Author Topic: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"  (Read 10762 times)

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Re: Turning the attention toward awareness
« Reply #25 on: December 21, 2015, 10:41:36 AM »
Well said. I, too, enjoy reading and assimilating your points of view. Thank you Attachless.

Middleway

  • Moderator
  • Just be a witness.
    • Vipassana as taught by Mr. Goenka - Switched to Shamatha
Re: Re: Turning the attention toward awareness
« Reply #26 on: December 21, 2015, 11:13:15 AM »
When we are aware of one thing (sense object) and not aware of others, it is called single pointed concentration. When I focus on a feeling, I lose awareness of my breath and body. Of course, it does not mean that my body does not exist when I am only aware of my feeling to exclusion of everything else. But bending/stretching single pointed concentration to a so-called "Presence" is speculation and not direct experience.
Take everything I say with a grain of salt.

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2015, 02:03:03 PM »
As we all know, the Multiverse is filled from top to bottom with invisible things that are very powerful and very real: magnetism, gravity, cosmic rays, most types of light, sound waves, electricity, radio waves and on and on. In fact, physicists and astronomers all around the world say that dark energy and dark matter -- which are invisible and cannot be directly detected, but which casts influences on all matter -- make-up 95% of the entire Universe.

Physics is an incomplete science - NONE of the theories give an adequate explanation of phenomena, though some are close enough approximations to be useful in the development of technologies and some predictions.

To say that physicists and astronomers all around the world agree on anything is untrue and meaningless. The one thing they agree upon is that the theories are transitory, incomplete and do not fully explain the universe. I.e. they are not accurate: hence the need to invent theories of "dark energy" and "dark matter" - to explain the fact the universe appears to be expanding faster and faster whereas Einstein's General Theory of Relativity does not extrapolate to this conclusion: actually it extrapolates to the opposite conclusion, that the universe should be slowing in expansion - so even this General Theory is incomplete and wrong, though it has some uses in technology and some predictive ability, within certain limitations.

Physics is a work in progress. There is no such global agreement as you propose.


I'm only reporting on my own first-hand, direct, ongoing experiences using Vipassana-based meditation techniques.

You claim that your "Presence" exists even in deep sleep although you do not have "direct experience" of it at that moment. It is your belief or speculation. is it not?

Yes, this is total speculation.

.... I identified with the "no self" experience, ....


I've truly embraced it and I understand "no self".
....

And so, off the top of my head, if I can symbolically give it a modest number, I imagine that I've contemplated and experienced the "no self" thing, millions of times over nearly a half a century of daily meditation.

So, "(You) identified with the no-self experience", "(You) embrace it", "(You) understand" 'no self'? This is not a no-self or not-self or non-self experience. It contains self and clinging/attachment/identification. It all sounds very egotistical - especially when you feel this need, again to give weight to your experience, by claiming to have experienced no self "millions of times".

Let's take a conservative estimate that you have experienced this "no self" just one million times, with no plural. Averaging your meditation at 4.5 hours per day for 365 days a year for 45 years means that you have spent approximately 74,000 hours meditating. Based on the conservative estimate of one million experiences of "no self" this equates to 13 such experiences in every hour of meditation, or once every four and a half minutes.

...
I just notice it and let it go ... like everything else.

Clearly this is not the case. You cling to it strongly: "Millions of times", "45 years of meditation". There is much clinging in your posting, little letting go.

Through my continual first-hand experiencesm within daily meditations of 3 to 6 hours, spanning the last 20 years, I now believe that the Presence is a real thing.

Your belief is meaningless. It creates no reality to the capitalised presence except in your own mind. You are kidding yourself. You are creating a solid thing from fleeting experience. Again, much clinging.

I'm delighted to hear that "nobody will have a problem." That's fantastic! I really feel welcome here. Thanks Middleway.

This kind of sarcastic and ego-filled comment does not win friends:

If I may translate, what you are saying is essentially that GOD exists even though we cannot see Him or talk to Him and that if I get my mind completely quiet and still, I will then feel "His Presence". I suggest you check out forums on "advaita" where your posts will be appreciated more.

