Deepening into peace

[Bexter]

Can this 'die-hard habit of claiming reponsibility', these thoughts, be questioned honestly, looked into until seen for what they are, whenever they arise? Would that be ok?

Yes!! Excitement, moved, cheerful energy in all of body (E). Also slight hesitancy in the form of the thought “I wonder if that will actually change things, make it less of a habit”, and counter-thought “Sure it will, that’s how the mind works!” (T) Frustration over the thoughts, constricted a bit in chest (E). Gratitude, gladness and warmth directed outward, for the company in this (T and E).

Please read each one and then dwell on it for a moment, noting whatever sensations come up, and then report back to me on any.

2. This is not about gaining something extra, becoming something special.
4. This is not a trick of the mind, or twisting the mind into believing certain thoughts.
5. This is not about gaining a particular bit of knowledge.
6. This is not about having a certain thought or sequence of thoughts.
8. This is not a belief, religion, or a philosophy, it not magical or mystical.
16. This is not about convincing you of anything.
17. This is not something that will lead to accumulation of money or things.

Excitement about these (E); there is no desire to do that (T)!

1. This is not a way to escape your daily life.
3. This is not about cultivating an altered state of consciousness.
9. This is not going to lead you to eternal peace and happiness, it is not about happiness.
10. This is not about freedom from emotions and intense feelings.
13. This is not a way to get free of depression or other diseases.
14. This is not about stopping thoughts, changing thoughts, getting rid of thoughts.

Initial resistance: Some impulse to think about this, defining things (E). Thoughts are triggered, such as “Well, doesn’t that depend on the definition of this or that?” (T) And “Just go with it, you know this will come as a result, if only you don’t aim for it…” (T) Counter-thought: “Really, I do want to drop all of that as well. I want to experience my daily life, with all what that means in mood states and thoughts. I want truth, not change.” (T) Sigh and slightly moved, relaxing, as there is an opening up to accepting all of this as is (E).

7. This is not about becoming a holy, good, moral or better person.
11. This is not about getting rid of self, ego, I.
12. This is not a solution to problems in relationships.
15. This is not a way to make the story of you disappear.
18. This is not a self improvement program.

This I do want! (T) Sighing and a physical pull (E) toward something ultimate, pure, rising above, moving beyond (T).

Is it ok if any such reactions and sensations are there? Can they be allowed to stay as long as they stay, pass through when they are ready?

Yes, they are ok as they are (T). Open spaciousness, calm (E). There is no rush to get rid of them (T). Warm feeling inside (E).

[ElPortal]

Hi Rebecka

Thanks for that response: excellent work!

So, experiences can be found, and some thoughts can be found, but can any individual called Rebecka be found?
Sure, the body - including its neuronal (mental) accoutrements - may collate and sort experiences into degrees of threat to its comfort and survival, and this may be labelled as 'thinking'. All bodies, including animals, seem to do that, right? But do this body and its thinking (neuronal) apparatus actually amount to a separate individual called Rebecka? Let's take a further look:-

1. Please stand up and walk slowly across the room for 5 steps, and then return slowly and sit down. A body moved around a room. Was that body you? Notice the experiecing of the whole thing? There is an experience, there are sensations, but does that experience and do those sensations amount to you, an individual?

2. Now as you sit, look carefully and notice whether any end of nose can be seen, any hands, or knees, any other body parts. Ponder carefully. There is an experience of noticing (visually) body parts, but are any of those body parts you? What is it that is looking? Is that you? Or is there just a sensation labeled as 'looking'? Is there just experiencing?

In each case, please just report what feels real (and as always use labels (E) and (T) to help to keep things clear).

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

Thank you for these questions, Mark!

1. Please stand up and walk slowly across the room for 5 steps, and then return slowly and sit down. A body moved around a room. Was that body you? Notice the experiecing of the whole thing? There is an experience, there are sensations, but does that experience and do those sensations amount to you, an individual?

