ix take 2

[ixturtle]

Hi vince--

(Adding below the last couple back and forths for continuity sake.)

The process of being aware happens at an organism level. The assumption (that its personal) is an overlay. LOOK and tell me if this is so for ix ?

Been sitting with this on and off all day. The thought arises, "even without thought these are the perceptions of the organism"... which is obviously a thought. WIthout thought there is just experience. The assumption that its personal is mental overlay-- but its like glue on hands (and ears and eyeballs, etc)...

This way short circuits the suffering, the old way perpetuates it.
Is there a choice about which way to be ?, or can intention be the 'best' that we can have ?

No choice-- as the sticky glue suggests. Feeling of powerlessness arises when seeking (attempt to shed glue) is strong. Feeling of ease arises when things just are (noticing glue on hands), including assumptions and stories and all the rest. Still, it feels good to be looking again.

love love,
ix


----------------------
From: vinceschubert
To: ixturtle

ixturtle wrote:where does awareness sit in this? is it part of the mental attribute of the organism? or is it something else?

Although language gives us "awareness" as a noun, there is no actual thing anywhere. It is the process of noticing.

ixturtle wrote:this awareness includes as part of experience an underlying assumption that what is experienced by the organism is indeed personal

No it doesn't. That assumption is part of the story of ix. The process of being aware happens at an organism level. The assumption is an overlay. LOOK and tell me if this is so for ix ?

ixturtle wrote:that what's happening is not happening to a different organism

How can you know this ? (stories may or may not reflect the Real, but we can't know.)

vinceschubert wrote:hammer hits thumb-- organism yelps "ouch!"

Yes

ixturtle wrote:and blames self or hammer or someone else,

Story response.

vinceschubert wrote:or even perhaps is seemingly very equanimous and breathes and says, "this too" and blah blah blah--

Story response.

ixturtle wrote:but still thinks its HER thumb that hurts

Story response.

ixturtle wrote:and that FEELS personal

Story response.

ixturtle wrote:prefer that it not hurt...

Organism response. Although there may still be a story element here if there is the idea that it should stop hurting, or wondering how long it will hurt for, etc.
i would label the story components as the reason for the suffering. Separate the pain from the suffering, and what is there ?
i have noticed that pain only exists when there is noticing of it (awareness ? hmm, awareness implies a philosophical stance - in language) If attention is drawn to something other than the pain...

So, there is this 'way of looking at it' and there is the habit of the 'old' way.
This way short circuits the suffering, the old way perpetuates it.
Is there a choice about which way to be ?, or can intention be the 'best' that we can have ?

love
vince

-------------

From: ixturtle
To: vinceschubert

vinceshubert wrote: It's the belief that 'you' are that Self that is the beginning of suffering.

ok then. let's unpack that.

belief: story made up of underlying assumptions (often unconscious) which are generated by conditioning and are wired into emotional response mechanism (ie., can trigger physical responses and lots of additional thinking)

"you": a name, you call yourself... (fa, a long long way to run...) "You" in this case refers to an overarching label i place on experience that is assumed (belief) to be personal.

"self": a conglomeration of physical, emotional and mental attributes, packaged as an organism that operates according to genetic programming and conditioning. it is characterized as "alive" and it's conditioning includes a sense of a separate identity distinct from the rest of experience.

"suffering": the pervasive feeling that the self is not safe, not OK, and needs to be defended at all cost.

where does awareness sit in this? is it part of the mental attribute of the organism? or is it something else?

regardless, this awareness includes as part of experience an underlying assumption that what is experienced by the organism is indeed personal-- that what's happening is not happening to a different organism-- and that what's happening matters (to itself at least).

i can see that this is only an assumption that does not exist without thought, but feels nevertheless validated by experience (as interpreted by thought): hammer hits thumb-- organism yelps "ouch!" and blames self or hammer or someone else, or even perhaps is seemingly very equanimous and breathes and says, "this too" and blah blah blah-- but still thinks its HER thumb that hurts and that FEELS personal and she would prefer that it not hurt...

---------------------

From: vinceschubert
To: ixturtle
How about this, a sense of self is fine. It is necessary for communication & other relationship stuff. It's the belief that 'you' are that Self that is the beginning of suffering.
To stop seeking because you realize that you already are that which you have been seeking is different to giving up on (imagined) finding.
When I say that ix is wise enough, what story arises?

[vinceschubert]

WIthout thought there is just experience

Is not the thought also experience ?

The assumption that its personal is mental overlay-- but its like glue on hands (and ears and eyeballs, etc)...

belief: story made up of underlying assumptions (often unconscious) which are generated by conditioning and are wired into emotional response mechanism (ie., can trigger physical responses and lots of additional thinking)

Are they wired into the emotional responses or are the emotional responses the result of the belief
Story here is that beliefs are thought that have been given permission to be acted on without conscious consideration.
If we believe in Santa, then we find out he is a myth, do we discard the first belief in favour of the new one (that he is a myth) ? or do we modify the first one so that it morphs into the new one, or do we keep the first one but hold a second one that says the first one is wrong ? That is do we have a new belief about Santa or a new belief about the first belief ? Can we have a belief, find out that it is wrong and discard it to have no belief ?, or must it be replaced by a new one.
Is it possible to have an open mind ? That is to actually not know/believe anything ?
Certainly, we have to behave as if some things are true to navigate daily life, but is it possible not to have beliefs ?
Can we choose what to believe ? (or what not to believe ?)
Ix can't find a self, and describes many experiences as personal, and from that deduces that the self must be hidden. Is that the way it is ?

xturtle wrote:and that FEELS personal

Have you seen the rubber hand illusion. (https://www.dropbox.com/s/l5l95ekxxmaog ... lusion.mp4) For the subject if FEELS like the rubber hand is theirs. Does that make it so ?


love

vince

[ixturtle]

Is not the thought also experience ?

of course. with or without thought, there is only experience. thought tends to distract or distort the experiencing of experience though, yes?

Are they wired into the emotional responses or are the emotional responses the result of the belief

Without the belief, emotional response would be different/absent.

Can we have a belief, find out that it is wrong and discard it to have no belief ?, or must it be replaced by a new one.

Usually we replace them-- i don't like Z is replaced by I like Z. Seems to me that it mutates, rather than overlays-- I don't believe my belief in Santa is wrong, I simply don't believe in Santa.

As for whether we can discard belief without replacing it, i "believe" that's what we're doing here... we're not looking to replace belief in "self" with belief in "no self"... we're looking to see what's true.

Can we choose what to believe ? (or what not to believe ?)

No. Mind absorbs beliefs from environment, both indirectly and directly. Indirectly in the sense of "my parents believe X so I believe X" and directly in the sense of the sun rising in the east (recognizing both sun and east as labels). Mind can't choose to believe Y instead of X (though people often try) unless it sees clearly that X isn't so and that Y is true. Mind can't choose to drop belief in X all together unless it sees clearly that X isn't so.

Ix can't find a self, and describes many experiences as personal, and from that deduces that the self must be hidden. Is that the way it is ?

Deduction is not that self must be hidden. Deduction is ix must not clearly see that X isn't so, and thus experiences appear personal despite "thinking" otherwise.

And yes, i saw rubber hand a year or so ago-- demonstrating that what "appears" may not be so...

[vinceschubert]

thought tends to distract or distort the experiencing of experience though, yes?

Habitual, conditioned thought does as it always has. The laughing when it is seen to be happening is helpful to bread that habit and offer a new conditioning. (have you forgotten to laugh ?)

Without the belief, emotional response would be different/absent.

That is true, but if the belief (habitually) persists then simply seeing it as an old belief will also change/dismiss the emotional response.

what we're doing here... we're not looking to replace belief in "self" with belief in "no self"... we're looking to see what's true.

Excellent ! Well said ! If we say "what is actual" instead of what is true, it makes it a bit more accessible. (true implies some external thing)

drop belief in X all together unless it sees clearly that X isn't so.

It's a bit subtle, but seeing that X isn't so would leave a vacuum (wouldn't it ?) so, something else that is so, might arise ?

ix must not clearly see that X isn't so, and thus experiences appear personal despite "thinking" otherwise.

Ok, so this points to either a disbelief in the "thinking otherwise" or a belief in the story that a Self does exist somewhere.
Have a rant as an advocate for the existence of a Self. Let's see what resonates and what doesn't.

love

vince

[ixturtle]

Apologies for dropping off the radar screen. You once (or twice) have told me not to worry about timing (time = story) but nevertheless, I feel grateful to you for picking this string up again and don't want to appear half-hearted.

That said, Half-hearted is, however, how I've been feeling!!!! ha hahahahhaha... Somehow the request for the rant left me with neither the vim nor the vigor to undertake it. But here goes...

Ok, so this points to either a disbelief in the "thinking otherwise" or a belief in the story that a Self does exist somewhere. Have a rant as an advocate for the existence of a Self. Let's see what resonates and what doesn't.

(rants always seem to deserve cap lock, so here goes...)

SO WHAT IF THE CONCEPT OF SELF IS A STORY-- THE CONCEPT STILL REFERS TO A LIVING, BREATHING, FEELING ANIMAL THAT PERSISTS THROUGH TIME AND THINGS HAPPEN TO IT. IT MAY NOT HAVE THE EXACT SAME CELLS IT DID WHEN IT WAS 7 AS WHEN IT IS 47 BUT SO WHAT? THE ORGANISM IS CONSTANTLY REGENERATING-- BIG DEAL. MEANWHILE IT HAS VERY COMPLEX NUEROPROGRAMMING THAT CREATES MOUNTAINS OF FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS, REACTIONS AND RESPONSES. YES THOSE MOUNTAINS OF FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS, REACTIONS AND RESPONSES ARE BASED ON STORY, BUT THEY STILL APPEAR IN THE AWARENESS OF THE ORGANISM, AND THEY PERSIST (ALWAYS CHANGING, BUT NEVERTHELESS, PERSIST IN THEIR EXISTENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORGANISM) OVER TIME! TAKE OUT A PHOTO ALBUM OR A JOURNAL-- THESE OBJECTS CHRONICLE THOSE STORIES OF CHANGE (BODY, THOUGHTS, FEELINGS) THROUGH TIME. THE ORGANISM (ALONG WITH ITS COMPONENTS) PERSISTS AND WE CALL THOSE PERSISTING COMPONENTS "SELF". SO WHAT IF THIS "SELF'S" FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS ARE SELF REFERENCING-- THAT'S HOW ITS BUILT. THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT NOT RELEVANT-- ITS HOW IT'S CONFIGURED.

that's one line of resistance anyway... sure there are others, but let's start here.

[vinceschubert]

Apologies

No need. No worries.

Half-hearted is, however, how I've been feeling

That happens.

Somehow the request for the rant left me with neither the vim nor the vigor to undertake it.

Hm, (story here says) there might be very low expectations. (or lots of other possibilities)

SO WHAT IF THE CONCEPT OF SELF IS A STORY

Your right of course. It's the behavioural outcomes, the emotional responses that count.
These usually change from lots of 'negative' and suffering (from minor discontent to depression) outcomes to a default state of joy when it is SEEN how the stories influence one.
In your case, in spite of not 'getting' the no self thing, i was (during our previous marathon) believing my story that you were almost 'getting' it and that the emotional outcomes in life for you had improved anyway.
Has the new baby highlighted the This IS IT portal for you ? Shown you the illusion of control more clearly ? ..or has it translated into a helplessness ? (or somewhere in between)

love

vince

[ixturtle]

Hm, (story here says) there might be very low expectations.

Yes, that's perhaps true. On the other hand, as mush as a cloud has descended in terms of much of what seemed clear to me before, it also doesn't feel very far away nor do i feel very needy about it.

It does appear difficult for me to show up daily, but your questions do spin around the heart/mind in the intervening time.

Baby highlights the difference a story makes. There's fuss, and then when need is met, no fuss. There is no holding onto story about the fuss not being met moments earlier.

Interesting to watch conditioning happen. When baby notes things leading up to things he doesn't like (for example, things I do before putting him to bed) there is fuss. This seems to rely at least a little on future/story, no? Or is that my projection?

As for "this is it"-- that phrase continues to be helpful and yet nothing seems to penetrate. The illusion of control is something i completely understand intellectually (at least when the cloud isn't there), but certainly do not operate from...

[vinceschubert]

Morning Ix,

It does appear difficult for me to show up daily, but your questions do spin around the heart/mind in the intervening time.

don't worry about daily. When it happens is fine, especially with the intervening activity.

mush as a cloud has descended in terms of much of what seemed clear to me before, it also doesn't feel very far away nor do i feel very needy about it.

Ok, rather than hunt for the content of what was forgotten (if that explains the loss of clarity), just focus on the sensations (feeling) of mush. Like fear, it is a result of mind (induced) attempting to (misguidedly) protect you, from some imagined outcome. Don't chase anything. Just rest in What IS. (and be open to what might arise)

Baby highlights the difference a story makes. There's fuss, and then when need is met, no fuss. There is no holding onto story about the fuss not being met moments earlier.

Yes, beautiful. Like animals, purely living in the NOW. (bloody shame that they have to learn the other before it can be let go of - my story)

This seems to rely at least a little on future/story, no? Or is that my projection?

