Ken Wilber - Subject becomes object

[holekyo]

do you wanna be my master ? wanna make me sit on your knees like a puppy ? like buddhist idiot in gompa when master arrived ?? i'm a motherfuckin mix 0,25 of russian. wanna treat me like a dog, i will bite off your balls and yell to a fuckin moon. fuck off. master, wtf ?? shit on you all

[EasyStu007]

As soon as we talk about it, we do not talk about it :D

[geoffreyah]

It is the detachment of the external world which is felt as a separation or loss that causes one to feel suffering not the objects. One thinks one has to have something, someone etc. One becomes dependent on externals.

[geoffreyah]

It's better not to identify with anything especially one's transcendental self or god or one will become ego inflated. It is an idea one can still identify with. The small self should not be identified because it has to continually undergo many psychological death and rebirths but it is an archetype that can undergo an unlimited amount of death and rebirths. Identification with the highest level or trans self is not inlightenment which is an ephiphany which comes once in a while.

[geoffreyah]

Only in the unconscious can one be completely without an object unless one is dead. Death only symbolizes the detachment of the subject from object, When one is dead one is a zombie without consciousness. We can never get rid of the subject therefore enlightenment is not under one's control, like epiphany, so meditation won't necessarily get one there. The opposite of nothingness is the infinite which can only be perceived through a subject. i

[smallpotatoes989]

subject meaning thoughts and emotions awakening the self.that is the simple step of geing enlightetend right.But you can not awake the self with wish but only thro surendering in to the momement becouse the self itself does not have an active role but it is observant. so you have to slowly and gently in meditation surrender in to the momement then you becouse observer that is the first step.i am way ahead have cleaned my third eye realy good in the past month. there is no limit to spiritual path

[vajraloka1]

yes 0+1 = 1

[rodrigojoseunb]

''The reason that enlightment is so tricky, is because it's so simple''. Normally, i think that's the motto of the good teacher.

[screwluse]

6:03 for the win!

[starbros1947]

6. Egoism is the identification of the seer with the instrument of seeing.

The seer is really the Self, the pure one, the ever holy, the infinite, the immortal. This is the Self of man. And what are the instruments? The Chitta or mind-stuff, the Buddhi or determinative faculty, the Manas or mind, and the Indriyas or sense-organs. These are the instruments for him to see the external world, and the identification of the Self with the instruments is what is called the ignorance of egoism.

[ricsenTV]

Every life has an ego and it come more strong when the life come more complicated, every unicellular will go threw the life stages to become human, thats why the population is growing. And when you become human your soul is sort of "adult" and can drop of the school.

Our planet is nothing els than a soul washing machine.

[mn8n]

This is a repetition of teaching from Yoga tradition - it's the exact teaching with many of the exact words & concepts layed out as the Tattva Bodha - shiningworld dot calm - Home%20Page%20Links/ Tattva%20Bodha .pdf

[thup100]

borshit

bala bala bala, look at yourdelf first. bababbabababbababababablalalal­lalalalalallalalalalalallalala­lal

[thup100]

borshit

bala bala bala, look at yourdelf fist

[michaelw2711]

Ken keeps putting his hand up like he's shiva, it's like subliminal messaging only not so subliminal.

[87bartosz]

his speech can be summarized in four words: THERE IS NO YOU

he said that "transcendental 'self' doesn't have any qualities, it's a vast emptiness", in other words - there is no you, you cannot be an object, check it.

[readchomsky]

This is an excellent talk. However, discussions of self are child's play without hallucinogens.

[TheMarcinSim]

I admire Ken Wilber - big mind !

[DadGladVoxer]

He refers to the "pure self" as an "it". Which is an example of how our use of language objectifies our Iamness.

[Johnnybeak]

This may sound silly to one who hasn't practiced witnessing/meditation ..just watching the breath as long as it takes.. maybe days, weeks, years... or maybe now... the mind drops away.. and one is just floating in a vast feeling of emptiness... without a body to identify with... but this sense of " I " am just awareness.. Aware of what? The entire view of perception.. the entire universe...if I am space.. I am All objects arising in this space... which is what allows everything to be free as is

[Maxaveli777]

@Johnnybeak bro i relate to what u posted here. U r so right.. those selfish ignorant individuals have no idea what WIlber is talking about. Without solid knowledge basis it's a waste of time to listen to this video. I would never understand it several years ago but i understand it now and feel great..

