Another guide please

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

That's it! Seeing just happening is great.

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?)

I said that in order to take 'space' as a thought, out of the equation, to make it easier to disregard. Thought finds reasons for perpetuating the 'self' myth and this idea that space between things 'separates' perception from what is perceived is just one example. (I'm not arguing that space is 'just an idea'...though it is interesting to look at space afresh).

Take hearing now. With eyes closed, become aware of some distant sound, not in the immediate vicinity but something like a car outside or a dog barking some way off. Now, is it possible to find a line in the experience of hearing between 'you' and 'the sound'? Where does 'hearing' end and 'the sound' begin? Is there any break between hearing and heard?

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!

Well, can 'separateness' be found in experience? Does it 'exist'? Is it something that can be seen?

But what of the opposite? What of non-separateness?

Best wishes,

Jon

[marka]

Hi Jon,

hope you're well today.

Well, can 'separateness' be found in experience? Does it 'exist'? Is it something that can be seen?

It cannot be seen, no. I cannot find it, no.

Take hearing now. With eyes closed, become aware of some distant sound, not in the immediate vicinity but something like a car outside or a dog barking some way off.

Well, initially maybe made a mistake because the sound (of music playing) was quite close.

That said, some observations in relation to this:

Now, is it possible to find a line in the experience of hearing between 'you' and 'the sound'? Where does 'hearing' end and 'the sound' begin?

Noticed that direction (of sound) seems to play a part, much as distance was doing for sight, with the same potential outcome: convincing that sound is separate.
Kept listening though and then noticed the physical ears seemed to play a part in convincing of separateness and thoughts were giving a running commentary - that my ears are not right by the speaker so sound must have to travel to my ears for me to hear it, which will take some time, so there must be some separateness! (thoughts seemed to be on overdrive for this one!)

To summarise this - thought would have me believe that hearing ends (and begins) at my ears and sound begins with the object/thing making the noise. Thought definitely seems to believe in separateness here.

Is there any break between hearing and heard?

But to this? I don't think there is. I think there is the illusion of a break. And that is where I am at the moment, beginning to notice the illusions around hearing.

Love to you Jon,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

Very well thanks. Hope you're well?

Noticed that direction (of sound) seems to play a part, much as distance was doing for sight, with the same potential outcome: convincing that sound is separate.
Kept listening though and then noticed the physical ears seemed to play a part in convincing of separateness and thoughts were giving a running commentary - that my ears are not right by the speaker so sound must have to travel to my ears for me to hear it, which will take some time, so there must be some separateness! (thoughts seemed to be on overdrive for this one!)

To summarise this - thought would have me believe that hearing ends (and begins) at my ears and sound begins with the object/thing making the noise. Thought definitely seems to believe in separateness here.

You are doing really well with this looking at experience. Well done with noticing the thought about 'physical ears'.

Try this exercise... Whilst noticing hearing happening, see if 'ears doing hearing' can actually be found. What is the experience? Can 'ears' be found? Don't think about this, just notice sensation. Try this a few times and then it will be worth repeating yesterday's exercise with the more distant sound.

Thoughts will tend to provide 'reasons' as to why things are 'separate' and much of the language science and even just conventional understanding from childhood onwards assumes these 'facts'.

Love

Jonathan

[marka]

Hi Jon,

I'm well thanks.

Initially, with this:

Try this exercise... Whilst noticing hearing happening, see if 'ears doing hearing' can actually be found. What is the experience? Can 'ears' be found?

well, ears can't be found! There is just hearing of sound. Who would of thought!?

Will report later on going back to the original exercise, possibly tomorrow.

Many thanks,
Love,

Mark

[JonathanR]

well, ears can't be found! There is just hearing of sound. Who would of thought!?

Ha ha! Yes!

And eyes. Can 'eyes' be found when seeing, or is there just seeing?

Jon

[marka]

good evening Jon,

And eyes. Can 'eyes' be found when seeing, or is there just seeing?

there is just seeing!

Can 'ears' be found? Don't think about this, just notice sensation. Try this a few times and then it will be worth repeating yesterday's exercise with the more distant sound.

so noticed ears can't be found, now back to the more distant sound, that's this:

is it possible to find a line in the experience of hearing between 'you' and 'the sound'? Where does 'hearing' end and 'the sound' begin? Is there any break between hearing and heard?

there is no line, no break. I don't think there is an 'end' of hearing, nor a 'beginning' of sound - there is just hearing of sound.

It's quite strange, direct experience is so obvious but its almost like I have to 'switch' into it - the rest of the time (i.e. when I'm not 'switched' into it) it's like I exist mainly in thoughts!

this is fascinating noticing Jon, thank you,

Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

there is just seeing!

Great!

there is no line, no break. I don't think there is an 'end' of hearing, nor a 'beginning' of sound - there is just hearing of sound.

It's quite strange, direct experience is so obvious but its almost like I have to 'switch' into it - the rest of the time (i.e. when I'm not 'switched' into it) it's like I exist mainly in thoughts!

Excellent. Yes it is kind of obvious and yet available at any time. keep looking in this sort of way, exploring sensations. Try Touch, Smell and Taste too. Touch may seem a little tricky as it may seem 'close to home' . But is 'body' found 'feeling' or, is there simply the sensation alone?

There is always the option to return to look at sense experience.

Look at Thought now. Just as in seeing, eyes could not be found, in thought, where is 'thinker'?

Love,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

thanks for the last post. Lots to focus on.

Initially, about this:

Look at Thought now. Just as in seeing, eyes could not be found, in thought, where is 'thinker'?

for me, in my mind, there is a definite difference between thoughts that are visual images and thoughts that are running commentary.

The visual images are much easier to notice that there is not a thinker, that the thought just appears - in that way it is much easier to notice a certain amount of detachment from thought.

Contrasting this with the ongoing commentary - this initially seems more 'real', more believable that there is an 'I' speaking these words.
Having said that I could not as yet find the author to those ongoing words!

I will continue with looking in this way,

love,

Mark

[JonathanR]

Great Mark,

I will reply later today (Tuesday)

Jon

[marka]

Hello Jon,

was waiting for you to post today but now wonder if you are waiting for me?!

not much to report today anyway, still here.

thanks,

Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

for me, in my mind, there is a definite difference between thoughts that are visual images and thoughts that are running commentary.

Good Mark, Very good to notice this difference between types of thought,

The visual images are much easier to notice that there is not a thinker, that the thought just appears - in that way it is much easier to notice a certain amount of detachment from thought.

.

Yes. So with these image type thoughts is it possible to look at them and see that no 'self' is making them appear?

Contrasting this with the ongoing commentary - this initially seems more 'real', more believable that there is an 'I' speaking these words.
Having said that I could not as yet find the author to those ongoing words!

Well that's good. But it is definitely worth looking at these announcement-type of thoughts. Sometimes people describe these as 'thought-stories'.

Somehow it gets noticed that there is a story going on ABOUT 'me'. Or, about anything that places a 'me' 'in' a situation, a time, a place, a body and so on. Do you recognise this?

It's always possible not to notice that thoughts (of 'self') are happening and to believe these for a while. But the main thing is to see through the illusory nature of 'self', that 'self; is always a thought ABOUT self and never an actual reality, isn't it?

Love,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

I have noticed that no self is making the image type thoughts appear, that they just seem to come by themselves (although it is very easy just to assume, out of habit, that there is a 'self' doing it).

Thought stories, hmm. Seem to be in those a lot! But I will keep looking at this, keeping in mind that 'self' is always a story about self, in thought


Thanks Jon, love,
Mark

P.s. I'm on a different device tonight, haven't worked out how to copy text yet, tomorrow maybe!

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

I have noticed that no self is making the image type thoughts appear, that they just seem to come by themselves (although it is very easy just to assume, out of habit, that there is a 'self' doing it).

It can be relatively easy to look and not be able to find a self. Seeing through the illusion of a 'doer' can be a little tricky at first. After all 'somebody' appears to have to 'do' work or even just look to see if there is a 'self'...do you see?

But keep looking. This can be tested. If there is one who is 'doing thoughts'? Shouldn't it be possible to find the creator of thoughts actually making them appear? And it should be possible to notice this 'thinker of thoughts' choosing and deciding what to think before the thought appears?. Have a look at this in experience. (Apologies if I suggested this before).

Thought stories, hmm. Seem to be in those a lot! But I will keep looking at this, keeping in mind that 'self' is always a story about self, in thought 

Again, what I said above.

Love,

Jon.

[marka]

Hi Jon,

I had a very clear experience today concerning internal voice type thoughts, during a yoga practice.
The experience involved just complete awareness - direct experience of the yoga was the main focus, the commwentary in head was seen for what it was - not the self, just a voice ccommenting. It was clear there was no 'me' doing the voice.

I will continue with your suggestions in the previous post, thank you,

Love,
Mark

[JonathanR]

Hi Mark,

I had a very clear experience today concerning internal voice type thoughts, during a yoga practice.
The experience involved just complete awareness - direct experience of the yoga was the main focus, the commwentary in head was seen for what it was - not the self, just a voice ccommenting. It was clear there was no 'me' doing the voice.

That is very helpful. Great. Keep looking and do look at what I suggested.


All the best,

Jon.