Thread for Douglita

[jowate]

Hi D,

It’s very, very simple and there’s nothing to ‘get’. When it’s seen in direct experience that no (unchanging, separate, substantial, whatever qualification the mind provides…) ‘self’ is to be found, that’s it!

This is very obvious (obvious that it’s obvious to you, from what you write). What you might still need to ask / explore is: whether or where any doubts or beliefs about this direct knowing still lurk. They will emerge contingently, supposing they are there of course, and the direct pointing has the effect of revealing them.

I'm always happy with the recognition of what seems true. Can this be right? Surely there should be more of a struggle, a resistance, a fight-back from a persistent or pernicious self-view?

Seeing-knowing directly what is true, in the sense of indisputable, beyond doubt, is liberation in this moment from the beliefs and doubts that are stress, unsatisfactoriness. There is no ‘should’ – i.e. different bundles of conditioning aka ‘people’ (!) have different responses. The assumption that there ‘should’ be some particular response can be one of the things that can cover up the simple knowing of the simple truth.

The view of non-self is like an old friend smiling; a relief, a pleasure, something to welcome . So I don't know if I'm on the right track or barking up the wrong tree with this. What does it sound like to you?

Sounds like you’re very much on the right track. But it’s worth continuing just to clarify whether doubts-beliefs remain.

Look at this: there is no entity, no ‘thing’ here or anywhere. There never has been. It’s evidently clear that there is no entity ‘here’ but is there an ‘entity’ in others, or elsewhere?

Look at the ‘sphere’ of awareness-arisings now. Is there any separate anything? Is there a separate ‘watcher’?

T.x

[Douglita]

Hi T,

Many hanks for that. I missed your reply of this morning as I had not yet discovered 'page 2' /:-). So I will have I will look at all this tomorrow and reply later. Gratitude, D x

[Douglita]

Hi T,

I will look at this one

There is no entity, no ‘thing’ here or anywhere. There never has been. It’s evidently clear that there is no entity ‘here’ but is there an ‘entity’ in others, or elsewhere?

But this morning I mainly looked at this one:

Look at the ‘sphere’ of awareness-arisings now. Is there any separate anything? Is there a separate ‘watcher’?

I'm about to go to Ikea for a big shopping trip later and I found a whole strand of me that was trying to keep separate and wasn't interested in investigating but was more like a 'wanter' than 'watcher'. Was aware this part feels inadequate and deprived…."I never get what I want." "If only I got this thing or this or this." It's just like my six year old son with constant desire for toys and dissatisfaction with what he has. "I'm bloody angry. If I get I will be happy." So there's a dialogue: "Yes but who will they make happy?" "Me, ME, ME , ME you fool!" "Who's me?" "STUPID; ME!" Then 'it' says: " I'm happy. I'm crying." "Why are you happy?" "Because I'm going shopping later. No it's because you're talking to me. Can you keep me company?" "Yes I can.". So this is maybe more in the realm of psychology but I have come across this deprivation mentality 'part' of me before and it has a strong will - can seem like the driver. As I included it fully there was more space/humour/fluidity in it and it became less of a hard ball of 'entity' and less separate seeming. So it is energy, emotion, will. Volition, samskaras I am engaging with. I found this verse of the Dhammapada:
'Seeking but not finding the housebuilder,
I have traveled through the round of countless births.
How painful is birth over and over again.
Oh housebuilder! You have now been caught!
You shall not build a house again.
Your rafters have been broken. Your ridgepole demolished.
The unconditioned consciousness has been attained.
And every kind of craving has been destroyed.'
(Dhammapāda, verses 153,154)

So unlike the Buddha I am samskara driven but I have 'caught' the housebuilder and we are in dialogue :-D And yet, and yet I see that this is also true:

Seeing-knowing directly what is true, in the sense of indisputable, beyond doubt, is liberation in this moment from the beliefs and doubts that are stress, unsatisfactoriness.

I found what you wrote there very moving, very TRUE, But I have a doubt due to habitual thinking that truth is ever attainable over there, somewhere else, in the future and the fact that samskaras/cravings are strong and catch me continually. So I can have freedom and chains but I feel like I am looking out of my prison window, which maybe has a nice terrace outside I can even sit in sometimes and be among the flowers and bees, but how do I break out lastingly?

D x

[jowate]

Hi D,

I found a whole strand of me that was trying to keep separate and wasn't interested in investigating but was more like a 'wanter' than 'watcher'

What you’re observing there are essentially habit-energies (samskaras). Habit-energies are self-perpetuating – in both senses (though bear in mind they only perpetuate the view of a ‘self’, not a really-existing self). The point with what we're doing here is to look and see them for what they are: ‘automatic’ mental habit patterns that further thoughts are labelling ‘me’ etc.

Can you see these habit-patterns attributing ‘self’ to themselves? Can you seen that this is simply another self-perpetuating habit pattern, a mere conditional arising, impersonal?

So this is maybe more in the realm of psychology but I have come across this deprivation mentality 'part' of me before and it has a strong will - can seem like the driver. As I included it fully there was more space/humour/fluidity in it and it became less of a hard ball of 'entity' and less separate seeming.

The operative word there is ‘seem’ like the driver. Look at it directly: is it the ‘driver’ or is it just habitual mental patterns that are believed to be the driver?

The second part of that observation is good – including it, turning towards it. Then it can be ‘seen’ clearly for what it is – not an ‘entity’ at all.

I found what you wrote there very moving, very TRUE, But I have a doubt due to habitual thinking that truth is ever attainable over there, somewhere else, in the future and the fact that samskaras/cravings are strong and catch me continually. So I can have freedom and chains but I feel like I am looking out of my prison window, which maybe has a nice terrace outside I can even sit in sometimes and be among the flowers and bees, but how do I break out lastingly?

Did you mean something more like ‘I have a doubt due to habitual thinking that truth is only ever attainable over there, somewhere else…’?

Anyway, I think the meaning is clear enough. As for breaking out lastingly, we need to move, soon, onto some investigation in direct experience into this belief about ‘samskaras/ cravings’. In one sense they are strong, but it can be seen directly that these thoughts-with-emotions are actually virtually nothing at all, like morning mist dissolving in the sun.

Meanwhile, don’t forget:

There is no entity, no ‘thing’ here or anywhere. There never has been. It’s evidently clear that there is no entity ‘here’ but is there an ‘entity’ in others, or elsewhere?

T.x

[Douglita]

Can you see these habit-patterns attributing ‘self’ to themselves? Can you seen that this is simply another self-perpetuating habit pattern, a mere conditional arising, impersonal?

I saw that these habit patterns have a strong 'wrapping around themselves' tendency, grasping, willing, creating a continuing story and reacting out of past stories. It felt very like a 'self' in-as-much as it had a big story about it's 'self'... but it was more like encountering a moving phantom, at times a powerful, rapid ghost-like 'force' and at times more like a part played by an actor, a character convincingly assumed for the sake of the 'play' .

The operative word there is ‘seem’ like the driver. Look at it directly: is it the ‘driver’ or is it just habitual mental patterns that are believed to be the driver?

I want to do more observation of this because I think I need more direct grappling with it. But I think I've seen through the 'driver' idea to a fair degree.

There is no entity, no ‘thing’ here or anywhere. There never has been. It’s evidently clear that there is no entity ‘here’ but is there an ‘entity’ in others, or elsewhere?

I have been looking at this since you suggested it. I had already been 'testing the waters' in the days before this by reflecting that my son has no self - no fixed, essential, permanent 'entity'. I expected to find this more challenging than 'me' as obviously I am very attached to my young son, and I suppose it's a truism that parents see their children as extensions of themselves, but found it surprisingly easy to see that this is true about him having no ''entity'. Widening this out to awareness of anyone and everyone I encounter, I see consciousness that wants to be happy, seeking this and seeking that, all with stories about who they are...shaping their lives as well as they are able to maintain and further that. On the one hand seeing others in the light of this reflection 'abstracted' them more. I would see beauty and ugliness and all in between interwoven. On the other hand I felt tender towards and connected with others as I feel and see we are all in the same boat, thinking we're in separate and very important little boats!

Did you mean something more like ‘I have a doubt due to habitual thinking that truth is only ever attainable over there, somewhere else…’?

Yes I meant that it is a habitual thought. I am tired just now so I'm not sure I can follow this more for this evening.

we need to move, soon, onto some investigation in direct experience into this belief about ‘samskaras/ cravings’.

I'm happy to do this.

D x

[jowate]

Thanks, D - I'm tired too so I'll respond tomorrow :)
T.x

[jowate]

Hi D,

I saw that these habit patterns have a strong 'wrapping around themselves' tendency, grasping, willing, creating a continuing story and reacting out of past stories. It felt very like a 'self' in-as-much as it had a big story about it's 'self'... but it was more like encountering a moving phantom, at times a powerful, rapid ghost-like 'force' and at times more like a part played by an actor, a character convincingly assumed for the sake of the 'play' .

Good observing there – ‘a moving phantom’ – nice image.

