Friday, August 28, 2026

4. The Asset & The Paradox.

The Most Valuable Asset I Own Is the One I Cannot Save

There is a peculiar irony in the way one lives.

Recently, I saw the below video

https://youtu.be/3SBf7hD0sEw?si=eKDnyAe6Uahl9eKw

And the thoughts started pouring...

Hence, as always, I thought of penning those down..

Here we go...!!!

I have spent a significant part of my life trying to accumulate things that I believed would eventually give me freedom. Yet, as I look at life more closely, I realise that there is a danger in spending too much of the present preparing for a future in which I may finally have the freedom to use what I accumulated.

Money can be earned again. Wealth can be rebuilt. Investments can recover. Possessions can be replaced.

Time cannot.

That, perhaps, is the most important financial lesson of my life, although it has very little to do with money.

I recently came across an interesting thought experiment involving a lottery. If I were offered a certain amount of money with absolute certainty, or a much larger amount with only a 25 percent probability of receiving it, my decision would depend greatly on where I stood in life. What may feel like an attractive risk when my basic needs are already secure may feel completely irrational when those basic needs are not.

And that is where the idea becomes much larger than a lottery.

My priorities have changed as I have moved through life.

At one stage, survival matters. Then security. Then comfort. Then experiences, relationships, freedom, meaning and, perhaps eventually, self-actualisation.

The mistake would be to keep playing the same game even after I have reached a different stage of the game.

At some point, the question should stop being:

“How much more can I earn?”

and become:

“What am I earning this additional money for?”

That question has been occupying my mind for some time.

Looking back at my own life

When I look at my twenties, I realise that I was playing a very different game.

I wanted to experience life.

I worked, I saved and I was reasonably responsible with money, but saving was not the central objective of my existence. I had energy, curiosity and a strong desire to consume life in its many forms.

I travelled.

I ate well.

I explored.

I learnt.

I questioned.

I experimented.

I tried to understand life, spirituality, existence, the afterlife and the fundamental principles behind things that interested me.

I was never interested in alcohol or drugs, not because I was making some grand financial calculation, but simply because they were never my choices. Similarly, whatever food restrictions I had were also choices, while I still enjoyed rich and good food.

My twenties and early thirties were largely about experiencing life while I had the energy to experience it.

I had also dreamt about self-employment. But somewhere within me there was a sense that I did not necessarily have to rush into it. I wanted to experience the transition between one phase of life and another consciously.

So, at 33, I took a sabbatical.

I experimented.

I tried to understand what it meant to earn differently, live differently and perhaps eventually work differently.

It gave me experience, but it also gave me something more valuable: perspective.

I eventually returned to salaried employment.

But I did not return to exactly the same mindset.

Over the years that followed, I began finding my own balance between money, entertainment, fitness, experiences, learning and freedom.

And perhaps that balance has been one of the most important outcomes of my life.

Money matters. But money is not the destination.

I do not believe in romanticising financial irresponsibility.

Money matters.

Savings matter.

Inflation matters.

Investments matter.

Financial security matters.

Health security matters.

Planning for the future matters.

There is nothing spiritual about being financially careless and then expecting life to somehow take care of the consequences.

But there is another equally dangerous mistake.

To continue accumulating simply because accumulation has become the habit.

At some point, I need to sit down and ask myself a brutally honest question:

Am I still earning because I genuinely need to build more security and freedom, or am I earning because I need to prove something to myself, to my family, to society or to an imaginary scoreboard?

The answer matters enormously.

Because there is a difference between working for freedom and becoming a prisoner of the work that was supposed to create freedom.

The objective of financial planning, at least for me, is not to become infinitely wealthy.

It is to reach a point where my money and investments can provide sufficient financial security while allowing me to make choices about how I spend the most valuable resource I possess.

Time.

The race against time

Time is perhaps the strangest asset of all.

I know exactly what it is doing, yet I can still behave as though I have plenty of it.

Every day, the balance falls.

And there is no top-up.

No refinancing.

No recovery.

No inheritance of someone else's unused time.

No investment that compounds yesterday.

Money can buy convenience.

Money can buy healthcare.

Money can buy experiences.

Money can buy comfort.

Money can even buy someone else's time and therefore give me more usable time.

But money cannot buy back a Tuesday that has already disappeared.

This is why the Warren Buffett example is so powerful to me.

The idea is not really about whether someone is worth millions or billions. It is about recognising that even the wealthiest person on earth has exactly the same fundamental constraint as everyone else.

There are only so many mornings left.

And the older I become, the more precious each remaining morning becomes.

When I am twenty-five, losing an afternoon feels almost irrelevant because there appear to be thousands more ahead.

At fifty, sixty or seventy, the arithmetic is different.

The remaining years may still be many, but the years of physical energy, health, curiosity and freedom are not infinite.

That distinction is crucial.

It is not enough for me to ask:

“How long might I live?”

I also need to ask:

“How many years will I have the physical and mental capacity to actually consume the things I spent my life earning?”

Because there is a peculiar tragedy in accumulating resources for a future version of myself who may no longer have the energy, health or inclination to use them.

The calculation I want to keep making

This is where financial planning needs to become life planning.

I want to periodically ask myself:

Have I saved enough?

Have I invested enough?

Have I accounted for inflation?

Have I protected myself against foreseeable financial risks?

Have I taken adequate care of my health?

Have I created enough financial independence to make choices rather than merely accept circumstances?

And then comes the more uncomfortable question:

If the answer to all of these is reasonably satisfactory, why am I still running at the same speed?

Perhaps I can continue working.

Perhaps I genuinely enjoy my work.

Perhaps I can continue earning and investing.

There is nothing wrong with that.

But there should be a fundamental difference between choosing to work and having no choice but to work.

If I can work for a few hours because I enjoy the intellectual stimulation, relationships, purpose or sheer pleasure of doing something meaningful, that is one thing.

If I work because stopping would collapse the entire structure of my life, that is something else.

The external activity may look identical.

The internal experience is completely different.

One is choice.

The other is burden.

And burden and freedom are deeply personal definitions.

Nobody else can calculate them for me.

Society can tell me what success looks like.

People can tell me when I should retire.

Financial influencers can tell me how much I should have.

Friends can tell me what I should aspire to.

But only I can honestly answer whether I have enough.

And being dishonest with myself on that question does not punish anyone else.

It punishes me.

Perhaps 45 to 65 deserves a different strategy

I have often thought about the period between roughly 45 and 65 as a particularly important window.

Not because life ends at 65. It obviously does not.

But because for many people, this may be the period when financial resources are relatively strong while physical and mental energy are still reasonably available.

It is therefore worth asking whether this is the period when I should begin slowing down the things that feel like burden and accelerating the things that feel like life.

Not recklessly.

Not impulsively.

Not by abandoning responsibility.

But consciously.

Perhaps fewer unnecessary possessions.

Less comparison.

Less proving.

Less compulsive accumulation.

Less running merely because everyone else is running.

And perhaps more travel.

More conversations.

More learning.

More fitness.

More food enjoyed without guilt.

More time with people I love.

More curiosity.

More silence.

More exploration.

More sitting somewhere beautiful without checking the clock.

More time doing things that have no economic value but enormous human value.

Because eventually, the question may not be:

“How much did I earn?”

It may be:

“Did I actually experience the life that my earnings were supposed to make possible?”

There is another journey I am preparing for

There is also a deeper dimension to how I look at all this.

I think of this life as having two layers.

The first is temporary.

This body is a vehicle.

This mind is also a vehicle.

It needs to be maintained.

It might need good food, movement, rest, discipline, stimulation and care.

If I want to travel through this life well, I cannot completely neglect the vehicle carrying me through it.

So fitness, health, food, sleep and mental well-being are not separate from spirituality or financial planning.

They are part of the same responsibility.

But I also believe there is another journey beneath the visible one.

Perhaps what I call myself is not limited to this body and this mind.

Perhaps consciousness, energy or what I call the soul has a journey that extends beyond this temporary existence.

I cannot claim to know the ultimate truth of that journey.

But I can choose to prepare for it.

And that preparation, for me, is not about escaping this life.

It is about experiencing it more consciously.

If the body is temporary and the journey is permanent, then this life becomes an opportunity to understand the traveller rather than merely decorate the vehicle.

Perhaps the purpose is not only to accumulate things for the vehicle.

Perhaps it is also to understand what is travelling in it.

To observe.

To learn.

To become less attached.

To understand myself.

To explore consciousness.

To reduce unnecessary desires.

To experience life fully without becoming completely entangled in it.

And perhaps, when this vehicle eventually completes its journey, whatever comes next will not feel entirely unfamiliar.

I feel I have, by and large, already been living this way; and for my benefit. It might sound like a brag but so be it. I respect that perspective also, if anyone offers.

Anyway, when I look back, I realise that none of this happened overnight.

The person I am today did not suddenly appear at forty.

It began somewhere around thirty-six.

The twenties taught me how to experience.

The early thirties taught me how to experiment.

The years that followed taught me how to balance.

And somewhere along the way, money stopped being merely something to accumulate and started becoming something to use intelligently in the service of life.

I do not think I have designed everything perfectly.

Life has obviously played its own role.

Circumstances, people, opportunities, limitations, coincidences and overall, what I personally understand as karmic arrangements have all contributed to where I am today.

