Revisiting the caution against self-inquiry as a primary practice

[elderberry]

I’ve been doing AYP twice daily for several years — deep meditation, spinal breathing, the usual progression. I attempted self-inquiry several times over the first few years over practice, and it never really clicked. However, over the past year or so, after taking in self-inquiry instructions from a few sources outside AYP, something finally clicked, and I’ve started getting exceptionally good results with it.

The clearest signal came at a recent week-long retreat where I did essentially nothing but self-inquiry the entire time. It produced one of the biggest leaps in progress I’ve ever felt — starkly different from previous retreats where I stuck mostly to meditation and pranayama. And in daily life, when I lean heavily into self-inquiry, the peace, stillness, and well-being it leaves behind is more noticeable than what I get from my conventional meditation/pranayama practices. In short, based on my direct experience and where I am on my path, self inquiry really seems to hit significantly harder than meditation and pranayama.

Yogani’s stance on this in his teachings are very clear. Keep meditation and pranayama as your primary practice, and add in self inquiry when you are ripe. There are a few neo-advaita/direct path lineages out there which take an opposite stance, saying that self inquiry can be used as a primary practice. Yogani fairly calls this out as being a potential trap which can keep you stuck in non-relational self inquiry, spinning your wheels for some time.

If I look at my own direct experience, here is how I see it.

The case for the standard AYP approach:

• The only reason I was able to experience such positive results from self inquiry in the first place, was because of my several years of AYP meditation and pranayama. I think this is by far the strongest argument you can make, and is an argument that yogani clearly outlines in his texts.

The case for self inquiry as one’s primary practice:

• My own direct experience. At the end of the day, the guru is in you, and in yogani’s words, we are all spiritual scientists that need to do a little experimentation to find what works for us. Based on the data I have at the moment, self inquiry just seems to power wash obstructions away like nothing else I have experienced. However, as mentioned above, it’s possible this is only happening because of my baseline meditation practice, not in spite of it.

• I am going out on a bit of a limb here. But, based on what has been arising in my experience, it feels that when performed properly, self inquiry allows the practitioner to touch into inner silence in a manner fairly similar to meditation. I would agree that when I first tried self inquiry earlier on in the path, it was highly non-relational. Now, self inquiry feels much more like a process of releasing one’s question into inner silence. I suppose technically its a bit more like samyama in that sense, rather than meditation. But I suppose the argument I am trying to make here is that, when done properly, experientially it sure feels like self inquiry is cultivating inner silence in a similar way that core practices do. However, at least in my own experience, not only does self inquiry feel like it’s generating inner silence, it also has this extremely intense quality of dislodging ego structures and identification with my thoughts, that I feel like I don’t get from meditation nearly as much.

For context, this line of thinking came about by studying the works of angelo dilullo, specifically his main book “Awake: It’s your Turn”. But, what I find to be more valuable than looking at the works of any individual author, is to look at the results of the practitioners within a particular community. After developing friendships with a few members in the community, many of them have had experiences mirroring my own. Many seem to be yielding exceptional results with self inquiry as a primary practice, and meditation as a supplementary practice, rather than the inverse which is typically taught in AYP. However, as usual the waters are murky, because most people I talked to had several years (or decades) or meditation experience prior to making the shift to self inquiry as the primary practice. So, it often comes back to the chicken or the egg question which was mentioned above. It can be really hard to isolate variables when trying to measure these sorts of things.

At the moment, my current AYP practice is pretty simple. Twice daily SBP + DM. 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes in the evening. I am toying with the idea of replacing these two sitting sessions with 2x 30 minute sessions of devoted self inquiry.

As a lifelong follower of AYP, needless to say I am a bit apprehensive at the potential decision to directly contradict AYP teachings and take up self-inquiry as my core standalone practice.

Curious what others think, especially anyone who’s actually navigated this shift. Am I missing a pitfall, or is there genuinely more nuance here than the standard guidance suggests?

[Drystone (Tom)]

Hi Ederberry,

Cool that you are having some interesting results.

Just a thought, have you considered that this could just be a ‘clunky stage’ that may settle down in time? Where would that leave you?

I personally don’t have self enquiry as a practice, I see it as more of an effect of practice, but like you said chicken and egg….

Is the way you are suggesting to use self enquiry really a meditation on a Koan rather than a mantra? It’s still a meditation so will stimulate energy a little, and cultivate stillness, but will not have the benefit of stabilising prana that SBP does, which could be useful if you find yourself in overload territory.

Also, aren’t you doing Samyama?

