How Do We Look Within?

[pseudonymous]

The key to looking within may be in the understanding that the external world, in its entirety, can and will communicate with us through our senses on whatever channel we happen to be tuned in to. If we are tuned into the physical body's channel, matter, then we will be communicated with through our appetites. At this level of communication, we are most likely to never wake up. If we are tuned into the reaction channel, then we will be communicated with emotionally. We may never wake up from this dream either, as it is very egocentric, and guarantees attachments.

When we are called into self awareness, the inward journey begins, and detachments are a noticeable effect of pulling away from the external dream. It opens our eyes and ears to an extent that we can begin to perceive the external dream having a dialogue with the internal witness. Synchronicity takes on a new level of meaning. Relationships that are formed or broken take on a new meaning. The process speeds up as we begin to have the ability to swiftly detach from the forms that we perceive as teachers and guides.

Does looking within simply mean that the witness is taking within what is manifesting without, and translating it into bread crumbs along a path that leads to wakefulness? Going within seems more of a realization than an action. It is the witness' first appearance in the process of walking the path. Before self awareness, communication is an external, unconscious dialogue (and often debate), where in a dreamlike state, the witness receives and reacts to stimuli offered up within the dream. Once self awareness is achieved, the stimuli becomes characters on a theater stage, where the witness is increasingly aware that there is a created script involved, and that there are actual actors behind the roles that are being played.

Self awareness brings seemingly higher symbolism, but is it really seeing the same symbols with new eyes, and hearing the same language with new ears? Is self awareness the witness having a dialogue with the dream, rather than a role in it? Is looking within reading the script, rather than living it as a reality?

pseudonymous

 

[aged hippy]

pseudonymous,
Where you say: "It opens our eyes and ears to an extent that we can begin to perceive the external dream having a dialogue with the internal witness." - is this not a description of spiritual enlightenment, with both the eternal (which is un-wise in matters of the world) and the limited (which is un-wise in matters of the spirit) learning to communicate with each other and live together?

Just a thought......

Warmest Regards

 

[pseudonymous]

pseudonymous,
Where you say: "It opens our eyes and ears to an extent that we can begin to perceive the external dream having a dialogue with the internal witness." - is this not a description of spiritual enlightenment, with both the eternal (which is un-wise in matters of the world) and the limited (which is un-wise in matters of the spirit) learning to communicate with each other and live together?

Just a thought......

Warmest Regards

hey aged hippy,

i have always been under the impression that all was working together to evolve consciousness as a whole, so it would certainly be considered a spiritual enlightenment. the problem with the word "enlightenment" is that it has six and a half billion definitions. the Eastern definition of "enlightenment" is not one i subscribe to, because it seems egoic to me. i think the word ought to be scrapped as a universal, but is useful for personal evaluation.

considering your name, i am humbly giving you a link to something, that if you are not aware of it, might be of great interest to you. i have found it to be an exceptional forum...

http://www.hipforums.com/index.php3

moderators, please forgive me if i have acted out of place here.

pseudonymous

 

[aged hippy]

My feelings on personal spiritual advancement (hows that - better than enlightenment?) is that we are a developing 'awareness', but that for hard-to-describe reasons, most of us have 'forgotten' it, and have susequently become trapped in the ego.

Spiritual advancement comes when we 'remember' (or work out) what, exactly, we have to do.

When you say: "...... all was working together to evolve consciousness as a whole,", yes, i do most certainly agree with this, but have a feeling that it all changed when we developed egos, which tend to cling to this mode of existence.

It is haps best to define, as exactly as possible, how one is using such words as 'soul', 'spiritual enlightenment', etc., as it is very easy for someone else to get the completely wrong impression, and some of us do'nt take much confusing.


Warmest Regards

ps. Many thanks for the link.

 

[pseudonymous]

aged hippy,

my only question about us being perfect, then acquiring egos, then having to rediscover our state of perfection, is that evolution appears to be unidirectional from asleep to awake, rather than awake to asleep to awake. i am only going on what is self-evident throughout creation. i am familiar with your perceptions, but have found it doesn't fit the evidence i can see all around me. doesn't mean i am right in my perceptions, just means i am taking a sensual snapshot of my reality, and trusting it until it expands in awareness.

peace,
pseudonymous

 

[aged hippy]

pseudonymous,

To be honest, i don't feel for a moment that we were 'perfect', if we were, we would not need to evolve. I'm not advocating any kind of a 'fall'.

The way i can best describe my feelings on this is that we were in a state of 'innocence' - rather than 'perfection', and became 'corrupted', as it were.

I see the individual ego as something that has developed, and that has crystallised, in only us. I feel that it's an individual aspect of our group awareness, which has developed it's own identity, and is clinging onto it with grim determination.

Warmest Regards,

malcolm

 

[iBrian]

Self awareness brings seemingly higher symbolism, but is it really seeing the same symbols with new eyes, and hearing the same language with new ears? Is self awareness the witness having a dialogue with the dream, rather than a role in it? Is looking within reading the script, rather than living it as a reality?

I liked this part - though if I may so, on the entire issue of dialogue - I don't know about anyone else but I personally feel quite predisposed to see my own communications as very much translated. There is a definite flaw in the process - perhaps due to the ego itself trying to shape the information against current pre-conceptions - or else even holding to new perceptions without any real justification.

As for the ego itself - it is a necessary part of the living self. We are alive, that makes us dynamic beings. The ego essentially is a necessary engine with regards to that process. Even as anyone moves towards any degree of self-awareness, always the ego will be present. I have heard claims of "ego-death", but even in my own most ascetic moment, I realised it only crushed, never removed. And once the discipline is released, so the ego is again.

 

[aged hippy]

I, Brian,
When you say: "As for the ego itself - it is a necessary part of the living self." - with respect, it is only apparent in humankind, as far as i know. Is there research that shows it to exist elsewhere? Other life-forms certainly have their own individual 'identity' but do not appear to have an ego, or, at least, not in as developed a form as in humankind.
This suggests to me that it is a recent development, haps since the end of the last ice age.

Warmest Regards,

malcolm

 

[iBrian]

No problem - you are certainly quite right to bring attention to the limitations - though if I may conjecture, perhaps it is more an issue of the language rather than implied meaning.

However, I don't want to distract from this intersting thread, so I've started something up in "Philosophy and science":

What is the "ego"?

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,

to address the title of the OP...

there is a method that can be employed to look within. this is called the Golden Flower technique.

i will be posted, hopefully shortly, more information about this particular technique.. though it is secret, so i shall have to be brief about some aspects of it.

it seems to me that most of the descriptions of ego are following along Jungian lines... this is not an understanding that is common in my tradition, as such, there isn't a whole lot to say on it.

from the Buddhist tradition, though, there is quite a bit... more so than i can effectively communicated through the limited medium of typing, however i shall try to post somewhat of how it's veiwed within the Vajrayana.

 

[iBrian]

They would certainly be most welcome posts, Vajradhara.