One Sensation at a Time?

Jazz Muzak, modified 11 Months ago.

One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Hello all, apologies if this has already been asked and answered.

I've been going back to the basics with my practice lately, and have been perusing the early chapters in MCTB2. In the chapter "The Three Characteristics", Daniel describes sensations and their mental impressions "arising and vanishing completely before the next arises, so it is possible to sort out which is which with relatively stable attention..."

I've noticed that typically in my vipassana practice, I am not noticing a single sensation at a time. In fact, the field of awareness that I am perceiving is very wide (although the width and depth changes, which I think has to do with the PoI), and is made up of many many many sensations. These all come and go quite rapidly. Is Daniel refering to how each individual sensation disappears before the "replacement" for THAT particular sensation arises, or is it more like the "one electron" theory where there is just one electron moving so fast it seems to appear everywhere? Do I need to increase the clarity my perceptual resolution and narrow my focus to the point I'm literally perceiving only one sensation at a time? Or is the wide field of many sensations that I currently perceive fine?

Thanks, and I hope you are all well.
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
One sensation at a time seems like how the left brain hemisphere perceives things.
All practices presented in MCTB seems to be for left hemisphere... while outcome somehow points to stroger right hemisphere output to perception. I mean specifically things like field of self knowing sensations and such. Actually these descriptions can be confusing to someone who already have stronger right hemisphere and especially if someone develops it somewhere at later stages.

In any way it is entirely possible that the presentation you describe is simply because it is natural for you.
Should you try to notice sensations on-at-a-time? I guess it shouldn't hurt to try. Just keep in mind that you do have two hemispheres with somewhat different qualities regarding sensations opposite practices will cause their activation. If you are a right hemisphere person then doing practices for left hemisphere might cause you to experience reality from its perspective which depending on many factors can be super helpful or can lead to some issues, at least until your brain learns how to use such configuration.

My 2 cents
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
This is unclear to me as well. 

So many things occur at the same time or very nearly so that it feels like walking naked through drizzle and being asked to 'feel every raindrop'. I just open up as much as I can and try and stay with it-whatever 'it' is at the moment. emoticon
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Do I need to increase the clarity my perceptual resolution and narrow my focus to the point I'm literally perceiving only one sensation at a time? Or is the wide field of many sensations that I currently perceive fine?

I look at things this way:

- Be careful about making the assumption that you're truly perceiving many objects at once because you can easily lock into the concept that you are, but that one concept is actually the object you're perceiving. Typically this is a mental image.

- You have to practice to increase the speed of recognition - the mind works very fast, so you need to get up to that speed of perception to see the way it's working.

- Clarity of perception is generally a function of speed

I hope this is helpful!
Jazz Muzak, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Do I need to increase the clarity my perceptual resolution and narrow my focus to the point I'm literally perceiving only one sensation at a time? Or is the wide field of many sensations that I currently perceive fine?

I look at things this way:

- Be careful about making the assumption that you're truly perceiving many objects at once because you can easily lock into the concept that you are, but that one concept is actually the object you're perceiving. Typically this is a mental image.

- You have to practice to increase the speed of recognition - the mind works very fast, so you need to get up to that speed of perception to see the way it's working.

- Clarity of perception is generally a function of speed

I hope this is helpful!


Chris, thank you for the input. So, you're saying I could be viewing a "TV screen of static" and assuming I'm perceiving each particle of static as an individual sensation when really what I'm perceiving is "TV screen of static" as a single object? Because right now it FEELS like the former, but it could certainly be the later.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Because right now it FEELS like the former, but it could certainly be the later.

There's only one way to find out which is happening, Jazz -- sit still and investigate it for yourself!

thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Because right now it FEELS like the former, but it could certainly be the later.

There's only one way to find out which is happening, Jazz -- sit still and investigate it for yourself!

Results will be influenced by how you do the investigation.
It is safe to assume that even someone who naturally use right hemisphere will do these kinds of practices using left hemisphere. Not only Vipassana practice of choice around these parts include using mental word labels but conclusion is specified and the goal of practice is not freestyle checking what is possible but getting to this exact conclusion emoticon

That is the issue with making conclusions based on very specific practices. If the practice drives the conclusion and conclusion drives understanding then depending on practices done conclusions can be like these practices, half the truth based on using half of the brain emoticon

edit://
Just to be clear: I am fully aware that more brain is used than half even if it is specifically left hemisphere practice. Right does its thing regardless and it provides left with where it could jump next.

However the interfaces and ways of generating consciousness which right hemisphere can provide are not used unless practices are specifically designed for right hemisphere.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"That is the issue with making conclusions based on very specific practices. If the practice drives the conclusion and conclusion drives understanding then depending on practices done conclusions can be like these practices, half the truth based on using half of the brain"

Its not black and white as this. Sure I do agree that  conclusions will be based on the practice but don't exclude the LATER integration that will take place as part of the "ripening" emoticon 

Stuff tends to equalize (Yin-Yang) if we get out of the way emoticon 
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
This thread 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Olivier:
This thread 
Which one represents me? 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
You? Who knows. I'm that little dog, though.
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
You? Who knows. I'm that little dog, though.
Funny, I was gonna say I'm the haughty lute playing pig !

I'm definitely one of the musicians though,
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Olivier:
Chris Marti:
You? Who knows. I'm that little dog, though.
Funny, I was gonna say I'm the haughty lute playing pig !

I'm definitely one of the musicians though,
I can see Tim FF in the picture but not in this thread! This pic is a false representation of this thread! Its not according to the Suttas!!! I OBJECT! 
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
Olivier:
Chris Marti:
You? Who knows. I'm that little dog, though.
Funny, I was gonna say I'm the haughty lute playing pig !

I'm definitely one of the musicians though,
I can see Tim FF in the picture but not in this thread! This pic is a false representation of this thread! Its not according to the Suttas!!! I OBJECT! 

True but... I think he is here...
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
I must be that pig guy with the electric guitar!!!
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Rather long faces on this picture so hard to say emoticonemoticonemoticon

I am am the one on the right though emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Dibs on being the owl so that I can uhm rise above it all. emoticon I was going to say fly away. 
thumbnail
Alan Smithee, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 310 Join Date: 4/2/10 Recent Posts
People can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Daniel is stating one of the core Buddhist doctrines, that, were we to have the power of concentration and mindfulness, we might (maybe) be able to see that no two sensations can occur exactly at the same time. I think that this is important because if more than one sensation can exist at the same time, one might say that one sensation is the master of the other, or that one is more "the self" than the other. That said, I've read innumerable accounts of those who have gotten stream entry (many posted by yogis on this site), and none of them have ever claimed to have refined their perception to the level of actually being able to see this. Conversely, the sharper the concentration and mindfullness, the more fluxy and vibration-y things seem to get (more, as opposed to less sensations). As a current Equanimity yogi, I can attest that this is my experience. Generally, from what I've read of yogi's accounts of getting stream is that concentration and mindfullness fixates and hones in on the gap when there are no sensations present, thus, pure emptiness, ie nibbana. I really don't know what I'm talking about here, but just a few days ago I reread the same section of MCToB 2 about the Three Characteristics, and the same section struck me, and this is how I made sense of it myself. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Attention can only perceive one sensation at a time. Awareness knows it all. And sure, the latter is a mind construction, but note that our entire world as it appears to us is a mind construction too. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I might add that I did notice this before stream entry. It's a good exercise, to do this with your attention to really see how partial it is.

As for now, I really prefer to use attention less and asareness more, because attention feels like an octopus clinging to my face. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Attention can only perceive one sensation at a time. Awareness knows it all.

Yeah -- just what is awareness, anyway? It looks to me like it's constructed. It's an idea we use to talk about a concept that no one has a satisfying definition for. It's like the self - something people assume exists but can't put their finger on.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
It's not a thing. It's a flow of becoming, where everything just knows itself while it arises. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
It's not a thing. It's a flow of becoming, where everything just knows itself while it arises. 

I'm not sure what this means. Can you elaborate? What is there in consciousness that's not a thing? If it's an idea, it's a thing. Even you just said:

Awareness knows it all. And sure, the latter is a mind construction, but note that our entire world as it appears to us is a mind construction too. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I don't care as long as it works. 

If everything knowing itself as it arises doesn't make any sense to you, then how do you define nonduality?
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I don't care as long as it works  emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Well then. Awareness and nonduality are the same thing as far as I'm concerned. 

Edit: NON-thing.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
This leaves me wondering what a non-thing could possibly be. But you don't need to explain it to me. I'll be fine not knowing.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Do you consider non-duality a thing? 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Why yes, I do. The only way for me to even consider non-duality is to have a construct, an idea, in mind. So yes, it's a thing. Everything in consciousness is a thing. It's all mind-made. All of this. Every last tiny bit.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
So that's how you are using the word. In that case, then it is a thing. I was merely trying to emphasize that any concept of what happens is but a construction and I don't think that the concept of what happens and what happens are the same things. It's just that the sensations clumping together as the concept sort of have name tags that point to all the other sensations and to the concept of being someone who knows them. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I'm happy to leave definitions of whatever it is that's outside my experience, outside of what's mind, as a mystery. A deep mystery that is completely untouchable and unknowable. I think folks tend to want to go there because it's scary. It leaves us with nothing to grasp, with no safety mechanism. Mind likes to think there's a floor beneath us and that we're not going to be in free fall our entire lives. But that's the point! We're in free fall our entire lives.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
The free fall is what I'm trying to describe. I called it a flow of becoming. I'm fine with leaving it a mystery too, but you asked.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I'm happy to leave definitions of whatever it is that's outside my experience, outside of what's mind, as a mystery. A deep mystery that is completely untouchable and unknowable. I think folks tend to want to go there because it's scary. It leaves us with nothing to grasp, with no safety mechanism. Mind likes to think there's a floor beneath us and that we're not going to be in free fall our entire lives. But that's the point! We're in free fall our entire lives.

Wow emoticon so you can't feel your feet on the solid ground at all?! Wow!
(I'm happy to skip that part) ;) 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
Chris Marti:
I'm happy to leave definitions of whatever it is that's outside my experience, outside of what's mind, as a mystery. A deep mystery that is completely untouchable and unknowable. I think folks tend to want to go there because it's scary. It leaves us with nothing to grasp, with no safety mechanism. Mind likes to think there's a floor beneath us and that we're not going to be in free fall our entire lives. But that's the point! We're in free fall our entire lives.

Wow emoticon so you can't feel your feet on the solid ground at all?! Wow!
(I'm happy to skip that part) ;) 
Is the ground always solid for you? For me it isn't. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"Is the ground always solid for you? For me it isn't. "

Not if I hop! emoticon 


Seriously, yes it does change in feet sensations and can get unnoticeable as if there are no feet on the ground at all, to fluffy and vibratory and heavy hard but most of the time it's solid and seems to have something to do with gravity as I'm always pulled down to it emoticon 

Of course I could also change the wording so we all quack together as birds of feather stick together emoticon The knowing of Mind impression of feet sensation touching the ground ... etc ... ;) 


p.s. please don't take my funky mood as something negative emoticon I really am in a funny mode after this last few days of some solidly perceived struggle. I'm sure it's just a stage change which does it's thing. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
"Is the ground always solid for you? For me it isn't. "

Not if I hop! emoticon 


Seriously, yes it does change in feet sensations and can get unnoticeable as if there are no feet on the ground at all, to fluffy and vibratory and heavy hard but most of the time it's solid and seems to have something to do with gravity as I'm always pulled down to it emoticon 

Of course I could also change the wording so we all quack together as birds of feather stick together emoticon The knowing of Mind impression of feet sensation touching the ground ... etc ... ;) 


p.s. please don't take my funky mood as something negative emoticon I really am in a funny mode after this last few days of some solidly perceived struggle. I'm sure it's just a stage change which does it's thing. 

No worries. It's just that I have experienced sinking into the ground and waves in wooden floors or pavements being large, not just tiny dots hopping around. I think it's fascinating to talk with people about how they experience the world. For me it varies a lot. Depression can make believes seem very solid, for instance. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I also wonder why it is so important to emphasize that we can only have one sensation at a time when it's ALL mindmade. It seems more effective to just go with the sensations that include a holistic knowing than bouncing around like that. Bouncing around doesn't make it something other than a construction anyway.

(In case you missed it, I also replied at the bottom of the previous page.)
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I also wonder why it is so important to emphasize that we can only have one sensation at a time when it's ALL mindmade.

