Hi there,
This is just to say thanks for email and will reply soon. Am traveling to England today. Will reply later this evening or tomorrow.
Best
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Want to be guided by Drdhamati
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
Have a good trip.
All the best
Dridhamati
Have a good trip.
All the best
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Dridhamati,
Im now entrenched in Devon for a week or so. Listening to rain outside, not so common in Spain.
On to questions.
Is this "i" in control when not observing?
No. The "i" or "me"or "mine" forms around impressions. The image I have is like cling film. A sense of will trying to form an identity that fits an idea and stretch it over what is experienced. Giving a sense of "in here" and " out there". There is a sense of volition, or will to live, though it isnt something controlled.
Is the someone in the street that which is observered through hearing?
I realise through reading this again, that the " someone in the street" is a label that is formed over the sensate experience. It is like that "cling film" I mentioned earlier. Sound enters through the sense of hearing and there is consciousness of sound through that sense, On the basis of that arrises a story of what is "happening".
This observation applies to each of the senses. The hardest to see this is in the mind sense. The reason for me is thst thoughts such as memories are so emotive. They come with a feeling tone. Yet when relaxed in that space thoughts arrise through the mind sense and there is consciousness of thoughts. They often constellate around the sensate experience of another sense if that is dominant. Thought arrising in dependence on the arrising of another sense, or vice versa.
Hand exercise.
When I looked at my hand in front of me there is consciousness of a hand and a desire to call that hand mine. There is a sense of "looking" at a hand.
When I close my eyes and put my hand on the table through the sense of touch there feels more direct experience of my hand. The sense of touch feels more like "my hand"
With the sense of sight there is consciousness of a form that arrises that could be my hand, yet the sense of touch is where I feel the hand.
Is there something or somewhere outside sensate experience?
"Things" and and sense of "place" form out of sensate experience, yet the only thing behind sensate experience is sensate experience. That is, there is just another sense. and consciousness of that sense. There is just consciousness of a particular sense and arrising in dependence on that the desire to form an image around it. the " i" is formed around these experience s. " i" am thinking this. " I " am feeling that...this creates a pattern and direction, a flow of where consciousness goes. Yet it does not exist outside of what is experienced directly. It constellates around sensate experience and forms impressions of what is experienced. it image makes. So the "I ,me mine" "exists" as a thought, that arrises in dependence on previous thoughts.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Im now entrenched in Devon for a week or so. Listening to rain outside, not so common in Spain.
On to questions.
Is this "i" in control when not observing?
No. The "i" or "me"or "mine" forms around impressions. The image I have is like cling film. A sense of will trying to form an identity that fits an idea and stretch it over what is experienced. Giving a sense of "in here" and " out there". There is a sense of volition, or will to live, though it isnt something controlled.
Is the someone in the street that which is observered through hearing?
I realise through reading this again, that the " someone in the street" is a label that is formed over the sensate experience. It is like that "cling film" I mentioned earlier. Sound enters through the sense of hearing and there is consciousness of sound through that sense, On the basis of that arrises a story of what is "happening".
This observation applies to each of the senses. The hardest to see this is in the mind sense. The reason for me is thst thoughts such as memories are so emotive. They come with a feeling tone. Yet when relaxed in that space thoughts arrise through the mind sense and there is consciousness of thoughts. They often constellate around the sensate experience of another sense if that is dominant. Thought arrising in dependence on the arrising of another sense, or vice versa.
Hand exercise.
When I looked at my hand in front of me there is consciousness of a hand and a desire to call that hand mine. There is a sense of "looking" at a hand.
When I close my eyes and put my hand on the table through the sense of touch there feels more direct experience of my hand. The sense of touch feels more like "my hand"
With the sense of sight there is consciousness of a form that arrises that could be my hand, yet the sense of touch is where I feel the hand.
Is there something or somewhere outside sensate experience?
