The Absolute Witness ~ Shinzen Young

Shinzen shares how the use of "witness' and "non-dual" has various meanings to different people. He shares of the difficulties and ambiguities in talking about these terms. Shinzen shares two senses of the word witness. The first example describes a certain level of equanimity with a "distance creating metaphor", which is a certain stage on the path that one must not get stuck in. Shinzen then goes on to describe the True or Absolute Witness and quotes from Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, then shares how the transition occurs from the "separate observer" to the "absolute witness". *See also Shinzen's talk on Non-Dual Awareness. Filmed in Nov. 2009 at Mt. Carmel Spiritual Centre in Niagara Falls.

[@killercreek450]

explained very well

[@rostislavsyrsky6676]

Shinzen is the enlightenment enlightening others. Great!

[@SaiF290]

This video is absolutely amazing. Thank you.

[@francescocarpini]

Very good. Thank you.

[@BernardGoHard]

You have explained, through words (which are necessary complications) that which isn't complicated at all...as you point out, [the only difference between the enlightened and non enlightened is this perception(non percpetion)]. All "information", including space/time, is all at once "percieved" by this "puncturing" moment to moment. It only appears as random puncturing because mind "cannot follow" this "zero".You put to rest the searching mind when you intuitively realize it can't be grasped. You simply go about your day knowing that in all your activities this perception comes and goes, there is nothing for you to really do ..as the koan goes, "...can you at once swallow all of the west river in one gulp..."

[@sjay4281]

Can you tell me more about how you trained upto this stage?

[@Highest_Truth]

that is wonderful.

[@AntarblueGarneau]

When the technique of "witnessing" observes the "witness" the "witness" disappears..."Content-less consciousness" or "No mind" occurs. Many years ago I experienced in a sit repeated occurrences of this; I was in and out of "content-less consciousness" for a relatively long period of time. When the witness disappears everything disappears! There is no observer, no observed. The space had no quality, no content, no dimension. These micro-seconds long sorties were interrupted periodically by the mind coming in and saying "OMG ----such and such is happening!" Then I would resume the witnessing technique and go back into it. As is implied this zero point experience in this instance was very cultivated over months and years. It changed my life fundamentally and there was some disorientation afterwards. ) 0

[@ExcellentHealth]

How long did it take, and what was your routine like? Thank you in advance.

[@markbrad123]

Equal see/feel everywhere.

[@mudskipper6702]

I realize from a Nondual sense it's all one however is this the same as the wise mind as taught in DBT Therapy and is it a separate function of the brain or the same brain functions with a different observant attitude

[@TheLynore1]

Does anyone know if Shinzen talks about Depersonalization Disorder relative to The Witness?

[@krizanthium]

I think this video gives rise to the question - when people dissapear, where do they go? Sort of a variation on the old "if a tree falls and no one hears it, does it make a sound?

[@brianlittrell797]

I think when people "disappear" they are merged with the Realm of The Absolute which is the field of all possibility, field of infinite potentiality where all possibilities exist and everything is One. It is God in it's original form, in It's unmanifested form. It is beyond time, space, matter, energy and is the source of everything that exists. Our consciousness dips into that field, into that reality, and then emerges again. So there is a mergence and emergence from that "place".

[@cosmofox]

The body doesn't disappear. What disappears is the construct of self-as-object, the separate identity.

[@Ndo01]

Is contentless awareness really contentless, or is it content that you don't have words for?

[@micahdelaurentis3719]

What's the difference between "content-less consciousness" and simply not being conscious? How would you know that you were conscious without content and simply not being conscious at all? Can you point to a feature of experience that identified it as "contentless"? You can't, because then it wouldn't be nothing. So this seems like a fallacy from the get-go. Someone... please try to explain this to me

[@Bronco541]

As someone who experienced it though very breifly, trust me, it is waaaay different. Its about the craziest experience ever. The reason everone uses these confusing terms to explain it is simply because there really is no language to explain it adequately. U can not understand it unless you experience it for yourself. Therr is nothing to prepare you for it.

[@premprabhakar1083]

Very good question.. your content, image, experience all are made by your mind. Mind is nothing but thoughts/knowledge. Thought/knowledge is always belongs to past. Past comes under time domain. Watch things without "words/launguage", "image", Unconditionally, choicelessly Or see things like a non- intellectual being.. or inocent like a one year child. You will taste timeless domain. In this domain there is no observer or observed, only "observing".

[@pisanghangus2]

Does anybody understand this ?

[@alankuntz4406]

Turiya

[@swingtrade2]

witnessing, no witness.

[@Johnnyredtail]

Sounds more like semantics to me?

[@JasonGafar]

Johnny Allison that's what she said.

[@fightington]

Sounds like he is clarifying and he states that

[@ultimanecat3091]

6:45 "They know that they are that nothing." Who knows that they are that nothing? If there is a knowing that knows it is that nothing then that knowing itself cannot be nothing or it would not know that 'nothing'.

[@reggaemow]

what if this nothingness just is the brain? which we can not "feel". the whole body is connected with a nerv system which sends information to the brain, the brains different parts for (touch, sound, see, image, talk, feel) interprets this information in its own way and functioning. nevertheless, the brain itself does not have any receptors to register itself, it does not have any nervs like the rest of the body. therefore we call it, "nothingness", our true self. where everything comes alive, is seen and dies away back into nothingness. the brain is singular and can not be observed objectively by itself, so we get confused and says that our true nature is this nothingness, which in fact just is our brain?

[@simonwagner8332]

I think ultimately we have to accept that direct experience is of a "higher order" than the world of beliefs and concepts, the brain here being just a concept. Your own brain is not in your direct experience, like you said.

[@johnhagee4216]

What if you count the number of neurons in our brains and then you just adjust the extent for that number? Like our true self is X, the number of neurons in our brain divided by Y, the number of words in our vocabulary, plus X again for an accurate ratio as to what word we might use to describe this true self. So the true self ratio of our brain would X/(X+Y) and if the ratio is 99.99% we could just use the word brain at all scientist conventions.

[@BeyondNonduality]

The brain is within no thing ness

[@BeyondNonduality]

The brain is an object yes it’s working as a strange loop in reality

[@BeyondNonduality]

Who is witnessing the brain 😂😂 the true witness

[@mrlife2007]

The world is flat