[Iex97]

@Johnnybeak but what if ive been there and now instead i want a rocket ship even more than the vast empty feeling

[Johnnybeak]

@Iex97 Haha... I agree! One can totally get too mixed up in this seeking for "emptiness" and trying to cultivate more awareness and all that. Thats why is very important to just have a consistent simple practice of hatha yoga, vipassana, weights, swimming and even jogging where there is great concentration of the whole body and breath. This automatically frees up the mind, a great energy rush, can be very blissful and is very grounding/balancing to the sense of self and the bodies physiology

[claudelebel55]

Nisargadatta says that even I AM is an arising in the absolute is prior even to I AM. He also says that I AM is our point of access, to stay in I AM from when all else will be revealed. Who is aware of I AM ?

[lFlash4]

How do you know that that which is aware is the object itself? I find it a lot more plausible.

[greenrate]

At 5:48 . . . Wilber does an "of course" . . . that simply isn't one by any means.

He proposes to have integrated all traditions into his perspective . . . but there are major traditions that categorically disagree with his statement that "the Transcendental Self has no qualities".

So where's the "integration" in that?

[claudelebel55]

@greenrate when speaking of the ultimate, there can only be one truth. In the relative there are many points of view, in the absolute, there is only one. So all traditions that propose to speak about Truth or God have to be speaking about the same thing. When it comes to disagreements then, they are either due to differences in language and culture which make it difficult, sometimes impossible, to hear what is actually being said because of our interpretations and filters OR .....

[claudelebel55]

@greenrate ....OR we are taking our opinions and beliefs to be the Truth, which they are not. There is a lot of this going around. People generally want to defend their point of view, their beliefs and in order to hear, really hear, you must be willing to suspend all knowings - this is Krishnamurti's freedom from the past, from our accumulations.

[greenrate]

@claudelebel55

You are making a general statement that's not too hard to agree with. I'm glad to agree with it.

But look: Wilber is saying something as if it were true . . . when its truth is by no means generally agreed.

That's intellectually lazy at best . . . and self-serving at worst.

And he just goes on as if that's okay. It's not . . .

[claudelebel55]

@greenrate your statement is also very general:

He proposes to have integrated all traditions into his perspective . . . but there are major traditions that categorically disagree with his statement that "the Transcendental Self has no qualities".

which traditions and what is it that they say. A distinction also needs to be made between the belief/dogmatic oriented religions and their mystical branches. Personnally, I don't give a hoot about what the dogmatists say. ....

[claudelebel55]

@greenrate you also are making a general statement: --> but there are major traditions that categorically disagree with his statement that "the Transcendental Self has no qualities".

Which ones ? also, we need to make a distinction betwee belief-dogma bound religions and their mystical branches.

Belief bound christians, for instance, are likely not interested in Wilber and what he has to say.

meanwhile, have a listen to YOU HAVE NO QUALITIES from shiningworldvideo: v=GrBchZ90apQ

[sukhbirsingh79]

Any idea whether this whole talk is available on a DVD or something?

[martinotagliani]

At least thats what i understood by meditation, psychedelic trips, and studies of the modern physics. Tell me what you guys think about it, i really wanna know.

[claudelebel55]

seeming contradiction - everything you see, experience, is not you yet at 5:50 he talks about experiencing this vast emptiness, but all experiences come and go ... Maybe this is due to the limitation of words but it does tend to confuse me.

[narozzz]

"Ignorance is the identification of the seer with the instruments of seeing."

Is it not possible that this statement is directed as much at mysticism as it is at scientism?

[higher0mental0state]

wilber changing your whole life in 9 minutes and 35 seconds

[Juefawn]

If the self is not an object, then your just nihilistic, to say, there is no self.

[douglasmacjames]

i listened a lot of gurus but he is the worst !

[Happyascanbe1]

This is just homunculus gone east. Equally appealing to housewives and equally ridiculous. Entertaining though. 

[thup100]

The Self-realization (4) is a Vajrayana term, that is why Zen Buddhists may not know; this self is not that self; just like this Heart/Mind is not that Heart/Mind. The self is not the ego self nor is it the soul self, but the True Self- our Buddha Nature. Therefore, Self-realization is realized of Self- the Tathagathagarbha. (Read the whole PrajnaParamita Sutra, where Shakyamuni Buddha try to describe the Mind or the True Self.