....
I've been meditating for 45 years, 3 to 6 hours of meditation each and every day, and have practicing either straight-up by-the-book Vipassana, or a style of it for 40 years. During the first 5 years of meditation, I practiced classic Zen.
...

I've been meditating for 45 years, 3 to 6 hours of meditation each and every day, and have practicing either straight-up by-the-book Vipassana, or a style of it for 40 years. During the first 5 years of meditation, I practiced classic Zen.

You are invited to read my introduction as a member of the forum to learn that I've been meditating for 45 years, 3 to 6 hours each and every day, most of the years spent in straight-up Vipassna or vipassana-based techniques.

It sounds very egotistical when you repeat this mantra over and over again to try and give weight to your opinions, theories and beliefs.

To be honest, from your posting and our exchange of private messages about your posting, I think you have either been mistaken in your practice for 45 years or missed the point of practice.

You may have merely been self-hypnotising for 45 years and/or building this strong ego that feels a need to justify itself with the mantra "I have been practicing for 45 years".

When I asked you not to link to your blog and especially as you sold things on your blog, you denied selling things. When I sent you a link to your store you deleted it even though I plainly told you that doing so would still not make it OK to link to your blog.

I find myself in agreement with Middleway that your understanding may be better suited to forums on advaita. I see little possibility that you are likely to change your approach to practice, accept that you might have spent 74,000 hours doing it wrong, clinging rather than letting go, building ego and attachment rather than cutting the roots, practicing reification rather than developing true insight (Vipassana).
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #28 on: December 21, 2015, 02:08:01 PM »
...
Other than that, I think anything being said after this point is bound to be repitition, as I think we`ve already weeded out all possibilities regarding this discussion, and everything else is going to become a philosophical, principle-based etc. discussion ....

We have this on the homepage for good reason:

Quote
The primary purpose of this meditation forum is to help each other with practice related issues - intellectual debate of unresolvable differences and speculation and theory is not beneficial on the path.
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Goofaholix

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
    • Theravada / Insight Meditation
Re: Re: Turning the attention toward awareness
« Reply #29 on: December 21, 2015, 02:29:38 PM »
I've been meditating for 45 years, 3 to 6 hours of meditation each and every day, and have practicing either straight-up by-the-book Vipassana, or a style of it for 40 years. During the first 5 years of meditation, I practiced classic Zen.

It's not just about doing time, but yes we are well aware.

I'm only reporting on my own first-hand, direct, ongoing experiences using Vipassana-based meditation techniques.

If that's the case could you talk a bit about which Vipassana technique were you practicing at the time you first realised "the Presence"? under which teacher?  Did you report it to your teacher?  how did that go?  What Vipassana principles/techniques did you apply as you experienced "the Presence"?

My point of view is closer to Einstien's, as expressed in his quote below.

The difference is that Einstein doesn't create an entity out of it and he hasn't given it a name, he refers to it as an emotion, a feeling, and a sense of wonder.  I think he is closer to Vipassana than you are.

So what we know about "the Presence" so far is that it is not the mental faculty of awareness, and it is not God, it is always there even when we aren't aware of it just like underfloor insulation, it is not subject to impermanence and conditionality.  Does that about sum it up? 

What is it's purpose?  Can it free us from craving, aversion, and delusion, from Dukkha?  If not what does it have to do with Vipassana?

p340

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2015, 10:05:21 PM »
I truly love this forum.
Metta p

Attachless

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
    • Vipassana
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #31 on: December 22, 2015, 02:45:52 AM »
...
Other than that, I think anything being said after this point is bound to be repitition, as I think we`ve already weeded out all possibilities regarding this discussion, and everything else is going to become a philosophical, principle-based etc. discussion ....

We have this on the homepage for good reason:

Quote
The primary purpose of this meditation forum is to help each other with practice related issues - intellectual debate of unresolvable differences and speculation and theory is not beneficial on the path.

That`s what I´m sayin  :P
to be or not to be - one hardly notices the subtlety

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #32 on: December 22, 2015, 01:16:08 PM »
I truly love this forum.
Metta p

What an interesting response to this rather weird thread!