Essentially I don’t know the answer to your query, but these are my initial thoughts about your suggestion. It’s up to you whether you want to do things your own way, it’s just not part of AYP practice (as you no doubt well know. )

Maybe try it for a while and see how it compares, see if the effects that you are feeling do wear off or not Nothing like direct experience

All the best,

Tom

[maheswari (maha moumneh)]

Hello elderberry

Self enquiry is not a practice that we allocate 30 minutes for it twice per day

It is a natural spontaneous discernment that happens by itself during daily life

So the advice is to keep the 2 ayp sessions

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Elderberry,

It is true that once abiding inner silence is present in the mind, some self-inquiry practices will work in a similar way to meditation, helping to increase and expand inner silence. And others work in a similar way to Samyama, involving releasing various things (and eventually everything) into silence.

So, depending on the practices used, it could be that someone could drop all practices other than self-inquiry practices at a certain stage on the path. And there are many yogis who have done this in the past, including some very famous ones such as Jiddu Krishnamurti and Ramana Maharishi.

Whether it is the wisest course of action to take is another matter. There are few self-inquiry practices that cultivate inner silence as well as Deep Meditation does. And few that are as purifying as Spinal Breathing Pranayama. How would the opening of the crown be managed without Spinal Breathing, for example?

So, someone could do this, but it may turn out to be a slower path. It could also turn out to be a more dangerous path, without providing some stable direction to the prana in the body.

In my own case I followed the AYP advice by keeping up Deep Meditation practice and Spinal Breathing and then added self-inquiry practices on to that. I found it to be a more sure and stable pathway then the “self-inquiry as a stand-alone practice” approach.

[elderberry]

Thank you for all the great advice guys.

@Christi the point you make about pranayama and crown opening is a very compelling one. I will agree that even in the best case scenario, self inquiry is clearly lacking when it comes to energy practices. If I choose to make the jump to self inquiry as a primary practice, I think it would still behoove me to perform SBP.

@Drystone I agree that this could certainly be a ‘clunky stage’. As far as a meditation on a koan vs. a mantra, see my explanation below on my reasoning as to why I feel self-inquiry operates on the same mechanics of meditation

@maheswari I agree. If I chose to take on self-inquiry as a sitting practice, that would be yet another departure from the AYP playbook. For the record, my game plan would be to do both, going all in on self inquiry as both a sitting practice as well as a spontaneous practice throughout daily life. I will admit this is a bit of a bold/risky move, which is why I am weighing this decision carefully.

As far as it relates to meditation/samyama, I am tempted to make the argument that if a self inquiry practice is structured in a very specific way, it contains the core qualities of meditation and samyama inside of it.

Based on my observation, it would seem that the core mechanic of meditation seems to be the practice of recognizing thoughts as thoughts. This was actually something that took me a long time to grasp. Initially when I started meditating, I thought the point was to “not have thoughts”. However as I read yogani’s texts more carefully, it was clear that wasn’t quite the point. The point was to constantly lose the mantra, and then come back to it. In other words, the core principle was to focus on the mantra, get distracted by a thought (probably), recognize that as a thought, and then return to the mantra. In that sense, the mantra is primarily just a useful tool for recognizing thoughts as such. It essentially gives us an objective measuring stick. “Oh, this isn’t the mantra, must be a thought. Ok, back to the mantra”.

This is why some traditions choose to use the breath instead of a mantra. They are just using different measuring sticks to allow the practitioner to recognize thoughts as such. And it would seem the more you do so, the more one cultivates inner silence.

Bearing this in mind, what I have found on my path is that there is a way to practice self inquiry which does not contain these mechanics inside of it, and there are ways (which have been much more effective for me), which do contain these mechanics.

When I first started performing self inquiry, it was extremely clunky and ineffective. I would pick up the “who am I/what am I” thought, and release it into inner silence as best I could. I never got particularly good results with this method.

After studying self inquiry from a few sources, I ended up with a slightly different approach to self inquiry.

1. If a thought occurs, clarify the thought. If a thought arrives in the mind, whether it’s conceptual, auditory, or visual image based, recognize the thought as a thought and try to clarify its contents a bit. For example, if it’s an auditory thought, you may choose to repeat the words of the thought once or twice to get a somewhat firm handle on what the thought actually is. But really, the key step here is recognizing thoughts as thoughts when they arrive.

