"looking at" vs. "looking for"

I'm coming to the conclusion that there are two ways to look, investigate, explore, be mindful, etc. of our experience and of ultimate reality.
One is good practice and one isn't.

Good practice or effective practice is to "look at." By that I mean to study and investigate what is actually happening right now without trying to get somewhere, change anything, or manipulate experience.
This is the "door to the door to the door ..."

Ineffective practice is to "look for," which is what I know I've done a lot of. It is very tempting and creates a lot of needless suffering. When a yogi "looks for" instead of "at" there is a subtle (and I guess often not so sublte) desire for the investigation of present sensation and reality to bring some imagined fruit, be it insight, bliss, rapture, power, peace ... whatever, this could be almost anything depending on the person and his or her preconceived notions about what practice can do for them. Thus, there is actually never an effective investigation because the yogi is actually only looking "at" in order to see the result they want so bad.
So reality is missed and any real insight is not likely to occur.

"there are two ways to look, investigate, explore, be mindful, etc. of our experience and of ultimate reality. One is good practice and one isn't."-telecaster

This is a powerful insight, Mike, and you've explained it beautifully. Yogis who follow your advice will save themselves a great deal of time and frustration. Thanks for posting this.

Kenneth

""there are two ways to look, investigate, explore, be mindful, etc. of our experience and of ultimate reality. One is good practice and one isn't."-telecaster

This is a powerful insight, Mike, and you've explained it beautifully. Yogis who follow your advice will save themselves a great deal of time and frustration. Thanks for posting this.

Kenneth"

Thanks, Kenneth.
I'm curious if anyone else relates to the "looking for" error or not.
It is certainly something I've done over and over and over.
I know that I am a compulsive person and I wonder how much that contributes.

I received (along with everyone else present, so I'm not telling anything secret) a 'pointing out instruction' for a kind of meditation that seems to reflect this distinction-- a good and important one to make. It runs: 'Find the presence of awareness in ...' There was some explanation involved, about the difference between 'looking for' and 'finding'; and about how when you do find something, it is impossible to really reconstruct the state of not knowing where it was, before you found it; and that you find it where it is and always has been, with a sense of 'yes, of course.'

I relate. But I think these things always get kind of paradoxical.

Growth processes are always paradoxical. Or they seem to be. Our mental processes very generously give rise to the appearance of stasis. Our planet, for example, is flying at 67,000 mph and rotating at about 1000 mph, but thankfully it doesn't feel like it. It feels like it's standing still. As a result of this appearance of stasis and standing still, we take the unit of experience to be the 'moment', and a moment is characterized by a 'condition'. We anticipate the time when 'this condition' will become 'that condition' that we want.

But in a living system, the unit is not a 'spot' or a 'moment'. It's a transition, a vector, a 'between-ness'.

So, when we really get with things and open up to what they are, this seems to, paradoxically, facilitate change.

The fact is that change was already happening. Now the mind is finally realizing that.

The 'looking for' perspective contains an unspoken insistence that things are as they appear to be, and therefore, there has been no change. The 'looking at' perspective tables that question for the time being. So the actual changing nature of things gets a chance to reveal itself.

But I think that even when we consciously or intellectually open up to experience, there can still be an unconscious, instinctual, or samskaric 'looking for' that arises and persists. This can manifest as the feeling of longing, yearning, or 'obsession'.

I don't think that holding that feeling is a crime. Rather, I think it's part of the very view and experience that buddhadharma was developed to address. Hence 'investigate the yearning itself'.

I think there is another level to "looking at' and "looking for".

"Looking for" has and associated expectation of reality that manifests and permeates our whole experience, including when we "look at". With regards to practice, we are either in this created story (not so good) or observing it (good).

[edit] To clarify, there is a level where "looking for" and "looking at" are not mutally exclusive. "looking at" always has "looking in" and vice versa.

"I think there is another level to "looking at' and "looking for"

"

I was thinking something similar, esp after re-listening to the second part of Kenneth's BG interview where he talks about encountering the Direct Path teachings after Arhatship.

Perhaps besides the "looking for" and "looking at" there is also a "what's looking" aspect of our experience and of ultimate reality

"Looking for" seems to be the all important first step on the path, a step which only need be taken once,
"Looking at" seems to accord with steps on the Path of Insight,
and "What's looking" seems to accord with steps along the Direct Path.

Mark VanWhy@ "Perhaps besides the "looking for" and "looking at" there is also a "what's looking" aspect of our experience and of ultimate reality"

It is the relationship to objects that matters, not the objects themselves. (to illustrate a point, lets solidify objects and relationships).

So we are "looking for" and before us there is a red ball, then we moved on to "looking at" and there is a blue ball (again simple to illustrate the point). If we consider the objects why would it matter red ball, blue ball, table, chair, there is nothing we can grab in objects that will help with what we seek. All these appearances appear, fundamentally it does not matter the manner in which these patterns appear. Whats matters is WHAT is ALL THIS?

To synthesize Telecastor's and MarkVanWhy's points, using Gary's metaphor, let's say I'm looking at a red ball. It does me no good and is in fact counterproductive to think about how other people are talking about rainbow-colored balls and wish to see them instead. There is, in front of me, a red ball. I can either look at it or spin off into fantasyland, thereby wasting my meditation session (Telecaster's point).

