M: But in the morning, I read part of this paper that you put out, I Am the Song of The Self, a couple of pages of verses.
R: Yes, that is a good meditation.
M: So, I do that and I shift into the … it causes the Matthew to go still.
R: Yes, it quiets the mind.
M: And I become very conscious of the truth of those mantras that, that they are … that those mantras are exactly, exactly true.
R: Yes, that’s right.
M: And then I will, generally, I will read a couple of passages without commentaries from The Crest Jewel of Discrimination, although I’ve stopped doing that because it’s just too much. And then I will do some of my Bhagavad Gita flashcards. And then I’ve just been taking this great joy in the Astravada Gita. Holy crap, that’s a joy! And then I will go about my day.
At any rate, any of these four things, or watching one of your videos, or reading one of your books, or anything by Dayananda, causes an immediate transition that is extremely distinct, and it happens like this, James. Imagine you slowly lowered your hand into a bucket of ice water. There is a change in your experience that happens in sequence in a very predictable way. Like your fingers get wet, then your wrist gets wet, start to feel the cold.
So, the first thing that happens is that the Matthew personality starts to go silent. And the second thing that happens is that I begin to stand as awareness and I don’t know how to … there is this silence and a direct awareness, and there is a feeling as if everything comes into focus. It is very much like, if you’ve ever looked through one of those old 35 mm cameras where you can move the barrel of the lens and zoom things into focus, it’s like that but it is not just visual. Everything comes into focus. Everything is fine. Everything is just one thing. There is a disinterest and a disidentification that happens. There is a … it becomes difficult to verbalize. You know? When I am identified with Matthew, I always feel as if my awareness is located in my head. When I am not identified with Matthew, there is a general awareness in which everything happens, and then there is the local awareness that is local to the body which feels that it’s shining off the face. It no longer feels like it’s in the head. It feels like the awareness that animates the meat body is shining off, as if my face were shining. And it is not …
R: Yes, reflected awareness.
M: So, when these things happen and their experiences, then …
R: They are all experiences, objects, that you are describing …
M: Yes!
R: … that you are witnessing.
M: Yes! But they are always coincident with the knowledge that I am ordinary conscious awareness. Like, when I become … when I drop the mistaken knowledges, when I drop the mistake of identification with the Matthew person, these things always happen. And my impression has been that, as long as I remain in that state, vasanas will burn off quickly, and it will become my default position. And, it is kind of everything I have ever wanted from life. It feels like, not that life becomes perfect, but that this is everything I have ever wanted. This feels right. I feel like I’ve got my shoes on the right feet for the first time. You know what I mean? Like things have stopped being … there is a feeling of wrongness associated with identifying with Matthew. It’s an iky feeling. You know?
R: Well, it’s not you. It’s not you, so, of course, if you identify with something that isn’t real, the mental construct is not going to feel good. That’s right.
M: And, so, like I wrote in my email, so, there is different levels of knowledge. There is like informational knowledge, like knowing the capitals of the states and countries, which is kind of sterile for the purpose of Self recognition. And then there is recognition knowledge, like knowing an orange by taste, which is knowledge plus experience and understanding. It’s a more complete form of knowledge. And then there is a more complete form of knowledge like riding a bicycle: not just knowing it’s a bicycle and knowing that you are riding it, but being able to skillfully steer around the pot holes—that’s knowledge. That’s complete knowledge, at least more of it.
R: That is actualized knowledge, applied knowledge.
M: Yes. If the knowledge that Vedanta is intended to reveal is that knowledge, then I just want to stay on that bicycle and keep wabbling and wabbling until I get steady at it.
R: No, that is not the knowledge.
M: Right. And that triggers a “Wait a minute! I’ve just regressed 40 years and am I just attached to experience again?”
R: You are not attached to experiences. You are attached to the experiencer. That’s the problem. Not the experiences. You are still identified with the experiencing entity. You are trying to make it all acceptable to the experiencing entity. But Vedanta points out that the experiencer, the experiencing entity, is just another object, another concept.
