This Primal Knowingness Knows Existence - 17th October 2016
Saar (Essence)
Ananta guides a seeker to investigate the relationship between beingness and awareness, clarifying that the recognition of one's true nature is not a logical inference or memory, but a direct, primal knowing prior to thought.
Without referring to memory, what is most primal? This witnessing knows even the sense of being.
The recognition of beingness recognizing its own source is where the distinction between awareness and consciousness dissolves.
Am I aware now? This question is distinct from the sense of existence; it points to the unborn.
contemplative
Transcript
This transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.
The one that is discussing itself, the one that is discussing about itself being awareness, comes and goes. Yes? How can it infer that it is something that is ever-present? That 'I am always present even in deep sleep' is only an inference.
This is a very good question. So let's look at what an inference is. You see, the inference is like... where is he? Very good to see you, my dear. So what is an inference? You see, if you wake up in the morning and you find some chocolate in your beard, you can infer that 'I must have had a midnight snack' or 'I must have sleepwalked and had this chocolate.' See, that is an inference. You deduce it. You come to a conclusion based on the evidence that you find. You see? But to say that I woke up at this time—or at least this was the time that showed up when the waking state came—and there was sleep and there was nothing in that, that is not an inference of this. So it is not an inference because we don't really know; like, it could be our children who could have just for a prank put some chocolate in our beard or something, so we are just inferring. We don't really know what happened.
So in this case, this is different. It is not an inference, but it is a knowing that yes, there was sleep and now there was waking. There is another way to look at this which could mean that you're saying that even for saying this—even to say this, that there was a state called sleep in which there was nothing—I have to rely on memory. You could be saying like that. So this is not the inference like a deductive inference, but reliance on some memory of experience to be able to say that this is what actually happened. Yes, this is true. See, but if you're going to be using memory for other things that we know, if you're going to be using memory for other things which have been experienced in the past and that we presume to know, then we can also use it in this way. Once we stop using memory and don't refer to the past for any knowing, then even that can be dropped, you see? Because without that, there is not even the search for freedom. When you're so fresh in the moment, so alive right now, there is nothing to be searched for or to be found.
So if memory can be used as an ally of the identity, then we also use memory to show you the reality of what you are. If memory is dropped as an ally of the identity, then we don't even need to refer to any other state—sleep state or meditation state or dream state. So in that way, we can say yes, we infer based on memory of what was experienced. But who is to say that the last second happened at all or not? You cannot see... we lost him, I got disconnected.
So I was saying the second aspect which you could be meaning as an inference could mean that which we are referring to memory to claim the knowing of something. And I was saying that as long as we are using memory for some sense of continuity, some sense of identity, then we can also use memory to dissolve this, to see what has really been experienced. When we stop relying on our memory at all, then we won't even have to refer to any other state which was experienced in the past. That was the first aspect of what you said.
Read more (15 more paragraphs) ↓Show less ↑
Then you say being can be confirmed by itself, but to call it awareness still seems to be an inference—an inference of this very being which comes and goes.
Yes, so it is beingness which itself is coming to the recognition of its source or of its true Self, because the Self never lost or pretended to be otherwise. So what is happening when you check 'Am I aware now?' The question is distinct from 'Can I stop being?' isn't it? So being—'I am that I am'—is different from 'I am aware even that I am.' So what is happening? The recognition, of course, still belongs to being, with being recognizing its own source, what it is made up of. And it is at this point, on this question 'Am I aware now?' that you see that there is no distinction even between awareness and Consciousness, although qualitatively they continue to play as if they are different in some way. Okay, he seems to be going in and out; hopefully the recording will help you.
Then he said, when we say we woke up or waking state came, but my experience does not see it coming and going. It just appears from nowhere and sees that it is here.
Yes, it is here in relation to it not being here. So that which comes and goes, there must be a witness of that coming and going, otherwise none of us would be able to even... none of us would have to even invent a term called sleep if it was not our experience. There's a difference between sleep and if I was to say, 'Oh actually you didn't go to sleep, what happened is that you came to this heaven where all the angels were there.' This is not my experience. So you see that? But that is not my experience. What was our experience? Oh, that there was nothing. So the 'I' that is able to say this—it was not the experience of heaven and the pearly gates—even when there was nothing, there was this 'I' who was aware that there was nothing.
