THe fact that this obvious truth is not mainstream or well known makes it so much more special . And yet even though it is not well known, it is everyone’s experience, whether they have seen it or not. It’s jncredible how powerful thoughts are at veiling reality.
This is such a beautiful and simple pointing. I just thought of an experience I once had waking and getting out of bed one morning, I could see everything around me very clearly...THEN I felt my eyelids open physically. There was no actual change in what I saw, proving to me that my physical eyes really don't have anything to do with what I see. So, from this experience it seems quite reasonable to me that I don't actually have any eyes at all and that I just 'think' I have them.
This is fantastic! I caught this by chance some years back when we first got Sky installed (2011 I think) I had been channel hopping and found Conscious TV (I’d forgotten the name until I saw it here!) and this was the exact interview that was on. Thank you Richard! 🙏🏼
I had no thoughts for a time and with eyes closed in that darkness I saw one eye. Then opening the eyes in the darkness of the room I continued to see one eye for a little bit!
Thanks Richard. Do you realise the huge amount of referencing yourself as "I" and "Me" there is here? In my opinion, by persistently referring back to yourself as "I" or "Me", you are identifying your false (conditioned/limited) self to be the boundless Oneness you really are... But this consciousness, this Oneness cannot ever be Two. Thus if you refer to this Oneness as "I" or "Me" or "We" or "Them", then that's a duality and you're pointing away from the True Oneness. That's why radical Non-dualists say "The apparent me", or they even just point towards their body and say "This" because the person or the illusion of a separate self doesn't exist. They say that any process like mediation, awareness etc seems to harden the sense of person-hood (the "I" or "Me" thought) which is a sense of separation (individuality) apart from the One Source.
Because the experience is non-verbal, I take the view that I can be relaxed about the words I use. No words can pin down our true nature, and to me phrases like 'the apparent me' are no better, and certainly not more poetic! But each to his or her own.
I’m so happy to have found the headless way, just recently actually, but I’m finding it easy to realize with each passing day. Thank you for your work Richard Lang, from a faceless friend to another. Namaste, Inlakesh, Sat Chit Ananda, Tat Va Masi. 🙏🏼
Beautiful , I have done all the experiments you demonstrated and totally resonate , it’s my first hand experience that I am boundless openness There is so much innocence, curiosity, compassion in your eyes Richard ❤, love you sweetheart
Thanks as always, for posting this. I'd like to mention again my own experience, as I have on another of your videos. I've been working with this and have found -- for me personally -- that I can most easily elicit the experience by "imagining" or "pretending" that I have no head. I've gotten it to be very repeatable, and I do it by pretending that a miracle has occurred, and that my entire head is simply gone, yet "I" am still able to see, etc., and it works very straightforwardly from that point! It's interesting to see things happening "on their own" rather that having "me" be a part of it. It gives a great feeling of spaciousness -- of release from limitations. Again, for me (at this time), it works best to outright "pretend" to not have a head, yet miraculously still being able to see things. If people aren't "getting it" I recommend giving a try with the variation I describe.
Thanks for sharing. That's actually quite good. I find the exercise of trying to prove that I don't have a head more agitating than illuminating to the mind.
I like the idea to have both a private self and a public self that complement each other. The next stage in human development ! I have deeply appreciate the authenticity of this interview. Thank you ! :)
I agree on the one and many view.. it's my experience. But surely non duality and the Buddhist view of no self is being misrepresented here. All that is implied is that one isnt limited to a separate limited sense of seif. The teaching applies when individuality is the limit of ones identity
@@FirstPersonHood simplistic i guess in its derision of say non duality and the Buddhist doctrine of no self. He says he's both limitless awareness and an individual person, that's fine. However, one is the reality and one just appears and disappears all the time. As an appearance its reality is never discrete anyway, never appearing independent of the totality of experiencing. My experience was, at about 4 years old i realized wherever i am, everything appears .. i can't experience anything and not be aIready prior to it. Odd realization for a child. Then of course we grow up and are indoctrinated into believing ourselves one individual in many., then when i started to awaken in my twenties i saw there is only one being and as apparent individuals we are all like fingers on the same hand. , we don't see it because we limit our identity to the individual finger.. Then some years later it became clear that no individual entity really exists as a doer.. the body might appear to act but i never act. Then that as my reality i have never come into existence and will therefore never cease to exist.. that was like passing through a great terror of non existence to come to a kind of death of death. But the whole identity of the bodymind literally dissolved into the void.. what they call the great death in zen .. and you realize you are that void you