I can tell you this from my experience - knowing now mind creates this experience we have is key. If we make assumptions about how mind works that aren't grounded in our own investigations and subsequent personal realizations and experience of how it works, we're just wandering aimlessly. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Of course I'm only talking from my own experience. From what other experience could I possibly be talking? It is MY experience that attention feels like an octopus clinging to my face and that I prefer to let things just know themselves when possible. But if you enjoy the bouncing around, feel free to bounce around as much as you like. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I said "from my experience" so that people reading would know that's the basis from which I was saying what I said. It wasn't a commentary on what you were saying. Peace!

emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
No worries, we are fine. emoticon I'm just sceptical of your phenomenology, that's all, because in my experience it doesn't do justice to how nonduality works. It's not like it reduces everything to superficial concepts. On the contrary, it has rich tastes and textures without having to bounce around like that. 

(I'm inbetween two different yoga classes now, so that's why my reply didn't come as fast as before. Just clarifying so you don't think that I'm holding a grudge and were declining your peace offering or something. emoticon ) 
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
IME the one sensation at a time thing is preposterous, as is the notion that there are sensate atoms arising and vanishing at a certain max rate independant of the intention to observe in this way (as ni said upthread , and as Burbea has stated on numerous occasions). 

Also i don't think taking experience as the only ultimate gold standard is right. Reason and analysis have their place and power. In fact it seems to me more and more that higher realization has to do with intellectual understanding and not perceptive attainments. That's stated by Gampopa in his description of the bhumis in Precious ornement of liberation, too.  

Well i also think we all agree anyway, but "social life is civil war", innit.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Obviously, YMMV Olivier  emoticon
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Reason and analysis have their place and power. In fact it seems to me more and more that higher realization has to do with intellectual understanding and not perceptive attainments.

I include reason and analysis in my definition of experience, Olivier. I'm not making an artificial distinction. It's all the same mind-made "stuff."
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
Right.

So, about the word mind, since we were talking about precise phenomenological codification. When i hear mind i think "intentional consciousness", as in attentional objectification. But you use it,or so it seems to me, as "impressional consciousness", as in the self-knowingness or luminosity of manifestation, or "absolute phenomenological life" (Some call this Jesus Christ emoticon)

Mind coming for latin mens, sanskrit manas, yes ? It seems to me like in the body-mind-spirit triad, what you're referring to might correspond better to the spirit part, is that fair to say ? Because in my perhaps incorrect understanding, mind usually describes the part of manifestation made up of thoughts and such, the so-called sixth sense door, so it's a confusing usage. 

"Some people say look for the mind, i say there is no mind", etc.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Olivier:
IME the one sensation at a time thing is preposterous, as is the notion that there are sensate atoms arising and vanishing at a certain max rate independant of the intention to observe in this way (as ni said upthread , and as Burbea has stated on numerous occasions). 

Also i don't think taking experience as the only ultimate gold standard is right. Reason and analysis have their place and power. In fact it seems to me more and more that higher realization has to do with intellectual understanding and not perceptive attainments. That's stated by Gampopa in his description of the bhumis in Precious ornement of liberation, too.  

Well i also think we all agree anyway, but "social life is civil war", innit.

I think that intellectual resoning refers to itself rather than to whatever it is we are trying to understand. On the other hand, I think that is also the case with dualistic investigations where there is assumed to be physical senses and a brain looking at something out there. In other words, you are both nuts. emoticon That doesn't preclude that I'm also nuts, by the way. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I'm just sceptical of your phenomenology, that's all, because in my experience it doesn't do justice to how nonduality works. It's not like it reduces everything to superficial concepts. On the contrary, it has rich tastes and textures without having to bounce around like that. 

Superficial concepts? Who said I was agin' rich tastes and textures? That's definitely part of the deal. But those are also objects, right?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I'm just sceptical of your phenomenology, that's all, because in my experience it doesn't do justice to how nonduality works. It's not like it reduces everything to superficial concepts. On the contrary, it has rich tastes and textures without having to bounce around like that. 

Superficial concepts? Who said I was agin' rich tastes and textures? That's definitely part of the deal. But those are also objects, right?
In my language use, concept level is superficial as far as phenomenology goes. Sure, there can be tastes and textures to concepts too, but only if we experience them on a level that goes beyond conceptual thinking. 

Objects? To which subject?
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I said "from my experience" so that people reading would know that's the basis from which I was saying what I said. It wasn't a commentary on what you were saying. Peace!

emoticon

In my experience there is a ... stiffness in the right side of the neck ... unpleasant, ... gone ... transcendent ... Devine ... rainbow-like ... blip, blip, blip ... quack quack quack emoticon 


p.s. I'm just in a funny mode now emoticon please ignore emoticon 
Olivier, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
[quote=Hibiscus Kid
]...I didn't feel that I could be aware of multiple things - it seemed like attention was scanning for and singling out sensations in turn (such as thoughts and the breath for example). An analogy: imagine trying to illuminate an entire room (awareness) with a laser pointer (rapidly shifting attention [or the mind] experiencing one sensation at a time). 

To this day, I still have trouble with open awareness practices for this reason.

Although I see that this is how the mind functions on some level, there is a disconnect in that this understanding hasn't really reduced much (if any) suffering. 
Can you not look at someone's face and hear what they're telling you while also not losing the feeling of your body ? 

What is "one Sensation" if not a self ?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Olivier:

Can you not look at someone's face and hear what they're telling you while also not losing the feeling of your body ? 

I would say that you can’t, but all sensations can know themselves at the same time. If you experience them, you are either not you in that moment or you are just fooling yourself with brain photoshopping from memory.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Olivier:

Can you not look at someone's face and hear what they're telling you while also not losing the feeling of your body ? 

I would say that you can’t, but all sensations can know themselves at the same time. If you experience them, you are either not you in that moment or you are just fooling yourself with brain photoshopping from memory.

To Olivier; 
yes, I can. For instance the breathing sensation is there and interacting with folks talking. 

To Linda;
Yes, when profoundly engaged with an experience/sensation there is no self in it unless I start pondering about it and adding extra hats onto my head emoticon 

All this kind of talk is but waste folks. Just saying. 
"My experience, your experience, this is the right one, no that is the right one". I only hope we don't confuse those practicing diligently with all this know-it-all chit chat. 

Good night dear folks emoticon 
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:

All this kind of talk is but waste folks. Just saying. 
"My experience, your experience, this is the right one, no that is the right one". I only hope we don't confuse those practicing diligently with all this know-it-all chit chat.
I am pretty sure mine is the right experience emoticon
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Ni Nurta:
Papa Che Dusko:

All this kind of talk is but waste folks. Just saying. 
"My experience, your experience, this is the right one, no that is the right one". I only hope we don't confuse those practicing diligently with all this know-it-all chit chat.
I am pretty sure mine is the right experience emoticon

Of course it is emoticonemoticonemoticon 

Edit; or should I say "mine is the left experience" emoticon 
Jazz Muzak, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Lots of beautiful discussion!

Been thinking about this more. I remember several years ago when I started my practice, I felt more like I had to do "one thing at a time", and I felt that I very specifically had to "shine a light" on sensations to get them in attention and "do the Vipassana", as it were. These days, it's much more of an allowing, letting sensations light up "on their own" in a way, which I think allows for the broader patterns of sensation that show up in "the Vipassana" these days (as opposed to "doing the Vipassana? I don't know for sure).

I suppose this is could be a natural progression of the practice, from "doing it" to "letting it happen." Lord knows when I'm "doing the practice" I get quite a bit more agitated and uptight than when "practice is doing me."
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I love it when the practice is doing me. emoticon
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
Would it be correct to view that as progress?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Helen Pohl:
Would it be correct to view that as progress?
View what as progress?
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Helen Pohl:
Would it be correct to view that as progress?
View what as progress?

Ah, sorry, I was referring to the practice doing you instead of the other way around. =)
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Helen Pohl:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Helen Pohl:
Would it be correct to view that as progress?
View what as progress?

Ah, sorry, I was referring to the practice doing you instead of the other way around. =)

I think Chris had a helpful comment about that. I'm not sure that the work put in needs to be detail oriented, specifically, but it seems to be the case that the practice does you after you have put in work in the practice. Karma. So yeah, I guess, but thinking of it as progress can be a trap, especially if it makes you prone to fool yourself that the pactice is doing you when it's really time to put in the work. The right amount of effort can be a delicate balance. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"The right amount of effort can be a delicate balance. "

But to be on the "safe side" better more effort than no effort emoticon 
However I would aim at Relaxed-Curious-Effort. 

I know efforting is looked at as something negative but effort will drop away on its own anyway at some stage, no reason to drop it too soon.


- from my limited experience that is emoticon 


thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
That's basically what I said in my reply to Hibiscus Kid, Papa Che, the one that seemed to upset you. emoticon
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Repetition is the mother of all skills emoticon it's good we keep repeating each other emoticon 
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Helen Pohl:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Helen Pohl:
Would it be correct to view that as progress?
View what as progress?

Ah, sorry, I was referring to the practice doing you instead of the other way around. =)

I think Chris had a helpful comment about that. I'm not sure that the work put in needs to be detail oriented, specifically, but it seems to be the case that the practice does you after you have put in work in the practice. Karma. So yeah, I guess, but thinking of it as progress can be a trap, especially if it makes you prone to fool yourself that the pactice is doing you when it's really time to put in the work. The right amount of effort can be a delicate balance. 

Thanks! It's just that it seems more often than not that practice goes where it goes and I can only direct it so much. Sometimes, not at all.

I do feel that I can adjust the effort involved so that I don't slack off or do something else that's unproductive. But, it's just a feeling. =)
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
I see a tiny frog above the guy in white. Can I be it?
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I suppose this is could be a natural progression of the practice, from "doing it" to "letting it happen." Lord knows when I'm "doing the practice" I get quite a bit more agitated and uptight than when "practice is doing me."

It was my vipassana practice, spent investigating detailed sensations and perceptions, that caused my practice to "take off" - to start happening on its own. As it worked out, doing certain practices caused the conditions that then let the practice do me. This wasn't an either/or process. It was a both process. Maybe there's a detailed meditation practice to be pursued, and then a meta practice that eventually results?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Hibiscus Kid:
I'm not responding to anyone in particular, but I'm sharing to add a data point about my experience:

When paying attention, it's clear to me that the mind is unable to experience more than one sensation at a time. I experience a larger scope of attention or a state of open awareness when the mind rapidly jumps between different sensations/thoughts/emotions etc. in turn.  

This was one of the biggest stumbling blocks for me when trying to practice using "The Mind Illuminated" as I didn't feel that I could be aware of multiple things - it seemed like attention was scanning for and singling out sensations in turn (such as thoughts and the breath for example). An analogy: imagine trying to illuminate an entire room (awareness) with a laser pointer (rapidly shifting attention [or the mind] experiencing one sensation at a time). 

To this day, I still have trouble with open awareness practices for this reason.

Although I see that this is how the mind functions on some level, there is a disconnect in that this understanding hasn't really reduced much (if any) suffering. 

I totally agree that's what happens when using attention. You are using effort, trying to see things from a reference point. That causes the famous head bounces described in MCTB2. You are using the Kazoo player, if I understand your description correctly (which I might not). No wonder you are suffering. 

It's not either - or, though. It can be very hard letting go of attention all at once. It might be easier to let go of the effort to control gradually by just welcoming everything that arises as it arises and sort of let it ripple through you in whichever way it happens to do. If directed attention moving around like a lazer beam is what happens, then go with that and relax into it. It is impermanent, you know. It's not going to stay as a lazer beam forever. It can't. You can also play around with tuning into wider objects, whatever is accessible for you. That is still an object and thus still attention working, but it's less of a laser pointer. If lighting up a whole room seems like to much, maybe a spotlight could be somewhere to start. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Hibiscus Kid:
I'm not responding to anyone in particular, but I'm sharing to add a data point about my experience:

When paying attention, it's clear to me that the mind is unable to experience more than one sensation at a time. I experience a larger scope of attention or a state of open awareness when the mind rapidly jumps between different sensations/thoughts/emotions etc. in turn.  

This was one of the biggest stumbling blocks for me when trying to practice using "The Mind Illuminated" as I didn't feel that I could be aware of multiple things - it seemed like attention was scanning for and singling out sensations in turn (such as thoughts and the breath for example). An analogy: imagine trying to illuminate an entire room (awareness) with a laser pointer (rapidly shifting attention [or the mind] experiencing one sensation at a time). 

To this day, I still have trouble with open awareness practices for this reason.

Although I see that this is how the mind functions on some level, there is a disconnect in that this understanding hasn't really reduced much (if any) suffering. 

I totally agree that's what happens when using attention. You are using effort, trying to see things from a reference point. That causes the famous head bounces described in MCTB2. You are using the Kazoo player, if I understand your description correctly (which I might not). No wonder you are suffering. 

