Hi Stacy,
I will reply to this tomorrow if that's okay.
Kind Regards,
Brian
Awakening from the Victim Concept
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Stacy,
Here are my answers:
The lie: I told my mom I was happy, carefree, didn't need anything, had forgotten my problems and that I felt totally present over the phone a couple of weeks back. The truth is that I felt depressed, anxious, worried, and overwhelmed.
I feel contracted tingling and throbbing in the solar plexus. I feel throbbing and heaviness in my neck. I feel tightness in my jaw. I feel tightness and pangs around the heart area. I feel heaviness and contraction in the belly. I feel a "buzzing" sensation around the head. My breathing is shallow.
I'll do one more just in case that wasn't correct:
The lie: I got stopped by the police yesterday for stealing money and cocaine from the Moroccan mafia after I beat the shit out of them.
I feel contraction and heaviness in the solar plexus. I feel a contracted heaviness in my gut. I feel tightness in my jaw. I feel contracted and tight in my shoulders. I feel a heaviness around the shoulders. My stomach feels rigid. I feel pangs in the middle of my stomach. I feel contracted and heavy around the throat. I feel tightness in my gut.
There comes a point when observing the sensations at which I can't tell what's going on anymore.
That is all for now I guess!
Best,
Brian
Here are my answers:
What is found?
The lie: I told my mom I was happy, carefree, didn't need anything, had forgotten my problems and that I felt totally present over the phone a couple of weeks back. The truth is that I felt depressed, anxious, worried, and overwhelmed.
I feel contracted tingling and throbbing in the solar plexus. I feel throbbing and heaviness in my neck. I feel tightness in my jaw. I feel tightness and pangs around the heart area. I feel heaviness and contraction in the belly. I feel a "buzzing" sensation around the head. My breathing is shallow.
I'll do one more just in case that wasn't correct:
The lie: I got stopped by the police yesterday for stealing money and cocaine from the Moroccan mafia after I beat the shit out of them.
I feel contraction and heaviness in the solar plexus. I feel a contracted heaviness in my gut. I feel tightness in my jaw. I feel contracted and tight in my shoulders. I feel a heaviness around the shoulders. My stomach feels rigid. I feel pangs in the middle of my stomach. I feel contracted and heavy around the throat. I feel tightness in my gut.
There comes a point when observing the sensations at which I can't tell what's going on anymore.
I do see that. I felt nauseous during both examples but I'm guessing that isn't DE (direct experiencing). So I omitted it for the purpose of the exercise.Do you see that?
That is all for now I guess!
Best,
Brian
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Great! Yes. Now try this:
Stream Exercise
Imagine for a moment a scene, one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high.
Consider in your mind's eye, if you can, how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side.
Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
1. Can you find anywhere where "Todd" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
3. Can anything be found for which 'Todd' is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
As always, relax & have fun!
Stream Exercise
Imagine for a moment a scene, one of a little mountain stream which is tumbling down a hillside gully, not far from its source. It has been raining and so the level is quite high.
Consider in your mind's eye, if you can, how it flows to the right over a little rock (where, had the level been lower, it would probably have gone around the rock), then the flow goes to the left over a tree bow, and then slows a little in a broader place, before splashing over a small cascade into a pool, and so on down the mountain side.
Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
1. Can you find anywhere where "Todd" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
3. Can anything be found for which 'Todd' is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
As always, relax & have fun!
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
(Substitute "Brian" for "Todd")
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Stacy,
The stream doesn't choose its directions. There are many contributing factors that choose its direction; the soil, gravity, the quantity of water, the water itself, the weather, the mountain etc.
It is not a separate entity from the rest of the conditions. There is no way to distinguish the stream as being "just the water" because it needs the soil. Neither is it "just the soil", or "just the features (rock, tree bow, cascade). I can't say that any aspect exists separate from the rest. Nor does the whole idea of a "stream" really exist separate from its parts but it is just a label for an idea. There is no part of the stream that constitutes its "essence" because the stream is an idea/thought.
