Severing

[Bananafish]

No need for apologies, Frank. :). I sometimes point out things that may be
helpful in out inquiry. That's it.

there's always some background identifying/labelling going on.

Is it possible to actually see mind doing this? Or is it that you are rather
speculating this from acquired knowledge?

[FDM]

Hi Kento

Is it possible to actually see mind doing this? Or is it that you are rather
speculating this from acquired knowledge?

When I look through the open window, a meaningful world appears as a unit. I do not see any composition taking place (so no 1. visual impressions -2. labels - 3. composite meaning).

Suddenly an unfamiliar noise. Here it is clear that there can be an impression without immediate recognition. The recognition happens half a second later.

This is what I called labelling - it's actually a recognition: there are no words or images in the recognition. I'm looking at a cup in front of me, but the word "cup" did not appear in the mind: the object was immediately recognized. (How that happened was not in my direct experience.)

So, I certainly do not see/experience the mind doing this, and I do not experience memory either. Meaning appears. Most of the time it's already there, but occasionally, with something unexpected, a little lag, is noticed.

Cheers
Frank

[Bananafish]

Hi Frank. :) A rainy day again here in Tokyo. Hope your day will be a great one.

Ok, the next question regarding what you described is, "does that in itself cause
any problem?"

Please actually observe that process and inquire into the question.

Best wishes,

Kento

[FDM]

Hi Kento

"does that in itself cause any problem?"

That process of the sense impressions and meaning appearing does in itself not cause a problem, not even in the case of pain.

But some of the meanings cause a problem. While some are barely noticed, others set off a chain reaction of thoughts. Depending on the type of thought, some things are considered a problem.

Cheers
Frank

[Bananafish]

Ok. :) And when broken down to the sensate level, what constitutes that "problem?"
Is there any sensation that feels to be problematic?

[Bananafish]

Forgot to say hi. :)

[FDM]

Hi Kento

You've asked a question that has rattled the sturdy cage of my I/ego/personality/self a little. Because it makes no sense for me to feel hurt when no hurt can be found. And yet I feel hurt; it's like I'm chasing a ghost.

And when broken down to the sensate level, what constitutes that "problem?"
Is there any sensation that feels to be problematic?

To start with the experience that started this, when somebody gives a deprecatory comment, "I" feel hurt.
- The hurt is not in the hearing itself.
- The hurt is not in the words which are perceived and then make sense of (no making is observed: sense appears almost immediately).
- The hurt starts as more thoughts appear, which - almost simultaneously - go together with certain physical reactions appearing (a little tightness in the stomach or chest).

And here is where the application of your instructions comes in:
none of these physical reactions (which seem to follow on the heels of thought/evaluation appearing) is in and of itself problematic. Just like the initial hearing of the words , they will create more interpretation, propping itself up.

It's like the whole thing is running circles and thereby charging its own battery with every turn it makes. Thoughts creating bodily reactions and vice versa. I see how the energy that is generated by this dynamic might result in the feeling of being hurt. Churning liquid milk into solid butter with every turn.

I know I'm analysing again, but I want to make sure I haven't missed anything and am looking in the right direction. At this point I'm almost eager for something seemingly hurtful to turn up in order to observe this dynamic up close again. I need to observe more to confirm this.

Cheers
Frank

[FDM]

Hi Kento

An addition to the last message:
I shouldn't have been so eager. A short time after I posted the previous message, an annoying physical pain showed up again (which I thought I got rid of in the past, but it apparently persists). As soon as it showed up, the worrying thoughts appeared too. Only then did I start to look closer at this - using some questions from the repertoire in your messages: the physical sensations (very minor actually), the thought mill seemingly working at full capacity, looking for the "me" that was really affected by this. Not finding that, and yet this feeling of worry persisting. Abated, but still there. Looking at this feeling of worry again, its components. No me in there. And it feels like mine still, less strong but still there, even though everything tells me it's a non-existent ghost.

Frank

[Bananafish]

Hello Frank. :) If the feeling is too intense, please take a little break and get a rest.
It's not a good idea to strain yourself too much doing this kind of work.

No me in there. And it feels like mine still, less strong but still there, even though everything tells me it's a non-existent ghost.

Let's get to the core of this contradiction.
What does it make feel "yours"?

Best wishes,

Kento

[FDM]

Hi Kento

It's not a good idea to strain yourself too much doing this kind of work.