T: The operative word there is ‘seem’ like the driver. Look at it directly: is it the ‘driver’ or is it just habitual mental patterns that are believed to be the driver?

D: I want to do more observation of this because I think I need more direct grappling with it. But I think I've seen through the 'driver' idea to a fair degree.

Ok, keep this in mind and report your ‘findings’.

Good observations around the entity-less-ness of your son too.

… On the one hand seeing others in the light of this reflection 'abstracted' them more. I would see beauty and ugliness and all in between interwoven. On the other hand I felt tender towards and connected with others as I feel and see we are all in the same boat, thinking we're in separate and very important little boats!

Yes, that suggests a clearer ‘seeing’ to me.

Now, looking at these ‘complexes’ of thoughts-with-emotions. Firstly, let’s look at the thought / mental activity part. Remember that our only concern here is to see, directly in experience, that these are not self. It doesn’t matter particularly what the content of the thought is as we’re not investigating this – it will be some kind of story. Often a painful kind of story that has corresponding painful feelings/emotions in the body.

So look in direct experience: can a ‘self’ that decides to tell one of these painful stories be detected?

Can any kind of ‘prior decision’ to think that particular thought (or any particular thought) be found, experientially? In other words, does it arise from ‘you’, a self, ‘I’, or does it just arise, presumably out of a whole complex of conditions which are out of ‘your’ control?

If you bring attention directly to the thought that is happening now, what happens to it?

Ok, that will do for now – if you could look carefully, and let me know your responses and observations that will be great.

T.x

[Douglita]

Hi T and many thanks for your post and reflecting back. Just an observation here but I find this process invaluable and am struck by yours and other's generosity in doing this guiding. :-) I feel things are changing...

I have to get my son ready for bed now and probably go to bed myself soon after, but just wanted to clarify what you were referring to when you wrote:

Now, looking at these ‘complexes’ of thoughts-with-emotions

Were you referring to the previous stuff about looking at samskaras or is this a 'new' one about observing any thoughts--with-emotions (as you put it) that arise? It would be good to know if possible before I start on this tomorrow but if you can't get back to me before then I'll just find a way to engage with it.

D x

[jowate]

Now, looking at these ‘complexes’ of thoughts-with-emotions

Were you referring to the previous stuff about looking at samskaras or is this a 'new' one about observing any thoughts--with-emotions (as you put it) that arise? It would be good to know if possible before I start on this tomorrow but if you can't get back to me before then I'll just find a way to engage with it.

D x

I'm talking about the same area (trying to avoid Sanskrit terms!) sankhara is sometimes translated 'complex' - I also refer to them as habits' and 'habit energy' - the 'habit' is a repeated, 'entrenched' mental-emotional tendency, which is arising in dependence on conditions, not in dependence on non-existent 'entities' (big clue there)!

T.x

[Douglita]

Thanks T.

I had a busy and very anxious day and didn't make much headway with these (or maybe that's just a thought ;-)), despite meditating briefly twice, although I was letting the questions ruminate throughout the day when I remembered them. In the 2nd sit I was able to catch up with the speediness of my mind enough to 'run' with it more, and when I wasn't getting bundled along with the thoughts and reactions and finding no self within them had moments of pure joy. I find not finding self very freeing and joyful. I'll have another go tomorrow with looking "carefully, and let me know your responses and observations".

D x

[jowate]

Hi D,

That's good - look forward to your observations tomorrow :)

T.x

[Douglita]

Having a tricky time issue here as K abroad, alone with kid and no transport today I had to make two journeys and doctor's visit which ended up taking 3 hours longer than anticipated so no chance to engage with this and knackered now. A local mum has offered to take young one with her kids tomorrow (school hols here) so after work tomorrow a.m there will finally be some non-me time ;-)

D x

[jowate]

:-)

[Douglita]

Hi T, hope you're well,

The operative word there is ‘seem’ like the driver. Look at it directly: is it the ‘driver’ or is it just habitual mental patterns that are believed to be the driver?

My mind wriggled here quite a bit and when I couldn't find a 'driver' wanted to come up with an alternative such as 'overseer' or 'overall manager' or even 'intelligence', as I was struck that although there was not an 'entity' as such there seems to be a will and organising principle at work that both oversees what's going on and directs. When I looked deeper at this I could certainly see habitual mental patterns and different aspects of intelligence or awareness but still no 'I' behind it or above it all.

So look in direct experience: can a ‘self’ that decides to tell one of these painful stories be detected?