But I also recognise that many of my choices have consciously moved me towards a life that feels increasingly aligned with what I value.

And today, if I have to describe my life honestly, I would say this:

I feel satisfied.

Not because I have everything.

Not because I know what tomorrow holds.

I don't.

I do not even know what the next moment holds.

And perhaps that is precisely why I want to remain available to it.

The reminder I want to carry forward

I do not want to turn this philosophy into another achievement.

That would be wonderfully ironic.

I do not want to create a new target called "freedom" and then spend ten years anxiously trying to achieve it.

I want to continue flowing with life.

To earn when earning makes sense.

To save when saving makes sense.

To invest when investing makes sense.

To work when work gives me meaning or value.

To stop when continuing has become unnecessary burden.

To travel when I can.

To learn when curiosity arises.

To take care of this body because it is the vehicle through which I experience this existence.

To explore the mind because it is the instrument through which I interpret it.

And to explore the possibility of something beyond both because that question has always fascinated me.

Most importantly, I want to remember that the purpose of accumulating resources is not to accumulate resources.

The purpose is to create the freedom to experience, understand, love, explore and live.

There will always be another financial target.

Another investment.

Another upgrade.

Another opportunity.

Another milestone.

Another number.

But there will never be another TODAY, another NOW.

Time is the only asset whose balance decreases simply because I am alive.

It depreciates every second.

It cannot be insured.

It cannot be borrowed.

It cannot be bought back.

And unlike money, its scarcity does not become apparent only when the balance is low.

The balance is falling right now.

So perhaps the real question I need to keep asking myself is not:

“How much more can I accumulate?”

It is:

“Am I using what I have accumulated to live the life for which I accumulated it?”

And perhaps an even deeper question:

“Do I realise that eventually this vehicle will change, but the journey will continue? And while I put the current vehicle to the best possible use, am I also preparing for the vehicle I may receive on my onward journey, so that it helps me move closer towards the final destination on the path to Liberation?”

For me, Liberation represents a state beyond the need for a vehicle altogether, a vehicle-less state extending into infinity.

Perhaps that is the deeper purpose of this journey.

To take care of the vehicle.

To use it fully.

To experience what it allows me to experience.

To learn through it.

To understand the traveller within it.

And, at the same time, to prepare the traveller for the journey beyond the current LIFE.

:-)

Thursday, August 27, 2026

3. (Pre) Paryushan 2026.

 Paryushan gives me eight days to pause, introspect, restrain, forgive, turn inward and, above all, remain aware.


Perhaps, the deeper question is not how much introspection was done during these eight days, but how much of this awareness carries into the other 357.


There should ideally be no great divide between the two.


So, a note to self:


*Am I living the 357 days of my year like the 8 days of Paryushan, or am I merely living the 8 days like the other 357?*


The true essence of Paryushan is perhaps not that these eight days become more spiritual, but that they remind me to bring this awareness into the remaining 357; into my thoughts, reactions, attachments, words, actions and relationships.


The real Paryushan may not be these eight days.

It may be what these eight days awaken in the other 357.

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

2. Saakshi Bhaav.

Saakshi Bhaav

Whatever occurs, whatever happens, whatever surfaces, simply occurs, happens and surfaces.


If I simply observe it, without adding anything to it, without adding the sense of doership to it, then what remains is only the happening, the occurrence, the surfacing.


It arrives, and it passes.


There is no separate physical role that needs to be created for observing. Observing is not a process that I have to perform. It is an experience. It is witnessing. It is simply being aware of what is occurring, without becoming entangled in the feeling of "I am doing this."


This does not mean that there should be no acknowledgement or response.


Something happens, there may be an acknowledgement. There may be a response. The response itself is also something that happens.


Why then is it necessary to mix the experience with doership?


There is no need to refrain from responding to a stimulus. A response may arise naturally and appropriately. But even that response can be witnessed.


The response is happening.

The acknowledgement is happening.

The thought is happening.

The emotion is surfacing.

The words are being spoken.


And all of this can simply be seen.


Consider an argument between two people. One person says something and the other responds. I can observe the other person's response. But can I observe my own response with the same clarity?


I can see the words arising.

I can see the thought behind them.

I can see the impulse to respond.

I can see the response itself.


The moment the thought arises, "See how well I responded. He could not even utter a word after that," something else has entered the picture.


The response itself may have been appropriate. There is no problem in that.


The problem begins when the response becomes an object of ownership.


"I responded well."

"I knew exactly what to say."

"I have this ability."

"I have been bestowed with such great acumen."

"This is why I am able to go ahead and grow in life."


What appears to be a simple observation has now quietly turned into doership.


The impurity is not necessarily in the response.


The impurity is in the ownership attached to it.


This is where Raag, Dwesh, Moh and Agyaan begin to operate.


Raag can arise towards the response that has been given, or towards the image of oneself that emerges from having given that response. The attachment is subtle. It may not look like attachment at all. Yet the moment there is a sense of "my response", "my ability", "my correctness", the experience begins to acquire ownership.


Dwesh can arise towards the opposite response, towards the person who disagrees, or towards the point that I want to establish as right. Again, the subtlety lies in the words:


"I want to prove my point."


Even this "I want to prove" can exist at a very micro, even nano, level.


This is why deeper observation is required.


Saakshi Bhaav is not merely observing the external event. It is also observing what happens within while the event is taking place.


The thought is observed.

The reaction is observed.

The response is observed.

The satisfaction after the response is observed.

The disappointment when the response does not go as expected is observed.


Nothing needs to be suppressed.


Nothing needs to be artificially changed.


It simply needs to be seen.


Moh enters when Raag and Dwesh become intertwined with the feeling of Maarapanu: my, mine, I, me.


Raag and Dwesh gain their binding force when there is ownership.


"My thought."

"My response."

"My point."

"My victory."

"My ability."

"My understanding."


The more weight given to this ownership, the more deeply the experience becomes entangled in the sense of self as doer.


And then comes Agyaan.


Agyaan is not merely the absence of information or knowledge. At a deeper level, it is the failure to recognise what is actually happening within.


When the doership mode is switched on, I begin to take ownership of what is occurring and identify myself with that ownership.


That very identification is Agyaan.


Shrimad Rajchandra expresses this beautifully in AtmaSiddhi Shastra, verse 100:


"Raag dvesh agyaan ae, mukhya karma ni granth;

Thaay nivrutti jeh thi, te ja moksha no panth."


Raag, Dwesh and Agyaan are the fundamental knots of karma.


And that through which their cessation occurs is the path to liberation.


The entire contemplation therefore comes back to where we began.


Whatever occurs, happens or surfaces, let it be observed through Nijbhaan.


If a thought surfaces, observe it.


If an emotion surfaces, observe it.


If a stimulus comes, observe it.


If an acknowledgement arises, observe it.


If a response arises, observe that too.


There is no requirement to stop the response.


There is no requirement to become passive.


There is no requirement to suppress the experience.


The response may happen.


But why add "I am the doer" to the response?


Why add ownership to what is simply happening?


Why turn an experience into "my experience", an action into "my action", a response into "my response"?


The acknowledgement can happen without ownership.


The response can happen without ownership.


The words can arise without ownership.


And the witnessing can remain.


This is perhaps where Saakshi Bhaav becomes much deeper than merely "watching".


It is not watching something from a distance.


It is seeing clearly, without adding anything that was not already there.


The event is there.


The experience is there.


The response is there.


But the additional layer of "I did this" need not be added.


And perhaps this is the most subtle part of the whole contemplation:


The effort is not to make witnessing happen.


The effort is to stop adding what does not need to be added.


The effort is to remain aware enough to see the moment when doership begins to enter.


And when that is seen, even that seeing is simply witnessed.


No struggle.

No suppression.

No new doership in the name of removing doership.


Just Nijbhaan.


Just Saakshi Bhaav.


Whatever occurs, happens or surfaces...


It arrives.


It is witnessed.


And it passes.


Paradoxically, the effort is about not putting any effort.

Thursday, August 20, 2026

1. Meditation.

Meditation

Sitting in meditation, turning attention towards the Self, maintaining stillness and restricting unnecessary bodily movements is undoubtedly a valuable discipline.

Yet there is something that perhaps needs to be watched even more meticulously:

Insistence (Aagraha)

Am I sitting still because stillness is helping awareness?

Or is there, somewhere beneath the surface, an insistence on being perfectly still?

Is attention moving towards the Self, or is attention subtly becoming occupied with posture, breathing and physical discipline?

Is meditation actually taking place, or is there an effort to create the appearance, even internally, of being a person who meditates well?

And if appreciation were to come from someone observing the posture, would that appreciation create a subtle sense of satisfaction?

These are not accusations. They are simply things worth observing.

Because discipline itself is not the problem.

The question is whether discipline remains a means towards awareness, or whether it becomes another object of attachment.

What is the purpose of meditation?

What exactly is meditation intended to accomplish?

Is meditation the posture?

Is it controlled breathing?

Is it remaining physically still for fifteen minutes?

Is it following every instruction of a guided meditation perfectly?

Or are these methods, useful supports intended to facilitate awareness?

If they are methods, then there is a danger in confusing the method with the purpose.

Consider a simple situation.

It is 6 a.m.

The decision is made to sit for fifteen minutes.

The posture is established.

The body is kept still.

Breathing is observed.

The instructions are followed carefully.

