Cosmik - Can you help?

[cosmiK]

:)

so,

is there a separate self, in any way, in any form?

[barrie1]

Hi CosmiK

is there a separate self, in any way, in any form?

There seems to be a sticking point between seeing that ‘I’ doesn’t exist and saying ‘I don’t exist’. The former somehow puts it apart from what I must still believe I am. It seems like a contradiction to say ‘I don’t exist’ because existence is happening here from this perspective. If I say it out loud it sounds absurd as there is actually a body saying it. I was doing some quite intense looking today but still not seeing. Do you think a sustained head on concentration on looking for the truth of no-self might break down this damn belief?

Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hey :)

There seems to be a sticking point between seeing that ‘I’ doesn’t exist and saying ‘I don’t exist’. The former somehow puts it apart from what I must still believe I am. It seems like a contradiction to say ‘I don’t exist’ because existence is happening here from this perspective.

Yes... exactly!

If you didn't exist then how could this sentence be read?

The sense of aliveness, of existence is not being questioned, what is being questioned is WHO/WHAT that appears to be the one that is living, or existing. This apparent person, this apparent self, this apparent "I"...

If I say it out loud it sounds absurd as there is actually a body saying it.

This is where the identification starts. Is a 'body' or 'self' really saying anything?

There is the appearance of the body, thoughts about existing and not-existing, a sound of a voice saying things out loud, and thoughts about there being a person that has a body, that is thinking about existing and non-existing and speaking out loud.

But is there really this "I"? this self?

does Experience really belong to this "I"? is it the person that experiences? or is the person just another experience? this is what we are looking at.

I was doing some quite intense looking today but still not seeing.

WHO/WHAT is Looking? is there a self that is looking and not seeing?

Seeing is always happening, there is just the assumption that there is an "I" that can Look and then finally See.

Do you think a sustained head on concentration on looking for the truth of no-self might break down this damn belief?

I would advise head on Looking, focus, yes... but this isn't a Truth that can be found, it's a Truth that already is, always is, and always was. It's literally there, closer than your nose. The important thing to keep looking at is this supposed "I" that can sustain and concentrate and then see the Truth of it's non-existence.

It's a shift in perception... "Seeing no-self" is just the recognition that the person, this "I", is completely in thought... that it has absolutely no existence apart from thought. There is Life, there is existence, as you have aptly pointed out, and that is NOT personal. Keep focusing on this apparent "I"... put all concentration on seeing if there is anyone there that is concentrating... if there is anyone there that is focusing... is there an "I" that focuses or concentrates?

Beliefs naturally go 'poof' once they are seen to be beliefs. Is the "I" / self / person anything more than a belief?

Lots of Love.

[barrie1]

Hi Cosmik

I hope you are well.

But is there really this "I"? this self?

Thanks for keep bringing me back on track

Seeing is always happening, there is just the assumption that there is an "I" that can Look and then finally See.

Slightly off the enquiry but could you explain for me how seeing is happening in deep sleep, it is seldom mentioned but is how we spend quite large part of our lives.

Keep focusing on this apparent "I"... put all concentration on seeing if there is anyone there that is concentrating... if there is anyone there that is focusing... is there an "I" that focuses or concentrates?

I had the idea of trying to turn back 180 degrees to see what was doing the looking, if anything. It led to a stillness and a blank was the word that came to mind, I don’t know that I would call it a space although very small quiet thoughts were appearing and disappearing. I have never had any meditation training so do not know if this is what might be expected.
Throughout the day I try looking without labelling, listening without an inside or outside and pay attention to sensations in the body, cycling through these exercises and allowing them to merge as one experience.
I know all you have said about there being no experience of a brain in dE but there is the thought that even though the ‘I’ is just a thought it is the brain producing the thought so it has every right to call itself ‘I’, but this makes the ‘I’, me, a brain. I know this is just a thought but it is a recurring bothersome thought. Should I just ignore it or is there some way I can see through it?

With much gratitude for all your time and guidance

Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hey Barrie,

Slightly off the enquiry but could you explain for me how seeing is happening in deep sleep, it is seldom mentioned but is how we spend quite large part of our lives.

