Requesting guidance

[Treelife]

Thanks Jon
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Regards
M

[Treelife]

Thanks Jon
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Regards
M

[JonathanR]

Hi M,

OK, we do have some questions for you. Please answer each one as fully as it seems to demand. (They don't need to be essays , just write whatever it takes to answer). And from what's actually seen rather than giving some sort of 'ideal' answer. Here we go:

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) a) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control.
b) What makes things happen? How does it work?
c) What are you responsible for?
d) Give examples from experience.

6) Anything to add?

All best,

Speak soon,

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form?
Was there ever?
No, I cannot find one. I hold a strong belief that there is no self. A ‘sense’ of self does arise, then when I look to see who/what/where it is it cannot be found; the ‘sense’ may disappear, or it may shrink, or the ‘sense’ may continue although with the knowing that it is not real.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience.
“The illusion”; hmmmm.... it may present in a feeling in the body that has a corresponding thought/belief/idea that this relates to Mic. Or it may present implicitly in narrative and thoughts.
“...when it starts...”; I find lately that I don’t have much interaction with stories of the past, if you really pressed me to come up with a more substantial answer I would probable say something like: Mic is a product of the story he learned from his childhood, that as a child it was in his interests to go along with the story and once established then the story just maintained itself.
“Describe it fully as you see it now.” For a lot of today experiences have presented as a subtle moving collage of sensory information (visual, auditory, bodily etc...) which have been folding in on each other and shifting through and past each other. Within that there is a story that floats through the collage or activity. The story sometimes moves forward, where it becomes central and has clear ideas; then other times it retreats, even disappears. Within that story there is a Mic, sometimes he is a clinician, sometimes he is a father, sometimes he is a husband and sometimes he is just some guy trying to cross the road without getting hit by the bus coming around the corner.

3) “How does it feel to see this?”; Sometimes dreamy, surreal, often ease of well being, sometimes a little flat, often it is perfectly ok. My happiness baseline is 7-8 out of 10. There are two feeling states, one is surface level, the other is deeper. On the surface level the corresponding feeling is.... can I say that it is whatever is in keeping with the narrative of Mic. Mic is excited, irritated, tired (he is tired a lot) or whatever. On a deeper level there is a fundamental feeling that it is ok. Like there is a knowing that none of it really matters, well certainly problems and issues don’t really matter. Other times there is the physical feeling of expansiveness, then other times there is a physical feeling of discombobulating ‘sense’ of being. Please grant me some license in my use of words here Jon, but the ‘sense’ of being may be located outside of the body, it can be spread around the senses or not in the senses.
“What is the difference from before you started this dialogue?”; Before I started this my baseline happiness was 4-5 out of 10. Mic was a solid rigid entity that took the stories and judgements very seriously.
“ Please report from the past few days.” Oscillations of, sense of self being stronger and central; and other times being diminished and/or withdrawn. Overall the oscillations are moving in the direction of the latter (diminished/withdrawn). Even when the sense of self is more prevalent there is still a strong belief that it is false, an illusion, not real. Note it is a ‘sense’ of self, not an actual ‘self’.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?
There was no last bit, no final push, this is an incremental decent into ‘being’ that has been progressing for the last two months. There were a number of peak experiences in meditation and after returning from every peak I noticed that something was different. The inquiry with Jon last year helped me take off on this journey, the inquiry this year guided the safe landing. Hmmm...every correspondence with Jon over the last few weeks helped deliver an important insight in accepting this reality.
5) a) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control.
I never was much of an existentialist, don’t see free will and never did.
b) What makes things happen? How does it work?
It just happens, it just arises. There is meaning in the narrative, but the narrative is fairly arbitrary.
c) What are you responsible for?
What is ‘who’ responsible for? In the story, Mic is very responsible, he is a bit of a hard ass actually, but I am not Mic.
d) Give examples from experience.
As I write this email the answers flow in response to the thoughts that arise. Whenever there are conflicting thoughts then one of those thoughts seems to win out and that is the one that guides the answers. There is no right or wrong answer to what is written, there is just a story that may or may not be viewed positively by the reader, but that doesn’t even matter – on a deeper level it really doesn’t matter.

