Ready

[Eggplane]

Hi Behzad,
I went to Elena's mini-intensive in NY yesterday. She started it off by having us imagining we were recently born babies. I found that very useful. I also felt a very strong energy/vibration inside my body, and extra-sensitive skin. Some thoughts said, "It's just a state, don't make too much of it." Other thoughts said, "Well, I kind of like it. It feels good. And it feels like something is happening." I still feel it today--or at least it arises very easily.

After the session, I told Elena that you have been busy with family, and I haven't been very satisfied with the slow turnaround rate. She mentioned a section on the web with 2-3 guides at a time, but I can't find it.

Otherwise, the 2 situations with ex-wife and girlfriend continue to be very tense. I did some Byron Katie-ish exercises, saw some patterns and scripts that have made these same problems appear and reappear over the past 6 years, and decided that I'm not interested in living out those scripts again. For a while I thought that "I need to find some new behavior," but I couldn't find behavior that felt comfortable. Then I thought, "There's nothing to solve, nothing that will get better, no behavior that I can choose that will make anything better. Just let it be."

I've been watching the emotions rise and fall & noticing (after the fact, unfortunately) when I get lost in the thoughts that often come in the wake of those emotions (usually thoughts of blame, of how I want things to be better, and of what I might lose or gain if they don't get better.) So the emotions and thoughts don't stick around and consume me nearly as buch as they did in the past. But both my ex-wife and girlfriend seem to be enraged even more---by what might look like increased indifference on my part?

Best,
Adam

[Behzad]

Dear Adam,

Sorry for not being able to answer youre messages. You are doing a wounderful job. I am having some issues with my family and in the same time I am working a lot because a lot of my workers are on vacation at the moment.

I dont have as much time as I used to and I want to ask you if its fine for you then maybe someone else can guide you so you can get a more intense interaction like you want and Elena told me that you were on the meeting, really glad to hear that : )

Is this okej for you, then I can ask another guide?

[Eggplane]

That would be fine, Behzad.

Hope that all works out well with family and work. And thanks so much for the time you've spent already. :)

Best, Adam

[pozablo]

Hi Adam,
My name is Pablo, and I would be happy to continue guiding you.
Please give me a day to look over the thread so far and I will get back to you tomorrow.
What time-zone are you in? I am in Central Standard time.

[Eggplane]

Thanks so much Pablo. I'm in New York--EST.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Adam

[pozablo]

Hi Adam,

Your dlilgence and sincerity, and the completeness and clarity of your answers are rare and wonderful.

Throughout this thread, the word “I” has been used in various ways.
You said

Every now and then it does feel like “I” am directing what I should focus on through intention

Would it be correct to say that sometimes in conscious awareness there is a feeling somehow associated with the label “I”? Please watch the experience and see if that is correct.

And

No single "me" amounts to much. There is no master “Me” that manages everything. Some claim to be that Master Me, but they go away quickly if I look at them.

Would it be correct to say that when attention focusses on them, they dissipate or fade away?
If so, here is a very big question:
At any given instance of attention shifting from one object to another, is it possible to find, in that moment, a director of that attention? If not, please describe what actually occurs.

Cheers,
Pablo

BTW, your writings show that you are so very much closer than you think. And when you get it, you will probably laugh like many others at how simple it actually is. HaHa-It's too simple to be described in words! The difficult complexity is in the illusion, not in the actuality. This may not make sense just now, but it will soon.

[Eggplane]

Would it be correct to say that sometimes in conscious awareness there is a feeling somehow associated with the label “I”? Please watch the experience and see if that is correct.

There is a feeling in the middle of my stomach—like a gentle whirlpool like the bathtub drain. Sometimes a tingling in my face. I’m tempted to call it mild anxiety. . . . I’m surprised I haven’t noticed it before.

No single "me" amounts to much. There is no master “Me” that manages everything. Some claim to be that Master Me, but they go away quickly if I look at them.

Would it be correct to say that when attention focusses on them, they dissipate or fade away?

Yes

At any given instance of attention shifting from one object to another, is it possible to find, in that moment, a director of that attention? If not, please describe what actually occurs.

No director. Usually—but sometimes he sneaks in.

The more I’ve looked the past couple of weeks, the more impulsive all of my actions seem. If I’m paying attention to attention (!), I can generally find loose linkages among that constant roil of sensations and thoughts that are stimulating each other, merging into each other, causing shifts in each other. But seeing these chains does not make the next thought or object of attention any more predictable. That previous stimulus could have led to any of hundreds or thousands of follow-up thoughts and shifts. Why this one?

