Enough is enough!

[Bananafish]

Hi Bananafish, trust you have had a pleasant weekend!

Here it has been windy and wet, which meant quite a long time indoors, with some fruitful investigation...

Hi John! :) Thanks, I had a great weekend.

Still a bit mysterious, but, from two main angles:
LOOKing is triggered when there is a contraction, or a feeling of being off balance, not in the flow, maybe a situation that would have in the past triggered some kind of ego-referencing (but now it's merely conditioned response, but with no entity-illusion at its centre).
LOOKing is triggered, or rather opened up to, as a natural responding to what is happening, because, well, what else to do?

In general, there are fewer negative thoughts. I haven't noticed inner dialogues such as "stop being an idiot, John". Habitual self-remorse or self-belittling evaporate in thin air, there is nothing for them to stick to...

Ok, John, could you now give me a most straightforward answer?
Is there any subject that is prompting something?

I rested on Sunday after a light lunch (life seems in order when there is time to do this in the weekend:-)). LOOKing focused on the breathing - in a general way - like using the breath as an anchor in vipassana - and I noticed some control. This has often been a playful exploration when doing breathing meditation - if the breathing is not just happening, "I" would try to expose the 'breather'.
Now that the LOOKing doesn't presuppose a subject, this became just an easeful letting go, noticing what seemed to be the traces of a control mechanism, like seeing an empty throne where a (illusory) manipulative ruler used to sit. Traces of control, but no controller...

Does any kind of subject that controls exist?
Cut through the rhetoric and give me a very simple answer! :)

[John Millar]

Is there any subject that is prompting something?

NO!

Does any kind of subject that controls exist?
Cut through the rhetoric and give me a very simple answer! :)

NO!

[Bananafish]

Hehe, great job, John. :)

Now, tell me (with 100% honesty!) if anything like "I," "self," or "me" exists
as any form other than a thought.

Just to notice that it's perfectly OK if there is one.
That's better than telling a lie that you clearly saw it.

Above said, again,

Did you clearly see?

[John Millar]

Now, tell me (with 100% honesty!) if anything like "I," "self," or "me" exists
as any form other than a thought.

There's a sense of presence - awareness, well and good, but still, I'm afraid, an as yet ingrained association with this as 'I', even though such an identity has not been found, and now that the assumption has been dropped, things are much more easeful.

Now, tell me (with 100% honesty!) if anything like "I," "self," or "me" exists
as any form other than a thought.

Thanks for this prompt, Bananafish. The previous responses were difficult. I wanted to be succinct.
Recapping:

Is there any subject that is prompting something?

A 'YES' response felt, well, dead, ridiculous. 'NO' was true, in that there is no self or entity to be found, it,s a thought, an old and familiar garment, there is causation, i.e., the way this mind-body operates is conditioned, but a subject that prompts can't be found... hence, the 'NO' responses, but still, I can't honestly say that this has been truly, once-and-for-all, experientially seen. If something can't be found after so much LOOKing, if the thing is logically sound, the penny must drop some time!
Sorry about all the verbiage - just feel the need to express the conundrum - the dopey stubborn cunning of this selfing mechanism. There has been a couple of weeks now of no 'angst', no kind of heart-pang dissatisfaction - the need to accomplish, or whatever, but there is suspicion that the the ego-identity mechanism is lying dormant, lying low for a while. On the other hand, I may be projecting that clear SEEing must be accompanied by the whizz-bang fireworks of some of the meditation experiences this mind-body has experienced in the past. The NO responses were quite traumatic, and there was some incredible self-aggrandizing verbiage/fantasy running through the mind this morning, just thoughts, but surprisingly egotistic and self-important in nature - things are being stirred up!

So,

Did you clearly see?

No, not yet... a lot of loosening, a lot more ease, but not the real deal yet, but that is associated with some spiritual pretense, surely this meditator-for-30-years will get a bigger fanfare than just a shrugging off! (laughing)

[Bananafish]

There's a sense of presence - awareness, well and good, but still, I'm afraid, an as yet ingrained association with this as 'I', even though such an identity has not been found, and now that the assumption has been dropped, things are much more easeful.

I can't honestly say that this has been truly, once-and-for-all, experientially seen.

Thanks for the honesty, John! No problem at all, we can continue LOOKing ...

So, what makes this "association" happen, and with what (whom) is it associated?

there is suspicion that the the ego-identity mechanism is lying dormant, lying low for a while.

What is this "ego-identity mechanism"? Does it exist, just like machines, in reality, or is it
what you made up ... an imagination? How did you come to know that such a concrete thing exists?
Where is it located? Can you find any?

On the other hand, I may be projecting that clear SEEing must be accompanied by the whizz-bang fireworks of some of the meditation experiences this mind-body has experienced in the past.

The NO responses were quite traumatic, and there was some incredible self-aggrandizing verbiage/fantasy running through the mind this morning, just thoughts, but surprisingly egotistic and self-important in nature - things are being stirred up!