;)

[thup100]

hey

[thup100]

sorry man, but i think actually the subject of inlitenment is not that simple at all and check self first carfully that what acxatly u r doing and which way is u r axactly practice atc:

[weetzybat]

he talks kinda slow

[MrCuntyballs2U]

Were just not that evolved........ We are instruments for displaying universal consciousness.......just not very good ones......as yet?

[MrCuntyballs2U]

@badger500 nice one!...... I amness ..... More like I aimless?

[badger500]

Contrary to Wilber, I tend to believe that the "I am-ness" is itself an illusion, or at least not quite what we naively think it is. I also question whether it is particularly valuable to pay attention to in our finite lives.

[garsett]

I'm normally not such a Ken Wilber fan, but here he explains things really really well.

This Pure Self - I call it the Pure Potential - is not the last step, however. It's what you manifest with it, even if it's just a play (Leela), that counts...

[SilentBud420]

you are truth/ god/ reality itself. expirenceing seperate idendities/selfs

[hohlwelt]

Thanks for posting, bobflea. What does he mean when he says 'god'? Are you familiar with the concept behind it?

[mdk444444]

Ken knows what he's talking about about but if you're interested in practical advice for transformation look to Eckhart Tolle.

[coolioto]

I like the sound of this and that's what worries me.

[narozzz]

@coolioto - Same here. I take a version of that position atheism, I think....

[cacaolover1]

this is one of the most lucid explanations of the process of becoming aware of the true self

[psstheyyou]

Kenny gives a great talk without once looking at the notes between his legs. Great stuff.

if there's such a thing as reincarnation then I think Kenny must have been a big band conductor with all those flashy hand and arm waving movements.

Or someone who unravelled the wool for a knitter.

[Jalexorid]

@psstheyyou

Excellent poem!

The grasses look favourably upon us today!

All is well in the place underneath the kettle.

[Johnnybeak]

Its both... We are the Relative Self and the Absolute Self ! ...but just to identify with one or the other you get all tangled up.... To integrate both by the realization that your Primal Pure Absolute Self is God/Spirit experiencing itself ( the only way it can) throught this human for.... Thank You ~Satchidananda

[SelfAware1]

well said my friend... i think peolple tend to forget that its all about balance.... being 100% spiritual is just as bad as being 100% egoic....

[1PostPoMoMaN1]

Yeah. These percentages are not exclusionary, though, therefore freedom is very great.

[greenrate]

@SelfAware1

Wilber doesn't mention that the practise of dis-identifying from all egoic content not only reveals the "Absolute Self". . . but also reveals one innate quality of that Absolute Self: the capacity to be identified with something other than itself.

"Identification" mistakenly has an always-negative connotation.

The capacity to CHOOSE identification (NOT avoid it . . .) is what's important.

It's the basis of our human-ness . . . and our unique Personal Self.

[SelfAware1]

you cant make yourself an objective thing to examine, when you do you are not looking at yourself, but a mental image representing yourself. nothing crazy, spiritual, scary, supernatural here. just facts. i dont understand why people are so militantly opposed to people like Ken. Probally because it threatens that very false sense of self.

[2bornot2b1984]

"Probally because it threatens that very false sense of self. "

That's circular. You are offering your premise as evidence of itself.

It also is predicated on the notion that having a "sense of self" is bad, which is your premise.

:-)

You see how that is circular?

Now don't get me wrong, it's your right to use circular logic. But if you are creating a dialogue based on reasoning, be prepared for your reasoning to be challenged if it is circular or self-contradictory.

[2bornot2b1984]

Just kill yourselves to experience what Ken Wilber is advocating.

Why does he define our experience here as getting "bruised, getting tortured, then dying"?

"Subjective" much?

What about the beautiful things the "objective" self experiences?

What about experiencing waves crashing around you? What about experiencing sunlight warming your skin?

We are here to experience. That involves pleasure AND pain. We come here to experience. That is the point of existence.

Wilber seeks to remove that

[guruu13]

I think you missed the point a little bit.

[2bornot2b1984]

That's possible. Or you/he are missing the point

"Everything you know about yourself is exactly what you are not"

Speak in absolutes much?

I understand there are varying degrees of that dynamic in everyone, however, people are varying degrees of "what they really are" in their MANIFEST form

There are aspects of my objective self that are definitely "what I really am", and varying degrees that aren't

Incidently, my comment is not just based on this one video

Wilber invalidates experience

[RockleTim]

imo,

Wilber is basically saying the same thing as every other spiritual teacher says, but I think he does it very clearly here.

He is simply discribing a different state of conciousness, a different self identity.