Who knows, but you are probably right. They learn much earlier than we imagine. Research has shown (recently) that the 'noises' that babies make are in fact just poorly expressed language (because of undeveloped speech organs). One mother taught her baby sign language and was communicating with it at extremely young age.
..but there is story and there is story.
Anticipation that something (enjoyable) might happen, because the conditions that have resulted in it before, are occurring again, is story, but is there a chapter about what if it doesn't happen ?
Not for the baby (yet) and if it doesn't then they are so busy in the NOW that it's a non event (excuse the pun)

As for "this is it"-- that phrase continues to be helpful and yet nothing seems to penetrate.

Investigating this. "penetration" suggests a story about something changing something. It suggests the idea of a possible outcome ? What is SEEn when you look here ?

The illusion of control is something i completely understand intellectually (at least when the cloud isn't there), but certainly do not operate from...

"operate from" suggests control again. The thing that slaps me in the face here is that by the time i think about it, it's already happened. Already finished. Done. Cooked. ..and all i bring to it, is extra. Corrupting the new NOW.

love love

vince

[ixturtle]

Investigating this. "penetration" suggests a story about something changing something. It suggests the idea of a possible outcome ? What is SEEn when you look here ?

Yes, I suppose it does. There is an expectation that perception will change, like a filter (mind) being taken off a camera lens such that the perception of experience would shift. I "understand" that the filter (the same old thinking even) can actually stay on the camera, but there the metaphor runs dry...

operate from" suggests control again. The thing that slaps me in the face here is that by the time i think about it, it's already happened. Already finished. Done. Cooked. ..and all i bring to it, is extra. Corrupting the new NOW.

This is one of the ones that felt seen before but now seems largely inaccessible beyond basic logic (conditioned computer responds according to conditioning so where's the control in that). Yes the subconscious mind is tick tick ticking away calling the shots, but conscious mind is doing its thing too. It may be superfluous-- extra, as you say-- and it certainly is exhausting, but perception is that the sum total of all this mental exercise (even if largely taking place unconsciously and expressed consciously) matters. I don't mean matters in the macro sense, but in terms of the organism, the mental network makes decisions that have an impact on itself and others.

[vinceschubert]

There is an expectation that perception will change,

Yes, it's a classic paradox. Change doesn't happen because in expecting change there is not acceptance of what IS.
...or, in the acceptance of what IS, resides the facility for what IS, to change.
...and what if what IS, includes expectations of change ?
Is it possible to be aware of the expectations, the fact that the expectations exist, without getting lost in the emotional responses to them ?

This is one of the ones that felt seen before but now seems largely inaccessible..

There is then recognition that this had been SEEn before. You may have gone back to sleep on this one, but that is just habit reemerging as the dominant behaviour. Although the habitual neuronal pathways have been reinforced, the new synaptic connections that were established back when this had some prominence, still exist and will be strengthened with use.
So, how does use occur when there is no actual direct control ?
Is intention useful here ?

but perception is that the sum total of all this mental exercise ...matters.

To say it matters confuses me. i don't know the story of anything mattering. i do understand if you mean that it has consequences. Perhaps you would elucidate this ?

the mental network makes decisions that have an impact on itself and others.

Yes, decisions happen and have consequences. ..and by the time they (the consequences) are noticed the conditions that they resulted from has finished. So do we beat ourselves up about it, or accept that it is done and allow the intention to learn and improve to occur ?

love

vince

[ixturtle]

Is it possible to be aware of the expectations, the fact that the expectations exist, without getting lost in the emotional responses to them ?

certainly, and by degree. there's a lot less expectation than once experienced and that which remains doesn't tug like it used to. almost didn't come back to this process in part because the need to "cross" is less, and that there was concern that engaging again would re-trigger frustration about "not getting it".

happy i did though! does it "matter"?

there is a lot of baggage with this word here. as "a grain of sand", it does not. as "a butterfly's wings" everything matters as its all apart of everything.

there is a story that "seeing" brings wisdom, less reactivity, more allowing, less personal suffering, less inflicting suffering on others and on the whole. can that story exist with complete acceptance? its subtle. might be linguistic more than anything, but the preference certainly exists. does it "matter"?

matter does suggest consequences for sure, as well as preferences for consequences. caring for the baby (or not) has consequences and there is a rather strong preference regarding those consequences, even given a fair amount of acceptance re., what is not in "apparent" control.

