Transpersonal Witness Meditation

[Encephalon]

Has anyone else used this meditation?  I was introduced to this a few years ago by a Ken Wilber workshop and it felt wonderfully liberating.  Of course, like many other adventures in stupidity, I stopped doing it. 

I love the clarity of KW's writing.

 

HIGHER CONSCIOUSNESS LEVEL 2: TRANSPERSONAL WITNESS EXERCISE (SOUL/SUBTLE LEVEL)

"Distinguishing marks of the transcendent self: it is a center and expanse of awareness which is creatively detached from one's personal mind, body, emotions, thoughts, and feelings."; "transcend and include" your body and mind/ego As long as you are chasing experiences, including spiritual experiences, you will never rest as the Witness. (Witness = external observation of your own ego)

 

Begin with 2-3 minutes of bodymind/centaur awareness

"Slowly begin to silently recite the following to yourself, trying to realize as vividly as possible the import of each statement:" (repeat several times)

 

"I have a body, but I am not my body. I can see and feel my body, and what can be seen and felt is not the true Seer. My body may be tired or excited, sick or healthy, heavy or light, but that has nothing to do with my inward I. I have a body, but I am not my body."

"I have desires, but I am not my desires. I can know my desires, and what can be known is not the true Knower. Desires come and go, floating through my awareness, but they do not affect my inward I. I have desires, but I am not desires."

"I have emotions, but I am not my emotions. I can feel and sense my emotions, and what can be felt and sensed is not the true Feeler. Emotions pass through me, but they do not affect my inward I. I have emotions, but I am not emotions."

"I have thoughts, but I am not my thoughts. I can know and intuit my thoughts, and what can be known is not the true Knower. Thoughts come to me and thoughts leave me, but they do not affect my inward I. I have thoughts, but I am not my thoughts."

 

Affirm as concretely as possible:

 

"I am what remains, a pure center of awareness, an unmoved witness of all these thoughts, emotions, feelings, and desires."

"If you persist at such an exercise, the understanding contained in it will quicken and you might begin to notice fundamental changes in your sense of 'self.' For example, you might begin intuiting a deep inward sense of freedom, lightness, release, stability. This source, this 'center of the cyclone,' will retain its lucid stillness even amid the raging winds of anxiety and suffering that might swirl around its center. The discovery of this witnessing center is very much like diving from the calamitous waves on the surface of a stormy ocean to the quiet and secure depths of the bottom. At first you might not get more than a few feet beneath the agitated waves of emotion, but with persistence you may gain the ability to dive fathoms into the quiet depths of your soul, and lying outstretched at the bottom, gaze up in alert but detached fashion at the turmoil that once held you transfixed."

 

Choiceless awareness

 

"If you are at all successful in developing this type of detached witnessing (it does take time), you will be able to look upon the events occurring in your mind-and-body with the very same impartiality that you would look upon clouds floating through the sky, water rushing in a stream, rain cascading on a roof, or any other objects in your field of awareness. In other words, your relationship to your mind-and-body becomes the same as your relationship to all other objects. Heretofore, you have been using your mind-and-body as something with which to look at the world. Thus, you became intimately attached to them and bound to their limited perspective. You became identified exclusively with them and thus you were tied and bound to their problems, pains, and distresses. But by persistently looking at them, you realize they are merely objects of awareness – in fact, objects of the transpersonal witness. 'I have a mind and body and emotions, but I am not a mind and body and emotions.'"

 

 

[EmeraldHead]

What do you gain from this? It doesn't really sounds like you're reaching higher degrees of consciousness from their description.

[ilumairen]

15 minutes ago, EmeraldHead said:

What do you gain from this? It doesn't really sounds like you're reaching higher degrees of consciousness from their description.

 

I would suggest this is one means of connecting to, and eventually resting in, what TWR refers to as the inner refuge.

Edited August 20, 2020 by ilumairen

[Encephalon]

1 hour ago, EmeraldHead said:

What do you gain from this? It doesn't really sounds like you're reaching higher degrees of consciousness from their description.

Maybe you've never considered the implications of escaping the shackles of your unconscious conditioning and ego-identification or the critical role this stage of development represents.  

[doc benway]

This objective sounds similar to the dzogchen approach I practice. The precise methods are different and, frankly, the devil really is in the details - especially in dzogchen instruction. Miss by a hair and you may as well miss by a mile. 

 

Nonetheless, the bottom line is cultivating a different sense of what we identify as “me.” In Tibetan Buddhism and Bön the highest possible “degree of consciousness” is considered to be the Nature of Mind or the Natural State and is often referred to as “nothing special.” It is simply the open awareness within which all experience manifests. We can learn to access that to a degree. Fully connecting with that in an irreversible way is liberation or Buddhahood. This is why dzogchen is said to be able to lead to Buddhahood in this very lifetime..

[forestofclarity]

It is potentially problematic if you are following a path that describes subject-object duality as an illusion or misconception. I wish I had been more careful about the mental habits I had built. Once they're in, they can be difficult to remove. I suppose it depends on the path.

 

It is interesting that these are affirmations to be repeated rather than topics to be explored. On that note, it is strikes me as a form of self-hypnosis rather than a meditation. 

[dwai]

Wilber appropriated a lot of techniques and ideas from Vedanta and applied in a haphazard manner, I dare say without proper understanding. 

Edited August 20, 2020 by dwai

[doc benway]

I don’t know anything about Wilber but I will agree that this type of practice can be problematic without adequate preparation, context, and guidance. For some people it can very effective and natural, for others ineffective. Some get into problems with nihilism or depersonalization as we were recently discussing elsewhere and yet others misunderstand and deviate from Dharma.

[EmeraldHead]

5 hours ago, Encephalon said:

escaping the shackles of your unconscious conditioning and ego-identification

JUST BUILD ENERGY BROO !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4Njb4uwnvk

that's the purpose of energy fields. They stabilize you deeper in the subconsciouss/unconsciouss. You don't therapy, just light and heat works great.

5 hours ago, Encephalon said:

or the critical role this stage of development represents.  

apologies to you and ilumairen, I don't get it. What is the benefits of this ? or rather the nectars one enjoys when doing it?

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by EmeraldHead

[ilumairen]

5 hours ago, steve said:

I don’t know anything about Wilber but I will agree that this type of practice can be problematic without adequate preparation, context, and guidance. For some people it can very effective and natural, for others ineffective. Some get into problems with nihilism or depersonalization as we were recently discussing elsewhere and yet others misunderstand and deviate from Dharma.

An interesting (critical) overview of Wilber:

 

https://markmanson.net/ken-wilber

[forestofclarity]

Elias Capriles wrote a long and academic treatment of the transpersonal movement, and Wilber in particular. He wrote an interesting comparison in his Beyond Mind II between transpersonal spiritual and Dzogchen, Capriles being an authorized teacher under Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. It is not an easy read, and as I said, it quite academic.  

 

https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=ijts-transpersonalstudies

 

 

10 hours ago, ilumairen said:

An interesting (critical) overview of Wilber:

 

https://markmanson.net/ken-wilber

 

[ilumairen]

31 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

Elias Capriles wrote a long and academic treatment of the transpersonal movement, and Wilber in particular. He wrote an interesting comparison in his Beyond Mind II between transpersonal spiritual and Dzogchen, Capriles being an authorized teacher under Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. It is not an easy read, and as I said, it quite academic.  

 

https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1201&context=ijts-transpersonalstudies

 

Looks to be an interesting and informative read (and may serve to highlight the error of my initial post in this thread.) Thanks.