Those are just past, thoughts, or imagination. Aren't they? Can you LOOK?

a lot of loosening, a lot more ease, but not the real deal yet, but that is associated with some spiritual pretense, surely this meditator-for-30-years will get a bigger fanfare than just a shrugging off! (laughing)

Who is it that meditates?
"I" or ... ?

[John Millar]

Thanks for the honesty, John! No problem at all, we can continue LOOKing ...

:-)

So, what makes this "association" happen, and with what (whom) is it associated?

It seems to arise from a sense of familiarity (like an old garment or guise), which erroneously implies a sense of self!' Awareness just is, but ownership is somehow made up, imagined - conditional responses/reactions?

What is this "ego-identity mechanism"? Does it exist, just like machines, in reality, or is it
what you made up ... an imagination?

Forgive the mechanistic analogies! As a child I used to project agency into machines (a fear of machines is one reason behind the engineering role... hmmm, the conquering fear routine from youth may be why this LOOKing is so drawn out...) Ego-identity mechanism. A construct for sure! A causal process..

How did you come to know that such a concrete thing exists?
Where is it located? Can you find any?

Conditioned assumptions, taken in by the selfing game projected onto this being since childhood? No fixed location, like an ephemeral ghost in the machine... Can't find any, so why the assumption? There are no grounds for this delusion, so why the obstinacy (physically felt, a shield around the heart)...
Working quite intensely now, on research. LOOKing, from time to time:-)

[Bananafish]

It seems to arise from a sense of familiarity (like an old garment or guise), which erroneously implies a sense of self!' Awareness just is, but ownership is somehow made up, imagined - conditional responses/reactions?

Can a sense have a subject behind it? Who is it that implies it? Who reacts?
Does the "I" make up the "I"? Can the "I" do anything?

Forgive the mechanistic analogies! As a child I used to project agency into machines (a fear of machines is one reason behind the engineering role... hmmm, the conquering fear routine from youth may be why this LOOKing is so drawn out...) Ego-identity mechanism. A construct for sure! A causal process..

Yes, just a process ...

Conditioned assumptions, taken in by the selfing game projected onto this being since childhood? No fixed location, like an ephemeral ghost in the machine... Can't find any, so why the assumption? There are no grounds for this delusion, so why the obstinacy (physically felt, a shield around the heart)...
Working quite intensely now, on research. LOOKing, from time to time:-)

Please, keep LOOKing. :)
You're doing very well, John. Keep the good work!

[John Millar]

Can a sense have a subject behind it?

No:-) A complex nerve and neural processing, no subject to be found... OK, sense in the sense it was used in 'a sense of familiarity' is more emotional than a pure sense (touching, hearing, etc.), but still, feelings, emotions, dependent arisings, but not dependent on a 'self'...

Who is it that implies it?

Seems to come from the head or heart regions - processing centres, control centres for much of what happens in this mind-body, but the vast majority of what happens is distributed, anyway, no self...

Who reacts?

Reacting is just part of the circus...

Does the "I" make up the "I"?

No (with some reverberation from the depth), the making up of the "I" is a deep, but nevertheless conditioned arising, part of the circus (but this is striking a deep chord of fear, almost anguish-->opening, suffering-->smiling)

Can the "I" do anything?

There is some reacting, but no - ouch!

Yes, just a process ...

Yes! Now LOOKing with less assumption that there is something to be changed or worked out...

Please, keep LOOKing. :)
You're doing very well, John. Keep the good work!

Thanks, Bananafish! Still LOOKing. Important to not let selfing coagulate around the fruition that this process has brought about so far, or rather, keep LOOKing as 'selfing' or whatever is happening! There 'never was any self'? Really! Wow!

[Bananafish]

Hi John, I've been quite busy all day, so I couldn't send you a reply.
Sorry, but I'm sure I can write to you tomorrow. :)

[John Millar]

That's fine, Bananafish! Things are going fine!
Greetings from the cold dark north!

[Bananafish]

Hi there!

No:-) A complex nerve and neural processing, no subject to be found... OK, sense in the sense it was used in 'a sense of familiarity' is more emotional than a pure sense (touching, hearing, etc.), but still, feelings, emotions, dependent arisings, but not dependent on a 'self'...

Nice. :)

Seems to come from the head or heart regions - processing centres, control centres for much of what happens in this mind-body, but the vast majority of what happens is distributed, anyway, no self...

Is the "no self" you are referring to a mere idea, or do you feel it as real?
Can you describe?

Reacting is just part of the circus...

What do you mean by "circus?" Can you describe?

No (with some reverberation from the depth), the making up of the "I" is a deep, but nevertheless conditioned arising, part of the circus (but this is striking a deep chord of fear, almost anguish-->opening, suffering-->smiling)

What do you mean by "deep?" Is that a sort of imagination?
Again, can you describe?

There is some reacting, but no - ouch!

Yes, yes, some reacting ... any reactor?

[John Millar]

Is the "no self" you are referring to a mere idea, or do you feel it as real?
Can you describe?

