Here are two basic forms of inquiry:
Notice all as awareness.
And notice how appearances are created here now.
And as we get more familiar with these explorations, it is natural to take this exploration to what appears as most unenlightened.
What appears most unenlightened to me here and now?
draft….
A simple way of looking at exploration: Notice. Shift. Do.
Each of them has many facets. For instance….
There are many gifts in projections.
The most obvious is that projections allows us to orient and navigate in the world. Our world of images create a sense of space and time, places whatever happens in the sense fields in space. connects images of past, present, and future events, places boundaries to create the appearance of objects, filters, interprets, and makes sense of it all. This can most easily be noticed through simple sense field explorations. Without our world of images, we wouldn’t function.
This world of images also creates an infinitely rich world. We can place boundaries anywhere. Find connections anywhere. Look at any (imagined) object from any number of perspectives. Create any number of contexts which dramatically changes how we see something. We quite literally create our own worlds through the images we place on top of the sense fields.
God hath given you one face and you make yourselves another.
- Hamlet 3.1, Shakespeare
This is an example of how great koans can be found in non-traditional sources.
And more importantly, it is a reminder of how any statement is a question and a pointer for inquiry.
It is always interesting to notice how different practices work together and how they may mutually support each other.
For instance, The Work and exploring sense-fields have a great deal of similarities, and there is also some cross-fertilization there.
In The Work, I explore the effects of taking a story as true, and find what is more honest for me than the initial belief.
And through exploring the sense-fields, I notice gestalts made up of image overlays on sense fields, what happens when gestalts are taken as real and substantial, and what happens when the images are recognized as a simple overlay of images.
The questions and sub-questions of The Work guide my exploration of the sense -fields. The sense-field exploration helps me notice the mechanisms here now, and in more detail. And through The Work, I get to see how beliefs play themselves out in my life in more detail.
Again, very simple, and perhaps obvious both in a psychological and spiritual context. But also something I find helpful and fascinating just about every day. I often do this before falling asleep and after waking up, and also at times throughout the day.
I can explore what is here in sensation, either as an open exploration of the sense field.
Or if a specific symptom, emotion, mood, or anything else draws my attention, I can explore that.
What do I find when I bring attention to sensations? How does it show up in sensation? What is its sensation facet?
What is here as images overlaid on those sensations?
How do they combine? How do I experience the combination of the two?
Before falling asleep in the evening, and after waking up in the morning, I like to take some time to explore the sense fields. And as I often write about here, one of the things I explore is the three times. How does the past, future, and present appear in the sense fields?
I may begin with bringing attention to each sense field – sensations, sight, sound, smell, taste, and thoughts/images – one at a time, and notice what is there.
Then, I close my eyes if they are not already closed, and notice how I have an image of my body laying there in the bed, in a room, in a building, at the outskirts of a small town, next to a forest, in a country, on the Earth. All of that happens in my own world of images. It is the movie I play for myself about the world. I recognize it all as images.
From lead to gold. It’s a familiar analogy, but still useful. And it is a slight variation of a familiar theme of this blog, but I’ll still mention it.
When I resist emotions, they become lead. And when I allow them with kindness, they are gold. Resisting emotions, or any experience – such as sensations or images or gestalts such as pain – there is a battle. There is an image of an “I” opposed to the experience as an “it”, and there is a sense of the battle dragging me down. It becomes a weight on me. When I allow experience as is, with kindness, it is revealed as experience. Ephemeral. Insubstantial. I may even notice the quiet joy in experience itself. And there is also a sense of fullness, of coming home.
When I believe a story, it is lead. When I inquire into and clarify it, it is gold. Taking a story as true, it is inevitably at odds with (my stories about) reality, and there is stress, tension, a sense of having to defend the viewpoint of the story, a sense of being right, and all of that is tiring and a weight on me. Inquiring into the belief and finding what is more honest for me, there is relief, receptivity, kindness, perhaps even a measure of wisdom. What appeared as a problem – whether it was the topic of the belief, or the belief itself, is now revealed as a guide and support.