This is going beyond the scope of this inquiry, but it is fun to talk about. I will throw it at you anyway :)

there is experience of going to sleep, then perhaps some experience of dreaming, then experience of waking up... then there are thoughts that say that there was 'deep sleep'. these all rest on the assumption of some individual point of awareness, and further on the idea that awareness is located inside a body, and further on the idea that awareness can turn on/off.

It only appears that a self goes to sleep, and only appears that a self wakes up.

that which you are is eternally here and never goes off and goes on :) there is only ever a story of being born, deep sleep, and death. when the body dies, the world disappears, when the universe collapses, you alone will remain.

and all of this is useless as an explanation, because you have to see this for yourself :) the most important insight is this "I"/self that you believe you are. The foundation stone to the house of cards ;)

and now... back to this "I" :-)

I had the idea of trying to turn back 180 degrees to see what was doing the looking, if anything. It led to a stillness and a blank was the word that came to mind, I don’t know that I would call it a space although very small quiet thoughts were appearing and disappearing. I have never had any meditation training so do not know if this is what might be expected.

that is a wonderful glimpse, but it was just an experience. we are not looking for a specific experience, but we are looking to see that the reality of a lack of self in any and all experiences, in any and all moments, always.

no matter what is happening, look at direct experience. Is there an "I" there?

in direct experience, there is seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, tasting and thinking... is there a self in that?

and in terms of what is expected, drop any expectations and instead focusing on seeing through this idea of there/you being a separate self, a separate entity... this is the key.

I know all you have said about there being no experience of a brain in dE but there is the thought that even though the ‘I’ is just a thought it is the brain producing the thought so it has every right to call itself ‘I’, but this makes the ‘I’, me, a brain. I know this is just a thought but it is a recurring bothersome thought. Should I just ignore it or is there some way I can see through it?

Yes - I understand. I have a background in psychology and understand that perspective. I was always more curious as to the nature of perception WITHOUT any preconceptions and the key seems to be looking at perception like a baby.

does a baby see the world as if a separate person were seeing it?

does a baby think that it has it's own individual experience and that others have their own experience?

does a baby think there is anything outside of it's "field of perception"? does it believe there is an objective world and it's perception is limited by "it's field"?

is there any separation in a baby's perception?

does a child think it is a baby ? :)

Just watch thoughts come and go... what does direct experience tell you about where thoughts come from?

and what does direct experience say about this self... this person?

what does direct experience say about a self that is trying to see through a self?

With much gratitude for all your time and guidance

My pleasure. Keep Looking at direct experience, and seeing things as nakedly as possible.

and keep the focus on this "I"?

is there an "I" that does? walks? moves? controls? chooses?

are "you" the thinker of thoughts? can "you" think and choose thoughts?

is there an "I" that experiences?

what is an "I" ... what is a self?

- with Love.

[barrie1]

Hi CosmiK

Sorry to hear you have not been well I wish you a speedy recovery.

You wrote:

and all of this is useless as an explanation, because you have to see this for yourself :) the most important insight is this "I"/self that you believe you are. The foundation stone to the house of cards ;)

and now... back to this "I" :-)

Thank you for the explanation, it of course raises a whole load of other questions so I will drop it right away and as you say get back to this “I” question.

no matter what is happening, look at direct experience. Is there an "I" there?

Only the ‘I’ that I imagine myself to be, hmm bit of dog chasing its tail there.

in direct experience, there is seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, tasting and thinking... is there a self in that?

In seeing, hearing, smelling and tasting – no, feeling on its own – no, feeling with thought tries to create a self, thinking - not the thoughts themselves but perhaps where they come from.

Yes - I understand. I have a background in psychology and understand that perspective. I was always more curious as to the nature of perception WITHOUT any preconceptions and the key seems to be looking at perception like a baby.

I am glad that you brought this up, I have been trying this on waking up in the morning but will give it more focus now. It is surprising how deep the concepts go and have to be dropped before the experience even approaches that of a baby.

does a baby see the world as if a separate person were seeing it?

No, as there is no thinking to form a separate person

does a baby think that it has it's own individual experience and that others have their own experience?

Again a baby does not think in the same learned concepts that we do so would only see what it sees. Very unlikely that it somehow assumes others are separate with their own experience.

does a baby think there is anything outside of it's "field of perception"? does it believe there is an objective world and it's perception is limited by "it's field"?