The body is not me (E). There is experience, lots of it (E). It seems to include some sense of subjectivity (E). That receptor-ness that was written about in the 10/3 post (T). Beingness, awareness (E). This is also is an experience, however, not an experiencer (T). Still, there seems to be a strong tendency to identify with this, an assumption that that this kind of experience is the experiencer (T). Looking inside, I have no experiential proof that this would be true (E). There are only physical sensations (vibrations in the body, some kind of spaciousness in the head and chest) and thoughts (E). No separate category of holy awareness or subjectivity! (T) This excites me! (E)

2. Now as you sit, look carefully and notice whether any end of nose can be seen, any hands, or knees, any other body parts. Ponder carefully. There is an experience of noticing (visually) body parts, but are any of those body parts you? What is it that is looking? Is that you? Or is there just a sensation labeled as 'looking'? Is there just experiencing?

Nothing is me. The body parts as seen visually, easily cluster with the body parts as felt from the inside (E). Neither is me (E). Thoughts happen, they are the ones with the agenda of doing this exercise; they are the ones that strive (E). Seeing happens. There is a thought that the seer is in there, receiving the vision (T). The thought is the one that creates the identification, so when they are noticed as just part of the experience, identification drops (E).

Normally, though, this is not looked at very closely, the body and the seeing is identified with, through thoughts (T). The state of non-identification is within reach, but that seems to only last as long as focus is on it (T).

Another thing: As this is written, there is a correcting going on. All the personal pronouns are substituted, as was the last task. This activity is enjoyed! This is not what comes up first and most naturally, but there is a will to train that perspective, which is truer. Is it good to do that here, or is it better if the first impulse is written down, as to not censor anything? Perhaps write down both the initial, as well as the corrected?

[ElPortal]

Hi Rebecka,

Again, great work.

This is not what comes up first and most naturally, but there is a will to train that perspective, which is truer. Is it good to do that here, or is it better if the first impulse is written down, as to not censor anything? Perhaps write down both the initial, as well as the corrected?

Good point. If we are to 'train into that perspective, which is truer', would this be any more than training the mind, superimposing a certain thought on what is happening? Is not what we are doing actually the opposite: namely tenaciously questioning everything, every thought construct (T), every belief clung to (T), which has jumped in and superimposed itself upon the raw experience; so, questioning those each and every time they are noticed, until the raw seeing and experiencing are returned to, all the thought content not necessarily not happening any more but seen for what it is, kind of relieved of its 'guard-dog' (ie protective) duties)? Does that resonate?

A. Questions: i) it seems that part of the very nature of Life itself is to be curious, to question everything, but what separate entity is there there to train thoughts?
ii) I mentioned thoughts' guard-dog duties: what might thoughts be trying to protect? Anything come up when you consider that? Never mind if not.

B. Here's another exercise, looking at the role of thoughts:-

Find a TV team sport on TV or a Youtube clip that lasts for at least 3 minutes, team sport such as soccer (the ideal sport to use for this), or basketball, or football, which has a commentary. 1. Watch with the sound turned OFF one minute of the people messing about with a round thing on a field, up and down, up and down. Let it sink in, the whole experience. 2. Once the first minute is completed, now watch another whole minute with the commentary (T) turned ON. Notice the differences. Notice how the commentator offers lots of know-how, even advice, seems to feel as though (s)he can influence somehow what is going on, as though one outcome is much preferred to the opposite outcome, the commentary may seem to heighten any supporter-ish feelings which are there, and call for an identification with one team or other, and with the importance of the game itself. 3. Now turn the volume OFF AGAIN and just watch the action with NO audible commentary, the shapes moving around on the screen etc. Again notice all the differences in the experience.

Did the commentary add one whit to the activities on the field, or to the success/outcome of the game? Let me know what comes up.

Again, as you consider these questions and exercises, don't forget to report back on the instant sensations which come up (E).

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

Thanks, Mark!

If we are to 'train into that perspective, which is truer', would this be any more than training the mind, superimposing a certain thought on what is happening? Is not what we are doing actually the opposite: namely tenaciously questioning everything, every thought construct (T), every belief clung to (T), which has jumped in and superimposed itself upon the raw experience; so, questioning those each and every time they are noticed, until the raw seeing and experiencing are returned to, all the thought content not necessarily not happening any more but seen for what it is, kind of relieved of its 'guard-dog' (ie protective) duties)? Does that resonate?

