What Remains Between The Thoughts? | Live Deep Dive

NI'll start by answering an email which was asking me to talk about Self-inquiry and surrender. Surrender more to be specific, and specifically how Ramana Maharshi explained it.

So, Self-inquiry — it's not supposed to be a long and arduous process of inquiring. What Sri Ramana Maharshi explained is quite basic, quite simple: whatever thoughts are arising, no matter what the thoughts, how many thoughts, whatever, you just question: to whom did this thought arise? And if you ask it to a child, they also know the answer: "To I." There's no other answer. The thought arose to I. That is I.

So you go: to whom did this thought arise? Answer is to I. Then the question is who am I? To me the more precise question is: so what is that I? Because you've already said "to I"; there's a knowledge, an already known fact, that this thought arose to I.

So what is that I? Self-inquiry is just being disciplined about doing this. Whatever thoughts arise, question: to whom did they arise? To I. Most definitely, to I. Not to something else, or someone else.

What am I? And there'll be like a ... There's a gap, and that gap is giving you the answer. The answer is not going to come in the form of a word, or a thought, or an experience, or a feeling.

The answer is: the thought arose to You. That's what You are. And then all the other spirituality stuff is describing what that You means. Because when the mind starts to look to its Source — that's how Ramana Maharshi would talk about it — the mind returns to its Source. It looks to its Source. That is just: what are you at that point?

You're just present, aware. That's the factual I. And then any next thought that comes and creates a new concept of I, that is not the factual I. That's the conceptual I. And in that I we can differentiate between male and female, and son and daughter, and dad and mother, and whatever. But if we only look at that point: to whom did this thought arise?

To I. What am I? As the mind quiets down and there's that gap, in that gap it's quite clear. That Self is nondual. That is the actual factual Self. And that is the end of the inquiry. The inquiry has completed.

You now know — and then the reason to continue the inquiry is to clear up the wrong ideas of self. So, now the other thing, and what this email is asking about, is that Self-inquiry, for a kind of mind that's very intellectual, or starts to think about that question, it gets hard and maybe surrender is the better option. But actually they're both connected; you can't have one or the other. First, if you're going to surrender, you can't surrender to a concept or a belief.

Although Ramana Maharshi would point out: if someone he thought is keen on religion, they've been raised in that and they're not practicing inquiry, you could tell them, yeah, just surrender. But then you're surrendering to a belief; a concept of God. You have not understood who you're going to surrender to. So there's two sides to it: one is look for yourself, what is the Self?

And then the surrender is that now whatever thoughts are arising, they are surrendering to this actual Self. Like my thought arises — oh, I don't know, I've got a presentation on Monday. Big presentation Monday on stage. Actually it's on Tuesday, but whatever. And that is a concept of I.

There's a person who will go on stage, needs to be prepared, needs to present to that audience. But that thought, in the moment, if you apply Self-inquiry, it can surrender to the actual Self which is here right now. What is that Self? Present... aware... Awareness.

So they are interconnected. You can't just say... Self-inquiry if it seems too hard, it's just more thinking. Self-inquiry is quite straightforward. To whom did the thought arise? That is I.

Whatever — in the gap between that question and no answer coming up — that is the Self. The Awareness. Not an experience, not an ... and so on and so forth. All right, let's ask questions.

QThis isn't so much a question as a process I went through this week. Now, it was Self-inquiry and I was working out what a concept is. The concept is basically the mind's tool to break down the universe into smaller chunks. So then I thought: what's not a concept? The Self is not a concept. So what would happen if me, the concept, tried to live in a non-conceptual world? It would be complete annihilation. It's impossible. So that was kind of the process, and it was a bit like feeling it pan out, and then after three or four days it was: that's it. There must be — that's it.

NMhm. Yeah. So I mean — that's the mind after it's seen — there's starting to be an inkling of: oh, my concept of self is wrong.

QYeah. Well, it clearly is. Clearly — can it possibly be a concept? Can a concept possibly live in what is nonconceptual, which is Reality?

NSo Reality is nonconceptual. It's nondual. A concept can't survive Reality. A concept disappears as soon as it hits Reality.

QYes. Yes — peace. Centered. Yeah, a bit like ground zero basically.

NYep. We got a question or a comment.

QA question. Since human language and speech, everything that comes out of that are all concepts to create an understanding. When doing this inquiry, thinking occurs so rapidly, the thoughts occur so rapidly that it seems impossible to see just one thought at a time. I may observe one, but so many happen before I really focus my attention on another. And so with a process of Self-inquiry, my challenge is: how do I see this being for what it is when I'm mired in the muck of thinking?

NSo you're not trying to look at the thinking. The inquiry is interrupting that thinking. So whatever thoughts are arising, we interrupt them. To whom are these thoughts arising? So whatever the chain of thinking was, that's been interrupted. You have to answer this question: to whom does the thought arise? There's no confusion about that question. The answer is to I.

