What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums
User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6380
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Sighclone » Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:00 am

enigma -

Welcome back, not that you ever really "left." Their loss (the banning forum) is our gain. And you and I have "clashed" over the last year. And all of it was civil, if occasionally pointed and direct. We are never opposed to civilized disagreement here. I firmly believe that refining pointers is the result of articulate, heartfelt disagreement. Many here speak from their experience as distilled through their travels in consciuosness. Those experiences differ as do the dimensions, "vibrational levels" (and I do not like that term, but it has some meaning) encountered. I cannot count the number of times I have read something to the effect "'Yada, yada, yada' was perfect for me -- thank you for that pointer." And many were yours.

My own personal path has been refined and exalted by your use of language, candor and sensitivity to others here. Thanks for hanging around!

Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce

User avatar
Mouse
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: Kyogle, Australia

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Mouse » Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:32 am

enigma wrote: To suggest that the subconscious (or thinking, not sure what you meant) can't stand the presence of your consciousness also makes no sense to me. Consciousness is always present whenever you are conscious. If what you mean is that noticing unconscious stuff makes it conscious, I'll buy that, though once noticed, it's not really possible for it to return again. I guess you mean thought returns when you stop meditating. Yeah, funny that.
So what I say is true in your experience.
I have been inspired by Barry Long's teaching and I write this so as to acknowledge my source of inspiration. It is a wonderful help, and it is a wonderful gift.

enigma
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:51 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by enigma » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:31 am

Mouse wrote:
enigma wrote: To suggest that the subconscious (or thinking, not sure what you meant) can't stand the presence of your consciousness also makes no sense to me. Consciousness is always present whenever you are conscious. If what you mean is that noticing unconscious stuff makes it conscious, I'll buy that, though once noticed, it's not really possible for it to return again. I guess you mean thought returns when you stop meditating. Yeah, funny that.
So what I say is true in your experience.
Sure, but the goal isn't to stop thought. It's more about noticing what it is that is aware of thought. Thought can't hide you from you. Thought isn't the problem, it's the attention to thought that keeps attention from falling back on itself.

enigma
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:51 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by enigma » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:33 am

Sighclone wrote:enigma -

Welcome back, not that you ever really "left." Their loss (the banning forum) is our gain. And you and I have "clashed" over the last year. And all of it was civil, if occasionally pointed and direct. We are never opposed to civilized disagreement here. I firmly believe that refining pointers is the result of articulate, heartfelt disagreement. Many here speak from their experience as distilled through their travels in consciuosness. Those experiences differ as do the dimensions, "vibrational levels" (and I do not like that term, but it has some meaning) encountered. I cannot count the number of times I have read something to the effect "'Yada, yada, yada' was perfect for me -- thank you for that pointer." And many were yours.

My own personal path has been refined and exalted by your use of language, candor and sensitivity to others here. Thanks for hanging around!

Andy
Andy, I thought I posted a response to this, but I don't see it, so something must have gone horribly wrong. Anyhoo, thanks. Nice to be back.

User avatar
Ananda
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:35 am
Location: Manchester, England
Contact:

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Ananda » Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:00 am

Thought can't hide you from you. Thought isn't the problem, it's the attention to thought that keeps attention from falling back on itself.
That's great.
:D

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6810
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Webwanderer » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:43 pm

enigma wrote: That's pretty good stuff, although I seem to have a issue here that I can't get past. This felt sense of self to which you refer is not Awareness as such. It appears in Awareness just as everything else does, right? You are aware of a felt sense of presence or existence. (To call it a sense of self already seems to personalize it, so I'm avoiding that but I don't pretend to know what you mean by it, and it's fine.) This sense of existence or 'I amness' arises with consciousness and leaves with it. 'Something' watches this come and go, and this is what is referred to as Awareness. This is prior to (more fundamental than) the sense of existence since you are aware of the arising and falling of that sense. That which is aware of this is your 'true nature'. Awareness itself.
I don't disagree with your take here, but allow me expound a bit on how I see it.

The separate self that that needs to be seen, is that part that is constituted of the belief systems that create our egoic identities. We are not the identifications held by our conditioned human mind. Once that is seen through however, a sense of self remains - and in its own context is separate in nature from the countless other conscious expressions engaged in life's experiences. Not in the sense of essential beingness and living origin (awareness), but in the context of unique perspective.

This seems self evident in the endless and ordinary experience of interacting with others. How could it be otherwise and yet continue to have experiences that reflect those different perspectives? Have any of us ever met two people, even two who appeared to be 'enlightened', who were totally identical in perspective? What can this tell us?

I realize that there has been much made of the basic state of Awareness; that all else is but object to that Original Subject, and to this I agree at its core. But that is not the whole story. There is the significance of Awareness 'of'. Now, the simple (and correct) argument is that that 'of' is the object, the created, the illusory. But if that is as far as we see, we would miss a great deal of what 'of' is. Call it original 'of'. That original 'of', infinite in its variety and potential expressions, is the unique perspective that is experienced as a separate self. It is what we all are as a unique being. It is - I Am. And while this 'self' consciousness of awareness, experienced through unique perspectives, may be at its source an object, that is not to say that it does not endure forever.

WW

Wesley
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:24 pm

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Wesley » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:45 pm

hi enigma,
the goal may not be to stop thought, but if it can be stopped by attention, by being still, isn't that a sign of something grand? If one can stop thought Now-

and Be the silent space they are-

that's surrender.

enigma
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:51 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by enigma » Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:45 pm

Webwanderer wrote:
enigma wrote: That's pretty good stuff, although I seem to have a issue here that I can't get past. This felt sense of self to which you refer is not Awareness as such. It appears in Awareness just as everything else does, right? You are aware of a felt sense of presence or existence. (To call it a sense of self already seems to personalize it, so I'm avoiding that but I don't pretend to know what you mean by it, and it's fine.) This sense of existence or 'I amness' arises with consciousness and leaves with it. 'Something' watches this come and go, and this is what is referred to as Awareness. This is prior to (more fundamental than) the sense of existence since you are aware of the arising and falling of that sense. That which is aware of this is your 'true nature'. Awareness itself.
I don't disagree with your take here, but allow me expound a bit on how I see it.

The separate self that that needs to be seen, is that part that is constituted of the belief systems that create our egoic identities. We are not the identifications held by our conditioned human mind. Once that is seen through however, a sense of self remains - and in its own context is separate in nature from the countless other conscious expressions engaged in life's experiences. Not in the sense of essential beingness and living origin (awareness), but in the context of unique perspective.

This seems self evident in the endless and ordinary experience of interacting with others. How could it be otherwise and yet continue to have experiences that reflect those different perspectives? Have any of us ever met two people, even two who appeared to be 'enlightened', who were totally identical in perspective? What can this tell us?

I realize that there has been much made of the basic state of Awareness; that all else is but object to that Original Subject, and to this I agree at its core. But that is not the whole story. There is the significance of Awareness 'of'. Now, the simple (and correct) argument is that that 'of' is the object, the created, the illusory. But if that is as far as we see, we would miss a great deal of what 'of' is. Call it original 'of'. That original 'of', infinite in its variety and potential expressions, is the unique perspective that is experienced as a separate self. It is what we all are as a unique being. It is - I Am. And while this 'self' consciousness of awareness, experienced through unique perspectives, may be at its source an object, that is not to say that it does not endure forever.

WW
I was with ya right up to the 'enduring forever' part. Which perspective is enduring forever; the perspective you had yesterday or the one you have today? Is there anything beneath this continually morphing perspective that endures?

enigma
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:51 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by enigma » Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:58 pm

Wesley wrote:hi enigma,
the goal may not be to stop thought, but if it can be stopped by attention, by being still, isn't that a sign of something grand? If one can stop thought Now-

and Be the silent space they are-

that's surrender.
Stopping thought is control, and control is not surrender. One may pick up a weapon and engage in battle (thinking), or one may furiously wave the white flag and call this surrender (stopping the thoughts) or one may walk off the battlefield (lose interest in thinking or stopping). THIS is surrender.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by karmarider » Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:28 pm

This is directed at Enigma, but I want to try to relate this to the actual inquiry.
Webwanderer wrote:...The separate self that that needs to be seen, is that part that is constituted of the belief systems that create our egoic identities. We are not the identifications held by our conditioned human mind. Once that is seen through however, a sense of self remains - and in its own context is separate in nature from the countless other conscious expressions engaged in life's experiences. Not in the sense of essential beingness and living origin (awareness), but in the context of unique perspective.
The inquiry bears this out. Identities remain. They just are not my identities. The my goes away.
Webwanderer wrote:This seems self evident in the endless and ordinary experience of interacting with others. How could it be otherwise and yet continue to have experiences that reflect those different perspectives? Have any of us ever met two people, even two who appeared to be 'enlightened', who were totally identical in perspective? What can this tell us?
The uniqueness of perspectives can come from the uniqueness of body-mind-memories. It doesn't necessarily predicate a unique sense of self. But I do agree that identities remain.
Webwanderer wrote:I realize that there has been much made of the basic state of Awareness; that all else is but object to that Original Subject, and to this I agree at its core. But that is not the whole story. There is the significance of Awareness 'of'. Now, the simple (and correct) argument is that that 'of' is the object, the created, the illusory. But if that is as far as we see, we would miss a great deal of what 'of' is. Call it original 'of'. That original 'of', infinite in its variety and potential expressions, is the unique perspective that is experienced as a separate self. It is what we all are as a unique being. It is - I Am. And while this 'self' consciousness of awareness, experienced through unique perspectives, may be at its source an object, that is not to say that it does not endure forever.

WW
Maybe it's a matter of terminology, but the "I am" does not endure forever. What remains is what always is, and that's Awareness, but it's impersonal. Just amness.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by karmarider » Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:44 pm

An important revelation that is falling out of this inquiry is insight into why it is that so many of us spend decades seeking. We seek through spiritual practices and beautifully woven spiritual theories, for decades, even lifetimes.

Many of the enlightened say that awakening is rather simple, when it happens. Many say that there isn't much difference between the unenlightened and enlightened, except a small but important shift in perspective.

The reason we get lost in seeking is that we never look. We do everything else, we even talk about looking, and we discuss what it might mean to look, and what will happen. We even discuss, very absurdly, that we shouldn't forget what we actually are when we are trying to see what we are not. Our practices don't work, they can't work, because it is the I which is practicing. Practices and theories do have some benefit--they seem to constrain the dualistic experience, and give us a stabilized state of imprisonment. Meditation, awareness, releasing, expounding on spiritual theories, spirituality and so on are still dream-state experiences of the "I". It's as if the "I" is trying to shift from egoic identities to Awareness.

What it seems to take is a willingness to drop everything I know and just look, normally, to see that I don't exist.

Wesley
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:24 pm

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Wesley » Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:36 pm

enigma wrote:
Wesley wrote:hi enigma,
the goal may not be to stop thought, but if it can be stopped by attention, by being still, isn't that a sign of something grand? If one can stop thought Now-

and Be the silent space they are-

that's surrender.
Enigma- Stopping thought is control, and control is not surrender. One may pick up a weapon and engage in battle (thinking), or one may furiously wave the white flag and call this surrender (stopping the thoughts) or one may walk off the battlefield (lose interest in thinking or stopping). THIS is surrender.
Awareness stops thought. Only awareness. Thought cannot stop thought. Awareness has no control in it. There are many ways to surrender. One way is to surrender to the present moment. The interest in thought is lost with this presence, or present moment awareness. And no thought.

What you have given is a conceptual understanding of surrender and no thought. It might happen as you say, but it isn't fixed in stone the way that you are claiming.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6810
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Webwanderer » Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:31 pm

WW wrote:And while this 'self' consciousness of awareness, experienced through unique perspectives, may be at its source an object, that is not to say that it does not endure forever.
enigma wrote:I was with ya right up to the 'enduring forever' part. Which perspective is enduring forever; the perspective you had yesterday or the one you have today? Is there anything beneath this continually morphing perspective that endures?
karmarider wrote:Maybe it's a matter of terminology, but the "I am" does not endure forever. What remains is what always is, and that's Awareness, but it's impersonal. Just amness.
Thanks for you comments.

Just to be clear, I did not say that a perspective did endure forever. My suggestion was that just because it was an object, possibly an original object, did not require that it must ultimately disappear. Maybe it must, but that is yet above my pay grade of understanding. I think that, based on what little experience one can have in a single lifetime in physical form, one can see that perspective evolves. However the self sense that animates that limited perspective endures through the evolution we can see. Who's to say what is the longevity of that self aware evolving perspective? Certainly not I. In the same light I cannot actually say it must eventually cease. I simply don't know, and I would suggest that those who claim to know may well be guessing based on logically created beliefs.

And KR, my take is that "I am" gets its "I" and its "Amness" from Awareness. It's simply made infinitely unique by the possibilities of Divine perspective.

WW

Ralph
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:08 am

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by Ralph » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:01 pm

karmarider wrote :
An important revelation that is falling out of this inquiry is insight into why it is that so many of us spend decades seeking. We seek through spiritual practices and beautifully woven spiritual theories, for decades, even lifetimes.

The reason we get lost in seeking is that we never look.
Perhaps the reason we get lost in seeking is because we are always looking but not for truth because the truth will put an end to the seeker and the seeking. As enigma put it so beautiful on another thread, “the seeker and the seeking, is a lie”.
enigma wrote :
The heart of the question is, why am I working hard to realize Truth if all it's going to do is put an end to me? Any 'want' is based on the belief in the separate identity which is looking for a better experience, and so the whole notion that the one wanting actually wants the Truth is false. This is how Truth can remain hidden in plain sight, because nobody is actually looking for it. It's important to begin here; The search for Truth is formed entirely from the delusion that one is not already that, and without that delusion, there could be no search. There's not one mind identified person in the world who has the slightest interest in finding Truth. Mind identification is the basis for the search as well as the denial of the Truth that is allegedly being sought.

The seeking has been going on for the entire lifetime in some form or another, and spiritual seeking is just another form. All of the seeking needs to stop, which is actually the point of the seeking. The goal is to reach a point of utter futility. The seeker is not looking for Truth and can't find Truth and simply needs to stop looking for something else. This is not to be turned into another method of seeking.

When the seeker asks, 'What's in it for me? Why would I want this Truth thing?', the light is beginning to dawn. There's nothing at all in it for the Truth seeker. The seeker and the seeking, is a lie.”
It may dawn on you one day that if you already are , then why continue with seeking. The 'seeker and the seeking' now just gets in the way, it becomes self serving.

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: What is the most direct way to realize "I" does not exist?

Post by karmarider » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:16 pm

Ralph wrote: Perhaps the reason we get lost in seeking is because we are always looking but not for truth because the truth will put an end to the seeker and the seeking. As enigma put it so beautiful on another thread, “the seeker and the seeking, is a lie”.
...
It may dawn on you one day that if you already are , then why continue with seeking. The 'seeker and the seeking' now just gets in the way, it becomes self serving.
Right, Enigma's explanations are indeed very clear, and so are yours.

But even when it is accepted that seeker and seeking are a lies, and the recognition has not yet dawned, then what choice is there but to either stop or look? Look with the view you don't exist, without expectation or anticipation. Look, as in look normally, not trying to reach any special meditative state or experience.

If there a more direct way than this, I'd like to know.

Post Reply