M: Yes, yes.
R: So you are actually putting intelligence and consciousness into the experiencer. But the experiencer is an inert conceptual entity. That is what the Mandukya Upanishad is saying. The waking state entity, the experiencer, is not real. So, how can you want anything for it, or establish anything for it, or do anything for it, because it is not actually a real entity. It is a conceptual entity.
M: Right. But there is another thing there that, when that experiencing entity actually goes silent, goes quiet, and there is just the awareness, there is such a joyful experience.
R: Yes, but there is the awareness for whom?
M: No, it’s just like a naked awareness. It’s not for anybody.
R: Ok, right. Fair enough with that. That’s describing that as an object. For whom is there a naked awareness?
M: There doesn’t seem to be any whom there.
R: Maybe it doesn’t seem like there is a whom there, but there is definitely a whom there because the whom is speaking, the whom is objectifying that experience, the absence of Matt and the presence of these other experiences. The Kena Upanishad says. It says “By whom? Who do they belong to?” You are pretending like there isn’t anybody there, like they don’t belong to anybody, but Vedanta points out that that the one to whom these experiences are presenting themselves is you.
M: But that’s not a person, that’s just a …
R: A what.
M: Yes, exactly.
R: The I is a what. Nothing belongs to what’s. All things only belong to who’s.
M: Well, it’s almost kind of like, it’s almost more like a process than an object. It’s not exactly a process, but …
R: No, it’s not a process because it doesn’t change.
M: Right. But it’s certainly not an object like a person or an identity.
R: It’s just existence shining as awareness. And the word I is the tangible representation of that, or the direct experience of that existence shining as consciousness.
M: Got it.
R: So, whenever you say I, I always only refers to that “what”, that existence, that being. You can say “I am”. That I exist and that I am conscious is innate knowledge. But it is not vritti knowledge; in other words, it is not thought knowledge. You are taking about thought knowledge.
M: Right. So, what I described to you just now, where I had gotten up to when I wrote you that letter a couple of weeks ago, so … about three months ago, before I read that letter, something has gone wrong with my body. And, it’s gotten to the point that, day by day, I think I might die. And, finally, I’ve started to go see doctors. But, the reason I tell you that is because I just didn’t have the energy to call or write another letter. So, after I wrote you that letter a couple of weeks ago, every day I was trying to formulate questions, right? Like I was going to come to this [Skype satsang with you] with a checklist, because I was afraid I would sit here and not be able to remember what I wanted to talk about. So, I’ve been re-writing this letter, like its dictated into my phone and it’s 12 pages long, and the next day, I throw it away and start over. And, I’ve been doing that for about two weeks now. And, somewhere along the line, it’s been this intense looking at exactly what it is that I want to ask and somewhere along the line, I recognize that I am aware that … so we make the distinction between knowledge and experience, but knowledge is also an object of experience. And, all of a sudden …
R: There is an identity between the knowledge of I and the experience of being. In other words, you only are, always. When you say “I” or “I am”, it means you exist and that existence is nondifferent from your awareness.
M: And if you look at the knowledge, you know, I am consciousness awareness …
R: Where does it take you? In other words, where does it situate you? The only purpose of knowledge is to situate you in the I, in the being.
M: Exactly. Yes. That’s exactly what happens. I don’t’ know how do I …
R: Because it removes the notion that you are Matt and that experiences are real.
M: Exactly. Yes. Up until a couple of days ago, I was having a question for you between the knowledge that I am awareness and the wonderful experience that results when I focus on that knowledge, the silence and [so on.]. And the fact that I wanted that silence, that I wanted that state of being, number 1, because it felt so wonderful, and number 2, because it’s true about just burning up vasanas; it just torches them. And I wanted it to become … Anyway, a couple of days ago, while I was drafting like the 12th draft of this letter, dude, I think I just hit the end of it.
