Another guide please

[marka]

Hello Jon,

I am having a real mixed week. Some things I am getting but I seem trapped to a certain extent with feelings. I explain this further on.

Do you feel that you have seen through the illusion of 'self' and of 'chooser-decider'?

No.

That is, in moments yes but most of the time my life is lived through habits and getting pulled into the thoughts and stories and feelings.
Recent events have produced a lot of difficult, painful emotions - they are definitely being felt by someone! Or something at least. And they definitely affect my thoughts, which create more feelings and help shape beliefs, or add to old beliefs.

To put this in context, especially the emotion side, I'm having a particularly hard week with disappointments around jobs and its having a massive negative effect on my mood.
This I think is proof as to exactly where I am with all this - had I truly seen through the illusion of self I'm sure it would be much easier to handle, that there would be recognition that there was no 'me' to have all this negative feeling but rather just negative feelings occurring.

All of this, in the difficult times, definitely appears as though it is happening to a person.

If I look I'm sure I won't be able to find a 'feeler', much as I can't find a thinker a doer or a chooser, but it does not take the power away from it.

So I would have to say no, I have not seen through the illusion and am instead very firmly rooted in a set of beliefs and habits, behaviours and thoughts, mingled indiscriminately with copious feeling !

where do we go with this Jon?

thanks,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

Just writing a quick, short reply, without quoting this time.

Of course challenging circumstances can make things seem impossible. But at the very same time there might be an opportunity in this, due to the very intensity of the thoughts amd feelings that insist 'I'm real!'

Anyway, something to look at. How could it be that there is no self but then, because circumstances become very uncomfortable a 'real self' actually appears? How could that occur?

So you tell me, what is going on?

All the best,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

How could it be that there is no self but then, because circumstances become very uncomfortable a 'real self' actually appears? How could that occur?

Hold on, this first bit:

How could it be that there is no self

well, this is what I'm looking at yes. I get this in the moments I look but I can't say that that statement is a truth I have completely realised.
(Or am I making this more complicated than it actually is. Is getting it in the moments enough of a realisation? Is the 'realisation' something more subtle and therefore less obvious to note?)

but then, because circumstances become very uncomfortable a 'real self' actually appears? How could that occur?

I can see your logic with this though Jon. What I am presenting (i.e. the above quote) makes no sense at all!

And this:

But at the very same time there might be an opportunity in this, due to the very intensity of the thoughts amd feelings that insist 'I'm real!'

I imagine the questions you have posed are a part of this? Exploring this opportunity? Please continue with this, directing me to look.

The other thing, sometimes I think I should give up on this process because I don't think I'm getting anywhere. Other times I feel more relaxed, not expecting anything and just content to let things unfold. I think the past few days have been of the former, I seem to put an imagined time pressure on myself or an imagined outcome.

Content to continue exploring in the main,

thanks,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

Or am I making this more complicated than it actually is. Is getting it in the moments enough of a realisation? Is the 'realisation' something more subtle and therefore less obvious to note?)

What is 'enough of a realisation'? But basically you have answered the question. More looking is needed.

There is no time pressure Mark. This process takes as long as it does and there have been good glimpses.

Where experience is painful or difficult it can be hard to focus and easy to react. But if it can be managed, to look directly at the pain or the reaction to circumstances can reveal a lot. This may be more difficult than looking at 'smooth' or comfortable experience but sometimes the very intensity of feelings provides an opportunity. 'Who (or what) is 'experiencing pain' for example? Is there a 'self' that 'experiences anger' or is there simply anger?


Best wishes,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

now that you have asked me those questions things seem to be a lot calmer!
I am sure there will be more 'pain' before things are totally settled though so will look when times arise.

Immediately though, I did look briefly at who/what was experiencing the pain as it was occurring and it seemed to lead me to anger, mixed with thoughts (ongoing commentary basically stating that I wasn't going to look!)

That's certainly some information, more than I perhaps realised.

Thanks, speak soon,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi MArk,

Sounds good. Just to let you know, I'm very busy tomorow, Saturday. I amy be able to post but if I don't you will hear from me on Sunday.

Best wishes,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

Don't worry if you're not able to get on today.

Perhaps you can help me refocus, maybe give some new exercises? The immediate pain from the past week has gone and I'm at a bit of a loss where to look.

