then verse 1.5 was: 'You have no castes or duties. You are invisible, unattached, formless. You are the witness of all things. Be happy.' So like this, many verses are there for this one key.

Second clue was: that which remains unchanging. Versus that which is the witness of all things, the second clue is it also remains unchanging. So whatever verse is 7.1: 'In me, the shoreless ocean, the ark of the universe drifts here and there on the winds of nature.' Then 7.2: 'In me, the shoreless ocean, let the waves of the universe rise and fall as they will. I am neither enhanced nor diminished.' This is very important. I am neither enhanced nor diminished. Although I am the shoreless ocean, the waves of which the arcs of the universe rise and fall, but I am neither enhanced nor diminished. So what is—I’ll give you an idea. When we look at something like this, notice how the mind will come and say, 'But you must now become like this. Now this has to go away completely.' What is the truth which is being discovered? I have always been this. I am that shoreless ocean, ocean with no boundaries, in which all these waves and ships are coming. And many ships, which are like the universe, they come and go, up and down they come, but I have remained untouched. This is the second clue, which is not only is that the witness of all things, it is the unchanging witness.

Third, which is similar to what you just spoke about: that which is beyond limitations or boundaries. One of the favorite verses, which is: 'I am wonderful indeed, beyond adoration. I am astounded at my powers. The universe appears within me, but I do not touch it.' And the verse 2.13: 'I am wonderful indeed, beyond adoration. I am everything thought or spoken, and yet I have nothing to say.' One more verse about this: 'I am unbounded awareness. Only in imagination do I have limits.' Notice how we thought we try to define you with some limits, with some limitation. 'I am unbounded awareness. Only in imagination do I have limits.' Reflecting on this, I abide in the absolute, in the limitless ocean of myself. Winds of the mind, all the myriad waves of the world, limitless ocean of myself. So that’s where the clue words—what have we done now? It is the witness, it is unchanging, it has no boundaries, it has no limits.

Okay. That which can only be found in the present, in the now. Since you are now and forever free—so my advice would always be, okay, leave the 'forever' aside. He’s saying you are free now. Now and forever free. So feel free now. Where will you find the truth? You will find it here. Where will you find yourself? Here and now. And I’ve said often that if you stay with your insight about what is here now and don’t go to the inference about what is here now, it will be cleanly obvious then.

Fifth: that which has no desires or aversion, beyond attachments and detachments. So today also we covered a lot of that, that many, many verses in this can be found about this, more than twenty here. Then sixth clue: that which is beyond doer, action, and inaction. So doer means not just these opposites of doer and non-doer; go beyond doership and non-doership. Action and inaction both do not apply to the reality of what we are. Again, verses have been found. Seventh: that which is beyond separation and union. So it is not that awareness manifests consciousness and then becomes lacking in something. Consciousness then plays as a person and it becomes less. Consciousness is not that. The truth is always you, neither enhanced nor diminished. It is always complete.

Eighth: that which cannot be found by the mind. Which means what? That no points or judgment, no inference, not even visual or creativity will point you to that. All these mental constructs will not point you to the truth of what you are. If you are just holding on to a concept, 'I am awareness,' and using that as a defense for your ego, or using that to show that you know something, you see, then know that this is just mental. Mental anything is not the truth. Concepts can only be used as thorns to remove other thorns.

Clue nine: that which is a direct insight and yet it is beyond any phenomenal perception. It shows you where to look. If you leave all phenomenal perception aside, have you also left? If you leave all phenomenal perception aside, have you also left? And if you are still there, how can you be there? It must be only as that which is non-phenomenal. So these words, don't get confused by them. Follow the clue. Find out that which is, which is not phenomenal. I’ve said often, isn't it, that if you put all phenomena one by one into a basket, have you also gone into the basket? But there is an 'I' which remains, the Self, the Absolute, awareness which remains outside the basket.

Number ten: that which is the source of your being, which in its unassociated being is consciousness. Yesterday I felt to say that when we shrug off the dust of concepts from our being, then being shines. It shines its unadulterated light. Just shrug off the dust of concepts from your being, no matter how valuable it might seem; it’s just dust. That which is the source of your being, which in its unassociated being is consciousness and playing as associated being is ego. So there are actually two pointers in this: where it is being with associated or unassociated, what is the source of that? And the second clue is how to come to what is the point of satsang, which is to come to this unassociated.

The last one that came up: that which is discovered following the guidance of the Satguru or by surrendering to divine presence. That which is discovered following the guidance of the Satguru or by surrendering to the divine presence. So then Chetna said something very beautiful today because she couldn't find the words about this in Ashtavakra. So she was saying, 'Is this for those who are telling us something of two signals?' Losing is this, my term, this matter. In a way that we are talking to this after being in such a part of the play. These are eleven.

Then Paul had come up with some nice ones also that were not in the original list of eleven. From what Paul says, yes, this is a very nice one. I like this, Paul. Thank you so much for this one. He says: that which you are trying to become, you already are. Good, true. That which you are trying to become, see that you already are that. How to see it then? He has pointed to one verse which is from chapter 15: 'Have faith, my son, have faith. You are awareness alone, the Self, the one who are the Lord of nature.' See, you are; you don’t have to become.

