Looking for Aparimana to guide me please
Guide request
Guide request
Re: Guide request
Hi Lindsay,
Thank you for the invitation!
It is a little late now, I will reply properly tomorrow evening, I hope that is OK,
very best wishes
Perry
(Aparimana)
Thank you for the invitation!
It is a little late now, I will reply properly tomorrow evening, I hope that is OK,
very best wishes
Perry
(Aparimana)
Re: Guide request
Hi, that's fine, look forward to hearing from you,
best wishes,
lindsay
best wishes,
lindsay
Re: Guide request
Hello again Lindsay,
OK, let's get cracking!
A bit of 'administration' to get out of the way - dull but important!
Looking forward to hearing from you!
Perry
OK, let's get cracking!
A bit of 'administration' to get out of the way - dull but important!
- Please could you confirm that you have read the Disclaimer on the home page
- This site has a nasty habit of quietly logging you out while you are writing ... then when you click 'submit', it tells you "Oh look, you need to log in!", and you lose everything you have written. To avoid gnashing of teeth, it is best to write your replies elsewhere, then copy and paste them in to the reply window - this way, you still have a copy in case the website has logged you out
- You may find it helpful to click the 'subscribe topic' link at the very bottom of the page to ensure you get an email whenever a reply comes in
- Let's aim to write once a day if possible, it is a good way to keep up the momentum ... I will confess confess in advance that I cannot always post every day, but that is the general intention!
Looking forward to hearing from you!
Perry
Re: Guide request
Hi Perry,
Thanks for your message - I'm having trouble copying and pasting from a word document - can you give me some suggestions - my computer won't seem to allow me to paste from that to this website.
Lindsay
Thanks for your message - I'm having trouble copying and pasting from a word document - can you give me some suggestions - my computer won't seem to allow me to paste from that to this website.
Lindsay
Re: Guide request
Hi Perry,
Sorry...worked it out.
Thanks for your reply, I confirm that I’ve read the disclaimer.
Will try to post once a day, even if it’s a short response. One thing I did want to ask initially is whether all our conversations are open for everyone registered to read? I’d prefer if they weren’t but if that’s the format then I guess I’ll go with it!
What brings me here …. a friend recommended the website and book some time in February or March and I’ve been fascinated since. One or two of the stories in the book had a strong impact and a feeling of spaciousness , expansion seemed to pervade some of my experience for a while – not long or constant - and hard to describe but definitely as a result of reading the book.
What I hope for, if successful, is more of a sense of release, peace or freedom from the recurring sabotaging stories/thoughts that seem to pop up every so often and that I can then exacerbate, though they aren’t so much of an issue as they used to be and often don’t last so long. More of an ability to stay present to my experience whatever it is, maybe more clarity would be good….umm…I could get carried away with this…
I hope that’s enough to get us started,
Best wishes, Lindsay
Sorry...worked it out.
Thanks for your reply, I confirm that I’ve read the disclaimer.
Will try to post once a day, even if it’s a short response. One thing I did want to ask initially is whether all our conversations are open for everyone registered to read? I’d prefer if they weren’t but if that’s the format then I guess I’ll go with it!
What brings me here …. a friend recommended the website and book some time in February or March and I’ve been fascinated since. One or two of the stories in the book had a strong impact and a feeling of spaciousness , expansion seemed to pervade some of my experience for a while – not long or constant - and hard to describe but definitely as a result of reading the book.
What I hope for, if successful, is more of a sense of release, peace or freedom from the recurring sabotaging stories/thoughts that seem to pop up every so often and that I can then exacerbate, though they aren’t so much of an issue as they used to be and often don’t last so long. More of an ability to stay present to my experience whatever it is, maybe more clarity would be good….umm…I could get carried away with this…
I hope that’s enough to get us started,
Best wishes, Lindsay
Re: Guide request
Hi Linsay,
It is one reason I usually recommend anonymity (ie choosing a non-revealing user name) - that way, although the content may be 'public', you needn't feel too exposed.
So, could I ask, what response arises now when you read "There is no such thing as a 'self' to be found anywhere in experience - there is no 'self' and never has been!"
Best wishes,
Perry
well done!worked it out
Yup, 'fraid so! In fact, it is visible even to people who are not registered .... The Whole Internet Is Watching :-)whether all our conversations are open for everyone registered to read?
It is one reason I usually recommend anonymity (ie choosing a non-revealing user name) - that way, although the content may be 'public', you needn't feel too exposed.
Yes, that gives a flavour, thank you!I hope that’s enough to get us started
So, could I ask, what response arises now when you read "There is no such thing as a 'self' to be found anywhere in experience - there is no 'self' and never has been!"
Best wishes,
Perry
Re: Guide request
What arises in response to ‘there is no such thing as a ‘self” to be found anywhere in experience – there is no ‘self’ and never has been!’
I think two opposing responses – on the one hand a sense of relief and freedom – if that really is the case then I’m completely free, without the limiting thoughts I’ve been telling myself all my life – thank god…. I’m free at last and open, at peace and now life gets interesting and playful, and simple… so really my sense of ‘I’ can do anything it chooses to…. there are no limits…
On the other hand…… oh really? Its all been a lie (that’s the truth of it) and there’s just this endless nothingness, no meaning - without all the stories and fabrications who or what am I? Surely without a sense of ‘self’ or ‘me’ life as I know it will just atrophy, nothing will get done or be achieved, my business will cease to grow and operate efficiently. ‘I’ will just be this vague energy existing and then not existing in some dark corner of the universe, unrecognized, unnoticed.
I think the words ‘ there is no ‘self’ and never has been’ brings up a deep-rooted fear of annihilation.
The paradox is that when I feel as though I’m not operating from a strong sense of self – at work, at home with my family, when I am just with my body, breathing, eating or whatever, I feel more connected, more recognized, more at ease than when I’m bound up with thoughts about this, that or the other; and of course, things do get done.
With thanks and best wishes,
Lindsay
I think two opposing responses – on the one hand a sense of relief and freedom – if that really is the case then I’m completely free, without the limiting thoughts I’ve been telling myself all my life – thank god…. I’m free at last and open, at peace and now life gets interesting and playful, and simple… so really my sense of ‘I’ can do anything it chooses to…. there are no limits…
On the other hand…… oh really? Its all been a lie (that’s the truth of it) and there’s just this endless nothingness, no meaning - without all the stories and fabrications who or what am I? Surely without a sense of ‘self’ or ‘me’ life as I know it will just atrophy, nothing will get done or be achieved, my business will cease to grow and operate efficiently. ‘I’ will just be this vague energy existing and then not existing in some dark corner of the universe, unrecognized, unnoticed.
I think the words ‘ there is no ‘self’ and never has been’ brings up a deep-rooted fear of annihilation.
The paradox is that when I feel as though I’m not operating from a strong sense of self – at work, at home with my family, when I am just with my body, breathing, eating or whatever, I feel more connected, more recognized, more at ease than when I’m bound up with thoughts about this, that or the other; and of course, things do get done.
With thanks and best wishes,
Lindsay
Re: Guide request
Hi Lindsay,
Thank you for painting such a clear picture!
The fear response is almost universal - on some level, it is very hard not to interpret "there has never been a self" as "you must get rid of your self", but of course, this is not at all what is meant at all! Things have been achieved, your business has been growing and all this has already been happening without any 'self' ... seeing the reality of this cannot take away something that was never there ... of course, you know this already, but there is no harm restating the case!
And yet this fear response is also our friend - it can be a very good pointer to where the 'delusion of self' is being held... so can you investigate, what is it that the fear is protecting? What is the 'self' that could be annihilated?
best wishes
Perry
Thank you for painting such a clear picture!
The fear response is almost universal - on some level, it is very hard not to interpret "there has never been a self" as "you must get rid of your self", but of course, this is not at all what is meant at all! Things have been achieved, your business has been growing and all this has already been happening without any 'self' ... seeing the reality of this cannot take away something that was never there ... of course, you know this already, but there is no harm restating the case!
And yet this fear response is also our friend - it can be a very good pointer to where the 'delusion of self' is being held... so can you investigate, what is it that the fear is protecting? What is the 'self' that could be annihilated?
best wishes
Perry
Re: Guide request
Hi Perry,
Thanks for your reply.
The self that could be annihilated is really a collection of memories and stories, thoughts about who ‘I’ am, thoughts about how others perceive ‘me’; so some sort of habitual personality traits and responses, based on past experience and conditioning. It is a body that others recognize as ‘lindsay’; it is feelings that are familiar, sensations that are familiar. The ‘self’ is really nothing at all and so, in truth, does not need protecting.
Though I say this, I don’t really believe it – somehow I believe that the thoughts must come from somewhere, from a directing ‘me’ or ‘self’ and yet I can’t work out how they come about… apart from being the result of previous thoughts that have popped out of the ether or out of previous experience, and they just kind of pop up as I stand here in the present. Does that make sense?
With thanks, Lindsay
Thanks for your reply.
The self that could be annihilated is really a collection of memories and stories, thoughts about who ‘I’ am, thoughts about how others perceive ‘me’; so some sort of habitual personality traits and responses, based on past experience and conditioning. It is a body that others recognize as ‘lindsay’; it is feelings that are familiar, sensations that are familiar. The ‘self’ is really nothing at all and so, in truth, does not need protecting.
Though I say this, I don’t really believe it – somehow I believe that the thoughts must come from somewhere, from a directing ‘me’ or ‘self’ and yet I can’t work out how they come about… apart from being the result of previous thoughts that have popped out of the ether or out of previous experience, and they just kind of pop up as I stand here in the present. Does that make sense?
With thanks, Lindsay
Re: Guide request
Hi Lindsay,
This enquiry works best when we take what we 'really believe', and investigate our experience to see whether what we 'really believe' is what is actually HAPPENING
The key is to look at what is called (on Liberation Unleashed) 'direct experience' ... you probably know instinctively what we mean by 'direct experience', but it is worth going into this a bit, as it is really the foundation for much of what will follow.
By 'direct experience' we mean sense experience, including internal feelings, and observed thoughts, in short, whatever can be directly perceived. This is as opposed to stories, interpretations, theories, speculation, ie being carried along in thought.
For example, if asked 'what is being hungry?', a 'normal' answer might be along the lines of 'it is when I want to eat' ... this is of course quite accurate for normal purposes, but is not getting at the 'direct experience' of being hungry - it still begs the question 'how do you know you want to eat?' .... if one were to speak from 'direct experience', the answer might be along the lines of "a slight tension in the stomach area, thoughts arise containing images of food, and ideas about how to get food."
Why is this important? Essentially, what we are doing is learning to distinguish immediate perception from interpretation and thinking. This is not because thinking and interpretation are in some way 'bad', but because the delusion of 'self' is, precisely, an interpretation that is mistaken for an immediate perception, a thought taken to be a reality.
For our purposes, 'direct experience' is real, sense experience is real, thoughts are real, but the CONTENT of thought is not real. If you read 'King Kong', an image of a huge ape probably arises in your awareness ... this thought is real, but of course, it is only a thought, the ape is not real, there is nothing to run away from. This is, no doubt, obvious. Yet when we think about 'I' and 'self', we behave as if these are real.
And so we investigate what we mean by 'I' - what is actually directly perceived? What is present in Direct Experience? Where is 'I' to be found, and what is it made up of? Is 'I' a sense experience, or an observed thought, or what?
This is my take on 'direct experience' - another guide (Cosmik) has written a short introduction to Direct Experience that will give you a slightly different flavour, and is well worth a read
............... so after that slight diversion, back to the plot .................
Take some time to investigate this, look carefully as thoughts arise, and see whether you can find out, with the certainty of immediate perception, whether there is a 'thinker' to be found in experience, and if so, how this experience is made up, how it develops and unfolds.
Here are some questions that might help give some 'hooks' to your investigation - don't feel you have to answer them, just use them if they help:
* Does the 'thinker' arise and pass away, or is the 'thinker' there all the time?
* Does the thinker know what thought will arise before it happens?
* Does the thinker 'own' the thought?
* How is the thinker separate from the thought?
Have fun, see what you find :-)
Perry
haha, yes, good observation :-)Though I say this, I don’t really believe it
This enquiry works best when we take what we 'really believe', and investigate our experience to see whether what we 'really believe' is what is actually HAPPENING
The key is to look at what is called (on Liberation Unleashed) 'direct experience' ... you probably know instinctively what we mean by 'direct experience', but it is worth going into this a bit, as it is really the foundation for much of what will follow.
By 'direct experience' we mean sense experience, including internal feelings, and observed thoughts, in short, whatever can be directly perceived. This is as opposed to stories, interpretations, theories, speculation, ie being carried along in thought.