It's not either - or, though. It can be very hard letting go of attention all at once. It might be easier to let go of the effort to control gradually by just welcoming everything that arises as it arises and sort of let it ripple through you in whichever way it happens to do. If directed attention moving around like a lazer beam is what happens, then go with that and relax into it. It is impermanent, you know. It's not going to stay as a lazer beam forever. It can't. You can also play around with tuning into wider objects, whatever is accessible for you. That is still an object and thus still attention working, but it's less of a laser pointer. If lighting up a whole room seems like to much, maybe a spotlight could be somewhere to start. 

I don't think Kid is walking your current path Linda emoticon Also saying that Paying Attention causes suffering is wrong. Could put people off Noting/paying matter of fact attention. Clinging leads to suffering. Noting brings us closer to this truth so all that's already there gets amplified. It's just how the path works. It's not the "kazoo player" attention that's the issue. That is a valuable insight practice tool. Do not get all disrespectful towards the kazoo player emoticon we owe it a lot don't you think emoticon 

One step at a time Kid. Kazoo player is doing a fine job and is serving the purpose of awakening. It's ok to feel gratitude for its fidgety music interpretation emoticon What we need is clearly comprehanding 1-10 sensations a second in its mono-note play. Stick to practice that keeps your noting without lapse for the duration of sit. No reason for practicing "cool" meditation styles just because people are silent on retreats or folks here say "choice less awareness" emoticon . Most work is done in the privacy of our home anyway. 

Also the laser point will change with stages rather than you willfully turning away from attention towards open awareness. No reason to force or change anything. Just matter of fact noting is enough and watch the changes take place on their own. 

Papa out! 

emoticon 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
If you find the Kazoo player useful, go with it. You be you. I said that attention causes suffering for me. HK said that in his experience noticing how mind is made up by attention did not reduce his suffering much if at all. I merely agreed. If HK doesn't want to do choiceless awareness, I'm not going to force him. If I made that impression, I sincerely apologize. emoticon
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Written words can be easily misinterpreted. emoticon my apologies. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
Written words can be easily misinterpreted. emoticon my apologies. 

They sure can. It's all good, Papa Che. 
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Hibiscus Kid:

This was one of the biggest stumbling blocks for me when trying to practice using "The Mind Illuminated" as I didn't feel that I could be aware of multiple things - it seemed like attention was scanning for and singling out sensations in turn (such as thoughts and the breath for example). An analogy: imagine trying to illuminate an entire room (awareness) with a laser pointer (rapidly shifting attention [or the mind] experiencing one sensation at a time).
In order to achieve any form of simultaneity you need to use right brain hemisphere. It doesn't feel anything like left hemisphere and when you even think about things like "mind" or even "awareness" then you are actually thinking about left hemisphere.

When I did practice of trying to be aware of both my hands it took few steps:
0. conscious switching
1. slow automatic switching - something helps switching awareness automatically even though it doesn't seem at first faster than doing it "manually"
2. fast automatic switching - much higher performance, almost like simultanous perception but switching is still noticeable
3. both objects merged and were perceived at once - objects merge and are observed as one. Pespective in mind seems more distant. Qualities define differentiation of objects.
4. awarness split in to two equal parts - two completely separate awarenesses observe two objects where each feel like single one observing single object. Literally feels like each object have its own observer
5 awareness disappears - true simulatanous perception, no mind. No objects are observed as they would be defined but all parts of them as separate.

Up to fourth somehow I was able to do rather quickly. Fifth took some more tinkering because it requires left mind to shut down completely which is not so obvious when you want to use it to observe these objects. Probably just WTF-ness ofthe split awarness caused me to stop at this stage.

What imho happens is that right hemisphere gets more and more involved in the process because it is natural for it and not so natural for left hemisphere. At first it just automate awareness (1st and 2nd), then awareness moves to right hemisphere which presents two objects as one (3rd), then actually consciousness switch to right hemisphere and it now drives left hemisphere, two instances at once (4th) and lastly left mind is completely disabled and it is now pure right hemisphere perception (5th).

The left and right minds have VERY specific feel to them. Once you know exactly how they feel this can be used to easily control what is driven by what. It is however at first not obvious at all. Besides right hemisphere need to learn to be used in this way and left need to be trained to be used in this way. I somehow managed to go to this split awareness mode rather quickly. It took one shoot at this practice actually but while it worked I experienced slew of strange perception artifacts due to it. My assumption is that this was so new for right hemisphere that right hemisphere was as underdeveloped in this kind of activity as when I was newborn. Basically I never learned it thus I had to learn it. It took up to few years to do it. Most issues went away after year/two after which it was more optimization and discovering how things feel to make it all work more seamlessly.

Interresting fact about right hemisphere: there are no things like "attention" or "awarness" or even "thoughts". All perceptions are perceived as... colors emoticon No perception from right hemisphere have any suffering in them. Everythign experienced by it is pleasant and as suffering free as it can be. Going in toright hemisphere perception (5th point) always completely elliminated any suffering related to sense of self. I obviously put all my effort in to this way of practice. Especially that since I managed to use right hemisphere presentation on senses improved dramatically with colors becoming incredibly vibrant... right hemisphere things in colors so thoughts about colors added more colors making everythign look likemade out of bliss.

The issue was: learning how to differentiate these minds and learn to not use left where it is not called for. To master that it took me almost ten years from the moment I could already do this right hemisphere perception.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"In order to achieve any form of simultaneity you need to use right brain hemisphere. It doesn't feel anything like left hemisphere and when you even think about things like "mind" or even "awareness" then you are actually thinking about left hemisphere."

emoticon you do crack me up every so often with this brain stuff emoticon thanks for the laugh emoticon emoticon 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Jazz Muzak:
Hello all, apologies if this has already been asked and answered.

I've been going back to the basics with my practice lately, and have been perusing the early chapters in MCTB2. In the chapter "The Three Characteristics", Daniel describes sensations and their mental impressions "arising and vanishing completely before the next arises, so it is possible to sort out which is which with relatively stable attention..."

I've noticed that typically in my vipassana practice, I am not noticing a single sensation at a time. In fact, the field of awareness that I am perceiving is very wide (although the width and depth changes, which I think has to do with the PoI), and is made up of many many many sensations. These all come and go quite rapidly. Is Daniel refering to how each individual sensation disappears before the "replacement" for THAT particular sensation arises, or is it more like the "one electron" theory where there is just one electron moving so fast it seems to appear everywhere? Do I need to increase the clarity my perceptual resolution and narrow my focus to the point I'm literally perceiving only one sensation at a time? Or is the wide field of many sensations that I currently perceive fine?

Thanks, and I hope you are all well.
Cheers people! I started reading this thread while waiting for my turkey to roast. These ethereal discussions tend to take me back to my childhood and a particular character https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9434BoGkNQ especially the brain stuff.  But it did get me thinking.  In our environment, there are hundreds if not thousands of things happening at the same time. We can't exclude them when we sit. That's why in the beginning we are told to find a quiet spot. All these things happening will be translated into sensations, added to the internally produced, that we are more aware of when in the meditative, introspective space. It should follow logically that when attention is limited we will be conscious of less of the input available and perceive them as a series of events. But if meditation is training in the expansion of attention it should follow that we will be able to perceive more and more of all input available inside and outside of our organism as practice advances. But even the fastest brain processing will be unable to keep up with the thousands of things happening and classify them as individual perceptions. So eventually from a point of steady, broad attention, many inputs are lumped together in a gestalt, a unified whole.  Have you noticed this?  That's all folks.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
When I'm talking about awareness, I'm not talking about the brain. I'm talking about sensations being aware of themselves. The brain is inside awareness, not the other way around. This is not my default experience, just glimpses, but Daniel describes it in his book and in many recordings.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"But even the fastest brain processing will be unable to keep up with the thousands of things happening and classify them as individual perceptions. So eventually from a point of steady, broad attention, many inputs are lumped together in a gestalt, a unified whole.  Have you noticed this? "


Thank you. Yes, this is very noticeable off cushion in everyday interactions with jobs, family, kids, avoiding paying taxes and the rest emoticon Precision of seeing each sensation with high clarity diminishes and there is just a more "wide knowing web of unfolding". 

We get confused if we think our off cushion "awakeness" is to be as precise as on the cushion but having such level of concentration off cushion is kind of impossible in my experience. There is more getting out of the way and things just unfold in the knowing of Thisness. It can have a dream-like quality to it or not. 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Hi Linda, do you have any links or sections of the MCTB2 where this is discussed?  Yes, this is what I am referring to Papa Che. I think the main, and most observable effect of practice is attentional flexibility.  There are two illustrations of this that I have thought of. One is a funnel where the broad opening is awareness. Meaning by awareness the broad attention that includes everything, what you mention as  "unfold in the knowing of Thisness". This can be taken to the limit where all sense of self disappears. But to function in daily life you have to work your way down the funnel, even at times limiting attention to a single thing. Like threading a needle. The ability to go from one end to the other of the funnel is the art learned in meditation. The illustration that reminds me of broad awareness is the mandala. Where there is a simple center surrounded by all these elaborate things but unmoved by them. 


 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Right now I can't recall in what recording Daniel explicitly said that the brain is inside the mind, not the other way around. I know that Michael Taft says that, but I'm pretty sure Daniel has said it too. If he were to deny it, I would of course trust that more than my memory.

I'd like to emphasize that my arguing here does not mean that I think it's unneccesary to meticulously investigate how attention works. Doing so is what go me to strean entry, and I'm sure I still have an awful lot to learn about dependent origination from the same kind of meticulous investigation. I just think it's misleading to talk about rapidly flickering attention as if that were the only way to experience the world, especially when it starts to sound like it would be a more objective version. As if those one sensation at a time - often translated by people as one little bip in one sense gate, which is of course far from always the case - were the real deal and everything else is just an illusion. It's all a magnificent illusion and it's all real. It is just as real when reality manifests with one integrated sense gate (which is NOT the same thing as concluding that it's all integrated just because one fails to master the speed of observation required to observe the rapid movements of the mind).
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Right now I can't recall in what recording Daniel explicitly said that the brain is inside the mind, not the other way around. I know that Michael Taft says that, but I'm pretty sure Daniel has said it too. If he were to deny it, I would of course trust that more than my memory.

I'd like to emphasize that my arguing here does not mean that I think it's unneccesary to meticulously investigate how attention works. Doing so is what go me to strean entry, and I'm sure I still have an awful lot to learn about dependent origination from the same kind of meticulous investigation. I just think it's misleading to talk about rapidly flickering attention as if that were the only way to experience the world, especially when it starts to sound like it would be a more objective version. As if those one sensation at a time - often translated by people as one little bip in one sense gate, which is of course far from always the case - were the real deal and everything else is just an illusion. It's all a magnificent illusion and it's all real. It is just as real when reality manifests with one integrated sense gate (which is NOT the same thing as concluding that it's all integrated just because one fails to master the speed of observation required to observe the rapid movements of the mind).
I'm supposing that the "brain inside the mind" discussion is the age-old argument of whether consciousness is localized in brain structures or exists independently.  It's an ongoing debate and scientists are always announcing that they found it: 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-consciousness
   The point of view I have read and makes sense to me regarding dependant origination is that the root of it is in the interdependence of consciousness and name-form.  They lean on one another and if one disappears the other does too.  Everything else grows out of this.  

According to the Saṃyukta-āgama version of the discourse in question, the instruction Māluṅkyaputta received on this occasion
was as follows:
“See by limiting it to seeing, hear by limiting it to hearing, feel by limiting it to feeling, cognize by limiting it to cognizing.”
Then [the Buddha] spoke in verse:
“If you are not in that,
and [not being in] that you are also not in this,
and you are also not in between the two,
this then is the end of dukkha indeed.”
Compassion and Emptiness in Early Buddhist Meditation (Anālayo)

This is just information, I don't care much for any of it.  I'm just interested in what I can experience.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Re mind - consiousness: Yeah, I know that it's an old discussion, and I don't claim to know any ultimate answer. I can only speak from experience, and there have been moments when that seemed totally obvious and self-explanatory. Besides, most others in this thread seem to take for granted that the brain is the limit, and they can hardly prove that either. 

Re dependent origination: Yes, that's how I understand it too. But there are still things to discover about how it manifests in detail in all different specific circumstances. I heard that Daniel revisited this after flipping the switch, to really get all of it. I see new such chains all the time. Not that I have flipped the switch yet, but I imagine that there will still be things to discover about the intimate experience of being human. 

Re senses: Yes I have heard versions of that too. I know. And still, that's not all that there is to it. The senses really do merge in states of high concentration and in states of through deconstruction. Even I have seen that. And I really think that the point of the passage is not to separate the senses from each other but to separate the sensing into senser and object. 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
“Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awoke, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.”
Zhuangzi
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.