I am still grappling with the formulation of intention. For example: “I will shift attention to outside the window when I am done writing this sentence.” And then I just did it. I know that I can not see the original creation of that intention. And I also have very mixed success in following through. Yet it is hard to escape the feeling that, at least for one brief and trivial action, something did direct my attention.

My strongest feelings of “I” usually come during extended intellectual analysis or internal monologue (with “me” as both speaker and audience). I am both something that is captured and a director. On the one hand, the feeling of “I” emerges out of being captured by emotions, observations, thoughts, etc. --creating the sense of a separate me who is affected by things and compelled to make sense of things. Then through the process of analysis and monologue, I forge them into biography, self-justification, proof of my ability to understand, and perhaps even guidelines for future behavior. This is where the sense of “I” gets really entrenched; as object of experience; as being with particular reactions to events; and as something that might potentially shape the future.

This action of writing about myself right now is a perfect example of this kind of analysis that produces “me”. . . . So, let me look again.. . . Yes, there is the whirlpool in the stomach.

HaHa-It's too simple to be described in words! The difficult complexity is in the illusion, not in the actuality. This may not make sense just now, but it will soon.

Reading my passages above, it is when I pull in the idea of intention or the director is present that all kinds of self-referential loops are created and things get really complex or obscure . . .

Thanks,
Adam

[pozablo]

Sometimes a director sneaks in, sometimes ‘I’ pull in the idea of intention, I am both something that is captured and a director, I forge [mental events] into biography, self-justification, proof of my ability to understand, analysis produces “me”…..

Wow! That kind of complexity must be really confusing! You’re gonna laugh your ass off when you see what’s really happening..along with the realization that there is no you to see what’s really happening!

Look, Adam, you’ve got some science background; ever heard of Occam’s Razor? Cut through complexity?
There ain’t no you at all anywhere. Never was, never will be. There’s just this one big thing happening, and part of it is bodies and brains and stars and gravity and thoughts and images and motivations and intentions and electromagnetism and feelings and and…Everything. No exceptions. No thing or constellation of things cause any ‘thing’ else. It can be said it’s all ‘connected’, but actually it’s all just aspects of the same always changing Thing, Now, Tao, It, Godhead, Universe, Buddha, or any of the other words that point to it.

This whirlpool feeling is not an I or a me, it’s just a feeling occurring like everything else.
This I that forges, that pulls in ideas? That’s just itself another idea that is happening.

Our whole work here together is about the absolute realization of this inside the head of this imagined-to-be-separate thing called Alan.

When ‘I’ say “look” or “watch’, those are just words to add to all the other influences that might lead to this realization. There’s really no you to look, but looking might just happen. There’s no I to write, writing is just happening here. Agency, directorship, is an assumption of our language. Like the assumption of zero in math, maybe. It’s not real. And, unlike the assumption of zero, it’s not even useful or necessary. As part of our language and culture, it seems as real as it once did that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it and trees are inhabited by spirits.

Please…what thoughts/feelings come up as you read the above?

[Eggplane]

To be honest, Pablo, the first feeling on reading your last post is the impulse to disagree. Not that there is anything to disagree with; or that I could come up with a better formulation. But because the compulsion to be right & to understand things better than everybody else has been crucial to my identity for decades. I’ve told myself that it is a source of parental approval, paychecks and what little social glory I’ve ever obtained. But I've really lost interest in that impulse, and I’ll let drift away before I write more . . . (Who will let it drift away? Me? Or is the impulse just not asserting itself with the same power as before?).

. . . And now I’m not finding that any very strong feelings are left. If anything, I feel a sense of relief—a slight melting in the limbs. “I” is associated with embarrassment, anger, shame, conflict and other things that are not particularly pleasant. And there is the hope that the weight of responsibilities won’t feel so constraining, that I can wear them more lightly. . . . Just thoughts, I remind myself.

And a bit of frustration: tightening in the head, twitching feet, scowls. Theoretically, I have no problem with no me. But “theoretically” is precisely that mode of thinking that has been the main backbone of “me” for decades. It doesn’t seem to have much impact on those feelings described in the last paragraph that can still capture me/create me.

When ‘I’ say “look” or “watch’, those are just words to add to all the other influences that might lead to this realization. There’s really no you to look, but looking might just happen.