It is indeed an ever-changing pattern with no constant quality that can be separated out.
"Brian" has no specific quality that can be separated out as a constant that defines "Brian". "Brian" is made of many qualities and conditions such as the body, the sound of his voice, his conditioning, his behaviors/choices, body language and character, thought etc. None of these aspects can be seen as a separate "decision-maker" or entity apart from the whole process or flow. "Brian" is simply all the elements. The only thing that can maybe be found as a constant is that which is watching it all happen and has no involvement. But even that is not autonomous or separate or distinct and is part of the overall flow and conditions to create "Brian". But all of that just makes an idea, "Brian" is just a thought about all these seeming conditions and contributors.
Today I decided to watch YouTube videos on starting an AI business. There is the remembering of a YouTube video I previously watched on the topic through thought. Then there is the use of the mouse, keyboard and computer to find that video again using the hands. There is the process of finding more information and videos on the topic using the same computer. There are the thoughts explaining my actions and what I am doing and should be doing. Before that, there were all the circumstances leading up to this decision. Getting out of bed, taking a shower, eating a pancake for breakfast, cleaning up cat messes, all the bodily sensations and interpreting them as emotions such as "inspiration". There were preferences for what videos to watch based on conditioning and thought processes. Was there a "decider" among all these processes? No apparent decider or distinct process that is autonomous or has authority over ALL the other factors. "I" have preferences like the motivation to make money, to want to eat, to feel important, the drive for a female mate etc. that make "me" want to watch these videos. There are environmental factors occurring, like the weather, my brother being away that might affect me in a certain way and drive me towards the decision to watch the videos. There is the fact that I had free time and no personal obligations to attend to. There are factors of purpose; wanting to live a better life, doing something "useful", the need to "build" something or impress people. There is even the way I react to the thought of watching the videos... and how that produces the response to want to do so. But it's not really "me" reacting but other conditions reacting. The "I" that is being alluded to cannot be separated out from all these processes. "I" react, "I" watch, "I" decide aren't as true as saying that reacting, watching, and deciding are happening like the water, soil, and flowing are happening for the stream. "I" doing all these things and having responsibility for countless, infinite factors seems impossible.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
There is no autonomous entity that is deciding because there is nothing separate from all the conditions that create a decision. Even if there is an "I", it can't be responsible for all the conditions that create an outcome or process. That means there is just the process happening.
There is no single process that is responsible for 'Brian'. If there was, that would just be another process and not a 'Brian'. 'Brian' does things according to all the conditions of life, his DNA, his thoughts etc. ad infinitum but there is no 'him' to claim it. There are just more processes, some of those might claim responsibility for the others. But it is still just a process.
Right now there is still the belief that 'Brian' is responsible for the conditions of his life such as what time he goes to bed. There is the belief that 'he' could change this. But there are infinite conditions going into bedtime tonight and the current circumstances. There isn't an autonomous entity in the processes happening. There is no evidence for that! All the evidence points to processes and conditions happening and they all fall under direct experiencing; thought, sound, color/image, taste, smell, sensation in terms of how they appear.
The only thing that it seems 'Brian' could be responsible for is experiencing. But even experiencing is another process! Wow! How can 'someone' be responsible for 'receiving experience' anyway? It's all just processes/streams. Hi Stacy,
The stream doesn't choose its directions. There are many contributing factors that choose its direction; the soil, gravity, the quantity of water, the water itself, the weather, the mountain etc.
It is not a separate entity from the rest of the conditions. There is no way to distinguish the stream as being "just the water" because it needs the soil. Neither is it "just the soil", or "just the features (rock, tree bow, cascade). I can't say that any aspect exists separate from the rest. Nor does the whole idea of a "stream" really exist separate from its parts but it is just a label for an idea. There is no part of the stream that constitutes its "essence" because the stream is an idea/thought.
