Back for round 2. Any guides to close the case please?

[arora]

Still digesting this last post Mark. I intend to reply in detail in 24 hours.
Many thanks and regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

OK, thanks for letting me know, Sandeep.
Look forward to hearing from you when you are ready.
Cheers
Mark

[arora]

Hi Mark

Responding to the technical points
A1. Point taken. It seems like I have tendency to easily slip from looking to thinking without realising the distinction, but I see what you mean when you point it out. I suppose I need to understand a bit better how to just 'look'. Will stick to your suggested exercises in their format.

A2. Usually the exercises and responses are at the back of my mind everyday, I just can't seem to come up with responses very quickly. It might be partly due to my lack of confidence in responses unless I have spent some time in them (I wonder if it becomes more mental in the process)
However I do understand the effectiveness of set protocols, so I'd be happy to take a break when you suggest so and get back when I can commit to regular posting.

A3. Will attempt to do better.

Took me a long time just dwelling on the above so far, might be best to attempt the exercise C first and then get back to you for the rest of the post within 24 hours.

C. Here's a simple simple exercise. As you do it, just observe. Choose a small snack now and eat it. I don't care how small! Do it slowly, quietly. Watch the actions, reactions. Follow the attractions, the bodily impulses. Notice the thought narrative. List them all. Take time. Notice all the inputs, environmental factors, cultural, climatic, conditioning (eg "traditionally Sandeep's favourite"), bodily impulses (eg 'not hungry', 'need for energy' etc). Ok, so let's compare with the mountain stream. There was some thought commentary, no doubt, but where was there an 'autonomous Sandeep' (as opposed to just happenings) which made the decision, which controlled what happened? If you can find that in the firsthand direct experience, please describe it to me in detail.

As decided to do the exercise:
action- went upto the fridge to check
Factors in play- thoughts 'need to be non-sugar, should I choose a drink instead' etc
- body impulses 'not hungry, just cleaned teeth' feeling of drowsiness, thoughts following that 'should I
have a nap first', feeling of fullness from coffee before.
environmental factors- availability of stuff in the fridge, everyone else in the house sleeping.
conditioning- 'sugar is not good, fruits are okay'
other factors- taste of pomegranate, last week's experience of the same fruit.

I don't think there has been a mountain stream analogy that we have discussed Mark, but I take it you are referring to a mountain stream just flowing irrespective of surrounding factors?
However I do see that list of all these factors clearly means that there is no one decision maker operating here. Thoughts debate but it is almost like action is taken even before thoughts reach a conclusion. There is no fine point in the debate that was found that determined the action taken! So thoughts are commentary only/mainly. It seems like there is just this habit or unchecked tendency to place huge focus and importance on thoughts!
As I sit with this, first reaction is settling of mind, then it is almost like mind wants to cling to this conclusion and use it in some way e.g. " so that means thoughts need to be ignored"
Next is seeing that it is another thought!
Stuck again!

Kind regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

Hi Sandeep,

Thanks for that.

So 1. where is the difference between what happened in 'snack-choice flow' on the one hand and 'mountain-stream flow' on the other?
2. Where is any real autonomous agent making the choice? Please describe that to me, how does it manifest? Is it anything more than a belief?

There are thoughts commentating, maybe even saying 'oh look, Sandeep is making this decision'. Does that make a real autonomous Sandeep, or is that thoughts, saying 'oh look, Sandeep is making this decision'? Where is any autonomous Sandeep there?

Our enquiry here is about whether we can find a separate I, remember. It's not about feeling better or worse. It's not about trying to stop thoughts, is it?

Cheers

Mark

[ElPortal]

HI Sandeep,

For some reason I completely missed the whole first half of your last post and only spotted your response regarding 'Simple Exercise C', so my post only relates to that part.

By all means take a little longer in considering/answering the rest - before dealing with what I wrote in my last post.

Hope that makes sense!

Warmly

Mark

[arora]

Hi Mark

I went through some of your comments in another post, and it helped me remind once again what is meant by first hand experience- sensations, feelings and faculty of thinking. My focus may have been more on contents of thoughts lately.

B. So now, looking at the issues raised in your last post:-

From what I understand, any reaction/action/thoughts can be traced back to multiple factors, and that makes them Not autonomous but the uniqueness of those set of factors is the individuality of Sandeep. So the two things - Not autonomous and Individuality both exist!

B1. Great observation! So you've been calling the uniqueness of a set of factors 'Sandeep' or 'the individuality of Sandeep'? Does that add up to a real individual or just a unique set of circumstances/factors moment by moment? Please let me have the evidence.

To me the moment to moment experience and the individuality of Sandeep mean the same things. Please correct me if we differ on the language/definition here.

ElPortal wrote:Finally, (additionally), could you please give me aspects of autonomous Sandeep which are NOT thought up? Please list them.
Arora wrote: Would you please elaborate on this a bit more Mark.

