Characteristics of the Witness

Hi, I've got some questions about the witness and whether I'm on the right track. I was just sitting so I'm going to describe how it seems to work and any advice would be very appreciated.

I sit down and enquire "Who am I?" attention turns back on this apparent "I" that seems to be the eye balls and skull so I concentrate on all the senses that make up eyes and head until it's clear that I'm observing them and not that which is observed. I began to notice some of the shifts that were taking place the more I kept inquiring into myself and was unsure if for the sake of practice I just keep focused on the sense "I AM" or should I examine these characteristics more.

The different Qualities I noticed:

Thoughts, body sensations, whatever arises, all seems like I'm watching television. They arise, stay for a little while, then subside.

Everything seems atemporal almost like a dream (Where do dreams happen?). The more I sit with the sense "I AM" and bring attention back with asking "Who am I?" the sense of "I" seems to spread out of the body and the separation of subject/object feels less pronounced. Awareness doesn't seem to have a "boxed" feel like it does if I'm distracted going about my daily routine.

Everything appears spontaneously and effortlessly. No matter what comes, whether its confusion, a very agitated mind state there is just awareness of it, just present awareness in each moment. At this point my question about whether or not to focus on the sense "I AM" or examine these characteristics just described seemed meaningless as the question was just another movement of mind.

I became curious about this presence of awareness, What is it? I must be this awareness but it still feels like "I" is something separate from it.

Thats all for now, Thanks!

"I became curious about this presence of awareness, What is it?"

Keep this curiosity, don't ask for answers from others. Why? Don't form a conceptual image of what it is, because whatever concepts and images you have about it will prevent you from directly realizing it.

Just ask yourself, Who am I? What is It?

Keep asking and the answer will reveal itself in direct non-conceptual realization.

There's an e-book I wrote which has quite a substantial section dedicated to this practice of self-inquiry: awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html

Xsurf, I started reading your e-book a few days and its incredible. Without having realized "I AM" the other stages seem overwhelming and far off in terms of where I am on the path. I've had passing glimpses and experiences but no solid lasting realization. I was wondering if there are any places in the book where you talk about good inquiry versus bad inquiry? I imagine that could be useful to a lot of people that post on here since there's a tendency to get lost in conceptualizing at the beginning.

When I do self inquiry, I ask the question "Who am I?" I see the thought arising and know that I am what witnesses the thought, I ask "Who am I?" again and just wait to see where self is being created in the body and stick with it until its unmistakable that I must be witnessing it and not whats being witnessed. But this seems more like I'm asking the question just to figure out what I'm not. After a bit of this I ask"Well who am I really? What's here thats witnessing?" and there's just nothing, its like my mind wants to take something as an object but doesn't know what it is. Should I just keep sticking to this?

Hi JonB2, frankly I need to re-read my e-book.. hahaha. Hopefully I will find time to edit my ebook and perhaps publish it in hardcopy some time. It has been a while since I wrote or updated anything on the self-inquiry section, but I believe you can find some advise on 'good and bad' self-inquiry.

But an advise I can give is... as long as you don't stagnate, i.e. get stuck on some experience, mental state, or conceptual answers thinking that's it, but continue your curiosity and inquiring, then there's no problem. There is no 'wrong inquiry' really. As long as you continue inquiring, you are on your way. This is one of the most useful advise Thusness gave me on self-inquiry (many times I too had the doubt like am I doing this correct? etc, but Thusness would assure me). Other than that, he simply answered "no, that's not it" or ask me to continue my inquiry (something along the lines) when I reported to him some experiences I had. He also told me not to philosophize or conceptualize what the inquiry is about, what it leads to, what experiences I should seek or expect and so on.... because all these are more meaningless conceptual proliferation and won't lead to any direct realization. When realization 'arrives', there is no concepts but an utter self-felt certainty and doubtlessness in pure Being itself. The certainty lies in the directness, immediate, pre-conceptual mode of realizing and experiencing.

Other than these advises, Thusness never talked much about self-inquiry to me, he preferred that I just 'navigate' myself, do things my way and find things out by myself. He only asked me to ask myself "before birth, who am I?" Afterall, inquiry is a process of self-discovery and not a spoon feeding session... Nonetheless, I have spent quite a substantial section to answer people's questions on self-inquiry in my e-book, hopefully it can be helpful.

"After a bit of this I ask"Well who am I really? What's here thats witnessing?" and there's just nothing, its like my mind wants to take something as an object but doesn't know what it is. Should I just keep sticking to this?"

Yet you are aware isn't it? Not being able to find anything is another thought or perception. But there is not a blank nothingness. There is an awareness of the thought. There is a presence. Now notice who is the source, the presence, the knower... trace the perception of nothingness to its source.

It is as the Dzogchen teacher Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche wrote in something I read today about the I AMness,

"In the practice that I explained before, at the end when we are dissolving everything into emptiness, in that moment we are discovering instant presence because we are not only lost in emptiness, there is also someone noticing that, there is a presence. So this is called instant presence."

He also said in another text,

"We sound another A and from that
moment we are no longer working with visualization, thinking,
or judging, but are only being in that presence. In particular, we
notice who is doing this visualization, who is being in this white
A at the center of the gakhyil. We are not looking at something
in a dualistic way; we are being in that state, and that is instant
presence and our real condition."

Discovering this instant presence which is the I AMness is the beginning of rigpa/knowledge/instant presence (not the end).

Short answer, keep inquiring... don't get stuck in any concepts. Awareness is not an object that can be grasped or located mentally, it is just an undeniable immediate presence. Find out who is the source of that nothingness? Who am I? That's why keep inquiring until realization.

Thanks xsurf thats exactly what I needed to hear, what I've gotten hung up on this past week is thinking too much about the inquiry process, it hasn't felt like I've been tracing perception back to the source. More like I've been doing Neti Neti, not the thought, not the emotion, not this not that... and when I ask "Who am I?" or "Can the Seer be Seen?" I keep thinking there should be something but even that subtle sense of presence is perceived.

I have a Mahamudra book written by Traleg Kyabgon Rinpoche called "Mind at Ease." In there are a series of insight meditation practices. What do you think about these? Is it worth doing these too or sticking with inquiry?

1. Recognizing the Nature of the Mind
a. Recognizing that the mind has no inherent existence yet is fully manifest
b. Recognizing that thoughts are elusive and ephemeral

2. Introducing the nature of the mind in a state of movement
a. Using mental images
b. Using opposing emotional states
c. Using disturbing thoughts
d. Using the Five Poisons
e. Recognizing that the mind is the creator of all existence

3. Introducing the nature of the mind through sensory impressions
a. Recognizing that the mind and sense impressions of phenomena are intertwined
b. Recognizing the inseparability of body and consciousness

4. Realizing that the nature of the mind is emptiness
a. Realizing that the mind is not something that can be found
b. Recognizing that failure to understand the nature of the mind is the root of all delusions

5. Establishing emptiness as spontaneously arisen
a. The conjunction of mind, sensory organ, and sensory object
b. The non-duality of mental states and appearances

6. Realizing that spontaneously arisen emptiness is self-liberation
a. Self-liberation of spontaneously arisen mental appearances

Hi, I have not read "mind at ease" but I have read Thrangu Rinpoche and Dakpo Tashi Namgyal Rinpoche teachings on Mahamudra and those were great. Particularly some of the Mahamudra pointers led to my (and Thusness)'s insight into emptiness. Books by those two authors I mentioned are highly recommended.

However their instructions are not exactly similar to self-inquiry so if you want to go that path, my book, ramana maharshi's book, chan master hsu yun writings etc are more relevant.

"Particularly some of the Mahamudra pointers led to my (and Thusness)'s insight into emptiness."

Sorry but this is a wrong info which Thusness just corrected me. Through reading Mahamudra texts, he had a deeper insight into the four yogas of mahamudra (from one pointedness to the the non-meditation aspect), it was not about emptiness. He realized emptiness even before that.