feared and there is absolutely nothing to fear as there is only the completeness of Self without otherness.. then when perceptions return its obvious there is only Consciousness and nothing else. So this successive pealing away of the onion. At least in my case... If id stopped at the first awakening id probably think i was both the Self and an individual. Now i feel i can be natural and not continually assert my non existence...which is absurd.. but i also wouldn't assert my individual existence either. The truth is beyond existence and non existence in my view, .or any of the opposites. I've been pretty deeply involved in Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta so perhaps its irritating to hear people dismiss them in favor of some straddling of individuality and Self.. Something not right about it to me. But then as i say, its also absurd to go around saying you don't exist like umm some people haha. Lets just be natural! I don't live in a spiritual enclave.. i live in an inmer city suburb around ordinary people... i behave naturally, i don't even talk about awakening unless it comes up, This is not to say Richard Lang is wrong at all. He is probably just being practical and I'm being nitpicky Haha
@@michaelmcclure3383 If my 'self' were real, then how could it be said that God is 'without boundaries'? If this 'self' were real, and not illusory, I would be occupying some of 'His omnipresent 'Space' which is impossible. God has to be All in All. I understand that as humans we have act 'as if' we are here, and separate, and make decisions, be a 'doer' etc, but beyond what is required for the social setting of our lives, there is..........no one, only 'The Only One'....? Having said, that, many of us realise that Truth is beyond words, beyond intellectual understanding, and because of that, whatever words we use to describe our experience, they remain just words, really, there is no means of describing what is ultimately true...So there is no conflict here just different ways of describing our take on it, different approaches to that.
Thanks Richard. Has been an incredible luck to meet you at SAND, there a spark showed, I'm trying to follow it and this video and all the material you share and your availability is absolutely great. Thanks.
Thank you Richard .. fortunately I met Douglas. Having no separate head is wonderful 😁 And how wonderful to be Spacious radiant awareness.
Yes, wonderful to be 'spacious radiant awareness'!
THe fact that this obvious truth is not mainstream or well known makes it so much more special . And yet even though it is not well known, it is everyone’s experience, whether they have seen it or not. It’s jncredible how powerful thoughts are at veiling reality.
This is the wonder!!
This is such a beautiful and simple pointing.
I just thought of an experience I once had waking and getting out of bed one morning, I could see everything around me very clearly...THEN I felt my eyelids open physically. There was no actual change in what I saw, proving to me that my physical eyes really don't have anything to do with what I see. So, from this experience it seems quite reasonable to me that I don't actually have any eyes at all and that I just 'think' I have them.
This is fantastic! I caught this by chance some years back when we first got Sky installed (2011 I think) I had been channel hopping and found Conscious TV (I’d forgotten the name until I saw it here!) and this was the exact interview that was on. Thank you Richard! 🙏🏼
I had no thoughts for a time and with eyes closed in that darkness I saw one eye. Then opening the eyes in the darkness of the room I continued to see one eye for a little bit!
True revelations, in my opinion
Thanks Richard. Do you realise the huge amount of referencing yourself as "I" and "Me" there is here? In my opinion, by persistently referring back to yourself as "I" or "Me", you are identifying your false (conditioned/limited) self to be the boundless Oneness you really are... But this consciousness, this Oneness cannot ever be Two. Thus if you refer to this Oneness as "I" or "Me" or "We" or "Them", then that's a duality and you're pointing away from the True Oneness. That's why radical Non-dualists say "The apparent me", or they even just point towards their body and say "This" because the person or the illusion of a separate self doesn't exist. They say that any process like mediation, awareness etc seems to harden the sense of person-hood (the "I" or "Me" thought) which is a sense of separation (individuality) apart from the One Source.
Because the experience is non-verbal, I take the view that I can be relaxed about the words I use. No words can pin down our true nature, and to me phrases like 'the apparent me' are no better, and certainly not more poetic! But each to his or her own.
I’m so happy to have found the headless way, just recently actually, but I’m finding it easy to realize with each passing day. Thank you for your work Richard Lang, from a faceless friend to another. Namaste, Inlakesh, Sat Chit Ananda, Tat Va Masi. 🙏🏼
Beautiful , I have done all the experiments you demonstrated and totally resonate , it’s my first hand experience that I am boundless openness
There is so much innocence, curiosity, compassion in your eyes Richard ❤, love you sweetheart
Its amazing how many ppl want to dis & misunderstand Nonduality & some other concepts.
LOL, to each their own...😮
really beautiful stuff, strange, subtle and Massive
So delightful. Many thanks for this upload.
Thank you. Lovely to see your face in this space!
It's not possible to see what you are as what is looking is it. Anything found is merely an object, concept or reflection.
