Inherent Or Not ?

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:51 am

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
By "real self" or "inherent self" I understand a concrete self that exist from its own side (here as well as in other people) and which proof of existence is for example the sensation of contraction in the eyeballs and eyebrows as well as the need to be defended when insulted or frustrated or irritated by situations or people.

What are you looking for at LU?
Can I get guided by username "s-p-a-c-e" (John).
I can wait as long as necessary.

A guiding to realize "emptiness" of this inherent self to make sure no stones are left unturned in the process of "not finding" that self.

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
Can I get guided by username "s-p-a-c-e" (John). I really liked his pointers and I can wait as long as necessary for him to be ready.

I expect a guiding to realize "emptiness" of this inherent self to make sure no stones are left unturned in the process of "not finding" that self.

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
Buddhism : Theravada, Zen, Chan, Tibetan
Nonduality : Ramana maharshi "I am", Greg Goode, Rupert Spira, Francis Lucille.
Others : Shamanism, Kabbalah

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self?
11

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:28 pm

Hey,

Thanks for the intro.

So what stone is waiting to be turned? :)

best wishes,
John
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:15 am

Hello hello John,
So what stone is waiting to be turned? :)
I guess it would be the stone of what is the true nature of experience, I understand there are many conceptual models we can use to describe it (in thoughts) but how to find a skilful model and actually experience it to decrease suffering ?

In the seeing, just the seen ?

So that means that there is JUST this self aware seeing right now ? And anything else : an object (a thing there), a subject (a dude doing the seeing), a time ("now") is only existing as a conceptual scheme superimposed onto the experience ?

So in this "dialogue" right now when you'll be looking at these "words" (aka the experience of seeing) there will be a seeing for you like there is a seeing for me right now ? And only that, at that moment ? Like you are connected to the whole universe, getting a subset of the whole universe in that moment, and that's it ? When the conditions are there, the seeing arises. When the conditions subside, the seeing ceases ?

How do you see it ? What your take on what experience is ? And why it seems to be occurring here now in that way for this (say my or your present) perspective and occurring there then for that (say my or your past) perspective ?

Thanks

Pierre

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:53 am

Hi Pierre,

Lovely to meet you.

So, you posted about "the true nature of experience"..."there will be a seeing for you like there is a seeing for me"...and "how to find a skilful model and actually experience it to decrease suffering".

It's often worth reflexively returning to our statements as expressions of how we see things, our habitual perceptions, to shine a light on them, to see what we might be presupposing, assuming.

Let's take, for example, the expressed motivation or aim of 'decreasing suffering'.

What would be an example, for you, of such suffering that you want to decrease?

Best wishes,
John
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:26 am

What would be an example, for you, of such suffering that you want to decrease?
I am thinking about very simple things like the sensations of contractions usually happening at the front of the body, ie head, throat, heart, belly, and the lower area, say when there is a frustration or irritation or anger coming. Or when there is desire for say food with the story that the good feeling from food will make the tiredness/frustration go away.

These sensations do not last, but there is aversion toward them with the want of eliminating them. Maybe that is the crux, the aversion toward them would be the problem, not them in themselves.

Trying to understand how the illusion of the self work at the moment. Why are these sensations coming up in the first place (especially the burn in the heart, or say the fear in the stomach), what on earth are they ?? How they come to be, how they feed the story and the story feed them ? What is the nature of this "I" to be defended ?

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:16 pm

Hey Pierre,

These sensations do not last, but there is aversion toward them with the want of eliminating them. Maybe that is the crux, the aversion toward them would be the problem, not them in themselves.

Trying to understand how the illusion of the self work at the moment. Why are these sensations coming up in the first place (especially the burn in the heart, or say the fear in the stomach), what on earth are they ?? How they come to be, how they feed the story and the story feed them ? What is the nature of this "I" to be defended ?

These are all great questions. I'd keep it very specific though, to you, because each of us is very different in our experience of this.

