I would love some guidance.

[Zinfandel]

In your room - can you see the space inside, the space outside. Where does each stop and start? Can space stop? Does it stop when it reaches you?

Another thing about this strange experience when looking. When I focus on seeing the space, at times what I see is NOT space. It is like everything is a part of the same material. Hard to describe, but like watching a picture, everything is paper and chemicals (or whatever). I see this thing like everything is this weird (hmm...) jello of different colors (is the closest term I can use right now) and the different colored 'parts' are moving within it.
So during these moments NOTHING is space, and yet I know almost everything in the universe IS space...

[Andrew White]

Hi Mike,

Gaps...Thoughts are hardest, hearing is hard, seeing space is easiest.
I spent time during almost an hour doing all of these. Weird feeling, and at the same time very focused seeing.
The seeing, focusing on the space really brings out the forms of stuff (the stuff sort of looses the label btw ;) and the 3d perspective thing is really brought out. This of course is after analyzing what I see :)

Good stuff, the labels dropping away or losing meaning. Now into this bring this form labelled Mike. Sitting here in this 'space' see this form amongst other forms.
When you close your eyes can you detect where Mike stops and another form starts. Is this form mapped by this awareness exactly? Question assumption on this.
So as you move where and how does awareness arise? Don't worry too much about putting this into language, but simply look at the process, become familiar with the mechanism.
Do it slowly, perhaps eyes closed at first might be easier: sense, awareness, perception...

Another thing about this strange experience when looking. When I focus on seeing the space, at times what I see is NOT space. It is like everything is a part of the same material. Hard to describe, but like watching a picture, everything is paper and chemicals (or whatever). I see this thing like everything is this weird (hmm...) jello of different colors (is the closest term I can use right now) and the different colored 'parts' are moving within it.
So during these moments NOTHING is space, and yet I know almost everything in the universe IS space...

And yet what is 'nothing is space', 'everything is space'. What is seen depends on the looking doesn't it? From one perspective it's all empty, from another it's all full.
We see these too as arisings, these perceptions.
And reflect back, looking happens, awareness happens, perception happens. There's a mechanism happening in this form isn't there? And we can observe this in other forms too - processes taking place. See it in this way, you know where we're going with this...

Best wishes,

Andrew

[Zinfandel]

In the flow of things. Noticed that I pushed for recreating the seeing and maybe even feeling from earlier.
Tension was observed and let go.
First there was struggke, craving, then release.

[Zinfandel]

Good stuff, the labels dropping away or losing meaning. Now into this bring this form labelled Mike. Sitting here in this 'space' see this form amongst other forms.
When you close your eyes can you detect where Mike stops and another form starts. Is this form mapped by this awareness exactly? Question assumption on this.

Did some meditation on this lying in a well-lit room. Upon closing my eyes, I examined awareness of Mike. It was really hard. There are lots of sensors providing info on where parts are. I noticed how the sens of how legs are bent and so on give information for creating an image. But there were large gaps. There was less (no?) awareness of parts really. No sense of them. Regarding where the next form starts, couldn't see this.

Opening the eyes was weird, I am in this space, but not sensing that space was part of me. More like I was part of the surroundings.
However the space investigated was definitely confined within these four walls, floor and ceiling. No space moving through walls :-)

Hmmm.. There appears doubt about what is seen. But the willingness to continue to look is there!
Talk to ya soon!

[Andrew White]

Hi Mike,

In the flow of things. Noticed that I pushed for recreating the seeing and maybe even feeling from earlier.
Tension was observed and let go.
First there was struggke, craving, then release.

Good. Keep everything in this moment, the memory of any past experience is not that important.

Did some meditation on this lying in a well-lit room. Upon closing my eyes, I examined awareness of Mike. It was really hard. There are lots of sensors providing info on where parts are. I noticed how the sens of how legs are bent and so on give information for creating an image. But there were large gaps. There was less (no?) awareness of parts really. No sense of them. Regarding where the next form starts, couldn't see this.

And we can see this process, these mechanisms arising in other forms too can't we. It's no different for a dog or a cat, senses, awareness, perception... the same mechanism. It's evolved this way, it just happens.

So when you see this, when you see a process compare it to other processes - is it special, does it need a self? Or is it just another arising. And if boundaries are unclear, well that's because there was an assumption there too wasn't there?

Opening the eyes was weird, I am in this space, but not sensing that space was part of me. More like I was part of the surroundings.
However the space investigated was definitely confined within these four walls, floor and ceiling. No space moving through walls :-)

So going back to your previous observation that nearly everything is in fact space we can see that it may appear to stop at the walls, at this form, but is that what happens in reality?
So we can observe - this arises in sight, it appears this way, or something else arises in hearing - these too are just mechanisms that have developed to take in a little of what's there - one tiny bit of the EM spectrum one small part of the range of sounds. It's not what's real, it's just an arising in sight or hearing isn't it?

Hmmm.. There appears doubt about what is seen. But the willingness to continue to look is there!

So look at this doubt. If there's an assumption - it should be this way, and then we see something else in direct experience that doesn't match the assumption we create a tension if we hold onto either end don't we? Doubt can only arise like this can't it? If there's no assumption, how can there be doubt - what is seen is just what is. And it doesn't have to mean this is the real, it means this is what's seen. Believing it to be real is an assumption too isn't it?
But look at this need to attach certainty, to know. I had this belief, now I see something else - I need to understand, I need to know. And this can bring insecurity and even fear.
But really what's to be afraid of. What is is just what is. Regardless of what is 'known' or understood about it it's just what is, it's just this way.
So in the moment we let go into what's seen and rest in the not knowing - it doesn't need to be known does it?
This is just another attachment. As the moment unfolds and changes we see that and we're just another set of arisings within that. Look at it this way, see the processes as they unfold and change, all around.
So why would there be something separate here? Some 'self'?
Keep looking at this and don't suppose what should be seen, just look and let me know how you get on.

Take care,

Andrew

[Zinfandel]

Just a quick reply. Keeping the looking going. Interesting. At a meeting, looking at space, the other attendants. Very interesting. At this moment very evident there is a personal vantage point from which observing is taking place. I know it isn't me, but maybe habitually is taking as a 'me'. Hmm arisings..?
Some more looking to do...

[Zinfandel]

Regarding this perspective.
I still seem to have this sense that everything is happening to this awareness + thinking process which still is like a 'me'.
I can refute it quite fast on basis on redundancy. I can ask to whom is this sensation happen? After a while it seems clear that there is no 'to whom' necessary, and I can't seem to find it either.

So, it is a perspective and thought complex...

The looking goes on. The search for Britain's next apprentice continues

[Zinfandel]

Update, Andrew!

can you see the space inside, the space outside. Where does each stop and start? Can space stop? Does it stop when it reaches you?

I can't see the space continuing like this, through walls and through me.
I have done meditation exercises some time ago where I imagined space going through me and extending indefinitely.
But it feels more like imagination than seeing.

[Zinfandel]

So now let's consider - look at the whole process, pick an example, it might be something mundane, getting a cuppa. A sensation arises in the form or a habit of thought, a pattern of behaviour, response, action, result - all these take place with the assumption of 'me' don't they? But seen in direct experience??

It seems quite 'impersonal' :-)
Yep, it's the same as when I walk focusing on walking and choosing where to turn, etc.
It's just a chain of some trigger - response leading to new trigger and so on...

This is clear at moments when there is looking done, but most of the time these behavior patterns are just on automatic.

[Andrew White]

Hi Mike,

Just a quick reply. Keeping the looking going. Interesting. At a meeting, looking at space, the other attendants. Very interesting. At this moment very evident there is a personal vantage point from which observing is taking place. I know it isn't me, but maybe habitually is taking as a 'me'. Hmm arisings..?

There is a unique 'vantage point'. Awareness is arising through this form. From the perspective of the other animate forms in the room awareness would arise with a different vantage point.

Regarding this perspective.
I still seem to have this sense that everything is happening to this awareness + thinking process which still is like a 'me'.
I can refute it quite fast on basis on redundancy. I can ask to whom is this sensation happen? After a while it seems clear that there is no 'to whom' necessary, and I can't seem to find it either.

Refuting it doesn't get us too far - that's just another thought that says,'There's no 'me' here.'
We're focussing on looking. Yes, when awareness is focussed it can lead to the sense of a 'me' - but that's an assumption. When awareness is not focussed, when you're dozing off or just zoned out where does this 'me' go? If it's real where is it then? If it's not present then look again - look at this from a different perspective. Awareness arises in this form - focussed or less focussed. It arises in other forms too, it's just an aspect of the set of processes that have a label. You might as well say, I have skin so there must be a 'me'. That's just another arising associated with this form isn't it? Doesn't prove there's a 'me'.

You have to see that awareness is present in this form, that form - in a tree, in a cat, in a fish, in a human - it's something that's evolved hasn't it?

I can't see the space continuing like this, through walls and through me.
I have done meditation exercises some time ago where I imagined space going through me and extending indefinitely.
But it feels more like imagination than seeing.

Like this example here, considering space and everything arising temporarily in space, changing, now part of this form, now part of that form. Just look and see this form of 'Mike' and see the other forms. What makes Mike special?

There's nothing wrong with using imagination as a jumping off point for seeing, it might serve better than using verbal thought. But the trick is not to take it too far. So consider space within imagination then use the senses, look and see what is there in arising. This ability to move back and forth like this is very useful.

It seems quite 'impersonal' :-)
Yep, it's the same as when I walk focusing on walking and choosing where to turn, etc.
It's just a chain of some trigger - response leading to new trigger and so on...

This is clear at moments when there is looking done, but most of the time these behavior patterns are just on automatic.

Don't think you have to be 100% in the moment all of the time. You just need to be more aware of it than is happening at present. When the assumptions are unchallenged, when you're pottering about at work or at home, this isn't a fully conscious aware state is it?

So we break up that pattern, bring awareness to the moment, to the real and we look.The more often this happens the more of which we become aware. The more that is seen. It can only be seen clearly in the moment and so this is the focus for your practice: right now there's awareness in this form. Whose awareness is it? Does it have an owner? Can it just be part of this form? Arising in this form?