   - Franz Kafka
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
“Insects Have Consciousness, Self-Awareness and Egos,” the headline read. 

On the other hand, it complicates daily life. “I still flush,” Klein says of his cockroaches. “But I hesitate.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/do-insects-have-consciousness-180959484/

thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
the lesson of the moth
i was talking to a moth
the other evening
he was trying to break into
an electric light bulb
and fry himself on the wires

why do you fellows
pull this stunt i asked him
because it is the conventional
thing for moths or why
if that had been an uncovered
candle instead of an electric
light bulb you would
now be a small unsightly cinder
have you no sense

plenty of it he answered
but at times we get tired
of using it
we get bored with the routine
and crave beauty
and excitement
fire is beautiful
and we know that if we get
too close it will kill us
but what does that matter
it is better to be happy
for a moment
and be burned up with beauty
than to live a long time
and be bored all the while
so we wad all our life up
into one little roll
and then we shoot the roll
that is what life is for
it is better to be a part of beauty
or one instant and then cease to
exist than to exist forever
and never be a part of beauty
our attitude toward life
is come easy go easy
we are like human beings
used to be before they became
too civilized to enjoy themselves

and before i could argue him
out of his philosophy
he went and immolated himself
on a patent cigar lighter
i do not agree with him
myself i would rather have
half the happiness and twice
the longevity
but at the same time i wish

there was something i wanted
as badly as he wanted to fry himself
Don Marquis
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
One of the most striking features of IIT* is that it makes consciousness a matter of degree. Any system with the required network architecture may have some of it. “No matter whether the organism or artifact hails from the ancient kingdom of Animalia or from its recent silicon offspring, no matter whether the thing has legs to walk, wings to fly, or wheels to roll with,” Koch wrote in his 2012 book Consciousness: Confessions of a Romantic Reductionist. “If it has both differentiated and integrated states of information, it feels like something to be such a system.

Koch, however, is perfectly happy to think that “we are surrounded and immersed” in consciousness. He believes “that consciousness is a fundamental, elementary property of living matter. It can’t be derived from anything else.

But this doesn’t mean it is spread equally everywhere. Koch and Tononi assert that, while consciousness can be an attribute of many things, a significant amount of it can exist only in particular kinds of things, notably human brains (indeed, in specific parts of human brains). And to turn IIT into a quantitative, testable theory, Koch and Tononi have formulated a criterion for what kinds of things those are.
* IIT = Integrated Information Theory

From:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/neuroscience-readies-for-a-showdown-over-consciousness-ideas-20190306/



thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:


Koch, however, is perfectly happy to think that “we are surrounded and immersed” in consciousness. He believes “that consciousness is a fundamental, elementary property of living matter. It can’t be derived from anything else.






Edward Taylor, ‘Upon a Wasp Chill’d with Cold’.
Lord, clear my misted sight that
I May hence view Thy divinity,
Some sparks whereof thou up dost hasp
Within this little downy wasp
In whose small corporation we
A school and a schoolmaster see,
Where we may learn, and easily find
A nimble spirit bravely mind
Her work in every limb …
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I just think it's misleading to talk about rapidly flickering attention as if that were the only way to experience the world, especially when it starts to sound like it would be a more objective version. As if those one sensation at a time - often translated by people as one little bip in one sense gate, which is of course far from always the case - were the real deal and everything else is just an illusion. It's all a magnificent illusion and it's all real. 

I'm curious and I suspect I missed something - who said that rapidly flickering attention was the only way to experience the world? It's useful to learn to see things that way when we're investigating how the mind works but it's certainly not the way we go around seeing all the time.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I just think it's misleading to talk about rapidly flickering attention as if that were the only way to experience the world, especially when it starts to sound like it would be a more objective version. As if those one sensation at a time - often translated by people as one little bip in one sense gate, which is of course far from always the case - were the real deal and everything else is just an illusion. It's all a magnificent illusion and it's all real. 

I'm curious and I suspect I missed something - who said that rapidly flickering attention was the only way to experience the world? It's useful to learn to see things that way when we're investigating how the mind works but it's certainly not the way we go around seeing all the time.
I appreciate that you ask. Isn't that what follows from saying that we can only experience one sensation at a time? It sort of implies that we have this rapid flickering attention all the time, to patch it all together, but just don't know it. Unless it's all clumped together to one large construct. And in this discourse (not in MCTB2, but often in discussions here, including this thread), it sounds like that is poor sensory clarity whereas those little bips one at a time is the real deal, as if that were the "real" outer world. 

I agree that it's a useful methodological approach. I also agree that's how the brain works. I do not think of the brain and the mind as the same thing, even though we also aren't separate from it but need it to function properly. It's just that I have had experiences of tapping into stuff that my brain and my sense organs couldn't possibly know, and I think there's more to that. 

In the example of the kazoo player, the whole symphony that is already there and that doesn't need the kazoo player to keep track of it, what would you say that is? 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I'm wondering: Chris, do you define mind as one single stream of aware arisings, one at a time? 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
In the example of the kazoo player, the whole symphony that is already there and that doesn't need the kazoo player to keep track of it, what would you say that is? 
I'm wondering: Chris, do you define mind as one single stream of aware arisings, one at a time? 

Linda, I'm tempted to ask you why you're asking me this since you can see for yourself, but here's what I see, and theorize as a result:

What I can experience depends on how I decide to view this melange. My moment-to-moment experience is a stitched-together collage of millions and millions of bits of sensory input interpreted by the mind. Mind is what's making my reality appear using this process over and over and over, many times each second. It's happening blindingly fast as the mind can do what it does blindingly fast. I can sit still in meditation. get somewhat concentrated and see this process play out - not over a long period of time because that's very taxing. But I can see snippets of it occurring. This process is what we call "dependent origination" and in the time it took me to type those two words it played out thousands, maybe millions of times.

So my theory, supported by my practice experience, is that we do indeed experience lots and lots of snow (like static on the television set) from all our senses, and mind blends it all together so that it appears smooth and seamless - just like a movie that plays at 30 frames per second. The movie is just a series of still images but they appear to be moving because the mind is doing its thing. The kazoo player (the gestalt?) kind of thing, yes. It's absolutely amazing to think of what the mind is doing at any given moment, right? The power and the speed, after all.

As for the "one thing at a time" question, I think there's a difference between what our slower, serial processing narrative mind experiences (which I see as only one thing at a time) and what the sub-surface subconscious signal processing part of the mind processing is doing - very, very fast stitching. I'm not sure how these two (or a thousand) processing parts of the mind interact, though.

Bottom line, this wonderful, beautiful, miraculous sensory dance is all just happening without "me" having to choreograph any of it. Choice is not an option emoticon

thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Note:The following post was saved as a draft earlier, while still being in progress, which is why it now appears here instead of what is at the bottom of the thread at the time of publishing it as a public post.

---

Chris Marti:

Linda, I'm tempted to ask you why you're asking me this since you can see for yourself, but here's what I see, and theorize as a result:
I thank you for your patience. Honestly, I’m not quite sure why this bugs me. I’d guess that it has to do with something that I still need to see. I’m sort of looking for the right pointers, I think - pointers that I can both understand and trust not to make me even more confused. I guess that makes me a bit paranoid about what pieces of knowledge to trust. I do look for myself, but when what I see seemingly differs from what some others see while at the same time fits with what other others see, then how do I choose how to investigate it further (especially if different people propose different methods of investigating it further)? The crudeness of language doesn’t make it any easier.

(Paused here to practice and attend a meeting)

I think it has at least partly to do with making sense of some phenomenology without reifying awareness. Your descriptions don’t lead me towards reifying awareness, but I get frustrated because they also seem to leave out the kind of phenomenology that I’m trying to make sense of. The non-duality as it manifests.



As for the "one thing at a time" question, I think there's a difference between what our slower, serial processing narrative mind experiences (which I see as only one thing at a time) and what the sub-surface subconscious signal processing part of the mind processing is doing - very, very fast stitching. I'm not sure how these two (or a thousand) processing parts of the mind interact, though.
This is the first time I have seen you describe it as nuanced as this. This definitely makes it bug me less. It takes away part of that nagging feeling. Part of what helps me here is that you acknowledge that there is some interaction going on that you are not sure about. That leaves space.

I also subjectively experience that there are processes going on that are aware of themselves even though they aren’t directly accessible to ”me”. I get hints from it. Some of it takes place on the threshold. It seems possible to me that there could be several parallell streams of processing going on at the same time on the level of sensations, depending on how you define sensations I guess.

Moreover, I have often had the experience of slicing and dicing the world in one way and when I find in retrospect that a different way of slicing and dicing is more suitable for the immediate situation, there is a recognition of having seen that too. One way of explaining that is that I'm just rationalizing it in retrospect, that I construct the sense of having seen it already. That is probably true for some cases. However, there are other cases when that seems far-fetched. It's very banal things, not intellectual endeavors at all, and it doesn't make me look better for having seen it, but on the contrary it has made me fel bad for not acting on it. Like when the cashier has been trying for a long time to get my attention because one of my groceries has gotten stuck on the assembly line, which hinders their work, and I realize that I have actually heard that sound of them calling out to me the whole time and also been staring at the spot where groceries are stuck without realizing that it had any relevance because I was sort of absorbed by the flow of the senses, that sensory dance in its making. Things like this happened to me all the time before I got my ADHD medication. That recognition rather than surprise tells me that some part of me was aware of the relevance of that specific way of hearing and seeing pieces of the information. That signal just didn't surface enough to stand out. I actually once read a scientific paper explaining how one of the medications for ADHD works in the brain, and that said that the medicine strengthens signals that the ADHD brain does not strenghten without the medicine whereas neurotypical brains do. Thus it helps with the filtering of parallell signals according to some principal that the brain has for recognizing relevance. 

Another thought related to this: there seem to be different kinds of automaticity (related because automatic implies that the chain of uccurrances required for the task takes place at least partly below the surface of consciousness). I'm going to use language of doing here even though that sounds like there is a doer, at a lack for better words. Okay. People very often do things automatically in a reactive way. Automatic thinking leading to narrowminded conclusions. Accidently walking to a place where one often visits even though the plan this time was to turn left to some other place. Locking the door and in retrospect having no clue whether that happened or not. Emotional reactions that aren't helpful. Stuff like that. However, there is also the kind of automaticity that comes from emptiness or from wisdom or whatever you want to call it. Shinzen Young has specific practices intended for developing that. One is auto-walk. I used to find that a bit odd, because it seems like most people already have automaticity when they walk (I have actually struggled with that; because of my wiring, I have had great difficulties in talking to somebody and holding a glass of water and walking at the same time, something that I share with many other autistic people - although, come to think of it, I think that has actually changed a lot for me, probably thanks to yoga). Recently I noticed the difference. I'm not claiming to be able to walk from wisdom or anything like that, but there is definitely a tangible difference between how I walk while being in something rigpa-like compared to how I walk at other times. The rigpa-walk is much better for my body, as it uses the muscles the way they are intended to be used rather than how I have learned to use them through bad habits. I think that explains why my fascia contracts on a regular basis, seemingly related to the cycling of nanas. So... how is it possible to tap into that? How does that fit into any model? There is some kind of knowing that arises part of the time, a knowing less limited by my conditioning. How does that enter my subjective stream of sensations happening? Or do similar sensations always occur in similar situations but get drowned by other sensations triggered by conditioning?



What I can experience depends on how I decide to view this melange. 

Choice is not an option emoticon
I understand that the limitations of language is to ”blame” here. Would you say that you make decisions but you have no choice what decisions you’ll actually make?



My moment-to-moment experience is a stitched-together collage of millions and millions of bits of sensory input interpreted by the mind. Mind is what's making my reality appear using this process over and over and over, many times each second. It's happening blindingly fast as the mind can do what it does blindingly fast. I can sit still in meditation. get somewhat concentrated and see this process play out - not over a long period of time because that's very taxing. But I can see snippets of it occurring. This process is what we call "dependent origination" and in the time it took me to type those two words it played out thousands, maybe millions of times.
I have no problem with this part. It doesn’t bug me at all.



So my theory, supported by my practice experience, is that we do indeed experience lots and lots of snow (like static on the television set) 
That fits with my experience too.



from all our senses, and mind blends it all together so that it appears smooth and seamless - just like a movie that plays at 30 frames per second. The movie is just a series of still images but they appear to be moving because the mind is doing its thing. 
I can’t shake the feeling that you are mixing apples with oranges here. Sure, the mind does that. But aren’t you sort of assuming that there is some kind of basic unit here? The still images? How do you know that those still images are more authentic than anything else? How do you know that it’s not your looking at them that makes them stand out as still images? How do you know that they aren’t waves rather than particles when you aren’t looking? For instance, I have heard and read several realized persons talk about one integrated sensory field.