That`s what I´m sayin  :P

I know you know that :) ... just that someone else seemed to think playing games like this would get somewhere.

Anyway now the nonsense has been dissected and Goofaholix has asked for clarification that person seems to have left the building.
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #33 on: December 22, 2015, 02:26:19 PM »
Other than that, I think anything being said after this point is bound to be repitition, as I think we`ve already weeded out all possibilities regarding this discussion, and everything else is going to become a philosophical, principle-based etc. discussion (although I enjoy it, I must say I have made freedom with great mystery, so I will not even attempt to go beyond this point in regards to my own practice (as your experiences are your experiences and you are free to express them, as many have done so in the past too, obviously, and have come to similiar conclusions)). May have to do with my allergy to beliefs (which sometimes turns out to be more harmful than it does good, too. That`s how unbelief-able I am :-P haha).

Will follow with interest tho. :-)

That is a brilliant response Attachless! I like that you are unbelief-able ... and open minded.

Following along with your suggestion to not be repetitive (except for one thing -- see next paragraph below), here we go ...

Please know that I'm only reporting and describing MY direct, first-hand, continuous experiences, and my understandings, about MY meditations. I'm not reporting on your experiences, or telling you what you have experienced, or how you should interpret your experiences. I'm not challenging the truth of anyone's experiences, conclusions, pathways or beliefs ... or the unbelief-able orientation that Attachless enjoys. I'm very happy that you have experiences that might be totally different than mine, and that your understandings are different than mine. I love that! I am in total harmony with that. I encourage you and everyone to keep meditating on the Vispassana paths.
 
 
Wide-awake Out-of-Body Experiences
while doing Vispassana Meditation (VM)


This is a report about the first-hand experiences that I've had hundreds of times while meditating. This is not about experiences that I've had while dreaming, or day dreaming, or when I'm in the state of awareness the floats between being awake and asleep. This is while I'm wide awake and brilliantly alert doing Vispassana-based meditation. This report condenses the OB experiences into one place. If I use the words "you" or "we" or "your" ... please know that they are just figures-of-speech, as I'm truly only talking about My experiences. I use those words to make my sentences and concepts flow, in the best way I can. OK ... here we go ...
 
A VM session begins and I'm wide awake, relaxed and fascinated.

For me, there is no effort to quieting the mind -- it is instantly silent. The reason this can happen, is because my center-most identity is the spacious and empty state of being. It is not that thoughts and sensations don't come up -- of course they do! -- but I'm utterly unattached and not interested in them while meditating.

OK ... I am sitting there in bliss-filled silence ... and let's say, I feel a tingling in the foot, or a slight current of tension in the back of the neck. In true Vispassana tradition, it is noticed and let go. Even the noticing that I noticed it, is let go. Anything that floats into simple awareness is noted and let go. I'm wide awake as a center of awareness in which consciousness flows in and out effortlessly, within the vast theater of emptiness, within. All is well.

Then without my intention, effort, or will ... it is noticed that the center of wide-awake awareness is moving up ... up above its normal "location" within. Still, I remain totally relaxed ... and let that observation go. It's no different than letting anything go, and just as easy.

It is noticed that the "center of wide-awake awareness" is still observing and letting go of bodily sensations, thoughts, feelings, and so called "external" noises, even tho it is a foot or two above the physical head. It is functioning normally. As taught in my Vispassana training and practiced for decades, I stay cool and utterly calm. It is absolutely easy to let go of the knowledge and consciousness that the "center of wide-awake awareness" is above the head of the physical body, below.

The "center of wide-awake awareness" rises to the top of the room. All consciousness during this meditation session is flowing through it ... and all of it is let go without effort, with the greatest of ease.

It is noted and let go, that the wide-awake meditation experience when out of the body is absolutely spectacular! All normal thoughts have utterly ceased from rising. Relaxation is supreme -- more thorough and complete than when in the body. The whole universe being perceived is filled with tranquility. The "center of wide-awake awareness" is floating in one moment -- the Now -- and consciousness, sensations, time and space float by.

Still, I'm connected to the body and can feel and let go of any of its sensations that arise. In fact, following along with my VM letting go skills, the entire body is now seen as a sensation ... and it is let go. No problem.

The meditation and clarity when fully awake and out of the body is remarkable. I let that understanding go, too.

I describe the "center of wide-awake awareness" as "functional" ... as it has the natural ability to move left, right, up, down, here, there -- without thinking about it, and with no effort what-so-ever. It can also re-enter the body instantly ... or slowly ... anytime it pleases. And it has the ability to select topics in consciousness to experience ... then release them, and instantly return to the spacious, silent, awake, state of being.

The feeling when out of the body is stunningly natural ... often feeling far more natural and certainly more relaxed, than when the center of awareness is in the body. And in true Vispassana fashion ... that feeling is released.

When brilliantly awake and out of the body, I notice that the consciousness that's expressing existence is constantly changing, and its floating within the center of awareness's "view" so to speak. The center of awareness is in one moment -- the Now -- and the center of awareness allows all of the consciousness and sensations of Creation to rise, flow, and disappear with the absolute ease. The understanding that the "center of wide-awake awareness" is designed to be a consciousness experiencer, is noted, not judged as being either true or false ... then released, as well.

Finally, there comes a moment when the "center of wide-awake awareness" feels the need to re-enter the physical body ... and instantly -- boing! .. it is here in the body, totally at home, feeling relaxed and refreshed. All is well.

I open my eyes, get up, make coffee, and go to work.
 
 
« Last Edit: December 22, 2015, 03:00:05 PM by Highwhistler »

p340

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #34 on: December 22, 2015, 03:09:28 PM »
lol

p340

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #35 on: December 22, 2015, 03:13:42 PM »
I truly love this forum.
Metta p

What an interesting response to this rather weird thread!



The weirdness is highly entertaining! Hope you can keep the sisyphos work going..

p340

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #36 on: December 22, 2015, 03:19:50 PM »
To clarify: It's because of your ongoing effort to defuse like a saint. I learn a lot. Really. And somehow still it feels for me like a spiritual Monty Python sketch! So it's humorous learning. The best! Thats why felt the urge to tell you: i love this forum!
« Last Edit: December 22, 2015, 07:09:42 PM by p340 »

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #37 on: December 22, 2015, 08:26:58 PM »
...
Wide-awake Out-of-Body Experiences
while doing Vispassana Meditation (VM)

...

Have you investigated the Buddha's teachings on Jhana? These experiences you are touching on definitely have some of the aspects of Jhana, however, without the proper Jhana factors established there seems to be a) an incomplete fulfilment and b) a lack of direction.

This seems to lead you to interpret these experiences as "out of body" experiences. If you concentrate on establishing Jhana factors in proper structure you may find there is more to discover and no need to interpret the experience the way you do.

I notice you didn't answer Goofaholix questions. This leads me to wonder how long you have been practicing alone - i.e. when you last went on a retreat and explored your practice with someone more experienced than yourself? I suspect a long time ago as you have missed some of the steps on the path and self-interpret everything into your own (and borrowed) language from other practices and schools.
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Goofaholix

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
    • Theravada / Insight Meditation
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #38 on: December 22, 2015, 11:22:00 PM »
I understand you first started practicing Vipassana in 1975 after several years practicing Zen.  Those must have been interesting times and I don't know about others but I'd be interested to hear anecdotes from those days.

What Zen approach were you practicing? who was your teacher? how did you hear about Vipassana?  what made you decide to change?  who were your teachers? where did you practice? did you meet any interesting people along the way?

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #39 on: December 23, 2015, 05:51:11 PM »
I notice you didn't answer Goofaholix questions.

Thanks for the responses Mathew, Goofaholix, and p340.

I do not answer all the questions, as I have limited free time and other primary interests that I'm devoted to. I calculate which topics would be most useful to touch upon, and then make the translations into words from my continuous, direct, first-hand experiences. Constructing the messages takes some time for me, as I'm not a skilled translator of inner experience, and not good with the written word. I have less free time this week as compared to last week, as I work at my urban gardens company which is dependent on the weather. This week it is unseasonably warm and I'm getting as much work done outside as possible, before the snow flies.