These thoughts - did an 'I' make them arise? Or do they just happen anyway, and then awareness gets carried along with them?

So throughout the day see these processes, watch as they arise, watch the assumption of a special 'me'. Tired old thought isn't it? And not really backed up by what is seen.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[Zinfandel]

Hi Andrew!
So much useful stuff in your answers.
Have been revisiting the last 2-3 pages of our conversation a couple of times/day.

This thing about a 'special' me...
It's funny. Because of 'my' vantage point it feels like I am special because I can't choose another point to look from :)
And yet, all this 'special' stuff is just another thought. I am not special.

Keepin' the looking going...

Thanks!

[Zinfandel]

Another reflection that kept the brain busy :)

There's nothing wrong with using imagination as a jumping off point for seeing, it might serve better than using verbal thought. But the trick is not to take it too far. So consider space within imagination then use the senses, look and see what is there in arising. This ability to move back and forth like this is very useful.

At the moment it is unclear how to see. Part of it feels like must be reached through reasoning right now.
The senses and the brain are a little limited in that they can't see or feel through walls.

I think I do understand the message though. I understand it as not maybe necessarily get all involved in physics and convince myself that because of the deep characteristics of matter, all is basically the same.
But from another angle through just looking at the manifestations in my near environment, that I have access to, I will eventually see this (without too much reasoning)?

Will do my best.

[Andrew White]

Hi Mike,

This thing about a 'special' me...
It's funny. Because of 'my' vantage point it feels like I am special because I can't choose another point to look from :)
And yet, all this 'special' stuff is just another thought. I am not special.

Good, no 'me', nothing special, in that it's separate, just processes that appear to arise within, processes that appear to arise outside. None of it is mundane, it is beautiful and special, but not separate, not containing an 'I'.

So when we look at anything, any single choice, any single thought we can trace the pathway of cause and effect to conditioning, habit, pattern, built up - this can be seen, and awareness at a point of focus is just another aspect, labelled and associated with this process. Each process is cause and effect, how could it be otherwise? How could there be a 'self' within it?

At the moment it is unclear how to see. Part of it feels like must be reached through reasoning right now.
The senses and the brain are a little limited in that they can't see or feel through walls.

I think I do understand the message though. I understand it as not maybe necessarily get all involved in physics and convince myself that because of the deep characteristics of matter, all is basically the same.
But from another angle through just looking at the manifestations in my near environment, that I have access to, I will eventually see this (without too much reasoning)?

Yes senses are limited, the five external ones and thought, which I would also include. But that's what we have to work with and it's enough. So right now if you try to put your finger on the 'self' where would it be? In which aspect of everything taking place does it reside?

So we use the senses, as they are and look openly - see what is around and see the processes taking place, without need of a self, all without self. And then we recognise that these processes are occuring in this form too, just the same, and also just happening, without self. So look at this:

What is the purpose? Does it need one?
What is the meaning? Does it have to mean anything? Who says so?
Who is controlling it all 'inside', 'outside', all around and within? Why does it need control?
Without any story of any of these, without any answers what happens? What is seen then?

When you read these posts, watch for the desire to find within them information. Watch the seeking that looks for some new piece to the puzzle.

There is no information, nothing to understand or to be known. Just an encouragement to look. All that is simply is. It is to be seen right now in this moment, without the story of self, the layers of 'meaning'. All that ever is is in this moment and the senses in this form or that form detect this or that, but seeing is the realisation in the moment of all as it is without making anything from it - just being, as beingness within this arising. See the wave and then know you are the wave.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[Zinfandel]

HiAndrew!

Good, no 'me', nothing special, in that it's separate, just processes that appear to arise within, processes that appear to arise outside. None of it is mundane, it is beautiful and special, but not separate, not containing an 'I'.

So when we look at anything, any single choice, any single thought we can trace the pathway of cause and effect to conditioning, habit, pattern, built up - this can be seen, and awareness at a point of focus is just another aspect, labelled and associated with this process. Each process is cause and effect, how could it be otherwise? How could there be a 'self' within it?

I am not quite there yet. But the looking continues. Thanks for pointing me!

[Zinfandel]

Hi Andrew,
Been so ticked off by this stuff now. What's the goddam problem!?
Where is the density that's preventing the seeing???

I know... Thoughts, sensations, impersonal, conditioning.

I was wondering about this returning to the moment and just watching.

I feel there are some ways I've been watching.
1. Just watching. Noticing - sometimes the mind puts labels "thinking", "itch". Sometimes there is noticing but without verbal labels. There doesn't seem to be much insight directly related to this process.

2. Watching, qnd asking question "where is the self?" "Is there a self owning this sensation?" "Is there someone thinking this?" And so on. Seems related, but adds a reasoning aspect to it.

3. Watching and connecting the dots. Asking "what led to this thought?" "What is the previous step in the chain?" "Is there someone controlling this?" "How is this impersonal?" Seems to be also rellated. What we've talked about here for a long time. Also seems quite reasoning-heavy.

Are all three good ways of investigating?

Man, I know the frustration and anger are connected to some expectation... But the effectiveness of direct pointing is still a big mystery to me at this moment.