For example, rather than talking about 'the illusion of the self', we turn it back on ourselves specifically and ask:

- What is it that I am calling 'myself'?
- Is there an example of something specific in experience that I can point to as having a particular stamp of myself?
- Are there examples of things that don't seem to have any stamp of myself?


So, as in the old Zen 'Ox Herding' stories, our first job is to catch sight of the Ox, and to see what are the signs of the Ox, and what are not signs of the Ox. :)

To give a brief example: maybe at times, you talk to yourself in the head about what to do next, etc. This talking/this voice may be seen as a sign of myself, as solid evidence.

On the other hand, when I scratch an itch, maybe there feels to be no stamp of myself in that at all.

So, there are domains of life that are 'selfy' (as it were) and domains that are not.

Use these three questions to see what you can uncover in your experience.

Look forward to reading.

Best wishes,
John
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:42 pm

What is it that I am calling 'myself'?
a) Mainly in thoughts and stories about my "past" and the logical connections of that story that group together sensation, experiences, perceptions, relationships as belonging to a "main character", a first person guy to whom all these things happened...Or simply a gathering of different sensations and perceptions (say a small patch of touch sensation, a partial visual impression, all collected together in memory or all grouped togehter as a body) and thoughts that seem to all be connected with each other in time and space (sensation, perception, story, somehow woven or linked together in an appearant connected fabric). That's the patchwork I call "myself".

b) Also in the sensation of tightness of the eyeball/brows that I can only fully relax when in deep "absorption meditation" (so called jhana practise) and expand from there (expand the joy/bliss). When leaving the meditation, the tightness usually returns later. Sometime fortunately I can close my eyes outside of absorption medidation and just relax and the tightness sensation decreases.

c) And then of course also in a combination of both front-body-strong-sensations and loop-repetitive-story.

This happens usually following a criticism or remark or commentary of one of my past or present action.
(or simply if someone happens to be pressing my buttons or if I'm very tired)
This is usually accompanied by some repetitive thoughts and narrative along the line of "how date (s)he talks to me like that" and followed by a tightning of the chest and deep sensation of burning (what is labelled "anger").
The strong sensation is there, the story is there.

Even when dropping the story (cause sometimes it's too ludicrous to be taken seriously) the burning sensation is still there.
So I guess the sensation is coming up to defend a self. But that self I cannot find. I can only find sensations/contraction/tightness and of course stories and narrative (usually repetitive or linked to similar stuff that happened in the past)



Is there an example of something specific in experience that I can point to as having a particular stamp of myself?
What do you call "experience" here ? Do you mean a situation I found myself in or in Direct Experience ?

so for the "stamp of myself" (I like that word here "stamp" ahah)

I'd say immediately for example my face, memory of my face. But then if I had an accident or a burn or something, then that "face" won't be here like it is/was but I would still say "me" or think I am here.

Memory of habits and patterns I have (say tastes and preferences). But then preferences and tastes have changed for me through the years so can't say it's fully that either.

Ok so what about stories (the central character of "my" story) ? Ok but then if dementia, does this means there is no "me" left ? It would appear so when I think about my grandmother's final years with Alzeihmer's disease. But then even if she didn't recognized us, does it say there is no illusion of self for her ? No I guess there was still a self for her (even though I can't say for sure).

So what about awareness ? I sometimes feel like I am this vast awareness ("a la" ramana maharshi) and everything appears as a modulation of "me". However in the buddhist "model" of dependent origination there is only awareness when there is something to be aware of. Appearance comes from an infinite number of conditions (e.g. this body has healthy eyes, there is an "object", there is light etc etc) and when any necessary condition disappears so does the "appearance" (even if only say that very specific angle from which it is seen or from which "I look at it") in no time also disappear.

In direct experience I can obviously witness say that screen, which is almost like a self-aware appearance, which is kind of a weird thing to say.

Ok looked more closely this body is of course ONE among all of the causes for the appearance. And so is the light ! and so is the "object" ! And so is the consciousness that is aware of it ! And so is the thought that I am "thinking" that gives a label to whatever I happen to be looking at in that moment.

So I'd say in a Zen way that yes many "things" give rise to that experience of screen right now.

from the basic material of this "seeing-the-screen experience/appearance" the "mental consciousness" imputes different labels: an "I" that is the witness of that experience, a "screen" that is seen, and many other stuffs that can be zoomed in and out (or rather "selected", "chosen") (say the difference colors of the screen, the letters, the words....), and of course, on top of that "seeing-the-screen experience" there is simultaneously a "sensing-the-fingers-tapping" experience (same here, there is ONE experience of typing and later the "mental consciousness" imputes different labels: an "I" that is the typer, a thumb-and-fingers-that-types one after the other "in time", a keyboard that is being-typed...and from the other sensations a "forearm-that-lays-on-the table...etc) and also a "hearing-that-french-song" (from sound-experience is imputed
and selected among many other stuff :"human voice" "french band X that I know" "word I recognize" "accordeon" "guitar"....)
Are there examples of things that don't seem to have any stamp of myself?
ahah good one !
Very "netti netti" :)

no stamp of self :

the "body". For instance, if I lose my hand immedialely the now "external hand" would look disgusting even though 2 min ago it was "mine".
Let alone what's inside the body. And then the skin recovers all that. If I make a heap of all my bones, hum I'm not that.

the "sensations" : they come and go. According to causes and condition they are here. In the absence of these causes and conditions, they aren't there anymore.

So that means that EVEN THAT SENSATION of BURNING is also coming and going.
But why is it wired to the thoughts or filtered throught the story ?
In direct experience, difficult to say if the thought triggered the sensation.
Well the hearing and labelling did right ? Like say your wife asks a question that you'd rather not hear.
Then these feeling come right ? Why do they come ?

Hum...hum... so it's like the appearence of the screen right ? Causes and conditions led to the burning. Whatever these causes and conditions are (say for instance in buddhism : avijja/ignorance). Ok Ok Ok.

the story of "me" : yeah that's a good one. Built and rebuilt along the years :). Nice story, maybe we could write the story and make a good book (like some do with their autobiographies) lol. But yeah more seriously the story is a nice stamp of self. And then of course in the story there is also the story of the preferences (likes/dislikes)

What else is there with no stamp of self ?

heard, seens, touched, tasted, smellts, thought

None of these is "me". It just seem that a "me" experiences them. And says there are "mine". Well conventionally I guess so. But say if i own a "book" is it really "mine" ? Only conventionally, other would say yeah, that's his book. But if I give it away, what changed in the book ? Nothing. Just a difference in the story here and in the story of the new owner there.

So it looks like a story in thought group all these together, in time, in space, in ownership and say these are "my" experiences, my unique point of view on the "world".

It's unique yes. Like any point of view "in time" for me or for "others" in the same time. Through causes and conditions appearances occur. With the end of these causes and conditions appearance ceases.

So "others" like "you" also have self-aware appearances of seeing. Well some conditions (a consciousness, a specific angle, light) led to your experience, like other conditions (another consciousness, another angle, a differently colored light) led to another appearance "here".

There ARE appearances. But is there an "I". Yes, in thoughts as a lynchpin as a gatherer of experience. That's what thought does, it gathers.

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:16 pm

Ok, good work Pierre.

What was good about your inquiring was how it all came back to mine, to what it is to be mine.

Now partly, there's a very boring aspect to this which is that the physical body regulates itself around certain constraints such as body temperature, blood pressure, heart rate etc, and so you'll recognise consistent feelings and sensations which are purely down to body regulation.

if we add to that sensation-al consistency of background, a socially conditioned narrative of myself, hey presto, we make a me, complete with physical evidence.

So, we can consider these two things distinctly.

On the one hand, consider the physical consistency, quite apart from any narrative. Sit and observe this physical consistency play out, observe physically being in everyday life. When narrative comes in, set it aside again, to just return to the physical expression.

Then, do the opposite, and focus on the narrative of me, on its own, distinct from the physical consistency of sensation, feeling, thinking etc.

What strikes you about the narrative of Pierre, when set apart from the physical?

What strikes you about the physical consistency of being when set apart from the narrative?

Best wishes,
John
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Sat Jun 29, 2019 10:41 pm

Hey John,
On the one hand, consider the physical consistency, quite apart from any narrative. Sit and observe this physical consistency play out, observe physically being in everyday life. When narrative comes in, set it aside again, to just return to the physical expression.

Then, do the opposite, and focus on the narrative of me, on its own, distinct from the physical consistency of sensation, feeling, thinking etc.
So I have been looking into these all day long.

What strikes you about the narrative of Pierre, when set apart from the physical?
I'd expect it to be pretty dry just these thoughts.
But in direct experience these made up memory ARE gathering the lot and are really vivid.
There is generation of a lot of things through thinking (mental images) and scenarios and meaning.
What is the meaning of that situation for "me".
So today some people I was supposed to meet were late.
And it was striking switching from the 2 ways of looking.
In the pure experience, just the usual pure experiences : sight, trees, sky, buildings, pavement, sensation of breathing, of back against a bench....nothing special really
And now in thinking, what a difference !!! Lots of meaning added about trying to join the people, wondering if the meeting got cancelled....A lot of NOT HERE stuff popped up. And of course different bodily reactions also coming up from all these scenarios.
And then, when I get the text confirming where they were and that they just arrived, relief and happiness !!!

But in pure experience, without the story NOTHING changed !!!!!! Same tree, same pavement, same breath....

So the thoughts and story and sensations coming from there (from these thinking and the meaning for "me") are bloody MAKING UP the sense of a self.

What strikes you about the physical consistency of being when set apart from the narrative?
Well for that one there isn't any consistency at all lol. Just one anonymous (land/sound/touch/taste)scape after another.
That tree, that street, these people moving, that sound, that touch sensation. No link between them in Direct Experience.
Ignoring the narrative it's like very anonymous, like it could be any one experience.

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Sat Jun 29, 2019 11:47 pm

Quick note (for the archive) :

Need to look deeper and closer at the "show".
How does the show pops? What does the show comes up as ?
Story of the "me/mine" layered on top of bare sensation/perception
+ emotions/burn in chest
+ label of worry/fear or anger/frustration.

But at the same time without the illusion, how to live ? Without preference and aversion ?
Ok so there will be a reframing of our relationship to the sensation/perception.

A new way of relating to them.

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Sun Jun 30, 2019 12:03 pm

Hi Pierre,

What strikes you about the physical consistency of being when set apart from the narrative?
Well for that one there isn't any consistency at all lol. Just one anonymous (land/sound/touch/taste)scape after another.
That tree, that street, these people moving, that sound, that touch sensation. No link between them in Direct Experience.
Ignoring the narrative it's like very anonymous, like it could be any one experience.

By consistency, I'm referring to the physical consistency of being within constraints such as heart rate, breathing rate etc - which provide the physical basis for experience. Hence we experience a measure of stability.

In terms of experience, that's more about being coherent. It hangs together. That tree, that street, these people - all hang together as one coherent experience, a coherence brought about through cognition. We are not yet at the stage of narrative layers.

So without narrative, we won't be freaking out when we see a tree, or a car, or a building. Thank God. :)

By the way, if you've ever had the experience where this basic cognition is not operating, you'll know how hellish it is.

So, here we are, human beings, living life. And then we bring in the narrative, what it all means, what things are, who we are, what the relationships are, the structuring of time...and so on. Now we're operating in a version of life, Life 2.0 :)

By the way, this is in no way to disparage thinking. Thinking is wonderful. As natural as rain. But it's a case of seeing more clearly what is occurring, and what isn't; when thinking is useful, and when not.

With respect to the previous inquiry into considering the physical/feeling experience and the narrative aspects set apart, distinct - also notice when you do this, the effect on spaciousness, and the experience of spaciousness.

When living more through the physical/feeling experience, what is the experience of spaciousness there?

When living more through the narrative, what is the experience of spaciousness there?

Does narrative constrain spaciousness? Or not.

Explore, happy Sunday. :)

/john
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:22 am

Hey John,
Does narrative constrain spaciousness? Or not.
So my observations at that level in the past couple of days is the following.
What I have noticed is the amount of enery/time that can be spend in obsession with even mild things like small irritation (say someone makes you uncomfortable) or small desire (say you want an ice cream).

My observation is that we CAN have an incredible effortless ability (through highly cultivated habits I would guess) to come back to the object of desire/aversion.

And this obsession takes up ressource, focuses the attention on that object and thereby prevent the "opening" of what we could call "multidimensional non oriented attention", sweet attention that is opened to anything that happens"

Interestingly this effortless obsession with objects (say aversion, coming back to the irritant, whereby a person or a situation, or desire, for that book, that dharma talk, that ice cream, that person (say in early onset of courtship, not so much in established long term relationship) that will make me happy forever) can also be directed to something else.

Ok so for example now instead of coming back to the object of aversion through habit, we come back to the breath or to a pleasant sensation (happiness/contentment...) and become one pointed on that for a long(ish) period of time.
(like Leigh Brasington style for lay householders, or Pa Auk Sayadaw style for the more hardcore ones who have big chunks of spare time)

Then instead of cultivating hatred/attachement and being "contracted by the anger" or "fearfull of losing the object of attachement" we can cultivate a state of openess, of "joy without object" (as Jean Klein coined it)

Although this state could be labelled still "contracted" (one pointed) it is in fact very expanded.

What I can say is by analysis and looking through Anatta (Not Self) and Emptiness teachings this expansion is slowly coming up in daily life too.

"In the seen, only the seen" : this experience of seeing comes with the conditions and ceases with the ceasing of conditions. No self, no object, just an experience of seeing.
When living more through the physical/feeling experience, what is the experience of spaciousness there?
Ok so by "physical/feeling experience" you mean the basic functions of the body and the basic perception/knowing/recognition (aka not psychotic) experiencing of objects ?
Ok in that "mode" nothing is threatening. Action occurs if necessary but nothing is "held" and nothing steal energy/ressource to obsess about.
When living more through the narrative, what is the experience of spaciousness there?
In direct experience the narrative takes up energy, it takes up TIME and ENERGY by hijacking experience by getting obsessed with one or several object coming back to them again and again and again, like a stubborn little kid that wants something from you will never cease to ask. Except that these thoughts and feeling and upset and craving are "in our heads" (so to speak as "head" is a mere label imputed on of a bundle of sensations/perceptions) and sometimes more difficult to get away from.

There is a stickiness to experience. And this stickiness/glue is costly. It restrict the experience because it focuses the mind on one subject only through emotion and stories, coming back to that object (how that book, that ice cream, that person is going to make us super dupper happy forever / or how that person wronged us, that situation was unfair, that money loss what MY fault, with anger directed internally or externally and obsessing and taking up energy to come back and be one pointed with the wrong kind of objects, source of disturbance in the mind)


That's my observation for now about the contraction of experience.

Thanks
Kind regards

Pierre

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:12 pm

Hey John,

Do you still want to continue to guide/accompany me in the exploration of these ?
The rabbit hole goes far doesn't it :) ? Hopefully we'll dig up some interesting and maybe new findings by keeping turning these stones ahah !

Just come up from a shamanic drumming and deep "gong bath" weekend and I have to say that the ability of this mind to generate images and stories is mesmerising.

Now the images that came from there could either be identified as "that was "me" in a previous life" or just as "these are 'just' images arisings" and "deep sensations/feelings" arising now in that moment, in that so called "alternate state of consciousness".

Believing in stories or not believing in them, who believes ? Who attaches ? What does the illusion show up as ?
Can I travel through time to reach out something my DNA/blood whatever can give me access to ?

Stories upon stories :) :)

What I am interested the most in is pinpointing and "mapping" the nature and shape and size and structure of the prison of words, whether the prison is beautiful and sweet or ugly and hellish.

What is this made of ? How to (what is a good way to) bring about a perception that is skilful in dealing with whatever appears ?

Will you be my guide so we can look together at the illusion and understand its deeper layers ?

Thank you
Kind regards

Pierre

User avatar
InherentNot
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:49 am

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby InherentNot » Mon Jul 08, 2019 6:07 pm

So just to give more perspective on what I am trying to do here (and hopefully get the mental space and the guiding to get through) :

My current "model"/"frame" (to be challenged/decomposed) is that what we are experiencing is a kind of "self-aware" "field" that "awares itself" (bu "itself" I mean for example an image, a sound, or a sensation in "the body") when the conditions are ripe for that specific image/sound to be "seen" or "heard".

What I am interested in is how the self show up (as) in the above.
If there is only the above ("self-aware"-image-sound-smell-thought-touch) how come we have these different layer of conditioning and views and can this be seen and dissolved and how to do that ?

So there is the labelling (as Lama Zopa says in his short book "How things exist" or the Dalai Lama in "How to see yourself as you really are") of the "base" (thoughts+perceptions+sensations) onto which "we" impute a label that is then believed to exist from its own side.

http://media.institutvajrayogini.fr/EVY ... npoche.pdf

Now the key as far as I get it is that the labelling itself is a "self-aware-thought" that has on top of being a thought the special feature that it is "believed" ie engaged with.

So how does that belief expresses itself this is what I am trying to explore.
I am trying to connect or understand how for example a tension or a hurt in the heart after hearing or being treated in such or such a way is arising ? How does the harderned layer of "thoughts" could have such a power ?

In the movie "Mother!" the character of Javier Bardem has NO power but he manipulates the character of Jennifer Lawrence and she doesn't know that she is the one with all the power.

How to get back the power and to dissolve the walls of the prison of words and emotions (fear, irritation, anger) ?

How does "anger" arises ? Or rather, what is the specific perspective (way of seeing/understanding things) that COULD give rise to this anger ? What is the relationship between a belief and the feeling ? How does it work ? How to dissolve it ? What happened when it's completely dissolved ?

I am looking for something very down to earth, an exploration together of these "mechanisms" and their end.

User avatar
s-p-a-c-e
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Inherent Or Not ?

Postby s-p-a-c-e » Tue Jul 09, 2019 10:27 pm

Hi Pierre,

Yes, am ok to continue, though I'm very busy at the mo, so keeping the posts short and on point would be helpful, thank you.

How to get back the power and to dissolve the walls of the prison of words and emotions (fear, irritation, anger) ?

How does "anger" arises ? Or rather, what is the specific perspective (way of seeing/understanding things) that COULD give rise to this anger ? What is the relationship between a belief and the feeling ? How does it work ? How to dissolve it ? What happened when it's completely dissolved ?

I am looking for something very down to earth, an exploration together of these "mechanisms" and their end.

It all comes down to perception. That's it. Like any skill, we can develop it, and in so doing, see more widely and deeply. Many of the things we think we need to do, such as dissolve anger, is based on a particular perception of anger. So, the first thing is to appreciate that everything you see to be the case, your landscape, is a product of your current state of perception.

This is the same with hurt, irritation etc - we are hurt because of what is perceived to be happening, what it means etc.

This is the basic notion to grasp: do not take anything at face value.

Have a ponder on that, and share what shows up.

best wishes,
John
"The more he looked inside, the more Piglet wasn't there." - A.A.Milne

Author, The Faun's Apprentice - see on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fauns-Apprenti ... B01AR2B63U


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest