2nd Gear: Practicing in Busyness Daily Life

Hi -- I'm new to the site and find the discussions here interesting and lively.

Kenneth writes in the "2nd Gear" article: "Tasks that require dualistic thinking (writing this message, for example) can be effectively accomplished from the witness state, and with practice it gets easier and easier..."

With fewer commitments than usual in the week ahead, I am interested in practicing with the witness state while engaged in activities like writing, reading, speaking, listening, doing the dishes, making decisions, etc. The witness state is a familiar one in meditation, on retreat and even in the 'still moments' of daily life. However, the witness state falls rapidly into the background once I engage in activities, especially when there's a sense of time pressure (a time pressure with the identification of me, mine or my ; ) ).

It seems easy enough to say: Stay focused on the sense of 'I' that is witnessing in the midst of doing or keep asking 'Who am I?' However, I find, in the midst of doing, that the attention keeps leaving the sense of 'I' or the continuity of inquiry fades out. So, is the guidance that when there's noticing that the attention has left the witness, the attention is returned to the 'I'/witness -- over and over again? ...just like bringing attention back to the the breath in anapanasati, for instance.

I would like to hear from others about how they work with 2nd Gear off the cushion in as much detail as they're willing to share. Any tools or devices that you find especially useful? More to say about this kind of practicing? Hope this line of questioning makes some sense.

Thanks,

Aaron

"So, is the guidance that when there's noticing that the attention has left the witness, the attention is returned to the 'I'/witness -- over and over again? ...just like bringing attention back to the the breath in anapanasati, for instance." -aaronj1

Welcome, Aaron. Yes, that is exactly the technique. If you have a less-than-challenging week ahead, you can prioritize the Witness and let everything else go on in the background. Of course you will forget a million times, but as you have pointed out, you can always return. In fact, the attitude you describe is crucial; since, for some period of time, you have chosen to prioritize the Witness, it doesn't really matter whether you accomplish anything else or not. Keep the Witness in the foreground as much as possible, and slow down everthing else until it becomes possible to stay with the Witness even as you do other tasks. I am experimenting with this right now as I write this, and I see that the slower I type, the less I lose focus on the witnessing consciousness. I am in the middle of my work day, so this is challenging, but once the momentum builds it becomes possible to dwell continuously as the Witness for longer and longer periods of time.

The beauty of 2nd Gear practice is that instead of an infinite number of changing objects, you have only one. Everything appears to be contained within pure subjectivity. Because there is no jumping from object to object, it's easier for the mind to stay in one place. This focused awareness leads to development of the kundalini energy within the mind/body and also provides a jumping-off place from which to realize nondual awareness.

Kenneth

"The beauty of 2nd Gear practice is that instead of an infinite number of changing objects, you have only one. Everything appears to be contained within pure subjectivity. Because there is no jumping from object to object, it's easier for the mind to stay in one place."
--Kenneth

When I try to dwell as the witness, usually I gradually drift to what I call "just witnessing" which is dynamic while "dwelling as the witness" seems to me to be static.

In "just witnessing" there is the constant flux of sensations and at the same time the knowing of them. For example I hear a sound: there are two distinct things i.e. the sound and a subtle sense of "knower". If I concentrate further, the sense of "knower" fades away little by little (or merges with the "known") and there remains only sounds or so it seems.

This state is very slippery and unstable. The "knower" component can have an infinity of varying degrees of clarity or lack of.
Does this qualify as "2nd Gear practice" or ""3rd Gear practice"? Is this correct practice or am I missing something?

Salam (Peace)
Abdou

Edit: added a few words for clarity and precision.

Hey Abdou,

I wonder if what you are experiencing is the partial deconstruction of the Witness state. So sort of changing from second gear to 3rd gear. The thing that seems common to my experience of the Witness, and my realization that it is "empty" is some sort of a sense of focalized (my neologism) and localized awareness. That is, when I really got a look at the Witness state, I realized that it actually had a location in space - a kind of point, kinesthetically sensed. That's when I realized that it was a kind of self-representation that was being generated. Then, of course, comes the question, "Who or what is aware of the Witness?"

I had a question: Is Gurdjieff's "self-remembering" a second gear practice?

Also, an idea: One magickal technique that I know would work for second gear practice would be to create a "Witness anchor." Get a large uncomfortable piece of jewelry or something else that can be worn close to the skin, that is sure to draw your notice at various times during the day. Resolve that each time you notice it or handle the item, you will re-assume the Witness state. This can be dressed up by ritualizing the resolution, or enchanting or enscorceling the item, preferably from the Witness state. The resolution should definitely be made from the Witness state. This should work pretty well.
D

"Keep the Witness in the foreground as much as possible, and slow down everthing else until it becomes possible to stay with the Witness even as you do other tasks. -Kenneth"

Hello Aaron,
I'm interested in hearing how your "Witness" practice is coming along. This is something I've also been experimenting more with whilst doing daily tasks.
Kenneth pointed out something that seems to be a key to doing this: to slow everything down...
- Tina

"Hey Abdou,

I wonder if what you are experiencing is the partial deconstruction of the Witness state. So sort of changing from second gear to 3rd gear."

Hey David,

Can you elaborate on the deconstruction of the witness state? My actual experience of all this stuff may be a bit confused for the moment.

For example, when I try to practice strict Vipassana noting: I can't help but have some sort of witnessing at the same time. And when I try to simply become absorbed in the witness, there is still some sort of noting.

I even wonder now if it is possible to practice one of these two techniques without also practicing the other to some degree.

Salam
Abdou

"

Can you elaborate on the deconstruction of the witness state? My actual experience of all this stuff may be a bit confused for the moment.

For example, when I try to practice strict Vipassana noting: I can't help but have some sort of witnessing at the same time. And when I try to simply become absorbed in the witness, there is still some sort of noting.

I even wonder now if it is possible to practice one of these two techniques without also practicing the other to some degree.

"

Hi Abdou,

I may not be the best person to ask about how the Witness self-deconstructs, because I never really "practiced it" until somewhat recently, and my experience of this happening was rather spontaneous. I didn't have a teacher, was very much oriented towards figuring it all out on my own, and was very influenced by western Phenomenology.

For me, the Witness state was something that occurred spontaneously, and for a lengthy period of time I felt stuck in it- I couldn't get out of it literally. It was kind of maddening, especially in social situations, where I felt I couldn't really dive in - there was always this very detached, observing presence which was me (not to mention the weird effect this has on others in social situations).

At some point I started really breaking down the Witness state - observing very closely what it was comprised of and how it manifested - and I found that it was composed of sensations, and that it was, in fact, a kind of self-representation - not much more privileged than my others, though definitely more abstract - a kind of reified awareness. Although I think it's possible that people may represent this to themselves in many ways, mine in particular involved a reference point in space - somewhere right behind my eyes. I think it's sort of something vestigial involving depth perception in my case.
Continued

Anyway, if you play around with the sense of a "location" of your consciousness, you'll notice that you can make it bigger or smaller, move it around, make it fill your whole body, put it in something else outside your body, make it fill the universe even. It's quite arbitrary, and really it's non-local - it doesn't occupy space, and it doesn't have a nature.

What you are describing as a blending between the sense of observing and the object of observation is a lot of what I experience now, which is why I commented that it might be self-deconstructing. I sort of deconstructed the Witness on purpose, but Kenneth says that it will happen on it's own.

I think there's definitely noticing with the witness state, but there can be noting, or noticing without the Witness. The Witness doesn't exist apart from your awareness of it.
David
Edited out redundancy

Hi David,
Agreed, when I look at it space and time are only mind categories. Prior to the "split", there is no time and no space. After the 'split' everything is there.

As for noticing without a witness that happens only before the "split" and the witness as I see it appears after the "split". The state before the 'spli't is very very unstable for me, that is why I say I can't practice noticing without a witness. Althought I have tiny glimpses of pure noticing or knowing without a 'knower' or witness.

What I call the split is what happens when I ask myself "Who knows this?": My awareness splits into two, one part of it becomes the 'knower' and the other becomes the 'known'. Sometimes, for very brief moments, the 'knower' and the 'known' merge into only knowing.

"At some point I started really breaking down the Witness state - observing very closely what it was comprised of and how it manifested - and I found that it was composed of sensations. --David"

What you explain is similar to what is puzzling me. It is similar to my own experience i.e. noting in the witness state, while Kenneth seems to say that the witness is closer to the source than noting.

I wanted to know if this practice is Ok, or do I need to find a way to abide in the witness with no noting?

Hope I made myself clear as all this is a bit confused in my mind.
Salam
Abdou

"
I wanted to know if this practice is Ok, or do I need to find a way to abide in the witness with no noting?

"

The only possible way I can think to do that would be from the perspective of the 8th jhana.