The feeling of 'me'

[Shin]

5 minutes ago, Blissout said:

Nisargadatta meditated on the I am for 3 years until liberation came for him. Many people seem to miss this fact.

I'll do it in one then ?

 

[Charlotte]

@cetus56 Thanks for your input Cetus! Yeah sticking with the I AM kinda of reminds of trying to contemplate without the actual question, how could you answer a question without the question? Am I making sense? ?

@Outer You need to spend less time on the internet sunshine. ??

 

[Shin]

27 minutes ago, Outer said:

Lets see who will become enlightened fastest.

 

 

You seem to full of yourself to even start the race.

Or was it supposed to be funny how you talked here ?

 

[Charlotte]

@Outer @cetus56 (ignore tag Cetus)

 

Outer, shin was asking if you were using the same type of humour in my post that you shat all over ?

[Preetom]

@Charlotte

You're doing it as it should be done. Don't doubt the process cause you're on the right track.

What you did at first was questioning  an object that felt like you. Upon clear seeing(inquiry) you disidentified from  that object and you also realized what a silly identity belief that was!

Right in that moment, Consciousness got liberated from that form and shined as it's true formless, timeless essence. This objectless consciousness is the final stage of self inquiry. Stay as that... Enlightenment is bound to happen.

But the thing is, there are probably many more identifications left in you. That's why after a while the sense of me arises again (maybe in the head or somewhere else). Again the questioning and inquiry is done to break that identification. Do NOT bypass it. You can't fake the formless Consciousness state. It remains present naturally when identifications are seen through.

Keep up the work. You know you're progressing if you see this witnessing mode naturally arising throughout the day. At some point it becomes 24/7.. then BAM!

"In the Absolute state, I don't even know that I AM" 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Preetom

[Charlotte]

13 minutes ago, Preetom said:

You're doing it as it should be done. Don't doubt the process cause you're on the right track.

Thank you! ?

13 minutes ago, Preetom said:

What you did at first was questioning  an object that felt like you

Yep! I've noticed that the object that mostly makes me feel like (more than any other) me is this feeling behind the eyes, very solid continuous type feeling. This feeling is literally how I identify with myself. 

15 minutes ago, Preetom said:

Stay as that... Enlightenment is bound to happen.

Will do! 

16 minutes ago, Preetom said:

But the thing is, there are probably many more identifications left in you. That's why after a while the sense of me arises again (maybe in the head or somewhere else). Again the questioning and inquiry is done to break that identification. Do NOT bypass it. You can't fake the formless Consciousness state. It remains present naturally when identifications are seen through.

Yes I agree. I'll work to continue the questioning and inquiry of those feelings. 

Can I just thank you so much for actually understanding what I have been doing ???

[Shin]

34 minutes ago, Outer said:

no of course not, looked cultish and quackeryish

1 hour ago, Outer said:

 

 

Doesn't mean it is.

That's a huge assumption, that you defended by even calling it stupid just after and by being annoying to someone who didn't do anything to you.

I'm not lecturing you if that's what you think, just pointing out clear signs of egotic behaviors in you.

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Shin

[Jack River]

21 minutes ago, Preetom said:

In the Absolute state, I don't even know that I AM" 

I call this unconsciousness/nonbeing

[Preetom]

49 minutes ago, Charlotte said:

Thank you! ?

Yep! I've noticed that the object that mostly makes me feel like (more than any other) me is this feeling behind the eyes, very solid continuous type feeling. This feeling is literally how I identify with myself. ?

It's the same story for every human. These sensations behind the eyes, in the chest, a subtle hazy self image of the body are some of the most persistent identifications where Consciousness is trapped in. Over time, layers of such feelings will get revealed. You must keep on inquiring and disidentifying. Sometimes written inquiry helps a lot (for me at least!). Externalize that sensation behind the eyes. Ask yourself, is that sensation literally me?? Does this sensation have likes and dislikes, have an age, a history, makes decision, craves certain objects? When you frame it like this, you see very quickly how ridiculous it all sounds and yet we are so gullible that we believe it as us.

49 minutes ago, Charlotte said:

Can I just thank you so much for actually understanding what I have been doing ???

 You're welcome. Actually it resonates so much because this is exactly what I've been doing and still doing. Now this has become kinda every waking hour thingy, running on the background. When these persistent identifications dissolve, you'll literally feel like not being in a physical body. You start feeling like all pervading. The Sufis told it so beautifully, ''Wherever the eyes falls, there is the face of God''

Also as a final note, do not make that I AM thing too complex. Trust me, I tried to wrap my brain around it for several years. It was all futile. This is NOT an intellectual or clever thing. This is a very personal, alive, feeling based inquiry. You can't cleverly bypass anything or rationalize away something cleverly. This will only make the process longer and longer. 

Just keep on honestly looking, and upon clear seeing dissolve all the 'me-ness' attached to various objects. That pure subject or witness can't be touched or visualized in any way. Just burn all the unquestioned identifications and Consciousness will shine in it's purity as your deathless self. In fact it is already the case! Only those persistent little sensations behind the eyes are preventing you from seeing it. Witness them with loving curiosity and see how they melt right before you! 

All the best. If you're diligent, this process will sky rocket soon  

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Preetom

[cetus]

2 hours ago, Charlotte said:

Thanks for your input Cetus! Yeah sticking with the I AM kinda of reminds of trying to contemplate without the actual question, how could you answer a question without the question? Am I making sense? ?

@Charlotte Here it makes perfect sense.

Another good quote of Nis- "Recede, recede, recede. Go back the way you came". That's a good practice/contemplation for trancending the "I Am"

"What were you before the announcement of your birth?"

[Preetom]

4 hours ago, cetus56 said:

@Charlotte Reading your post I too was reminded of the words of Nisargadatta "Stay in the "I AM" and in doing so you will trancend it".

Sounds like your heading in the right direction here.

@cetus56 Just want to clarify this I AM thing further. 

When @Charlotte was so focused on the sensations behind the eyes because of it's convincing 'me-ness', she was not staying in the I AM. She was staying as I AM THIS (where, THIS=sensations behind the eyes. You can put any object at it's place)

So this is not what Maharaj means by staying as the I AM.

But when @Charlotte saw though the identification, that persistent sensation eased & she was just aware formlessly. This is what Maharaj meant as the I AM. That which remains when 'THIS' part is subtracted, is the real I AM. Enlightenment happens from staying in this I AM.

I'm discussing about it because it's a very subtle mechanism and it's so easy to misinterpret it. Focusing on an object as I AM makes it I AM THIS. It will never ignite Enlightenment because it is concentration meditation. Enlightenment happens from staying in the formless I AM (also known as being aware of being aware).

Knowing this, what @Blissout said about zooming out from the I AM actually didn't make sense to me experientially. I AM is not an object you can zoom in or zoom out from. It is the formless, aware presence that you notice (not as an object, you just know it's all pervading presence) when the obsessive focus and fascination with a particular object ceases. In my inquiry, I find it very useful and lot less confusing if I treat I AM as the Pure subject/witness that can't be known like an object. It immediately cuts down unnecessary goose chasing.

I hope I didn't make you people more confused.

I'm only trying to see if we are on the same boat experiencially or not!

Edited October 29, 2018 by Preetom

[Shin]

8 minutes ago, Preetom said:

@cetus56 Just want to clarify this I AM thing further. 

When @Charlotte was so focused on the sensations behind the eyes because of it's convincing 'me-ness', she was not staying in the I AM. She was staying as I AM THIS (where, THIS=sensations behind the eyes. You can put any object at it's place)

So this is not what Maharaj means by staying as the I AM.

But when @Charlotte saw though the identification, that persistent sensation eased & she was just aware formlessly. This is what Maharaj meant as the I AM. That which remains when 'THIS' part is subtracted, is the real I AM. Enlightenment happens from staying in this I AM.

I'm discussing about it because it's a very subtle mechanism and it's so easy to misinterpret it. Focusing on an object as I AM makes it I AM THIS. It will never ignite Enlightenment because it is concentration meditation. Enlightenment happens from staying in the formless I AM (also known as being aware of being aware).