It is indeed an ever-changing pattern with no constant quality that can be separated out.
"Brian" has no specific quality that can be separated out as a constant that defines "Brian". "Brian" is made of many qualities and conditions such as the body, the sound of his voice, his conditioning, his behaviors/choices, body language and character, thought etc. None of these aspects can be seen as a separate "decision-maker" or entity apart from the whole process or flow. "Brian" is simply all the elements. The only thing that can maybe be found as a constant is that which is watching it all happen and has no involvement. But even that is not autonomous or separate or distinct and is part of the overall flow and conditions to create "Brian". But all of that just makes an idea, "Brian" is just a thought about all these seeming conditions and contributors.
Today I decided to watch YouTube videos on starting an AI business. There is the remembering of a YouTube video I previously watched on the topic through thought. Then there is the use of the mouse, keyboard and computer to find that video again using the hands. There is the process of finding more information and videos on the topic using the same computer. There are the thoughts explaining my actions and what I am doing and should be doing. Before that, there were all the circumstances leading up to this decision. Getting out of bed, taking a shower, eating a pancake for breakfast, cleaning up cat messes, all the bodily sensations and interpreting them as emotions such as "inspiration". There were preferences for what videos to watch based on conditioning and thought processes. Was there a "decider" among all these processes? No apparent decider or distinct process that is autonomous or has authority over ALL the other factors. "I" have preferences like the motivation to make money, to want to eat, to feel important, the drive for a female mate etc. There are environmental factors occurring, like the weather, my brother being away that affect me in a certain way and drive me towards the decision to watch the videos. There is the fact that I had free time and no personal obligations to attend to. There are factors of purpose; wanting to live a better life, doing something "useful", the need to "build" something or impress people. There is even the way I react to the thought of watching the videos... and how that produces the response to want to do so. But it's not really "me" reacting but other conditions reacting. The "I" that is being alluded to cannot be separated out from all these processes. "I" react, "I" watch, "I" decide aren't as true as saying that reacting, watching, and deciding are happening like the water, soil, and flowing are happening for the stream. "I" doing all these things and having responsibility for countless, infinite factors seems impossible.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
There is no autonomous entity that is deciding because there is nothing separate from all the conditions that create a decision. Even if there is an "I", it can't be responsible for all the conditions that create an outcome or process. That means there is just the process happening.
There is no single process that is responsible for 'Brian'. If there was, that would just be another process and not a 'Brian'. 'Brian' does things according to all the conditions of life, his DNA, his thoughts etc. ad infinitum but there is no 'him' to claim it. There are just more processes, some of those might claim responsibility for the others. But it is still just a process.
Right now there is still the belief that 'Brian' is responsible for the conditions of his life such as what time he goes to bed. There is the belief that 'he' could change this. But there are infinite conditions going into bedtimes and the current circumstances. There isn't an autonomous entity in the processes happening. There is no evidence for that! All the evidence points to processes and conditions happening and they all fall under direct experiencing; thought, sound, color/image, taste, smell, sensation.
The only thing that it seems 'Brian' could be responsible for is experiencing. But even experiencing is another process! Wow!
The question does arise... what is watching? That still seems like the only constant. That's the only way change could be observed... from a constant!
That is all!
Kind Regards,
Brian
Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
The stream doesn't choose its directions. There are many contributing factors that choose its direction; the soil, gravity, the quantity of water, the water itself, the weather, the mountain etc.
It is not a separate entity from the rest of the conditions. There is no way to distinguish the stream as being "just the water" because it needs the soil. Neither is it "just the soil", or "just the features (rock, tree bow, cascade). I can't say that any aspect exists separate from the rest. Nor does the whole idea of a "stream" really exist separate from its parts but it is just a label for an idea. There is no part of the stream that constitutes its "essence" because the stream is an idea/thought.
It is indeed an ever-changing pattern with no constant quality that can be separated out.