It does! So the implication is still to stop when the personal pronouns come up, but not to correct them, but rather to question them and connect to E? No need to reformulate the words, then, just seeing the gap between them and E?

A. Questions: i) it seems that part of the very nature of Life itself is to be curious, to question everything, but what separate entity is there there to train thoughts?

I was trying to explore this experientially this night and morning: What is there, truly, that wants anything? (T) There is some kind of curiosity/will/intention/direction/impulse/drive/striving, in my experience (E). And this drive is directing the spotlight of attention to focus on different things, which – for some reason – seems most relevant (E). When focus on “what’s important” (according to this will) is lost, this will brings it back (E). It’s much appreciated by this being, directing it! (T) The drive can be trained, it seems, through (for example) meditation (T). It is driving me to post here (E). When “I” try to look in to “my” experience, it is that drive that is initiating and sustaining the trying! (T) The identification process seems very fond of this drive, and easily latches on to it; “This drive is the core of what I am”, it says! (T) There is recognition that this identification happens, but there is no experiential proof for it, just the conviction of the identification process (E).

ii) I mentioned thoughts' guard-dog duties: what might thoughts be trying to protect? Anything come up when you consider that? Never mind if not.

First thoughts that come up (this is all Ts): Clarity, keeping truth conceptual and easy to handle. Boxing in reality, to make it practical. Protection from chaos and disorder, from loosing control an overview. The identification process, specifically: Keeping me apart from others, to prioritize myself and keep me safe from danger. “This is ME and this is important to keep alive, more important than other life and other things!”

Ironically my (E) right now: A good feeling to get the purpose of thoughts more clear and identified, with the help of thoughts!

B. Here's another exercise, looking at the role of thoughts:-

Find a TV team sport on TV or a Youtube clip that lasts for at least 3 minutes, team sport such as soccer (the ideal sport to use for this), or basketball, or football, which has a commentary. 1. Watch with the sound turned OFF one minute of the people messing about with a round thing on a field, up and down, up and down. Let it sink in, the whole experience. 2. Once the first minute is completed, now watch another whole minute with the commentary (T) turned ON. Notice the differences. Notice how the commentator offers lots of know-how, even advice, seems to feel as though (s)he can influence somehow what is going on, as though one outcome is much preferred to the opposite outcome, the commentary may seem to heighten any supporter-ish feelings which are there, and call for an identification with one team or other, and with the importance of the game itself. 3. Now turn the volume OFF AGAIN and just watch the action with NO audible commentary, the shapes moving around on the screen etc. Again notice all the differences in the experience.

Before I did this, I could guess that it would be pretty different. The things I noticed was that the commentary really latched on to my experience, kind of took up space in my head. I enjoyed it more watching it without the commentary, for sure. However, I think that if I was really into the history of the group plays, the teams, the implications of the score etc, like one can be if one is following a league, the comments would be more tempting. As it was now, I felt like I had a fuller, more direct experience of what was going on on the field, when the sound was off.

Did the commentary add one whit to the activities on the field, or to the success/outcome of the game? Let me know what comes up.

None, of course. They affect my overview of the odds, gave a sense of being oriented, letting me know what’s significant and not, telling me about the background of the players and how many other people out there thought his game was important, but not the actual happenings.

[ElPortal]

Hi Rebecka.

Great stuff!

So the implication is still to stop when the personal pronouns come up, but not to correct them, but rather to question them and connect to E? No need to reformulate the words, then, just seeing the gap between them and E?

Sure, just to notice that they are there is ok, isn't it? Or do we want mummy to take them away? If the "'ego is the unquestioned belief in a separate self", as it has been defined by some experts, then once observed as such it is no longer unquestioned, is it? A thought is one thing, but a belief (ie a thought plus a second thought that the first thought was true) is totally another. Is there an appetite to question EVERY belief, and every thought, to see whether any of them are provably true? If so, try it throughout the day and let me know what you find that was definitely, absolutely true.

Re the game and commentary:-

However, I think that if I was really into the history of the group plays, the teams, the implications of the score etc, like one can be if one is following a league, the comments would be more tempting.

And would it be ok if Life likes just as much to play as to see through the play? What if this were the case?

Once again, don't forget to report also the sponataneous sensations which come up, as these are read and considered.

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

Sure, just to notice that they are there is ok, isn't it? Or do we want mummy to take them away? If the "'ego is the unquestioned belief in a separate self", as it has been defined by some experts, then once observed as such it is no longer unquestioned, is it? A thought is one thing, but a belief (ie a thought plus a second thought that the first thought was true) is totally another. Is there an appetite to question EVERY belief, and every thought, to see whether any of them are provably true? If so, try it throughout the day and let me know what you find that was definitely, absolutely true.

Yes!! Excitement (E). That’s like my new favorite quote! “A thought is one thing, but a belief (ie a thought plus a second thought that the first thought was true) is totally another.” That is very much where the entanglement happens, in that second thought (E&T). That way of saying it now, triggered more clarity for me about the division between E and T. (E&T) Clarity, amusement, physical relaxation, playful/giddy (E).

Been questioning a few ”obvious” thoughts during the day (I mean some really “true” ones – such as “my name is Rebecka”, “I am eating”, even “there is no self”) and they – fairly easily – are clearly seen as thoughts, with no relationship to truth (E). It’s so clear! (E) Reality is bigger, and thoughts happen within it. Thoughts don’t decide the parameters of reality, or could ever clearly describe them. They are another language. Or, rather, they ARE language, which is not reality. I’m rambling now, but this is so cool! (T) Excitement, a bit moved, energized (E).

I have had thoughts about these concepts being true before, but now I see more clearly. (T)

And would it be ok if Life likes just as much to play as to see through the play? What if this were the case?

Playful, energized, loving, moved: smile on face, tears wanting to come out, body wanting to dance, stomach has butterflies (E). It’s great!! Life can do that, and I’m so totally fine with that! (T) Noticing that there is some regret now, clinging to the experience of seeing through, at least having that “ability”, so I can move in and out of it. (E&T) It has such a free and happy feel to it! Mixed feelings now.

[Bexter]

So excited and into it now, that I forgot all about the "Hi Mark" and "Thank you Mark" etc.

Thanks SO much for your guidance, it's very helpful, as I'm sure you can tell. :-) Hope you have a nice evening.

[ElPortal]

HI Rebecka,

A great response: feels like something's going on over there:-

Playful, energized, loving, moved: smile on face, tears wanting to come out, body wanting to dance, stomach has butterflies (E).

Cool: if there are tears wanting to come out, why try to hold them back? If there is body wanting to dance, why try to stop it? If there are butterflies, isn't that cool too? All noticed, lived, embraced, purging, expressing, flowing?

Now an exercise about choosing:-

Place three objects, say 3 pens pencils or 3 glasses/cups on a table in front of you. Now, noticing all the happens including sensations (E) and thought commentary (T) look at them carefully and then pick just one of them up slowly.
Now, please consider and describe as best you can what happened, the process.
1. .How did the 'choosing' take place?
2. Especially, can any separate individual be found there which made the choice?
3. Thoughts may (or may not) have plenty to say about what was going on, but did thoughts decide? Let me know.

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

I really look forward to spending the daily time with these questions of yours, Mark :-)

Cool: if there are tears wanting to come out, why try to hold them back? If there is body wanting to dance, why try to stop it? If there are butterflies, isn't that cool too? All noticed, lived, embraced, purging, expressing, flowing?

Everything is welcome, some is sub-threshold for acting out. There is an warm, happy feeling (E) about the thought of letting everything flow (T). I’t likely that I hold back more than I know, and that this threshold could be lowered (T).

Place three objects, say 3 pens pencils or 3 glasses/cups on a table in front of you. Now, noticing all the happens including sensations (E) and thought commentary (T) look at them carefully and then pick just one of them up slowly.
Now, please consider and describe as best you can what happened, the process.
1. .How did the 'choosing' take place?
2. Especially, can any separate individual be found there which made the choice?
3. Thoughts may (or may not) have plenty to say about what was going on, but did thoughts decide? Let me know.

1. There was attentiveness, a waiting for something to happen (E). Impulses toward the three different objects, taking turns to surface, like a dance (E). Bit of butterflies again, excitement/anxiety/nervousness (E), I don’t know what I will choose! (T) A dragging this moment out, exploring it (E). Thoughts that I want to see where the choosing comes from , which impulse I’ll act on (T). Suddenly a decisiveness and a movement, almost impulsive (E). So arbitrary (T). So much activity sub-threshold, willing and counterwilling the impulses (E). The lingering before acting seemed to be causing an uncertainty, somewhat uncomfortable, but also thrilling.
2. There is no chooser to be found(E) (for the looking that’s being initiated by who-knows-what.. (T) ) Probably lots of triggers, obvious and subtle, one thing leading to another (T). There are many claims (T) about the initiatives and counter-initiatives being from “me”, and there is a going along with this conviction as well (T), but no direct experiential proof (E). None.
3. They were be part of the maps of triggers, in my experience, leading to actions (E). I’ve read in neuroscience, that thoughts come after emontions (bodily reactions), justifying decisions rather than making them (T). I couldn’t discern that exactly, but there seemed to be an interplay between lots of stuff attention couldn’t keep up with (E).

All the best to you,
/R

[ElPortal]

Thanks very much for all of that, Rebecka.

Can any "I' be found, that 'made the choice of one item over the others'?
Could you explain what is meant by 'sub-threshold', as I don't quite understand what you are meaning by this word. Thanks.

Now, lets look further into this:-

Imagine for a moment a scene: one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high. Consider in your mind's eye, if you can, how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side. Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground, the grass, weather conditions etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or is it more the product of environmental conditions and water, like an an ever-changing pattern?

A. Now, consider: can you find anywhere where 'Rebacka' as an independent agent' autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements, that is not a part of the overall flow?

B. Now please consider a regular decision made, eg what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from: any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!). etc etc. Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find somewhere?

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

Good morning, Mark! No post yesterday, since I was fully booked up.

Can any "I' be found, that 'made the choice of one item over the others'?

No, there is no ”I” that can be singled out (E). Any choice of ”I” definition would be arbitrary and made up (T).

Could you explain what is meant by 'sub-threshold', as I don't quite understand what you are meaning by this word. Thanks.

Below cut-off for action. Impulses, movements in the body in one direction, such as a boost of energy (E) accompanied with the imagined activity of dancing (T), but which is not strong enough or does not last long enough to result in action.


About the mountain stream: What a beautiful picture of the so-called “choices” we make (T). Appreciation, contentment (E).

Does it choose any of its directions?

No. They are a mere result of lots of factors, such as the height levels of the environment and how much power is in the stream due to rain. As humans, we have a strong tendency to animate things, identify them as individuals with will and choices. So we could imagine that the stream has a personality, history, and in one sense, is an individual. Then we could get invested in the “choices” it made, relate to it that way, and even feel like we have a personal relationship with it. We can feel sorry for it, for making bad choices and feel offended if it makes choices that are bad for us. But in reality, it’s just part of the flow of life. Just like us, and our “choices” (T). This is obvious to me any time I actually look (E). Calm. No reactions to this (E).

Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground, the grass, weather conditions etc?

No. It’s a label, an imagined entity. Like our own selves. (T) Still no reactions, feels familiar (E).

Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or is it more the product of environmental conditions and water, like an an ever-changing pattern?

The concept is fairly stable, the label (T), but as an actual entity (E), it doesn’t exist at all. The flow and the content of the actual “stream” is ever-changing (T).

A. Now, consider: can you find anywhere where 'Rebacka' as an independent agent' autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements, that is not a part of the overall flow?

No. It’s all just flow. (T) Experientially I can’t find an agent (E). There are thougths and ideas of an agent, just like I can imagine that the stream has a choosing self (T), but if I try to find it, it’s not there (E). There is a knowing of this, intellectually (T), as well as experientially (E). It’s familiar to “realize” it (E). However, in everyday life, it seems like there is that habit of forgetting this, so I guess there is still reason to “hammer it in” from different directions (T).

B. Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find somewhere?

It can’t be found. When ever it feels like an “intervention” it always comes from another factor. Cause and effect.