When I take the mental field as substantial and real, it is lead. When I recognize it as what it is, it is revealed as gold. Taking my own world of images as real and substantial, there is stress. I create an imagined world as overlay of the sense fields – sensations, sights, sounds, smell, taste – forget it is imaginary, and get weighed down by it. The images of I, the wider world, and their relationships, appear as real and substantial, and I experience those relationships as precarious, slightly uneasy, and at times tense. When recognized as my own world of images as it happens, the edge goes out of it. Now, it is all recognized as images, interpretations, questions about the world. Innocent. Insubstantial. Ephemeral. They are still very useful for orienting and navigating in the world, but I don’t need to scare myself by them. The images of I, me, the wider world, relationships, and a world beyond these images, are all images. Helpful, and an overlay of images.
I went into a bookstore a couple of days ago and found copies of Sarah Palin’s autobiography prominently displayed in the fiction section. It may have been a staff person who deliberately placed them there, or a customer with a sense of humor. For a book with so many obvious distortions and factual errors, it is perhaps a good placement.
But all biographies and autobiographies are in a very real sense fictional. They are heavily filtered through interpretations and whatever information is available – itself just a selection and heavily interpreted.
During the nights now, there is a sense of all drifting. Of all being in flow. It pulls any sense of having a sense of solid ground to stand on with it, which makes it difficult to hold onto a sense of a separate “I” – a center located in space and anchored on particular sensations.
It may be because I still have a very low grade flu.
In any case, it is an invitation to notice that ground – or those anchor points – for a sense of a separate I. To explore the dynamics around it, and notice what happens when it – the image of a doer/observer and the sensations it is anchored on – is noticed as content of experience just like any other content of experience.
I also notice the slight fear that comes up , and how comfortable that sense of a center seems. It is familiar. Has been around for a long time. (With some vacations.) And there are stories saying that something terrible will happen if identification is released out of it, if I find myself as the mystery all content of experience is the play of.
I don’t notice it much during the day since attention then has many places to go. But during the night, the flow of content goes into the foreground, pulling – almost – anchors, ground and “I” out to sea with it.
When I resist, it is uncomfortable. When I find curiosity and allow it as it is, it is quite different.
And when attention goes to the murmurs of fear, allowing it as it is with kindness, the sense of the flow and pull as “other” softens and falls away.
I am still exploring what happens when there is identification with the image(s) of a doer and/or observer.
There is obviously identification with a story, in this case the doer/observer images.
It is localized in space, in my case in and around the head area. The sensations here serve as “anchors” in space for the doer/observer images.
A few things I notice about tiredness….
I notice tiredness of body and/or mind in the conventional sense.
When I look a little closer, I find that the tiredness appears quite differently through each sense field. As pure sensation, it is just a sensation. When it is combined with a label (“tiredness”) the sensation/story gestalt of tiredness appears. And when that one is taken as real, the tiredness gestalt appears as real, solid and substantial. It becomes an object in my life.
And when stories about that tiredness are taken as true, there is a holding onto or (more often) pushing away of this sense of tiredness. I wrestle with tiredness.
Things and experiences may appear a certain way, as a glass, cat, music, pain, emotions, an object, an experiencer, a sense of self.
But what do I find when I investigate them here and now? What do I find when I explore those that seem the most clearly defined, easily labeled, real, solid and stable?
Right now, there is an experience of a slight, dull pain at the base of the scull on the right side, and a slightly sharper pain at the left temple.
When I actively resist the experience, I find that the pain appears more solid, real, stable and easily labeled. There is also more of a sense of separation to it, and of a doer and observer that is separate from it. (Or trying to separate itself from it.)
It is easy to assume that an object is an object and the subject is really and only a subject.
