I find that somehow, by shifting the focus of attention, I become the very thing I look at and experience the kind of consciousness it has; I become the inner witness of the thing. I call this capacity of entering other focal points of consciousness – love. – Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
I heard that quote from Nisargadatta, the famous advaita sage, on a recent month-long retreat. I found it significant, because at the time I was working with the enquiry question, “What is Love?” and had started to come to the same realization. So, when I heard the very simple description of love that Nisargadatta gave, of the capacity to place one’s consciousness on something, I thought to myself, “Exactly!”
When I first started working with the question, “What is Love?” my initial experience was of feeling the connection between all things, almost like seeing the subtle, but pervasive, effect that each atom had on each other atom in the universe. But then, the answer began to change, and for some time, each time I asked the question, “What is Love?” almost immediately a huge amount of fear, anxiety, etc. would arise. At first I thought that I must be doing something wrong, but as I continued to ask the question the same exact thing kept happening. Before I asked, everything would be even, clear, etc. and then BAM all sorts of intense and difficult emotions would arise. I began to get interested in this fact, and decided that it’s arising couldn’t be an accident, but rather was exactly what should be arising. And so I shifted to just being with, and seeing clearly, all of it as it arose. Much as I would do with vipassana practice, I gently explored and relaxed into the experience. Eventually, as all experiences do, it faded, and I had the sudden and shocking realization that this was an answer to the question, “What is Love?” Love is the capacity to be present with something. When I shared that with my teacher, Trudy Goodman, she acknowledged that yes, that is what is meant by Love. And she also mentioned that it kind of trips people out to see that, because it really doesn’t carry with it all the charged emotionality that people assume it should.
Reflecting on this a little later, it occurred to me that any practice that allows one to be with experience more fully is itself a practice of Love. All of the vipassana practice that I’ve done, seeing clearly the nature of phenomenon and the mind-body-self process, was strengthening Love. And now I really don’t see a difference between the practices that more emphasize surrender and love and those that emphasize awareness and attention. For me, they converge in the simple act of “shifting the focus of attention” to include whatever it is. And what happens when we are able to do that for the whole of Reality, just as it is? For me, that’s when things start to get interesting!
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
exactly!. cool insight, dawg
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:51 am
I LOVE this post. hehe. You have my undivided attention universe!
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Love is the capacity to be present with something. Yes.
Does not even the lover eventually say “Be with me, stay right here with me, always” ?
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Hey Vince!
You’re integrating “surrender and love” and “awareness and attention” by “’shifting the focus of attention’ to **include** whatever it is”.
Next step (figuratively speaking):
Who is it?
-= OR =-
What am I?
[Note the switercheroo in those 2 questions of the "who" and the "what".]
Regards,
Mike
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Hi Mike,
Interestingly the other two questions I worked with on this retreat where “Who am I?” and “What am I?” respectively. And both teachers I worked with (Jack Kornfield and Trudy Goodman) asked me specifically about the difference between the experience of each of these questions. I actually spent most time working with these two questions and it was very, very interesting.
May 28th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
exactly!. cool insight, dawg
June 15th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Thanks Vince,
Great post and really helpful insights. A couple of follow-up questions. How would your framework apply when emotions such as anger or perhaps even hatred come up? Does just being present for these visceral, human experiences constitute love? If I am willing to sit with anger is that an expression of love? What about when I perceive deep social injustice or a person harming another human being? Is just bringing my attention to what I’m experiencing in that moment enough, or does love require action? Or, if I’m forced to kill to save the life of another or myself can I kill with love? Can I love the person I have to punch to defend myself? By applying your framework, would accepting that physically hurting another to defend myself is necessary and bringing awareness to the acceptance that this is what is needed constitute love?
In general, I wholeheartedly agree with your post, and am not trying to play devil’s advocate. However, I am interested in your thoughts on the boundary conditions of this type of framework.
Much appreciated!
June 25th, 2009 at 11:51 am
“….any practice that allows one to be with experience more fully is itself a practice of Love”
Yes, that is what I find for myself as well. Allowing experience as it is, as if it would never change, is an expression of love.
It is an expression of love for reality (God, existence, Buddha Mind etc.), as is sincere inquiry, prayer, and other practices.
June 26th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Hi Vince,
Nice post. To be an “inner witness” as the act of love is very inspiring wording. Also I owe you an email! In progress.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Beautiful post Vince, thank you.
And thank you more generally for your work, inspiration and commitment on both this site and the podcast, great stuff!
All the best
Thom