 

Quote

Some of Wilber’s “holoarchies” are gradations of being, which he views as truth itself; however, being is delusion, and its gradations are gradations of delusion. Wilber’s supposedly universal ontogenetic holoarchy contradicts all Buddhist Paths, whereas his view of phylogeny contradicts Buddhist Tantra and Dzogchen, which claim delusion/being increase throughout the aeon to finally achieve reductio ad absur- dum. Wilber presents spiritual healing as ascent; Grof and Washburn represent it as descent—yet they are all equally off the mark. Phenomenologically speaking, the Dzogchen Path is “descending,” but not in Washburn’s or Grof ’s sense—and “transpersonal” is not a synonym of “sanity.” A synthesis of Wilber, Grof, Washburn, Jung, Laing, Cooper and non-transpersonal authors in the framework of Wisdom traditions is imperative.

 

[Encephalon]

20 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

It is interesting that these are affirmations to be repeated rather than topics to be explored. On that note, it is strikes me as a form of self-hypnosis rather than a meditation. 

That wasn't my experience.  As Wilber points out, "If you persist at such an exercise, the understanding contained in it will quicken and you might begin to notice fundamental changes in your sense of 'self.' " From this I infer a process that develops with time and consistency.  To me it feels more like a reimagining of self, the harnessing of the power of imagination to dis-identify with mental objects, so I quite naturally felt these were topics to be explored rather than mere affirmations in the service of self-hypnosis. 

Edited August 21, 2020 by Encephalon

[Encephalon]

This technique was originally conceived by Ramana Maharshi. Simply put, it's a form of meditation that seeks to eliminate the identification of the seer with the instruments of seeing.  And it does require healthy ego-strength to be effective as intended.  We can't reconstruct our "self" without safely and mindfully deconstructing it. 

 

I took the SuperHuman Operating System - https://superhumanos.net/ - a few years ago and was lucky enough to get it for $250, and the value I received was limited by my grosser levels of emotional immaturity and psychological baggage.  I'd love to take it again! KW is not a perfected being but the work that's been made available to mere mortals is profoundly liberating when practiced as intended.  

Edited August 21, 2020 by Encephalon
imperfection

[forestofclarity]

Of course. I really only piped up because of the comparison to Dzogchen teachings, and it seems to me to be very far apart from Dzogchen. 

 

I do think it is important to practice with diligence and devotion. Some day-- maybe soon, maybe later--- the time for practice will be done. 

 

6 hours ago, Encephalon said:

That wasn't my experience.  As Wilber points out, "If you persist at such an exercise, the understanding contained in it will quicken and you might begin to notice fundamental changes in your sense of 'self.' " From this I infer a process that develops with time and consistency.  To me it feels more like a reimagining of self, the harnessing of the power of imagination to dis-identify with mental objects, so I quite naturally felt these were topics to be explored rather than mere affirmations in the service of self-hypnosis. 

 

[doc benway]

2 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

Of course. I really only piped up because of the comparison to Dzogchen teachings, and it seems to me to be very far apart from Dzogchen. 

Nothing is very far apart from dzogchen, other than the practitioner, and not even that one from the perspective of the Nature. The comparison may have been a bit irresponsible on my part. At the same time, we’ve got our different paths and showing where we might converge can be useful and supportive. That was my intent.. 

 

 

2 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

I do think it is important to practice with diligence and devotion. Some day-- maybe soon, maybe later--- the time for practice will be done. 

 

 

 

[Kubba]

Forgive me, but the method described in the post souds quite a bit intelectual, taking one into the mind. I thought best meditative practices aim at dissolving the superficial mind, even temporarily. I know that KW is famous thus what he teaches should appear as worthy practicing but what if that’s not the case? He is for sure a good speaker and a brilliant writer, very convincing and spent a dedicated time for developing what he has developed, nontheless methods he passes on might not be the best ones so I’m not surprised that the author of the post spintaneously withdrawn from those “meditations”. 

 

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Edited August 29, 2020 by Kubba
Typo