Could noting and labelling (or mindfulness practices) be used within Nisargadatta's "I am" approach?

 

I really liked this response to the following question, thanks to AI reasoning:

Q: Could noting and labeling (as per Buddhist meditation practice such as Mahasi noting) work with noting and labeling the "I am" (as Nisargatdatta taught with his teachings on the "I am")?

A: Yes, noting and labeling could be applied to the "I am" in a way that aligns with Mahasi-style insight meditation and Nisargadatta’s teachings.

How This Would Work

1. Noting the "I am" as an Object of Awareness

   • In Mahasi noting, you label experiences as they arise (e.g., "thinking," "hearing," "pain").
   • You could note "I am" as a phenomenon when it naturally appears in awareness.
   • If identification arises, note "identifying" or "selfing."

2. Seeing the "I am" as Impermanent and Not-Self

   • Traditional Buddhist noting is designed to reveal impermanence, suffering, and not-self (anicca, dukkha, anatta).
   • By noting the "I am" in real-time, you might see that it is an arising and passing event—not a fixed reality.

3. Going Deeper into Nisargadatta’s Approach

   • Nisargadatta suggests staying with the "I am" without conceptualizing it.
   • Noting might initially create distance, making you aware that the sense of "I am" is an experience, not the ultimate truth.
   • Eventually, the goal would be to drop even the label and abide in pure being.

Potential Challenge

• Over-Conceptualization: Noting could reinforce a dualistic observer, keeping "I am" at the level of mind instead of allowing direct abidance in it.
• Solution: Use noting only to dissolve identification, then let awareness rest naturally in the "I am."

Conclusion

Yes, noting and labeling could help deconstruct the habitual identification with "I am" and reveal its transient nature. However, at some point, Nisargadatta’s approach invites you to go beyond noting and simply be the "I am" in its purest form.