Most people who follow institutionalized meditation paths have listened to their teachers well, and have read books and websites that mirror their traditions. And so when they talk with their friends, or create messages on forums like this, they repeat the accepted ideas quickly. Messaging happens rapidly for them because they are sharing pre-packaged concepts, guidelines and teachings that they have copied into their minds ... and they simply paste into their communications. The content of their communications are largely a copy of the stuff that's accepted by the community that they are embedded in, and well inside the boundaries that their institutions expect them to patrol and guard.

On the other hand, my messages are reportings of direct, genuine, first-hand experiences that are original -- to me. Tho on a platform of Vispassana, my experiences are not limited to the boundaries, teachers, and teachings of any tradition.

With yesterday's message, I decided to share an intro to my first-hand, wide awake, out-of-body experiences as I figured that to be an important and entertaining topic that will interest this community. And, understanding the mechanics of how OBEs happens for me would be helpful to understanding my future posts on:
  • what is consciousness? (I offer an answer)
  • the raw materials that make-up consciousness
  • the nature and function of the Attention
  • the nature, home and abilities of the "Center of Wide-Awake Awareness"
  • the anatomy of the "Center of Wide-Awake Awareness"
  • easy, highly effective, VM techniques that are not shared with the masses
  • the structure and function of the Inner Theater
  • the inner Quantum Field Library of psychic content and potentials

(Btw: I'm looking for another symbolic phrase for "quantum field" as I see how it makes some people roll their eyes and freak-out ... but I've not found a better phrase yet. I will.)

Yes, in the intro to my OBE experiences, I think that most Buddhist scholars, teachers, monks and the Buddha himself would jump off their meditation cushions and shout "That's a jhana state dude!!!"

I'm not saying it is a jhana, or are not ... and I really don't care. But, the set-up, mechanics and experiences seem similar to what most Buddhist researchers, and Buddhist meditators with similar first-hand experiences, would describe as jhana-like. To me they are just repeatable, authentic, first-hand, very natural and fundamental experiences that involve being brilliantly wide-awake, supremely relaxed, absolutely pure in concentration, delight in being formless, and utterly detached from the rising and disappearing of all consciousness.

Yesterday's message of my OBE experiences was just an intro -- that's all and nothing more. There are more levels and spheres to "the jhana's" as some may call them, that I experience and may share in the future.

But, I'm slowly learning from the community that it's best to take baby steps when sharing my experiences that are not within the classic VM teachings ... those teachings that have been distributed to the masses down through the centuries.

Thanks again for your thoughtful messages.
 
« Last Edit: December 23, 2015, 06:05:08 PM by Highwhistler »

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #40 on: December 23, 2015, 07:05:04 PM »
I do not answer all the questions, as I have limited free time and other primary interests that I'm devoted to. I calculate which topics would be most useful to touch upon, and then make the translations into words from my continuous, direct, first-hand experiences.
I didn't want to get involved in this thread, and not to ruffle any feathers, but it doesn't sound like you've grasped the concept of a discussion forum. You've made some very long, wordy posts since joining, so it comes across as a bit disingenuous to make claims about a lack of time and desire to talk to other's questions or points, many of which would require a minimal amount of time or energy to respond to. This isn't just a sound board where you can just avoid points you don't want to talk to, and present yourself and your observations in a way that avoids any sort of scrutiny. Doing so brings into question the legitimacy of your claims and runs counter to the spirit of the forum.

I'm sure more information might make things clearer, but it sounds like what you've been doing is a highly subjective, personalised practice that is difficult to relate to for the average other forum member.

Pacific Flow

  • Member
  • Write something about yourself here
    • Goenka Vipassana
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #41 on: December 25, 2015, 04:16:33 AM »
No offense Highwhistler, but it all sounds like a made up marketing story to me and not all that genuine. You are trying to sell something, maybe get yourself established as a teacher and create followers. I might be wrong, but that's how i feel about your postings.

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #42 on: December 26, 2015, 08:35:03 AM »
I didn't want to get involved in this thread, and not to ruffle any feathers, but it doesn't sound like you've grasped the concept of a discussion forum. You've made some very long, wordy posts since joining, so it comes across as a bit disingenuous to make claims about a lack of time and desire to talk to other's questions or points, many of which would require a minimal amount of time or energy to respond to. This isn't just a sound board where you can just avoid points you don't want to talk to, and present yourself and your observations in a way that avoids any sort of scrutiny. Doing so brings into question the legitimacy of your claims and runs counter to the spirit of the forum.

I'm sure more information might make things clearer, but it sounds like what you've been doing is a highly subjective, personalised practice that is difficult to relate to for the average other forum member.

Thank you Dharmic Tui. No feathers are ruffled.

I thought that a forum was for people to share their ideas, to read about everyone's ideas, and then to discuss things freely. To me, "freely" means as much or as little as each person desires. That's what I am doing.

You, everyone, and I, are free to share our ideas, to read and assimilate other people's messages, and to have any discussions that we please.

I, personally, am not a traffic cop for your ideas, or a judge for your communications, and I do not say how or if you communicate at all. But you are certainly welcome to judge my communications, or say that they are authentic or not, or that you do not appreciate my angles of visions or communication styles. You are welcome to do all that. I take no offense.

I love being free. And to me, you are certainly free to do, or to say, or to discuss anything, in any way, anytime that you so desire.

It is fine with me if a few people can relate to what I'm sharing, and perhaps a majority do not. I will still do my best with my communications.

Thanks again.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:20:53 AM by Highwhistler »

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #43 on: December 26, 2015, 08:51:51 AM »
No offense Highwhistler, but it all sounds like a made up marketing story to me and not all that genuine. You are trying to sell something, maybe get yourself established as a teacher and create followers. I might be wrong, but that's how i feel about your postings.

Hi Pacific Flow. I take no offense.

Whether you believe it or not, what I'm sharing is not a marketing story. My messages are authentic, truthful reportings of my own, direct, continuing, first-hand experiences.

You and everyone are welcome to have your own experiences, and to me, your experiences are as equally real and as valid as mine.

You and everyone, are no higher and lower than I. In my mind and heart, we are on the same level. Being on the same level, I have zero interest in "followers." I am interested in people being a lamp unto themselves. I appreciate when people sit under their own Bodhi tree, and have their own experiences.

I have read many of your messages on the forum, and I appreciate that you are compassionate. The way that you share your ideas is clear and natural-feeling, even on esoteric subjects.

Sorry if my style of communication is not your cup of tea. I will continue to my best.

Thanks for the message.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:19:20 AM by Highwhistler »

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #44 on: December 26, 2015, 09:10:15 AM »
 
Again: Please remember that I'm only reporting and describing MY direct, first-hand, continuous experiences, and the understandings about my Vipassana-based meditations. This is my direct insight knowledge. I'm not reporting on your experiences. I'm not telling you what you are experiencing, or what you should experience, or how you should interpret your experiences. I'm not challenging the truth of anyone's experiences, conclusions, pathways or beliefs. I am not judging or evaluating your first hand experiences, your messages, or your styles of communication.

I'm very happy that you have experiences that might be totally different than mine, and that your direct knowledge might be different than mine. I love that we are unique. I'm in total harmony with that. I encourage you and everyone to keep meditating on the Vispassana-based paths of your choosing.

Please know that in my messages, when I use the words "you" or "your", or talk in the 3rd person, it's only to make my messages flow a little better. Actually, everything that I'm sharing is only about my experiences.
.
.

The experience of emptiness

When a meditator is completely detached from body and external sensations, as well as detached from the ebb and flow of all conscious thoughts, dreams, feelings, imagination ... s/he floats in silence, utterly concentrated on emptiness, entangled with emptiness, being emptiness -- INDEFINITELY.

The experience of emptiness is not a fleeting thing. Emptiness appears to be standing still, while the consciousness that expresses the rest of Creation, arises and disappears on top of it.

Even tho emptiness is sometimes called "the uncreated" by some, it is actually a natural part of Creation that is everywhere -- outside and inside. Emptiness can be experienced. It is part of the Universe. It is part of a meditator's inner ecosystem. It is the most common quality in the human psychic universe ... and it is also the most ignored, the most under-appreciated, and the most undervalued.

Emptiness is experienced by being aware of the consciousness that express it ... and it is expressed with the qualities that we experience: boundless spaciousness, silence, acceptance, timelessness, tranquility, neutrality, infinity ... The reason that we can be aware of emptiness is that consciousness is expressing it ... otherwise we would not be aware of its existence, of course.

The experience of emptiness is not limited to the time spent in meditation. It's experienced everywhere in daily life. It is the fabric, the very foundation of all conscious experience. The meditator experiences it while walking, working, gardening, watching tv and movies, driving, making love, in the unfolding moments of ordinary life.

She experiences emptiness in all so-called "material objects" ... in trees, flowers, the soil, mountains, rocks, animals, insects, stars, trees, the space between objects, in books, pens and paper, computers, her own body, mind, feelings -- literally throughout Creation. It's even experienced as the vast background, while we are listening and talking, and in touch and feelings.

The experience of emptiness is not special. It is utterly normal, common, ordinary, completely natural.

It is not something that is rarely had. It is not a "big wow" experience. It is not the exclusive property of holy people and spiritual-types. It's anywhere and everywhere, and part of the normal, average, daily experience had by saints and sinners ... and all of us in between. Babies, toddlers, people on their death beds are experiencing it. EVERYONE experiences it -- but few there be that focus their attention on it for a continuous length of time, value it, and illuminate the experience.

Again: the meditator can be focused on emptiness, and be emptiness, in an unbroken concentrated, continuous way -- indefinitely.
 
 
The structure of the emptiness experience

In my ongoing first-hand experience of emptiness, the 2 main observations as to the structure of the emptiness experience are:

1. The awareness of emptiness, with no observer.

2. An observer is aware of emptiness.

To a meditation researcher like me, s/he allows both experiences to freely exist, and she is unattached from both. She happily experiences emptiness, with and without an observer, again and again -- anywhere, anytime, throughout her life. She does not give more value to one or the other, but is happy to have the experience of both -- millions and trillions of times -- forever.

In the totality of my first-hand, ongoing, eyewitness, direct experience ... #2 is the clearest, most accurate truth.

To the Buddha, he said that #1 is the clearest, most accurate truth.

That's perfectly fine with me. I welcome everyone to have their own experiences and have observations and conclusions that are totally different than mine ... or the same, or completely different than the Buddha's.

You can easily experience both versions ... just stop your mind and observe the experiences. Don't just read about it, and then follow in lock-step with what a teacher is saying, or with what I'm saying -- experience emptiness for yourself -- continually. Be a lamp unto yourself. Again: these are not big-wow moments. They are the most common and ordinary first-hand meditative, and daily life experiences.


Flickering emptiness

In my experience there's a deeper level of concentration within the sphere of emptiness:

As the emptiness is fully concentrated upon (with zero effort, zero distraction, and with absolute relaxation), it is experienced as flickering on and off, countless times a second.

And so there's an awareness of emptiness in a fraction of a second, and nothing in the next fraction of a second. The nothing is like, symbolically speaking, a "black hole". It can be portrayed in a flow of words like this:

... > emptiness > black hole > emptiness > black hole > emptiness > black hole > emptiness > black hole > ...

In my experience, I tunnel into the black hole experience and arrive at these possibilities:

1. The awareness of a black hole, with no observer.

2. An observer is aware of a black hole.
(That is: the observer is aware and it experiences a black hole)

Both experiences exist. I allow both to rise into awareness and disappear, freely -- forever.

In the totality of my first-hand, ongoing, eyewitness, direct experience ... #2 is the clearest, most accurate truth.

Awareness of the black hole only exists on the front end and back end of the experience ... like, when entering and leaving the extremely brief experience.

Again: I welcome you to have the same, or different experiences ... and I consider your experiences to be equally as valid and real as mine.
 