R: You see? What is knowledge? Knowledge isn’t a thing. It’s just the absence of ignorance. So, Vedanta doesn’t give you experiences or anything of the sort, because you already are what you are experiencing. There is no experience superior to being you. Most everyone wants to and or subtract some experience from themselves. But it doesn’t work because no addition or subtraction changes you. You are always only just you, existence shining as awareness. Nobody ever said that you exist or are conscious because it is a self-evident fact. But all the mental noise about what you want and what you don’t covers it up.
So Vedanta negates the thinker, the feeler, the perceiver, the doer. When it gets rid of that … words are hard here … you fall back on the default. You don’t fall back—those are just words. You actually are the default all along but you don’t know it. So, when we take away the ignorance, leftover knowledge is the knowledge of me.
M: Yes. Something is happening for me that is different from what has happened in the past.
R: “Me” means who? Matt or “me” means awareness?
M: Awareness.
R: Yes, but, so what? Any happening is going to be different for awareness. All happenings are different. Awareness isn’t different. You are not different.
M: When we talked and wrote, I don’t know if it was the last November or whenever it was, and I told you that Matt the critical character was now like a soap opera in another realm, that was wonderful. That was a wonderful thing.
R: For whom was that? For you!
M: Right.
R: No, you didn’t say that with enough confidence. For whom was Matt a soap opera?
M: For awareness, it was like I disconnected …
R: No. No, no. For me [awareness]! You don’t want to own it, you see? You keep objectifying awareness. You have to say “me”. If you say awareness, awareness becomes an object. To whom? To whom is awareness an object? To me! Now, what does “me” mean? “Me” means awareness! Doesn’t it?
M: Right.
R: This is the hard part now. This is the most subtle part. This is the hard part that is very difficult to get. Every time you objectify yourself, you say “There is only awareness.” Now, awareness is saying “There is only awareness.” Why would awareness say “There is only awareness”? or say there is peace or there is…whatever?
Look at your language: You are saying “there is, there is, there is, there is …” You told me. The way you phrased it, all that knowledge, the way you phrased it is “There is.” Now, while you are saying there is I’m wondering who is speaking to me?” And it seems to me that you think that somebody called Matt is speaking here. But there is no Matt to speak here.
So I say for whose benefit are these experiences happening? And you have to say “For me awareness!” Because “ If I say, for whom is there awareness, awareness suddenly becomes an object for me. But the me is awareness so how can you actually make that statement, that there is Matt, or there is this, or there is awareness?
See the point of view? By by virtue of what do I know these things? There is not one thing that is not known apart from awareness, apart from existence, existence and awareness being synonyms. So, the one that is talking all the time is only awareness. It’s never anybody else of anything else. That’s what advaitam, nonduality means.
There are not two awarenesses. There is no subject and object. There is the appearance of a subject and an object that is produced by ignorance. And when Vedanta takes away that ignorance, there is nothing to say then. You just say “I” and you know that that word “I” only ever refers to awareness. Now, if you know that, you’ll never make all these statements about the objects as if the objects had any meaning. The objects have no meaning apart from you [awareness]. I am the meaning or the content of every statement that I make—I awareness; I existence.
At some point, you have got to claim it. And you still don’t want to claim it.
M: Everything that you … the way I understand what you just described happened to me about two days ago as I was drafting a letter and I just thought “Oh, this is just me!”
R: There you go! That’s right. There is only me! There is only me. If you say the word Matt, it just refers to me, awareness. But it doesn’t refer to the conceptual Matt. Every thought points to me, awareness. No matter what thought is there, it only points to me awareness. You do not have a thought, an idea, an object, an experience without a witnessing subject—an existent witnessing subject. And that existent witnessing subject is me! That’s it. There is only me. Some call it solipsism.
A friend wrote me the other day and said “I haven’t written to you for three years and I want to tell you something funny.” He said, “My doctor wants to put me awareness on meds because he says I have solipsism syndrome. He thinks I am nuts.” And that is how it looks from the outside because ignorance generates duality.