For example, if asked 'what is being hungry?', a 'normal' answer might be along the lines of 'it is when I want to eat' ... this is of course quite accurate for normal purposes, but is not getting at the 'direct experience' of being hungry - it still begs the question 'how do you know you want to eat?' .... if one were to speak from 'direct experience', the answer might be along the lines of "a slight tension in the stomach area, thoughts arise containing images of food, and ideas about how to get food."
Why is this important? Essentially, what we are doing is learning to distinguish immediate perception from interpretation and thinking. This is not because thinking and interpretation are in some way 'bad', but because the delusion of 'self' is, precisely, an interpretation that is mistaken for an immediate perception, a thought taken to be a reality.
For our purposes, 'direct experience' is real, sense experience is real, thoughts are real, but the CONTENT of thought is not real. If you read 'King Kong', an image of a huge ape probably arises in your awareness ... this thought is real, but of course, it is only a thought, the ape is not real, there is nothing to run away from. This is, no doubt, obvious. Yet when we think about 'I' and 'self', we behave as if these are real.
And so we investigate what we mean by 'I' - what is actually directly perceived? What is present in Direct Experience? Where is 'I' to be found, and what is it made up of? Is 'I' a sense experience, or an observed thought, or what?
This is my take on 'direct experience' - another guide (Cosmik) has written a short introduction to Direct Experience that will give you a slightly different flavour, and is well worth a read
............... so after that slight diversion, back to the plot .................
OK, this is a great place to start. So on some level you 'know' (or at least feel, or maybe assume) that 'you' are 'the thinking of your thoughts', yes?I believe that the thoughts must come from somewhere, from a directing ‘me’ or ‘self’ and yet I can’t work out how they come about
Take some time to investigate this, look carefully as thoughts arise, and see whether you can find out, with the certainty of immediate perception, whether there is a 'thinker' to be found in experience, and if so, how this experience is made up, how it develops and unfolds.
Here are some questions that might help give some 'hooks' to your investigation - don't feel you have to answer them, just use them if they help:
* Does the 'thinker' arise and pass away, or is the 'thinker' there all the time?
* Does the thinker know what thought will arise before it happens?
* Does the thinker 'own' the thought?
* How is the thinker separate from the thought?
Have fun, see what you find :-)
Perry
Re: Guide request
Hi Perry,
Apologies for my late reply - I wish I had a bit more quiet time to investigate your questions – to ‘think’ about the thinker! Perhaps I should have waited until our low season at work to ask for guidance ….oh well… …. I’ve started so I’ll finish…here’s my response..
The thinker does arise and pass away and isn’t there all the time though generally I believe that thinking happens so quickly as to make me believe its there all the time; waiting to pounce on the unsuspecting being.
The thinker doesn’t know what thought will arise before it happens – thinking is way too random for that.
The thinker thinks it owns the thought but – in a way there are no unique thoughts…they’ve all been thought before in some sense. The thinker can’t own any of them really – they think they do and even feel like they do but they don’t - thoughts just appear sort of haphazardly.
How is the thinker separate from the thought? This is the hardest question – because I am lost in thought most of the time…just as breathing isn’t separate from the breather, breathing isn’t owned- its just breath happening and… I get that , so I guess that somehow thought is just thought happening - but it doesn’t FEEL like it is!
I keep returning to thoughts of - what about when we intentionally direct our thought to think about certain things that we want to resolve – how is that just thought happening? Its too directed, too focused surely to just be thought happening?
...feeling stuck and muddled!
Best wishes,
Lindsay
.
Apologies for my late reply - I wish I had a bit more quiet time to investigate your questions – to ‘think’ about the thinker! Perhaps I should have waited until our low season at work to ask for guidance ….oh well… …. I’ve started so I’ll finish…here’s my response..
The thinker does arise and pass away and isn’t there all the time though generally I believe that thinking happens so quickly as to make me believe its there all the time; waiting to pounce on the unsuspecting being.
The thinker doesn’t know what thought will arise before it happens – thinking is way too random for that.
The thinker thinks it owns the thought but – in a way there are no unique thoughts…they’ve all been thought before in some sense. The thinker can’t own any of them really – they think they do and even feel like they do but they don’t - thoughts just appear sort of haphazardly.
How is the thinker separate from the thought? This is the hardest question – because I am lost in thought most of the time…just as breathing isn’t separate from the breather, breathing isn’t owned- its just breath happening and… I get that , so I guess that somehow thought is just thought happening - but it doesn’t FEEL like it is!
I keep returning to thoughts of - what about when we intentionally direct our thought to think about certain things that we want to resolve – how is that just thought happening? Its too directed, too focused surely to just be thought happening?
...feeling stuck and muddled!
Best wishes,
Lindsay
.
Re: Guide request
Hi Lindsay,
I've got back from work way too late to do you justice tonight, sorry, I'll be back tomorrow!
Just quickly, though:
Perry
hey, you're doing fine!feeling stuck and muddled
I've got back from work way too late to do you justice tonight, sorry, I'll be back tomorrow!
Just quickly, though:
this is good! so you've got what you know on the one hand, and what it feels like on the other ... isn't that annoying? like a wobbly tooth you can't quite leave alone? this tension or dissonance can be the perfect spur to investigate - you can get to the bottom of this, and clear the question up for once and for all, by noticing, looking, investigating .... what exactly is going on during thought? What is the basis for this feeling?just as breathing isn’t separate from the breather, breathing isn’t owned- its just breath happening and… I get that , so I guess that somehow thought is just thought happening - but it doesn’t FEEL like it is!
Perry
Re: Guide request
Hi Lindsay,
OK, I have a bit more time now...
When it comes to the work we are doing here, sometimes it is good to put a bit of time aside (and writing a reply obviously takes a bit of time), but most of the 'investigation' work can be done at random moments during the day .... actually, that is normally better than an intense burst. Hopefully some of these questions will hook your interest, in which case you may find your attention being drawn to them when little spaces open up throughout the day.
I don't suppose you meant this literally, but I'll take the opportunity for a reminder anyway - we are not primarily in the business of thinking about things here, but directly observing, looking with new eyes [metaphorically of course] at the nature of our experience - thinking and speculation not required!
From what you are saying, it seems that thoughts 'just arise', so in what sense is the thinker 'doing' the thinking?
We say "I think" ... but what if there were only thinking, thoughts arising 'in' awareness, no thinker 'doing' it? Is this possible?
Put aside whatever you may rationally believe, and see if this can be resolved through direct experience - Is there really a thinker to be found in experience? Investigate the 'sense' or 'feeling' of a 'thinker', and see what is actually going on underneath!
Best wishes,
Perry
OK, I have a bit more time now...
... but maybe you don't! We're all so busy aren't we?I wish I had a bit more quiet time to investigate your questions
When it comes to the work we are doing here, sometimes it is good to put a bit of time aside (and writing a reply obviously takes a bit of time), but most of the 'investigation' work can be done at random moments during the day .... actually, that is normally better than an intense burst. Hopefully some of these questions will hook your interest, in which case you may find your attention being drawn to them when little spaces open up throughout the day.
to ‘think’ about the thinker
I don't suppose you meant this literally, but I'll take the opportunity for a reminder anyway - we are not primarily in the business of thinking about things here, but directly observing, looking with new eyes [metaphorically of course] at the nature of our experience - thinking and speculation not required!
OK, good ... So is this 'thinker' what you mean by 'my self'? Is 'my self' something that could arise and pass away?The thinker does arise and pass away and isn’t there all the time
quite!The thinker doesn’t know what thought will arise before it happens
From what you are saying, it seems that thoughts 'just arise', so in what sense is the thinker 'doing' the thinking?
We say 'the wind blows', but where is the wind that is doing the blowing? There is only blowing!just as breathing isn’t separate from the breather, breathing isn’t owned- its just breath happening and… I get that , so I guess that somehow thought is just thought happening - but it doesn’t FEEL like it is!
We say "I think" ... but what if there were only thinking, thoughts arising 'in' awareness, no thinker 'doing' it? Is this possible?
Put aside whatever you may rationally believe, and see if this can be resolved through direct experience - Is there really a thinker to be found in experience? Investigate the 'sense' or 'feeling' of a 'thinker', and see what is actually going on underneath!
Best wishes,
Perry
Re: Guide request
btw .... forewarning: I'm on holiday for a week from the 9th (in a week's time). I probably won't be able to post during that time (camping!)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 169 guests