The looking itself can be frustrating. Sure, I can’t find any me. But I can’t find electricity either and this computer is working fine. I’ve gotten pretty good at watching my daily behavior and feelings and seeing their automatic quality (the thoughts are a bit tougher to watch in action). But it feels like I’m just waiting, waiting for something to happen; and always wondering what’s blocking my view.

. . . My view? I’m waiting? I’m watching? Hmmmm…. But when I follow this train of thought and look harder at who's looking, I get caught up in that dense web of complex interconnections and feedback again.

[pozablo]

the compulsion to be right

Sounds like what you are saying is that sometimes the felt need to prove your pre-existing concepts as correct is stronger than your need to see what’s actually true. Or, conversely, there is a fear of letting go of pre-existing concepts.

All the following are concepts, ideas, labels about what is ‘you’:

Sometimes a director sneaks in

sometimes ‘I’ pull in the idea of intention

I am both something that is captured and a director

I forge [mental events] into biography, self-justification, proof of my ability to understand analysis produces “me”

feelings…. can still capture me/create me.

And then:

always wondering what’s blocking my view

Hmm. Could it be those same pre-existing concepts?
This is not about concepts, it’s about Seeing—ignoring concepts and thought except as phenomena. Not paying attention to their meaning, but looking to see how they arise and fall with no ‘causer’.
If they were ‘you’, would this you sometimes exist and sometimes not?

I can’t find any me. But I can’t find electricity either

[/quote]. Of course you can. Watch a thunderstorm. Try cutting that power wire to your computer and run a short across it. You can see it with your own eyes.

How about Santa Claus?
The Easter Bunny?
Jehovah?
Krishna?
Allah?

[Eggplane]

always wondering what’s blocking my view

Hmm. Could it be those same pre-existing concepts?

Yes, it could well be. . . .
I often say that thinking gets in the way of so many things--but I apparently can't walk the walk yet.
so, rather than thinking about it more, just let those ideas drop for now.

This is going to be a short post because a busy family weekend looms. I may be able to read your posts, but probably can’t write again until Monday.

My attention will still be on the rise and fall of thoughts, sensations and intentions. And a weekend with mom will doubtless generate plenty of emotions to observe! I'll especially look out for those thoughts and stories that seem to capture . . . well, to see what it if anything they are capturing.

When engaged in light activities there is less frustration and conceputalization than when I am focusing only on this. But it also sometimes just feels like a game of imagining that nobody is controlling all of this behavior, rather than seeing it.

[pozablo]

Adam,

Just discovered that my response to your last post didn’t go thru, maybe due to lots of current exquisitely evasive computer problems.

Re-reading my last posted response, have to laugh at the competitiveness that came up on this side. Unfortunately, old habits and responses do not always simply go away once you see, but at least they are not taken personally and then not defended, leading to extinction. My remark about electricity was uncalled for. Your point, I believe, is the axiom that it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something. We have to admit that the Easter Bunny might possibly exist, even though we have no evidence other than word of mouth.

So, how do you decide what to believe? Our work here is not about changing beliefs, it is about direct experience, knowing for yourself. But if you are defending old beliefs, that makes it hard to open up to contradictory experience.

So, another question, what is this ‘I’ or ‘self’ or ‘me’ that might possibly exist? Please introspect, look for it and describe it completely. (Not think about it; see if it can actually be found. And if it can’t be found, then please describe what it might be. Where did it come from, what function does it or might it serve?)

Cheers,
Pablo

[Eggplane]

Hi Pablo,
It looks like I checked the thread this morning just minutes before you posted. I've already written up an account of my weekend, which I'm posting here. And I'll give some thought to your "What is me" question tonight and tomorrow morning.

I hope you had a better weekend than I. My girlfriend gave me the silent treatment, and my mom kept pushing the “so what are you doing with your life” discussion. But it generated a lot of thoughts to observe.

I found that very few of my thoughts used the “I” label directly. Most of the thoughts related to my girlfriend were about her: why she was behaving this way, how unacceptable that behavior is, what I should say to her, etc. “I” only entered as a reaction, as in “When you act like this, it makes me feel . . .” I know from experience that these thoughts are really one-sided and unhelpful, and that uttering them rarely gets a good result. So I kept my mouth shut too. I've done that before, but this is the first time it didn't feel like a struggle. But the thoughts kept coming fast and furious anyways.

My mom, on the other hand, kept pushing me to talk. So many of my thoughts came into awareness only as they were being uttered. In this case, my thoughts and utterances were mostly abstractions. My mom kept pushing me to say something concrete about my life, but I mostly responded in terms of concepts and ideas and observations.