1. Can you find anywhere where "Brian" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
"Brian" has no specific quality that can be separated out as a constant that defines "Brian". "Brian" is made of many qualities and conditions such as the body, the sound of his voice, his conditioning, his behaviors/choices, body language and character, thought etc. None of these aspects can be seen as a separate "decision-maker" or entity apart from the whole process or flow. "Brian" is simply all the elements. The only thing that can maybe be found as a constant is that which is watching it all happen and has no involvement. But even that is not autonomous or separate or distinct and is part of the overall flow and conditions to create "Brian". But all of that just makes an idea, "Brian" is just a thought about all these seeming conditions and contributors.
2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Today I decided to watch YouTube videos on starting an AI business. There is the remembering of a YouTube video I previously watched on the topic through thought. Then there is the use of the mouse, keyboard and computer to find that video again using the hands. There is the process of finding more information and videos on the topic using the same computer. There are the thoughts explaining my actions and what I am doing and should be doing. Before that, there were all the circumstances leading up to this decision. Getting out of bed, taking a shower, eating a pancake for breakfast, cleaning up cat messes, all the bodily sensations and interpreting them as emotions such as "inspiration". There were preferences for what videos to watch based on conditioning and thought processes. Was there a "decider" among all these processes? No apparent decider or distinct process that is autonomous or has authority over ALL the other factors. "I" have preferences like the motivation to make money, to want to eat, to feel important, the drive for a female mate etc. that make "me" want to watch these videos. There are environmental factors occurring, like the weather, my brother being away that might affect me in a certain way and drive me towards the decision to watch the videos. There is the fact that I had free time and no personal obligations to attend to. There are factors of purpose; wanting to live a better life, doing something "useful", the need to "build" something or impress people. There is even the way I react to the thought of watching the videos... and how that produces the response to want to do so. But it's not really "me" reacting but other conditions reacting. The "I" that is being alluded to cannot be separated out from all these processes. "I" react, "I" watch, "I" decide aren't as true as saying that reacting, watching, and deciding are happening like the water, soil, and flowing are happening for the stream. "I" doing all these things and having responsibility for countless, infinite factors seems impossible.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
There is no autonomous entity that is deciding because there is nothing separate from all the conditions that create a decision. Even if there is an "I", it can't be responsible for all the conditions that create an outcome or process. That means there is just the process happening.
3. Can anything be found for which 'Brian' is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
There is no single process that is responsible for 'Brian'. If there was, that would just be another process and not a 'Brian'. 'Brian' does things according to all the conditions of life, his DNA, his thoughts etc. ad infinitum but there is no 'him' to claim it. There are just more processes, some of those might claim responsibility for the others. But it is still just a process.
Right now there is still the belief that 'Brian' is responsible for the conditions of his life such as what time he goes to bed. There is the belief that 'he' could change this. But there are infinite conditions going into bedtime tonight and the current circumstances. There isn't an autonomous entity in the processes happening. There is no evidence for that! All the evidence points to processes and conditions happening and they all fall under direct experiencing; thought, sound, color/image, taste, smell, sensation in terms of how they appear.
The only thing that it seems 'Brian' could be responsible for is experiencing. But even experiencing is another process! Wow! How can 'someone' be responsible for 'receiving experience' anyway? It's all just processes/streams. Hi Stacy,
Does it choose any of its directions? Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc? Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
The stream doesn't choose its directions. There are many contributing factors that choose its direction; the soil, gravity, the quantity of water, the water itself, the weather, the mountain etc.
It is not a separate entity from the rest of the conditions. There is no way to distinguish the stream as being "just the water" because it needs the soil. Neither is it "just the soil", or "just the features (rock, tree bow, cascade). I can't say that any aspect exists separate from the rest. Nor does the whole idea of a "stream" really exist separate from its parts but it is just a label for an idea. There is no part of the stream that constitutes its "essence" because the stream is an idea/thought.
