Getting The Most Out Of Self-inquiry

[Guest]

Meditation begins.

The first step a person usually takes when looking inside to find themselves is just that: Looking inside themselves.

You set up your own borders before you even begin inquiry.

In one quick unconscious action you build your prison. Then you try to escape by moving into the center of the cell.

You unconsciously define" inside yourself" and then you focus your intuition there, where it remains. The illusion of self persists.

It's obvious you can never escape when this is the game you play.

 

 

The logic of self inquiry is as follows:

If I can perceive it, it must be outside of the existential me.

 

Confirm each of the following:

I can perceive my thoughts therefore my thoughts are outside of the existential me.

I can perceive my emotions therefore my emotions are outside of existential me.

I can perceive my body sensations therefore my body sensations are outside of the existential me.

I can perceive light and sound therefore light and sound are outside of the existential me.

 

Now sit for meditation.

Spend some time observing everything outside.

 

Then you may begin the inquiry:

If everything is outside, where can I existentially be?

[WhatAmI]

To be honest, I am confused about self-inquiry because the thing that is doing the inquiry is the mind.

You are not the mind.

So who are you? you are the thing that's observing the mind asking itself inquiry questions.

You are the thing observing the body as it tries to experience what its true self is.

So is it better to just sit and rest in the space that is not 'looking' for where you are?
Because what you are is not tangible, you can never actually find it out there in the physical world.
What you are is consciousness that allows all this stuff to be experienced by you as a human.

[Guest]

@WhatAmI

You have some good points, let me try to clarify some things further.

50 minutes ago, WhatAmI said:

because the thing that is doing the inquiry is the mind.

Inquiry shouldn't be just a purely mental exercise. The aim is to turn awareness back onto itself using all of the sensations that arise in awareness as a guide. Communicating this process requires that it begins on a mental level and then the person practicing has to shift it to an experiential level.

51 minutes ago, WhatAmI said:

You are not the mind.

So who are you? you are the thing that's observing the mind asking itself inquiry questions.

 

This is correct, you are not the mind. This can be confirmed by the fact that you are able to observe your thoughts. You can also ask yourself the question "what am I going to think next?" and you will move into the position of awareness for a few moments as you wait for the next thought to appear.

 

52 minutes ago, WhatAmI said:

So is it better to just sit and rest in the space

This is my point. You shouldn't rest "in" a space.

The sensation of "inside-ness" is a subtle trap of the mind-emotion-body complex that localizes consciousness.

What I'm saying is instead of looking at the mind-emotion-body complex as "internal", you experience it externally. As by the logic of inquiry you know that if you perceive it, it is external to "you" (as consciousness). To experience your mind, body and emotions "externally" requires that you take your position as consciousness.

If you realize that everything you will ever experience is external to consciousness, even your sense of an "internal "self, then everything is experienced as one space. Non-duality is realized.

54 minutes ago, WhatAmI said:

that is not 'looking' for where you are?

This is why I chose to use the word "observe" because "looking" is focal and energetic whereas "observing" is broader and passive. If you are "looking" your attention jumps around rapidly, especially if you are "looking" for something from the place of mind.

It is possible to "observe" your mind as it is "looking". If you are doing this then whatever the mind "looks" at cannot unsettle you. You become more relaxed and more stabilized as the space of awareness.

Have I answered your questions?

[WhatAmI]

4 minutes ago, Galahad said:

person practicing has to shift it to an experiential level.

@Galahad So your saying the point of self-inquiry is to find whatever you think you are in the outside world?? what about people that are blind/deaf/have lost touch of their senses? The way that we sense things is only just the way that our brain interprets it. Right now I am looking at the computer screen and my brain is associating meanings to symbols/letters and creating my own interpretations of what is presented. I don't really see how you can find yourself/connect with your true self in the outside world.

According to Shankara, whenever you are identified with passing thoughts, feelings or sensations, you should say to yourself "Not this, not this" and replace it instead with "I am that which is constant". So like you can look at your environment and realise that the trees are not constant, the people around you are not constant, nothing is constant but I guess the space that the people/trees are in.

