Back for guidance

[AwayKen127]

I'll share with you my personal current understanding. Being enlightened is said to be the absence of suffering. I think, however, that the absence of suffering is only a result of enlightenment. I think that enlightenment is having ultimate insight (the emptiness of all phenomena, which I have clearly seen), and then to apply that insight constantly, instantly, and in all situations (which I certainly have not attained). A way to see the insights and also to develop the habit of applying them is to discover and then to practice noticing how all the illusions (of self, world, meaning, separation, etc.) are constructed. That's what I'm trying to point you to.

[Russ84]

Thanks for sharing and yes that all makes sense and seems helpful to understand what you are pointing to.

You might remember a scene from your childhood and then a scene from later in your life. What are the microscopic steps that connect these scenes and situate them within "your life"?

Since noticing that memories no longer come with emotions I struggle to notice any connection of those memories to a single story of my life. It seems silly to try to bundle them up into one coherent story of Jerry, when remembering a specific memory it's hard to relate that event happening to "me" sometime in the past. Also there's rarely thoughts of "I'm feeling this because that happened", when such thoughts arise there's looking and no connection found so that story loses any importance.

Are you grokking? So how do you construct the belief that a thought can belong to you?

Yes this all seems clear. Thoughts of continuity of a me seems to be a major part of constructing the belief of thoughts belonging to me. Thoughts references other thoughts like "I'm feeling this" when a sensation arises.

[Russ84]

Hi Jeff, I've been looking at all the different sensations when breathing and noticing how they don't relate to each other. Started to try this as I noticed thoughts of each breathe being a single event when they are so many different sensations.

[AwayKen127]

Nice, Jerry. That's the way.

[Russ84]

Hi Jeff continuing to look at all the sensations when breathing. Noticing as many thoughts as I can, not just the thoughts of sensations being related to an event but also thoughts of sensations having a position.

[AwayKen127]

Great! Do sensations require a perceiver? Is a perceiver found among the sensations? Can a sensation perceive another sensation? Is there an act of perception--something that needs to happen before a perception comes into awareness? Or is there just sensation?

[Russ84]

There's more awareness of sensations not having a position or being related, when focusing on the breathe there's more times of no one breathing, just breathing itself.

Still finding only a subtle difference between believing to be in control and not. There might be expectations of a greater change when seeing no one in control, but since no one has been in control it's not going to be much different at all, same sensations, very similar thoughts.

Will look at the perceiver questions today.

[Russ84]

Do sensations require a perceiver? Is a perceiver found among the sensations? Can a sensation perceive another sensation? Is there an act of perception--something that needs to happen before a perception comes into awareness? Or is there just sensation?

No sensations don't require a perceiver and there isn't one found in sensations. Sensations are just sensations, they don't perceive other sensations.

I'm noticing the thoughts of being in control refer to an imagined sensation not the actual sensation. Still not always obvious but seems to be clearing up as I look.

[AwayKen127]

I'm noticing the thoughts of being in control refer to an imagined sensation not the actual sensation.

Could you say more about this?
Jeff

[Russ84]

Yeah sure, the thought of being in control seems to be a visual image of the area of the sensation rather than pointing directly to it.

I guess it could be two different thoughts happen quickly, an image of where the sensation is happening, like on an outer nostril, and a thought of being in control.

[AwayKen127]

Very good! The idea of control refers to the idea of the sensation. No thought can refer to the actual sensation! But there is an illusion that thought can refer to actual sensation. This illusion happens when the idea of the sensation is mistaken for the actual sensation. Do you see?

[Russ84]

Not all the time yet but will continue to look! When I'm meditating I come to see it after a while but it doesn't last when up and about during the day. I'm trying to look throughout the day to see it.

[Russ84]

Hi Jeff still looking over the last day, didn't get to meditate this morning so hope to do a sit after work today.

[Russ84]

Hi Jeff, had a good look yesterday and this morning still struggling to see the illusion where the sensation is an idea not the actual sensation.

[AwayKen127]

The sensation itself is ineffable. To see this, ask whether another person hearing your description of your sensation would feel the same sensation you are feeling. No, when they hear the description, it evokes a memory of theirs, which is NOT your sensation. Similarly, when you label or recognize a sensation, you are doing a sneaky comparison of the sensation that is present now with a memory of something you've felt in the past. A thought says they are the same sensation, but they are NOT. Keep on dissecting the mechanism and you will find that thoughts say nothing about actual experience.