(Paused again in order to take part in a Parnashavari empowerment with Garchen Rinpoche)

Cont.: Maybe sensations from ”the different sences” aren’t basic units that only seem like one thing because the mind blends them together - maybe it’s all just expansions and contractions in one integrated sense field that is sliced and diced AND blended by the mind to be perceived like there are separate senses?



The kazoo player (the gestalt?) kind of thing, yes. It's absolutely amazing to think of what the mind is doing at any given moment, right? The power and the speed, after all. 
Uhm, did you get tired here? I don’t blame you. I do ask many questions. You kind of ducked my questions here, though. Papa Che even interpreted this as you celebrating the Kazoo player. I do agree that it is amazing how the mind creates our entire experience, despite the Kazoo player getting in the way of appreciating how the whole symphony knows itself, without needing us to capture it.



Bottom line, this wonderful, beautiful, miraculous sensory dance is all just happening without "me" having to choreograph any of it. 
Sure. No problem with that.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I understand that the limitations of language is to ”blame” here. Would you say that you make decisions but you have no choice what decisions you’ll actually make?

When I said, "Choice is not an option" I was referring only to the fact that I have no choice but to experience sensory signals that arise. If the bell in the church around the corner rings while I'm within earshot, I'll hear it. I can't decide not to hear it. I wasn't referring to choice as in making a decision to walk over there, or to scratch my head, or to read that book I just bought.

I can’t shake the feeling that you are mixing apples with oranges here. Sure, the mind does that. But aren’t you sort of assuming that there is some kind of basic unit here? The still images? How do you know that those still images are more authentic than anything else? How do you know that it’s not your looking at them that makes them stand out as still images? How do you know that they aren’t waves rather than particles when you aren’t looking? For instance, I have heard and read several realized persons talk about one integrated sensory field.

I compared perception to a movie only to briefly describe I experience how the mind works, not to assert a specific, detailed, or accurate scientific sort of conclusion. It's just a metaphor. I have no idea if there's a basic unit of anything "out there" because I can't directly experience anything "out there" - it's all necessarily mediated through the senses and the mind.

Keep in mind, all I'm doing is describing my experience and theorizing about what's behind it. I'm not omniscient. I've spent time meditating and observing, reading dharma and scientific research, and I'm innately curious about how this experience is put together, which is the same urge that got me started in meditation back when it was painful and made me anxious. But I don't expect to ever truly know anything. I'll always have far more questions than answers.

You seem to think I ducked one of your questions (kazoo/gestalt), but I have no idea why you say that so maybe you can explain and I'll try to clear it up.



thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I understand that the limitations of language is to ”blame” here. Would you say that you make decisions but you have no choice what decisions you’ll actually make?

When I said, "Choice is not an option" I was referring only to the fact that I have no choice but to experience sensory signals that arise. If the bell in the church around the corner rings while I'm within earshot, I'll hear it. I can't decide not to hear it. I wasn't referring to choice as in making a decision to walk over there, or to scratch my head, or to read that book I just bought.

I can’t shake the feeling that you are mixing apples with oranges here. Sure, the mind does that. But aren’t you sort of assuming that there is some kind of basic unit here? The still images? How do you know that those still images are more authentic than anything else? How do you know that it’s not your looking at them that makes them stand out as still images? How do you know that they aren’t waves rather than particles when you aren’t looking? For instance, I have heard and read several realized persons talk about one integrated sensory field.

I compared perception to a movie only to briefly describe I experience how the mind works, not to assert a specific, detailed, or accurate scientific sort of conclusion. It's just a metaphor. I have no idea if there's a basic unit of anything "out there" because I can't directly experience anything "out there" - it's all necessarily mediated through the senses and the mind.

Keep in mind, all I'm doing is describing my experience and theorizing about what's behind it. I'm not omniscient. I've spent time meditating and observing, reading dharma and scientific research, and I'm innately curious about how this experience is put together, which is the same urge that got me started in meditation back when it was painful and made me anxious. But I don't expect to ever truly know anything. I'll always have far more questions than answers.

You seem to think I ducked one of your questions (kazoo/gestalt), but I have no idea why you say that so maybe you can explain and I'll try to clear it up.



I like the more questions than answers approach and I share that innate curiosity and appreciate it in others. Sometimes you sound to me like you are very sure about the nature of reality, and when what you sound so sure of collides with what I experience and conclude, I get frustrated because I pend back and forth between doubting my own experience and doubting you. It seems very presumptuous to think that I might notice something that you don't notice, and yet my experience is what it is. It kind of feels like a short story by Niklas Rådström in which a guy wakes up from dreaming that the Eiffel tower didn't exist, only to find out that the consensual reality is that there never was an Eiffel tower, so he must have been dreaming that it did exist. 

The questions that you ducked were a whole series of questions aiming at exactly the thing that is my Eiffel tower here. I'll try to approach it from a different direction. 

Here goes: In exercises like the two fingers touching, I have no difficulties whatsoever to feel one little bip at a time, attention doing its thing of scanning the area to complete the picture, and it is easy to conceptualize that as the two fingers taking turns in being subject and object, one point at a time. Bip bip bip. Sure. But I can also feel sort of a blob of contraction floating there on its own, and it couldn't care less about what finger it belongs to, because fingerness isn't relevant to it, and separation between surfaces even less so. There is no one sde touching the other side in that mode, because the sensation is in the meeting itself. It has sort of its own life. 

It feels like it's not the same thing as just being sloppy and missing the photoshopping going on from memory. It synchs up and stands out on its own and has a very clear location. It knows where it is. It doesn't need me to process it the way we are taught that the senses work. The information is directly available at the spot, or so it seems. Of course it's not one static continuous blob. It keeps arising and passing away rapidly. It's like a myriad of little spheres of knowing AND separate arisings of a concept of them as being one formation (those arisings sort of tag the other ones). But the subject-object relationship between the fingers falls away. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Here goes: In exercises like the two fingers touching, I have no difficulties whatsoever to feel one little bip at a time, attention doing its thing of scanning the area to complete the picture, and it is easy to conceptualize that as the two fingers taking turns in being subject and object, one point at a time. Bip bip bip. Sure. But I can also feel sort of a blob of contraction floating there on its own, and it couldn't care less about what finger it belongs to, because fingerness isn't relevant to it, and separation between surfaces even less so. There is no one sde touching the other side in that mode, because the sensation is in the meeting itself. It has sort of its own life. 

It feels like it's not the same thing as just being sloppy and missing the photoshopping going on from memory. It synchs up and stands out on its own and has a very clear location. It knows where it is. It doesn't need me to process it the way we are taught that the senses work. The information is directly available at the spot, or so it seems. Of course it's not one static continuous blob. It keeps arising and passing away rapidly. It's like a myriad of little spheres of knowing AND separate arisings of a concept of them as being one formation (those arisings sort of tag the other ones). But the subject-object relationship between the fingers falls away.

I did a lot of this finger touching observation when I first started vipassana practice. I notice that only one of these mental images can be kept in mind at any one time. I theorize that touch is occurring in both fingers. But for some reason, I can only experience one of those sensations and its accompanying mental image. They may pulse back and forth, right-left-right-left-right-left, but the same applies.

I notice that every touch sensation, wherever it comes from, is accompanied by this kind of mental imaging. So are sounds. So is taste. So are sights. And so are thoughts. And this happens with blinding speed, as we've both now described. And somehow one finger seems to dominate. In my case, it's the right one, which maybe corresponds to me being right-handed but I'm not sure. (Please don't confuse this with Ni Nurta's comments about right & left brain processing.)

I can also "see" a mental image (another third object) of both fingers touching at that one tiny point, but that appears as another mental image being conjured up in the mind, not based in recognizing the touch sensations from both fingers at the same time, which I can't seem to actually observe. For me, this "both fingers" experience is not the subject/object falling away. The subject/object is the mind (subject) and the touching sensations and their related mental images (objects). As long as I'm observing, that's my subject/object view. At no point can I say that observing anything is a non-dual experience, as observing is inherently dualistic.

I see any experience like these, of any object, as standing on their own, being things - objects - in and of themselves. Here I'm referring to the mental images, of course. They're all fast and rapidly changing, as you described, and they all have the same source - mind interpreting sense perceptions in various ways.

Now, if you were to ask me exactly where all of this subject/object recognition takes place, what specific physical location, I would not be able to tell you. This is like the famous example by Ken McLeod - holding up a phone and asking someone to tell you whether the phone is - is it in your hand or in the observer's mind? This is where things get blurry and we start to see that all objects are empty of permanent essence. They are physical things, we think, yet they don't exist without some location-less process of mind.

So... yeah. I'll stop here for now.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I'm thinking that if we hypothesize that everything we perceive is actually a projection in our mind (which doesn't preclude that something else exists), then it is only our own narrowmindedness that sets the limit. Much of that narrowmindedness is inherent to being human and we can't do much about it. We depend on the conditions that it dictates. We generally* can't ignore the laws of nature. Those seem hard-wired. It's not like I can stop believing in them. However, I see no reason for sensations to be limited to either the left finger or the right finger, when there is a field of mutual touch that can be aware on its own accord. The limitation to one finger at a time is only valid if we believe that the sensations come from something external tickling our nerve ends and sending signals to the brain. If it's all in our mind, then the information doesn't need to go anywhere. Talking like this tends to piss people off. I'm not claiming that any of this is true. I really don't know what to believe. I can only say that it doesn't seem like I'm that hardwired to believe that touch sensations must travel separately from each single finger tip respectively to be processed in the brain. 

Non-dual is a concept that is used in many different ways, a relative thing. True, there can be no falling away of the subject-object relationship while you put yourself in the position of an observer. That was kind of my point. This falling away happens for me when I relax away from the observer position because it becomes clear that it isn't necessary. The knowing is there anyway, and the me is forgotten. 

*) However, sometimes reality selectively presents itself in a way that seems to challenge laws of nature. Whether those instances are hallucinations or different planes of existance, I really can't tell. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
So no, I don't think that the tiny little spheres of knowing about contraction are any more conceptual than the tiny little bips of touching the other side. It sounds to me like such a belief would stem from a conviction that the little bips are closer to sensing an actual external world. That conviction is conceptual. We don't actually know that from the phenomenology. 

A side note: the more I relax from being me, the more it turns into waves rather than particles. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
It sounds to me like such a belief would stem from a conviction that the little bips are closer to sensing an actual external world. That conviction is conceptual. We don't actually know that from the phenomenology. 

Hmmm...  here's my reply:

I get the impression from your latest comments that you suspect we choose what to perceive, then how to interpret our experience. While there is a thread of truth to that (all experience is mediated by mind), it makes me wonder, if it's actually the case, why noting and vipassana are valuable at all? What would be the difference between experience and fantasy? What is the value of observation?

I'm not proposing a strict regime of materiality here. I am theorizing, based on my experience from the investigation of the process of perception, that there's a basis for what we experience, even though we don't have direct access to the actual phenomena that underlie what our minds perceive. Yes, it's all mediated by mind, but it's not made up. There are sense perceptions that we can distinguish from mental images that are not based in our present moment sense perceptions. I can detect the difference between what I can sense from touching two fingers together and the imagined experience of those two fingers blending together into one. This is not something I can just ignore or imagine away. It's also, I suspect, the basis for the shared experiences that we all agree on, i.e.; the church bell rang. We all heard it ring.

What do you think?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
It sounds to me like such a belief would stem from a conviction that the little bips are closer to sensing an actual external world. That conviction is conceptual. We don't actually know that from the phenomenology. 

Hmmm...  here's my reply:

I get the impression from your latest comments that you suspect we choose what to perceive, then how to interpret our experience. While there is a thread of truth to that (all experience is mediated by mind), it makes me wonder, if it's actually the case, why noting and vipassana are valuable at all? What would be the difference between experience and fantasy? What is the value of observation?

I'm not proposing a strict regime of materiality here. I am theorizing, based on my experience from the investigation of the process of perception, that there's a basis for what we experience, even though we don't have direct access to the actual phenomena that underlie what our minds perceive. Yes, it's all mediated by mind, but it's not made up. There are sense perceptions that we can distinguish from mental images that are not based in our present moment sense perceptions. I can detect the difference between what I can sense from touching two fingers together and the imagined experience of those two fingers blending together into one. This is not something I can just ignore or imagine away. It's also, I suspect, the basis for the shared experiences that we all agree on, i.e.; the church bell rang. We all heard it ring.

What do you think?

I have done observational studies professionaly for 19 years. If you really think that your observations aren't at all affected by what you expect to observe or what you think is possible, then I'd say you are incredibly naive. That does not mean that observations are useless. Choice isn't the issue. It's not like you choose what to expect. That's karma/dependent origination. 

I need to go to yoga class now, followed by a meditation session, and then I have three job applications to do before I go to sleep, so I'm not sure I will be able to get into this in more detail today. I'm happy to continue the conversation as soon as I have the time to both listen and express myself as nuanced as this topic deserves. Thankyou for engaging with it!
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I have done observational studies professionaly for 19 years. If you really think that your observations aren't at all affected by what you expect to observe or what you think is possible, then I'd say you are incredibly naive. 

Linda, I'm saddened by the name-calling and the anger I detect in this last reply of yours. Maybe you should just take your time and read what I posted, then think and reply. Don't just react. I put a lot of time into this discussion, which I'm happy to do assuming this isn't the kind of response I'll be getting from you. This is not personal in any way from my end. Please don't make it that way on your end.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Uhm, what? I'm so sorry, since that apparently came out totally different from what was intended in my end. I'm not angry at all. Why should I be? I'm fascinated. But since you find it disrespectful or hurtful or both, then I sincerely appologize. I have seen much worse jargon here without anyone stopping to think about it for a second, and I truly thought we were both in this discussion with curiosity and good will and the comfort from knowing that we share the curiosity and good will. Since you don't sense that from me, I'll be much more careful with my jargon. I'm really very sorry for my carelessness and bad judgement.

I really thought you would just laugh. Still trying to figure out when and how a little friendly teasing is okay with you, since you do seem to enjoy that. I'm apparently lousy at it so I guess I'd better settle for being boring. I certainly prefer that to hurting or saddening you. 

Are we okay?

edited to add: I so hope that surprise, sincere apologies and instantly feeling the need to make it right are okay reactions, since you asked me to not react. This is my spontaneous reaction. And if this comes out the wrong way too, then please believe me when I say that the intentions are friendly. My abilities to compensate for being autistic are very inconsistent. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
We're certainly okay. I was concerned about the language in our comment but you've helped me understand. I'm looking forward to your next reply.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Oh, what a relief! Thanks for getting back to me so quickly about that! I appreciate it. Please do tell me anytime you get concerned. I prefer to know so that I can adjust my tone to fit my intentions.

Now that you said it, I can see how it can be interpreted, especially without smilies.

I look forward to continuing the conversation. I find it fascinating how seemingly banal details about such an ordinary everyday experience can be a ride deep down the rabbit hole. I would really much rather continue this conversation now than doing job applications. Since I apparently have one of those days when I trip over the social cues, I probably shouldn't do any of it, but if I don't do my job applications I'll loose my unemployment insurance. Bah. See you later. emoticon
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"I can see how it can be interpreted, especially without smilies"

emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon 
Tim Farrington, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
Linda
It sounds to me like such a belief would stem from a conviction that the little bips are closer to sensing an actual external world. That conviction is conceptual. We don't actually know that from the phenomenology. 
Chris

Hmmm...  here's my reply:

I get the impression from your latest comments that you suspect we choose what to perceive, then how to interpret our experience. While there is a thread of truth to that (all experience is mediated by mind), it makes me wonder, if it's actually the case, why noting and vipassana are valuable at all? What would be the difference between experience and fantasy? What is the value of observation?

I'm not proposing a strict regime of materiality here. I am theorizing, based on my experience from the investigation of the process of perception, that there's a basis for what we experience, even though we don't have direct access to the actual phenomena that underlie what our minds perceive. Yes, it's all mediated by mind, but it's not made up. There are sense perceptions that we can distinguish from mental images that are not based in our present moment sense perceptions. I can detect the difference between what I can sense from touching two fingers together and the imagined experience of those two fingers blending together into one. This is not something I can just ignore or imagine away. It's also, I suspect, the basis for the shared experiences that we all agree on, i.e.; the church bell rang. We all heard it ring.

What do you think?
Linda

I have done observational studies professionaly for 19 years. If you really think that your observations aren't at all affected by what you expect to observe or what you think is possible, then I'd say you are incredibly naive. That does not mean that observations are useless. Choice isn't the issue. It's not like you choose what to expect. That's karma/dependent origination. 

I need to go to yoga class now, followed by a meditation session, and then I have three job applications to do before I go to sleep, so I'm not sure I will be able to get into this in more detail today. I'm happy to continue the conversation as soon as I have the time to both listen and express myself as nuanced as this topic deserves. Thankyou for engaging with it!
 
Chris

Linda, I'm saddened by the name-calling and the anger I detect in this last reply of yours. Maybe you should just take your time and read what I posted, then think and reply. Don't just react. I put a lot of time into this discussion, which I'm happy to do assuming this isn't the kind of response I'll be getting from you. This is not personal in any way from my end. Please don't make it that way on your end.

Linda

Uhm, what? I'm so sorry, since that apparently came out totally different from what was intended in my end. I'm not angry at all. Why should I be? I'm fascinated. But since you find it disrespectful or hurtful or both, then I sincerely appologize. I have seen much worse jargon here without anyone stopping to think about it for a second, and I truly thought we were both in this discussion with curiosity and good will and the comfort from knowing that we share the curiosity and good will. Since you don't sense that from me, I'll be much more careful with my jargon. I'm really very sorry for my carelessness and bad judgement.
I really thought you would just laugh. Still trying to figure out when and how a little friendly teasing is okay with you, since you do seem to enjoy that. I'm apparently lousy at it so I guess I'd better settle for being boring. I certainly prefer that to hurting or saddening you. 

Are we okay?

edited to add: I so hope that surprise, sincere apologies and instantly feeling the need to make it right are okay reactions, since you asked me to not react. This is my spontaneous reaction. And if this comes out the wrong way too, then please believe me when I say that the intentions are friendly. My abilities to compensate for being autistic are very inconsistent. 

I think this exchange gets to the heart of something here that interests me, with regard to the value of observation, in a deeper way than the examples of the two fingertips or the church bell can. Chris “detected” name-calling and anger in the phrase “incredibly naive,” and was saddened by it. It was enough to make him doubt the value of continuing the conversation. And Linda promptly reassured him that her intentions were far from his initial reading, that she valued the conversation as much as he did, and in the same spirit, and gave further reassurances across the board. The relief for everyone when the point was clarified was lovely to see. And there is a tacit value hierarchy implicit in all of this. Chris’s initial “detection”, his observation of an angry bit of name-calling, immediately changed the nature of the game; the value on a certain kind of anger-free, mutually respectful communication was greater than the substance of the conversation itself. The church bell rang; words were said. We can all agree that the church bell rang and the words were said--- I think--- but the value of the observation remained undetermined and led to a higher level exchange, a meta loop. Linda wasn’t angry or trying to sadden Chris when she rang the bell. But it took more work to get to the meaning of the words she said. This is the deep human humility that I think is ultimately inherent in the value of observation: anything human is already suffused with implicit value; a meaningful observation happens within a human context in all cases. The actions here speak louder than the words: once the bell rang with a note of what appeared to be anger, everyone’s behavior changed instantly. Why? I would say, because it meant something important, to everyone involved. That in itself may seem incredibly naive, in these depths of phenomenology, epistemology, and dharma. But whatever it is, that "something important to everyone involved," and whyever it is, i don't think it can be overlooked, when we're talking about the value of observation. I think we are already talking about value, when we talk about observation.
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:

I get the impression from your latest comments that you suspect we choose what to perceive, then how to interpret our experience. While there is a thread of truth to that (all experience is mediated by mind), it makes me wonder, if it's actually the case, why noting and vipassana are valuable at all? What would be the difference between experience and fantasy? What is the value of observation?
In order to improve experiences it is useful to be able to clearly perceive their components and vipassana practice is great for that.

It is more useful of course when person knows how to change experiences by their will and after they loose tenth fetter.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
"Doctor, my tenth fetter is loose! Do I need surgery?"   emoticon
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
"Doctor, my tenth fetter is loose! Do I need surgery?" emoticon
Mr. Marti, my recommendation is to get more fiber in your diet, and remember to stay hydrated in these tough times. emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
It sounds to me like such a belief would stem from a conviction that the little bips are closer to sensing an actual external world. That conviction is conceptual. We don't actually know that from the phenomenology. 

Hmmm...  here's my reply:

I get the impression from your latest comments that you suspect we choose what to perceive, then how to interpret our experience. While there is a thread of truth to that (all experience is mediated by mind), it makes me wonder, if it's actually the case, why noting and vipassana are valuable at all? What would be the difference between experience and fantasy? What is the value of observation?

I'm not proposing a strict regime of materiality here. I am theorizing, based on my experience from the investigation of the process of perception, that there's a basis for what we experience, even though we don't have direct access to the actual phenomena that underlie what our minds perceive. Yes, it's all mediated by mind, but it's not made up. There are sense perceptions that we can distinguish from mental images that are not based in our present moment sense perceptions. I can detect the difference between what I can sense from touching two fingers together and the imagined experience of those two fingers blending together into one. This is not something I can just ignore or imagine away. It's also, I suspect, the basis for the shared experiences that we all agree on, i.e.; the church bell rang. We all heard it ring.

What do you think?

I was talking about conclusions drawn in retrospect, conclusions that wouldn't have that much base in the actual observations. It referred to the situation of perceiving both little bips coming from one finger at a time AND little spheres of knowing contraction. The latter ones seem to emanate from the meeting of the fingers rather than from one finger sensing the other one. If I were to draw the conclusion that the bips from one finger at a time were closer to raw data from an outside world, that conclusion would not have any basis in empirical observations. My data include both cases. The way I see it, both manifestations are equally real and equally constructed. Nothing in the data says otherwise. My experience flows back and forth between sensations knowing themselves directly where they are and a subject-object relationship where the fingers take turns in sensing each other. The subject-object relationship fits within the paradigm of separate senses sending signals to a brain, and when a sense of a doer/observer arises, that's what happens. It is also the case of vice versa: when sensory phenomena manifest in a way that fits with the notion of separate senses signalling to a brain, a doer/observer arises. However, for some reason that doesn't always happen. Sometimes sensory phenomena manifest in a way that seems more like the knowing is immediate in the sensation, where it occurs, without having to go through me. It's like I am that sensation rather than having it. It's self-reflective. Immediate. It doesn't come with words. Those come only in retrospect. The sensation is effortless - in a different way than what you describe about not having the choice to hear or not to hear. In one respect that is effortless too, but I'm talking about a different kind of effortless. The kind of effortless that comes from not being separate from. I would guess that it is what Daniel talks about when he says that there is no this side and that side. I can't be sure that he would agree, though. My experience is that this mode involves less suffering than the mode where there are sides taking turns being subject and object. I would prefer to flip the switch to being in that mode as the default - even if that means that I need to let go of the idea of having sensory experiences come through sense organs and being processed in the brain. Ni Nurta doesn't seem to think so, but rather thinks it has to do with using the right half of the brain more. Maybe that is the case. Or maybe it is the case that knowing occurs immediately in the meeting between the fingers because all of it is mind anyway, which means that the sense organs and the braind are in the mind too. I don't know. I think I need to acknowledge that I don't know, even if that will make most people think that I'm a nutjob. 

I can only speak from my own experience. Maybe sensory phenomena in your experience more consistently manifest as different sides taking turns. Do they?

I can distinguish between mental images and touch sensations too. What I'm experiencing is not mental imagery. It is very kinesthetic. It is touch. It's just not touch as conceptualized as one side touching the other, which is what we usually associate with the concept of touch. It's pure sensing. I don't know why you think that it must be a mental image. That's a conclusion made by you. Is it because I said thay it wasn't touch? If so, it's a misunderstanding due to the limitations of words. I was merely trying to explain that the sense of one side sensing the other was not there. It was just the pressure, the contraction. That is still experience, not imagination. It seems like rawer sense data than the data that is tagged with a concept of one side touching the other. More deconstructed rather than less. And if I keep going, the contraction falls away too and it's all just a buzzing of energy - first with kinesthetic buzzing and sound buzzing and light buzzing separate from each other, although more and more synched up, and then they integrate. Touch turns into sound. Sound turns into light. Light turns into bare awareness. Then locations fall away, and through a series of rather weird steps, finally consciousness goes away. 

To my knowledge, the physical world actually involves more space than matter. The notion of our fingers being solid and separate is just how it appears at this scale and with human sensory processing. There are even physicists that think that it's all holographic projections of data rather than matter. I'm not saying that there is no real world. It is as real as it gets. I just don't see how we could possibly know what it's like ultimately. 