My consciousness interprets "the trees" and "the people" as external to me but all of these objects/beings are created in my mind. It isn't real. If I was deaf, I would not be experiencing the sound of the trees for me to know that "i am that" which is the space for me and the trees.

My point is that I don't see how experiencing our senses, and observing all of creation, is going to help us understand our existence. Our senses/interpretations are done in the way that our human mind is capable of it.

How is everything "out there"? How is it that humans are capable of experiencing something that is beyond our natural capability.
I understand that all of this meditation/self-inquiry is to bring us to god/the universe, but are humans even capable of experiencing god in this form? God is in every one of us but if we were meant to be god, then why were we put here on earth in human form?
Isn't the point of our consciousness taking the vehicle of our human body to show us a human experience?
If we were meant to have a god-like experience, why were we born as humans?

8 minutes ago, Galahad said:

What I'm saying is instead of looking at the mind-emotion-body complex as "internal", you experience it externally. As by the logic of inquiry you know that if you perceive it, it is external to "you" (as consciousness). To experience your mind, body and emotions "externally" requires that you take your position as consciousness.

If you realize that everything you will ever experience is external to consciousness, even your sense of an "internal "self, then everything is experienced as one space. Non-duality is realized.

"requires you to take your position as consciousness" consciousness is the observing self. The self that is experiencing/noticing/observing. So your experience is external to consciousness. I don't see how that creates non-duality when what is outside (even my internal thoughts and sensations) are separate from that which is observing.

By the way, thanks for taking the time to explain, I'm still new to practicing this so that's why I don't really get it

[Guest]

@WhatAmI I'm going to use this short clip from Harry Potter as an analogy for the process of self inquiry.

This is the closest thing that I have ever found that illustrates what I'm trying to describe.

Watch the two shots as the camera moves "into" the mirror.

 

 

 

Maybe watch those few seconds a couple of times.

Notice how everything reverses the moment the camera touches the mirror. None of the raw data in the mirror changes but the perspective is completely reversed. Everything is exactly the same but everything seems to turn inside out. Weird right?

Also notice that as the camera is approaching the mirror there is a sense of duality, there is what the camera is "seeing" and what the mirror is "seeing". This duality creates the sense that something is happening "behind" the camera. Because the sense of "behind" arises, the sense of "in front" also arises. The position of the camera is "sensed" between the mirror and students. The position of the camera is sensed between what is happening "behind" and what is happening "in front".

When the camera and the mirror merge there is no longer a duality, what the camera sees and what the mirror sees are exactly the same. At this exact moment the sense of "behind" drops away. In a way there is only what is happening "in front" without any sense of a "behind". - this is where language gets tricky because as soon as you say "in front" there is an assumption of "behind."

For this reason, when the camera and the mirror merge, the position of the camera is no longer "sensed" anywhere. All that is seen is the image as "one" happening.

Now notice again that even as the camera approaches the mirror, what the camera sees and what the mirror sees are in fact the same, there was never really a difference. The entire time there was only what was happening in front of the camera, the mirror was just a trick that created the sense of "behindness". It's important that you understand what I mean here.

This is like the paradox of pre and post enlightenment. Everything is the same before and everything is the same after. But there is a sense of "two" before which gives rise to the sense of locality and then only a sense of "one" after which gives rise to the sense of non-locality.

 

So how does this sense of "two" between you and the world arise?

In keeping with the analogy of the camera and the mirror, imagine that consciousness is like a three dimensional camera and your mind-body-emotions together are like a three dimensional mirror. 

Because we are speaking in three dimensions now, there is the sense of "inside" and "outside". The sense of "inside" and "outside" is formed from the senses "in-front" and "behind" , "up" and "down" and "sides".

You have a very real sense of what is "inside" you and what is "outside" you, right? 

The aim of self inquiry is to break this illusion. You do this by taking the position of consciousness. In a way you never take the position, you are already there. You have been there the entire time. Just as everything in the clip was happening "in front" of the camera the entire time. (I mean in front without a sense of behind - words fail me but I hope you can understand this)

In this way everything is happening "outside" of you (as consciousness) and nothing is happening "inside" you (as mind-body-emotions).