"Things" and and sense of "place" form out of sensate experience, yet the only thing behind sensate experience is sensate experience. That is, there is just another sense. and consciousness of that sense. There is just consciousness of a particular sense and arrising in dependence on that the desire to form an image around it. the " i" is formed around these experience s. " i" am thinking this. " I " am feeling that...this creates a pattern and direction, a flow of where consciousness goes. Yet it does not exist outside of what is experienced directly. It constellates around sensate experience and forms impressions of what is experienced. it image makes. So the "I ,me mine" "exists" as a thought, that arrises in dependence on previous thoughts.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
In other words: what's more 'real', the experienced sensations, or the identity placed on those sensations?
Just to confirm: 'I realise through reading this again...', is this realisation the result of thinking, or deducing? Or is is the result of observation?
The question is about forming two mental pictures of the hand. The first mental picture is formed using the sense of sight, the hand viewed with the eyes. The second mental picture is formed when the hand rests on the surface, from mentally drawing the shape of the hand from the areas of contact between hand and surface.
And then comparing the two mental images. Are they the same? Is one image more a 'hand' than the other?
And looking through all available senses, all 6 of them:
Does the "I ,me mine" "exist" as anything else other than a thought?
All the best
Dridhamati
And does the identity formed by this “cling film” hold any 'reality'?The image I have is like cling film. A sense of will trying to form an identity that fits an idea and stretch it over what is experienced. Giving a sense of "in here" and " out there". There is a sense of volition, or will to live, though it isnt something controlled.
In other words: what's more 'real', the experienced sensations, or the identity placed on those sensations?
That's a great description of the process of perception.I realise through reading this again, that the " someone in the street" is a label that is formed over the sensate experience. It is like that "cling film" I mentioned earlier. Sound enters through the sense of hearing and there is consciousness of sound through that sense, On the basis of that arrises a story of what is "happening".
Just to confirm: 'I realise through reading this again...', is this realisation the result of thinking, or deducing? Or is is the result of observation?
Thanks for the answers.Hand exercise.
The question is about forming two mental pictures of the hand. The first mental picture is formed using the sense of sight, the hand viewed with the eyes. The second mental picture is formed when the hand rests on the surface, from mentally drawing the shape of the hand from the areas of contact between hand and surface.
And then comparing the two mental images. Are they the same? Is one image more a 'hand' than the other?
'So the "I ,me mine" "exists" as a thought' Thanks for that."Things" and and sense of "place" form out of sensate experience ... So the "I ,me mine" "exists" as a thought, that arrises in dependence on previous thoughts.
And looking through all available senses, all 6 of them:
Does the "I ,me mine" "exist" as anything else other than a thought?
All the best
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Dridhamati.
Experienced directly, the experienced sensations are more real. The identity grows around these sensations. It tightens around a constellation of sensations and forms an image out of them. Then this image starts to judge these sensations as good and bad, or even doubt the sensations that it is experiencing, that they are made up by the very thing that is judging them, which has manifested through these sensations itself!
Hearing the sound in the street is a result of observation when I let go of thinking. There is a desire to label every sensation that arises, to place it as something "inside" or "outside" my "self". And in doing do starts to form a judgement on it ie, do "i" like that sound or not? When I let go of thinking and just observe the sensation of hearing, there is sound and the perception of sound. I notice that sound comes and goes, what can stay is the " idea" of the sound. That most of the time I am not directly hearing anything, that I am hearing the idea of the sound, or any sense come to that. Immediately I have labeled something as the " sound of something" and started to judge whether I like it or not... I find this an interesting revelation, just how much Plantonic ideas have influenced my experience of things.
The " hand" exercise.
Is one image more of a " hand".?
In the last email I said the hand when in contact with the surface of the table "felt" more like a hand. Yet, alluding to what I wrote above, the visual hand is more of a hand. I see the "idea" of the hand . The " handness" if that makes sense. When I touch there is a mental image formed from sensations of the hand.
Does "I , me, or mine", exist as anything else other than thought?
This "i" exists as an idea. "I" dont know what something really is. It is an "impression" of what is experienced. This "impression" is tainted with judgement. The self forms around these judgements. So the self can judge experience, even doubt it.
In all senses there is this desire to form an identity around what is experienced. There is no control over what is experienced, though there is a desire to control how it is interpreted. That desire comes from a thought that experience is referring to a self and being judged by it. Yet observing the senses, there is just a sense and the perception of that sense. The self exists as an idea that holds experience of the senses together
With best wishes.
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Experienced directly, the experienced sensations are more real. The identity grows around these sensations. It tightens around a constellation of sensations and forms an image out of them. Then this image starts to judge these sensations as good and bad, or even doubt the sensations that it is experiencing, that they are made up by the very thing that is judging them, which has manifested through these sensations itself!
Hearing the sound in the street is a result of observation when I let go of thinking. There is a desire to label every sensation that arises, to place it as something "inside" or "outside" my "self". And in doing do starts to form a judgement on it ie, do "i" like that sound or not? When I let go of thinking and just observe the sensation of hearing, there is sound and the perception of sound. I notice that sound comes and goes, what can stay is the " idea" of the sound. That most of the time I am not directly hearing anything, that I am hearing the idea of the sound, or any sense come to that. Immediately I have labeled something as the " sound of something" and started to judge whether I like it or not... I find this an interesting revelation, just how much Plantonic ideas have influenced my experience of things.
The " hand" exercise.
Is one image more of a " hand".?
In the last email I said the hand when in contact with the surface of the table "felt" more like a hand. Yet, alluding to what I wrote above, the visual hand is more of a hand. I see the "idea" of the hand . The " handness" if that makes sense. When I touch there is a mental image formed from sensations of the hand.
Does "I , me, or mine", exist as anything else other than thought?
This "i" exists as an idea. "I" dont know what something really is. It is an "impression" of what is experienced. This "impression" is tainted with judgement. The self forms around these judgements. So the self can judge experience, even doubt it.
In all senses there is this desire to form an identity around what is experienced. There is no control over what is experienced, though there is a desire to control how it is interpreted. That desire comes from a thought that experience is referring to a self and being judged by it. Yet observing the senses, there is just a sense and the perception of that sense. The self exists as an idea that holds experience of the senses together
With best wishes.
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
Now, observing the workings of mind a bit more closely.
In the way the sensations that are felt via the sense of hearing are called 'sound', what would the sensations felt via the mind-sense be called?
In other words, just as the sense of vision, or hearing, etc is observed, and visual sensations are received, what kind of sensations are received via the mind-sense?
What does this say of the final 'picture' that has been concocted, and that we call “Reality”?
Indeed, if 'there is a desire to label every sensation that arises, to place it as something "inside" or "outside" my "self".' then on what basis is the 'seen' hand more a hand that the 'touched' hand?
Also, you mention a 'handness', can you please expand on this?
All the best, and Seasons Greetings!
Dridhamati
Yes. Thanks for that.Experienced directly, the experienced sensations are more real. The identity grows around these sensations...
Now, observing the workings of mind a bit more closely.
In the way the sensations that are felt via the sense of hearing are called 'sound', what would the sensations felt via the mind-sense be called?
In other words, just as the sense of vision, or hearing, etc is observed, and visual sensations are received, what kind of sensations are received via the mind-sense?
And does this judgement, labelling, etc, occur when observing sensations through the other senses?Hearing the sound in the street is a result of observation when I let go of thinking … I find this an interesting revelation, just how much Plantonic ideas have influenced my experience of things.
What does this say of the final 'picture' that has been concocted, and that we call “Reality”?
Now that is interesting, particularly in the light of what you wrote in the previous paragraph.In the last email I said the hand when in contact with the surface of the table "felt" more like a hand. Yet, alluding to what I wrote above, the visual hand is more of a hand. I see the "idea" of the hand . The " handness" if that makes sense. When I touch there is a mental image formed from sensations of the hand.
Indeed, if 'there is a desire to label every sensation that arises, to place it as something "inside" or "outside" my "self".' then on what basis is the 'seen' hand more a hand that the 'touched' hand?
Also, you mention a 'handness', can you please expand on this?
Well, nothing to add to this statement. It pretty much sums up the entire work this dialogue is meant to cover. It's so uplifting to read something like this from the person being guided.This "i" exists as an idea. "I" dont know what something really is. It is an "impression" of what is experienced. This "impression" is tainted with judgement. The self forms around these judgements. So the self can judge experience, even doubt it.
In all senses there is this desire to form an identity around what is experienced. There is no control over what is experienced, though there is a desire to control how it is interpreted. That desire comes from a thought that experience is referring to a self and being judged by it. Yet observing the senses, there is just a sense and the perception of that sense. The self exists as an idea that holds experience of the senses together
All the best, and Seasons Greetings!
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hello Dridhamati,
This is just a quick reply. I shall answer more of the questions tomorrow.
I just want to say a little about how my meditation is going.
There is much more space opening up. Im hav some interesting experiences coming from observing experience without it having a centre, which goes contra my first ever post!
Words are limiting but there seems to be just bubbles of experience that are observed and are being observed at the same time. They coemege. The main thing I am glimpsing is this desire to refer experience back to a fixed,controlling self. Yet it is coemerging with the object.
Anyway, I am exploring this more. Will write more later
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
This is just a quick reply. I shall answer more of the questions tomorrow.
I just want to say a little about how my meditation is going.
There is much more space opening up. Im hav some interesting experiences coming from observing experience without it having a centre, which goes contra my first ever post!
Words are limiting but there seems to be just bubbles of experience that are observed and are being observed at the same time. They coemege. The main thing I am glimpsing is this desire to refer experience back to a fixed,controlling self. Yet it is coemerging with the object.
Anyway, I am exploring this more. Will write more later
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Dridhamati,
Unfortunately I have sinusitis this past day or so.
What kind of sensations are recieved via the mind sense?
The mind sense is thoughts. These thoughts have a hedonic tone. Painful, pleasurable and neutral. It can be a " background noise" or commentary in the "head". It is discursive. Memories. Abstract ideas. They have an energetic quality depending on the thoughts.
When I refer to the handness I am really referring to the platonic idea of the nuemena. I can see it waxed too poetical and was tge wrong word in this case to use. What I wanted to say was it is easier to see an idea when it is held infront of you. Having said that, this exercise has confused me a little. When I close my eyes there is still an image of a hand. Infact, as I wrote in a previous report, the tactile hand "feels" more like my hand.
Thank you for your time and hope you are having good festivities!
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Unfortunately I have sinusitis this past day or so.
What kind of sensations are recieved via the mind sense?
The mind sense is thoughts. These thoughts have a hedonic tone. Painful, pleasurable and neutral. It can be a " background noise" or commentary in the "head". It is discursive. Memories. Abstract ideas. They have an energetic quality depending on the thoughts.
When I refer to the handness I am really referring to the platonic idea of the nuemena. I can see it waxed too poetical and was tge wrong word in this case to use. What I wanted to say was it is easier to see an idea when it is held infront of you. Having said that, this exercise has confused me a little. When I close my eyes there is still an image of a hand. Infact, as I wrote in a previous report, the tactile hand "feels" more like my hand.
Thank you for your time and hope you are having good festivities!
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
Now observing thoughts as sensations, just as sounds are sensations.
What in these thoughts makes them 'painful, pleasurable or neutral, or energetic'?
The point is to form a mental picture (if you can draw then pencil out this picture) of what is observed. First what is observed via the sense of sight -looking at the hand, and second what is observed via the sense of touch -feeling the contact points between hand and table. It's about drawing up the 'edges' or 'contour' of what is called the “hand”, viewed from two different senses, and then comparing these images.
Which of the two drawn images most resembles the hand, and why?
Is that a bit clearer?
Thank you for sharing some of your meditation.
Good work Sinhendra!
And a very happy new year to you and your loved ones.
All the best
Dridhamati
Best wishes for a prompt recovery.Unfortunately I have sinusitis this past day or so.
Indeed thoughts.The mind sense is thoughts. These thoughts have a hedonic tone. Painful, pleasurable and neutral. It can be a " background noise" or commentary in the "head". It is discursive. Memories. Abstract ideas. They have an energetic quality depending on the thoughts.
Now observing thoughts as sensations, just as sounds are sensations.
What in these thoughts makes them 'painful, pleasurable or neutral, or energetic'?
Yes, this exercise can be a little confusing. Sorry if I haven't been clear enough.Having said that, this exercise has confused me a little. When I close my eyes there is still an image of a hand. Infact, as I wrote in a previous report, the tactile hand "feels" more like my hand.
The point is to form a mental picture (if you can draw then pencil out this picture) of what is observed. First what is observed via the sense of sight -looking at the hand, and second what is observed via the sense of touch -feeling the contact points between hand and table. It's about drawing up the 'edges' or 'contour' of what is called the “hand”, viewed from two different senses, and then comparing these images.
Which of the two drawn images most resembles the hand, and why?
Is that a bit clearer?
Thank you for sharing some of your meditation.
Wonderful to read. And is there a feeling of nihilism still present?There is much more space opening up. Im hav some interesting experiences coming from observing experience without it having a centre, which goes contra my first ever post!
Good work Sinhendra!
And a very happy new year to you and your loved ones.
All the best
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hello Dridhamati,
I seem to be not doing this daily, though I am keeping up with the reflections and grateful fo makesr your guidance.
What is in the thoughts that makes them pleasurable etc?
The thoughts are impressions. There are different levels of thoughts. There are undercurrents of thoughts. These produce a general feeling tone, an underlying emotion. They are what I refer to subterranean or background volitional thoughts. These thoughts can spread themselves over other sensate experience, colouring perception. There are other thoughts that grow from sensate experience and become detached and one can loose oneself in them. They can be sluggish or fast thoughts depending on the deeper volitional thoughts behind them. The mind sense is made up of thoughts that are constantly referring to a "self". That is, a "sense" of self. So the mind/ self senses painful or pleasurable experience.
Exercise.
I have done this exercise before, but not with a hand, with the whole body shape. The one that looks like a hand is the one that one assumes to be the hand through association. The mind associates certain shapes and forms with what is a hand. Its like a filter. It perceives forms and desires to label them. There is a perfect image of s hand and the mind tries to filter what is percieved so it can fit that. Its as if the mind has a hard drive of all forms and projects that onto what is percieved. Eventually finding s shape that fits and thus labels it. From a label comes judgement. A "good" hand or a " bad" hand for example. The mind sense is what makes it a "hand". Just looking or just touching, there is no " hand". There are contours, shapes, lines, defintion etc, though no hand.
Meditation
Thank you for your encouragement!
This has been quite a shift for me. I don't get a feeling of me dropping away into the ocean, its more that I am noticing more this desire to refer experience back to some central control, which however, I notice is also desiring to refer bsck to a central control. I am seeing more a process of "selfing" through experience rather than no self.
Happy new year to you!
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
I seem to be not doing this daily, though I am keeping up with the reflections and grateful fo makesr your guidance.
What is in the thoughts that makes them pleasurable etc?
The thoughts are impressions. There are different levels of thoughts. There are undercurrents of thoughts. These produce a general feeling tone, an underlying emotion. They are what I refer to subterranean or background volitional thoughts. These thoughts can spread themselves over other sensate experience, colouring perception. There are other thoughts that grow from sensate experience and become detached and one can loose oneself in them. They can be sluggish or fast thoughts depending on the deeper volitional thoughts behind them. The mind sense is made up of thoughts that are constantly referring to a "self". That is, a "sense" of self. So the mind/ self senses painful or pleasurable experience.