I feel like I'm not straining myself enough. I feel like if I could only run a little faster I could catch this ghost and drag it into the light of day.

On a practical note, does this sound like a good way to go about it: When I read your post it is usually during a break or when I'm not working. Then I carry out the first observations. And then intermittently while busy with other things, I come back to it. In addition to the observation instruction of the day, the first question you asked - "what is that person that is taking things personally?" - also keeps spontaneously appearing in less busy moments.

Let's get to the core of this contradiction.
What does it make feel "yours"?

I can't find it. I keep trying to identify that "perfume" of me, that "flavour" that hangs around everything, but every time I move a little closer, there's nothing there to be found. But when I back off again, this ghost of me-ing appears again as a vague feeling, something looking through my eyes, connecting "me" so something from "my" past, etc. But when I close in on it, it's not there.

Observations (some entangled with thoughts):
-- whatever appears in the body is caught by attention (there's an awareness of these things happening): the foot walking, the wind felt on my skin, the feeling of water being swallowed, the thing behind the eyes taking in the sights, looking, etc. And then there's the thought "me", "mine", "my" which appears which each of them.
-- beyond this word me there is also this undeniable presence of being, this feeling/sense of being alive. And then the word "me" appears to claim that that too.
-- I'm looking around on my desk: papers, books, pens, glasses, a phone, a glass, etc. I'm asking what in this experience of looking feels like me. Is there really a subjective flavour beyond the thought "me" appearing to claim experience, or is that flavour just background just more vague me-proliferations, memories etc. appearing?
For the first time, I'm starting to anticipate the loss of this very personal, subjective me-flavour. (There already seems to be some anticipatory nostalgia should this very subjective, personal, intimate sense of me, this flavour, this vague feeling that connects everything have to go.) But if this very subjective feelings turns out to be nothing more than a thought or thoughts masquerading as me, I'll feel duped.

I need to investigate this further and look at it more closely and more repeatedly.
So this is where I'm at now. I'm starting to ask if this subjective me-flavour in most experiences could be just a thought connected to other thoughts or if there something more fundamental beyond that.

Let me know if I'm wasting energy barking up the wrong tree, but otherwise I feel I need to spend more time with this question

Cheers
Frank

[Bananafish]

Not at all, Frank. You're doing a great job in observing.

In some cases there is this strong desire to acquire something of one's taste
from the inquiry, but that isn't seen in your replies. That is a sign that
your attitude towards the observation is a decent one.

One thing that caught my eyes was ...

the thing behind the eyes taking in the sights,

What makes you state that there is this "thing" behind the eyes?

[FDM]

Hi Kento

What makes you state that there is this "thing" behind the eyes?

Because the visual sense seems so dominant in my case.

When I close my eyes, the other senses have a chance to become more vivid. Then awareness seems to be wherever something appears: in the feet, the hands, in the hearing, or even the nose (when having partaken of too much mustard), etc.

But when my eyes are open, it's like the other senses have to take a back seat and the awareness is firmly there. This, subjectively, feels like being behind the eyes - I know there's nothing behind the eyes, but it's as if awareness has "parked" itself there comfortably, at least as long as the eyes are open and sight dominates.

When the eyes are closed and when hearing something it is like there's just the sound (and quickly on the heels of that the meaning appears). But with sight, there's always an element of this bodily limit that is perceived and divides this experience into something seen and something seeing. When I close my eyes this division disappears, not at once, but gradually. Early this morning I noticed there's an exception to this: when I lie in bed, the surface of the body is felt at all the contact points of the body with the mattress, yet then, too, there seems to be a head-bias in most physical positions.

When awareness is felt to reside behind the eyes, it actually feels empty behind the eyes. (I know this makes absolutely no biological sense; there's no experience of the retina, optical nerve, part of the brain, etc.) When the eyes are open, this empty space feels restricted to the inside of the head. When lying in bed, awake with the eyes closed (when there's also a head-bias), the empty space feels more limitless.

In the Goenka vipassana retreats I attended many years ago the basic technique was a form of bodyscanning, and then, too, the most detailed sensations could be felt in/on the head rather than other parts of the body. So even there, there seemed to be a head-bias.

Today, like yesterday, will be another +30°C (+86°F) day in Belgium. I'm asking: who is warm? For some reason, here it is very obvious that a judgement-thought is added to the sensation. The added judgement seems more like a natural reaction, a cause-effect thing, and for some reason doesn't seem to cause a strong "I"-flavour.

I'm more concerned about neutral experience where this "I"-flavour also seems to be present.
But in this case there's exceptions too. This morning, before it was hot, I was watching the trees, listening to the birds, some traffic in the distance, just sitting with a cup of coffee in my hand, not doing anything. At that moment, there actually didn't seem to be any "me" of "I"-flavour attached to anything, i.e. before I started reflecting and investigating if there was.
But when I started asking if this experience contained any trace/flavour/inkling of me, a certain intimate subjectivity seemed to be added to the experience. The previous awareness - which didn't manifest itself as anything - become a self awareness. This led to the absurd thought that it was my trying to find the "I" that was keeping the "I" alive.

So I'm continuing to notice and look into this "I" sense/flavour in various experiences throughout the day.

15 or 20 years ago, while staying at a Buddhist monastery in Thailand, a monk told me I had to let myself "die" (as the disappearance of the breath tended to take me out of concentration.) I thought it was meant as advice not to be worried about the disappearance of the breath, but now this advice pops back into my mind with some added connotations.

It must be tiring for you to read through these lengthy reports. I'm not sure if something is valuable or not, soI write it all down in the hope that you might spot where the hiding place of the illegitimate foundation of this "me" house.

Cheers
Frank

[Bananafish]

Hi Frank. :)

Thanks for the elaborate explanation! It sometimes helps to just write
something down, so that, as you said, we could find something to inquire into.

This led to the absurd thought that it was my trying to find the "I" that was keeping the "I" alive.

Why don't we investigate this? Please see how that "I" sense is when you are trying to find it.
Then see how it is when you are not trying it.

Warm regards,

Kento

[FDM]

Hi Kento

Please see how that "I" sense is when you are trying to find it. Then see how it is when you are not trying it.

There's an old mug with an assortment of pens and pencils on my desk. I can look at it in a way that there's almost just seeing. When attention is with the senses, there actually does not seem to be a "me". (But this observation that there was no me involved, happens afterwards.)

When I tried to find out where the "I"-flavour, the "me", was in this seeing, I noticed that I wasn't really (not a 100%) looking at the mug with pens anymore. Part of that attention was turned back towards "me", towards an assumed looker/watcher. The very act of turning back introduced the split between something seen and, hence, something looking. (But why would I turn back in the first place, if there wasn't already a presupposition of something to be turned back to?) Staying with this me-flavour, this sense of an "I" who's looking, I notice there is no explicit "me"-thought involved in this. It is really just a flavour, a hint, a perfume, a fleeting hint. The word "I" or "me" does not appear in the mind, neither does an image of myself. Yet there is a sense of me. Can there be an unmanifested thought? A knowing without a thought appearing? (I notice I'm trying to use logic and analysis again to penetrate this question, rather than observation.)

Also, if I become aware of being with the senses (to be distinguished from looking back to find the "me" experiencing), a subtle sense of "me" seems to be added to the mix. If I become mindful or if I become aware of being aware, the same subtle sense of me seems to appear. (Hm, this seems to be going completely against what a popular non-duality teacher says - I have some of his books.) It's subtle, it doesn't manifest itself as a thought, at least not explicitly, but in the same elusive perfume kind of way mentioned above already.

There also a very "gross" way in which a sense of "me" is added to experience: by thinking. For example, my evaluation of an experience, my memories, my plans, my decisions, etc. Some thoughts do not really carry that me-sense, like practical problem solving (e.g. will I take this road or that road to get somewhere).

Many actions do not involve a me-flavour either. Sneezing. Or when I notice that the traffic lights ahead are turning red, speed is decreased. This seems to happen almost automatically and no explicit "thought" about it seems to be involved.

So there is still this sense of "I/me", and I'm still trying to feel into it more. There may not be an explicit thought "I" or "me" in this "I"-sense, but it could be implied. So now I'm hunting for an hint of thought in this subjective/intimate/personal feeling.

Cheers
Frank

[Bananafish]

Hi Frank. Rainy day again here in Yokohama (I've recently moved here).
It's good to stay inside and focus on the inquiry with you, though.

There may not be an explicit thought "I" or "me" in this "I"-sense, but it could be implied.

Is what is implied the sense itself?
What is the reality about implications? Please see this and report.


Warm regards,

Kento

P.S.
Are you interested in having a video-chat inquiry session?
If so, please let me know, as I offer it for free.