You seem to be getting mad that Wilbur is saying that his state is better than your state, which I agree is bullshit. This isn't is a question of how you SHOULD be, just him explaining the "enlightened" state of mind

[SelfAware1]

exactley!! there is no Better state, there is not higher plateau u must reach, you just gotta unlearn duality and what your left with is everything. and that is you. words dont do it justice. but good insight.

[narozzz]

@SelfAware1 - UNLEARN DUALITY! That's it! I knew there was a concise way of saying it, and you nailed it!

[SelfAware1]

those experiance of waves and sunlight you talk of are truly beautiful, but you split reality into "you" and "not you", subject on object, then you only experiance those things from a reletively narrow perspective. when you toss out the lie that there is a "you" feeling sunlights warmth, then your just left with sunlights warmth, it is all pervading and far more intense and vibrant. it is no longer an experiance seperate from the experiancer. it is one, that is you.

[2bornot2b1984]

@ your statement about the experience being from a relatively narrow perspective, I say...

To each his own.

:-)

Get it?

I think maybe I should be a guru. I could do it better.

It aint no thang.

[zerosetteaccordion]

Does any1 know 4 more videos of him? From some seminar or something like that...?

[zerosetteaccordion]

nice explanation Ken!Ty

[vajraloka1]

why not get somthing out of what he says instead of praising him? he,s not a rock star...please

[mmeredith82]

I'm a huge Ken Wilber fan, you can quantify his growth every time he speaks. He is amazing. His principles along with Psycho Cybernetics have helped me immensely with life and with trading.

[thibaulthalpern]

How do you "quantify" his growth? Or do you mean you experience the difference in his growth?

[sonofhendrix]

hummm. like a microprocessor cannot simulate its slef in 3D graphics?

[nickotwincities]

One of the most concise explanations of our fundamental 'Self's ever captured on video. Reminds me of brother Watts. Thanks Ken!

[teaparty111]

He is very clear----lucid---a very good guide to enlightenment! PEACE

[CloudshadowMan1]

What does Cloud think he is? This is a question worthy of frequent reflection. It's like the commercial; I could have had a V-8. When Cloud catches himself suffering he could say; I could have identified as being the Witness. This was a fairly good pointing out exercise. A fuller one is in his book; A Simple Feeling of Being. Peace and contentment to all beings.

[rainsplitter]

I just finished reading A Brief History of Everything. It's great that you've posted these lessons from Ken Wilber. I am really taken by the way that he can vocalize concepts that I have been experiencing in such a refreshingly coherent and easy to understand language.

[bobflea]

That's great to hear. I know exactly what you mean when you say you are taken by the way that he can vocalize concepts that you have been experiencing. It's seeing the impressions and insights that you have been accumulating confirmed and substantiated - and articulated in a way that deepens your understanding of these things. I would recommend his book "A Theory Of Everything" as a great follow up to "History Of Everything."

Thanks for the post.

[DRNSTRK]

finite body = object

soul, spirit, energy = subject

its so easy to understand this concepts when you have experienced them by yourself

[teaparty111]

Exactly

[seigneurvoland666]

is he an idealist then?

[MaBu888]

Not an idealist. He finds that idealists create too great a wall between the ideas and the world. He is an integralist, because he sees two poles that need to be integrated, such as idealism and realism.

[mananirvana]

I wish my high school friends were into this stuff. :(

[seigneurvoland666]

i agree!!!!

[cacaolover]

This is the most lucid and clear explanation of this process I've ever heard

[bobflea]

What a great comment. Thanks for posting it. That's exactly the way these talks and Ken Wilber's work in general have always struck me - so it's great to see that he's had a similiar effect on you.

[conqueredlove]

Actually, I-I is not a Mystery.

It is Awareness.

Very limited Awareness. It doesn't even know what's behind itself.

[conqueredlove]

Uncaged animals rest in this pure awareness.

At a dophin feeding pool in Orlando, FL I couldn't help but conclude that these were not the heroic, intelligent animals that swim the open waters. They were just feeding machines with a lost sense of joy.

Where it is true that the subject becomes the object in enlightenment it is also difficult to maintain I-I when I-I's resistance to body-mind affliction is not strong enough.

The body is a machine; the mind, a computer. I-I is a Mystery.

[clarinetato]

There's no such thing as illumination as a finality to all things. To recognize your-self being, is the first step.

[jsChannel1]

Just be aware of things without trying to solidify yourself in the process.