But I can also wonder who it is that is looking at the ball. This is a different category of practice entirely. Looking at the ball (the object of experience) is what I call 1st Gear. I also think of it as "what" practice. Inquiring into the knower of this experience (the subject) on the other hand, is what I call 2nd Gear or "who" practice (MarkVanWhy's point).

If you were to ignore both subject and object entirely and notice instead the space in which ball (object), subject (the sense of knower) and the whole subject/object package arise, you would be at 3rd Gear. 3rd Gear is not a practice, per se, but rather a surrendering in this moment to what IS prior to your experience.

As always, if 3rd Gear sounds like doubletalk, downshift to 2nd Gear. If 2nd Gear sounds like gibberish, downshift to 1st Gear. Keep it simple. All of this makes more sense as you continue to practice. Above all, don't wish for experiences or knowledge you don't have (thanks, telecaster) and don't theorize about what you've heard someone else say. Instead, practice. You only have a limited amount of hours left in this lifetime. Don't waste them!

Affectionately yours,

Kenneth

Telecaster's point is very important for me as a beginner. I am constantly having problems "looking for" as I have read too much and try to relate it to my practice as opposed to doing the practice.

I feel that a process of actively letting go of expectations and just letting go of things the mind grabs onto and ruminates is important when trying to directly "look at" so that one can see just as it is when practicing.

"Telecaster's point is very important for me as a beginner. I am constantly having problems "looking for" as I have read too much and try to relate it to my practice as opposed to doing the practice.

I feel that a process of actively letting go of expectations and just letting go of things the mind grabs onto and ruminates is important when trying to directly "look at" so that one can see just as it is when practicing."

I'm noticing that this creeps in on my practice too..
What is going on around and in me has only a very little bit to do with what I've read and thought about in terms of "practice," but, I think I am often looking at things through a filter of practice jargon, thoughts, expectations, etc.
When I manage to remove this filter things brighten up considerably and an immediate intimacy can occur.

Related thoughts:
I'm discovering that even if I am looking "at" I have a narow field of reality that I am willing to see. Widening this field brings insight.
Example: At work I do a lot of things that I don't care for. My office is a mess. I put things off. I avoid certain people sometimes. I have little (and sometimes big) moments of dishonesty. I don't work as hard as I think I should. All these things added up make me uncomfortable and cause suffering.
Can I look "at" all that? Can I see the mess and my feelings about it just as it is? Can I look at my feelings of shame over various behaviors just as they are without trying to change them? Is it okay to be just this thing (person) right now with all the perceived flaws and really look clearly and dispasionately?
I can and I'm finding it is an important practice.

edit/addition: so I have found that for the most part when I look I have narrowed my field of vision in order to eliminate these uncomfortable things. Same thing in my parenting, other relationships, etc. etc. And, ANY expansion of that field to let more in brings more intimacy with life and more insight.

and more: the resistance to looking at these things is accompanied by a furrowed brow and some pain and tension in my forehead just above the brows, by tightening and anxiety in my chest and abdomen. when I do attempt to look at these things I see that the vision just above my head and outward from there darkens while the anxious feelings (a cold tightness in the solar plexus) increases.

"and more: the resistance to looking at these things is accompanied by a furrowed brow and some pain and tension in my forehead just above the brows, by tightening and anxiety in my chest and abdomen. when I do attempt to look at these things I see that the vision just above my head and outward from there darkens while the anxious feelings (a cold tightness in the solar plexus) increases."

Hi, Telecaster (or do you prefer Mike?....if I remember your name correctly)

Thanks for starting this thread. I've been acutely aware lately of the trouble I cause on the cushion when I look for certain experiences and refuse to acknowledge others. Today while sitting, I noticed how the difference between manipulating (grasping would be another word for it) and watching had everything to do with stress and the cessation of stress, to express it in the Theravadin jargon -- and, of course, you can guess which leads to which. ; )

One thing I'd be curious to know, jumping off of what I've quoted from your post above, is what happens to the sensations in your brow and head and at the region of your solar plexus when you stare them down, so to speak?

In other words, after the vision darkens and anxious feelings increase, what happens next? Do the sensations travel in your body? Do they change in quality, as well as intensity? Does the feeling tone change? And, lastly, when you're able to watch them objectively, does this impact your perspective on the conventional events associated with them? It sounds like that is the case, and I'd love to hear more about your process of 'looking clearly and dispassionately', as you put it. Reminds me a lot of Daniel's MCTB chapter "From Content to Insight."

Thanks, again, for starting this thread.

Happy widening,
Ryan

Ryan:
that is a hard one. I went through this process with work in a major way yesterday and I can't quite remember how it all went.
But --
I'm still doing it on a smaller scale (because my resistence to reality is weaker today) and here is what I think happens:
the tension seems to go backwards and upwards through and then out my body. so, the brow tension grows back into my skull and then up out the top of my head while the chest tension seems to move backwards and then up and out my body through my head. I think.
what remains is the key thing to me: a body and mind at least temporarily free of stress and tension and an almost magical intuitive intelligence (or "insight") that helps me to see certain things as they really are. This process can happen over and over if one looks with the right skills to the right things at the right times. A lot like peeling an onion except that this onion can un-peel itself if one loses the mindfulness habit.
This process seems to be a great way to deal with the "relative" "me" stuff but I also think if done correctly and continuously leads to insights into the three characteristics as well. And, possibly, to a greater awareness of the "witness."
-Mike

hard one, eh? you seem to have handled it very well. thanks for the description.