Exercise.
I have done this exercise before, but not with a hand, with the whole body shape. The one that looks like a hand is the one that one assumes to be the hand through association. The mind associates certain shapes and forms with what is a hand. Its like a filter. It perceives forms and desires to label them. There is a perfect image of s hand and the mind tries to filter what is percieved so it can fit that. Its as if the mind has a hard drive of all forms and projects that onto what is percieved. Eventually finding s shape that fits and thus labels it. From a label comes judgement. A "good" hand or a " bad" hand for example. The mind sense is what makes it a "hand". Just looking or just touching, there is no " hand". There are contours, shapes, lines, defintion etc, though no hand.
Meditation
Thank you for your encouragement!
This has been quite a shift for me. I don't get a feeling of me dropping away into the ocean, its more that I am noticing more this desire to refer experience back to some central control, which however, I notice is also desiring to refer bsck to a central control. I am seeing more a process of "selfing" through experience rather than no self.
Happy new year to you!
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
The 'hand' is a construct, a concept.
So having realised this, what of the next point below.
What are these 'painful', 'pleasurable', 'good', 'bad', etc, words? Can they be found in experience?
Observing physical experience itself, what renders it 'painful or pleasurable'?
And then observing mental experience itself, that is thought, what renders it 'painful or pleasurable'?
'Self', and 'no-self', are thought-based constructs, as you've seen. In that sense neither exists in its own right, neither can be pointed to in experience.
However, a process can be observed: that of the 'creation of the delusion that a “self” exists' -the 'selfing' process.
And in the light of this observation, is the belief in this delusion -that a “self” exists- still present?
All the best
Dridhamati
Indeed.... The mind sense is what makes it a "hand". Just looking or just touching, there is no " hand". There are contours, shapes, lines, defintion etc, though no hand.
The 'hand' is a construct, a concept.
So having realised this, what of the next point below.
Is there really 'painful or pleasurable experience'?... So the mind/ self senses painful or pleasurable experience.
What are these 'painful', 'pleasurable', 'good', 'bad', etc, words? Can they be found in experience?
Observing physical experience itself, what renders it 'painful or pleasurable'?
And then observing mental experience itself, that is thought, what renders it 'painful or pleasurable'?
That is an excellent observation.... I am seeing more a process of "selfing" through experience rather than no self.
'Self', and 'no-self', are thought-based constructs, as you've seen. In that sense neither exists in its own right, neither can be pointed to in experience.
However, a process can be observed: that of the 'creation of the delusion that a “self” exists' -the 'selfing' process.
And in the light of this observation, is the belief in this delusion -that a “self” exists- still present?
All the best
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Dridhamati,
Have sent the email on. Thanks for notifying me about the list.
Have been looking at the naming of what is pleasurable and painful.
Pain or pleasure actually is a texture. It is tight, or soft, or warm. Etc. What renders it painful or pleasurable is a judgement on that experience. it is an impression of that experience that seeks to refer back to a self. it gathers momentum depending on how much attention is placed on it. Consciousness zooms in on the pain for example. Yet when I let go of the fiction around tge "pain" there is just texture s of sensate experience. Mental impressions, thoughts, arrise out of the experience, then one can become detached from the physical experience and be filled with pleasurable or painful thoughts. Without any investment in these thoughts however, without clinging to them, they are empty. The clinging creates a sense of self.
The "selfing" process is the constant desire to make sense of experience, to tell a story about what is happening . It is the bifurcating mind separating out self and other, likes and dislikes. Yet there is no central control, no centre, these stories arrise and fall depending on conditions. The self is imagined. Becoming more conscious of that process one can "choose" what one imagines.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Have sent the email on. Thanks for notifying me about the list.
Have been looking at the naming of what is pleasurable and painful.
Pain or pleasure actually is a texture. It is tight, or soft, or warm. Etc. What renders it painful or pleasurable is a judgement on that experience. it is an impression of that experience that seeks to refer back to a self. it gathers momentum depending on how much attention is placed on it. Consciousness zooms in on the pain for example. Yet when I let go of the fiction around tge "pain" there is just texture s of sensate experience. Mental impressions, thoughts, arrise out of the experience, then one can become detached from the physical experience and be filled with pleasurable or painful thoughts. Without any investment in these thoughts however, without clinging to them, they are empty. The clinging creates a sense of self.
The "selfing" process is the constant desire to make sense of experience, to tell a story about what is happening . It is the bifurcating mind separating out self and other, likes and dislikes. Yet there is no central control, no centre, these stories arrise and fall depending on conditions. The self is imagined. Becoming more conscious of that process one can "choose" what one imagines.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
So if I read correctly, the “self” --this fixed, separate entity-- only exists in the imagination. It is a thought-construct?
Now how does this “choosing” occur then?
Please observe the process of “choosing” in action (cup of tea/cup of coffee, blue shirt/green shirt, etc.)
All the best
Dridhamati
That's spot on observation. Thanks.What renders it painful or pleasurable is a judgement on that experience … Without any investment in these thoughts however, without clinging to them, they are empty. The clinging creates a sense of self.
That's another great observation. Thanks.The "selfing" process is the constant desire to make sense of experience, to tell a story about what is happening . It is the bifurcating mind separating out self and other, likes and dislikes.
Indeed, no central control.Yet there is no central control, no centre, these stories arrise and fall depending on conditions. The self is imagined. Becoming more conscious of that process one can "choose" what one imagines.
So if I read correctly, the “self” --this fixed, separate entity-- only exists in the imagination. It is a thought-construct?
Now how does this “choosing” occur then?
Please observe the process of “choosing” in action (cup of tea/cup of coffee, blue shirt/green shirt, etc.)
All the best
Dridhamati
-
lordoflions
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 7:06 am
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Dridhamati,
The self is a fiction. Its created through thoughts arrising from and constellating sensate experience. Perception itself is image making. The self is what is imagined in a perceptual situation, which has a subject/object polarity..
Within this imagined polarity are volitional tendencies arrising out of this. This separates the experience into "I like" or "dislike".
Reflecting more on this and observing the process of choice further, what " I " percieve as a choice is in fact a fiction, because it would assume that there is a "self" that is making that choice. Yet this self arrises out of and bifurcates direct experience. The choice happens when there is percieved an object "out there" in relationship to a subject ;in here"'.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
The self is a fiction. Its created through thoughts arrising from and constellating sensate experience. Perception itself is image making. The self is what is imagined in a perceptual situation, which has a subject/object polarity..
Within this imagined polarity are volitional tendencies arrising out of this. This separates the experience into "I like" or "dislike".
Reflecting more on this and observing the process of choice further, what " I " percieve as a choice is in fact a fiction, because it would assume that there is a "self" that is making that choice. Yet this self arrises out of and bifurcates direct experience. The choice happens when there is percieved an object "out there" in relationship to a subject ;in here"'.
Best wishes,
Sinhendra
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
-
dridhamati
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:09 pm
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Want to be guided by Drdhamati
Hi Sinhendra,
Thank you for your clear and unambiguous answers.
At this point in the dialogue I ask a series of 6 questions. The responses help determine if all bases have been covered. The questions can be answered all at once, or one by one. Either way they are best answered from direct experience.
Here goes.
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 decision, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work? What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.
6) Anything to add?
All the best
Didhamati
Thank you for your clear and unambiguous answers.
At this point in the dialogue I ask a series of 6 questions. The responses help determine if all bases have been covered. The questions can be answered all at once, or one by one. Either way they are best answered from direct experience.
Here goes.
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 decision, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work? What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.
6) Anything to add?
All the best
Didhamati
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 222 guests