[QueerLiberation]

Ken is a wonderful object to be aware of. His pure Self is fun to watch come out and play.

[Elephant1960]

Truly wonderful. I love this guy. Thanks for posting this.

[robbwindow]

The self and the I resonates more as a subject when the I's cross over, that attract knowing of many other I's. I think :o)

[Gabe360flip]

I took a large dose of LSD. At one point my heart was beating so fast and hard and I was so scared. Thought it was going to explode and I would die. The room left..I experienced all of us as spiraling energy, all connected. Then I was in nothing but white. I was feeling what I was seeing. I knew I was dead. I wasn't scared. It actually felt soooo good I didn't wont to go back at that point. Then I was back. Only way I could explain is simply love. God pouring love into me. But.. wasn't my time?

[Gabe360flip]

That it was unlocked the door for me. I've learned much since and still have a lot to learn. I have seen and felt the oneness of god, and all beings. I witness karma laws, synchronicity, and I have visions now. I've learned we have created this world of material objects covering up the spiritual world that I have been to and back from. I'm here. It's there. Our false identifications covers it up. But why would we do this to ourselves? comfort? That side is all bliss! I still don't get life :(

[laughingpuddle]

How can Ken leave psychedelics out of the integral map of development? He mentions many styles of meditation and psychotherapy, but not psychedelics AFAIK.

[bobflea]

He actually does talk about psychedelics on several occasions - from Stan Groff to Ayahuasca use- in his books and on the Integral Naked web site.

[bobflea]

I think the point though is that psychedelics effect STATES of consciousness, and don't neccessarily do much to move people through STAGES of consciousness. Also, meditation practices and psychotherapy are actual sciences for observing, identifying and interpreting the mind - wjereas I don't think the same can be said for psychedelics. No psychedelic experience is going to show something called moral stage five or describe the function of the shadow or repression or projection.

[bobflea]

Psychedelics combined with meditative practices and psychotherapy can be useful though.

Wilber has been very involved with the artist Alex Grey, who's work is all based on psychedelic insights and visions.

[bobflea]

Focus on what it is in you that doesn't get life - and that's Spirit.

[laughingpuddle]

Thanks for your reply. I think what you refer to as states versus stages is what I think of as states versus attitudes. Attitudes are moral frameworks and dispositions, while states are the variable vibrancies that any attitude can take on.

Is this the video where Ken Wilber talks about the three stages of science? Psychedelics would fit into the first stage; they enhance the degree to which injunction can take place; observation.

[bobflea]

Your definition of states and stages is really similar.

A state is a temporary condition of consciousness. A person can bounce in and out of a state under certain circumstances. There are naturally occurring states such as waking, dreaming and deep sleep. There are also states that are induced, such as shamanic voyaging, trance states, hypnosis, psychedelic experiences and so on.

[bobflea]

A stage is a relatively permanent trait of consciousness. Stages occur as a developmental sequence. Each stage transcends and includes the prior stage-therefore, it is not possible to skip stages. As Wilber says, temporary states become permanent traits by developing through the stages of consciousness.

[martinotagliani]

@Gabe360flip Our true self its god. But as a ilimited potencial, it is abstract. Imagen all possibilitis, but none of them actually happening. So our ego, its the connection between god and our individual minds. Our existence is serving to focalize this ilimited potencial, and there for, making it real and expirienced. The world of material objects it is was have been atracting a small fragmented piece of the godly consciousness in the birth of a human being, making life possible.

[martinotagliani]

@Gabe360flip Life its about all of the fragmented pieces of the goldy consciousness (individual beings, me and you), live in a harmonic and integral way. But that is just to create and enviroment of peace, were the real goul its to achieve as much bigger area of the godly consciousness as possible. Being as close as possible to the absolute truth, to the mind of god.

[WSxcartoonxVBZ]

This is truly amazing, thank you for who ever posted this

[bobflea]

I'm really happy this resonated with you. I think it's pretty brilliant too, so I'm glad to have passed it on.

[hodonkain]

Later he mentions Jesus Christ or "God".

And Jesus teaches. Possibly one of the the many things that he was teaching when he died on the the cross is the fact that the object, the body isn't as important as the eternal mind.

-just an idea.

[bobflea]

Nice.

[1PostPoMoMaN1]

This idea has been useful in 'real life'.

[bobflea]

Absolutely. That's what is great about Ken Wilber's work - it's about grounding oneself in reality, so it's relevant and directly applicable to "real life".

[MaBu888]

And in my experience it has been useful.