It is indeed an ever-changing pattern with no constant quality that can be separated out.
1. Can you find anywhere where "Brian" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
"Brian" has no specific quality that can be separated out as a constant that defines "Brian". "Brian" is made of many qualities and conditions such as the body, the sound of his voice, his conditioning, his behaviors/choices, body language and character, thought etc. None of these aspects can be seen as a separate "decision-maker" or entity apart from the whole process or flow. "Brian" is simply all the elements. The only thing that can maybe be found as a constant is that which is watching it all happen and has no involvement. But even that is not autonomous or separate or distinct and is part of the overall flow and conditions to create "Brian". But all of that just makes an idea, "Brian" is just a thought about all these seeming conditions and contributors.
2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Today I decided to watch YouTube videos on starting an AI business. There is the remembering of a YouTube video I previously watched on the topic through thought. Then there is the use of the mouse, keyboard and computer to find that video again using the hands. There is the process of finding more information and videos on the topic using the same computer. There are the thoughts explaining my actions and what I am doing and should be doing. Before that, there were all the circumstances leading up to this decision. Getting out of bed, taking a shower, eating a pancake for breakfast, cleaning up cat messes, all the bodily sensations and interpreting them as emotions such as "inspiration". There were preferences for what videos to watch based on conditioning and thought processes. Was there a "decider" among all these processes? No apparent decider or distinct process that is autonomous or has authority over ALL the other factors. "I" have preferences like the motivation to make money, to want to eat, to feel important, the drive for a female mate etc. There are environmental factors occurring, like the weather, my brother being away that affect me in a certain way and drive me towards the decision to watch the videos. There is the fact that I had free time and no personal obligations to attend to. There are factors of purpose; wanting to live a better life, doing something "useful", the need to "build" something or impress people. There is even the way I react to the thought of watching the videos... and how that produces the response to want to do so. But it's not really "me" reacting but other conditions reacting. The "I" that is being alluded to cannot be separated out from all these processes. "I" react, "I" watch, "I" decide aren't as true as saying that reacting, watching, and deciding are happening like the water, soil, and flowing are happening for the stream. "I" doing all these things and having responsibility for countless, infinite factors seems impossible.
Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
There is no autonomous entity that is deciding because there is nothing separate from all the conditions that create a decision. Even if there is an "I", it can't be responsible for all the conditions that create an outcome or process. That means there is just the process happening.
3. Can anything be found for which 'Brian' is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
There is no single process that is responsible for 'Brian'. If there was, that would just be another process and not a 'Brian'. 'Brian' does things according to all the conditions of life, his DNA, his thoughts etc. ad infinitum but there is no 'him' to claim it. There are just more processes, some of those might claim responsibility for the others. But it is still just a process.
Right now there is still the belief that 'Brian' is responsible for the conditions of his life such as what time he goes to bed. There is the belief that 'he' could change this. But there are infinite conditions going into bedtimes and the current circumstances. There isn't an autonomous entity in the processes happening. There is no evidence for that! All the evidence points to processes and conditions happening and they all fall under direct experiencing; thought, sound, color/image, taste, smell, sensation.
The only thing that it seems 'Brian' could be responsible for is experiencing. But even experiencing is another process! Wow!
The question does arise... what is watching? That still seems like the only constant. That's the only way change could be observed... from a constant!
That is all!
Kind Regards,
Brian
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
I'm sorry, I don't know why it posted my answers twice in one post! That was not my intention and I don't know how to edit it!
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
If you want me to re-post it so that it is less confusing, let me know! If you can make it out and read it, then that's fine too!
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
No.
*Whar* are you doing?
Do you recall "Colored Socks?"
Knowing is about knowledge which is all in the mind and we are not interested in that
We are only interested in looking at and seeing what is actually going on in your present moment-to-moment experience. We are only interested in your Direct Experience in the moment..