But what do I find when I explore what initially appears as object and subject? Experienced and experiencer? Observed and observer? For instance, how do each one appear through the sense fields?
Mystics from different traditions talks about how all is happening within and as the Divine Mind, aka Buddha Mind, Big Mind, Brahman, Tao etc.
This can sound abstract and as a nice idea, but it is also something we can get a taste of – or recognize more clearly – here now and in immediacy.
Breath practice can also have an element of inquiry, either as a natural side-effect or as a result of more intentional focus.
Using the breath as an object of attention, attention is invited to calm down and stabilize.
In the process, I may quietly and wordlessly notice some of the dynamics around it
I usually bring attention to the sensations at the tip of the nose, but it could also be on the expansion of the belly front-and-back, the expansion of the chest, or the sensation of the cool air flowing through the nose and into the lungs.
My experience since the initial awakening is that “everything” is insubstantial and awareness itself. Whatever I see is God.
But this “everything” is only a rough everything. It leaves something out: smaller islands of density.
These function as anchors for a sense of I located in space, on sensations, and created through an overlay of images. There is a sense of a doer and observer located in and around the head area, located on sensations there (in my case and right now, created through a slight muscle tension in the upper neck and through the tongue slightly pressing against the back and upper part of my mouth), with an overlay of images of a doer and observer, images displacing some of those sensations so the sense of an observer is more around and outside of the head, and - crucially - images and stories telling me that is what I am.
All photographs are memento mori. To take a photograph is to participate in another person’s (or thing’s) mortality, vulnerability, mutability. Precisely by slicing out this moment and freezing it, all photographs testify to time’s relentless melt.
- Susan Sontag
I came across this quote earlier today at a exhibit of Binh Danh’s beautiful photos.
A photography is always about the past, something that is already gone. It is a reminder of the ephemeral nature of any situation, experience and life. This situation, experience and life will be gone too, and so will eventually all of humanity.
In the same way, I find that thoughts are always about the past. They are either obviously about the past, apparently about the present – yet really about something that is already gone, or apparently about the future – but always projections based on the past. All thoughts are memento mori as well.
I can explore this through stories, reflect on how ephemeral my experiences and life is, find a new sense of urgency and appreciation that way, and a help in reorganizing my priorities in life.
And I can explore the ephemeral nature of everything in immediacy, as it happens here now. I can expore it through the sense fields, one field at a time. When I bring attention to the sounds, what do I find? Do any sound hang around? If a sound seems to last for a while, does it really? Can I notice how stories about past, current and possible future sounds create a sense of continuity? Can I find continuity outside of those stories? Can I notice how a story tells me a sound is similar to or the same as a previous sound? Is it really the same?
As soon as I take myself as the image of a separate I, it is not recognized as an image.
It is one of the many tricks of the mind.
The separate self gestalt takes different forms, such as a doer and an observer, always made up of sensations and images and other sense fields as appropriate. As any other gestalt it happens as content of experience, living its own life. It is not more what I am than any other content of experience.
Yet, as soon as this gestalt is taken as what I am, it becomes invisible as gestalt and content of experience. It becomes the eyeball that cannot see itself.
Even when attention is brought to it, it may shift to another location in space so it can take a look at where it used to be, continuining to be the eyeball that cannot see itself.
(There is a lot going on here: A story of a separate I located in particular area of space, usually in/around the head. A story of something observed. A story saying the separate I is observing. A story bringing attention to it. A story making it appear in a slightly different location in space.)
A simple way to explore this is through the headless experiments, as that which all experience – including the separate I gestalt – happens within.
Another is to explore the separate I gestalt – the doer, observer and so on – through the sense fields. How does it appear in each sense field? What are the sensation components? What is the image? Where is it in space? Is it content of experience? Does it come and go? Is it different from any other content of experience? Is it what I really am?
Penn & Teller’s seven basic principles of magic and how they apply to the topics of this blog.
Palm: to hide an object.
Attention is absorbed into content of stories, and what we are does not notice itself. It is hidden in plain view.
Also, when stories are taken as true they are not recognized as stories. For instance, as soon as there is identification with the image of a separate I, it becomes the eyeball that cannot see itself.
Ditch: secretly dispose of an object.
Everything self-liberates. Something happens in experience, and it is gone before it has even manifested.
Steal: secretly obtain an object.
Whatever happens arrives out of thin air, out of nowhere.
Load: remove an object to where it is needed.
Identification moves into a sense of a separate I.
Also, the sense of a separate I sometimes move around, especially when attention is brought to it. (It moves to another location, as the “new” observer of where it just was.)
I am no expert on how to work with or relate to the dark nights, but here are some things that seem helpful to me….
First, all of the usual practices can be helpful, whatever they may be. Ethics. Work in the world. Relationships. Inquire into beliefs. (Including those about the dark night.) Allowing experience as it is, as if it would never change. Be with experience, in a wholehearted and heartfelt way, with kindness. Be with emotions, with heart and kindness, allowing them to unfold and change as they want. Tong len. Rejoicing in others happiness. Jesus prayer. And so on.
And one that is especially helpful for me now is to explore how the dark night appears in each sense field. How does it appear, whatever it may be? (Despair, aridity, grief etc.) Is it content of experience, as any other experience? And then also notice the doer and observer of this inquiry. How does the doer + observer appear in each sense field? Are they content of experience as any other content of experience?
It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am the All. From Me did the All come forth, and unto Me did the All extend. Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find Me there.
- Gospel of Thomas, verse 77.
What we are and everything is, is that which all happens within and as. When I explore anything through the sense fields, I find that the way it appears in each sense field is as ephemeral and insubstantial, as no thing appearing as something, as awakeness itself. A stone = sight, sensations, an overlay of images, and each of these are no thing appearing as something, awakeness itself.
Again, maybe 101 stuff, but good to notice….
When I explore my own world of images, the mental field overlay on the sense fields, it is quite helpful to notice the overlay on the wider world, and also on the me part – my human self. But what is really helpful is to notice the overlay of the wider world, the me and the I, the relationships among them, and how drama is entierly created from these relationships, within my own world of images.
If I don’t notice the overlay of a me, and also – and especially – the overlays of a doer, observer etc., there is easily still an identification with these, and I don’t notice how all drama is created in the relationships between the wider world and the me + I.
When I include the images of a me + I, in their many forms, the “trick” is seen through. I notice how it is all within my own world of images, and how any drama is created within my own world of images.
In exploring the mental field, I notice a few things related to language and communication…
The mental field mimic each of the other fields. It mimics sight (images), sound, taste, smell, sensation, and even itself. (For instance when there is a memory of a previous thought.)
The mental field labels and interpret what is going on in the other fields. There is a sound, then an image of a bird placed on that sound. (In the area of space where that sound seems to come from.) A smell, and an image of a possible source and further associations.
I notice a series of shifts for myself…
First, there is a noticing of what I am and what everything is. All is awakeness, no thing appearing as something, the play of Ground, and so on.
But something is left out. The sense of a separate I – as a doer and/or observer – is left out of this, and is still taken as what I am.
There is a oneness state here. A separate I one with everything, and all as awakeness itself.
And also a sense that something is missing. It is not quite complete yet.
I keep coming back to the same topics here…
Anything can be an analogy to some aspects of the awakening process, and so also magic.
In magic, there is an illusion. Something appears to happen that doesn’t really.
There is misdirection. Attention goes elsewhere, not to the mechanics of what is happening.
The trick may be revealed. There is insight into what is really happening.
And we still enjoy the trick. The appearances, and the skills and showmanship that goes into it.
Exploring the sense fields is a very useful and versatile tool, maybe especially helpful for noticing how the mental field creates an overlay on all the fields, creating gestalts such as a sense of space and time, a me and a separate I.