Knowing this, what @Blissout said about zooming out from the I AM actually didn't make sense to me experientially. I AM is not an object you can zoom in or zoom out from. It is the formless, aware presence that you notice (not as an object, you just know it's all pervading presence) when the obsessive focus and fascination with a particular object ceases. In my inquiry, I find it very useful and lot less confusing if I treat I AM as the Pure subject/witness that can't be known like an object. It immediately cuts down unnecessary goose chasing.

I hope I didn't make you people more confused.

I'm only trying to see if we are on the same boat experiencially or not!

Do you really need to inquire ?

In my experience I just need to let go of everything and stay still.

Like just not trying to go anywhere or to do anything, just be.

It can take a while but usually always happen.

 

 

[Preetom]

33 minutes ago, Shin said:

Do you really need to inquire ?

In my experience I just need to let go of everything and stay still.

Like just not trying to go anywhere or to do anything, just be.

It can take a while but usually always happen.

You're right. It all boils down to this effortless Being without identifying with any object. It's the most Enlightenment conducive state.

You mentioned that it takes about 45 minutes for you to go to that 'place'.It's because you're a fairly advanced meditator. Maybe in 5 years, you'll go there at 2nd minute.

But in the beginning, there is identification with lots of of sticky, persistent and recurring thoughts and sensations. Only rigorous questioning unwires them just so you an reach towards Being. Consciousness becomes more and more unsticky through this process over time

Just let go(when it's a random, weak object). Or else go down into brutally honest inquiry in the form of questioning and attacking it from many different angles (also writing if necessary) if it is very sticky recurring identification. My point is, you can't bypass the 'me-ness' attached with objects with clever rationalizations or suppress it. It will only make the process longer.

Once your attention is unsticky, you can just be for hours and days without feeling like being stuck in a body or an object

[Blissout]

Nisargadatta and ramana both made it very clear that the I AM is an object and belongs to the ego and needs to be transcended. I am not making anything up .

 

From my experience there is a difference by focusing on the IAm and going directly to pure awareness.

[Shin]

25 minutes ago, Preetom said:

1 minute ago, Blissout said:

Nisargadatta and ramana both made it very clear that the I AM is an object and belongs to the ego and needs to be transcended. I am not making anything up .

 

From my experience there is a difference by focusing on the IAm and going directly to pure awareness.

 

That's what Preetom said several times now.

I Am This (Body/Mind/Whatever we think we are) ---------->>> I Am (Witness of the witness without any other objects) ---------->>> I-I (Pure consciousness, total merging with/as God)

[cetus]

@Blissout @Preetom  Nisargadatta may have used "I am" interchangeably.

One quote is: "stay in the I am and in doing so trancend it".

And in another quote:  Do not bother about anything you want, or think, or do, just stay put in the thought and feeling, ‘I am’, focusing ‘I am’ firmly in your mind. All kinds of experience may come to you – remain unmoved in the knowledge that all perceivable is transient and only the ‘I am’ endures. 

[Preetom]

24 minutes ago, Blissout said:

Nisargadatta and ramana both made it very clear that the I AM is an object and belongs to the ego and needs to be transcended. I am not making anything up .

From my experience there is a difference by focusing on the IAm and going directly to pure awareness.

Let's not see it from a narrow perspective my friend. Let's sort this out experientially!

If I AM is an object you can 'focus' on, tell me from your own experience what are objective qualities of this I AM? Is it a color, a sound, a subtle sensation? Does it have a specific pinpoint location? Tell me. If you can't find any of these qualities, then why are you declaring I AM as another object? Notice that whatever you point to as I AM is not the I AM but I AM THIS.

If I AM was purely an object like lets say the sensations in the head, then Maharaj would advice to firmly focus on the sensations in the head. That would be a concentration meditation. But he repeatedly said that, Subtract the THIS and THAT and only stay as the I AM.

From my experience, I AM is a pure witnessing state. This I AM cannot be objectified in any way. When Maharaj says that the I AM needs to be transcended or ''In the Absolute state I don't even know that I AM'', he means that by staying as that pure subject I AM in an unbroken fashion, at one point you realize in a flash that this very 'knowiness' or I AM is not something you personally own. Right at that moment, You discover the I AM as the impersonal Universal Consciousness, the Only Consciousness there ever was and ever will be. That is the absolute state where the last vestiges of personhood is given up.

That's why I AM or pure witnessing is the direct doorway to Absolute. By staying with the I AM unbrokenly, you discover it's Truth.

I am elaborating all this over and over again because I find from my personal experience that creating more and more layers in the Subject or I AM just makes the witnessing process more complex and inefficient. The mind runs into intellectual land to make sense of things by objectifying the subject, witness behind witness behind witness....I hope you get my point.

Why not just take only one pure subject, the formless I AM and just watch...carefully eliminating everything the I AM is not...until the I AM reveals itself as the Absolute?

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Preetom

[Preetom]

23 minutes ago, Shin said:

That's what Preetom said several times now.

I Am This (Body/Mind/Whatever we think we are) ---------->>> I Am (Witness of the witness without any other objects) ---------->>> I-I (Pure consciousness, total merging with/as God)

Oh thanks for putting it like this! Finally someone resonates ^^

[Blissout]

10 minutes ago, Preetom said:

Let's not see it from a narrow perspective my friend. Let's sort this out experientially!

If I AM is an object you can 'focus' on, tell me from your own experience what are objective qualities of this I AM? Is it a color, a sound, a subtle sensation? Does it have a specific pinpoint location? Tell me. If you can't find any of these qualities, then why are you declaring I AM as another object? Notice that whatever you point to as I AM is not the I AM but I AM THIS.

If I AM was purely an object like lets say the sensations in the head, then Maharaj would advice to firmly focus on the sensations in the head. That would be a concentration meditation. But he repeatedly said that, Subtract the THIS and THAT and only stay as the I AM.

From my experience, I AM is a pure witnessing state. This I AM cannot be objectified in any way. When Maharaj says that the I AM needs to be transcended or ''In the Absolute state I don't even know that I AM'', he means that by staying as that pure subject I AM in an unbroken fashion, at one point you realize in a flash that this very 'knowiness' or I AM is not something you personally own. Right at that moment, You discover the I AM as the impersonal Universal Consciousness, the Only Consciousness there ever was and ever will be. That is the absolute state where the last vestiges of personhood is given up.

That's why I AM or pure witnessing is the direct doorway to Absolute. By staying with the I AM unbrokenly, you discover it's Truth.

I am elaborating all this over and over again because I find from my personal experience that creating more and more layers in the Subject or I AM just makes the witnessing process more complex and inefficient. The mind runs into intellectual land to make sense of things by objectifying the subject, witness behind witness behind witness....I hope you get my point.

Why not just take only one pure subject, the formless I AM and just watch...carefully eliminating everything the I AM is not...until the I AM reveals itself as the Absolute?

 

Ugh.

The whole point is to land on pure I.

You can do that by bypassing the I AM (which is the root of the ego I) again, both nisargadatta and ramana mentioned this. Ramana calls it the i-thought. Robert Adams talks about it, Rupert Spira talks about it. Rupert spira tells you to ignore the I AM and go directly to objectless awareness which is not AN OBJECT. I AM is an object appearing in awareness.

OR you can put attention on the I AM until it dissolves which will reveal the PURE I.

Do some research!

The feeling of a ME the feeling of an I is the I AM, it's an object in awareness. many can't go directly to pure awareness so they meditate on the I AM.

I find it very easy to land directly on pure awareness which is objectless... in the pure I there is no I AM object.

If you can't go directly to pure awareness that is your problem. but know the difference.

[Blissout]

21 minutes ago, cetus56 said:

@Blissout @Preetom  Nisargadatta may have used "I am" interchangeably.

One quote is: "stay in the I am and in doing so trancend it".

And in another quote:  Do not bother about anything you want, or think, or do, just stay put in the thought and feeling, ‘I am’, focusing ‘I am’ firmly in your mind. All kinds of experience may come to you – remain unmoved in the knowledge that all perceivable is transient and only the ‘I am’ endures. 

I AM meditation is fine! but it's for beginners. once you can recognize pure objectless awareness, there is no need for I AM.