So, how does use occur when there is no actual direct control ?
Is intention useful here ?

use occurs when there is a noticing of non-control, and that noticing arises due to conditions. presumably intention also arises due to conditions, but perhaps leans the noticing in a particular direction.

decisions happen and have consequences. ..and by the time they (the consequences) are noticed the conditions that they resulted from has finished. So do we beat ourselves up about it, or accept that it is done and allow the intention to learn and improve to occur ?

mostly the latter; occasionally this meat sack gets caught. laughter helps. :-)

[vinceschubert]

Just as in take 1, your answers are so complete and 'spot on' that i find nowhere to go. It's like trying to boil water that is already boiling.
How about this; your imperfections are perfect. This includes the idea that imperfections are nothing more than ideas. It also includes the idea that perfect is an idea. There is nothing to gain. This includes the idea that gain is an idea. It also includes the idea the the idea of gain is an idea. There is nothing to change, including the idea that change is an idea. Improvement is an idea. Everything is an idea, except what is happening now. ..and that becomes an idea the moment it is thought about.
What is it the Ix seeks ?

love love

vince

[ixturtle]

Everything is an idea, except what is happening now. ..and that becomes an idea the moment it is thought about.
What is it the Ix seeks ?

i would describe this pot as having a few small bubbles around the edges and i guess what the pot "wants" is a rolling boil that spills right on out of the pot!

two things leap to mind:

1) what i write to you here is a result of "looking" when there is mostly stillness. BUT in relationship to others i can get so caught up that while eruptions are mostly modest, internally it feels like sheer emotional combustion. i can sense (and even intellectually work out) the supposed "story" behind the emotion, noting that the thoughts on which the whole thing rest are on extremely shaky ground, but nevertheless the felt sense of indignation born of SELF-righteousness suggests that there is a strong identification with SELF still present.

i "know" that these emotional freak outs are part of the whole and that "seeing" does not necessitate this changing (or vice versa), but at the same time it seems like true "seeing" would allow them to have a quality of "show" or "just what's happening" to them rather than the utterly identified and agonizing confusion, reactivity, etc., that ensues.

the intention to wake up in these moments is there, so perhaps that's all there is. but even that smacks of lack of acceptance, thus locking the whole thing in place. so voila, CONUNDRUM!

2) when i read other strings and people get it, there is a big "OH!!" or even a smaller "oh... yes, i've always seen that." i guess IX is seeking some sort of "oh"...

[vinceschubert]

i would describe this pot as having a few small bubbles around the edges and i guess what the pot "wants" is a rolling boil that spills right on out of the pot!

Ha, yes. Well, all rolling boils start with little bubbles.

but at the same time it seems like true "seeing" would allow them to have a quality of "show" or "just what's happening" to them rather than the utterly identified and agonizing confusion, reactivity, etc., that ensues.

Ok, ok, ok. i see that you idea of failure to 'get it' is based on the idea of a complete and permanent 'state' of enlightenment. Wow !. Have i propagated that ? Do you think that vince never erupts ? (he does.)
Certainly they happen less and end quicker. Now they usually end with the recognition that it happened and a chuckle. This has been progressing for a couple of years now. Will it ever not happen ? i don't know. Does it matter ? (does anything matter ?)
What does (seem to) matter is that with the recognition that i'm lost in emotion, comes the recognition that habit still asserts itself. Not that i must be identifying with a self. (i suppose after 64 years of establishing a habit, that 2 years of undoing it, is still early)

that there is a strong identification with SELF still present.

This SELF that you have never been able to find ?
Is it true that you just deduce that one exists ?

the felt sense of indignation born of SELF-righteousness

Is this more than mind labelling ? i don't mean the sensations, but the interpretation of them.

so voila, CONUNDRUM!

Conundrum is good. It can shut the mind down and allow SEEing. That is what koans aim for.
What is the face of Ix before her parents are born ? (Do try and chase this until mind either explodes or quits)
How can everybody be enlightened and not know it ?
How is it that you are everybody and everything ? ..and they/it are you, but nothing is separate ?
Why does vince's story of Ix result in warm, fuzzy feelings, (in the vince organism) when it is entirely 'self' contained ?

i guess IX is seeking some sort of "oh"...

That might, or might not happen. It didn't for vince, yet there is no doubt that the dream of most, that there is an independent, separate Self, is the delusion responsible for most of the worlds suffering. It is SEEn clearly how this works. (i think you SEE that too)
When you get to the top of the mountain,(even if you think it's not very high) to keep trying to climb higher, robs you of appreciation for the summit.

love

vince

[vinceschubert]

Ha, this jumped out this morning;
This quote from Rupert Spira:
"All thoughts that revolve around an imaginary, inside self leave an echo or imprint in the body. As a result, the body becomes a safe refuge for the sense of separation, long after the belief in a separate self has dissolved."
For me, it points to the continuation in automatic thoughts/reactions of an apparent separate self after 'seeing through the illusion'.

xx