Thursday, November 10, 2011

Direct Pointing vs “Who AM I?” Inquiry. Simplified.

What is the method and what are the differences?
I would like to make it clear how direct pointing (“I” does not exist) differs from Inner inquiry in non-duality (Who Am I?)
In Direct Pointing we hold seeker’s attention, focus very narrow - on one and only thing - that “I” does not exist. 
“Who AM I?" Inquiry implies that there is some "who" that exists. From the start of your inner inquiry, by formulating your questioning in this way you assume a basis, a default - there is "who" there, and I just need to find it. 
In Direct Pointing we are focusing on NOT FINDING. 
In “Who AM I?" Inquiry we are focusing on FINDING.
If you notice that the seeker is mixing and matching these two methods, while working with you - explain him the difference of these methods, and show him that mixing both only will give him either temporary fuzzy, blissy state, or his brain will start to “explode” from trying to solve this riddle.
What are the results?
If you find through Direct Pointing that “I” does not exist, then gradually, you will start to recognize Who YOU are.
If you find through “Who AM I?" Inquiry who YOU ARE, then you also will see, more immediately, that "I", that we are looking into with Direct Pointing, does not exist.
Both methods lead to the same.
Direct Pointing is seeing the illusion of separate entity from the start, then continues unfolding.
“Who AM I? Inquiry is continues unfolding, seeing the illusion of the separate entity somewhere in a process.
Direct Pointing is more efficient, quick right from the beginning, therefore falling of beliefs structure (what we call unfolding) can be either light and restful or intense and violent, and all in between. 
“Who AM I?" Inquiry more contemplative, slow, sometimes takes years and years, allows for gradual unfolding.
It is not a coincidence that Direct Pointing was born in the times where we see rapid changes in consciousness of the human and his environment. There was a need, an intention for consciousness liberating itself more rapidly. 
Who we are?
In both ways there is no separate entity “who is looking” or “who is guiding”. These are just different movements of the same vastness.  We do not choose the way, or choose being guided, or be a guide, we are just an appearance that presents itself as Direct Pointing guides at this moment.
This ride
on the very 
is awesome!



  1. WHO AM I
    Who- Finding UNIVERSE
    AM - Aadi
    I - Anadi
    Aadi & Anadi Means which has no Beginning & Which has no end,It is Eternal.

  2. Buddhists say: I Am Not, Therefore I Am, Therefore I Am Not. Hindus say: I Am, Therefore I Am Not, Therefore I Am. Two different dharmic traditions that are actually the same, according to the Dalai Llama himself.

  3. IMO, either method will take us to the Source or Life or whatever special label it has. I was introduced to the What am I? question many years ago but never got any where with it and always envisioned the Self as some super being way beyond or above me (like god). The LU thing works a lot better and quicker because it assumes there is no Self/self or universal manager but only the Source/Life or whatever label works. Ramana basically said the same thing (You are the Self) but then gave some of his followers the Inquiry (Who am I?) to work with. Whatever works for you..............