B2. Here I am inviting you to describe the 'individual Sandeep' in direct experience. What evidence do you have of this NOW, apart from thoughts, commentaries? Can we find a real autonomous Sandeep here? If so, please describe it/him? If you cannot find such an individual in your firsthand experience, just say so.

No, I can not find an individual in first hand experience. In the process of looking, the thoughts are seen as thoughts regardless of the contents and then looking dissipates leaving just the experience..the sensations of body, hearing etc.

Hmm so it appears like this 'feeling' might have power to override the thoughts....and it is interesting to consider that even though there is a debate going on and some annoyance of attention being in the debate in the head, but the action might be what it is regardless! So now I understand what you mean by 'flow of life'

B3. Great again! Yes, sure, thoughts seem to have lots to say about stuff: debates, comments, advice etc..... but, can you find where thoughts have actually made the decision? And if it appears that they have, can you find where that is ever 'Sandeep' owning them? If so, please describe that.

The point where the decision is made is always seen in the retrospect. I still have not been able to discern whether liking of a thought precedes an action sometimes or thoughts are always just after the action. The fine line seems very fine to catch! However in both situations it is automatic, and the thought up owner is the next thought!

'Believing in a thought' consists of 2 parts it seems to me- Firstly, as you said, attraction towards that thought and a sense of 'ah that is right'. Secondly, an automatic physical/emotional response to that thought which is the main criterion for me that thoughts are playing a significant (and unnecessary) role in life.

B4. Great, so in 'believing' we've got an attraction towards a thought and a claim that 'it is right'. Is any real individual needed to do that attraction or to do that thought? Or could they all just happen without an individual ie automatically?

yes, agree again. The process seems to happen automatically. By logic, it must be the habit to think that 'I' have chosen it.

Look at the mountain stream which I described earlier. As you go through daily life, see whether you can find where 'Sandeep' REALLY intervenes as an autonomous entity into the flow of Life in a way that the mountain stream does not. Nothing wrong with thoughts, no need to 'get rid of them', but is there any need to believe them or to believe that they are making decisions? Even if believing them happens, does that show a real Sandeep who is doing the 'believing' or is there anymore than Life doing an attraction, or 'it-is-true'-ing (which we call believing). Where is the evidence of an autonomous agent "Sandeep", doing the choosing and deciding?

Keeps bringing me back to the experience and verification of the fact that 'sandeep' can not be found. I guess that's where it stops at the moment.

Kind regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

HI Sandeep,

That's brilliant. So it sounds from what you write as though, if we drop the need to interpret the experience of this moment as 'individual me', what we're left with is WHAT IS - the experience of this moment, with no division between outside and inside, this and that, just a continuous movement or flow of Life. This IS a seeing through the illusion of a separate self. It may not be accompanied by the experiential fanfare and birthday cake which had been expected, but has life ever been flowing any other way (even if there was the belief in a real autonomous individual, even if there still IS at times that belief, until looked into)?

We are now left with the question of expectations. Of course, the body mechanism wants things as comfortable as possible, how would it not? But please answer this question for me: really should anything be different in any way from how it is now? Could it be?

If your answer to the above question is basically 'no' then it looks to me as though the rest of the issues which come up can be looked at together or in one of LU's post-gate support groups, and I would propose now putting some summing-up questions to you. Are you up for this?

Warmest regards

Mark

[arora]

Thanks for that Mark

This IS a seeing through the illusion of a separate self

I think some reassurance was needed to the mind and hearing this was certainly helpful.

really should anything be different in any way from how it is now? Could it be?

I have to say No, any other answer will have to be thought up. I realise for a while a lot of answers had been thought up, reasoned in the head.

the rest of the issues which come up can be looked at together or in one of LU's post-gate support groups, and I would propose now putting some summing-up questions to you. Are you up for this?

Would love to look further into this with you.

Kind regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

Hi Sandeep,

Great, thanks for that. Yes we can do that.

First, I would like to fire at you a checklist of preliminary questions. Answers can be brief if you like (eg yes/no), but as ever, please answer each one from the NOW FIRST-HAND DIRECT EXPERIENCE, rather from intellectualising:-

1. Have you been able to find, a ‘self’ that is the ‘experiencer’?

2. Or a self that is 'the doer', or can control what happens?

3. Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?

4. Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

5. Can "the body" be found to be any more than label for sensations (namely tactile & kinesthetic)?

6. Can the five body senses be found to be experienced or caused by this ‘self’, rather than simply being unexplainable happenings?

7. Can a self be found ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’?

8. Is there doubt or unclarity that in all these cases the ‘self’ is nothing other than a mental fabrication?

And finally:

9. Are there any doubts about seeing through the illusion of separate self?

Cheers

Mark

[arora]

Hi Mark

1. Have you been able to find, a ‘self’ that is the ‘experiencer’?

2. Or a self that is 'the doer', or can control what happens?

3. Or a self that ‘makes’ decisions?

4. Or a self who ‘does the thinking’?

5. Can "the body" be found to be any more than label for sensations (namely tactile & kinesthetic)?

6. Can the five body senses be found to be experienced or caused by this ‘self’, rather than simply being unexplainable happenings?

