MiracleMan

Doesn't Self-Inquiry Imply a Doer?

16 posts in this topic

Who is the one inquiring?

How does any kind of practice or exercise or movement produce stillness?

Wouldn't every second of meditation be used to imply a doer?  Same with inquiry, it implies there is someone asking the question right?

If separation isn't possible, then how could any activity (meditation, masturbation, running, self-inquiry, eating, shitting) bring about a desired result?

It's as if we believe there is something magical or special about meditation compared to other activities.

It's such a mind fuck.  If separation is an illusion, how could an activity make separation unapparent? 

No activity was required to make separation apparent.  There wasn't a doer who made things appear seperate, so then why is it always implied that there is a doer here to end the supposed illusion of seperation?

All spiritual exercise implies there is a 'you' and there is some 'thing' you can 'do'.  

So I'm wondering what to 'do' at this point, lmao!

 

Edited by MiracleMan

Grace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MiracleMan No, it does not imply a doer.

There is no method to enlightenment. Enlightenment is always the case and there is no way to get to it other than to realize it right now. Stop looking for a "how". There is no how. How is already too indirect.

It's difficult precisely because it is RADICALLY DIRECT. You are already it, yet you are trying to "get to it", which is already 1 step too far.

Enlightenment is step 0. The mind does not know how to take step 0 because any movement of the mind is already step 1, and so one step too far.

You keep looking and looking but looking will not work. What's required is being. Being is prior to looking.

Take a psychedelic so you can be shown what being is, so you know what to pursue.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For context, Ramana Maharshi's response to this --- how can thought be used to end thought --- was as follows:

 

"The mind will subside only by means of the enquiry 'Who am I?'. The thought 'Who am I?', destroying all other thoughts, will itself finally be destroyed like the stick used for stirring the funeral pyre."

 

But can thought ("I"/"doer") use thought (self-inquiry/who am I?) to end thought?  That's the question, as it would seem inherently contradictory.

 

 

Edited by robdl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MiracleMan said:

Who is the one inquiring

You...you don’t know what you are, so you’re inquiring, except you’re not inquiring, you’re asking someone else, reinforcing the illusion. 


MEDITATIONS TOOLS  ActualityOfBeing.com  GUIDANCE SESSIONS

NONDUALITY LOA  My Youtube Channel  THE TRUE NATURE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ON SELF-INQUIRY AS AN ENLIGHTENMENT PRACTICE

Once you've transcended the 'Paradigm of Self', Self-Inquiry as an Enlightenment practice becomes moot.  BE-ing just is what it is.  What Self-Inquiry as an Enlightenment practice is designed to do is put the 'Paradigm of Self' into high-relief in awareness so it can be transcended.  Now, this doesn't mean that contemplation becomes moot post-Enlightenment, don't fall into the trap of thinking that.  Enlightenment doesn't change anything about BE-ing other than raising awareness of what's always gone down.  And actually, what you need for Enlightenment is to transcend the 'Paradigm of Self or No Self'.  And this can only happen when you can BE in the moment without pre-judgments or pre-expectations.  So, you gotta transcend all paradigms for Enlightenment.  'Need to Know' BE-ing has nothing to do with BE-ing.  I just wanted to point out that Enlightenment is much more than transcending the 'Paradigm of Self', that's just the starting point.

Edited by Joseph Maynor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, robdl said:

But can thought ("I"/"doer") use thought (self-inquiry/who am I?) to end thought?  That's the question, as it would seem inherently contradictory.

The primary thought before all other thoughts is the I-thought. Implying the belief  "I am the thinker of thoughts".
When one inquires as to the source from which "the I that thinks thoughts arises",it is found to be non existent. It disappears along with all the thoughts, showing it to be a thought also, and not the true "I" or Self.

The "who am I" practice is/was recommended by Ramana as a concession to those who weren't quite "ripe" for the question to fully end the ego/thought-self. Someone who was 'ripe" for the question (i.e, had done previous sadhana/practices enough to clear/purify the majority of their karma, or was just karmically ready by birth),the one question would end the ego identity for good.

For others (maybe not all),the question does end thought briefly/temporarily at first, by creating a gap of inner silence/stillness and emptiness. Upon which the ego will rise again and the question "to whom does this thought arise for". If a sufficient level of inner silence is already present, thoughts will end upon questioning "who/what am I". If not there will be a mental answer of "me". To which the "who am I" question is re asserted. Every time one is brought back to that silence and emptiness, the "non-practice" is to stay there effortlessly, be the witness to what may arise. With consistent inquiry,one remains in that silent, timeless emptiness longer and longer, just being.
In the emptiness is the true, no-thought, I-sense. The abiding, thoughtless knowing/awareness that 'I AM" (I exist). Being  :).
The source is prior to time, knowledge, experience of the thought/belief "I am (I exist as) the body-mind".

Permanent abiding in the timeless, unbound, infinite aware Being,is enlightenment.

Edited by who chit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MiracleMan the dream ego is trying to kill itself to realise life is a dream and it doesn't exist. There is no contradiction. Before enlightenment, your in the dream. After enlightenment, your out of the dream. Then ego is not identified with, and just seen as dream stuff.


There's Only One Truth!

My book on Enlightenment and Non Duality

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07BHWCP7H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In “my” case  :)

 

First there was the necessity of FREEDOM without problems, conflict, suffering, (FEAR).

This perpetual movement of time will continue to feed off of itself. This self feeding loop must end. Then there is freedom to inquire unbound by motive-volition, personal and collective authority; as in (spiritual authority).

To be totally empty of any volition motivated and fueled by desire-fear. 

Freedom; consciousness empty of problems comes first. Until there is freedom, inquiry is inevitably going to lead to self deception; thought seeking security in itself.

For me inquiry was holistic understanding-seeing of the nature, structure, substance of thought-self. 

For me psychological time, volition-desire ended first. Volition-fear then is not able to perpetuate the self feeding loop of time. Then inquiry can be maintained with a suspended bias. 

After all, how can one inquire in an unbiased way when they are bound by a particular outcome-reward. Thought is very cunning. It seeks security in its own movement to self sustain. It perpetually moves to capture and maintain a certain degree of certainty, even though in its very nature it is, and always will be, inevitably uncertain. Thought mechanically seeks security-permanence in its own movement, even though in its very nature it is, and always will be, insecure and impermanent. 

To me, freedom is in the beginning, not the end. 

Edited by Faceless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whole insight into the nature of psychological time & whole insight-perception into the nature of thought-self, which is one and the same movement of time as the i. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who or what is it, that seeks to be?
See that, what is, is already here, being.
 Empty...timeless..aware...abiding is-ness/presence :).

Edited by who chit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MiracleMan All these conclusions are from the mind.

The question to ask moment to moment is:

Is there identification to the body-mind. Belief in thought. Belief in being the body, the person?

11 hours ago, MiracleMan said:

So I'm wondering what to 'do' at this point, lmao!

As you wrote. There isn't anything you can 'do'. It's futile. But do you really see that? Because if you do you STOP. And STOPPING isn't anything you do.

If you don't see the futility you continue to 'do' as you always have. 


He has no will of his own.
He dwells in reality,
and lets all illusions go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MiracleMan said:

Who is the one inquiring?

The Imagined, False, Separate Self aka A THOUGHT

How does any kind of practice or exercise or movement produce stillness?

Nothing can produce Stillness

Wouldn't every second of meditation be used to imply a doer?  Same with inquiry, it implies there is someone asking the question right?

If you sit in meditation as a separate self indentifying with an object (body/mind), then yes there seems to be a doer.

If separation isn't possible, then how could any activity (meditation, masturbation, running, self-inquiry, eating, shitting) bring about a desired result?

Separation does not exist. But be honest with yourself. In your direct experience, if there is no separation then you need not do anything. But because you feel like you're a separate self, so that separate self has to systematically unwire itself to go back it's home aka the source.

If separation is an illusion, how could an activity make separation unapparent? 

Unexamined beliefs and misplaced identity created this seemingly apparent separation. 

No activity was required to make separation apparent.  There wasn't a doer who made things appear seperate, so then why is it always implied that there is a doer here to end the supposed illusion of seperation?

That's wrong. All your life, you've been consciously and unconsciously fed with beliefs and dogmas and misplaced identity. All of that has made an entire network of tendencies and deep rooted feelings in you which seem to render this separation.

Separation is not a feature of reality. It is pseudo-reality you're rendering every moment with your belief system and perspective.

All spiritual exercise implies there is a 'you' and there is some 'thing' you can 'do'.  

Of course! That's the very purpose of true spiritual practices. To observe the limited self and divest it of it's limitation

So I'm wondering what to 'do' at this point, lmao!

Self inquiry is always into the false self. There is no Self inquiry after Enlightenment. Use the limited self to dismantle itself. Stop imagining yourself as an object no matter how gross or subtle it is. You're the Awareness that knows all objects. That awareness can't be objectified. The more your identity shifts from being a human body to Awareness, the more the boundaries of separation begins to erode.

All the best

 

 


''Not this...

Not this...

PLEASE...Not this...''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try rigorously concentrating your attention on the automatic process of separation "I" versus "there". How does that happen? Is it really the case that there is some "there" and some "I"? Or is it just an arbitrary metric for convenience that became so automatic that you can barely notice you do that illusory separation all the time? Like meters and kilograms - there's no such things.

There is no liters in the ocean.


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MiracleMan

You are the present moment knowingness of experience (aka awareness, awakeness) 

Any doer in the field of your knowing is not who you are, you are the knowing. Look it up! Not on Google,  look it up in the now, in your experience. 

Awareness is formless, but it's you. It's described also as no-self, because it has no form. It is the 0, the ground 0 of experience,  but it's not nothing.

Pure Nothing would be the lack of awareness. But no-one has ever experienced that. #FairyTales

Edited by Dodo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2018 at 7:12 PM, Joseph Maynor said:

And actually, what you need for Enlightenment is to transcend the 'Paradigm of Self or No Self'.  And this can only happen when you can BE in the moment without pre-judgments or pre-expectations. 

I question if that’s true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now