6) Anything to add?
I really feel a deepening into the realization over the last few days. Thanks Jon.

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Thanks for your answers. I will reply later on today.

Thanks

Jon

[Treelife]

No rush Jon.
Am camping for the weekend so I will have limited availability from tonight.
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

No worries about the camping. Hope you have fun. Just reply when you can.

Thanks again for your answers. Lets just take a look at a couple of things you said?

No, I cannot find one. I hold a strong belief that there is no self.

Ok, so on looking for a self, one is not found. That's pretty clear and you have said so.

But that way of putting it will always carry the flavour or whiff of a 'self' that 'does the looking'. Do you see this? At the very least there's some idea of a self implied in the wording.

Do you think that we might change this way of talking slightly, to 'no self is seen'? Do you see the difference in this way of speaking? Tell me now what the difference is, if you will?

Also, earlier you said 'I think this is clarity for this leg of the process'. Could you say what clarity is, for you, please?

All the best,

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

But that way of putting it will always carry the flavour or whiff of a 'self' that 'does the looking'. Do you see this? At the very least there's some idea of a self implied in the wording.

I agree. Language has its limitations, especially in writing.

Do you think that we might change this way of talking slightly, to 'no self is seen'? Do you see the difference in this way of speaking? Tell me now what the difference is, if you will?

Yes that is different. The inquiry is a bit more fluid. To say, “I can see that there is no self”, starts from the presupposition that there is an I. Whereas “on looking, no self can be found”, is less restricted pre-loaded conclusions to the inquiry. It feels freer, the ‘sense of self’ that may arise seems more transparent, fluid – cannot say this is through the change of language or if it represents a natural deepening of the insight, of the process.

Also, earlier you said 'I think this is clarity for this leg of the process'. Could you say what clarity is, for you, please?

Am curious that you pick up on this particular line. So far as can be recalled from the time of writing that email, there was a struggle to figure out how to end that email as writing that email required facing the doubts that where arising; doubts/struggles that we have been writing about for the previous couple of weeks; doubts that come to the fore when the assumption of ‘no self’ is purported. At the time, clarity represented that the doubts are not real; more than that the doubts had lost their dominant position among the other thoughts that arise.
Much thanks and regards,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Sorry for your wait.

. Whereas “on looking, no self can be found”, is less restricted pre-loaded conclusions to the inquiry. It feels freer, the ‘sense of self’ that may arise seems more transparent, fluid – cannot say this is through the change of language or if it represents a natural deepening of the insight, of the process.

Well, test it. I would.

Is there 'someone'. 'looking'. Or even ' someone doing looking'? Does that phrase adequately express what's really going on, or is it more accurately served by different language. Could 'seeing is happening' be closer?

. At the time, clarity represented that the doubts are not real; more than that the doubts had lost their dominant position among the other thoughts that arise.

Very nice. Is that still seen?

If so, is there a 'seer' that 'sees' that?

All best,

Jon

[Treelife]

Is there 'someone'. 'looking'. Or even ' someone doing looking'? Does that phrase adequately express what's really going on, or is it more accurately served by different language. Could 'seeing is happening' be closer?

. At the time, clarity represented that the doubts are not real; more than that the doubts had lost their dominant position among the other thoughts that arise.

Very nice. Is that still seen?

If so, is there a 'seer' that 'sees' that?

Jon, please forgive me if the following answer misses the point of your question. Over the last week/weeks the insight and its corresponding experiences is deepening. It also zooms in and out somewhat.
There is no 'seer' that 'sees'!!
There are images that arise, there are notions, beliefs, ideas, emotional sentiment that also arises. The conclusion that there is no 'self' is made evident by the fact that all these objects (images, notions, beliefs, ideas, emotional sentiments, narratives, physical sensations, sounds...) that exist on the plane of experience, none of them are privileged. None of them are privileged is the clearest way of describing all this. In order for there to be a 'self' then one of them must be privileged. The 'sense of self' arises and that has no solid status of privileged position over the rest - admittedly it plays useful roles when in work and in interaction with other people who do hold the assumption that Mic does exist.
Doubts about the non-existence of Mic, are significantly diminished! As the doubts arise, they too lack privileged status.

Thanks again Jon,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

There is no 'seer' that 'sees'!!

:-) Great!

Ok, so, can you give a 100% big fat YES that there is no separate self?

Jon

[Treelife]

A bit tied up at the moment Jon,
Just sent you a PM if you wouldn't mind checking it.
Talk soon
Mic

[Treelife]

Hi Jon
As mentioned, over the last week life suddenly became stressful in a way that wasn't anticipated. Correspondingly this is having an impact upon the narratives of self, the inner critic, as well as painful emotions. The problem is not gone away but the initial wave of shock and confusion is starting to taper off. Although it is emotionally challenging, the problem just unravel itself, so please+ let us proceed with the process. The sense of self has become more vocal, therefore this is a (challenging) opportunity to really see the idea of self in action.

Ok, so, can you give a 100% big fat YES that there is no separate self?

From the 10th of June, up until last Thursday morning, the answer to this question was: "100% big fat YES that there is no separate self". However the experience of osculating has 0reemerged. Over the weekend a lot of thoughts and feelings that have a notion of 'self' embedded within them have been arising. What was previously a transient 'sense of self' that had no dominion over the other objects, has become amplified. Cognitively, over the weekend there was still the belief that 'the self is not real', but the sense of self is in a strong privileged position.

Now, as the thoughts and emotions arise, as the dark heaviness hangs from my shoulders and chest, as the sense of self occasionally becomes energetic, the gaze of inquiry asks the question; who is the one thinking those thoughts, feeling those emotions, seeing the heaviness? If the 'sense of self' is the object, who or what is the subject that experiences it? This is starting to create more space between everything.

Thanks and regards,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Sorry that you have had a very stressful time.

Don't worry about the oscillation. As you say, it's an opportunity to notice the appearance of self.

The sense of self has become more vocal, therefore this is a (challenging) opportunity to really see the idea of self in action.

Yes, as you say.

Cognitively, over the weekend there was still the belief that 'the self is not real', but the sense of self is in a strong privileged position.

Do not rely on beliefs. What are beliefs?

Whilst I understand the symbolism used in the phrase 'strong privileged position', look at this.

Where is the position?

Where is the occupant of it?

Is it an energetic, uncomfortable sensation you're talking about? If so, root into that and see if a 'person' is found there, 'experiencing it' or if there is just raw experience, raw discomfort? Along with thoughts that make a lot of noise? (Not saying it's particularly easy but it can be very revealing).

If the 'sense of self' is the object, who or what is the subject that experiences it? This is starting to create more space between everything.

Yes, and it may happen that the 'seeing' that there is no self will come in and out of focus. Who or what would control when no self is seen (or not)? Is it possible to prevent 'seeing'? Who or what could prevent stressful circumstances from happening? Or prevent the temporary appearance of a self?

All the best. Relax and see what happens Mic.

Jon

[Treelife]

Thanks Jon,

...the phrase 'strong privileged position', look at this.
Where is the position?
Where is the occupant of it?
Is it an energetic, uncomfortable sensation you're talking about? If so, root into that and see if a 'person' is found there, 'experiencing it' or if there is just raw experience, raw discomfort?

Yes, the word energetic is useful to describe the sense of self. It has an experience of being identified with. And the ‘strong privileged position’ does invite the question of what position over what other/alternative positions.
The trick in this stage of the inquire is to be able to sport the ‘self’ that is identified with. Once it is spotted then the enquiry does it’s thing reasonably effectively a reasonable amount of the time.
The word ‘self’ has been used in the inquiry so much that it has almost lost its meaning, however the idea of ‘separate self’ does help show up the experience/perception that is being looked at. The word ‘separate’ seems to be key to the inquiry here. Within the entire field of perception, what is that that which is separate from the rest? What seperate part of this is privilaged, is identifyed with?
The oscillations are subsiding today – still, of course ‘who is the one who is osculating?’

Will keep going, Regards,
Mic