I still can’t see the thoughts as they arise. But I could often observe what they were doing soon after they arose. These kinds of thoughts surely all promote separation in one way or another, despite rarely having an explicit “I” attached to them. But, following on your last posting, I tried to avoid thinking about the thoughts and didn’t give any special attention to where they come from, or where they go, or what they are trying to do. Instead I saw that in both cases the thoughts were fairly random: Reactions, rhetorical maneuvering, self-justifications, etc. Most were also recycled ideas that revolved around familiar patterns. But to call them a coherent “me”—or even to say that I believe many of them—would be a bit much. Thoughts that seemed so important at the moment are forgotten minutes later.

For the most part I remained outwardly quiet & calm. Not even much feeling of having to repress angry expressions; they just didn't arise very often. I looked for bodily sensations, and they were mild. When strong emotions did come, however, they were remarkably sudden, forceful and overwhelming. But they disappeared without a trace after a minute or two and did not get entangled with the thoughts. Certainly not the high levels of enduring agitation that lasts for days, like I have experienced in the past (although much less so over the past year).

Today there is a feeling of light sadness—a weird bodily nausea. And some indifference to my girlfriend’s attempts at reconciliation (scowling and cold body language). Also, some wondering . . . . I feel like I got a good look at how these thoughts and emotions just go on without me. And I’m wondering if a) I am still looking in the wrong place; or b) it really is so obvious and trivial that it doesn’t even rate the promised “Hahaha” for me, but just a bit of lethargic sadness.

[pozablo]

the thoughts were fairly random: Reactions, rhetorical maneuvering, self-justifications, etc. Most were also recycled ideas that revolved around familiar patterns. But to call them a coherent “me”—or even to say that I believe many of them—would be a bit much. Thoughts that seemed so important at the moment are forgotten minutes later….When strong emotions did come…they were remarkably sudden, forceful and overwhelming. But they disappeared without a trace after a minute or two and did not get entangled with the thoughts.

Those discoveries alone are worth so much. I'm very happy you were able to Look at what’s actually going on even in the midst of situations with such powerful history and emotional influences!

I’m looking forward to your response about “self” and what it is or might be.
And asking you to begin to consider that perhaps the ‘self’ our culture believes to be real is laughably trivial compared with what actually Is.

[Eggplane]

O.K. Pablo, thoughts on what I is:

"I" and "me" are words that constantly comes up in conversation: the social I, the category that makes communication and administration easier. Probably better to call it the “Communication I”. I notice that even you LU folks tend to use it a lot. It is possible to imagine communication without references to “I”, but like most concepts it makes communication a lot easier. What would language be without concepts?

I could go on and draw on network theory or fuzziness of all discursive concepts to explicate how the Communication I works. But such explanations are provisional, and not where you want me to look anyways. I want to see if the Communication I actually refers to anything. But before I can really look, I’m going to have to scrape away some other concepts as well. Please bear with me.

I’m tempted to say that the “I” is a kind of organizing rubric, a framework for ordering localized thoughts and sensations and putting them in relation to each other. But it is really not very good at that. Although certain familiar patterns of thought do repeat themselves, they are not predictable. Any order is an illusion, at most a post-hoc attempt at justification. Also, “I” is a thought, or something that comes embedded in thoughts. Any organization that happens with a thought disappears when the thought disappears.

So many people spend so much effort looking for a “true self”. Which suggests that all of those thoughts and impressions being ordered by “me” are somehow felt as inauthentic—or at least inappropriately ordered. But then why assume that there is an authentic “I” beneath all the inauthenticity, a hidden jewel that will be discovered with enough digging?

Perhaps “I” creates, as the neuroscientists like to say, a sense of continuity. But I can look at my tomato plant and assume that it too has continuity with the seed that spawned it. The “I” is not necessary to create a thought about continuity.

Plenty of things exist and grow without “I”. It is not the same thing as consciousness. Nor is it necessary for learning or language or any of those other things that supposedly make humans unique. Nor is it a necessary assumption of neurophysiological descriptions. Rather it is something that disappears with neuroscience, regardless of the fact that neuroscientists sometimes feel compelled to explain it (and usually fail, resorting to hoary abstractions).

As a tool to order stuff or a model of anything that goes on inside of us, “I” is really a failure. Any further speculation would basically be about how the Communication “I” functions despite having no clear reference other than the body. . . . .

I am still circling around what appears to be nothing. Not yet directly seeing nothing. Only watching things dissolve.

Best, and thanks,
Adam