A baby doesn’t think, again it only sees, hears etc what is within its field of perception, it would not imagine anything outside of that.

is there any separation in a baby's perception?

I doubt there are any lines of separation drawn.

does a child think it is a baby ? :)

Not sure about that.

Just watch thoughts come and go... what does direct experience tell you about where thoughts come from?

Thoughts seem to form out of nothing

and what does direct experience say about this self... this person?

That the idea of this self arises in a similar way

what does direct experience say about a self that is trying to see through a self?

‘what a stupid idea’

is there an "I" that does? walks? moves? controls? chooses?

I had written another response here but there was a decision that it did not feel right, was not really addressing the question, and then, jab, deleted. There was control, movement, doing the action and a decision. The manual doing was on auto in response to the decision and the decision was a thought arising with a feeling of increasing certainty until it reached a tipping point, but none of it could be said to be the result of an independent self.

are "you" the thinker of thoughts? can "you" think and choose thoughts?

I can choose a target thought – eg holidaying in the Caribbean, but did I choose the thought to make this a target thought, I don’t think so.

is there an "I" that experiences?

The only ‘I’ is a thought, even where the thought comes from does not experience, the only thing that can experiences is consciousness.

what is an "I" ... what is a self?

The case for it being a fiction is mounting.

best wishes
Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hi :)

thank you for your wishes!

Only the ‘I’ that I imagine myself to be, hmm bit of dog chasing its tail there.

yes... is there an "I" there that imagines an "I"?
or is the "I" just a thought?

In seeing, hearing, smelling and tasting – no, feeling on its own – no, feeling with thought tries to create a self, thinking - not the thoughts themselves but perhaps where they come from.

certainly when there are effective emotions and thoughts, the self feels and appears to be real, but keep staring at this. is it actually there? or is it just a stubborn habit born out of conditioning?

I am glad that you brought this up, I have been trying this on waking up in the morning but will give it more focus now. It is surprising how deep the concepts go and have to be dropped before the experience even approaches that of a baby.

yes... but again, focus on this "I" from that perspective of naked experience/baby-ness.

Thoughts seem to form out of nothing

and what does direct experience say about this self... this person?

That the idea of this self arises in a similar way

yes... aren't they one and the same. isn't self and thought synonymous?

I had written another response here but there was a decision that it did not feel right, was not really addressing the question, and then, jab, deleted. There was control, movement, doing the action and a decision. The manual doing was on auto in response to the decision and the decision was a thought arising with a feeling of increasing certainty until it reached a tipping point, but none of it could be said to be the result of an independent self.

exactly... there are thoughts, sensations, apparent decisions and choices, deleting, control, movement, doing.... but is there an "I" doing any of this? is there an "I" that experiences any of this? Look closely at this.

I can choose a target thought – eg holidaying in the Caribbean, but did I choose the thought to make this a target thought, I don’t think so.

exactly... it appears there was a 'choice' to think a thought... but try the experiment again and check and see if you can find an "I" that chooses?

is that choice any less spontaneous/automatic that anything else?

what is an "I" ... what is a self?

The case for it being a fiction is mounting.

yes... keep bringing back your focus to this "I" / this self.

with Love.

[barrie1]

Hi Cosmik

I have to say I am struggling with this at the moment and am finding it difficult to concentrate on anything. I don’t know if it is the enquiry or physical ailments but I am feeling a bit depressed and have become very quiet at work. I know this shouldn't be a problem truth is always here but if I can't muster concentration to focus and just get caught up in streams of thought then how does that work? It will pass but is heavy going right now, I have made some replies to your last post though.

Only the ‘I’ that I imagine myself to be, hmm bit of dog chasing its tail there.

yes... is there an "I" there that imagines an "I"?
or is the "I" just a thought?

just a thought of an 'I' imagining an 'I'

yes... aren't they one and the same. isn't self and thought synonymous?

Yes, definitely, thought is needed to tell the story of a self, feelings on their own can’t make an imaginary self

exactly... there are thoughts, sensations, apparent decisions and choices, deleting, control, movement, doing.... but is there an "I" doing any of this? is there an "I" that experiences any of this? Look closely at this.

No, these are all experiences but not experienced by an ‘I’

I think the expectation is there that I should feel different in some way on recognizing that the 'I' does not really exist. Maybe it is an expectation that is holding me back?

Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hello Barrie,

I have to say I am struggling with this at the moment and am finding it difficult to concentrate on anything. I don’t know if it is the enquiry or physical ailments but I am feeling a bit depressed and have become very quiet at work. I know this shouldn't be a problem truth is always here but if I can't muster concentration to focus and just get caught up in streams of thought then how does that work? It will pass but is heavy going right now, I have made some replies to your last post though.

I am sorry to hear about the ailments and the feelings that are passing through

just let go and let this inquiry and practice become natural... just like experience is always happening, also notice if there is an "I" anywhere in this experience?

is an "I" aware of anything?

I think the expectation is there that I should feel different in some way on recognizing that the 'I' does not really exist. Maybe it is an expectation that is holding me back?

I agree.

you are very clear as to the nature of this "I"

contemplate these two words carefully and deeply


EXPECTATIONS


LET GO


sending Lots of Love your way my friend.

[barrie1]

Hi Cosmik

Feeling much better now thanks. The difference between writing last week and now feels like two different people, the body sensations and the mental outlook, but there must be something that is constant that knows both states.

you are very clear as to the nature of this "I"

Conceptually yes, and here's the 'but', it feels as though I am only wearing the clothes of understanding but am not the understanding itself. Is it unreasonable to expect that there should be a feeling of certainty. The idea of a self in control seems to have been given up on but on the other hand there is no unshakeable conviction that it does not exist.

Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hi :)

The difference between writing last week and now feels like two different people, the body sensations and the mental outlook, but there must be something that is constant that knows both states.

When studying the nature of experience, we can say that there is a KNOWING aspect to experience, and a KNOWN aspect. The Knowing can be described as 'awareness' or attention. The Known can be described as what shows up... sensations, thought, just a changing experience. We can say that while experience always changes, it is always known, and that never changes. But even separating experience in to a knowing/known is purely abstract and is done so only for the purposes of discussion and investigating experience. When we actually look at directly experience, the knowing can never be separated from the known, because they are one the same. So we say, there is JUST experience.

What is key for this investigation to see if this 'knowing' is person. Is it the self/person/"I" that knows?

what direct evidence is there of an "I" that knows?

Look at this directly.

What in direct experience says that there is a 'something' there that knows? isn't the 'something' there just an added assumption? does experience need a separate 'something' to know of it?

Conceptually yes, and here's the 'but', it feels as though I am only wearing the clothes of understanding but am not the understanding itself. Is it unreasonable to expect that there should be a feeling of certainty.

It is not an unreasonable expectation, but again, any expectation is just a wish for something different than what is here now. The important thing is to Look deeply in to what is here, now... simple experiencing.

in what is here now, is there a "but" about the self? is there a self no matter what situation is? no matter what shows up is there an actual "I" there?

The idea of a self in control seems to have been given up on but on the other hand there is no unshakeable conviction that it does not exist.

well where is this self that could exist?

this "there is no unshakeable convication" is because there are self-referencing thoughts constantly referring to their "I" center, and that is totally fine. there isn't anything wrong with it.

what we are doing is looking purely at direct experience to see if the core of those assumptions is true. we are testing those assumptions out. the belief in that self is a strong one, and a deeply held one, but like any belief, it can seen through simply by looking at reality as it is.

is it true that there is no self at all in reality?

is it true that there was never a "you" separate from Life?

~

there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING hidden from you. The answers are ALL right there, and it will take an honest Look to see that it is true.

there is no need for any absolute conviction because there already is no self.

this just needs to be simply recognized.

~

what else comes up for you? what else is a sticking point? keep going.

with Love.

[barrie1]

Hi Cosmik

Hope all is well with you.

But even separating experience in to a knowing/known is purely abstract and is done so only for the purposes of discussion and investigating experience. When we actually look at directly experience, the knowing can never be separated from the known, because they are one the same. So we say, there is JUST experience.

I can see hearing and seeing in this way and have been spending time looking at feeling and thought. The concept of awareness as a separate thing is a tempting idea but it is not how things actually are, the awareness cannot be separated from the object. That was always something that I could not understand from many Advaita teachers, that you are awareness, and to feel yourself as awareness, well whatever is felt is just another experience, but it is perhaps just how I interpreted it. If there is nothing other than experience here and that is objects and awareness, without creating separate objects then in a way there is just awareness. What makes just experience unpalatable is the thought of what happens on the death of the body, no body so no experience. Don't worry I don't actually spend a lot of time with this sort of speculation more just looking.

what direct evidence is there of an "I" that knows?

none that I could ever find

is there a self no matter what situation is? no matter what shows up is there an actual "I" there?

don't believe there is but there is a strong impression that there is.

this "there is no unshakeable convication" is because there are self-referencing thoughts constantly referring to their "I" center, and that is totally fine. there isn't anything wrong with it.

Not sure if self-referencing thoughts are the cause, unless they are just not noticed, it is more a feeling thing that I am exploring but is difficult to describe, kind of empty, non-thinking feeling but need to check it is just another state.

what else comes up for you? what else is a sticking point? keep going.

I have been very close to throwing in the towel and just plugging away at this on my own but you are right I need to keep going.

Thanks for all your support

Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hi Barrie,

apologies for the delay. I seem to be having a few issues with notification, again.

The concept of awareness as a separate thing is a tempting idea but it is not how things actually are, the awareness cannot be separated from the object.

Yes, exactly.

another way to put it is that there is just experience. in seeing, just seeing... in thinking, only thinking... in hearing, only hearing... only experiencing. no experiencer.

we can use "awareness" to point to all of it, just like we use the word experience.

"awareness" is not some experiencer or point of localized sentience.

But going back to the focus of this inquiry... when we refer to direct experience... we never find anything more than a seamless array of sensations, thought, images, feelings... just experience. the "I" / "person" / "self" is nothing more than the combination of these factors.

check to see if that is clear so far?

That was always something that I could not understand from many Advaita teachers, that you are awareness, and to feel yourself as awareness, well whatever is felt is just another experience, but it is perhaps just how I interpreted it. If there is nothing other than experience here and that is objects and awareness, without creating separate objects then in a way there is just awareness.

the awareness teachings are very powerful and direct ways to non dual awakening, but are often misunderstood. when we say "there is just experience"... it is the same as saying "there is just awareness".

"awareness" is used as a pointer to that which all appearances appear to. but those appearances are never distinct and independently existing, they are awareness itself. only thought structures as beliefs in objectivity, separation and self serve to give structure and definition to awareness.

we can thus position our inquiry as such, using the word "experience" or "awareness"

in experience, is there an "I" that experiences?
in experience, is there an actual and substantial "I" that can be found? or just habitually labelled combinations of sensations, feeling, thoughts and images?

or

in all that shows up in awareness is there anything that is self?
is there anything specific that shows up in awareness an "I"?
does anything exist independently from awareness?
is awareness located inside a person/body/brain?

these angles of inquiry lead us in different ways to clarity about the nature of experience.
in terms of this inquiry, the most important thing to investigate is the validity of this personal self. this controller, this experiencer, this entity that is inside a body and separate from others, objects, the universe, life...

What makes just experience unpalatable is the thought of what happens on the death of the body, no body so no experience. Don't worry I don't actually spend a lot of time with this sort of speculation more just looking.

Yes, i understand. "death" is also a very important part of non-dual inquiry. what is it that dies? moreover... what is it that ever lived? was there ever an actual body or person that was born and will die?
examining direct experience we never find evidence of an actual person... just thoughts and images of one, and sensations and thoughts that sometimes arise so fast as to add to the "reality" and "actualness" of the person.

seeing no self is seeing that the person never was and never will be. the person or body or "I" does not exist independently but is just another part in the web of life, another appearance in awareness, another aspect of experience. it is seeing clearly that whatever was habitually labelled as "I" / self is a misidentification. The person was never "you", but more accurately showed up in you as experience/awareness. The use of the word 'you' to point to experience/awareness is not meant as anything personal, but to just point to the sentient beingness that is aware of this sentence, Life itself, awareness itself, alive experience untethered by an individual point or identity.

is there a self no matter what situation is? no matter what shows up is there an actual "I" there?

don't believe there is but there is a strong impression that there is.

this is what you need to investigate. sit and just notice and break down this "strong impression". this strong impression is just another arising in awareness, just another flavor of experience. notice how sensations are flowing, feelings are flowing, thoughts are flowing, images are flowing, flashing phenomena... but also notice that NONE of these arisings point to an actual "I". they all are just there, as experience, free and undefined. only thought comes in and adds "I" and "me".

Tackle this question again and investigate it thoroughly. Be confident in your investigation as your last response tho this question was not very convincing. You are not convinced that there is not a separate "you". You must check direct experience.

Not sure if self-referencing thoughts are the cause, unless they are just not noticed, it is more a feeling thing that I am exploring but is difficult to describe, kind of empty, non-thinking feeling but need to check it is just another state.

This is unclear. Can you expand on this?

I have been very close to throwing in the towel and just plugging away at this on my own but you are right I need to keep going.

Thanks for all your support

I am available to chat on Skype if you would like to talk more in depth.

Hope all is well,

with Love.

[barrie1]

Hi Cosmik

apologies for the delay. I seem to be having a few issues with notification, again.

No worries, I prefer a slower pace so happy with that if it's ok. I have a confession to make, that I have been re-reading a non-duality book, which is against the rules I know but it has been very helpful - You are No Thing by Randall Friend. I couldn't help but think that you could have written it, it is so close to what you have been saying. It was really helping things fall into place so I don't feel to bad about my misdemeanor.

we never find anything more than a seamless array of sensations, thought, images, feelings... just experience. the "I" / "person" / "self" is nothing more than the combination of these factors.

I really liked this, that hit home.

does anything exist independently from awareness?
is awareness located inside a person/body/brain?

The way I am seeing things is like everything is on the one side, nothing looking

this entity that is inside a body and separate from others, objects, the universe, life...

I'm never quite sure when 'Life' is referred to if that means just living things or the more all inclusive meaning including inanimate objects. This may not be the best example of but it just reminded me of the question.

Not sure if self-referencing thoughts are the cause, unless they are just not noticed, it is more a feeling thing that I am exploring but is difficult to describe, kind of empty, non-thinking feeling but need to check it is just another state.

This is unclear. Can you expand on this?

This is unclear, even to me and I wrote it!

I am available to chat on Skype if you would like to talk more in depth.

Thank you very much for the offer, do you think it would be helpful?

with gratitude
Barrie

[cosmiK]

Hey,

I have a confession to make, that I have been re-reading a non-duality book, which is against the rules I know but it has been very helpful - You are No Thing by Randall Friend. I couldn't help but think that you could have written it, it is so close to what you have been saying. It was really helping things fall into place so I don't feel to bad about my misdemeanor.

:) It's fine, even if you are reading that, make sure to put focus back on the sense that there is an independently inherently existing "you" or "I" there. That keeps the focus on this investigation regardless of what you are doing.

we never find anything more than a seamless array of sensations, thought, images, feelings... just experience. the "I" / "person" / "self" is nothing more than the combination of these factors.

I really liked this, that hit home.

Right. This is KEY. The deconstruction of the conglomerate of senses, feelings, thoughts and stuff arising which create the illusion that there is a separate self there from the rest of the flow of life.

does anything exist independently from awareness?
is awareness located inside a person/body/brain?

The way I am seeing things is like everything is on the one side, nothing looking

Yes, exactly, in essence whatever shows up is "self-luminous", in the sense that it does not need a separate "I" or experience to experience it, it... JUST IS.

The idea of an "I" in experience is unfounded... it can never be verified, and this starts to sink in deeply.
Even the idea of an experiencer is unfounded... and it too can never be verified through direct experience. there is simply just experience.

I'm never quite sure when 'Life' is referred to if that means just living things or the more all inclusive meaning including inanimate objects. This may not be the best example of but it just reminded me of the question.

So "Life" (capital L) is usually used by people here to just refer to the seamless flow of happening, and is usually used "all-inclusively". That's the way I use it any way. we can say Life = experience. The words just point to this inseparable dance, this alive experiencing. Observing that, we investigate, Look deeply to question once and for all if there is really a self there at all in any of it. No matter what we look at, we never find a self, just a stream of arisings, all part of the dance of Life!

Thank you very much for the offer, do you think it would be helpful?

Well, my main goal is to help you See this, and i'll do whatever I can to help.

It seems that intellectually you are very clear, and I'm sure you see this, but perhaps there is some doubt somewhere about this, and that is something we should ZERO in on and check thoroughly.

If there are any doubts or any sticking points arising, then by all means please express them and i'll do my best to point from there.

with Love.