M: So, James, what you described about arriving at a point that it is just me, so that … I think that’s exactly what happened to me over the last couple of days. But there is an additional thing and that is that: everything in my experience, it all also seems to be me.
R: It is! It is.
M: Kind of not me and me at the same time.
R: That’s right, it is but it isn’t. Not the same, but it’s not different. That’s what we mean. That’s what Maya means: it’s not the same, but it is not different.
M: And then, the content of the experience of illness and procrastination is just blah blah.
R: It’s just thoughts, that’s all. Just thoughts—in me, awareness!” The world is in me, I’m not in it. ,All the thoughts are in me, I am not in them.” Krishna said in the Gita.
M: And I kind of feel that I ought to fix what I can, but at the same time, I’m not that interested.
R: That’s why I said you’re fine. Don’t fix anything. Nothing can be fixed, because there is only two categories existence: satya and mithya. Mithya is what is not real, it is seemingly real—so how can you fix something that is seemingly real? And the other category which is real is me, awareness, and how can you change or fix something that is real i.e. permanent, unchanging? So, there is no possibility to changing either: neither you [awareness] or your experience.
M: Ok, so here we come to the good point, then: tell me, James, from what you are as awareness, how do you steer the life of Mr. Swartz the body?
R: I don’t!
M: Well, something has to …
R: Isvara is doing that! There is a factor known to awareness that generates experience. It is not the same as awareness, but it is not different from awareness. And it is responsible for experience. Awareness is not responsible for any experience. That factor that is generating experience we call Isvara. And I-awareness don’t care.
M: Holy crap, dude! I just got it all of a sudden. Yeah, ok. Yeah. It is getting steered, it’s just not you.
R: It’s not me, awareness! It’s getting steered already! So, why would I waste my time steering something that is already being steered! It’s all in the pipeline! As we speak, Isvara is generating everything all the time. And, I’m just sitting here: generate as you will, Lord. Go ahead! because it has nothing to do with me, awareness! I’m just a witness.
M: What an enormous relief!
R: Well, yeah! That’s called freedom. Relief. That’s freedom from experience. Let God, let Isvara, whatever you want to call it, let the factor that generates experience generate experience, because it’s generating experience anyway whether you like it or not. Why concern yourself!? I don’t worry about it.
In my mind, I woke up this morning “Well, I will do this this and this.” After about two minutes, I realized that I was not going to do this this and this. I wasn’t supposed to do those things because they weren’t on Isvara’s list.
M: I think I got it man.
R: Yes, I think so. It’s the key. Don’t worry about it. It’s been taken care of. That’s what “I am not the doer” means. “I am not the doer” means “I am awareness.” The doer is some factor in awareness, not “inside” awareness, but a factor that is known to awareness that generates all the events that is called my life. And the sum total of all experience is functioning all the time in me, generating the experience, not just for this James body, but the Matt body, the bird body. It’s making the sun go around, the wind, the stars, and the moon, everything. And I’m just sitting here watching it. I can think “Oh, I want this” or “I want that” and it means nothing.
M: I want to ask you something else, because it occurs to me and I don’t know why. Is there anything else that I should do?
R: No! Because how can I, awareness do anything? The I is not a doer. The knowledge of awareness is that I am not a doer. Isvara is the doer! How can awareness do anything? It’s not made of parts. Existence is not made of parts. Consciousness is not made of parts. There is no way it can do. There is no room for it to do anything.
M: Now that I’ve asked and you’ve answered, the question has become more clear to me. I’ve begun to look at these states that I go into, and the mechanism …
R: You, awareness, don’t go into any state. The states appear in me, awareness. Just say “The states that appear in me.” You see? Your tendency is that you are still seeing yourself as Matt, as an object, as a doer. Because “I go into” means “I do”! Everything presents itself to I and then goes away on its own. It’s a vertical movement. Things appear in me and then they disappear. I am simple ordinary awareness when they appear and simple ordinary awareness when they disappear. I’m aware of the absence of an object and its presence. That’s all.