Allt the best to you!
/R

[ElPortal]

A very clear response again, Rebecka.


So, is there any remaining 'sense of a self' there, and if so please describe it. Notice I said 'sense of a self', as in 'experience'? (Notice that I didn't say 'thought of a self'.)

Can a real individual doer be found called Rebecka?
or a body that 'is you'?
or an autonomous, decision-making agency?
or anything that is truly controlling anything?
Are the experiences ever really Rebecka?
Are the memories of the past, and projections of the future any real Rebecka?

Now consider quietly and carefully: can the possibility be entertained that what has gone under the name of 'Rebecka' has never ever been anything other than 'this experience', but taken to 'be an individual called Rebecka and her story'? Stay with it. Let me know what comes up.

As you consider these questions, please notice any physical reactions once again, and report on those. Also stay with them and just give them some space to express.

Cheers

Mark

[Bexter]

Hi again Mark! Missed you while the site was down!

So, is there any remaining 'sense of a self' there, and if so please describe it. Notice I said 'sense of a self', as in 'experience'? (Notice that I didn't say 'thought of a self'.)

There is no sense of self, no experience whatsoever that is a self (E). There are only thoughts and beliefs coming up now and then (E). The Habit (T).

Can a real individual doer be found called Rebecka?

Nope (E). No thoughts or protests here; it seems clear (E).

or a body that 'is you'?

No (T). Oh, that was a thought! (T). Surprise (E). There seem to be some resistance or hesitancy here (T). Excitement (E). Fun! Let’s look at it! (T)…. Physical sensations, tingeling (E). Is this me? (T). No (E). It’s physical sensations, it’s not a self (E&T). There is no body that’s me (E).

or an autonomous, decision-making agency?

Nope (E). This is clear as I look (E). Just like the stream (T). Feeling happy and peaceful. A bit playful as well (E).

or anything that is truly controlling anything?

Well, not anything any self initiates (E&T). Lots of factors, some coming from within this being, some from without (T). But it all just happens (E).

Are the experiences ever really Rebecka?

Some subtle constriction (E). Seems like if the self couldn’t be the experiencing/er, at least it wanted to be the experiences! (T) Wait a minute! What self wants this? (T) These are just thoughts and thoughts of thoughts! (T) Surprise (E). Bit excitement and playfulness, giddy (E). Clenched teeth (E). Relaxing (E). Disoriented (E), like I lost track of something (T). Now, where was I? (T) Laughing out loud for quite a while (E) at the irony of that expression (T). Restating the question (E). No (E). The experiences are not me (E). The identification process (thoughts of thoughts) begs to differ, but that’s its job, it seems (T). Amusement (E).

Are the memories of the past, and projections of the future any real Rebecka?

No (E). They are just thoughts in the present (E). This is clear (E).

Now consider quietly and carefully: can the possibility be entertained that what has gone under the name of 'Rebecka' has never ever been anything other than 'this experience', but taken to 'be an individual called Rebecka and her story'? Stay with it. Let me know what comes up.

For sure! (E) To the extent it’s clear to me in and about this instant - and it’s pretty clear - it’s also clear that all instances are this way (E). The mind and the identification processes have certainly been busy, weaving it’s patterns and “making sense” of the experiences (T), but in the end there are only the experiences and the pattern weaving is included within (E).

This was really fun! :-)

[ElPortal]

Cool, Rebecka, great to be back in touch, and thanks for those answers, really fun to read too!

It is looking as though the illusion is being seen through here, and that 'mind games' are seen for what they are. If you have any further issues you want to raise please feel free to do so now. Otherwise, I will give you our summing-up questions. Please take your time with them and just answer them honestly and as fully as you can, from your present experience (i.e. practice rather than 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, how it starts and works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now. (Don't forget here that I am more interested in the experience, rather than theories).
 
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) Do you decide, intend, choose, control events in Life? Do you make anything happen? Please try to describe the process as best you can, even if gropingly. Don't forget to give some practical examples from your everyday experience (even if there is no real 'you'!) What are you responsible for? (Don't forget to answer this last element).

6) Anything to add?

I look forward to hearing from you when you are ready.

Cheers

Mark.