In this context, 'no self' just means no 'self' can be found, so 'no self' is more like a deduction than a visceral experiencing. As there have been several true but transient 'no self' experiences in the past (as a youngster, as a musician, in the 4th Jana, etc., etc.), there is a sober realisation that the 'no self' referred to above is not the real McCoy! OK, given that the past memories of 'no-self' experiences were passing, maybe they were not the 'real McCoy' either - but they provide a kind of experiential yard-stick, and egotistical clinging, and spiritual pretense...
Hmmm. Another attempt: When there is LOOKing, and islands of assumed self-hood dissipate, that is visceral, i.e., not academic, but it's a bit like looking under a stone on the beach, no treasure there, but maybe there is under another one not yet noticed... All a bit stupid, as no LOOKer can be found either (underneath the persisting assumption that this mind-body must enclose one), but it seems more LOOKing is required, and more refinement in the LOOKing (letting go of assumptions, letting go of the 'let goer')...

What do you mean by "circus?" Can you describe?

'Circus' somehow seems a bit loose as an analogy. A bit untidy, some humour, cause-effect/action-reaction sequences, but no real entity, only make-believe characters.

What do you mean by "deep?" Is that a sort of imagination?
Again, can you describe?

The 'reverberation from the depth' was a real visceral experience, meaning that your question 'Does the "I" make up the "I"?' was/is disturbing - strikes deep, that's a good one, still fertile 'Does the "I" make up the "I"?'...
The statement in the middle of all that, 'the making up of the "I" is a deep, but nevertheless conditioned arising...' means hidden or subconscious - not yet SEEN, but is just pontification. So, yes, it is an inference, an imagination. Let's test out 'Does the "I" make up the "I"?', because that still cuts deep! There's pain here, behind the belly, in the spine, binding the heart, shaking, easing - a fairly stereotypical Vipassana type clearing sequence (this sort of stuff is usually non-verbal - just putting words onto it for communication). A bit tired, so I rest a while (luxury of being in 'research' mode with simulations running and no-one bothering).... Here again, reviewing all this, still a pang of pain in the central column, presence, typing, a surface sense of the body, the face, noticing the fingers, the letters appearing on the screen... Aware of a mental probing, why is not finding an "I" not the same as realising non-self? Feeling of being caught out by the teacher in school, not knowing the answer, breathing, belly against the desk, sit up straighter, playing with posture - a good posture to rest the arm with the frozen shoulder seems to bring the body too close to the desk and restrict the breathing, aware of clutter.
This 'self' thing. 'Me'. 'John'. Where? Trying to find a self is the same as trying to freeze a dynamic processing. Is realising Anatta the same as realising Anicca (impermanence)? Who cares! Still somehow trying to make a battle of this, get in there and sort things out... Who can sort what out?

Yes, yes, some reacting ... any reactor?

No reactor, and the reacting is helpful - for some directed LOOKing, and another indication that the gateless gate has not yet been reached, but what a ride this is!

[Bananafish]

Hi John. :)

Been pretty busy again ... sorry for the late reply.
I promise I'll write you back as soon as possible.
Be well, keep LOOKing!

Bananafish

[John Millar]

Don't worry, Bananafish!

I've been very busy too. One interesting and positive observation was that last Friday, I was late leaving from work to go to a Christmas party and found that the bus no longer left from the same bus-stop. Normally, something like that would have prompted a bit of annoyance (probably not so noticeable on the outside - the name is John Millar not John McCenroe - but I would have had a good complaining session!). There was no reaction at all to this inconvenience. I noticed that the verbalisation was ready to start up, "why hasn't anyone informed us of the change in bus routing, etc.", but the verbalisation was just seen as a rather empty habit-pattern, there was no self-referencing or self-pitying angst behind it, and the verbalisation evaporated before it even got going. This may just have been mindfulness arising at the right time and nipping the thing in the bud, but it seemed that there was no self for anything to hang onto... Nothing whizz-bang or altered-state about this, just a sober clarity!

OK! Still LOOKing!

Be well and happy!
John

[Bananafish]

Hi John!
Sorry for the delay ... lets' start. :)

it seems more LOOKing is required, and more refinement in the LOOKing (letting go of assumptions, letting go of the 'let goer')...

Can you refine the LOOKing? Who told you that?
Has LOOKing become something like a training for you?

When you LOOK, what is it that makes you feel you need
more refined version of LOOKing? Isn't it a sheer illusion?

This 'self' thing. 'Me'. 'John'. Where? Trying to find a self is the same as trying to freeze a dynamic processing. Is realising Anatta the same as realising Anicca (impermanence)? Who cares! Still somehow trying to make a battle of this, get in there and sort things out... Who can sort what out?

I'm afraid you are complicating things here. Yes, "Who cares?"
Literally, WHO IS IT THAT CARES?

LOOKing is simple, John.
Throw out all those Anatta or Anicca or Sunyata ... whatever ... verviage (sorry for the use of
this kind of strong word) and ...

JUST LOOK, please. Feel the sound, the touch, the smell, see the sight,
and LOOK if there's any subject that is doing them.

No reactor, and the reacting is helpful - for some directed LOOKing, and another indication that the gateless gate has not yet been reached, but what a ride this is!

What is that "indication?"
Who told you that the gate should be "reached?"