1. ComD 1: f. 320; the text is slightly edited.
2. The Tiffin Lecture source material for the following list, most of the content of this first section, and certain elements in the remainder of this lecture have been rendered in another (differently edited) version in “Fragments from the Spiritual Speeches of His Divine Majesty Sadguru Meher Baba. (13) On Spiritual Achievements,” Meher Message, vol. 1, no. 12 (December1929), pp. 6-7.
3. The text of TTL/FF p. 101 and TTL p. 101 reads: “With the Gross Eye, the ‘Subtle’ things are seen: . . .” (TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 1 reads similarly). The diary source corroborates this: “With the Gross eye, the Subtle vastu-s are Seen” (ChD 57: p. 171). Yet it is hard to explain why subtle objects (vastu-s) would be seen with the gross eye (except on the first plane, where, according to God Speaks, this does happen; but there is no indication that Baba is talking about the first plane in our present text). A few lines below this, TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 1 provides the following: “But, as actually the gross material things (jaḍ-vastu) are seen, so also are the Subtle things seen with the Internal Eye, i.e. (Subtle eye antar-draṣṭī), and with the ‘Mental Eye’ (divya draṣṭī), God is Seen” (TTL/FF p. 101 and TTL p. 101 read similarly, except that all the lacunae have not been filled). This passage implies (though it does not explicitly state) that “gross things” are seen with the gross eyes. Since in many other places Baba has affirmed that gross (and not subtle) objects are perceived through the gross senses, the editors have emended “subtle” to “gross” here.
4. This indented list and the two paragraphs before it were published as saying no. 112 in “Sayings of His Divine Majesty Sadguru Meher Baba,” Meher Message, vol. 2, no. 12 (December 1930), p. 1. For further information, see Appendix 5, Table 10, p. 514.
5. The “Tiffin Lectures” source texts (TTL/FF p. 102 and TTL p. 102) for these last three sentences are somewhat garbled: “Now just as this ‘eye’ sees this slate with the same (eye) open or closed, the same way, if it sees ‘Self’ with the same (ete) [sic] open, it is the same in all these.” (TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 2 reads similarly.)The underlying meaning seems clear, however, and the editors have emended accordingly.
6. In ChD 57: p. 176 the phrase “he kāmī” has been written in the Gujarati script on the bottom row of the left-hand column, across from and slightly below the English in the right-hand column, “sound sleep.” This phrase “he kāmī” has been carried over into TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 3, where it takes the form of a parenthetical penciled note filling blank spaces in the table (all the other slots in the table having been filled in). If this phrase is indeed in the Gujarati language, it means something like “O lustful one”; possibly the expression has a sarcastic connotation. It is not immediately clear why this phrase has been added at this juncture. Perhaps the notion is that the ordinary human, cycling between sound sleep, dream, and wakefulness (in the lower half of the diagram), is caught in the net of desire and lust (kām). Does this handwritten annotation register some comment that Baba himself made? We cannot be sure, but it seems unlikely that the diarist would have inserted this thought on his own initiative.
7. Literally “freed” or “released,” in idiomatic usage khalās often functions as a kind of exclamation, meaning “finished! —done! —over with!” Though the word does not appear in the text of the TTL/FF p. 103, TTL p. 103, or TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 3, it does occur in the diary source (ChD 57: p. 174) and has been interpolated from there.
8. ChD 57: p. 178 gives the Marathi phrase “tumchī bokanḍīvar bāsto,” “sit on your neck”; the sense of this idiomatic expression is to restrain or hinder from action. In TTL/FF p. 104 Chanji translates this into Gujarati: “gardanpar savār chhej”; TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 3 gives a similar reading. Probably in the original lecture Baba dictated this phrase in its Marathi form.
9. These last two sentences are based on TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 4, which reads “It is nothing – only the experience (realization anubhav) is required.” TTL/FF p. 104 and TTL p. 104 read: “It is nothing. Only the ‘experience’ is required.”
10. TTL/FF p. 104 and TTL p. 104 read: “For example, take your own question . . .” (TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 4 reads similarly). Presumably Baba was referring to a question which one of the mandali attending the lecture had recently asked; in other words, Baba was alluding to the give-and-take in this very lecture as an example of the process of acquiring intellectual understanding that does not succeed in transforming one’s root experience and breaking the identification with the false self—as he illustrates below with the example of the scorpion.
11. The source text of TTL/FF p. 104 and TTL p. 104 reads thus: “[you who] regularly hear all such talks (of ‘experience’ and ‘nothingness’ etc.) are NOT void of or any exception to these ‘inexperienced’ drops . . .” (TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 4 reads similarly). A word seems to be missing here: “void of” what? The editors have supplied the word “sanskaras,” since it makes sense in this context, and since this phrase recurs throughout the literature of this period.
12. The texts of TTL/FF p. 105, TTL p. 105, and TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5 do not indicate by what means one is travelling here; but the diary source (ChD 57: p. 180) clarifies that point: “samadhi is the rest one takes when travelling on foot from nager [sic] to Bombay . . .” (emphasis added).
13. These same three types of Muktas were described in the previous lecture (pp. 226-27 earlier). Similarities of wording suggest that TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5 (used here as the primary source in preference to TTL/FF p. 105 and TTL p. 105: see endnote 15 below) was based on ChD 57: p. 168; though ChD 57: pp. 162 and 164 present much of the same content, the wording of those diary pages better matches TTL/FF pp. 99-100 and TTL pp. 99-100, which is the source for the relevant content in pp. 226-27 earlier. For detailed discussion of the textual and dating problems that vex these two passages and, indeed, these two lectures as a whole, see endnote 1 on pp. 563-64.
14. This narrative interlude referring to the context of Baba’s dictation does not appear in the “Tiffin Lectures” sources (TTL/FF p. 105, TTL p. 105, and TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5) but in the diary source (ChD 57: p. 168). That diary page gives 18th August (not 19th August) as its date; for a full discussion of the problems and complications involved here, see endnote 1 on pp. 563-64.
2. The “Videh-Mukta” keeps the body, which is moved by the Higher Powers (he has acquired) of “Jivatma” but “Unconscious only.[”]
3. The “Acharya” keeps the body, moves and works it “Self-consciously” with His own “Knowledge, Power & Bliss”.
The typed draft version in TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5, however, presents this list—with the complete three numbered items—in a much more reasonable form. Its first item is the “Videh-Mukta,” who “leaves the body immediately”; second comes the “Jivan-Mukta,” who “keeps the body which is moved by the Higher powers”; and third is the “Acharya” who “keeps the body, moves and works it, ‘Self-consciously’with His ‘Knowledge, Power and Bliss[’].” This text reproduces the content of the diary source, ChD 57: p. 168, and it accords with what has been explained about these three types of God-realized persons elsewhere in this and the preceding lecture. Plainly the text of TTL/FF p. 105 and TTL p. 105 (both the products of the same act of typing) is defective; TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5 has been preferred as the source here.
16. This phrase (jīvātmā chalāve chhe) appears uniquely as a handwritten interpolation in TLD/FF: 19-8-26, p. 5. Remarkably, it asserts that the jīvātmā persists after Realization. The editors cannot think of another instance in Baba’s writings where the jīvātmā is credited with this.
17. In God Speaks, by contrast, the Jīvanmukta is characterized as enjoying creation-consciousness; the description of the Jīvanmukta in this lecture corresponds to what God Speaks calls a Majzūb. (See also the previous lecture of 18th August 1926, p. 226 and footnote ‡.)