7. Can a self be found ‘in here’ which is separate from the world and others ‘out there’?

8. Is there doubt or unclarity that in all these cases the ‘self’ is nothing other than a mental fabrication?

And finally:

9. Are there any doubts about seeing through the illusion of separate self?

Basically answers for 1-6 are a clear 'No' because it has been seen so multiple times.

7. There is no self found 'in here' however no unity is seen either. So unsure whether I can say yes or no to this question.

8. No again

9. Perhaps will be useful to report that there is such heaviness, emptiness, almost sadness that is felt as I attempt to answer these questions. Constant mind continuing to arise thoughts and doubts; and constant coming back to this moment's experience where doubts fade.

Many thanks and regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

Hi Sandeep,

The honesty and sincerity are appreciated. I can feel those emotions from here!
Is there disappointment that THIS seems so ordinary, not a more extraordinary experience which might have been expected?

First regarding 9: Please give me a rant. Try put into words that 'such heaviness, emptiness, almost sadness'. Describe it in detail along with both its claimed 'raison d'être' and its physical attributes. Let me know if it passes, and if so, how it moves on, what replaces it (rather similar to the 'welcoming emotions exercise' I gave you on 22nd January).

Now regarding 7: That's fine, Sandeep. Can any disunity be seen? If so, how is this known or made manifest? How would unity look, different from THIS?

Cheers

Mark

[arora]

Thanks Mark

Is there disappointment that THIS seems so ordinary, not a more extraordinary experience which might have been expected?

First regarding 9: Please give me a rant. Try put into words that 'such heaviness, emptiness, almost sadness'. Describe it in detail along with both its claimed 'raison d'être' and its physical attributes. Let me know if it passes, and if so, how it moves on, what replaces it

I previously considered it a general change of feelings and emotion and tried to attribute several other reasons to it (working too much, work situation etc) or mostly just left it alone to pass. But as you said, it feels more true- that the particular heaviness and sadness that comes with exploring the answers IS the disappointment at nothing being what was hoped for (less and less expected now). There is a reluctance to accept that there would be nothing more..or perhaps just disappointment at having to stop searching if that is it!

In terms of physical attributes, right now, since I have been sitting with it for about half an hour, there is the more feeling of emptiness again...it is perhaps more down in abdomen now where as earlier it felt more in the chest area..the face is turned in a sad expression, or in smile now, at noticing this. It is already less and hard to isolate. In previous instance I think it was just ignored with business of rest of work week and hard to say if it lingered on in the background or moved away. Right now it is mild feeling in the abdomen..can be described as a sinking feeling perhaps. Trying the welcoming emotions exercise,... the reason is long lost in noticing, it is just a physical sensation now. Makes me wonder if it is always or mostly there in this mild form which is just taken as normal and ignored during day to day activities and now in this noticing it is just more obvious!
Unsure about moving on and replacement part yet.

Now regarding 7: That's fine, Sandeep. Can any disunity be seen? If so, how is this known or made manifest? How would unity look, different from THIS?

Tried to sit with it, and No, it is hard to say any disunity or unity. My idea of unity was a feeling of unity somehow. But as I try to explore, it is just back to the sensations, thoughts, sensory input and can't say there is any disunity (or unity)

Kind regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

Hi again Sandeep and thanks for that earnestness, as ever.

Could it be that some kind of grieving process could be happening here, the loosening of grip on what had been hoped for? - all part of embracing of what is. Consider now: is there truly anyone or anything there that can accept or reject this moment's happening, in all its excitement, wildness, craziness, dullness, sadness, emptiness, happiness - whatever way that it expresses itself? Could there ever be anyone truly able to do that?

Now let's have a look at the summing-up questions and see what comes up. Take your time with each, and answer honestly, as fully as you can, just from FIRST-HAND NOW EXPERIENCE as ever (not from theory):-

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?
 
2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now. 
 
3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.
 
4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look? 
 
5) Describe how deciding, intending, choosing and controlling events in Life happens? What makes things happen? How does it work? What are you responsible for? Please try to describe the process as best you can, even if gropingly. Don't forget to give some practical examples from your everyday-life experience eg choosing a meal, operating a computer etc (even if there is no real 'you'!)

6) Anything to add?

Feel free to answer all the questions, or to approach them a few at a time if preferred. I look forward to hearing from you when you are ready.

Cheers

Mark.

[arora]

Hi Mark
Taking a little bit more time with this. Always on my mind and will reply in detail soon.
Thanks and regards
Sandeep

[ElPortal]

Oki Sandeep,

Thanks for letting me know.

M