Direct or Actual Experience is
Seeing
Hearing
Feeling (Sensation, not emotion. Emotion is Sensation plus made-up thoughts & labels)
Tasting
Smelling
Thoughts Arising (but not their content)
Where is the DE in your reply?
This sounds like LOTS of thinking.
Would you please try again? No logic. Just Direct Experience, please.
Thanks
*Whar* are you doing?
Do you recall "Colored Socks?"
Knowing is about knowledge which is all in the mind and we are not interested in that
We are only interested in looking at and seeing what is actually going on in your present moment-to-moment experience. We are only interested in your Direct Experience in the moment..
Direct or Actual Experience is
Seeing
Hearing
Feeling (Sensation, not emotion. Emotion is Sensation plus made-up thoughts & labels)
Tasting
Smelling
Thoughts Arising (but not their content)
Where is the DE in your reply?
This sounds like LOTS of thinking.
Would you please try again? No logic. Just Direct Experience, please.
Thanks
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
I will try again. I’m just misunderstanding some of the questions it seems…
I am being asked:
Regarding the stream parable… you are saying you want me to only use words such as “seeing”, “hearing”, “feeling”, “tasting”, “smelling”, “thoughts” to describe questions about an imagined stream? It just seems to me like all the instructions are asking about imagination and thought… about stories… about parables… about fantasy stories… but then I’m asked to somehow answer them with “direct experiencing”.
I want to do this correctly. I really do! I’ll look back at the last exercises… I’m just really unclear here! These questions are about imagined scenarios! You give examples of thought-based imagined factors like “color preference” and “need to look hip” yet reject my answers which are congruent with the suggestions!
I am being asked:
I am being told to describe things such as “environmental factors”, “color preferences”, “practical issues”, “what is available”, “available time for preparation”, “purpose”, “need to fill up for the day”, “need to look hip” etc. These do not seem like suggestions that are instances of “direct experiences”… which is confusing me. Because this question is suggesting I use such descriptions as “purpose”, “color preferences”, “need to look hip” in my example… which I did. So, do I not discuss these suggested examples, ignore them and simply look at “direct experiencing” contrary to what the question and the suggested topics that are being asked of me? I am very confused about this! Actually!2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
Regarding the stream parable… you are saying you want me to only use words such as “seeing”, “hearing”, “feeling”, “tasting”, “smelling”, “thoughts” to describe questions about an imagined stream? It just seems to me like all the instructions are asking about imagination and thought… about stories… about parables… about fantasy stories… but then I’m asked to somehow answer them with “direct experiencing”.
I want to do this correctly. I really do! I’ll look back at the last exercises… I’m just really unclear here! These questions are about imagined scenarios! You give examples of thought-based imagined factors like “color preference” and “need to look hip” yet reject my answers which are congruent with the suggestions!
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Brian
Okay let's see if we can clarify. Here is one of your answers:
The question is, how did you get there?
It sounds like you used logic, thought about it & wrote lots of explanation from your thinking.
You're being asked to LOOK. Yes, it's a made- up scenario, but it's possible to LOOK in your mind's eye, rather than think.
Can you see that?
Maybe I should give you only pointers that don't require imagining, like ButtChair.
Try this:
Hearing Exercise
Find somewhere quiet to sit. Rest for a moment and listen to the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside. Whatever it is, I'll just refer to it as 'what can be heard'.
1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?
2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?
3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'? What do you find?
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found?
Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
Is that better?
Loving,
Okay let's see if we can clarify. Here is one of your answers:
Yes. All of that is true."Brian" has no specific quality that can be separated out as a constant that defines "Brian". "Brian" is made of many qualities and conditions such as the body, the sound of his voice, his conditioning, his behaviors/choices, body language and character, thought etc. None of these aspects can be seen as a separate "decision-maker" or entity apart from the whole process or flow. "Brian" is simply all the elements. The only thing that can maybe be found as a constant is that which is watching it all happen and has no involvement. But even that is not autonomous or separate or distinct and is part of the overall flow and conditions to create "Brian". But all of that just makes an idea, "Brian" is just a thought about all these seeming conditions and contributors.
The question is, how did you get there?
It sounds like you used logic, thought about it & wrote lots of explanation from your thinking.
You're being asked to LOOK. Yes, it's a made- up scenario, but it's possible to LOOK in your mind's eye, rather than think.
Can you see that?
Maybe I should give you only pointers that don't require imagining, like ButtChair.
Try this:
Hearing Exercise
Find somewhere quiet to sit. Rest for a moment and listen to the sounds in the room where you are, or sounds from outside. Whatever it is, I'll just refer to it as 'what can be heard'.
1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?
2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?
3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'? What do you find?
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found?
Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
Is that better?
Loving,
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Stacy,
By imagining a scenario from the past and thinking about it.
Yes, okay. Should I use the 'direct experiencing' terminology (seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling, thoughts) to answer?
No, only sound!
There is no one 'doing' the hearing. Only sound!
In direct experience, there is sound. No 'I', 'body', 'person', 'brain' or 'pair of ears' can be found, just sound.
There is no 'inherent hearer' to be found in direct experience.
Any suggestions of a "hearer' is nothing other than thought.
What can I say? It is better. I don't know why I struggle so much with the stream exercise. I won't lie, the rejection of my answer has brought up all sorts of trauma, abandonment, shame, guilt and beliefs so far. Useful for healing, looking at, and doing 'The Work'. All things work together for good.
I am willing to try the stream exercise again. I have a weekend retreat for the rest of this weekend. If you are fine with me doing it again at this time I am happy to just LOOK. I may have to do that on Monday then. Chances are I won't be available Saturday and Sunday. Might be good to give it some space!
Thank you!
Kind Regards,
Brian
The question is, how did you get there?
By imagining a scenario from the past and thinking about it.
Can you see that?
Yes, okay. Should I use the 'direct experiencing' terminology (seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling, thoughts) to answer?
1) In 'hearing' can anything be found other than 'what can be heard'?
No, only sound!
2) Can what is doing the hearing be found? Or is there only 'what can be heard'?
There is no one 'doing' the hearing. Only sound!
3) An 'I'? a 'body'? a 'person'? a brain? a pair of ears? Can these be found doing the hearing? Or is there just 'what can be heard'? What do you find?
In direct experience, there is sound. No 'I', 'body', 'person', 'brain' or 'pair of ears' can be found, just sound.
Can an INHERENT HEARER be found?
There is no 'inherent hearer' to be found in direct experience.
Would anything that is suggested as the hearer, be anything other than a concept/idea/thought?
Any suggestions of a "hearer' is nothing other than thought.
Is that better?
What can I say? It is better. I don't know why I struggle so much with the stream exercise. I won't lie, the rejection of my answer has brought up all sorts of trauma, abandonment, shame, guilt and beliefs so far. Useful for healing, looking at, and doing 'The Work'. All things work together for good.
I am willing to try the stream exercise again. I have a weekend retreat for the rest of this weekend. If you are fine with me doing it again at this time I am happy to just LOOK. I may have to do that on Monday then. Chances are I won't be available Saturday and Sunday. Might be good to give it some space!
Thank you!
Kind Regards,
Brian
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Brian,
Darlin' (I'm from the South), you're answers were correct. It is just that it was obvious that you used *thinking* more than *looking.* Relax into the questions and see what arises. Don't try to think your way through it.
Yes, it's good to know where our sticking points are, but try not to get "stuck" there. Just allow all of it to pass through. You're getting there!
Yes, give it a little break and try *meditating* on the Stream Exercise again. Do not send lengthy analysis of it. That is *thinking*.
For example, these answers come from LOOKING:
No.
Something like that. Have you read "Gateless Gatecrashers" which can be downloaded from Resources, Books here? That might help you to get the sense of Direct Experience.
"Enlightenment is an accident. Meditation makes you accident prone."
Sunryu Suzuki
Relax and enjoy the sensations of just looking!
Much love,
Okay, this is what you have to un-learn. Never believe thinking. It lies. Check your gut like you learned earlier. Is it tight or relaxed?By imagining a scenario from the past and thinking about it.
Don't just use the "terminology," all of these pointers are *meditations." Sink into them. See, Feel, Hear, etc. Notice thoughts and content of thought, but don't believe it, just let it go.Should I use the 'direct experiencing' terminology (seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling, thoughts) to answer?
Darlin' (I'm from the South), you're answers were correct. It is just that it was obvious that you used *thinking* more than *looking.* Relax into the questions and see what arises. Don't try to think your way through it.
Yes, it's good to know where our sticking points are, but try not to get "stuck" there. Just allow all of it to pass through. You're getting there!
Yes, give it a little break and try *meditating* on the Stream Exercise again. Do not send lengthy analysis of it. That is *thinking*.
For example, these answers come from LOOKING:
No.Does it choose any of its directions?
Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc?
No.
I see an ever-changing whole in a moving pattern.Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
No. There is a Sensation of relaxing as the flow does its thing.1. Can you find anywhere where 'Brian' autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
Something like that. Have you read "Gateless Gatecrashers" which can be downloaded from Resources, Books here? That might help you to get the sense of Direct Experience.
"Enlightenment is an accident. Meditation makes you accident prone."
Sunryu Suzuki
Relax and enjoy the sensations of just looking!
Much love,
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Stacy,
Thanks for your patience!
Kind Regards,
Brian
Tight!Is it tight or relaxed?
I will check it out and answer the stream questions tomorrow!Have you read "Gateless Gatecrashers" which can be downloaded from Resources, Books here?
So I've heard!"Enlightenment is an accident. Meditation makes you accident prone."
Thanks for your patience!
Kind Regards,
Brian
-
Anastacia42
- Posts: 12000
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:04 am
- Contact:
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
I'll watch for your answers.
You're welcome.
Much love ,
You're welcome.
Much love ,
~ Stacy
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
"Thought is a garbage can. If you look into the garbage can, all you will get is garbage."
~ Adyashanti
Re: Awakening from the Victim Concept
Hi Stacy,
Here are my answers:
That's it!
Kind Regards,
Brian
Here are my answers:
No choice!Does it choose any of its directions?
No difference!Is it even really a separate entity different from the water deposited in it, the rocks, the depressions in the ground etc?
It is a flow made of its conditions.Is it even the same entity moment by moment, or more the product of weather conditions and water, like an ever-changing pattern?
No, there is an ever-changing flow with an expansive sensation in the belly.1. Can you find anywhere where "Brian" autonomously intervenes into life, choosing something that is not the product of all the elements; that is not a part of the overall flow?
I chose to prepare a Dutch pancake for lunch. There were sensations in the belly, thoughts about wanting to eat, images/colors changing while preparing, the sizzling sounds of cooking, and finally tasting etc. The pancake experience is made of ever-changing conditions. Conditions are just arising, no choices. The conditions are made of direct experiences (thought, taste, sound, feeling, images/colors).2. Now please consider a regular decision made eg; what to wear in the morning, or what to eat for lunch, and describe to me what happens. There are environmental factors, there are colour preferences (but where did those come from - any autonomous intervention there perhaps?), practical issues (such as what is available), available time for preparation, purpose (eg; need to fill up for the day, or to look hip and cool for that person!) etc.
There is just a flow happening. No one or thing can be separated out.Where in there is an autonomous entity intervening in the flow of life? Can you find someone somewhere?
No!3. Can anything be found for which 'Brian' is responsible – if so responsible to what and for what?
That's it!
Kind Regards,
Brian
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests