Forum: Dharma Overground Discussion Forum

This is sort of a response to Martin's post on "No-self," wherein he said: "Do you think it helps to have different strategies depending on if it's a sensation which makes up a feeling of subject, or a sensation which seems like object?"

This is a simple technique that can be applied to many other techniques. A few premises: Subject and object are not separate entities, but often we must use tactics to sort of catch the subject off guard. Essentially, we cannot just will our self concept away, but pointing a technique to that sense of self can often be useful; but when is it appropriate to do so?

Give this a shot-- it has worked for me over and over and over. Apply your technique to something that is not on your side of the split. Something completely "not you," that does not have any sense of you about it. For example, use vipassana to deconstruct the rhythmic sounds of your clock. Break down every component little part of a compounded "external" sensation. After you have done this for 10-15 minutes, FLIP the technique onto "your side" of the split. Use the same technique on the sensations that make up the sense of "watching" the darkness behind your eye-lids, or your thoughts themselves, or the sensations that create your forehead. Do this for 10-15 minutes and alternate again.

That is all it takes. You are deconstructing the same empty, causal, transient phenomena regardless of what side you are currently focused on, but by doing it in this way, it creates a massive synergy each time it's flipped back onto your side. I'm not sure why, to be honest, but perhaps it is because the mind can see fundamentally that the two things are not separate, and it sees this exemplified in a way that makes this knowledge impossible to resist.

Again, this can be used in combination with many techniques. Let me know if it works (or doesnt) for you.

Hi,

I found this technique very useful in allowing me to see the 'watching' sensations objectively, as it were, without having a stake in them, without trying to push them away or change them, but just seeing them vibrate and change in their own pattern. Is this the intention of the technique?

You mention that you know some other useful techniques, would you mind sharing them?

Thanks a lot for this
- Martin

Yes, Martin, that is exactly the point. Using the technique in this way, it "hits" the watcher side with a lot of force; and it's also more calculated since you are consciously deciding what side to inspect. You can use that to your advantage also, say, when you have an "ah-ha" moment, you know to flip it back onto yourself and hammer it in even deeper.

I mentioned noting originally, and below is "who am I" explained through this variation. But again, you can use this with nearly every insight technique imaginable, or even if you're just sitting around thinking about reality in an analytical fashion.

"Who am I" inquiry. This technique is deceptively simple, but you have to play with how it's asked, it must be asked like you mean it, and asked like you are really looking for something (not just waiting for something to show up). There are 3 basic ways to approach this: focus on the question itself (the words/sounds in your mind), asking the side that "isn't yours" currently (if you close your eyes and you sense "the back of my eyes"), or "your side." A good way to ask your side "who am I" is to focus on the outline of the limits of your visual field, then ask in a way that implies you have no face and that you're asking "through" the face. Try not to cross your eyes, but ask in a way that would be like asking THROUGH the visual field and TO the back of your skull. As you use this method, simply realize that these 3 routes exist. First focus on the "other side" and "the question itself," after you've done that for a few minutes, switch it onto "your side." You'll feel whether or not it's working and what you should continue to do. You'll intuit whether your should stick to "your side," wander around the others, or so on.