How do you prove this?

you observe a thought - the though must be happening outside of you

you observe an emotion - the emotion must be happening outside of you

you observe your senses - the senses must be happening outside of you

 

Everything you will ever observe is happening outside (without a sense of inside) because:

You observe the feeling of "inside" - the feeling of "inside" must also be outside you.

Consciousness remains the same always. It is never touched by anything that appears outside of it. It is always constant. It is always invisible and clean.

When you realize this you simultaneously realize "I am everything, I am nothing and I do not exist" Duality falls away. You see the world as it is.

You see god everywhere, you see yourself nowhere.

[WhatAmI]

@Galahad I understand that part when I say "I am nothing" -- I am not my ego/mind/body/emotions BECAUSE they exist outside of me..

But when you say "I am everything" is this because you realise that everything is outside, nothing is inside. All that you can observe as a camera is outside of you as a camera.

In the merging process of my camera and the mirror (the mirror being everything outside of my consciousness), I will realise that my camera, and everything outside of my camera is happening at the same time. My consciousness is observing, and what is outside (the mirror) is being observed by my consciousness at the same time. so that's non-duality?? that's the realisation of "i am everything"?

3 hours ago, Galahad said:

You see god everywhere, you see yourself nowhere.

So when you/other people say "you see god everywhere" is that basically saying that your consciousness is connected to everything outside of it? and because you no longer identify as "yourself" you see things for what they are?

[Guest]

On 3/29/2016 at 3:05 PM, WhatAmI said:

But when you say "I am everything" is this because you realise that everything is outside, nothing is inside. All that you can observe as a camera is outside of you as a camera.

Yes but this cannot be communicated because the mind cannot grasp non-duality. You say "as a camera" and "outside of camera" - this is still two. experientially there is no difference between perception and perciever because the perciever is also a perception. All perceptions arise out of nowhere and end in nowhere. (this nowhere is the "nothing" aspect of who you really are)

 

On 3/29/2016 at 3:05 PM, WhatAmI said:

I will realise that my camera, and everything outside of my camera is happening at the same time.

Yes, as long as you understand that there is no difference between the camera and what the camera sees.

The next challenge is the experience of time. This is where mind-body-emotions become tricky because they take their form through time (what we call time).

Just as the ego (your sense of self) has a false sense of locality in space (by creating the illusion of "inside" and "outside") it also has a false sense of locality in time (by creating the illusion of past and future). The sense of time gives rise to the illusions of control and free will. 

You can break all of these by resting as awareness (consciousness) after you have realized awareness through self-inquiry.

This is where enlightenment can become scary because it means letting go of your ideas of control and realizing you have no free will.

This is the "surrender" aspect of spirituality. 

I can explain this to you if you want. I just don't want to ramble too much if it's not needed.

[WhatAmI]

@Galahad Yes can you explain to me how I'm supposed to let go of what is inside and outside and when/where it is and just surrender to it?

If the point is just to let go of it, then what is the point of being aware and observing what is happening when you are just going to let it go?

Can you give a pretend example of what you would go through in your head when doing this? So i know what to look out for when I am doing it:

Example of what i thought so far:
- a thought arises
- OBSERVE the thought which happened outside of me. what my consciousness is aware of, and what is being observed is the same thing (hence realising that I am nothing)
- both happened at the same time (hence realising that I am 'everything' ????) (still confused about this notion of I am everything)
- because it can be observed, just let it go because you have no free will/control over it

 

[30secs]

@WhatAmI good example there men..we are Awareness so we are everything in that level, yes in the sense that you have no free will ..the thought come and go itself, and you are just a watcher.

[Guest]

@WhatAmI

 

6 hours ago, WhatAmI said:

Yes can you explain to me how I'm supposed to let go of what is inside and outside and when/where it is and just surrender to it?

Maybe don't worry about inside and outside right now. I'm going to describe an exercise for you below. 