M: So, …
R: It’s hard to formulate it, right? It’s hard to formulate it, that’s why you need Vedanta. Because Vedanta has the words that match who You Are. That’s why I only speak Vedanta—because they match perfectly who I Am.
M: You know? I’ve been reading more of Sundari’s satsang. And you and her satsangs’ have a different style of writing. Her style seems more absolute, in a way. One of the things I recognize reading hers, that I don’t remember in reading yours at least not with the same impact, is that she talks about absolute ending of duality. And I remember you saying something like, when you realize the Self, if you are perfectly satisfied, then you are done. But why not clean your vasanas anyway? What else are you going to do?
R: There I am talking to the imaginary jiva. There I’m provisionally accepting the belief that you are a doer. Because getting to where we are right now takes a long time and it is very difficult, isn’t it?
M: It is! It has taken my entire life.
R: Yes, it has taken your entire life. And we have to take that person seriously. It’s not the truth, but it is good enough. Close enough for government work. So, we deal with that imaginary entity until it matures and can understand what you just understood.
M: Ok, so here is the part that is fishy for me right now, and I am going to tell you in two parts, ok?
R: You mean fishy for Matt: there is nothing fishy for you, awareness. Why do you care about what is fishy? But we can deal with the fishy if you want.
M: Yes, let’s deal with this for a second.
R: Ok.
M: As Matt, I can continue to trigger these states. And the way I trigger them is that I direct my attention to awareness and then the silence happens. And, then, I’ll be damned if Matt doesn’t start cleaning his fucking house. What a surprise, right? There are a lot of dirty vasanas that I could clean up through … and I’ve begun to look at these states as a type of meditation, and they feel really good. And they feel really free. And they clean up a lot of the vasanas. On the other hand, it’s not important anymore.
R: It isn’t important, but it is important for the world. …
M: There is the … So, I should keep going! even though …
R: Your life is not only valuable to you; it’s valuable for everybody else. What’s the difference between you and everybody else!? So, when you are wandering around proscrastinating, it’s doing nobody any good. You could be doing something noble, something meaningful.
M: Yes, I feel like I want … this is where I came from the question about how you steer your life, because, it feels I ought to live with integrity. And, on the other hand, the concept of living with integrity seems like assuming an identity that is not real.
R: But you’ve been assuming an identity that is not real all along. Why not just pretend that you are Matt and do the right thing?
M: Ok, I’m really happy with that answer.
R: I’m pretending to teach you and you are pretending to listen. Life’s a game. It’s OK dirty and it’s OK clean but clean is better for all concerned. Just clean it up! It’s not going to change you, awareness. You are still you. You still exist. But the thought that there is something wrong with the world doesn’t have to be there. If it isn’t, you’re a benefit to the world.
M: I am so fucking glad that you are there for me, James. I’m sorry for the cursing.
R: That’s all right. I knew this was an important conversation. Finally, the penny dropped. You’ve been at this for 40 years, you’ve been trying to sort this out. Thank God you persevered and got to this …
M: Oh, man! Thank God I ran into your teachings, because I would have just continued to plod along until I ran out of time.
R: Because you are too smart; you are too clever by half, that’s the problem.
M: Plus I was so unhappy with being unhappy.
R: Unhappy with being unhappy—that’s not good. If you are going to be happy, be happy being unhappy. I have to go. My wife has dinner and we have a guest coming for dinner.
M: Two things: I love you like crazy. Thank you so much.
R: I love you too, man. You’re a great guy.
M: And tell Sundari thanks for the satsangs, man! I read her stuff every day now.
R: Yes, I will but now you are making me feel small. You like her satsangs better than mine.
M & R: [laughter]
M: I don’t like them better, but it’s nice to have two viewpoints.
R: It is nice to have two viewpoints.