Over the last few weeks, I have noticed a particular flavor of this more, as it happens in daily life.
I notice the images of the wider world, me and of the relationships among these, and how any sense of drama is created among and within these images. If there is a sense of drama – tension, stress, attraction, aversion and so on – it is all created within my own world of images.
It is obvious, in one sense, and also what I discover through The Work, but it is still a little different to notice it as it happens, in daily life. It has its own flavor.
And when it is noticed in this way, it just becomes silly. There is no point in taking it seriously anymore. Why would I want to create drama for myself in this way, or at least be caught up in it as real? When it is noticed in this way, I cannot take it as substantial and real anymore.
I can of course use it as information and as something to help my human self orient and function in the world, and it is a very helpful tool in this sense. But when it is noticed as it happens, it cannot be taken as substantial and real anymore.
What are some of the ways of working with let Your will be done?
In general, it makes sense to do what needs to be done in a conventional sense. Acting in ways that seem appropriate to whatever situation we are in, with whatever kindness and insight is available to us.
And within this, nurture an attitude or orientation of let Your will be done, and also notice that it is already so.
I can use it as a prayer, in a sincere and heartfelt way.
And I can take it as a pointer, a starting point for inquiry, and maybe notice that it is already so. God’s will is already done, in everything that happens, including that which I take as initiated by a doer here.
I can notice that through the headless experiments or the Big Mind process.
I can inquire into causality, finding infinite causes to everything that seems initiated by a doer, leaving the doer as nothing at all.
I can explore the sense of a doer as it appears in the sense fields, maybe finding it as a gestalt made up of sensations and images. And finding only a story saying that this gestalt initiates anything.
What does it mean to be present? Or more accurately, to notice that you are present? When is it a useful pointer, and when not?
It is a pointer to bring attention to what is here now. To what happens in any sense field, including the mental field when it is noticed as happening here now.
And it is helpful in just that way. It is an invitation to notice that it is all happening here now, including mental field creations of past and future. It is an invitation to notice what happens when I get lost in ideas of past and future and take them as real and substantial (stress), and what happens when I notice them as ideas only (recognized as memories and scenarios, and as tools only).
As any pointer, it may be helpful and functional in some situations – in this case when someone is in the habit of getting lost in mental field creations without noticing what is happening.
But the pointer can also have drawbacks.
The witness/observer gestalt tends to come up, and it may easily be taken as what we are. I recognize that I am not most of what is happening in the sense fields, and the gestalts that come from a mental field overlay. Instead, I take the witness gestalt as what I am, and don’t recognize that one as a gestalt as well.
The idea of present also implies past and future, the three come in one package. So if the idea of present is taken as substantial and real, the idea of past and future tend to be taken as substantial and real as well.
A practical approach here is to use notice you are present as a pointer to bring attention to what is happening in the sense fields, and notice them as content of experience.
Then notice the idea of “present” overlaid on the sense fields, how it implies past and future, and how all of those ideas happen here now in the mental field.
And also investigate the sense of witness or observer created, see how it appears in the sense fields, and notice that too as a gestalt and content of experience.
Am I content of experience? Am I any of the gestalts? Content of experience comes and goes, what is it that does not come and go?
I have been curious about the sense of a witness or observer lately.
What are the sensation components of the sense of a witness?
What images is it made up of?
Is it content of awareness? Does it come and go? Is it different from other gestalts, such as the gestalts of me (as this human self), pain, emotions and so on?
What happens when there is identification with it, when I take it as what I am?
What happens when that identification is released? (Even if I just imagine it.)
What happens when I notice the sense of observer or witness as a gestalt, as any other gestalt?
When I explore the identification with it, I see that identification with a sense of an observer is another foothold for that sense of a separate I. It gives it ground to stand on, another ledge within content of experience, facing the (apparent) abyss of releasing identification out of any gestalts and stories.
| donation | donation | donation | donation | donation | donation | donation |
