I went to a coffee shop this morning for breakfast, and had lots of opportunity exploring the dynamics of the field, as I wrote about in the previous posts. I also see how the words are probably very similar to what I have written in the past, but as it arises in the present, the experience of it is of being completely fresh and new. (From the inside perspective, it is fresh and new, for others who may read it, just the same old 🙂 )
Another thing I explored…
The field (a) filters itself through a sense of I and Other, and with this, there is (b) a sense of something, more specifically an exclusive identity, to protect and defend. There is a belief in the idea of a separate I, and an elaborate and exclusive identity of this I. (c) When something arises that is outside of this identity, defense kicks in – either passively waiting to be engaged, or actively. (d) Along with the impulse to defend comes a set of sensations. (e) A story or set of stories are added to these sensations, interpreting them (as tension, contraction, anger, fear) and the wider situation (he is…). (f) These stories reinforce the sensations, make them seem more solid and stable, they reinforce the initial story of I and Other, and they reinforce the exclusive identity and of having to defend this identity against something else arising in the field.
So there are several reinforcing cycles here. The first between the sense of I and Other, and the trigger and reaction (the situation may be interpreted to justify the reaction, reinforcing the sense of I and Other, and of something to defend). And then also between the consequences of the reaction and the trigger (he did… so I get angry, uncomfortable, afraid), and the sense of I and Other (he did… so I…).
It is the job of the mind to make our beliefs seem real, and it does the job well. But it also means that when we see through it, even at one point of this chain of events, it all tends to unravel. And as we allow it to unravel, over and over, the habitual patterns gradually change.