TWO TRANSCRIPTS of Satsang with Ramesh Balsekar 1 January 12, 2001 17 July 25, 2006 Mumbai, 12 January 2001 Satsang with Ramesh Balsekar We can choose to be here today. It’s free will. And we can choose to listen today with free will or not to listen today. In that sense I think that we have free will. Ramesh: But there, you can only decide, right? What happens [from that point forward] you don’t know. Your plane may [be late]. Yea, but it can leave later. Ramesh: Yes, but then you won’t be leaving [at] the time your free will [thought it would]. But it’s a matter of time. Ramesh: Yes. So what exactly do you mean by ‘free will’? I mean the power to decide. Ramesh: To decide. That’s all, isn’t it? The power to decide. That’s all. Coming from your own experience, what is your experience? You make a decision, but whether it happens or not, you really can’t say because other forces come into the picture... What the results will be, that also you’re not very sure. So you’re quite right. You have the free will to make a decision. Quite right. You have a free will to make a decision. Was that your only question? Your name is? Françoise. Ramesh: Françoise. From France? From France. I live in New York. Ramesh: What brought you here, Françoise? Do you know what we are talking about? Yes. Ramesh: Somebody told you about what we are talking about here? Yeah. Ramesh: Did you read any of my books? No, not yet. A friend sent me here. Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 1 12 January 2001 Ramesh: A friend sent you. I see. Your friend was here? Yes. Ramesh: He told you about what we are talking about? Briefly. Briefly. Ramesh: So briefly, what do you think we’re talking about here, Françoise? What are we talking about? Yes. I’m here to find out. Ramesh: Well, I can tell you we don’t talk about sports, we don’t talk about good food, we don’t talk about good wine. [laughter] I’m sure. I’m sure. [laughs] Ramesh: Would you consider yourself a spiritual seeker, Françoise? Yeah, I think so. Ramesh: Many years? Not many years. I’m a young spiritual seeker. Ramesh: A young spiritual seeker. Yeah. Ramesh: What started it, do you know, Françoise? What started it? It started one day I lost my eyesight for three months. Ramesh: You lost sight for three months? Yeah. Ramesh: I see. And that made you think of God? [laughter] Yes. And light and darkness. Darkness and light. Ramesh: Yes. Until then you didn’t think of God? Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 2 12 January 2001 Until then, I didn’t really think of God, no. Ramesh: I see. So now. Is that all you wanted to know? Whether you have free will or not? No, that’s not all. There are plenty of things that I wanted to know, that I try to know... but I’m here mainly to listen to you, not to listen to my voice. Ramesh: Yes, but to listen to me: I talk. I don’t give lectures. You see. I don’t give a lecture. I talk to people as when you and I talked this morning. If anyone has any questions, they are free to ask. OK. OK. Ramesh: You see? I see. Ramesh: So, in life, what do you think you’re looking for? In life, what is it you’re looking for? Now, you said you were blind for three months... I think I’m looking for happiness and peace. Ramesh: Happiness and peace? Yes. Ramesh: By happiness, you mean peace? Is that what you mean? Peace and happiness. Ramesh: So, supposing you have to choose one. [laughter] What would you choose? Peace would be the good one. Ramesh: Peace would be better. Peace means happiness, right? Also you know? If you feel peace, you feel happy. Ramesh: Happiness means you want happiness without the unhappiness. In life, our experience is we always have pleasure and pain, happiness, unhappiness, comfort and discomfort. This is true. Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 3 12 January 2001 Ramesh: You see. So when you mean happiness, you mean one - and not the other. No, I mean to find the peace in both cases. Acceptance. Ramesh: In other words, what you mean is, you would like to have the ability to bear whatever life brings. Absolutely. Ramesh: Sometimes happiness, sometimes unhappiness. Yes. Ramesh: And that ability to bear whatever life brings is what you call peace. Yes. Ramesh: I agree. In a peaceful way. Ramesh: I agree. So how do you think now? Now? What is your understanding, Françoise about how to achieve that peace? What is your understanding now? Through acceptance. Acceptance. Ramesh: Can you explain that word: acceptance? True acceptance of the events or emotions. Ramesh: To accept whatever happens in life. Yes. Ramesh: Are you able to accept it? Maybe. Ramesh: How do you think you can achieve that ability to accept whatever life brings? How do you think you can achieve this ability we all want - to be able to accept whatever life brings: sometimes happiness, sometimes unhappiness. How do you think that can happen? Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 4 12 January 2001 I think it can happen if you... Ramesh: What is your understanding now, about how to achieve this peace we are all looking for? I think it’s something... Happiness and unhappiness is something that doesn’t last. Ramesh: Yea. So that is what life brings. Sometimes pain, sometimes pleasure, sometimes happiness and sometimes unhappiness. Yes. Ramesh: Now, my concept is that we do have that peace. That peace everybody has. So we don’t have to achieve it. But what happens is, that peace is obstructed by something we think or do. That peace which is always there, is obstructed by something we think we do. So we don’t have to achieve the peace. My concept is, basically, we don’t have to achieve the peace which is already there. What we are concerned with is removing the obstacle to that peace, you see? Yeah. Ramesh: Removing the obstruction which prevents that peace from happening. So what is the obstruction? In life, what is your experience, Françoise? What prevents that peace? Now, from my concept: peace is there. What do you think prevents you from reaching that peace during whatever you do in the waking hours? What is your experience? Too much attachment. Too much ego. Too much emotion. Ramesh: Now, emotion - you’ll find some people with more emotion than others, isn’t that right? Yes. Ramesh: I have a friend, a German friend who is very emotional. I often see him. Tears come to his eyes. Emotional. And his family history is: he’s been in a soldier family of six generations. So he’s been a soldier for six generations, but when I talk to him, if something touches him, tears promptly come to his eyes. And yet he has been a soldier. He has been a good soldier. You see? Yes. Ramesh: So the arising of emotions has not prevented him from being a good soldier. So my point is if emotion arises, what does it matter? Why are you concerned with emotion not arising? Have you ever wondered if it is the arising of emotions which disturbs you from the peace, which means you don’t want the Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 5 12 January 2001 emotions to arise. Why do you not like emotions to arise? Fear of what? What people will think? No. Fear of suffering. Ramesh: Yes, but emotion arises and emotion can be anything. Fear itself can be an emotion. You see? So the arising of whatever [emotion] does not prevent you from having that peace. Suppose fear arises. You don’t accept the fear and you stay around to be a brave woman, and you’re unhappy. Therefore, you’re away from the peace. Anger arises because it is your nature to be angry - more angry than another person. More afraid than another person. So arising of fear, arising of anger and also arising of compassion, happens because according to my concept, it is the nature of the human object. Each object has it own nature and that nature according to my basic concept, Françoise, is this: according to my concept, every human being is basically... What do you think a human being is basically, essentially, in this manifestation, in life as we know it? Basically, what is a human being? What do you think? What is a human being? You see the manifestation, the universe, the manifestation, what is it made of? What is the universe or the manifestation made of, Françoise? It’s made of objects, isn’t it? Heavenly objects. Objects in land. Objects in air. Objects in water. Planets, stars. So whatever exists in phenomenality, whatever exists in the phenomenal universe in an object. Isn’t that right? My basic concept [that I suggest you contemplate is]: what is a human object? Everybody wants happiness, peace, whatever. But who is this everybody? Let’s first consider that. Who is this everybody? Who wants this peace? Basically, my point therefore is, Françoise, that a human being can not be anything other than one type of object, which along with thousands of other types of objects constitute the totality of manifestation. Isn’t that right? That’s right. Ramesh: Essentially, basically what I’m saying is that each one of us is an object. We forget that. We forget that we are an object because the Source has created that object with such a design, let us call it nature, that the object considers itself a separate entity with volition. “I have free will. I can do what I like. I’m responsible for my action. Therefore I can either do good action or bad action. I can be brave or I can be timid. I can be kind or I may be unkind. Everything is in my control. I’m in charge of my life.” So, for that person who thinks in terms of “I am in charge of my life,” my question is, who is this ‘you’ that you’re talking about? And my point is that all that you are is basically an object. One kind of object. One type of object. One specially designed and programmed object, but nonetheless an object. Basically, the human being cannot be anything more than an object. That has to be accepted, doesn’t it? Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 6 12 January 2001 Yeah. [laughs] Ramesh: In other words, we are either the subject, pure subjectivity, potentiality, energy, God, whatever you choose to call it - the Source - the one reality from which the entire manifestation has come. So there is only pure subjectivity, pure reality, the one Source which is the subject, the pure subject, and everybody else is an object. It’s very clear, isn’t it? And yet, this is the basic, simple truth which everybody forgets. “I want this. I like you. I don’t like [such and such].” So therefore, my question always begins with: Who is this who wants something, who does not want something; who likes something, who does not like? Who is this? It is basically an object, you see? So if that object is able to think that it has volition, then that ability to think that it has volition and is in charge of life, that itself must have come from the Source. So an object who considers himself a separate entity with volition, has that ability to think so only because the Source has created that ability in that object. That is clear, isn’t it? So what is a human being? My concept is, a human being is an object, uniquely programmed by the Source. Now, when I say the Source, you can give it any name you like so long as you remember that all those labels refer to only one thing - the Source. Therefore, you can call it the Source. The Hindu Upanishads call it ‘Consciousness’, ‘the impersonal awareness of being’. ‘I am’. Not as Françoise or Ramesh, or Krista, or anyone. The awareness that we have is simply of being alive. I am. The impersonal awareness of being is the Source. So the Source has identified itself with each human object and created this impersonal awareness and immediately identified it with an individual entity. So the Source or consciousness itself has done [this]. So this identification, ‘ego’ you said, has been created by the Source. And what is this programming? Each human being has been created as a unique individual entity, a unique individual human object so that Source itself, by whatever name you call it, may be able to use each individual, each uniquely programmed human object to bring about whatever the Source wants. That is my basic concept. Each human being is a uniquely programmed instrument, object, or computer created by the Source so that the Source can do whatever it wants, can bring about whatever it wants through each human object, through each uniquely programmed instrument. Therefore, anything that happens through any human object is not something done by an object. An object can do nothing. Therefore my basic concept is: anything that happens through any human object is not something done by an individual, but something brought about by that Source which has created that human object in a special way so that whatever happens to that birth is exactly what the Source wants to bring about. You think this is strange for you? What I’ve just told you? I repeat, every human being is a uniquely programmed, designed human object so that the Source can bring up through each uniquely programmed human object whatever the Source wants to produce. Not what the object wants to produce. You see. Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 7 12 January 2001 Yes. Ramesh: It seems strange, doesn’t it? Yes, it is. [laughs] Ramesh: And yet, what am I saying? What I have said is: ‘Thy will be done’. Thy will be done. Is that strange? It’s been there in the Lord’s prayer ever since you were a child. So what I’m saying is exactly what those four words say. Thy will be done. Thy will is the Source’s will, you see. So what is this programming I’m talking about? The unique programming which enables the Source to bring out whatever the Source wants and not what the objects wants. The programming, according to my concept, is this: you have no choice in being born to particular parents, therefore you have no choice about the genes - the unique DNA in this particular human object. This particular human object has a distinct DNA which not even twins have. Even twins have different DNA and the DNA in the body can identify that body as that particular individual body. So, Françoise has no choice about the genes in this human object called Françoise. But for the same reason, Françoise had no choice about the environment in which Françoise was born to particular parents. In France, in a particular environment, physical, social, the particular environment in which this human object Françoise was born, Françoise has no control. To which human parents, in which environment, which geographical environment, which social environment, [Françoise] had no control. And what Françoise is, what Françoise really is, the personality, the persona called Françoise is, according to my concept, nothing more than this programming. The genes or DNA plus the environmental conditioning, which includes social conditioning, your education, your social upbringing, everything is part of that conditioning which is changing every moment. Ever since a baby has been born, this conditioning has been going on. You see? A baby is born, a child, six months, eight months, the child is not concerned with which other child there is; but as Françoise grew up, the environmental conditioning told her she must associate with these children and not with those children. She must go to this school, not to some other school. So at any moment, Françoise the persona, is an individual entity which had no control over either its genes or the environment and social conditioning. What else is Françoise? Therefore, Françoise is a fiction. There is truly no Françoise, except this feeling of being an ‘independent’ entity, and this feeling of independent entity which has been imposed on the personal awareness of being is called the ‘ego’. So the ego, according to my concept, which makes Françoise think she is an individual with volition, to be in control of her life, is really only a fiction created by what the Hindu’s call: Maya. I call it ‘divine hypnosis’, you see? Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 8 12 January 2001 So, when the Source created this human object and the parents gave her the name Françoise, then, by ‘divine hypnosis’ a fiction was also created; a hypnosis that Françoise is an individual entity. By creating an identification; a fictional, conceptual identification with a particular body-mind organism and a name. So what is Françoise? Basically a name given to a human object over the programming of which the so called Françoise had no control. You had no control over your genes. You had no control over your conditioning, and what Françoise is, is nothing but genes plus your conditioning right at this moment. So you say you make a decision. When you make a decision Françoise, on what is that decision based? That decision which you think is your decision, according to my concept is based essentially on the genes and the environmental up to date condition. Any decision that you make. Supposing on a particular point you made a decision ten days ago. During these ten days you have met people, you have done some reading, and that reading and talking during the ten day may have changed your existing conditioning so that the decision on the same subject, in the same circumstances ten days ago could have been different from your decision today. You see what I’m getting at? Yes. Ramesh: The conditioning keeps on changing. Now what is happening now, Françoise? You and I are having a talk. So the talk that we are having could change the existing conditioning in either of us. You see what I’m getting at? So the conditioning is getting on all the time, and whatever decision you think you are making is based on the genes plus the up to date conditioning. So you call it your decision. But is it really your decision, Françoise? When, on analyzing, investigating you’ll find that what you call your decision is based entirely on something over which you have no control. So even that decision which you think you make is based on something over which you have no control. And the decision that you think you are making is exactly what the source wants you to make. So, what does the Source do? It uses every human object, uniquely programmed object, as a computer. It uses each human object as an individual, uniquely programmed computer. How do you use your computer? You put in an input and your computer has no choice but to bring out an output strictly according to the programming. Isn’t that right? Do you use a computer at all? Yes I do. Ramesh: So when you use your computer, what do you do? You put in an input, then you press a button and the output that comes out has nothing to do with the computer’s choice. It is strictly according to the programming. Isn’t that right? But Transcript of Two Satsangs with Ramesh Balsekar Advaita Fellowship page 9