Then you say the inference I was speaking about is not about memory but about it being an assumption.
So yes, so that we check. That is not an assumption because an assumption could mean that any of us could assume that a different state could be there. But we all say that sleep is something in which there is nothing. It's an experience where there's nothing, and that is why when there's an experience of something, we invented another term called dream: 'I had a dream that there was something.' And then I went back to sleep. All this is speaking from the direct experience of what we have experienced, and we can only speak from direct experience from what has been here in memory. Once we stop relying on memory, then everything is just fresh and in the moment. And even fresh in the moment, I find that I am aware even that I exist. I know I exist. This knowing is primal. This existence is also seen from that perspective.
So we can just, if you're not relying on memory for anything, we can just check right now: what is most primal to me? This witnessing. It witnesses even the sense of being. This knowingness—it knows itself and knows of the existence. So without inferences right now, without even referring to memory, what is it that we find here? We find that there is a sense of existing. Who is aware of the sense of existing? That is 'I.' It is not a personal 'I,' it is not an entity 'I,' it is not a phenomenal 'I,' yet it is undeniable that I am aware of my existence. The reporting can only happen phenomenally, of course; all these words are just part of a phenomenal play. But knowing of this existence—is that also phenomenal? Is awareness of this existence also phenomenal? Who is aware of the phenomenal perceiving? Because many times confusion happens between the natural functioning of this being (which is a part of which the phenomenal perceiving is a natural part) and that which is aware of even this function.
You say that without referring to memory, I find that I am here. I am here, and this sense is aware of its existence.
So to say 'this sense is aware of its existence' means 'I am that I am.' I am that I am. That which is aware that this sense is aware of its existence—what can we say about that one? Is it not known that this being is aware of itself? Not a person or entity, but just here? Yes.
To jump from here to 'I am awareness and eternal'...
Yes, so let's look at both of them separately. This awareness that being knows itself—is this subject to the presence even? Is this more intimate even than being to you, or is the being the most intimate? What seems to be on the screen: the sense of existence, or that which knows the sense of existence? What seems to be appearing: the sense of existence, or that which knows the sense of existence? Once this becomes clear, then we can get to the eternal part. Because the eternal part means that which is beyond time. And then when you start to see that time is just part of the functioning of this Consciousness itself, and that which is prior to this remains untouched by the play of time, then we can call it the Unborn or the eternal.
That which he says to me the most intimate is the being. That which knows the sense of existence seems to be simply a thought talking about knowing being.
Without the thoughts, just check: am I aware now? And whether this awareness is a functioning of the being, just like sight or hearing or taste or touch—the tools in perceiving. This awareness which is aware of all of this functioning of being... just contemplate these questions. Already it's not a bad thing if you just feel this being aware of itself. It is the end of the spiritual journey. In fact, most spiritual paths don't have anything beyond this. 'I am that I am' is completely fine.
Yes, you say without the thoughts there is just being. This being seems to be the source of the five senses, but the being itself doesn't seem to be something that something higher is aware of.
Might one day just say that, 'Oh, but it was so simple. I was aware of this being. This being was not aware of me.' But even if it feels like right now it is just this being which is aware of itself, there is no trouble, because ultimately there is no distinction between being and awareness.
The Thread Continues
These satsangs touch the same silence.
On a similar theme
But... God is Here. - 9th March 2026
9 March 2026
Ananta teaches that God dwells within the heart, hidden only by the 'blanket of me.' He guides seekers to rest in the...
On a similar theme
Allowing the Atma To Reveal the True Gyana (Self-Knowledge) - 20th February 2026
20 February 2026
Ananta guides seekers to move beyond the mind's 'checker guy' and conceptual labels by resting in the witnessing...
The following day
The Invitation is to See Who Witnesses All of This - 18th October 2016
18 October 2016
Ananta guides seekers to recognize themselves as the non-phenomenal witness that remains untouched by the mind's drama....