This was a poky one! I got down to a gut level which felt quite murky with a particular story attached about not being able to enjoy myself and 'having' to be anxious. It felt like a deep patterning that was engrained in my body, emotions and mind. I tried staying with the experience in the sense of being less interested in the story attached to it and more trying to detect a self in the whole complex of experience. It wasn't there! This was both not a surprise and a kind of surprise, as I realise I am used to identifying with this patterning/set of feelings/emotions and set of thoughts.

Can any kind of ‘prior decision’ to think that particular thought (or any particular thought) be found, experientially? In other words, does it arise from ‘you’, a self, ‘I’, or does it just arise, presumably out of a whole complex of conditions which are out of ‘your’ control?

This one is a wriggly one too, as I am aware that thoughts are being directed in-as-much as I was meditating and I was applying your questions to my experience…so there was direction and decisions going on, creating or leading me into other experiences. But going on the hunt for 'prior' decision was interesting as although I could say it was a prior decision to meditate and decide to focus on these questions - kind of intention or overall decision - there was no prior 'decider' Oh dear… is that even English? That is, I found the second way you framed the question easier to work with. I am aware I am capable of deciding and willing, but I cannot find any personhood, any quintessential I behind it.

I

f you bring attention directly to the thought that is happening now, what happens to it?

Seems to burst like a bubble, or move on pretty fast.

I have a doubt lurking after going through the above and I will try to articulate it because I want to pin it down: While I believe and accept that there is no 'doer of the deed' I still wonder if I've seen through it or merely 'thought through it'. However, I am doing these investigations in an open and non-intellectual way, attempting a truly open enquiry on an experiential level rather than from the 'head', and have been honest to myself and to you about what I have found, which is no self, I still somehow can't believe it and think I must be tricking myself somehow. I'm clever, so i think I'm 'just' being clever! This seems a bit of a crazy doubt, as whenever I have had more sustained glimpses of reality I have been struck most by the fact that consciousness seeks form and identifies with it but there is no identity, no separate self to call our own.

D x

[jowate]

Hi D,

Some very good and honest observations there!

I was struck that although there was not an 'entity' as such there seems to be a will and organising principle at work that both oversees what's going on and directs. When I looked deeper at this I could certainly see habitual mental patterns and different aspects of intelligence or awareness but still no 'I' behind it or above it all.

Another way to look at that ‘will’ or ‘organising principle’ is: is it anything other than conditionality?

(If everything arises in dependence on conditions, do those conditions themselves depend on a (belief in a non-existent) conceptual entity, ‘I’/’me’/’my-self’?)

Habitual mental patterns are ‘automatic’ and likewise where you observe “It felt like a deep patterning that was engrained in my body, emotions and mind” – but does that require this ‘self’ thingy?

‘Intelligence’ can be seen as a quality of awareness – but does awareness seem to be ‘me’ in that ‘personal’ sense?

I tried staying with the experience in the sense of being less interested in the story attached to it and more trying to detect a self in the whole complex of experience. It wasn't there! This was both not a surprise and a kind of surprise, as I realise I am used to identifying with this patterning/set of feelings/emotions and set of thoughts.

Very good! ‘I am used to identifying with’ could also be rendered ‘habitual thoughts identify themselves with…’.

This one is a wriggly one too, as I am aware that thoughts are being directed in-as-much as I was meditating and I was applying your questions to my experience…so there was direction and decisions going on,

This again describes a conditional-arising process. Look more carefully in direct experience at how these ‘decisions’ arise (any decisions, in fact). Is it a cool, logical thought process conducted by the all-controlling all-powerful ‘I’, or do they more ‘emerge’ from a mess of thoughts, emotions, distractions, sundry sense-arisings … ? (I know it’s obvious which I’m pointing to, but do look without prejudice, as much as you can.)

I am aware I am capable of deciding and willing, but I cannot find any personhood, any quintessential I behind it.

Exactly!

I have a doubt lurking after going through the above and I will try to articulate it because I want to pin it down: While I believe and accept that there is no 'doer of the deed' I still wonder if I've seen through it or merely 'thought through it'.

Yes, it’s not enough to ‘believe and accept’. But it looks to me that it’s gone further than that, and that it’s the doubt itself that is holding that back from being fully known / appreciated.

However, I am doing these investigations in an open and non-intellectual way, attempting a truly open enquiry on an experiential level rather than from the 'head', and have been honest to myself and to you about what I have found, which is no self, I still somehow can't believe it and think I must be tricking myself somehow. I'm clever, so i think I'm 'just' being clever!

The trickster mind is very clever! It is being tricksy, but the opposite way from what you think. That is, it’s holding its ground by promoting doubt in what is genuinely seen.

Well, that’s what I reckon – look at your experience directly to see whether that rings true.

T.x