2. Notice how the thought feels like it’s about “me”. Locate the sense that the thought is about “me,” in two respects: the remembered “me” who is the subject of the thought, and the immediate “me” — the viewer/thinker the thought seems to be occurring to right now. For example if you had the thought “I want a sandwich”, there is a direct remembered “me” via the word “I” contained in the thought. If you had just the amorphous thought “sandwich”, there is an immediate sense of “me” which is aware of this thought occurring. Try to find this sense of “me” in either case, depending on the contents of the thought

3. Look for the “me” The thought points to a “me,” so look for that “me” in your immediate experience — not by thinking about who or where it is, but by looking for it, or feeling for it. It is very important to do this relationally, like yogani emphasizes. In practice, this would likely look like asking “who am I/what am I” in relation to that “me” you just found in step 2, and releasing that inquiry into inner silence.

4. From here, one of two things can happen. If a thought occurs (that you can recognize), repeat from step 1. If a thought does not occur, then just continue abiding in inner silence.

When I started practicing in this manner, it’s like a switch flipped, and self inquiry knocked my socks off in terms of the sense of inner silence it cultivated in my direct experience.

The argument I am aiming to make here is, when self inquiry is performed in this type of way, it feels a whole lot like step 1 very closely replicates the core mechanics of meditation. The core mechanic being that one recognizes thoughts in the mind as such. Likewise, step 3 very closely replicates the core mechanics of samyama.

There is just one part which is tricky about this. Because we are not using the mantra, I will admit that it can be a fair bit more challenging to recognize thoughts as such if you do not have a baseline of inner silence cultivated. The mantra offers a very helpful measuring stick, whereas with this process you are kind of “on your own” in terms of needing to recognize thoughts as such. So in that sense, I would agree that self inquiry is not an advisable baseline practice for beginners. But, if you have the capability to consistently recognize thoughts as such without the aid of a mantra, it feels like it is pulling the same levers as meditation.

With all that being said, I would like to take a bite out of the humble pie and recognize that often times spiritual practices are a LOT more subtle under the hood than they first appear. So I should tread lightly when making claims about the mechanics of how meditation works under the hood.

For the more experienced practitioners out there, am I totally off base in my assessment? Or is there some truth to what I am saying in that self inquiry, when performed in a specific manner, pulls the same levers that meditation does under the hood?

[yogani]

Hi elderberry,

There is certainly nothing wrong with undertaking self-inquiry when it comes naturally, which depends on to what extent abiding inner silence (witness) has been previously cultivated. But replacing deep meditation with self-inquiry could risk stalling further progress by arresting the cultivation and stabilization of abiding inner silence. Can self-inquiry cultivate abiding inner silence, or is it only creating subjective experiences (wowie!) based on the inner silence that has already been cultivated? Who can say? It may take many years find out.

It should be pointed out that deep meditation has nothing to do with recognizing or analyzing thoughts. It is only about using the mantra as a vehicle to effortlessly and repeatedly transcend all thoughts, including the mantra. That, combined with an active daily life for stabilizing stillness/witness in the nervous system, is how abiding inner silence is cultivated. No analysis involved. Just meditate and go out and live.

Abiding inner silence integrated into daily life can not only facilitate natural inquiry in stillness, but also provides an unshakable foundation that is beyond all the ups and downs of life, including everything going on in mind, emotions, body and the surrounding environment. We become less attached and overwhelmed, while at the same time fully and passionately engaged in life. It enables much better decision making too (we could say divinely supported), so I’d think twice before dropping deep meditation for an experimental self inquiry practice. You can do both, using deep meditation for stillness/witness foundation building. Your call of course.

The analysis can be made very complicated, but the whole thing is really quite simple. We just meditate daily and do what life calls us to do between sittings, whatever it may be. If it is doing a lot of self-inquiry, no problem (be sure to self-pace!). If it is going to school, work or caring for family, great. It’ll all go easier and more effectively with a solid foundation of abiding inner silence.

The guru is in you.

Note: Besides offering a broad discussion on methods of self-inquiry in the later AYP lessons, there is also an optional “self-inquiry sutra” that can be added to sitting samyama practice.

PS: I asked the Forum AI about this, and here is what it came back with, according to the AYP approach of course. How you proceed is entirely up to you:

According to the sources, self-inquiry does not replace deep meditation for the cultivation of abiding inner silence; rather, the two practices serve distinct, complementary roles in the AYP system.

Deep Meditation as the Primary Cultivator

Deep meditation is regarded as the direct means for cultivating inner silence (also called the witness or pure bliss consciousness). In the AYP system, it is the foundational practice upon which all others—including self-inquiry—rely for their effectiveness.

• Continuous Practice: Cultivating inner silence is described as an “endless continuum” rather than a one-time achievement. Yogani explicitly states that he does not recommend dropping the mantra even after inner silence becomes “abiding,” as the ongoing procedure continues to provide subtle nuances and support for more powerful practices.
• No “Arriving”: Even for advanced practitioners, including Yogani himself, the twice-daily meditation routine is maintained. The idea that one can reach a point where practice is no longer needed is identified as a “pitfall of the mind” or an “illusion of attainment”.