Thanks as always, for posting this. I'd like to mention again my own experience, as I have on another of your videos. I've been working with this and have found -- for me personally -- that I can most easily elicit the experience by "imagining" or "pretending" that I have no head. I've gotten it to be very repeatable, and I do it by pretending that a miracle has occurred, and that my entire head is simply gone, yet "I" am still able to see, etc., and it works very straightforwardly from that point! It's interesting to see things happening "on their own" rather that having "me" be a part of it. It gives a great feeling of spaciousness -- of release from limitations.
Again, for me (at this time), it works best to outright "pretend" to not have a head, yet miraculously still being able to see things. If people aren't "getting it" I recommend giving a try with the variation I describe.
Whatever actually works! Any ticket Home is a good ticket.
+Nobody Inc. Look for yourself! Test it! Do an experiment...
+Nobody Inc. Join us in a free video meeting - we have them weekly. Email from the website if you want to join. It's easier to communicate that way.
Thanks for sharing. That's actually quite good. I find the exercise of trying to prove that I don't have a head more agitating than illuminating to the mind.
@@crappycigar9665 it is about seeing
I like the idea to have both a private self and a public self that complement each other. The next stage in human development ! I have deeply appreciate the authenticity of this interview. Thank you ! :)
Such a balanced, useful and healthy approach. Thank you, Richard!
Thank you for your appreciative feedback :-)
😊😊
🥰 Thank you very much, Richard.
Lovely interview, so eloquently expressed.
U
I agree on the one and many view.. it's my experience.
But surely non duality and the Buddhist view of no self is being misrepresented here. All that is implied is that one isnt limited to a separate limited sense of seif. The teaching applies when individuality is the limit of ones identity
Too simple?
@@FirstPersonHood simplistic i guess in its derision of say non duality and the Buddhist doctrine of no self.
He says he's both limitless awareness and an individual person, that's fine. However, one is the reality and one just appears and disappears all the time. As an appearance its reality is never discrete anyway, never appearing independent of the totality of experiencing.
My experience was, at about 4 years old i realized wherever i am, everything appears .. i can't experience anything and not be aIready prior to it. Odd realization for a child. Then of course we grow up and are indoctrinated into believing ourselves one individual in many., then when i started to awaken in my twenties i saw there is only one being and as apparent individuals we are all like fingers on the same hand. , we don't see it because we limit our identity to the individual finger..
Then some years later it became clear that no individual entity really exists as a doer.. the body might appear to act but i never act.
Then that as my reality i have never come into existence and will therefore never cease to exist.. that was like passing through a great terror of non existence to come to a kind of death of death. But the whole identity of the bodymind literally dissolved into the void.. what they call the great death in zen .. and you realize you are that void you feared and there is absolutely nothing to fear as there is only the completeness of Self without otherness.. then when perceptions return its obvious there is only Consciousness and nothing else.
So this successive pealing away of the onion. At least in my case... If id stopped at the first awakening id probably think i was both the Self and an individual. Now i feel i can be natural and not continually assert my non existence...which is absurd.. but i also wouldn't assert my individual existence either. The truth is beyond existence and non existence in my view, .or any of the opposites.
I've been pretty deeply involved in Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta so perhaps its irritating to hear people dismiss them in favor of some straddling of individuality and Self.. Something not right about it to me. But then as i say, its also absurd to go around saying you don't exist like umm some people haha. Lets just be natural! I don't live in a spiritual enclave.. i live in an inmer city suburb around ordinary people... i behave naturally, i don't even talk about awakening unless it comes up,
This is not to say Richard Lang is wrong at all. He is probably just being practical and I'm being nitpicky Haha
@@michaelmcclure3383 If my 'self' were real, then how could it be said that God is 'without boundaries'? If this 'self' were real, and not illusory, I would be occupying some of 'His omnipresent 'Space' which is impossible. God has to be All in All. I understand that as humans we have act 'as if' we are here, and separate, and make decisions, be a 'doer' etc, but beyond what is required for the social setting of our lives, there is..........no one, only 'The Only One'....?
Having said, that, many of us realise that Truth is beyond words, beyond intellectual understanding, and because of that, whatever words we use to describe our experience, they remain just words, really, there is no means of describing what is ultimately true...So there is no conflict here just different ways of describing our take on it, different approaches to that.
I think it’s up to each person’s interpretation. That’s kinda the beauty of it. So many different ways to explain the unexplainable.
Thanks Richard.
Has been an incredible luck to meet you at SAND, there a spark showed, I'm trying to follow it and this video and all the material you share and your availability is absolutely great.
Thanks.
Great to meet you too, Cristiano. And do drop in to a hangout - you are most welcome.
Oscar material!
Yes, Iain does perform well... :-)