Then another provision: what you are right now can never be bound. Which is the same as the second, which is the unlimited ocean. Good. The Self is always effortlessly here. You don’t need to reach. So these two, the first one and the third one, are interrelated in a similar way. Beautiful. Self is effortlessly right here and requires no need to reach. It is not movable by ability here, but to be found by the mind. All these concepts will come from the mind. Just by believing the mind, you will have to come to the truth, but dependent on phenomena.

This is also very nice: beyond the mind’s idea of birth, death, and life. 'The sage neither rejects the world nor desires self. He is free of joy and sorrow. He does not live and cannot die.' Beyond the ideas of stability and instability. All this is in the verse he said: 'Wise one’s state never varies. Sleeping soundly, he is not asleep.' This is chapter 18; we will share more of this when we come to that. 'The wise one’s state never varies. Sleeping soundly, he is not asleep. Lying in reverie, he is not dreaming. Eyes open, he is not wakeful.' So if this is confusing for someone, don’t worry about it. We will come to that chapter. I know that it is pointing to the Self which is beyond all of these states. It is not talking about the phenomenal states which might be appearing. Thank you.

Poetry is good because the play is not seen. Is it a little—oh yes, Father, can we say waves of universe are nothing but the voice in the head? Because perception of the world is not troublesome at all.

Yes. Yeah, but what he is meaning, I feel, is not the feeling of the ups and downs. The feeling of the ups and downs, if that is what waves is conveying to you, is because of the voice.

The Self, which is beyond all of these states—it is not talking about the nominal states which might be appearing. Thank you.

Poetry is good because the play is not seen. Is it a little... oh yes, Father, can we say waves of universe are nothing but the voice in the head? Because perception of the world is not troublesome at all.

Yes, yeah. But what he is meaning, I feel, is not the feeling of the ups and downs. The feeling of the ups and downs, if that is what 'waves' is conveying to you, is because of the belief in the voice in the head. But what he is talking about is this shoreless ocean in which all of this appearance and disappearance, and objects and non-objects, with the coming and going of people, events—all of this is within this ocean within myself. It might be this giddiness because of the waves is giving you beating; this is because of the voice. You feel that you are the sufferer of them.

Yeah, because he said, right... hello? And you know, I'm just finding you, watch it, my connection got disconnected. Okay, anyways, I have just a short statement to make. Okay, because he said that the waves come and go but I am not impatient. But I am not impatient. So, so we can say that only this interpretation which the voice is continuously giving us, this comes and goes. So the waves come and go, the events as they are meant to happen. I find a job, I lose the job, but when the mind comes in...

No, but you have to make a query here for yourself. See, even this voice comes and says that I become impatient about something. The waves of the universe that are coming and going—it is when the voice of the interpreter is born that this seeming side effect, which is of impatience, is born. And inside, Father, while talking to Julian, you touched on how awareness is an aspect of consciousness. Perception is an aspect of consciousness. Awareness, perception of either the other object or imagination... so I'm not restricting perception to just the five senses, but also including the seeming inner perception, because both are dependent on attention. That which is dependent on attention in this world, without the concept, you can pick up the glass without calling it glass. Functioning of this... it is the mind which uses the labels and concepts to make something out of the appearance and ultimately to make something out of you.

I like to point these things out. Yeah, I know there's some teachers like to bundle everything up into one. But first, one has to realize there are qualitative differences in the play. Then you are able to see that all this emerges from the same essence. But when you try to lump it as, 'Okay, perception and also noise, it's all one big...' then it becomes a bit confusing. Then you say, 'Okay, but this perception... see, then why is... why am I... and attention is going away, is my perception...' This kind of confusion can come. Once you see that perception is another aspect of your consciousness, ultimately everything is made up of awareness. But you are aware of sight; sight is dependent on you. You are not aware of sight. So although the father and the son are the same, yet qualitatively the son comes from the father; the father does not come from the son, you see?

So to make this qualitative distinction helps to remove a lot of confusion because you are experiencing the son like the son. You're experiencing the quality of perception, you are experiencing the quality of existence. And although everything is made up of awareness itself, therefore is awareness itself, these qualitative distinctions we are still experiencing. And the mind has given power based on this qualitative distinction. So to notice that, 'Yes, this is how this quality functions,' brings clarity towards all of it and you see that all of it is this one Self, one awareness. If it is meant to leave the meeting as a mantra, it was out there. Everything is the qualitative distinction. This belongs to my distinction between all there is after consciousness and the irony aspects of the play of consciousness. Because this is still not gotten over. Ah, please tell me the meaning that they have not... the levy without it... we just use, just using the mantra that sages are not walking oceans under the ocean. They're not jumping off that... it is unbound and kerosene. So that is when they become mentally... we just try to apply these concepts and that way we are not in the same sort of qualitative denial of the appearance of consciousness. It is a beautiful what is occurring with itself. We are not in demand with the appearance of consciousness, but they come to a point where we can see the 'I' which is. Because I can... can I make a request? We look at the remaining questions tomorrow. Thank you all so much for being in satsang today. Satguru Sri Moojiji Ki Jai.