The Greater You Is Not Contained in the 4 Dimensions - 15th December 2017

And because we have reinforced this belief over and over, that's why we need to have satsang also over and over. Because one belief has been reinforced over many, many years, even multiple lifetimes, the truth can seem like we have to hear it over and over also over multiple lifetimes. So this is what is happening here: one set of conditioning which is being let go of. And many times in satsang, a new set of conditioning is filtered in. It is effective of what we see. I think many times that is the thing that works, especially for those who end up with this conceptually. And sometimes it's a surprise how much we are without this. I think a lot of times what happens is one set of concepts replaces another because something appears as emptiness. To be empty of concepts, you can be convinced that it's a bad idea. If you went to science class in seventh standard and you were empty of all scientific concepts, I'm sure the teacher would get very upset with you. We have been trained to rely on these crutches called concepts, and we have relied on them for our own identity. So now if I ask you, 'Who does the I represent?' and I request you not to rely on any concept of it, but your own insight about it...

That is the only answer I'm really interested in. That answer can be a non-verbal answer, it can be an 'I don't know,' or it can be eloquent words arising trying to describe the indescribable. I'm very happy to hear that. Usually, the eloquent answers just have to be passed on. So this question, 'Who does I represent?'—how is it when I ask you not to refer to a concept? You see, okay, this 'I' must be very natural. Because if you need a concept to remember who I am, it cannot be true. Because we don't need a concept to remember anything even about this body. If I am sitting, for example, we don't need to remember a concept; it seems so natural. You don't have to refer to, 'Okay, what was the last awareness?' No, it's not like that. In our natural existence, what are we? We have been convinced that in our natural existence we have this body-mind, but is this true? Before your first notion comes, what are you? Many ways to ask this question. One of the most potent ways is to ask you: what is aware of your existence? What is aware of your existence? Is that an object? Is that a thought? You have to think about it? 'I exist and I'm aware of the I.' That which is aware—does it have a shape and size? And you'll answer this conceptually or phenomenally?

So can we experiment with not using a concept and answering it with this deeper insight, with a pure intuition? You see, there are two things: you can tell me, 'Ananta, I am not contained within this sense-presented world,' or 'When I checked, I found I am contained in it.' Show me that. I'm happy to look together like that. But just conceptually 'I must be this' or 'I must be that'—we just inferentially nodding is not going to do it. Together we inquire. If you don't want to come to me, you can say Ashtavakra said... you said Ashtavakra said you are the shoreless ocean in which the arcs of the universe come and go. But represent this: when you have checked about yourself, can you say, 'I don't find myself to be this boundless, I found myself bound'? But from your looking, not from your assuming or judging.

Wait, wait, wait. So let's say the one part which is 'I don't know.' Now let's not even get into the content of whatever is arising. What witnesses this arising? Whether it is a physical sensation or whatever, the same way the answer appeared. So these concepts will appear. Let's try not to answer conceptually. That's my invitation.

So my invitation now is to say: okay, this is what is arising. 'Who really cares? What's in it for me?' That is another way of saying 'What's in it for me,' actually, right? So we've already dealt with that, the maha-mantra of the mind: 'What's in it for me?' So let's see if you can, for a change, instead of being so concerned about what it is, say, go deeper and see what witnesses that which is saying this. Right? So can we explore this together? Or is the 'I don't care' so loud that we are not able to look?

Not so loud. So let's look at that next. What else might be appearing? That might have gone by, something else will come.

So something comes or there is nothing. Is the witness of that vanished? That which witnesses the vanishing—what can we say about that?

No, I agree. Now that which is aware of the mind, the witness of the quest, that witnesses the question... and this is now, it's vanished. The question is gone.

Let's move to... so this is not language, yes. So focus—take it away from that part, this position. Most focus is it. What can you tell me about that key without using anything? So we can say our attention is moving. What is the attention reporting back to you? You said, right, it is looking back to me. So I just want to know about this. Does it have a color? Take your time, don't rush through this. Attention is going to these places. Attention is bringing back content to me, including this body is being visually perceived. That which receives all this content—what is that? Someone is receiving. I don't know how.

And is that someone related to you in some way?

Yes.

In what way? Is it you, or is it related to you?

Same as me. As it is.

So it is you, because it is not secondhand information. You know it. But that someone is not the same someone who could have a concern about the future, who could have issues with anything anymore. Or is it the same? So let's look at that. Let's look at that. So a memory could be appearing, a thought could be appearing. Now, that which is witness to them, what is its quality?

Okay, let's start simple. How does anything that is appearing here actually affect that one? That one that is witnessing it might be based on circumstances again.

Suppose we don't assume any of that. Let's just look at things as they are. So these words are coming. Suppose some words came which you did not like, and some anger, some frustration comes. So even that is perceived. Our attention could move and go to that frustration or some joy can come, peace can come. All these can come. Now, that which perceives all of this—does that take on the quality of them?

I can see that there is a perceiver, this who is perceiving.

Yes. So if this perceiver is qualityless, then is it an object? Can it be an object without quality? You see, so if this body is an object, can it contain something which is not an object? Not a physical object, no. It cannot be. So either inferentially or through your direct looking, it is non-objective. It cannot be contained in this container that we call the body. So this exploration is like this: to see which 'I' there is. And if you find that 'I am the perceiver,' truly I am this perceiver, then this perceiver—what relationship does it have with the identity that I have? Is it like you say, 'I am very straightforward'?

Okay, can we clarify that this quality belongs to the perceiver itself? Whatever quality you consider yourself to have, can we take on this that is perceiving all of this and see whether that quality belongs to it? Therefore, can we see that this perceiver is what we call 'I' because everything is coming to me? Yes, I see. So let's figure out what is in our experience. What is more real then? The actual me with a lot of qualities, or this perceiver which is qualityless? In our experience right now—we are not saying give up, we're just looking very scientifically and saying: in my direct experience right now, what is it that I am? Am I that one with all these qualities, or am I the witness of the qualities? It seems we are more familiar with the one with qualities.

But don't believe we are more familiar. You see, the word is 'more real.' Right now, can you find such a one with the qualities? Can you produce it? That's what I mean by reality. Does it have a tangible existence in this moment? The perceiver is not going anywhere. We're just looking for that one who has all these qualities of opposites. Does it have any existence, actual existence now? If you were to try and find that one—because in this moment you are empty of that, actually, absolutely—but if you were to try and find that one, can you do so without the notion? I still don't see it actually. But what about this 'me'? For that, we need to have a notion. So if the sages have said that the real is that which does not come and go, and the one that comes and goes is not real, then you can see that this perceiver is constant. So this emotional entity that I consider myself to be, that is coming and going. This is a very beautiful insight. We started certainly because of your grand performance and post-video, by the way, sweet. But we have to go around because food is nice and I'm sitting here. Thank you. Thank you so much for being in satsang.