As for the church bell ringing, the notion that it is a specific separate sound from something called a church bell, that's conceptual. Sure, most of us hear the sound. For somebody who is deaf, it's just kinesthetic vibrations if sensed at all. For a newborn child... I don't even know to what extent they experience it as one separate and continuous type of sound. They certainly don't think of it as a church bell.  A dog probably hears overtones that the human ear (mind) can't perceive. If I have a headache or an autistic meltdown or for some other reason resist the sound, it will be a terrible and painful noice. If I have learned that resistance causes the sound to be painful, I might be mindful enough to surrender to the sound and let it move through me. Then it will be energizing and quite pleasant (this is also the case for drilling machines). In some states I may not conceptualize it as a church bell or even as a sound, but just sense intensified energy buzzing. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
To complicate matters further:

Does sensory input seem real when you dream?

Can you hear the so called nada sound? I would guess that it is not external, and yet it is fully audible. 

Have you ever had a hallucination of some kind? I can tell you that phenomenologically they appear to come through the sense organs. I can also tell you that it is not qualitatively different from how our senses usually interpret raw data. It's just a shift in figure and ground. That shift can happen very gradually, starting with maybe hearing the phone ring while taking a shower because something in the white noise reminded of the pattern of the telephone signal enough for it to stand out as a possible phone signal. As the mind goes more and more into constant red alert, it tends to overinterpret such similarities more and more. Gradually it develops into hearing the phone signal loud and clear, indistinguishable from a real signal, while at the same time holding the phone and seeing that it is turned off. 

Have you ever had the kind of Kundalini phenomenon of a lightning bolt going up through your spine and exploding in your head? The experience of sound can't be negotiated away, and yet, none of my cats reacted to the loud noice. 

There are experiments where people get to listen to the exact same sound but with different images of mouth movements. They hear different sounds. In transcribing spoken language, similarly, I have noticed that I hear different sounds depending on how I demarcate the sequence, especially when there is overlapping speech. It can be deviously convincing. 

Have you ever tried having one foot in a bucket of hot water and the other foot in a bucket of cold water, and then moving both feet to the same bucket of lukewarm water?

Have you ever focused your vision on one spot long enough for it to turn to nothingness?

Have you ever caught the weird artefacts in your periferal vision, such as a levitating upper half of a lamp pole?

Have you ever had meditation-related visions be projected in your visual field? I know you have. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"Have you ever had the kind of Kundalini phenomenon of a lightning bolt going up through your spine and exploding in your head? The experience of sound can't be negotiated away, and yet, none of my cats reacted to the loud noice. "

Wow emoticon is that "bang" kundalini? I wrote about it in one of my logs, in the night something produced a sound as if a heavy plank of wood fell flat down on the wooden floor "bang"! I looked at my dog to see if he reacted (which he would) but he was just chilling out on the floor. Does that mean A&P Nana or else? 
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
"Have you ever had the kind of Kundalini phenomenon of a lightning bolt going up through your spine and exploding in your head? The experience of sound can't be negotiated away, and yet, none of my cats reacted to the loud noice. "

Wow emoticon is that "bang" kundalini? I wrote about it in one of my logs, in the night something produced a sound as if a heavy plank of wood fell flat down on the wooden floor "bang"! I looked at my dog to see if he reacted (which he would) but he was just chilling out on the floor. Does that mean A&P Nana or else? 

I had one of those 'exploding head syndrome' things about a month ago emoticon

Also it's happened more than once when I am preparing to go to sleep and am listening to music(same album every night) that I've heard sounds that are not on the record-bird chirps, drops of water plopping 0_o What IS that??
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Helen Pohl:
Papa Che Dusko:
"Have you ever had the kind of Kundalini phenomenon of a lightning bolt going up through your spine and exploding in your head? The experience of sound can't be negotiated away, and yet, none of my cats reacted to the loud noice. "

Wow emoticon is that "bang" kundalini? I wrote about it in one of my logs, in the night something produced a sound as if a heavy plank of wood fell flat down on the wooden floor "bang"! I looked at my dog to see if he reacted (which he would) but he was just chilling out on the floor. Does that mean A&P Nana or else? 

I had one of those 'exploding head syndrome' things about a month ago emoticon

Also it's happened more than once when I am preparing to go to sleep and am listening to music(same album every night) that I've have heard sounds that are not on the record-bird chirps, drops of water plopping 0_o What IS that??

If it feels like an energy surge going upwards through the spine or something like that, and/or if you could sense the explosion happen in your head, it's probably related to A&P. In a book about Kundalini Vidya I read that there are many different kinds of unstable Kundalini arisings apart from the kind that puts you on the path, so I'm not sure whether they all map to actually passing the A&P or if the deflected arisings don't count. That's "above my pay grade".

If no energetic buzzing of any kind is involved, it could just be hallucinations or something on the normal spectrum but approaching the hallucination end of it. Those seem to be much more common than people generally think. I very often hear phone signals while listening to music or taking a shower. The mind recognizes some patterns and fills in the blanks, and for some reason sometimes that seems to take on a life of its own. It's all just wave patterns, you know, and they need to be processed in order to make any sense. Lots can happen in the processing. It's a miracle that it works as well as it does. I think that the more you focus on it, the more often your mind treats it as relevant information and lets it reach your conscious. I have sometimes developed phone signal hallucinations in periods when I needed to stay alert for incoming phone calls. My mind somehow let more patterns come through the filter, just in case, and it got pretty absurd. I think we can train ourselves to notice some aspects more than others. I still think observations are valuable. I just think it's also important to keep in mind that are methods of observation are causal too. 

There seems to be a consensus that Exploding head syndrome is not in any way fatal, at least the last time I checked. I haven't been bothered by any of it since I started my daily practice. Many years ago it scared the crap out of me. I worried that I was having strokes or something, and for a long time I concluded that it was panic attacks. I had never heard of Kundalini. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Head's up for Linda and Tim now that he has engaged:

I have two webinars to host today and another tomorrow, and a series of meetings about economic research projects I'm funding. This means I won't be able to read the thread replies from last night and early today thoroughly and respond intelligently until this busy period over, probably tomorrow.

Sorry. I don't want you to think I'm not interested.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Head's up for Linda and Tim now that he has engaged:

I have two webinars to host today and another tomorrow, and a series of meetings about economic research projects I'm funding. This means I won't be able to read the thread replies from last night and early today thoroughly and respond intelligently until this busy period over, probably tomorrow.

Sorry. I don't want you to think I'm not interested.

How thoughtful of you! Thanks, and no worries. I'm not in any rush. I'll probably be wondering about this until I die, so there's plenty of time, I hope. 
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

How thoughtful of you! Thanks, and no worries. I'm not in any rush. I'll probably be wondering about this until I die, so there's plenty of time, I hope. 
Again, no smiley face emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Ni Nurta:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

How thoughtful of you! Thanks, and no worries. I'm not in any rush. I'll probably be wondering about this until I die, so there's plenty of time, I hope. 
Again, no smiley face emoticon

Do I need one? emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:

What would be the difference between experience and fantasy?

That’s a very good question, and I think there is more to it than has been addressed here. To what extent do we observe an already-existing world and to what extent do we create our world? It's dependent origination, sure, but that doesn't really answer my question. Is there such a thing as phantasy if we look closely at the dependent origination? What would that be? We can see a difference between pretending and experiencing. We have concepts like dreams and hallucinations to distinguish "real" experiences from "imagined" experiences. However, hallucinations use the same mechanisms as ordinary sensory processing, so the difference is not as clearcut as one might think. In the yoga of dream and sleep, we learn from our own experience that there is no clear line between sleeping and being awake in the mundane sense. That's fascinating. I find it more useful to talk about causality - in what ways and for whom. The dreamtime is less likely to affect other people, except for when people mutally meet in dreams and/or share dreams and/or finish each other's dreams (it has happened to me). Fantasies/day dreams only affect other people if we act on them. In some ways we might. Can we manifest reality, physically? I don't know. What is reality anyway? I have had many experiences of magickal causality, like prayers making a difference too many times and in too weird ways for it to be all coincience, and I have had clairvoyant dreams. I think it is very useful to keep track of what is consensual reality and what isn't, and the causal relationships, but I'm not entirely sure that one is necessarily more real than the other. In my experience, practice makes the world as we know it fall apart. I wouldn't recommend the practice for anyone who isn't ready to let go of everything they thought they knew. You never know how deep your rabbit hole will be once you open up to it. 

And yet I am a phenomenology nerd. emoticon Experience doesn't have to be "real" to be fascinating. I find it interesting to investigate what seems to be the logic and/or possible patterns within a mode or a state or a scale or whatever context is relevant. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
It seems to me that when I use directed laser beam attentional focus, one point at a time stands out, and when I open up the focus, sensations synch up.* It's situated. I don't think there are enough data to conclude that one of those modes is more true than the other. The mode of observation seems causal. And when I forget myself as a referential point, they merge, sometimes to the point of cessation. 

Even subatomical particles manifest differently depending on whether or not they are observed. Maybe it's something like that?

*) That also corresponds to differences between nanas. 
Jazz Muzak, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
A wise man once said "How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real?"

Food for thought.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Jazz Muzak:
A wise man once said "How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real?"

Food for thought.

Another one once said "why is all the toilet paper gone!" emoticon emoticon 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Jazz Muzak:
A wise man once said "How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real?"

Food for thought.

It's all dependent origination. Everything that arises to existance is conditioned. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
When it synchs up, touch sensations at one point, it's like a threedimensional rippling arising from nowhere and spreading outwards in all directions from the point of touch. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
When it synchs up, touch sensations at one point, it's like a threedimensional rippling arising from nowhere and spreading outwards in all directions from the point of touch. 


Like little explosions.

This is empirical experience just as much as any observation filtered through the idea of an attentional system in the brain being the only real mode of experience. Interesting to see the taken for granted values in people's assumptions about what is a real experience. Nothing personal, just an observation. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I'm also observing that it seems to be considered okay to refer to people's empirical observations as mental masturbation as long as one says that it's nothing personal. 
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 116 Join Date: 12/1/20 Recent Posts
Interesting that you'd respond this way, especially since you weren't really engaged in the "mental masturbation" I expressed criticism of.

There is indeed nothing personal involved though, and nobody was being criticized as an individual or subjected to any ad hominem attacks.

It would have been both irrelevant and fruitless to address the specific points of which I am critical.

My opinion should be of zero relevance to you.

Jazz asked a question, and I offered a few suggestions based on my own practice. If you feel the need to debate or dispute the empirically verifiable data that I offered, please do so in a thread of its own and I'd be happy to engage.
thumbnail
Daniel M. Ingram, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 3204 Join Date: 4/20/09 Recent Posts
I similarly haven't read this whole thread, but the functional, experiential answer is going to vary by the underlying jhanic mode/vipassana jhana you happen to be in at that time. We could add subjhanas and all of that, but probably not helpful for most.

The microscopic temporal and spacial resolving power of the center of attention of the A&P/2nd vj mode of experience/attention is really, really different from the wide, fast, chaotic, complex, peripheral attention mode of the DN/3rd vj mode, which itself is really different from the Equanimity/4th vj mode of experience/attention, which is wide, open, inclusive, more even regarding center/periphery/space/self/other, generally felt as a slower wave that somehow encompasses more complex textures, and is more complete and perceptually integrated.

We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.
thumbnail
Helen Pohl, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 88 Join Date: 8/10/20 Recent Posts
Daniel M. Ingram:
I similarly haven't read this whole thread, but the functional, experiential answer is going to vary by the underlying jhanic mode/vipassana jhana you happen to be in at that time. We could add subjhanas and all of that, but probably not helpful for most.

The microscopic temporal and spacial resolving power of the center of attention of the A&P/2nd vj mode of experience/attention is really, really different from the wide, fast, chaotic, complex, peripheral attention mode of the DN/3rd vj mode, which itself is really different from the Equanimity/4th vj mode of experience/attention, which is wide, open, inclusive, more even regarding center/periphery/space/self/other, generally felt as a slower wave that somehow encompasses more complex textures, and is more complete and perceptually integrated.

We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.

Thanks, this gave me a little bit more confidence in my own practice. =)
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Daniel M. Ingram:
I similarly haven't read this whole thread, but the functional, experiential answer is going to vary by the underlying jhanic mode/vipassana jhana you happen to be in at that time. We could add subjhanas and all of that, but probably not helpful for most.

The microscopic temporal and spacial resolving power of the center of attention of the A&P/2nd vj mode of experience/attention is really, really different from the wide, fast, chaotic, complex, peripheral attention mode of the DN/3rd vj mode, which itself is really different from the Equanimity/4th vj mode of experience/attention, which is wide, open, inclusive, more even regarding center/periphery/space/self/other, generally felt as a slower wave that somehow encompasses more complex textures, and is more complete and perceptually integrated.

