Awareness Without Objects
Q: Hi, Robert, thanks for The Ten Thousand Things, which my wife and I are reading and discussing together at the moment.
Just read chapter 23, ‘Choiceless Awareness’, regarding the Ramana invocation to focus on the ‘I am’. One of the things one comes up against in Advaita circles is the notion of ‘awareness without objects’ and that this is the condition in which we should ideally be hanging out on a (semi-) permanent basis.
There is, of course, the discussion about whether objects apparently or inherently exist, but maybe we can leave that aside and just look at the notion of awareness without objects. In my own experience of day to day living, whether sitting quietly or engaged in whatever activity, no such state has ever been experienced. The idea of awareness without objects makes no sense to me, and probably has as much survival chance as a fish out of water, though I imagine the fish would have at least a few (rather unpleasant!) minutes. Perhaps you could say something about this from your perspective if you can find the time and are so inclined.
Thanks again, and be well!
A: Hi, John. Thank you. You are most welcome.
One can spend a lifetime trying to experience the world according to the claims of others. Since you are asking me to share my perspective, it’s really quite simple. I have no need for Vedanta or any other belief system, and I am not trying to experience anything beyond this present aliveness and all it contains. Free of the desire to become or attain anything that is not here now, it is easy for me to see that in the world of so-called “spirituality,” most often, the emperor has no clothes.
I find myself entirely awake and exquisitely aware. Each moment is potentially rich, and all the more if we meet it without preconceptions about the so-called “Truth.”
I have no idea what that awareness “really” is, from whence it comes, or of what it consists. I see many seeking to deal with the inevitable pain, loss, insubstantiality, and mortality of the human situation by trying to convince themselves that behind all this lies a pure, featureless, consciousness (Brahman), which is undying and unchanging, which is what “I” really am so that the I of experience is only a figment.
But in my understanding, frustration, pain, loss, fear, and all the rest of the “negatives” are simply part of living as a human primate animal. Those feelings just arise if and when they do, just like the “positives,” such as pleasure, joy, peace of mind, creativity, love, etcetera. Trying to have one without the other is, I say, a fool’s errand.
When I open my eyes in the morning, I find a world of objects, feelings, and thoughts, complete and intact. I do not have to try to create that world, any more than I have to try to circulate my blood or grow my hair. The world just happens, and I could not prevent that happening even if I wanted to.
Ordinary, everyday experience conflicts completely with the claims of Vedanta, which can never be directly perceived, but only heard about from others and credulously believed.
Advaita Vedanta (non-duality) has become faddishly popular among “spiritual” people, who imagine that if they could only experience that Brahman alone is real, and the universe is not real but only Maya (illusion), then they would be “saved” from impermanence, loss, and mortality.
Even accepting the dubious claim that the entire material world does not “really” exist, but is only a kind of dream, one’s direct experience still does not accord with the claims of Vedanta, for within the so-called “dream” are countless happenings of various kinds: sights, sounds, thoughts, etcetera, and those experiences cannot be made to go away. You can call all that a dream, but that does not explain any of it, nor make any of it go away.
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, but, apart from dogma and testimony, I don’t see much evidence for the claims of Advaita—not even ordinary evidence. I hear you saying that you don’t see much evidence either.
As always, I am just reporting my view of these matters, not telling anyone what to believe or disbelieve.
Does that help?
[The comment thread below has been unusually rich—well worth looking at.]
I don’t think there is a definitive answer to this question of pure awareness without objects etc. however has anyone involved in this discussion today ever read a book by Douglas Harding titled “0n Having No Head, a Rediscovery of the Obvious”. I read this book over 40 years ago. The insight it gave me has stayed with me ever since. It points to ordinary everyday awareness which can be best described as emptiness. It’s very rarely noticed because it’s always there and taken for granted. This is not a belief like believing or identifying with Brahman or some such nonsense but totally ordinary. It doesn’t make one feel blessed or special of course inevitably people will turn it into that. It doesn’t promise divinity or life after death. From my understanding it’s pointing to the light of Awareness. When the body-mind dies the light goes out and the individual disappears. As far as any of us know it’s finished. This Presence which seems to be what these differing opinions seem to be about cannot be named is totally mysterious and always there until it’s not. End of story. I’ve always found it revealing and fascinating that when I have mentioned this to people who are interested in this kind of thing there’s a tendency to not notice because it’s so ordinary and obvious or say yes but and start discussing thoughts and opinions about non-duality. Before I shut up I’d like to add that I’m 76 years old and my daily life has nothing to do with any of this. I’ve been a professional actor for 40 years live in midtown Manhattan. Most of my friends and acquaintances are in show business and not particularly “spiritually” inclined. I’ve probably said too much but what the hell. My best to all. Thanks for indulging me.
In my humble opinion, a lot of what goes on in “spiritual” circles is hypnosis, plain and simple. Thank you,as always Robert, for your sensible approach.