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:22:08 AM by Highwhistler »

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #45 on: December 26, 2015, 09:12:43 AM »
I thought that a forum was for people to share their ideas, to read about everyone's ideas, and then to discuss things freely. That's what I am doing.
I guess there is "freely" and then there is "openly". You are clearly concealing information where it suits you, as you have typed three reasonably long posts, without addressing other people's questions or comments. People are free to be as open or guarded as they want to on here, I guess things might change though when you make some fairly bold claims right out of the gate. It just comes across like you're talking at the community rather than with it.

One recurring observation I have heard from those with more wisdom and experience than myself, is that true progress is noted by one becoming just a little bit less selfish. To me this would include being more transparent with one's self, but obviously this is me speaking from my own subjectivity.

I don't think there's a question you could ask me that I wouldn't give some sort of answer to.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:17:20 AM by Dharmic Tui »

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #46 on: December 26, 2015, 09:33:03 AM »
I don't think there's a question you could ask me that I wouldn't give some sort of answer to.

You are doing a good job with your messages. You are very open and clear with your points of view. I'm reading and assimilating all of your messages. You are not guarded, and you communicate with an intuitive gut instinct. I like that.

In the earliest scriptures of Buddhism, it seems like the Buddha was a fellow who went on, and on, and on. And so I feel that we are in good company, when some of us choose to post longer messages, from time to time.

I have no questions for you right now, but I may in the future. Thank you.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:41:23 AM by Highwhistler »

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #47 on: December 26, 2015, 09:39:02 AM »
I guess the question begs, why are you so guarded? Like why reveal half a backstory, yet withhold the rest? You have mentioned lack of time, however that is not the case, as you could have used the energy you have used in the last hour to respectfully respond to others. So there is a lack of desire, or an uncomfortableness with the questions. Maybe both.

But good to have you here, what you aren't saying is just as informative as what you are saying.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 09:41:05 AM by Dharmic Tui »

Highwhistler

  • Guest
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #48 on: December 26, 2015, 09:59:28 AM »
I guess the question begs, why are you so guarded? Like why reveal half a backstory, yet withhold the rest? You have mentioned lack of time, however that is not the case, as you could have used the energy you have used in the last hour to respectfully respond to others. So there is a lack of desire, or an uncomfortableness with the questions. Maybe both.

But good to have you here, what you aren't saying is just as informative as what you are saying.

Hi again Dharmic Tui.

I believe that I've posted one of the longest, most complete, introductions that have ever been shared by any member of this forum: http://www.vipassanaforum.net/forum/index.php/topic,1711.450.html

I looked for your own introduction, but could not find it. Please share a link to it, as I would love to know more about you. I'm sure your bio is far more transparent, better written, clear, and in greater detail than mine. In advance: thank you!

I have a job that is dependent on the weather. It has been unseasonably warm, and so I have to work outside in my gardens to get the garden beds ready for spring. I will have more time when the snow flies, but right now, I have less free time.

And so I select the topics that I feel are most beneficial for me to discuss, and then I simply write about those topics -- translating into words, from my own first-hand experiences.

Now, you may think that I'm not doing a good job in what I have selected to create messages about. In fact, if you were in my shoes, you would select different topics. If you were me, you would communicate in different ways.

That's OK. I don't mind that you would do things differently, if you were me.

Thank you saying that it's "good to have you here." I feel welcome.



PS: I own an organic urban vegetable gardens company in the U.S. I can't give you a link to its website in the postings on the forum, as some folks see that as marketing and promotion. However, I believe it would be OK to do it in a PM. Is that correct? And so if anyone would like to have a link to my urban gardens website, and receive photos of the 2015 gardening season, just send me a PM. That may help verify to you that I can be busy, from time-to-time, working on other projects that are important to me ... if you need proof.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2015, 10:16:18 AM by Highwhistler »

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Highwhistler's views on "How does one "look" within?"
« Reply #49 on: December 26, 2015, 10:02:59 AM »
If I write you this bio, you will openly answer others' questions? I'm prepared to do this if this is your condition.

I'm also extremely busy, but I've never cited time as a reason why I won't respond to others.