The Relationship Between the Two

The sources define the relationship between meditation and self-inquiry through the metaphor of a “cart and horse,” where meditation (the cultivator of silence) must always be in front of self-inquiry.

• Meditation as Prerequisite: For self-inquiry to be “relational” (meaningful and grounded in experience) rather than “non-relational” (mere intellectualization), it requires a foundation of inner silence cultivated through deep meditation.
• Self-Inquiry as Integration: While meditation takes the attention inward to stillness, self-inquiry is used to integrate that stillness into daily life, helping to dissolve the “I-thought” and identification with the mind.
• Proactive vs. Passive: Deep meditation with a mantra is considered a “proactive” way to cultivate silence, whereas self-inquiry is often less structured and can be hit-or-miss if used as a standalone approach.

Risks of Replacing Meditation with Inquiry

The sources warn that attempting to use self-inquiry as a standalone path or as a replacement for meditation can lead to significant obstacles:

• Building “Castles in the Air”: Without the witness quality provided by meditation, self-inquiry becomes “mind playing with mind,” leading to frustration and potential psychological strain.
• Inefficiency: Inquiry-style meditation is described as less efficient than mantra-style meditation because it attempts to dissolve many objects (thoughts/feelings) simultaneously rather than repeatedly refining one simple object into stillness.
• Reduced Progress: If a practitioner drops meditation because they feel “there” already, they risk stalling their progress and becoming susceptible to the fluctuations of the mind again.

In summary, while self-inquiry is a powerful tool for integration and realization, it relies on the “fuel” of meditation to function correctly and is not intended to take its place.

[iamjaden (philipp)]

@elderberry

I really do belief that the goal of every spiritual path is to become aware that we are not the doer of action. This truth, most of the time is seeded in the mind by a guru. If the mind finds this seed truth attracting enough and nourihses it, it will start to grow and the inner conviction that this is the final truth becomes stronger and stronger.
At this stage the only question that remains is centered around that sense of I. Why do I feel like I am the doer? Why do I think that this thought is attached to “someone”. To whom or what is that connected in my current experience of I.. Who is meditating, who is breathing.. The answer to all of these is “I” and looking for this “I” and drawing attention inwards this way is the contemplation state which will lead to a experience of silence. Staying in that silence will weaken the ego sense and destroy it in the end.
If we do not think this thought is true or we really think we better should do pranayama, meditation, tantra or any other technique, than that’s the way to go.

All progress is in the mind only, the Real Self never was not, nor was more or less as it always was and will be.

If I might add a link to Ramanas 40 Verses on Reality. It came to mind. I really like it. you might aswell .. (PS: on this blog there are a lot of very good translations of Ramanas teachings)
Translation 40 verses on reality

Regards, Philipp

[SeySorciere]

I am with Maha on this one. With sufficient abiding inner silence, it is a spontaneous, naturally occurring discernment (AYP discrimination & dispassion phases of the journey).
And as Yogani points out the aim of deep meditation is not about recognizing thoughts as thoughts - the focus is not on thoughts but on the Awareness “behind” the thoughts. DM allows the disentanglement of Awareness from thoughts (mind).
Understanding and right application of self-inquiry is a tricky business unless it has started occurring naturally and then you can help it along by choosing to abide in inner silence (Awareness) over whatever else is happening.

Interesting discussion, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. Please do share further results if you decide to pursue self-inquiry as a primary practice.

I am editing to add a PS
However, what I have noticed is that the people I have introduced AYP to (as some are aware I have a small meditation group here in Seychelles) and have been practicing a long time (10 yrs +) do not appear to naturally come to the realization of the switch in self- identification, that what your felt sense of “I” is Awareness. I keep probing them with self-inquiry but no success. They enjoy the benefits of meditation but do not make the leap to Truth. Perhaps, it is just that everyone is different.

[selfpaste (Adrian)]

Hi elderberry,
You already have many good answers, but let me just add a short reply to the discussion.

I believe that AYP is flexible enough for you to put much more emphasis onto self-inquiry, if you choose to do so. Yogani has said that a daily routine consisting of DM only will bring you all the way eventually.

So, you could simply shorten your usual AYP routine to something like 15 min DM and then add your self-inquiry practice after. That way, you can make sure that you have a good amount of inner silence going into self-inquiry.

I’ve had periods in my life where I’ve had more inner silence and periods where I’ve had less. And I would say that when I’ve had less, self-inquiry would have been hard to perform effectively.