Requesting guidance

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

They are experienced in the body. By the body.

The body is an entity that 'experiences' these things? This needs investigating.

Physical sensations & emotion are related to the body, but they are not experienced 'by the body'. The physical sensation of pain in my neck, or tightness in my chest, or bubbling in my tummy are not felt by the neck, chest or tummy. The sensation hangs in it own territory. The mind labels it as body. The mind/thoughts might labels it as 'self' but certainly the mind/thoughts have something to comment on the sensation and often this commenting is what often gets labeled as 'self'. But it is not 'me', it just says it is 'me'.

This seems to me like intellectual explanation. We need to go deeper than this.

What do you say?


Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

The body is an entity that 'experiences' these things? This needs investigating.

I don't stand over that statement any more.

Sensations just exist. It is the mind that puts the label on the sensation that they are part of the body. But when I can create some separation between the mind and sensations then it is clear that sensation experiences stand alone.
With repeated practice of this exercise the mind is calming down a little, but still busy making it difficult to hold focus. But when that space is created it is then clear that the experience stands on its own.

Regards,
M

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

. The body is an entity that 'experiences' these things? This needs investigating.
I don't stand over that statement any more.

Why not? Weren't you speaking from experience when you said this?

. But when I can create some separation between the mind and sensations then it is clear that sensation experiences stand alone.

How do you go about creating separation?

What do you actually do to achieve it?

What makes it necessary?

. the mind is calming down a little, but still busy making it difficult to hold focus.

Hold focus?


love,

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon.
A bit tied up yesterday and today, will try write tonight or tomorrow.
Regards M

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,
Sorry for delay, been a bit busy and also quite run down yesterday.

"The body is an entity that 'experiences' these things?
This needs investigating.
I don't stand over that statement any more. "
Why not? Weren't you speaking from experience when you said this?

Yes, I was speaking from experience. Then through inquiry insight the experience changes. At a glance the experience may be, the sensation resides in and is noticed in/by the body. If I give it more than a glance and see if that really is the case, then I note a separation between the sensation and the idea of the sensation residing in the body. So I guess both are true, I experience it in the body and I experience it as standing alone. The difference between these two is 'look and see' (inquiry), and how much focus is needed depends from time to time.

But when I can create some separation between the mind and sensations then it is clear that sensation experiences stand alone.
How do you go about creating separation?
What do you actually do to achieve it?

Off the top of my head there are two ways:
1) Focus on the sensation, where is it? Then ask that what is/or who is, experiencing it. Then look again, more closely, 'is that really the case?' This sometimes leads into the second way.
2) Trying to focus on the sensation - and focus isn't easy lately - then look and see what is sensation and what is not sensation, i.e. activity of the mind. Get everything that is not the sensation to give some space to the sensation. Look and see what is sensation, and what is other stuff. Find the boundary/border/line between the sensation and everything else (mind/thoughts/visions...) - the line between 'existence' and 'self'. When I can clearly see the boundary, then I can see clearly that the sensation is the sensation and it is the mind that categories it as experienced by the body.
The mind does have reactions to the sensation, but it does not seem accurate to say that the mind is the receiver or the creator, or the experiencer of the sensations - of course this is easy to see once the differentiation between the sensation and the mind is being observed and this differentiation is not as easily achieved as it was a few weeks ago.

What makes it necessary?

I don't know. I don't see myself as making an enemy of the mind/thoughts - you warned me about that some time ago and I'm careful not to do that - but I guess it is something about being able to look at the mind (while getting caught in the cycle that it is the mind that is trying to look at itself). Answer to your question is, I don't know, and I also am not sure I fully understand the meaning of the question.

...the mind is calming down a little, but still busy making it difficult to hold focus.
Hold focus?

I am trying. As a general comment, admittedly it is very interesting how the pace of the mind has changed and how it is actually quite a struggle to hold focus on these exercises. As if the mind is suddenly acting like a strong willed toddler who does not want to eat what is being put in front of him. I've reestablished a meditation schedule again, to support the focus. Again commenting generally, It doesn't feel like a strong battle or an important quest - what happens in this is what happens in this - maybe I should push it more, but...

In terms of practicalities, I am off to W Africa again on Wednesday for 10 days. I think what could work is me doing the exercises albeit will have less two way feedback between us, than we have when I am home - if that is ok with you?

Regards,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Just to respond, very briefly, to your post. Yes, why don't we pick up the inquiry again once you are back from W. Africa.?

Hope you have a great and rewarding time.