Thanks
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

Remember the 'perceiver, perceiving, perceived investigation? You said this...

Now, is it possible to find a line or 'cut-off' point between perceiver and perceiving?

No, it appears to be the same thing.
Similarly, is thare an observable break between perceiving and perceived?

Um. I'm not sure about this, like what is actually being asked. Observable break between the actual seeing (perceiving) and the object that is seen (perceived)?

Go back to this. Find a suitable object and place it not far away in front of your gaze. Look at this again and particularly, explore the relationship between the object perceived and the perceiving of it.

How can anything perceived be 'separate' from the perceiving of it?

You see that the perceiver and the perceiving are not separate, don't you? But how can there be perception of anything without there being an object that is perceived? Isn't perception always 'of' something? ('I 'cannot see a strawberry without strawberry being in a relationship with 'my' perception of it, for example).

Could be said that senses 'meet' sensations and that 'separation' between subject and object is an illusion created by thought?

Won't seeing always be irreducibly 'glued' to whatever appears in vision, that there is no 'cut off line' between hearing and whatever is heard. Can you find examples of these?

Best wishes,

Jon.

[marka]

Hello Jon,
Thank you for the exercise.
I've actually been a bit unwell again today, wwill post tomorrow.
Mark

[JonathanR]

OK Mark. Thanks.

[marka]

hi Jon,

seem to have come down with another thing, like a migraine that builds in the morning and by the afternoon i have so much pain by my eye that all i can do is sleep. Eases a bit after sleep, wiped out though. Third day now.
May be off for a day or two. Taking sudafed as think its sinuses.

Have been thinking about the exercise today but really not in any state to engage properly at present.
Be back soon hopefully, will post tomorrow even if just to say still here.

thanks, Mark

[marka]

Jon, will be back on tomorrow. Definitely sinuses.
thanks,
Mark

[marka]

Jon hello,

thanks for your patience over the past few days.

Now, back to this:

Find a suitable object and place it not far away in front of your gaze. Look at this again and particularly, explore the relationship between the object perceived and the perceiving of it.

I've had a good look at this. I notice that distance of object seems to play a part - as in convincing that there is a separation.
I kept looking. On occasions got a 'sense', the briefest of moments, that of course there is no separation - seeing just is as object just is.

How can anything perceived be 'separate' from the perceiving of it?

And that is where this began to make sense.
I will continue to do this, to make sure I really get it!

Could be said that senses 'meet' sensations and that 'separation' between subject and object is an illusion created by thought?

I have noticed that thought plays a part here, commentary really, but not truly understand this statement at present. I will continue.

much love Jon,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

Glad you are so much better now.

I've had a good look at this. I notice that distance of object seems to play a part - as in convincing that there is a separation.
I kept looking. On occasions got a 'sense', the briefest of moments, that of course there is no separation - seeing just is as object just is.

Good looking! Yes, I know what you mean. Distance or 'space' can seem to cause us to imagine a separation 'across space', between a 'me' and an 'it'. But look at it again. In spite of the idea of space the redness of a red cup is still sensed directly, isn't it? If there is no 'Mark perceiving' but just perceiving happening, then where is separateness?

And that is where this began to make sense.
I will continue to do this, to make sure I really get it!

Excellent. But remember, in a very real sense 'you' can't 'do' this. It can only be seen or noticed. Yes?

I have noticed that thought plays a part here, commentary really, but not truly understand this statement at present. I will continue.

Yes. It's good to notice that thought often has some announcement or other to make that is like a story about what is supposed to be going on. For example, there was an assumption of a thing, 'distance' that was supposed to 'separate' perception from that which is perceived?

Love,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

Did looking today with a spoon and with bark of a tree, each time was aware that they were just there, and that seeing was just happening.

In spite of the idea of space the redness of a red cup is still sensed directly, isn't it? If there is no 'Mark perceiving' but just perceiving happening, then where is separateness?

Yes, in spite of space still sensed directly. Bark of tree sensed (seen) directly as was spoon (although I notice you said the 'idea' of space - as in created in thought?)

And if just perceiving happening, no me, then where is the separateness ...... it makes sense that there is no separateness but not sure I 'see' it!

maybe I will continue with this,

speak soon,
Mark