Okay? Now when the answer comes — to I — that is your opportunity to then: yes, that is I. That is the non-conceptual I. It cannot get more non-conceptual than that. Otherwise whatever other answer comes up, that would have to be a description — it would have to be maybe an experience of the Self, or to see the Self in some way. But instead, when you say "to I," you are present as you are, and the answer to the mind is: yes, that is I. Or if you want to continue the inquiry part, then it's who am I — and yes you do need to, because you're interrupting the thoughts and you're asking the question and the inquiry is becoming clearer. There will be a point where there's a gap in the thinking, and that is the answer. The gap in the thinking — there's still Awareness. There's still you as the present, aware, real — whatever — it's not that you're an entity.

Whenever we start to think of ourselves, the thought comes packaged with an idea of self. But what this inquiry is showing you is: when you say this thought arises to I, what is that I? Does that I have any qualities besides being aware? Can you say it's green or yellow or tall or short and whatnot? It doesn't apply. And it is known, because when you say the thought arises to I, it is known that it arises to I. So the I is not unknown. It's not that there's no self-knowledge. The self-knowledge is there. It's just being confused by all the thinking and focused on the thoughts.

So Ramana Maharshi had another quote here, an analogy. He said: as long as the enemies sally forth from the fortress — so as long as from the fortress the enemies are coming out, you've got to destroy them where they arise. And if you do that, then the fortress falls into your hands. And how odd is that analogy for a very pacifist sage who would not eat an animal? Why is he talking like this?

So you first think of where he is speaking to us. It feels to a human being — it feels like there is one thing in the world, and even your mind is like attacking you. But that's not what's going on. The mind is the fortress. It's got its defenses, it's got its concepts, it's built this model of the universe, model of self — that is the fortress. The enemy is coming. Enemy is a harsh term, but they're the thoughts which have the wrong concept of I — that is being cast as the enemy. How do you destroy them? With Self-inquiry. So as the soldier approaches you with its concept of I, how do you destroy it where it is? Because the concept of I, like Davy was saying, cannot stand up to the Reality of I.

No concept of I — like, okay, I'm going to describe what you are, let's say thought: I'm going to describe what you are, you are pure Consciousness, blah blah, even Awareness — it's just a word. But then if you pause in that second: to whom did this thought arise? That is not a word. That is the actual fact of what you are. And that is how we're defeating the thoughts where they arise. And at the end the thoughts — the soldiers — have to surrender to this, the actual Self. Concept will never be good enough. I can talk about it. I can write poetry about it.

QThe gap just seems so fleeting. It's there and then it's gone.

NYes. It's not that we want to completely eliminate thought. That's what I was saying in the last video. If we do that, then the mind has ceased to function in a normal human way. But that's not the point. We're not trying to lobotomize this mind. So you notice what you are — once you know a fact, you know the fact. You don't keep repeating the fact in your mind. Okay. Like Maharaj would say: you're sitting here, you know you're sitting here, you don't have to think about it. You don't have to repeat "I'm a woman, I'm a woman" or "I'm a man, I'm a man." It's just once you know a fact about something — if it's so core to your understanding of the universe, that's there. So we are putting that in the mind: that when I — you know — the I should point to this and not to what all the other things it's been pointing it to.

QOkay. Thank you.

NYes, we have Neil. Oh no, JS is first and then Neil.

QFirst of all, thank you so so much. Thank you. For me, it's a two-part question. First, I am aware of the thoughts. There's Awareness, but sometimes that Awareness gets pulled into the thoughts and I get lost. So how to anchor that Awareness? And then when I'm anchored, I can't say I am that Awareness because it feels like it's everything. But then at the same time, the mind — I feel like it's part of the mind, or the mind tells me that's just the mind. So I feel like it's like the Russian dolls. And then I feel like I'm just trapped in a bottle and the key is on the inside, but I can't get out, and I can't find the key to get out because it's on the inside. But I'm aware of these concepts of thoughts. I know this. I can watch them. I know it's the I-entity that I've created and I see them, but then the attention gets sucked into them often. Mantra helps, but then soon the attention is gone. How to anchor? How to get out?

NSo I mean the approach of Self-inquiry is you're not trying to — there's no need for an anchor once you understand what the Self is. Yes, when you're saying Awareness, that's actually not how Ramana Maharshi is saying Awareness. He is saying Awareness is another name for you. Why are we calling you Awareness? Why are the sages saying you are the Awareness?

So we again go back to that simple inquiry: to whom did the thought arise? To you. It can only arise to that which is aware. It cannot arise to a rock which is insentient, let's say.

QMhm.

NSo whoever that thought arises to is aware. It is in your nature to be aware. Now what the mind does — it splits it into this one entity which possesses Awareness. What can possess Awareness? Plus this simple inquiry is proving that wrong. You are what is aware. It's not that you are one thing and Awareness is another thing and somehow you came to possess it and you can only have it for like 50 to 100 years and then it's over. What is that thing that becomes aware?

And in direct experience, you are the Awareness. And that is why we're stopping the thoughts — because the thoughts cannot get it. They're trying to, just because of — like we talked about two-dimensional beings not being able to understand third dimensions. Thoughts are actually the experience of what the brain is computing. And the brain again is a bunch of neurons, billions of neurons. And none of them are in themselves sentient. So it's like asking a computer to describe what is red. It'll say our RGB and R should be 255 and that's 0 0. But what has it done? It's not explained anything. And that will keep happening. So the thoughts will keep being confused, but you will no longer be confused because the meaning of I is self-evident. It's obvious.

QYes. And thank you so much. I joined last meeting — the last one where I explained the experience I had — and that was you. Yes. I came through Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj as well in 2013, and I didn't understand anything he was saying. I'm sorry. I don't know why I'm crying, but I feel so much gratitude for you. And I feel — thank you. It's like you're annihilating me, the me, the small me. So thank you so much.

Sorry. Thank you.

NIt's just the seed was planted and it just grows.

QYes. Thank you so much.

NNeil, do you want to ask a question?

QYeah. Good morning, Nabeel, and everybody else. I wonder if I could refer to your last video and about the Ashtavakra — and there's so much in there, but there was one passage, if I read it — I wrote it down — that just intrigues me. It says: "One who has realized that only by caring is misery caused in the world becomes free, happy, serene, and desireless." By caring — that's the thing. That's the phrase, the word that gets me — that only by caring is misery caused in the world. I mean that's a fascinating point and I was wondering if you could expand on that please.

NYeah, sure. So I mean, how mostly that will be heard is quite offensive — only by caring, which means you should become selfish — and then people equate nonduality with solipsism, which is only I am aware and nothing else is aware. But that's actually the other end of the spectrum, where the ego has become so huge that you discard everybody, everything else that could be conscious. Nonduality is: there's no self — no ego.

So when you say not caring, it's about not caring for those ideas around the wrong idea of self. If you see who has caused the most misery among humans, it's people who cared about their ideology, their religion, whatever that was — that they cared so much about it that to them that was the right thing to do no matter what horrors they were causing. There's no mind which thinks itself it's evil. When it thinks that, then it's not going — the evil — then it's chastising itself.

So that care — not caring — is not caring for the wrong ideas of self which can then lead to all these chains of thinking which can go so horribly wrong. It's not that you don't help a person on the street, because that's not not-caring. Not caring is a detachment from just what was entirely not Self, and now you know what is Self — and then it's not about caring, it's the love is natural. Self-love as the sages call it — self-love is not love for oneself. So it's not caring for your own thoughts which might still arise, because you see through them. You see how they are entertaining that wrong idea. They're creating the voodoo doll of someone and poking pins in them, or of yourself. It's all false, because: to whom did this thought arise?

To whom did this emotion arise? That is I — that it's the actual factual I versus the conceptual I — and we're not going to care. There's no need to care for that conceptual I.

QOkay. I mean actually I must say that the last video — there's so much in that. I got a whole list here but I won't do it. I won't read, but I got so many questions and so many points within that that was quite amazing. Okay, I'll let somebody else speak, but so thank you very much.

NThank you. No worries.

QHi Nabeel. Hi everyone. I have a question to formulate. I'm going to basically start with what I heard. So there is Awareness, Consciousness appears in Awareness, and then this body becomes kind of the vehicle in there where you sense — the Sentience senses through the body, let's say. And my question with this background: with what tool, or who is it that gets — that realizes Self? Is it the mind that finally gets — I mean if you are Awareness, is it the Awareness itself that realizes itself, or is it the mind that tries to, through the Awareness giving attention to the mind — the mind realizes the greatness of Awareness? Like, do you see what I'm trying to say?

NYes. I mean these questions are there until they're not, because all these questions will split what is nondual into different categories. And even to explain in my videos I will do that sometimes, because you cannot talk really about nonduality — you'll have to make some distinction, and you talk about that distinction, and you show actually those distinctions are false, and then you leave it to the listener to realize there's no duality.

So when I split up Awareness and Consciousness, that's just to distinguish between: there can be a state where there is experience, and there can be a state with no experience. And because when you're talking, that talk is going to the filter of a mind — and I can imagine what that model of the mind is like — I work with one — and in that model there is a quite strong belief that there's a physical universe with their bodies and brains and so on. So we can explain in that sense: when a body starts to function, that functioning is experienced — that stream of experience — call it Consciousness. The stream of experience that's Consciousness — it appeared in Awareness.

Now in a stream of Consciousness the question can arise: what is it that's awake? That doesn't often happen. So the question has arisen: what is it that's awake — that's happening in this stream of Consciousness. It's like in the dream you start to question: am I dreaming? That is part of the dream. It's a storyline in the dream. Nobody — it just happened. And now in the dream you start to — you know what happens in the movies is you wake up and then it's the same actor in a different world. Here you realize: the actor. There's no waking up. There only can be dreams. And the Awareness is that base Reality in which all these dreams appear.

So what we call awakening is still a dream character realizing it's in a dream. And yet who is experiencing the dream? That must be that — and you can validate it. That is the Awareness, the one and only. So yes, you're right. Awareness becomes aware that it is aware. But not in the sense that it's only in that dream context. There's no global realization.

QYeah, you get this close but there is a gap, and that gap is — there's no way to talk about it or reason about it. You just have to cross that gap. And how it happens — it's not through thinking or conceptualizing or anything like that. It has to be, I guess, the reverse of that: letting go of the thoughts, holding your attention away from the thoughts, and then just wait and see what happens. It's kind of like that.

NThere's no formula, no process to get there to cross that little gap — to see yourself as Awareness. The process — Self-inquiry is the process. To me that's — I don't know why I can't explain it... Like it's quite straightforward when you say, "To whom do these thoughts arise?"

Now, let's say we're in a dream world. You're in a dream in a dream in a dream, like in Inception. At any level in the dream, if you question: to whom did this thought arise? To I. One thing that is real in whatever level of the dream we are is that you are that which is aware. That cannot be simulated. You cannot simulate — because otherwise what the simulation is is not aware.

Okay, now what is confusing to the mind is almost everyone imagines that if you just combine the right things you will get a thing that is conscious — with AI and all these robots and so on. People like: is the AI sentient? But come on — if you meet the right conditions, the most that you can say is what has happened is now there's experience. But what is it that became conscious? Because just until one second before that point — let's just imagine there's a point. We meet the minimum conditions for experience. Now there's experience.

Go one second before that. Same equipment. Everything is same. Nothing has changed. Now we have experience. So it is not the equipment, the instrument that has become conscious. It's never the instrument that is conscious. When experience arises, it arises to what is being called Awareness. The only thing left is now to validate for yourself: is this Awareness something other than what I am? And that's what Self-inquiry gives you — that answer. So that is very clear. So it doesn't matter whatever simulation you're in.

QBut what I'm doing is Self-inquiry — I'm using my mind to do that and to reason through that. But there is an experiential — I don't know, it's a feeling or something like that — that you feel yourself being the Awareness. Everything you're saying makes complete sense, but somehow — so do you know what it's like to be the Awareness?

NNo, it's like this. It's like this! It means there's experience. As soon as there's experience, that means you are what is aware. To be the Awareness means it is possible for experience to arise to you. To be the Awareness does not mean that there's a certain kind of feeling — like there must be bliss or there must be peace. It does not mean that you should be aware of multiple minds in one dream world because your Awareness is what is aware of all the minds right now. But because there's no link between this brain and that brain, right now there's two separate dream worlds. Eventually we'll have a connection and then those will merge, and then the philosophers will again question: oh, what happened to that self? Is it now two selves submerged into one Self? But they're still not seeing the big picture. That that's already what is there — there is no actual self. It's really hard to admit that to a mind. The mind we're only using to stop the thinking and focus on this thought: to whom did this thought arise?

The mind will not have an answer except to I. To I. And then another thought should come in the mind and tell it: yes, that is I. What is that I? And now the mind is quiet and you are there — aware, present, real. That is what is called Awareness. It's not a possession. It's not something. It is the nature of what you are being turned into a word so we can communicate.

Leslie. Oh, we can't hear you. Here we go.

QYep. Thank you so much for your podcasts and your videos and this opportunity on the Q&As. I've been listening to you for a couple of years now and it's just lovely. So thank you. Just this question on Self-inquiry. So I started my journey into nonduality about 10 years ago. I attended a few workshops on enlightenment and the workshops were very simple. It was just based on Self-inquiry of who am I?

What am I — for five days that's the only thing that you did was who am I or what am I. And at the end of that five days — well, you know, after a couple of days the brain would just give up on trying to even think about who am I or what am I. As part of this workshop it was a responsibility of the person to explain to another what or who you were. And it's impossible as you know to explain. But the amazing thing is in that process there was a change in state almost — a surge of energy, a change in perception of the world — just in trying to describe the who or the what. So that's an explanation, a description. My question to you is: it's the same inquiry who or what am I, but in the desire to let another person know what you are, it changed the whole scenario. What's happening there? Why is this feeling of bliss, love, euphoria, separation from self suddenly exposed?

NSorry, what was the last part of your question?

QSorry. What is the difference in having a Self-inquiry that's sort of private — what am I? You know, intellectually what you are — but then in having to describe what you are to another, it's no longer private. It's impossible because words can't do it. And suddenly that feeling of who or what you are changes — almost like you become a state almost — your state, more my state, changes from being in a body to not in a body. The question is why is it — it's the same thing — but why is it in exposing it that it becomes so obvious that it's different?

NSo when the inquiry really works, the mind is affected. Because what is the mind doing most of the time? It's thinking around the wrong concept of I. It's planning, anticipating, or thinking back: what did we do wrong, what's wrong with the world, and all that. So when the inquiry works, those kinds of thinking are fizzling out and the mind is freed. That is liberation. That is the liberation. And then yes, you might feel this and that and so on.

But what it sounds like is in the workshop, it was just trying to implement what has been heard — that this is how, what should be done. But that's where it does matter to be in contact, even through writings, with a sage that truly understood. They weren't just telling you this because they heard it from their sage and that's the method. They understood: this is what the Self is. And with that energy, they've come up with: okay, this is how I'm going to maybe try to pass it on. Because every dream is being had by the Self. And if I can poke a hole in a dream, land an airplane there — you know, the paper airplane. You come up with all these different ways of communicating.

And what it sounds like what you experienced is: because you were focusing on the inquiry, the mind did run out of ideas. You started to feel: actually I'm not just — I'm not this body — this what is, what am I? The mind has changed the identity of self into this small thing — but the Self is everything visible, everything heard, everything felt, that's inseparable from the Self. As soon as that starts to sink in, there'll be all the stuff people hope they get — they can get it. But eventually it becomes the new normal. That is the Self. Like what's there to get excited about? That is the Self.

So when you initially come across the methods it might hit you a certain way; later it's not hitting you that way. But we should not focus on that. The only thing is to become clear — just clear the mind. Now we know for a fact: that is I, not this other puppet, whatever — you know, the simulation I, dream, correct I — and that's the difference. So sometimes when you hit something new, it opens up the mind, you have a new kind of experience — but still that's why I keep saying the end goal is not a particular kind of experience or to remain a certain flatline. Now whatever experience is coming, approach it with the knowledge: I am not this body, not this mind. I am Awareness itself. And it's not conceptual. You can do Self-inquiry. See for a fact. Yes. Right now, what are you right now?

Henriette, here we go.

QHi. Yes. So I used to ask a lot of questions. And you were always kind enough to answer them on the channel, for example. I've asked other people questions. And I haven't really had a concrete question for a long time. When I listen to — I always listen to your videos, for example, I don't watch them. I listen usually with my eyes closed and I feel like I understand at that time, or it makes sense, or I'm not sure how to say it — but I feel like I'm Arjuna and I still can't get up, you know, on the battlefield. I'm still just stuck sitting there. I can't get up. Because I feel like — and I've said this before, probably a million times on some videos when I commented — that I feel like intellectually I'm getting something, but getting concepts intellectually is what's that worth really? So I'm not really sure what to do honestly from here. There was something else I was going to say and now it's gone. Like some people will talk about having had these experiences where they feel like they're out of body and they can see themselves from over here and over there and all these wonderful things and bliss and blah blah blah. I haven't had — I mean on the rare occasion when my mind kind of calms down and I'm really able to meditate or sort of just be and just be aware. Yes, there is like a peace and a calmness and whatever. But I've never had any sort of magical experiences. And not that I'm looking for the magical experiences. I just feel like I don't know. I'm stuck I guess. So if there's anything you would suggest.

NYeah. So a couple of things. So when you're hearing the videos or you're reading someone you know — like Nisargadatta Maharaj, whatever — at that point it's making sense. It's perfectly true. That's not the intellectual understanding. That is you recognizing the truth. Because the truth is basic, it's straightforward. It's not that hard. So truth has a natural — when something is true, it is true. You can't tell someone, "Oh, sunlight isn't warm."

If they're feeling the warmth, yeah, it's warm when you're out in the sun. So that is the nature of truth — that it shines of its own accord. So that is the test of truth right now. All this other stuff where you hear near-death experiences and all, and people take all kinds of substances and toad venom or whatnot — and sure, I haven't had that. Who cares? Because whatever you've had is still a local experience. Even if you had experience with — oh, I exploded, I became the universe. All right, now the experience is over, and now you still have to have the mundane experience. But to me, what's important is in the mundane experience, you start to see how the truth is shining in front of you. It's not a mundane experience.

Like try — when I do talk about light or I talk about music — think of that. Turn that into a pointer. Look — this is a silly thing — when I'm looking at the sky, I start to see spots, you know, the little tiny things.

QOh, yeah. You have a video about —

NThat's a miracle, because that's telling you that this whole world in front of me, it's entirely subjective. Because otherwise it's whatever science describes — it's happening in here. Why is it over there? And same with colors. The eyes only got color red, green, blue. Why am I seeing purple over there? It's entirely a subjective world. Suddenly you're out of body. You don't need to be close to death and have an out-of-body experience. You are not in the body because this whole world right now is the experience of the body. And no matter what substance you inject in the body, that is still the experience of this one body. And sure the experiences can be vast and amazing or they can be mundane. But again, we're coming back to: let's focus on the truth and see how that wipes the slate clean in the mind.

All right, Muhammad.

QYeah. Thank you. Thank you for all the sharing, all the information and all the knowledge, everything sharing. It was very helpful. It's not a question. I just wanted to check whether I was following. I have taken recently a different approach to it, and I just feel like there is a blocking character which was built which is not showing the truth — which is not allowing me to be the Awareness because of that character. So instead of understanding what is Awareness, what these words, different words, different things all really mean — now let's say after I wake up, or initially I can see: okay, a body is there, a Sentience I feel is there, and the world is there. I can just be in that. I don't have to do anything else. I can stay on that stage. It's in the baseline where a body is loaded, a world is loaded in that experience — the state without taking a character and without understanding also. I'm not interested in understanding these words what they are, anything — just the initial stage of what I get initially, what comes — just stay with that stream or experience or whatever it is. So just focusing on not developing that character which is blocking the real view, and just trying to get rid of that built character out of this Awareness. Would that work, or is it fine?

NSo I mean what you're seeing is very powerful. You're seeing how the mind's building the character and all that. So the reason we point that out is to just understand the nature of how — what is the mind, what am I, what is Reality. But it's not to change anything. It's not to stop the character from appearing, because who will do that? The character will go on this hero's journey where it's going to now slay the dragon — and that's also part of the mind. It's just two fingers on the same hand.

So this is only pointed out so you see what the truth is: nonduality. If you start with no duality, at no point can you have a duality. So either there is nonduality, or there is duality and nonduality is wrong. So that's what we're trying to validate. Do you start as — is the process like this: that I'm born and I am a thing that has become conscious, and at some point, you know, I'm changing, I will die and unconscious, gone, black, gone? Okay, that's the standard view of the world. Even people who believe in an afterlife — they're hoping that I can save whatever I am and that gets to carry on.

But what you're seeing is nothing is born. Because when that state in which experience appears — that's the same as nothing, what everybody thinks is nothing and is so scared of — that is my natural state, your natural state. When I say my, I just mean in general. The natural state is that baseline, and then something's appearing in it — a dream world — and there's a story, there's a character. Fine. We're not trying to change anything. You go play with it. But you know with the knowledge of what the Self is. So every interaction you have is — it's not like the game GTA, Grand Theft Auto, where people go and do crazy things. It's not like that, because these are not non-playable characters. Every character is a playable character. But every character is being experienced by that baseline which is the Self — and that is the surrender side of it. Now you know — now the mind has to be devoted to the Self. Because a mind — what does it do for these years? It works in this one body. It's so devoted to the body. And then it's got its circle, my family and then my people and so on. But now the mind should be devoted to the truth, the actual Self. And that will change the dream, because now the character will have the energy, the inspiration to do stuff — better stuff, interesting stuff.

QYeah. Not — I mean thinking — not from the character. It's like with just whatever it is, is — and not making any effort. Just let the things to be as it is. Not making any effort out or anything. Within — with whatever is loaded like a world or body or anything — not doing anything, just rest on that, whatever is there at the moment. Just trying to be present, and not trying to understand also. Not trying to understand the words or what is this — just staying with whatever is loaded in the ways without making — like whatever is loaded as initial, just staying on that. I'm not sure I put it the correct word. And I'm not a native English speaker.

NYeah. I mean, yes, there's a side of effortlessness to it. But just make sure you're not falling into the trap of trying to just stay there — like be effortless all the time — because, you know, let's say you've got the body has a function, you've got a job, whatever, you've got to do something. The effort is the experience. You cannot have — it's a bit of a waste of life if you just — I'm not — I don't encourage — you know what used to happen is in India or wherever this spread, the eastern wisdom traditions — you would see the person on the street with no clothes on and then people look up to them. That's what they think the ideal is. That is not the ideal. That was a path because that person was so obsessed with the question they took that journey. But at the end, whatever — everything is allowed, everything is happening anyway, nobody is doing it.

So if the mind finds inspiration and let's say I don't know — doing music or writing a book — and there is effort involved — there's lots of effort involved in every video I do, I feel the effort — but I don't feel it as — you don't perceive, you don't look at it the usual way. It's not me doing it, or I'm wasting my time, or I'm using it well. It's different, and how it's different is hard to say. I mean that work, what the effort you put is now — it's naturally, it just happens. It's not — I mean before when a character I was doing it's different — and naturally it comes.

But — so I just want to say: don't make it a job to remain restful, remain effortless, because even that's now a new kind of job. No, that's not required.

QThank you. Thank you. It's clear. I get it. I get the point.

NAitree. Is it Aitree?

QNabeel, thank you for the opportunity to ask a question. My question is: so from the standpoint of doing the inquiry, I understand that I'm not the body, I'm not the mind. Because when I'm fast asleep, I don't have the awareness of the body and mind. And if it was true that I was the body and mind then I should have that awareness at all times. And however what I have difficulty in understanding is: why is Awareness of the nature of I — as in there is Awareness and that is primal, prior to anything else that I experience. You know when experience happens it happens because of the Awareness — and how is that the Self, or how is that I? Because that I also disappears in deep sleep. And if Awareness is primal and it's even prior to death, or like even after death it's still present, then how is that absent in deep sleep? And so if that is the sense of I — if Awareness is the Self — if I don't know if I'm making sense.

NYes. Yes, you are making sense. So what's happened is you're looking at Awareness as this global presence before experience. It's not an individual possession. And so when you say I — even I is not there — you're talking about the individual I. And yes, that is correct. So that was the self, the small-s self, that was found to be unreal, because that just exists after Consciousness begins — then there's thought and thinking — there is that I-character or the me. So I would like to differentiate by saying that's me, an individual character, individual persona. And then what happens is as you realize that Awareness must be there first, then there can be a dream world or a mind, and then in that there can be characters — then the meaning of I has to change, because you are there when that experience or dream begins. So you cannot be something that appears later.