All best wishes

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,
I hope you are well.
I am back from my trip, disappointingly it did not go as planned and unfortunately ended prematurely - but that is ok too.
If you are still open and available I would like to continue with inquiry - if not then that is ok too.

To give a summary report;
On an intellectual/cognitive level I am secure in my believe that there is no 'self'. However I do not really get it on a gut level. I've been activating the antenna of checking in on a daily basis of 'what experiences this sensation?...' When I ask the question it does NOT seem to be able to penetrate as it once used to - maybe it is from repetition as you suggested before, (this this does concern me a little). I do not have any sense of there being anyone in control but there remains a 'sense of self'. The sense of self can be characterized by the body as self, this seems to be propped up by a belief/idea. Alternatively, sense of self can be characterized by thought processes/mind.

I do continue to feel very content with more feelings of happiness than I have ever been familiar with - and when I do have a dip in mood I feel confident it will rise again supported by feelings of self compassion which is now easier as I don't really believe my own thoughts. I don't have the same level of fight or push in working against the 'sense of self' as I did prior to mid October - I am not sure if this is a good or if it is a bad thing???. I fear it might slow down progress in gaining clarity, yet I like this sense of not having to push myself.

Warmest Regards,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Of course, let's continue with the inquiry.

I don't really believe my own thoughts. I don't have the same level of fight or push in working against the 'sense of self' as I did prior to mid October

As long at there is a wish to look and see that there isn't a self this is fine.

On an intellectual/cognitive level I am secure in my believe that there is no 'self'. However I do not really get it on a gut level.

This is what we must address now.

The sense of self can be characterized by the body as self, this seems to be propped up by a belief/idea.

We'll look here.

Today, perhaps over a couple of days, look for moments when it seems that the body is 'me' or 'me' is the body. It may be sensation or thought but notice the identification. Notice particular instances and let me know.

Try the following:

When sitting down somewhere, notice the sensation or sensations where 'body meets chair'. This could be experienced in various ways as warmth, pressure or other sensations. The labels for the sensations don't matter but noticing how it feels does. It helps to close the eyes.

Now, is there 'a body'? Is there 'my body'. What is the actual experience of these sensations? Is there 'a body' ? Is there 'me'?

Probably there are thoughts about the experience. Interpretations. Are these thoughts the sensations of sitting or are they thoughts about it, 'me' 'self' 'body'?


Just to let you know, I will be out of touch at least on Friday and over the week-end but back again early next week



love

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

As long at there is a wish to look and see that there isn't a self this is fine.

Yes, there is much bigger part of 'me' wanting to look than there is a part of 'me' that wants to avoid looking.

Today, perhaps over a couple of days, look for moments when it seems that the body is 'me' or 'me' is the body. It may be sensation or thought but notice the identification. Notice particular instances and let me know.

On noticing today I am inclined to conclude that the 'me' is a message from the mind, from thoughts. This needs more time and enquiry to be certain.

When sitting down somewhere, notice the sensation or sensations where 'body meets chair'. This could be experienced in various ways as warmth, pressure or other sensations. The labels for the sensations don't matter but noticing how it feels does. It helps to close the eyes.

Now, is there 'a body'? Is there 'my body'. What is the actual experience of these sensations? Is there 'a body' ? Is there 'me'?

Probably there are thoughts about the experience. Interpretations. Are these thoughts the sensations of sitting or are they thoughts about it, 'me' 'self' 'body'?

There appear to be three categories, pure sensation, the knowing that 'a body' exists, and finally the identification with body - fluctuation between them in the exercises. The latter two seem to be associated with a visual image of the body.

Note: I tend to lose focus on the contact with the chair as there are lots of sensations (strong sensations) in the body.

I 'll continue with these exercises for the next few days.

Regards,
M

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

On noticing today I am inclined to conclude that the 'me' is a message from the mind, from thoughts. This needs more time and enquiry to be certain.

I'm tempted to say this so I will... no. you don't. you don't need time to think about it. That's the very last thing that's needed from this quite simple point/moment of seeing that 'me' can only be a message from the mind.

Perhaps the mind wants 'certainty'?
Is 'certainty' needed? where bare reality is already noticed?

I 'll continue with these exercises for the next few days.

Good idea. I won't say 'don't think about it' but if there are lots of words, commentary, announcements, notice that none of these are the sensations that are happening.

The sensations (of sitting) are experienced directly. Thoughts appear. Both of these really happen. But is anything that thought narrates about any of this actually happening?


All the best,

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

I'm tempted to say this so I will... no. you don't. you don't need time to think about it. That's the very last thing that's needed from this quite simple point/moment of seeing that 'me' can only be a message from the mind.

Perfect, just what I need to be told, and retold. Thank you. Don't think about it - thoughts do exist just like sensations, but there is no merit in indulging them.

In terms of doing the exercise: When I am sitting and close my eyes and focus on the sensations of my contact with the chair and REALLY focus on that experience then there is nothing else. The questions, is there a body, is this my body, is this me? are met pure sensation. Met with the knowledge that it is the mind that says the sensation is in the body. It is the mind that categorises and transforms the sensation in to 'body'. The sensatins of being in the chair lose their boundry and blend into the experience of physical sensation generally and they can be quite strong. Quite nice actually. The perception that this is the body is contingent on the activity of the mind. Once in the sensation then there is no body, therefore no 'I am the body'. The mind/thoughts say that me is body.
[Interistingly all this is happening in the context of dealing with some work stress with corrosponding negative evaluations on me - this is relivent because in the past such evaluation stress was inclined to hamper the inquiry. ]
I think it would be good to keep up with this exercise for another few days - what do you think.

Enjoy your weekend if we do not get to communicate before hand.
Regards,
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

What you've written all sounds pretty positive.

In any exercise you do, whatever sensations you notice , what else, really, is going on?

Thoughts appear and at some stage disappear.

Is the content of thought, what thoughts are about, ever 'really happening' in the way that sensations of seeing, hearing, smell, touch and taste do eally happen?

Best wishes,

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

In any exercise you do, whatever sensations you notice , what else, really, is going on?

I am not sure I understand this question. Are you asking me to describe the other experiences I am having, IN ADDITION TO THE SENSATIONS?
If that is the question then the answer is that there are sensations all over my body, I put some effort into bringing focus back to the specific experiences of 'sitting', but there is somewhat an experience of blending that I don't get too hung up on. I do have thoughts, the main thing I notice is trying to keep focus on the experience of sitting/bodily sensation. There is a tendency to slip off and get distracted. Or there is a tendency to be caught in some sort of interpretative knowing about the meaning of the sensation. I have had a stressful week so today this brings up feelings of sadness which the mind gets pulled into. When I can hold focus (not VERY difficult) I can see that mind labels everything, interoperates everything, puts meaning on everything (either through words or images or just holding an alleged knowing). No this is not real but the mind seems to be convinced of it, or at best distracted by it.

Thoughts appear and at some stage disappear.
Is the content of thought, what thoughts are about, ever 'really happening' in the way that sensations of seeing, hearing, smell, touch and taste do eally happen?

No, thought content is not truth. It is an idea, a belief, a fluttering of words or images or meaning, all completely subjective and often very powerful and very convinced of its own legitimacy.

Hope you have a good weekend,
Best Wishes
Mic

[JonathanR]

Hi Mic,

Thanks. i had an interesting weekend.

There is a tendency to slip off and get distracted. Or there is a tendency to be caught in some sort of interpretative knowing about the meaning of the sensation.

Who or what is doing that?

No, thought content is not truth. It is an idea, a belief, a fluttering of words or images or meaning, all completely subjective and often very powerful and very convinced of its own legitimacy.

How can an idea be convinced 'of it's own legitimacy'? Does a thought think?


love

Jon

[Treelife]

Hi Jon,

There is a tendency to slip off and get distracted. Or there is a tendency to be caught in some sort of interpretative knowing about the meaning of the sensation.
Who or what is doing that?

Focusing on the body or the experience of sitting, is disturbed by distractions of other experiences - mostly thoughts. Often there is interpretation or meaning in the experience, even if not always thoughts (but thought are common). I am reluctant to talk about 'the mind', as such a phrase will give the impression that 'the mind' is an autonomous entity - which it isn't even though it may feel like it.
Who is doing it? This mental activity is the closest thing that I can now identify to a 'self'. [BUT 'sense of self' is again dissolving. However I am very cautions about this as I have been here before - a few times.]

How can an idea be convinced 'of it's own legitimacy'? Does a thought think?

Complicated question, and it pulls me into my mind. I guess it does not make sense that there is a duality in a thought. I guess a thought does not think. I understand from observing/experience that a thought just arises. BUT there is often an implicit assumption that the message/meaning within that thought represents truth. Or can I say that one thought has the idea that something is so, and another thought holds the idea that the first thought is a true thought.

I think that in order for me to answer these questions over the next few days, I will have to divert my attention more towards thoughts than the body.

Thanks Jon,

Mic