Everything appears disciplined.

Yet what is happening within?

There may be thoughts such as:

“Don't move.”

“Keep the back straight.”

“Stay focused.”

“Don't get distracted.”

“Come back to the breath.”

Then, perhaps:

“Seven minutes have passed. Eight more to go.”

And eventually:

“Why is this taking so long?”

At that point, something interesting may have happened.

Instead of observing, there is supervision.

Instead of awareness, there is enforcement.

Instead of simply being present, there is an attempt to manage the experience.

Could that too be insistence?

Can an experience be manufactured?

This leads to another question.

Can meditation as an experience simply be manufactured by following the correct procedure?

The conditions can certainly be created.

A particular posture can be adopted.

The body can be kept still.

Breathing can be regulated.

The eyes can be closed.

A guided meditation can be followed.

Fifteen minutes can be completed.

But can awareness itself be commanded into existence?

Can an inner experience be demanded merely because all the external conditions have been fulfilled?

Perhaps a method can prepare the ground.

But an experience cannot necessarily be ordered to appear.

The moment there is an expectation,

“Something must happen now.”

“This meditation must be good.”

“A particular experience should come.”

another layer may have entered the process.

There is then an attempt not merely to observe what is present, but to produce a desired state.

That too deserves observation.

When discipline becomes a burden

Perhaps the important question is therefore not:

“Is there enough discipline?”

But:

“Is discipline supporting awareness, or is insistence turning discipline into a burden?”

There is a subtle difference.

Discipline can create the space for awareness.

Insistence can make the discipline itself the object of attention.

Then even meditation can become a performance.

The body is held rigidly.

The posture is repeatedly corrected.

The minutes are counted.

Distraction is treated as failure.

A voice in a guided meditation gives an instruction, and the mind immediately responds:

“Come back.”

“Focus.”

“Don't get distracted.”

But perhaps even this deserves to be seen.

There is distraction.

Then there is the recognition of distraction.

Then there may be an insistence that distraction must not happen.

These are three different things.

If the third is not noticed, the practice can quietly move from awareness into control.

What does awareness actually mean?

Perhaps awareness is not simply the ability to force attention back whenever it wanders.

Perhaps awareness also means seeing the wandering itself.

Discomfort arises. It is seen.

Impatience arises. It is seen.

The desire to finish arises. It is seen.

The desire for appreciation arises. It is seen.

Pride in maintaining perfect posture arises. It is seen.

The thought, “This is going very well,” arises. It is seen.

The thought, “I have been sitting perfectly still,” arises. It is seen.

There is no immediate need to label these as good or bad.

There is no immediate need to suppress them.

There is simply an opportunity to see.

And perhaps this is where the distinction between awareness and control becomes important.

Control says:

“This should not be happening.”

Awareness says:

“This is happening.”

What then is meditation?

Perhaps meditation is not merely a method.

And perhaps it is not merely an experience.

A method can support the practice.

An experience may arise during the practice.

But awareness can observe the entire movement.

The body is sitting.

Thoughts are arising.

Sensations are changing.

Breathing is happening.

Attention is moving.

Insistence is arising.

Resistance is arising.

Expectation is arising.

Even the desire to meditate correctly is arising.

All of this can become an object of observation.

Then meditation need not be reduced to:

“How perfectly was the session performed?”

The deeper question becomes:

“What is actually being observed?”

The movement towards “I” and “mine”

There is perhaps an even subtler layer here.

Discomfort arises, and immediately it becomes “my discomfort.”

A thought arises, “my thought.”

An emotion arises, “my emotion.”

A meditation session takes place, “my meditation.”

Insistence arises, “my insistence.”

Even an achievement becomes “my discipline.”

The language itself can reveal how quickly experience is appropriated.

So perhaps even this can be watched.

Instead of immediately saying:

“I am uncomfortable,”

there can simply be recognition:

“Discomfort is present.”

Instead of:

“I am becoming impatient,”

simply:

“Impatience is arising.”

Instead of:

“I am distracted,”

simply:

“Distraction has arisen.”

This is not merely a linguistic exercise.

It can become a way of noticing how quickly experience is converted into “I” and “mine.”

And perhaps that very movement is worth observing in meditation.

The real discipline

Then perhaps the deeper discipline is not merely:

“The body will remain still for fifteen minutes.”

It may be:

“Awareness will remain present to whatever arises, including insistence, resistance, expectation, identification and the desire to control.”

If the body moves, that movement can be observed.

If discomfort arises, discomfort can be observed.

If impatience arises, impatience can be observed.

If pride arises, pride can be observed.

If the mind wanders, wandering can be observed.

If there is an urge to force attention back, that urge can also be observed.

Nothing needs to be immediately converted into “me” or “mine.”

Nothing needs to be immediately rejected either.

Because there is a possibility of sitting absolutely still for fifteen minutes while remaining completely occupied with posture, performance, discipline, progress and expectation.

And there is also a possibility that one moment of clearly seeing insistence as it arises may reveal more than fifteen minutes of mechanically perfect stillness.

So perhaps the essential question is not:

“Am I doing meditation correctly?”

Nor even:

“Am I disciplined enough?”

Probably, it is simply:

“What is happening right now, and is it being seen without insistence, without resistance, and without immediately making it ‘I’ or ‘mine’?”

Maybe, that is where meditation moves from a procedure towards awareness.

And perhaps that is where the real practice begins.

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

5. Guru Purnima 2026.

 🌕✨ Guru Purnima is not a single day. It is a way of living. ✨🌕


🌼 A Shishya (Disciple) may not always find the right words to express gratitude. 🙏🏻💛


🌿 A Shishya is not someone who only praises the Guru (Master). A Shishya is one who lives according to the Guru's Aagna. 📖✨ Every teaching is reflected upon. 🧘🏻 Every instruction is practised. 🌱 The only aim is to attain what the Guru has attained. 🎯🪷


🙏🏻 That is perhaps the highest offering a disciple can make. 🌺


🌸 No amount of praise, admiration, or wishes can match the sincerity of living the path shown by the Guru. 🛤️ Guru Purnima is not merely about speaking more about the Guru. 🗣️ It is about transforming oneself through the Guru's teachings. 🌼✨


🪷 A Master simply shares the path that has been realised through direct experience. 🌄 There is no feeling of "I am making someone progress" or "I have transformed someone." ❌ There is only the role of a Nimit. 🤲🏻 The same compassion ❤️, the same guidance 🪔, and the same wish for spiritual growth 🌱 naturally extend towards everyone, without distinction. 🌍🤍 That very absence of attachment and partiality is the beauty of Madhyasthata. ⚖️🕊️


🌿 The disciple, on the other hand, fully acknowledges the value of that Nimit. 🙇🏻 Without diminishing the importance of one's own Upadaan, there is deep gratitude towards the one through whom the path became visible. 🌅 Just as a student learning from a great maestro remains focused on mastering the art, 🎼 the disciple remains focused on attaining the state shown by the Guru. 🪷🎯


✨ The Guru doesn't claim, "It happened because of me." 🙏🏻 The Shishya wouldn't think, "It would have happened anyway." 🌼 One remains free from doership, 🕊️ the other remains free from ingratitude. 🤍 Both understand the true place of Nimit and Upadaan. ☯️


🌸 Perhaps this is the real purpose of the Guru–Shishya connection. 🤝 Not admiration, ❌ not dependence, ❌ and not ownership, ❌ but transformation. 🌱✨


🌕 Guru Purnima is therefore not celebrated once a year. 📅 It is celebrated every day a disciple sincerely lives the Guru's teachings 📖🪷 and keeps upskilling, 📈 while the Guru continues to selflessly be the strongest Nimit. 🙏🏻🤍


🌺🙏🏻 Special gratitude to all the wonderful mentors, and if you are receiving this, you are ONE of them. 🙇🏻🌼


💛 Feeling loved... 🤗

💛 Feeling blessed... 🙏🏻✨


🙇🏻 Indebted forever. 🌸♾️


🕉️🌺🙏🏻

Friday, July 24, 2026

4. खुशी.

 मैंने पूछा, खुशी का पता क्या है?

उसने कहा, खुशी की व्याख्या बता, क्या है?


मैंने बोल उठाः

चेहरे पर मुस्कान लाए, वो खुशी।

मीठे से ख़्वाब दिखाए, वो खुशी।

मित्र परिवार को प्यार दे और पाए, वो खुशी।

मधुर विचारों को जगाए, वो खुशी।


उसने पूछा, बता ये सब पाने को जाना कहाँ है?

जैसे ही मैं सोचने लगा, उसने कहा...

ये सब तो तेरे और मेरे भीतर है, अभी है, यहाँ है।

Wednesday, July 22, 2026

3. When does the dream end?

Excerpts from Swadhyay (23/Jul) by Sir. It might not be precise and the understanding might have been reflected otherwise at some junctures. Kindly discern accordingly.

King Janaka once dreamt that he had lost everything. His kingdom was gone. His wealth had vanished. He wandered hungry, helpless and exhausted. Finally someone offered him a simple bowl of food. Just as he was about to eat, the food slipped away and in utter despair he cried out...

...and suddenly he woke up in his palace.

Unable to understand what had happened, he asked Ashtavakra,

"Which is real? That dream or this waking world?"

Ashtavakra replied,

"King, both are dreams. The one you saw at night concludes when the eyes open. The one that you are presently living and consuming concludes when the eyes close."

What a staggering perspective.

The purpose is not to deny this world.

The purpose is to understand that I have been treating karma uday as the ultimate truth.

That is the real danger.

The moment I start believing that the present karmic arrangement is the ultimate reality, everything begins to feel permanent. I begin identifying myself with my body, my mind, my relationships, my possessions, my opinions, my achievements, my failures and my circumstances.

The arrangement is temporary.

The identification becomes permanent.

That is bondage.

Since beginning-less time, almost every ounce of my energy has gone into protecting, preserving, beautifying and strengthening this temporary identity while almost completely neglecting my permanent identity, the soul.

The greatest mistake is not merely that I live in Sansaar.

The greatest mistake is that I have mistaken Sansaar for my identity.

Perhaps the problem is even deeper than that.

At the subconscious level, I have continuously conditioned myself to believe that temporary happiness is the highest happiness.

Every desire...

Every attachment...

Every fear...

Every expectation...

Every disappointment...

Has quietly reinforced the same false belief.

Without even realizing it, I have kept feeding myself that the pleasure arising from karma uday is the greatest happiness available.

Because of this conditioning, my attention has remained almost entirely outward while the infinite peace, infinite knowledge and infinite bliss belonging to my true nature have remained ignored.

The conditioning has become so deep rooted that I no longer even feel the pinch of this delusion.

That is perhaps the most frightening part.

Buddha expressed something extraordinarily profound.

All conditioned formations are impermanent.

All conditioned formations are incapable of giving lasting fulfilment.

Whatever is conditioned cannot be taken as my ultimate identity.

How powerful these words become when seen in the light of spiritual practice.

Everything that is arising through karma is continuously changing (passing away).

Everything that changes is temporary.

Everything temporary can never become my permanent refuge.

Whether expressed through different spiritual traditions or different words, the pointer remains immensely valuable.

Stop identifying with the changing.

Recognize the one whose journey truly matters.

Then comes another realization that shakes me even more deeply.

This human birth is unimaginably precious.

A healthy body.

A capable mind.

Comfortable and supportive circumstances.

A life that is not burdened with extreme suffering or survival.

The teachings of Omniscient lords like Bhagwan Adinath and Bhagwan Mahavir.

The living inspiration of supremely enlightened beings like Shrimad Rajchandra.

Spiritual mentors who continuously guide, remind, challenge and redirect me whenever I begin drifting away.

Every essential ingredient required for the recipe of Moksha has already been placed before me in abundance.

Nothing meaningful is missing.

The equipment is ready.

The vehicle is ready.

The guidance is available.

The destination is known.

The path is available.

The only thing that remains is my own awareness and my own purusharth.

How many lifetimes would it take to receive such a combination again?

I honestly do not think that this rarest of the rare, best of the best and most beautiful combination will be received again anytime in the foreseeable future. The probability feels unimaginably small. In all likelihood, it may require an infinite... infinite... infinite waiting period, and even then there is absolutely no assurance, no certainty and no warranty that such a combination will ever arise again.

This body is not the destination.

This mind is not the destination.

They are vehicles.

Their purpose is not merely to be maintained.

Their purpose is to be utilised for liberation.

The path to liberation does not lie somewhere outside.

It lies within.

The experience of Sansaar also lies within.

Nothing necessarily needs to change in the external world before the inner transformation can begin. Even if it needs to change or if the change is demanded, the purposeful outcome lies in the intent / the target for which it is changing

The real transformation is not from one worldly situation to another.

It is from identification with the temporary to identification with the eternal.

It is from living as the temporary personality to recognising the permanent Self.

Every moment spent strengthening only the temporary identity is a moment not invested in awakening the permanent one.

The greatest tragedy, apparently, is not death.

The greatest tragedy is spending an entire lifetime protecting the dream while forgetting the dreamer.

May I never again mistake the vehicle for myself.

May I never again mistake karma uday for the ultimate truth.

May this rare human birth be used for the very purpose for which it has become available... the journey from experiencing Sansaar to experiencing the Self, and ultimately, the path to liberation.

Amen!

Monday, July 20, 2026

2. The Illusion Of Absolute Judgements.

 I don't think maturity is something that can be answered with a simple "Yes" or "No.", or who is more or who is less!


In the material world, I tend to generalize qualities like maturity, intelligence, success, wisdom, and capability. But these are not absolute traits. They are often context-dependent.


A person may be very mature when it comes to handling relationships, yet immature in managing money. Someone may make excellent business decisions but react impulsively in emotional situations. Another person may be highly disciplined in health but careless with time.


So, if someone asks me, "Is this person mature?", my first question would be: Mature in what context? According to which parameters? From whose perspective?


Without defining the context, any answer is incomplete.


The same applies to success or intelligence. My definition of success might be living an enriched, meaningful life, while someone else's definition may be accumulating wealth. Neither definition is universally correct; they simply reflect different value systems.


Because of this, I also feel it's unwise to become happy when someone calls me "mature" or upset when someone calls me "immature." Such judgments are usually made within a particular context, using criteria that may or may not be relevant to me.


Mahavir uncle says: Don't get caught in raag (attachment) or dwesh (aversion). Observe the drama of life with sakshi bhav...as a witness. 


People's labels are often limited by their perspective. I can acknowledge them, learn from them if they're useful, and let go of the rest.


_"So, I wouldn't label that person as either 'mature' or 'immature' in general. I'd first want to know the context. In some aspects they may demonstrate maturity, while in others they may still be growing."_

1. Identifying the Swachhand.

 The Task: Identify the (egoic) self-will (Swachhand) in the activities and occurances and action it in alignment with the higher purpose


The experience: 


This task felt less like an exercise and more like an inner journey.


Amidst work, weekend plans, sports, fitness, spiritual reading and other activities, there were repeated moments; sometimes brief, sometimes prolonged, when I would suddenly pause and ask myself:


"Am I being Swachhandi here?"


Very often, before I could think further, another question would arise on its own:


"What would Sadguru Bodh (the teachings of the enlightened masters) or Jin-aagna (The commandments of the almighty) indicate in this situation? What have my spiritual mentors been trying to cultivate in me all these years?"


That naturally led to a deeper observation.


- Am I presently in Saakshi Bhav?

- Am I aware that Raag or Dwesh is operating?

- What is the intensity of Moh in this activity?

- Is this involvement really necessary?

- Or am I convincing myself that it is required from a Vyavahar standpoint, while actually becoming engrossed in it?


Shrimad Rajchandra's words repeatedly came to mind:


"There is only one path to the Supreme Ideal in all three periods of time. Accept only that Vyavahar which helps lead towards Paramaarth."


Gradually, two simple questions became constant internal alarms for me:


AIA: Am I Aware?


and


IIN: Is It Necessary?


These two questions repeatedly interrupted the momentum of many activities and invited me to look within before proceeding.


One thing became very clear to me.


This entire experience has value only if it contributes to my own inner growth. If I narrate this experience with even a subtle expectation of appreciation, recognition or validation, then I would be missing the very purpose of the homework.


My focus has to remain on my own upliftment. The Laksh of Self-realisation should never be lost. Observing Swachhand... Moment by moment, task by task, situation by situation has itself been beneficial.


This also reminded me of the three-month practice that was suggested in March... to sit with oneself for 48 minutes daily. I had not formally taken that vow, but I genuinely wished to experience it without carrying the burden or identity of "following a vow well." That itself felt like a subtle danger.


I noticed a similar danger zone during this task as well.


Whenever AIA and IIN became active, another question sometimes emerged:


"Am I truly working on myself only for self-searching, inner cleansing and upliftment?"


This also led me to another observation that was very meaningful for me:


Am I serving the real and permanent identity (the Soul)? Or am I serving the temporary identity of body, mind, name, ego, possessions, greed, attachment, anger, pride, deceit and delusion that belongs only to this birth?


I do not see this task as something that has concluded. Rather, it has given me a direction for continued observation.


I sincerely wish to continue this practice.


The constant practice of AIA and IIN, with the backdrop of the teachings received from my spiritual mentors, Satpurush Bodh and Jin-aagna, has made this exercise deeply meaningful for me.

Thursday, June 18, 2026

2. Trust, Belief, Faith... And Beyond.

Trust, Belief, Faith... and Beyond

The words Trust, Belief, and Faith often appear similar. Yet on the spiritual journey, each performs a distinct role.


Understanding their difference can help clarify the path shown by the enlightened ones.


Trust


Trust begins with the source.


Throughout beginningless time, innumerable enlightened beings have declared a single truth: the body is not the real self.


The body exists. It requires care, nourishment, and responsible use. Yet it remains temporary, changing from moment to moment and eventually perishing.


The Self, they declare, is of a different nature.


The Self is the conscious principle (the knower and observer). It is not created and cannot be destroyed. Bodies change, states change, karmas change, but the essential nature of consciousness remains.


The enlightened ones do not make this declaration as a belief or philosophy. They speak from direct realization.


Trust therefore is not blind acceptance. It is a reasoned respect for those who have reached a state of complete knowledge and complete freedom from attachment and aversion.


Trust asks:


"Can I rely upon the testimony of those who have directly experienced reality?"


Belief


Belief concerns the message itself.


After listening to the teachings, reflecting upon them, and examining them through reason and observation, a person may arrive at conviction that what is being taught is worthy of acceptance.


Belief is deeper than mere trust.


Trust says:


"I respect the teacher."


Belief says:


"I accept that what is being taught may indeed be true."


Yet belief still remains indirect knowledge.


One may believe that honey is sweet, but sweetness is not known until tasted.


Similarly, one may believe that the soul is pure consciousness, but belief alone does not reveal the soul.


At this stage, a danger appears.


A person may become satisfied with intellectual agreement. The teaching is admired, discussed, defended, and praised, but not lived.


Belief that does not mature into practice becomes another form of postponement.


The enlightened ones never asked for admiration.


They invited verification through experience.


Faith


Faith is not confidence that someone else will save us.


Faith is confidence that the truth realized by the enlightened ones can also be realized by us.


Trust gave confidence in the teacher.


Belief gave confidence in the teaching.


Faith gives confidence in one's own capacity to walk the path.


Faith says:


"If they realized their true nature, then I too possess that same potential."


The enlightened beings do not stand as objects of worship seeking followers.


They stand as evidence.


Their existence demonstrates what is possible.


Faith therefore becomes the courage to practice, persist, and continue despite obstacles, distractions, karmic influences, and inner weaknesses.


Without faith, effort weakens.


With faith, effort becomes steady.


The (Missing) Fourth Step


Even trust, belief, and faith are not the destination.


They are only the bridge.


The destination is direct realization.


A person may trust the enlightened ones completely.


A person may believe every scripture.


A person may possess immense faith.


Yet liberation remains distant until consciousness turns toward its own pure nature.


The enlightened ones repeatedly point toward self-experience.


Their message can be summarized simply:


Do not stop at trusting us.


Do not stop at believing us.


Do not stop at having faith in the possibility.


Realize what we realized.


Know what we knew.


Become what you already are.


The Path to Liberation


The path is not merely the accumulation of praise, rituals, intellectual knowledge, merit, or external achievements.


Such activities may create favourable conditions and may reduce harmful tendencies, but they are not liberation itself.


Liberation is the complete manifestation of one's own pure nature.


As one of the revered enlightened beings states:


"Moksha is one's own pure state."


The journey therefore is inward.


From trust in the realized ones.


To belief in their teaching.


To faith in one's own potential.


To direct experience of the Self.


And from direct experience arises true freedom.


The enlightened beings have shown the road.


They have walked it.


They have confirmed its destination.


The remaining step belongs to each seeker individually.


The work is ultimately one:


To know oneself as one truly is.


Everything else is secondary.

Tuesday, June 2, 2026

1. The Root of the Wandering.

 The Root of the Wandering (Nano-Management)

A nano-level diagnosis of Raag and Dwesh, and what it actually means to be free of them.


Preface: The Simplest Formula and the Hardest Practice

The enlightened beings did not leave a complicated map. They left one line.

Jyaan tyaan thi Raag Dwesh rahit thavu, e Dharma chhe.

Getting rid of Craving and Aversion, wherever I am and in whatever I am doing, that is Dharma. That is the path. That is the entirety of the spiritual work available to a human being in this birth.

Not ritual. Not accumulation of knowledge. Not performance of renunciation. Just this: the progressive reduction, and eventually the complete absence, of Raag and Dwesh in every moment of living.

Simple to state. The work of a lifetime to “live”.

And the reason it is the work of a lifetime is not because Raag and Dwesh are rare or exotic. It is because they are so continuous, so ordinary, so completely woven into the fabric of every moment of experience, that they are almost entirely invisible. Not the large, dramatic versions. Those are relatively easy to spot. The nano versions. The ones that operate in fractions of seconds, hundreds of times a day, below the threshold of ordinary awareness, those are what actually drive the accumulation of karma across Anantkaal, beginningless time.

This journal is an attempt to see them. At that level. Without flinching.


Part One: The Root Knot

Love, hate, and ignorance are the main knots of the bondage of karma. That by which their stoppage occurs is the path to liberation.

This points to three things as the root of all karmic bondage: Raag, Dwesh, and Agyaan i.e. craving, aversion, and wrong knowing respectively. And it names them as a knot, not three separate problems but one tightly interwoven structure where each feeds and maintains the others.

Agyaan is the foundation. Wrong knowing means taking the temporary, fake identity, the body, the name, the roles, the accumulated self-image, to be the real "I." From this wrong identification, everything else follows automatically.

Because if I believe I am this body and this name and these roles, then everything that feels good to this body and this name and these roles will produce Raag. I will move toward it, crave it, seek its repetition, feel diminished in its absence.

And everything that threatens, inconveniences, or displeases this body and this name and these roles will produce Dwesh. I will resist it, push it away, feel disturbed by its presence, feel relieved by its absence.

Raag and Dwesh are not moral failures. They are the automatic and inevitable result of Agyaan. They are what happens when the wrong identity is taken to be real. And they are what keeps the wrong identity feeling real, because every Raag and every Dwesh reinforces the sense that there is a "me" here who wants and does not want, who is pleased and displeased, who is served and threatened.

The knot is self-tightening. Agyaan produces Raag and Dwesh. Raag and Dwesh reinforce Agyaan. And the accumulation of karma from all of this ensures that the cycle continues into the next birth and the next, across Anantkaal.

The path to liberation is not the path of managing Raag and Dwesh from outside. It is the path of seeing through Agyaan from inside. And seeing through Agyan means, first and most practically, seeing Raag and Dwesh as they actually operate, at the nano level, in the texture of my real day.


Part Two: The Felt Sense, and the Problem of Where the Attention Goes

Here is the most precise and most honest observation I can make about how Raag operates in my actual experience:

When something convenient, pleasant, comfortable, or familiar arrives, a wave of felt experience moves through the system. A warmth. A settling. A reaching. A satisfaction. Something in the body responds, something in the senses registers it, something in the mind endorses it, and something in what I loosely call the heart opens toward it.

And my entire attention goes into that wave. Into the feeling. Into the experience.

This is where the problem lives. Not in the pleasant feeling itself. In where the attention goes.

Because in that moment of felt-good experience, the one who is actually experiencing all of it, the “Knower”, the true experiencer, the real "I," becomes completely invisible to itself. It has merged with the instruments through which the experience is happening. It has identified with the body feeling it, the senses registering it, the mind endorsing it. It has mistaken the screen for the projector. The instrument for the one who is aware of the instrument.

This is Moh at its most fundamental and most ordinary level. Not the dramatic, visible version. The quiet, continuous, moment-by-moment version. Happening in every pleasant experience. Happening in every moment of Raag.

And the same thing happens in Dwesh, but in reverse. Something inconvenient, unpleasant, or unwanted arrives. The system contracts. The body tightens. The mind resists. The senses recoil. And again, the entire attention goes into the contraction, into the resistance, into the felt sense of aversion. The true experiencer is again invisible to itself, now identified with the instrument of resistance rather than the instrument of pleasure. But equally lost. Equally merged. Equally absent from itself.

In both Raag and Dwesh, the mechanism is identical: the true experiencer loses itself in what is being experienced. The attention flows away from the “Knower” and into the content of experience, whether that content is pleasant or unpleasant.

And Nijbhaan, the awareness of the true Self, is precisely the reversal of this. Not the blocking of experience. Not the absence of feeling. Not the suppression of the wave. But the presence of the experiencer, knowing itself as distinct from what is being experienced, even while the experience continues fully and completely through the instruments.

The wave can still happen. The body can still feel it. The senses can still register it. The mind can still note it. But there is a background knowing: this is being felt by the instruments. The one who is aware of the instruments feeling it is not the instruments. That background knowing is the beginning of actual Raag-Dwesh reduction. Not suppression. Not management. The true experiencer simply not losing itself inside the experience.


Part Three: Raag for Anukulta and Dwesh for Pratikulta, The Two Engines of Wandering

Gaadh (Extreme) Raag for Anukulta, convenience and pleasantness, and Gaadh (Extreme) Dwesh for Pratikulta, inconvenience and unpleasantness. These two, intense craving for what is agreeable and intense aversion for what is disagreeable, are the engines of Anantkaal of paribhraman, the wandering across beginningless time.

Not occasionally. Continuously. In every moment of every day.

And the subtlety that makes this so difficult to see clearly is this: Anukulta and Pratikulta are not only the big, obvious things. They are the texture of every moment of experience. The preference for one chair over another is Anukulta-Raag. The slight irritation when a door is harder to open than expected is Pratikulta-Dwesh. The satisfaction when traffic moves smoothly is Anukulta-Raag. The barely perceptible contraction when a conversation goes longer than preferred is Pratikulta-Dwesh.

None of these feel significant. Each one seems entirely trivial. But each one is the same mechanism as the gross versions, just operating at a finer grain. And they are not happening occasionally. They are the continuous hum of an ordinary day, running beneath conscious awareness, shaping every preference, every reaction, every movement toward and away.

Nano management of Raag and Dwesh means learning to see these. Not the occasional large fires. The constant small sparks. Because the large fires are made entirely of small sparks, accumulated and compounded over time.


Part Four: The Nano Map, Raag and Dwesh Across the Ordinary Day

What follows is a mapping of where Raag and Dwesh live in the texture of an ordinary day, at the level of granularity where they are usually invisible.

In physical sensation and comfort.

The preference for a certain temperature in the room. The mild dissatisfaction when the water in the shower is slightly off. The pleasure of a comfortable seat and the subtle resistance to an uncomfortable one. The enjoyment of a particular taste and the slight disappointment when the food is not quite as expected. The pull toward physical ease and the resistance to physical effort.

None of these register as Raag and Dwesh in any dramatic sense. But every one of them is the system moving toward Anukulta and away from Pratikulta, automatically, without examination, hundreds of times a day.

In social interaction and conversation.

The slight warmth when someone responds enthusiastically to what I have said, Anukulta-Raag. The barely perceptible contraction when someone seems uninterested or dismissive, Pratikulta-Dwesh. The pull toward conversations that are comfortable and familiar. The resistance to conversations that are challenging or uncomfortable. The micro-pleasure when I am understood and the micro-irritation when I am not. The satisfaction when the conversation goes the way I hoped and the subtle deflation when it does not.

In work and effort.

The flow state when work is going well, accompanied by a subtle Raag for that state, a craving for it to continue. The resistance to tasks that are tedious, difficult, or unclear. The satisfaction of completion and the subtle disappointment of delay. The pull toward work that feels meaningful and the resistance to work that feels pointless. The micro-pride when something is done well and the micro-irritation when something does not come together as expected.

In the relationship with time.

The mild impatience when something takes longer than expected, Pratikulta-Dwesh directed at the passage of time itself. The pleasure when something finishes sooner than expected, Anukulta-Raag. The resistance to waiting. The pull toward efficiency. The subtle agitation when the day's rhythm is disrupted and the satisfaction when it flows smoothly.

In the relationship with people.

Raag for those who agree, validate, appreciate, and support. Dwesh, ranging from mild to intense, for those who challenge, criticise, ignore, or simply do not fit the preferred relational texture. The pull toward people who make the fake identity feel good and the resistance to people who make it feel threatened or uncomfortable. The micro-warmth when someone behaves as hoped and the micro-contraction when they do not.

In spiritual practice itself.

The Raag for the pleasant state of a good meditation or a good reading session. The subtle seeking of that expanded, soothing feeling. The mild disappointment when the practice feels dry or mechanical. The pull toward spiritual contexts that feel elevating and the resistance to those that feel flat. The satisfaction of understanding something deeply and the subtle irritation of confusion. All of this is Raag and Dwesh operating within the very activity that is meant to reduce Raag and Dwesh.

In recognition and being seen.

The micro-pleasure when the name is mentioned positively. The micro-deflation when it is not mentioned at all. The Raag for being understood and the Dwesh for being misunderstood. The pull toward audiences that are receptive and the resistance to those that are indifferent. The satisfaction of a contribution being acknowledged and the subtle lack when it is not.


Part Five: The Mind's Partial Awareness and Its Own Trap

Here is where the examination must become most precise and most honest.

When the mind is aware that Raag or Dwesh is operating, something does happen. The involvement reduces slightly. The aggression of the craving or aversion is diluted. The reaction is less intense than it would have been without the awareness. And this is real. It is genuine progress at one level.

But here is what also happens, and it is worth seeing with complete honesty:

The mind then registers that it was aware. It notes the reduction in involvement. And it produces a quiet conviction: "I was aware, therefore I did better. The awareness is working."

And that conviction itself, that felt-good of having been a good observer, that subtle satisfaction in the quality of one's own witnessing, is itself a Raag.

The mind is now experiencing Anukulta-Raag about its own spiritual awareness. It is feeling good about feeling less. It is craving the experience of being a good observer. And it is doing all of this, and calling it progress, while remaining entirely within the domain of the mind.

This is the most elegant and most invisible trap in the entire inner life of a seeker. Because it wears the most acceptable clothing imaginable. It wears the clothing of genuine spiritual development.

The paradox is precise and uncomfortable: the pride in humility is still pride. The Raag about reduced Raag is still Raag. The mind congratulating itself for its own partial awareness is still the mind. Still the instrument. Still not the “Knower”.

True reduction of Raag and Dwesh does not leave a residue of satisfaction about the reduction. The “Knower”, resting in its own nature, does not feel good about feeling less. It simply is. Without commentary. Without a scorecard. Without the meta-Raag of spiritual self-approval.

This does not mean awareness is useless or that the mind's partial awareness should be abandoned. It means the awareness must be awareness all the way down. Including awareness of the mind's tendency to convert awareness itself into a new object of Raag.


Part Six: The Experiencer and the Experience, The Only Real Distinction

Everything in this journal comes back to one distinction. The most fundamental distinction available in the inner life.

The experience and the experiencer.

The experience is everything that happens through the instruments: the pleasant sensation, the unpleasant sensation, the thought, the emotion, the preference, the resistance, the felt-good wave, the contraction. All of it, Raag and Dwesh included, is experience. It arises in the instruments, moves through the instruments, and passes through the instruments.

The experiencer is the “Knower”. The real "I." The one who is aware of all of this happening. The one who is aware of the body feeling, the mind thinking, the senses registering, the emotions moving.

Agyaan is the confusion of the two. Taking the experience to be the experiencer. Taking the felt-good wave to be the "I" that is feeling it. Taking the contraction of Dwesh to be the "I" that is resisting. This confusion is the root of all Raag and Dwesh, because only a self that is identified with the instruments can crave what pleases those instruments and resist what displeases them.

The “Knower” in its own nature, Swabhaav, neither craves nor resists. It knows. It is aware. It witnesses. Raag and Dwesh are Vibhaav, the distorted state, the state of the “Knower” when it has lost itself in the instruments and their experiences.

Nijbhaan is the return of the “Knower” to its own nature. Not a dramatic event. Not a mystical experience. The quietest possible thing: the experiencer becoming aware of itself as the experiencer, rather than being lost in the experience.

In that awareness, the wave of pleasant sensation can still move through the instruments. But the “Knower” is not inside the wave. It is aware of the wave. And what is aware of the wave is not moved by the wave.

This is not indifference. The “Knower” aware of itself is not cold or detached in any ordinary sense. It is present, (whereas the “Knower” that is lost inside the experience is not present), because it is seeing what is actually happening rather than being swept along by it.

And from this seeing, Raag and Dwesh do not have to be managed or suppressed. They begin, naturally and gradually, to reduce. Because the fuel that feeds them, the identification of the “Knower” with the instruments and their experiences, is being progressively withdrawn. Not by force. By seeing.


Part Seven: What Nano Management Actually Means

Nano management of Raag and Dwesh is not a technique. It is not a practice to be added to the day. It is a quality of seeing that, once genuinely established even partially, begins to operate continuously.

It means catching the micro-Raag in the moment of its arising. The slight preference for one chair over another. The barely perceptible pleasure when a message arrives from a particular person. The micro-satisfaction of a task finishing on time. Not to suppress these. Not to judge them. To see them. To know: this is Anukulta-Raag operating. This is the instrument responding to what is agreeable. The experiencer is here, watching.

It means catching the micro-Dwesh in the moment of its arising. The slight contraction when a plan changes unexpectedly. The barely perceptible irritation when someone speaks in a tone that is slightly off. The micro-resistance to a task that is tedious. Not to suppress these. To see them. To know: this is Pratikulta-Dwesh operating. This is the instrument responding to what is disagreeable. The experiencer is here, watching.

And it means catching the meta-Raag as well. The subtle satisfaction of having caught the Raag. The quiet spiritual self-approval of being a good observer. Seeing that too. Without drama. Without the second layer of judgment about the judgment.

The seeing does not have to be continuous from the first day. It cannot be. It begins as occasional, brief, and partial. Four genuine moments of seeing in a whole day is four more moments than yesterday. Each genuine moment of the “Knower” knowing itself as the experiencer rather than being lost in the experience is a moment of actual Nirjara, actual dissolution of accumulated karma. Not dramatic. Not visible. But real.

And gradually, with genuine consistency and without the performance of spiritual progress, the moments accumulate. The gaps between them narrow. The seeing becomes more natural, more available, more present across more of the ordinary day.

Not perfectly. Not all at once, but gradually for sure and that too with the visible progress, if treaded consistently.

The direction is clear. And the direction is enough to walk in.


Part Eight: The Only Question Worth Carrying

Through the meal, through the meeting, through the pleasant sensation and the inconvenient situation, through the moment of recognition and the moment of being overlooked, through the spiritual practice and the ordinary distraction, one question is worth carrying as a quiet companion:

Is the experiencer present right now, or is it lost inside the experience?

Not asked as a burden. Not asked as a performance. Not asked to produce a spiritually satisfying answer.

Asked honestly. In the fraction of a second before the wave of Anukulta or Pratikulta fully takes over. In the gap, however small, between stimulus and response.

Because in that gap, even briefly, the “Knower” can know itself. And in knowing itself, it is not adding to what has already accumulated across Anantkaal.

That not-adding is the beginning of freedom.

And freedom, from this direction, is not a distant destination.

It is the natural condition of the “Knower” that has stopped confusing itself with its instruments.

It is what remains when Raag and Dwesh, seen clearly and without drama, have nothing left to feed on.


Jyaan tyaan thi Raag Dwesh rahit thavu, e Dharma chhe.

This is the path. Already known. Now to be lived, one nano moment at a time.


 

Thursday, May 28, 2026

16. Before I respond.

 Before I Respond

An honest examination of the gap between stimulus and response, and what lives in that gap.


Preface: The Question That Changes Everything

There is a question that, if I ask genuinely and repeatedly across the texture of my ordinary day, has the potential to alter the entire direction of my inner life.

Not a complicated question. Not a philosophical one. Just this:

Before I respond, am I aware?

Not aware in a performed sense. Not the awareness that pauses for a moment and then proceeds with exactly the same response it was always going to give. But genuinely aware, in a way that indeed touches the root of why I am giving the response at all, and whose interest it is truly serving.

This journal is my attempt to examine that question honestly, across the full range of stimuli that arrive in my ordinary life, from the simplest physical hunger to the subtlest desire for recognition. The examination is not comfortable. But it is the most practically useful thing I can do with my inner life.


Part One: The Anatomy of My Response

Before I examine specific stimuli, I need to map the mechanics of how my response really happens. Without understanding the structure, my examination of individual situations will remain superficial.

The stimulus arrives.

It arrives as a physical sensation: hunger, thirst, fatigue, sexual desire, physical discomfort. It arrives as a thought: a memory, a plan, a comparison, a sudden desire for music or entertainment or a particular food. It arrives as a situation: someone says something, I see something, an opportunity appears, a threat is perceived. And it arrives from apparently nowhere: a mood, an impulse, a craving with no obvious external trigger.

In the framework of karma, none of these arrivals are random. Each stimulus is the fruit of a previously planted seed. The thought that crops up suddenly was not created in this moment. The situation that surfaces unexpectedly was not generated by chance. Both are the result of previously accumulated impressions and actions finding their moment to ripen. This does not mean my life is fatalistic or that choice is an illusion. It means that what arrives is not in my hands. What I do with what arrives, that is where my work lives.

The response fires.

And here is the most important and most uncomfortable observation I can make about myself: in most cases, my response is pre-set.

Not chosen. Not evaluated. Not filtered through genuine awareness. Pre-set, by habit, by routine, by the accumulated patterns of a lifetime of identifying with my body and my name and the roles that surround that body and name.

If hungry, I eat. If a thought of music arrives, I play music. If a desire surfaces, I locate the tools to satisfy it and deploy them. My system is efficient. It has been running for decades. It does not wait for my instruction. It knows what to do.

And the root driver of all of it is consistent, even when the surface varies enormously: my response serves the fake identity. The body's comfort. The mind's preferences. The ego's image. The reputation. The sense of continuity and security of the temporary self.

This is not a moral judgment I am making about myself. It is simply an accurate description of how my automatic system operates. The question is not whether this is good or bad. The question is whether I see it.


Part Two: The Layers That Arrive on Top

One of the most precise observations I can make as an honest inner examiner is this: my desire does not arrive simple. It arrives layered.

The hunger example makes this visible with particular clarity.

Hunger, in its original form, is a straightforward signal from my body. My body needs fuel. This signal is genuine, real, and appropriate to respond to.

But within moments of the hunger signal arriving, something else has already joined it. My mind does not simply ask: what nourishment is available? It asks: what do I want? And the "what do I want" is a completely different question, driven by a completely different centre of gravity.

The layering happens fast and usually below the threshold of my conscious awareness:

The basic signal is hunger. Nourishment is needed.

The first layer of addition is preference. Not just food, but specific food. Something that tastes a particular way, something familiar and satisfying, something my mind has previously associated with pleasure.

The second layer is quality. Not just the preferred food, but a good version of it. Fresh, well-prepared, as it was that one time it was particularly good.

The third layer is accompaniment. The right drink. The right side-dish, which is typically for the taste buds. The right setting. The right timing within the day.

The fourth layer is ambience. Where is the meal happening? With whom? In what environment?

And sometimes, a fifth layer: the social dimension. Is this meal an opportunity for connection, for a certain kind of experience, for an occasion?

By the time all these layers have assembled, what began as a simple biological signal from my body has become a complex desire package, assembled almost entirely below the level of my conscious awareness, and presented to me as a single unified wanting.

And I endorse it, usually without examining how many layers of Raag, of craving, are embedded in what just appeared to be a simple need.

I need to see this mechanism clearly. It operates identically across every category of my desire. It is not unique to hunger. Sexual desire arrives as a physical signal and accumulates layers of fantasy, preference, context, emotional meaning, and identity. My desire for recognition arrives as a simple wish to be seen and accumulates layers of specific audiences, specific forms of acknowledgment, specific comparisons with others. My desire for entertainment arrives as a simple wish for rest and accumulates layers of preferred content, preferred duration, preferred social context.

Seeing the layering, in real time, as it happens, is one of the most precise awareness practices available to me. Not to suppress the layers. To see them. To know, with genuine clarity: this is the basic signal, and these are the additions I have placed on top of it. They are not the same thing.


Part Three: My Pre-Set Response and Its Variations

By honest examination, my response to most stimuli is not freshly chosen in the moment. I draw it from a library of established patterns, refined over years, customised to specific contexts, and deployed automatically.

This pre-set quality of my response takes several forms, each worth examining separately.

The habitual response.

The most common form in my day. A stimulus arrives, a pattern activates, and the response executes. Hunger arrives; I prepare or seek the usual meal. A particular time of day arrives; I follow the usual activity. A familiar social situation presents itself; I deploy the familiar social response. There is no gap, no examination, no choice in any meaningful sense. The whole thing runs on automatic.

My habitual response is efficient. It is also the mechanism through which my fake identity perpetuates itself most invisibly, because it requires no conscious endorsement from me. It simply continues.

The decorated response.

This is my habitual response with a layer of justification or refinement added on top. The desire is the same. The serving of the fake identity is the same. But I now accompany it with a story that makes it look more considered, more spiritual, more mature, more appropriate.

"I am eating this meal because the body needs nourishment," when the real driver is a craving for that specific taste.

"I am sharing this insight because it might be useful to others," when the actual driver includes my wish to appear wise.

"I am resting today because sustainable practice requires balance," when the precise driver is simple fatigue and my desire for comfort.

None of these stories are entirely false. There is usually some truth in my justification. But the justification arrives after the desire has already decided. It is not the reason. It is the decoration I place on a response that was always going to happen anyway.

The switched response.

When my preferred response is not available, I do not pause and examine whether a response is truly necessary. I switch. The desired food is not available, so I seek the second choice. The preferred entertainment is not accessible, so I find an alternative. The stimulus remains active. I simply re-route toward the next available satisfaction.

This switching happens so fast that it can appear to be flexibility or equanimity. But genuine equanimity would produce a pause and an examination. My switching produces only a redirection of the same seeking toward a different object. The seeking itself never stops.

The suppressed response.

This is the most complex category, because my suppression can look like inner work from the outside, and can even feel like inner work from the inside, while remaining entirely in the service of the fake identity.

The first variety is environmental suppression. The context does not permit my response. The spiritual retreat prohibits a certain activity. The social setting makes a certain expression inappropriate. The professional environment requires a certain restraint. My desire continues at full strength inside. The expression is blocked by external conditions. When those conditions change, my response picks up exactly where it left off. Nothing has been dissolved. The retreat ends and the suppressed activity resumes. This is my fake identity waiting for a permissive environment, not the "Knower," the real identity, doing inner work.

The second variety is self-induced suppression with genuine inquiry. This is rarer and more valuable. The stimulus arrives and, before the automatic response fires, something in me pauses and asks: is this necessary? Am I genuinely dependent on this, or is this a conditioned wanting that I have simply never examined? Could I live without satisfying this, not as punishment, but as an experiment in understanding what this desire actually is?

This kind of pause is the closest thing to real inner work in my stimulus-response cycle. It is the witness arriving before the response. It does not always change my outcome. Sometimes the examination concludes that the response is appropriate and it proceeds. But it proceeds with awareness rather than on autopilot. And that difference, however small it seems, is significant.

The third variety is self-induced suppression with borrowed reasoning. This is the most subtle and the most common pattern I notice in myself when I consider myself a spiritual seeker. A scripture says to control the mind. A teaching says desire leads to bondage. A spiritual identity requires a certain visible restraint. So, I suppress the response, not because the desire has been genuinely seen through, not because my examination concluded it was unnecessary, but because suppressing it serves the image of being a serious practitioner.

The desire is still fully present in me. I am managing it for reputational purposes. My fake identity is suppressing one desire to feed a more refined desire: the desire to be seen, including by myself, as someone who has mastered desire.

This is perhaps the most elegant trap in my entire inner life. And it is worth seeing with a particular kind of honesty, and even a particular kind of gentle humour. My spiritual ego suppressing worldly desires to protect its spiritual reputation is still the ego. Still the fake identity. Still serving the same master, in slightly more sophisticated clothing.


Part Four: Specific Stimuli, Examined Honestly

What follows is my honest examination of specific categories of stimulus, from the most physical to the most subtle. For each one I ask: what arrives, how does the layering happen, what does my pre-set response look like, and what would it mean for genuine awareness to be present in me before the response fires?

Physical Hunger

What arrives: a signal from my body that fuel is needed. Genuine, biological, appropriate.

How the layering happens: as I described above. The basic signal is immediately joined by preference, quality, context, timing, and sometimes social meaning. By the time I consciously register the hunger, it has already been processed into a desire package that includes far more than nourishment.

My pre-set response: I locate the preferred food, or the best available approximation, and consume it with as much of the desired accompaniment as circumstances permit.

What awareness before my response would look like: I pause genuinely at the point where hunger arrives. I notice: this is the biological signal. And these are the additions I have placed on top. Are the additions necessary? Is my craving for a particular taste a genuine need or a conditioned preference? If the preferred food is not available and a simpler alternative is, what happens inside me? Is there acceptance, or is there a low-level dissatisfaction that quietly colours the meal?

The awareness practice is not for me to eat only plain food as a performance of detachment. It is for me to know, clearly and honestly, what is hunger (need) and what is craving, and to see the difference without pretending they are the same.

Sexual Thought

This stimulus is worth my examining with honesty precisely because I so rarely examine it candidly. It is either treated as the primary enemy to be conquered, or it is avoided entirely as too uncomfortable. Neither treatment is useful.

What arrives: a physical signal, or a thought, or a response to a perception. Natural, biological, and in the right context, entirely appropriate to a human life.

How the layering happens: very fast, and extremely thoroughly. The basic signal immediately accumulates fantasy, preference, relational meaning, identity, and sometimes complex emotional content. What arrives as a simple physical impulse becomes, within moments, a layered desire that is simultaneously physical, emotional, and identity related.

My pre-set response varies significantly by context and circumstance. But the inner movement, the craving, the pull toward satisfaction, the potential frustration if satisfaction is not available, operates consistently regardless of whether my outer response is expressed or suppressed.

What awareness before my response would look like: not suppression and not indulgence as a spiritual position. Genuine seeing of the full desire package. I acknowledge the basic signal without shame. I see the additions clearly without feeding them. I ask honestly: what am I really seeking here? Physical release? Emotional connection? Validation? A temporary dissolution of the separate-self sense? These are different needs, and I regularly blend them within this single category of desire.

The awareness is not for me to eliminate the desire. It is for me to know what the desire truly is, not just its surface presentation.

Recognition and Fame

This is among the subtlest and most persistent stimuli in my inner life, including in my spiritual practice.

What arrives: a moment where the question of how I appear to others becomes activated. Someone important is present. Something has been accomplished. A contribution has been made. An opinion has been shared. And I orient, automatically, toward: how is this being received? Am I being seen? Am I being valued?

How the layering happens: the basic signal, a normal social sensitivity to my standing in a group, accumulates very quickly into something much more specific. Not just being seen, but being seen in a particular way. As competent, as wise, as generous, as spiritually evolved, as successful. The specific form of recognition I desire varies by context and by the particular shape of my fake identity, but the basic structure is always the same: my temporary self seeks confirmation of its own reality and value through the eyes of others.

My pre-set response: I shape my behaviour and speech, often unconsciously, to maximise the likelihood of receiving the desired form of recognition. I make contributions in ways that are visible. I share insights with an awareness of the audience. I practise generosity in ways that can be noticed. And when recognition does not arrive, or arrives in the wrong form, I experience a subtle inner deflation that is real and consistent, even when I deny it.

What awareness before my response would look like: I catch my orientation toward the audience before my behaviour is shaped by it. I notice that this contribution is about to be made in a way that maximises visibility. Can I make it in a way that serves the purpose without the performance? I need to be honest about the answer. Sometimes the answer is yes. Sometimes my desire for recognition is so embedded in the motivation that I cannot separate the action from it, and even that honesty is valuable.

The most refined version of this stimulus is my desire for spiritual recognition. Being seen as a serious seeker. Being known as someone with genuine understanding. Being respected in a community of practitioners. This is not different in structure from my desire for professional recognition or social status. It is the same mechanism wearing different clothes. And I need to see it with the same honest clarity.

Name and Legacy

Closely related to recognition but distinct in its temporal dimension: not just being seen now but being remembered. Leaving something that outlasts my body. Being known for something that persists.

This desire is particularly worth examining in the context of my writing, my teaching, or any form of expression that creates a lasting record.

What arrives: a motivation to create something, to express something, to contribute something that will be valuable. On its surface, this motivation can appear entirely selfless.

How the layering happens: the basic creative or expressive impulse, which may be entirely genuine, accumulates a desire for the expression to be attributed, to be remembered, to be associated with my name. The work matters, but the work mattering to others, and those others knowing it is my work, matters additionally and sometimes predominantly.

What awareness before my response would look like: I examine genuinely, before or during the act of creation, whether my motivation is the expression itself or the attribution. Would I do the same work, with the same care and depth, if I were certain that no one would ever know I created it? The honest answer to that question is a very precise diagnostic of how much the legacy-desire is driving my creative act.

Greed and the Accumulation Impulse

What arrives: an opportunity, or a perception of scarcity, that activates my accumulation instinct. More money, more security, more resources, more options. The signal dresses itself as prudence, as responsibility, as care for the future.

How the layering happens: the basic security instinct, which in moderate form is appropriate and functional, accumulates layers of comparison with others, status signalling, and identity, being the kind of person who has abundance, who is successful, who does not need to worry.

My pre-set response: I follow the accumulation impulse, often with considerable energy and inventiveness, and I justify the pursuit as responsibility, provision, or prudent planning.

What awareness before my response would look like: I genuinely distinguish between the security instinct and the accumulation impulse. Is this action serving a genuine need for stability and provision? Or is it serving a desire for more that has no natural ceiling, that will not be satisfied by any particular level of accumulation because the driver is not security but the identity of being someone who accumulates?

The awareness practice is not for me to renounce all provision and planning. It is for me to know clearly where genuine need ends and my accumulation impulse begins.

Entertainment and Stimulation

What arrives: a sense of restlessness, or a lull in engagement, or a completed task, that activates my search for the next input.

How the layering happens: the basic need for rest or variety, which is genuine, accumulates a preference for specific kinds of stimulation, a resistance to actual quiet, and sometimes a use of entertainment as an escape from the discomfort of being alone with the contents of my own mind.

My pre-set response: I locate the preferred stimulation and consume it. The scroll begins. The content plays. The conversation starts. I keep the system occupied.

What awareness before my response would look like: I pause at the moment of reaching for the phone or the screen or any form of stimulation, and I ask genuinely: what am I seeking right now? Rest, in which case actual rest without stimulation would serve better. Genuine enjoyment, in which case what follows can be inhabited rather than consumed. Or escape, in which case the thing I am escaping from is worth looking at directly rather than avoiding.

The test is simple: after fifteen minutes of the chosen stimulation, is there more inner space or less? If less, I consumed something that did not nourish. If more, the rest was genuine.


Part Five: The Root That Does Not Change

Across all these categories of stimulus and response, one thing remains constant in me.

As long as I take the temporary identity, my name, my body, my roles, my accumulated self-image, to be the real "I," every response I give will serve that identity. Not because of moral weakness or spiritual failure, but because that is what the system is designed to do. A system I have built around the fake identity will protect and serve the fake identity. This is not a malfunction. It is the system working exactly as I have trained it to work, across a very long time.

When I decorate the response, I do not change the root.

When I suppress the response, I do not change the root.

When I spiritualise the response, I do not change the root.

What changes the root is a genuine shift in my sense of identity. When the "Knower," the real "I," begins to be my actual centre of gravity rather than the body and the name and the roles, my responses begin to change not because I am managing them but because the driver has changed. The same situations arise. But they pull less. The craving for satisfaction is quieter. The fear of loss is quieter. The need for recognition is quieter. Not because I have suppressed them, but because I am no longer feeding them from the centre.

This shift does not happen all at once. It happens in moments, the moments of genuine Nijbhaan, where the "Knower" knows itself even briefly, and in knowing itself, is not pulled into the automatic service of the fake identity.

Each such moment is real. Each such moment is progress. And each such moment makes the next moment slightly more possible.


Part Six: Nijbhaan (Self-Awareness) as My First Stop

So what would it truly mean, practically, in the texture of my real day, for Nijbhaan to be my first stop before the response fires?

Not a formal meditation before every meal. Not a ritual pause before every conversation. Not a performance of consideration before every decision.

Something simpler and more fundamental: a quality of inner orientation in which my awareness of the real "I" is present as a background even as the stimulus arrives and the response begins to form.

In this quality of orientation, I do not block the stimulus. I do not suppress the desire. The hunger arrives, I note it, and the appropriate response follows. The difference is that I note it. I see the craving layers as they assemble. I recognise the pre-set pattern as a pattern rather than as an inevitable necessity. And in that recognition, however briefly, there is a choice available to me that was not there before.

Not always a different choice. Sometimes the pre-set response is entirely appropriate and I proceed with it. But I proceed with awareness rather than on autopilot. And the awareness means I am not adding anything extra, no unnecessary Raag (Craving), no unnecessary Dwesh (Aversion), no claiming of the action as the fake identity's victory or loss.

The question "before I respond, am I aware?" is not a burden I carry through the day. It is a light I switch on, as often as possible, in as many moments as possible.

Not perfectly. Not always.

But more than yesterday.

And gradually, with genuine consistency and sincere honesty, the gap between stimulus and the “Aware response” narrows. Not because the stimuli change. Not because my desires disappear. But because my centre of gravity quietly shifts from serving the Fake / Temporary Identity to the Real / Permanent one.

From the one who is always about to respond.

To the one who is Aware.


Every response I give reveals my centre of gravity. The practice is to know, honestly and without drama, where that centre is. And then, gently and persistently, to let it move.