And the second point is: what is most true to you when you say the nature of Self — that is your nature. If you start to take away — this quality could change, that quality could change. I could be born a boy or girl, I could be tall or short, whatever. There's some quality left that must be most natural to you. What is that?

QIt seems like the answer would be Awareness, because if there wasn't a sense of — if there was no Awareness there is no I — yes, there's no possibility of mind, world, whatever. Then it would be — if you are not Awareness then you're not aware, which means then you know it's like that contradicts your direct most obvious fact known to you right now.

NSo yes, we are sorting out the previous I which gets discarded. Like what Maharshi would say — I-I — and it's a very weird term for most as you read that, but then you get it: is that when you go to the inquiry the answer is who am I? I am I. I-I. Not the old I — that one doesn't even exist. I am I — the actual I. I-I. So it's just because we're running out of words, and of course I is the correct word because you can't talk about Awareness in the third person or second person. But the problem is there is no person. So the pronoun you're left with is for a person. But the mind works it out. Because I was just a pointer. It was a fuzzy concept. I — until I became a dad, I never thought about myself as a dad. And then the I gets very strongly associated with dad. But that I is the fuzzy I that exists in the mind. That's the persona. It's a subset of the mind. And you cannot be a subset of the mind, because everyone says "my mind" — so which way, which one is it? Is it you are a subset of the mind, or you possess the mind? Actually it's neither. There you are — actually more like a foundation stone on which everything is being built.

QOkay. Okay. So because the Awareness is fundamental, and when I do the inquiry the fundamental nature is — when I realize that I'm not the body, I'm not the mind, and it's just that there is no thing there when I do the inquiry — then I realize that because there is just that pure — you realize that because it is you that is aware, you cannot be something apart from Awareness. See — oh, it is you that is aware. Because when the mind goes to this, it'll say: "Yes, Awareness is amazing. It's fundamental. It's universal." But then there's still I —

NYes. So this need to cut through that. No — it's not like Awareness is an amazing thing and beautiful thing and there's still this little me we got to get rid of. To whom do these thoughts appear? To I. I means that wonderful amazing universal Awareness. So it's clearing it up.

QBut that I — the I that's wonderful — is not always present. Is it present when I'm fast asleep?

NSo is Awareness absent when you're fast asleep? What is absent is the other I, the small I, the conceptual I. That one is absent. The I that comes after you wake up — whatever roles you have in life, names and so on — that comes later. But if Awareness is absent, how can experience come back? There can be no first experience. Awareness has to be there, then there's the possibility of being aware of a perception. Okay? And even what we call deep sleep, it's actually an experience. It's an experience of when the brain is in a certain state.

It's still the experience of one brain — that deep sleep experience. There is no experience of being Awareness, because that would be what you were before this life began. Is there an experience to that? That is why you were here. If you go to Nisargadatta or you go to Buddhism — there's the Emptiness — and what are they pointing out? The no-attribute state with no attributes. Even to say Awareness — yeah, it kind of breaks down there. What are you there to be aware of? But it's the best word I have, because you can't remove that quality from Reality, because if you did there's no possibility of any experience ever arising — of there ever being something appearing out of nothing. So that is the basic.

QSo what — sorry — what happens when the experience starts to take place at birth? What happens from — like what changes?

NSo there must be some — like even in the one body, you're not experiencing everything. My nails are growing, the skin cells are dying and whatever — you're not experiencing everything. So there is some minimal condition at which something rises as a phenomenon, and as a perception in Awareness. What that is — that's up to the scientists to get there and explain why, what is it. I don't know — the theories around it and so on. But the inner — the first direct experience — what is it? You can experience it. And that's a few different inquiries I'd like to point out, but they're hard to get there because everything has to shut down and you have to watch it come back up. And what you watch come back up is: first of all there's no words, no thoughts, no sense of being human, whatever. First thing is there's a sense of existence which is the — yes — I am — but not in words. It's like — and when you is — and you're coming from somewhere which was just most natural. It's not nothing. It's not what people think of as nothing — some dark forbidding place. It's perfect, peaceful, perfectly natural. The bliss of sleep as you might say it — the bliss of sleep. When I wake up it's like: oh I don't want to wake up. I don't want to wake up. Why don't you want to wake up? Because you are in a natural peaceful no-mind, no-world, no-I state. In there the sense of I arises. And because there's a sense of I, the mind — that's the kernel for the mind — through these billions of years of evolution that has been used to create experiences which can allow a life form to survive. And that's why the mind's I is very self-centered around this protection of this body, spreading of its DNA and whatnot.

But if you think about it — because my job is quite technical, I stay up to date with all this AI stuff and so on. So when you build these huge machine learning models, it takes a huge amount of power to train them. So you start with random weights and then you train it. There's a process called backprop — getting too technical — back propagation which sets the weights and so on. But that is extremely expensive. That's why all these companies are spending how many tons of water and how much power to run a whole city on a model. The brain can do it on 25 watts of power and much better than those models, because it's not just a blah blah language. Why is it able to do that? Because the mind is not working — it's not a mathematical model. It's built around that kernel of existence. And then you start to poke that — oh that's pain. Oh, we can use pain to motivate. We can use pleasure. And then that's expanded into the mental self and the mental world and so on. But to get that even to start up with that you need Consciousness, and Consciousness depends on Awareness. And that's how we're going to the base fundamental. What was I? What were you before you were born? When you were born, you must have been something. And it turns out it's not a thing. It is just Awareness.

Okay, Daniel has been waiting very long, so we should let him ask a question.

QThank you. Yes, I'm so delighted to have the chance finally to thank you for all you've done. And I discovered you a couple of years ago when my algorithm suggested to me this video that Nisargadatta describes — the ever-awaited first moment was the moment when I was convinced that I was not an individual at all.

And then you went on and he was talking about the pain of individuality and he called it tumors and he had said it was scalding pain and so on. Yeah, it was quite moving. And then of course then there was the second chapter of the Ashtavakra where you were talking about King Janaka's enlightenment and how he explained it in such beautiful terms. Anyway, I just want to thank you for the meticulous care you put into assembling all these things and it's clear that it's there and that you present them to us with beautiful thought and beautiful images. It's just what a luxury to have. We're so lucky to have found you, all of us.

Now, I want to say something about the last one you did, the sixth chapter, the Ashtavakra, and it has to do with — I'm going to quote a line here. "One who knows for certain that birth and death, happiness and misery, come and go in obedience to destiny, sees nothing to accomplish. He engages in non-action and in action remains unattached." Now this strikes me that the whole idea of free will has baked into it an idea of separate self and individuation. How else can you have free will, you know? So and I think that many students of Ramana Maharshi and Nisargadatta and Ashtavakra and so on all talk about limitations on that idea of free will as it's commonly conceived of. And I'm just thinking maybe that's one of the first enemies that attack the fort — is individuation. And if you can see that it just doesn't do you any good at all — and that's one of the first things you should, in harsh terms, kill the enemy — but also in Nisargadatta's terms saying you have to begin by rigorously rejecting the false in all its disguises. I don't know. How does this all strike you? It's rather late in the whole thing to bring up the idea of free will or not, but we can do that another time, but I just want to get your reaction to this and mainly to thank you.

NYeah, no worries. Thank you. So yes, the whole problem is the idea of individuality. And free will is like you said — after you have an agent, a free agent in the universe and have some way to act outside of the laws of the universe, then we have free will.

QMhm.

NSo I think in this video or maybe some other one I said like that is a huge delusion. Even your smartest physicist somehow believes in free will. Why? Like how can you have power over the laws of physics? Because that's what free will is — like I can somehow — I have power over this body but not over that bottle over there. Why? Like so somehow I have a godlike power where I'm manipulating the laws of the universe based on what I want and it's only within a certain bit of space, certain period of time. It just — it's so absurd. I don't know how it — well, I do know how, because of course I do, because it's just a blind spot. So until it's pointed out to you that there is no such self, you could never imagine — like if I had not come across these teachings, no, I would have gone back home crying and I will go laughing.

QRight. Nice.

NLike Nisargadatta said — I came into the world crying and I'll go back laughing.

QYes. Yes exactly.

NBut most people come crying and go crying. Where are you going? That's where you came from. It's perfect. It's fine. It's beautiful. And free will is the idea that somehow magic I can control my thoughts. See, you can't take that away from me. I can control my thoughts — until you sit and you try to — and then: no, you can't.

QRight. Yeah. Well, the false ego jumps up fully formed then, you know.

NAll right, we've gone over time, but if someone has any last question or comments.

QYep, we have — JS still. Sorry. Yeah, sorry. So I again I can't thank you enough because I can sense the power and the energy field to the point that is subduing my mind — but then I was enjoying that energy, that power, but the thought then came, arose, and said maybe this is just the mind playing a different form — like this, what is this soup, this energy I'm enjoying from you. Or is it not my energy? It's your energy.

NWhat you're feeling — and don't think of the mind as something trying to fool you or get you wrong and all that. No, there's no such mind, because then that mind would be a thing with free will and powers and all. There's no such.

QYes. And I often catch it anyway.

NYes. It's showing you what Henriette was talking about. We miss it because we've heard these tall tales — but what you're feeling, that is expanding. It's telling you: look, you're not this tiny little thing. It's not like that. And you have to find that in the most mundane things — like the experience of light, in the emotion. How deep is this emotion? Like if there's one dimension you should look at, it's depth.

QYes. But this is so powerful. I feel like — like I said, I feel like it feels like it's going to annihilate everything. It's so powerful. I —

NSo, okay. As long as that doesn't scare you, that's fine. But that's a wrong kind of formulation.

QYeah. No, it doesn't. Yes. It's just how do you function then? But I just want to thank you. I feel like — I don't know why I want to use this term. I've never used this but I want to prostrate at your feet and please don't leave me. So thank you so much again.

NThank you. Thank you.

All right, thank you all. Thank you all for joining in the great conversation. See you all soon. Thank you. Thank you.