6 hours ago, WhatAmI said:

If the point is just to let go of it, then what is the point of being aware and observing what is happening when you are just going to let it go?

If you are truly observing then you are automatically surrendered because it is arising and disappearing without any input from you.

 It sounds like your mind is "pretending" to be the observer because you said :

6 hours ago, WhatAmI said:

- a thought arises
- OBSERVE the thought which happened

If you are observing a thought that has already happened then you are not actually being the observer (as consciousness), you are being the observer (as mind) looking back at a thought in latent memory. While you are looking back the next thought is already appearing unnoticed. If this is the case then you will be strung along from one thought to the next but you will feel like you are "watching" them.

What you are actually doing is watching the brief memory of what has already happened but it is happening so fast that it feels like it's happening now.

You can fix this by meditating like this:

Stop the mind completely for a few seconds.

Watch the space.

Watch a new thought beginning.

Watch the new thought ending.

Watch the space (if there is one)

Watch the next thought beginning

Watch the next thought ending

 

As you are doing this pretend that you have no memory of the thoughts that have just happened. You are ONLY looking at new thoughts as they are appearing. You DO NOT LOOK BACK at any thoughts that have already happened.

You should not be concerned by the contents of any thoughts, it doesn't matter if they are good or bad or right or wrong you just watch them as they come and go. It also doesn't matter how quickly or slowly the thoughts come and go, just keep looking forward.

This might feel quite weird at first, and you might not feel like you are doing it very well. That doesn't matter just keep trying it as best you can. You may find your mind goes completely blank for some periods. If that happens just keep looking forward. You also might get a slight headache, don't let that put you off either.

If you get pulled into any thoughts and forget the exercise just keep doing it as best you can when you remember what you are supposed to be doing.

Try this for 1 hour straight without any distractions and then tell me if it's different to what you have been doing.

[WhatAmI]

@Guest Ohhh woops!! I think that was a communicational error on my part: by observing a thought when im meditating, I actually do it at the same time, i probably should have written it as the same step, that was my bad!

16 hours ago, Guest said:

You DO NOT LOOK BACK at any thoughts that have already happened

THAT BEING SAID... I have noticed that during meditation I don't really have a problem -- I can observe and watch a thought come and go. BUT when I am doing a meaningless action after meditation, e.g. walking home from uni, washing the dishes, sitting on the bus/train, I have a tendency to "Look back" at thoughts. For example, when I am walking home, I think about all the shit that happened throughout the day and replay the conversations I had with people in my head. And when I catch myself looking back at the thought, THEN i let it go but it makes me realise how UNCONSCIOUS I am throughout the day and how long it takes for me to realise I am looking back. It's easier to focus on observing during meditation because you sit there with the intention of knowing that you will be observing, whereas you forget to be observing during the rest of the day. any tips on how to make observation last throughout the entire day?

So is that process the only thing you do when you meditate?
Leo talks about self inquiry in that you look for yourself,  realising that "nothing" is noticing there is nothing inside of you and stuff.
So you don't do any looking when you meditate? Do you do any mantras?

[askdfjnak]

@WhatAmI This might help

 

 

 

[WhatAmI]

@Mutupo FUCK that really spoke to me on SO many levels!
Especially 4.28: "you would rest so much easier if you solve this one thought AND THEN it will be easier to rest as awareness"

wow. that is so me... i guess I've been doing stuff for my entire life it's so hard to just rest.

thank you so much!!

[askdfjnak]

@WhatAmI I also like this video. Mooji covers some more aspects of this.

 

 

[Dodo]

On 4/1/2016 at 10:07 AM, Mutupo said:

@WhatAmI I also like this video. Mooji covers some more aspects of this.

 

 

Great clarification! I've been trying to imagine nothingness, now I know that the nothingness was observing that imagining of nothingness  It was on the other side. 

[Jonathan]

@Guest Your wise instruction has helped me greatly. I'm glad I wondered into this thread.

[step1]

@Guest A great thread.  Hope you come back with more insights soon.