We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.
Thanks! It really is situated, isn't it? Empirically, I mean. 

This takes away that nagging feeling of having dreamt that the Eiffel tower never existed, only to be told by everyone that the dream must have been about the Eiffel tower existing, because everyone knows that there has never been an Eiffel tower. 

I'm ridiculously relieved, which says something about what I have to work with, I guess. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show."

I like it emoticon short and to the point. I knew there was a good reason why I liked your book so much.


p.s. Can you sign my copy emoticon (just kidding) emoticon 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
"one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show."

I like it emoticon short and to the point. I knew there was a good reason why I liked your book so much.


p.s. Can you sign my copy emoticon (just kidding) emoticon 
I was hoping someone would notice the sensible advice that Daniel gives. But it always seems to be lost in the awe at the fireworks. What a waste of time!  Let's get drunk at the Bar(do) and dance with the gypsies, how's that for rolling with whatever.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Angel Roberto Puente:
Papa Che Dusko:
"one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show."

I like it emoticon short and to the point. I knew there was a good reason why I liked your book so much.


p.s. Can you sign my copy emoticon (just kidding) emoticon 
I was hoping someone would notice the sensible advice that Daniel gives. But it always seems to be lost in the awe at the fireworks. What a waste of time!  Let's get drunk at the Bar(do) and dance with the gypsies, how's that for rolling with whatever.

You buying the drinks?! emoticon (I'm broke) 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Papa Che Dusko:
Angel Roberto Puente:
Papa Che Dusko:
"one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show."

I like it emoticon short and to the point. I knew there was a good reason why I liked your book so much.


p.s. Can you sign my copy emoticon (just kidding) emoticon 
I was hoping someone would notice the sensible advice that Daniel gives. But it always seems to be lost in the awe at the fireworks. What a waste of time!  Let's get drunk at the Bar(do) and dance with the gypsies, how's that for rolling with whatever.

You buying the drinks?! emoticon (I'm broke) 
Sure! Send out the invitations I have an open tab at the Bar(do). Besides, I bet on a couple of horses at the racetrack and won big. I tried not to gamble but the names just called out to me, Deep End and Origi Nation.
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Daniel M. Ingram:
We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.
Spot on observation, those people who just observe what is rolling through these topics and do not put their ideas, do not actively participate in these passing shows are the real winners
Jazz Muzak, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Daniel M. Ingram:


We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.


After continuing to practice and read this thread over the last few days, this has basically been the conclusion I've come to. It is what it is. Let's work with it here and now.

For what it's worth, I'm currently in some funny mode where when I sit things are very spacy, wide, even, don't really have a problem with what's happening, and my world kind of manifests as a fusion of sense doors in some funny way, with mind and body and everything right there in the field with everything else.

When I wrote the original post, things were wide, lacking a reference point in some bizarre disturbing way, not so even, kind of buzzy, kind of annoying, kind of "in my face and all around me", like getting blasted in the face with a garden hose or something, clearly not very fun or satisfying.

I've been around this block a few times over the years, so you'd think I'd be at the point where I recognize where I'm at when I desperately searching the internet because I'm just CERTAIN I've fucked my life up and my practice is destroyed. But alas, it gets my goose every time in some new, creative way. And then I sit, and I observe, and slowly but surely everything is okay again.

Thanks for everyone contributing by the way! Loving the discussion.
Tim Farrington, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
Jazz Muzak:
Daniel M. Ingram:


We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.


After continuing to practice and read this thread over the last few days, this has basically been the conclusion I've come to. It is what it is. Let's work with it here and now.

For what it's worth, I'm currently in some funny mode where when I sit things are very spacy, wide, even, don't really have a problem with what's happening, and my world kind of manifests as a fusion of sense doors in some funny way, with mind and body and everything right there in the field with everything else.

When I wrote the original post, things were wide, lacking a reference point in some bizarre disturbing way, not so even, kind of buzzy, kind of annoying, kind of "in my face and all around me", like getting blasted in the face with a garden hose or something, clearly not very fun or satisfying.

I've been around this block a few times over the years, so you'd think I'd be at the point where I recognize where I'm at when I desperately searching the internet because I'm just CERTAIN I've fucked my life up and my practice is destroyed. But alas, it gets my goose every time in some new, creative way. And then I sit, and I observe, and slowly but surely everything is okay again.

Thanks for everyone contributing by the way! Loving the discussion.
Jazz, I'm delighted that the avalanche you set off with your desperate grain of sand has at least been part of the movement that brought you to the point where you are no longer CERTAIN that you've fucked up your life and destroyed your practice! Reading it has almost certainly destroyed my life, and most likely fucked up my practice completely, but I take that as a given, and am still grateful for you having set the thing in motion.

Also, I think that at some point, with all this mental masturbation, the discussion obviously crossed over into some kind of mental group sex. In that light, your are responsible karmically for a pretty wild orgy, with any number of happy endings. For this too, the sangha thanks you.

love, tim
Jazz Muzak, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Tim Farrington:
Jazz Muzak:
Daniel M. Ingram:


We could get all constructionist vs essentialist here, but practically, empirically (in the experiential sense), one should just roll with whatever attention mode is rolling through, whatever space weather presents, and work with that rather than ideals about what it should be except to notice the sensations that make up those ideals as part of the passing show.


After continuing to practice and read this thread over the last few days, this has basically been the conclusion I've come to. It is what it is. Let's work with it here and now.

For what it's worth, I'm currently in some funny mode where when I sit things are very spacy, wide, even, don't really have a problem with what's happening, and my world kind of manifests as a fusion of sense doors in some funny way, with mind and body and everything right there in the field with everything else.

When I wrote the original post, things were wide, lacking a reference point in some bizarre disturbing way, not so even, kind of buzzy, kind of annoying, kind of "in my face and all around me", like getting blasted in the face with a garden hose or something, clearly not very fun or satisfying.

I've been around this block a few times over the years, so you'd think I'd be at the point where I recognize where I'm at when I desperately searching the internet because I'm just CERTAIN I've fucked my life up and my practice is destroyed. But alas, it gets my goose every time in some new, creative way. And then I sit, and I observe, and slowly but surely everything is okay again.

Thanks for everyone contributing by the way! Loving the discussion.
Jazz, I'm delighted that the avalanche you set off with your desperate grain of sand has at least been part of the movement that brought you to the point where you are no longer CERTAIN that you've fucked up your life and destroyed your practice! Reading it has almost certainly destroyed my life, and most likely fucked up my practice completely, but I take that as a given, and am still grateful for you having set the thing in motion.

Also, I think that at some point, with all this mental masturbation, the discussion obviously crossed over into some kind of mental group sex. In that light, your are responsible karmically for a pretty wild orgy, with any number of happy endings. For this too, the sangha thanks you.

love, tim

God bless you Timothy.

I apologize deeply for ruining your life and your practice. If I could only go back in time, but as my ex likes to say "coulda shoulda woulda ASSHOLE."

Concerning my karmic responsibility for all this mental sexual activity, I embrace it whole-heartedly. May all beings experience the depths of needless mental masturbation. May all beings understand the power of beautiful, ham-fisted inuendo.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Jazz Muzak:

Concerning my karmic responsibility for all this mental sexual activity, I embrace it whole-heartedly. May all beings experience the depths of needless mental masturbation. May all beings understand the power of beautiful, ham-fisted inuendo.


My log is full of it now, you bastard. emoticon I almost made another multidimensional model to make sense of the phenomenology (the first of which scared the crap of my teacher at the time), but I kind of gave up on it because the different axes would be based on different logics, which made it horribly inconsistent. Also, all axes would collapse on the emptiness side, and sort of turn inside out to allow for non-dualism to apply to form. We just don't have enough of spatial dimensions in our reality to model it. Maybe that's why we sometimes see spinning toroids just before a cessation. It's a mental image of our reality folding around itself. 
Jazz Muzak, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 33 Join Date: 9/27/19 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:


My log is full of it now, you bastard. emoticon I almost made another multidimensional model to make sense of the phenomenology (the first of which scared the crap of my teacher at the time), but I kind of gave up on it because the different axes would be based on different logics, which made it horribly inconsistent. Also, all axes would collapse on the emptiness side, and sort of turn inside out to allow for non-dualism to apply to form. We just don't have enough of spatial dimensions in our reality to model it. Maybe that's why we sometimes see spinning toroids just before a cessation. It's a mental image of our reality folding around itself. 

I love models. I'm usually too dumb to understand them, but I do my best.

Concerning spinning toroids, do you ever play with twisting reality around in funny ways in EQ? I like to see if I can pretzel it up real good and watch it bounce back. Really fuck with the 'typical' proportions and all that. The other day I had my head up my ass and the room was like a spinning donut and then I twisted that on itself and everything started rolling foward like it had momentum or something. Silly, goofy things to do during a boring sit. Not sure it accomplishes anything, but boy do I enjoy it!
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I usually hate models, but that's because most of them are too gross simplifications. I love models that actually say something and where the layout has tangible meaning rather than just looking neat. 

Yes, I love playing around with reality! It doesn't spin for me, but it tilts in different directions, flattens, gets super-depth, falls into my face, and so forth. Objects in the visual field can levitate, sink into the ground, become transparent, and disappear into nothingness. Reality can turn into wave formations of different sizes, up to tsunami version. Sometimes the space can turn into something that looks like a portal. I have had the subjective experience of levitating upside-down, falling through my bed, turning my senses inside-out, sneaking out through my third eye, and having energy splashing out through my crown and down around me in an egg-shape. I have been empty space engaged in cosmic lovemaking with awareness, creating the existence. I have been Good, newborn at any given moment, innocent, unconditioned and driven by pure joy.

I figure that being able to let go of taken-for-granted assumptions of reality probably won't hurt. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

Reality can turn into wave formations of different sizes, up to tsunami version. 


That was just once, when a lake tilted, so technically, that was actually a tilt rather than a wave. The waves haven't been higher than a metre or so, and they are usually smaller. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Sounds like a great development. I'm glad. 

That fusion of sense doors is lovely, isn't it? 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I just assumed that I was included in everyone but Chris Marti. My bad. emoticon But thanks for saying that it wasn't my very intense engagement in this thread that appeared to you as mental masturbation! I know that others' opinions shouldn't matter, but they still do. So like Chris Marti was before, I was saddened. And just like it was for Chris, I was mistaken about the intention too. I'm glad. 

Thanks, I'm good. I'm enjoying the phenomenology discussion in this thread. I also have a meeting booked with Daniel about this which I'm very much looking forward to. I like triangulating pointers from different people, as words are so frustratingly inadequate. 
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 116 Join Date: 12/1/20 Recent Posts
Apologies for not being more clear, and I very much appreciate your understanding. I can end up communicating on forums like an old curmudgeon, so I really need to be more careful in my wording of stuff.

I know Chris from KFD and we butted heads many years ago, but I know he's genuine and has solid insight which is why I related more specifically to him and his approach.

Apologies once again for coming off as a prick, and I look forward to chatting more on here!
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
Apologies for not being more clear, and I very much appreciate your understanding. I can end up communicating on forums like an old curmudgeon, so I really need to be more careful in my wording of stuff.

I know Chris from KFD and we butted heads many years ago, but I know he's genuine and has solid insight which is why I related more specifically to him and his approach.

Apologies once again for coming off as a prick, and I look forward to chatting more on here!

emoticon I was the one coming off as a prick just the other day, so I'm in no position to judge. I look forward to chatting more too. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I know Chris from KFD and we butted heads many years ago...

This was no doubt during my time as an asshole. Then again, some might say those days are still with us  emoticon  
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I see no reason for sensations to be limited to either the left finger or the right finger, when there is a field of mutual touch that can be aware on its own accord. The limitation to one finger at a time is only valid if we believe that the sensations come from something external tickling our nerve ends and sending signals to the brain.


I'll reply again in another way:

The limiting factor you mention is what I call "experience." The limitation is based on what we actually observe, not on what we later imagine. So to me the perception is limited by what actually gets sensed (observed). The later in time interpretation can be anything we want if we're willing to imagine it, but it's not the original perception or the naturally occurring mental echo of it, both of which are by then long gone. That original observation can't be resurrected except by our thinking process - our re-imagining of it.

This, at least for me, isn't all that complicated, but it is dependent origination, which I see as having a very solid basis in observation and investigation.

Olivier, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 742 Join Date: 4/27/19 Recent Posts
I'll just say it, this worldview seems to me incompatible with dependent origination.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
... this worldview seems to me incompatible with dependent origination.

Can you elaborate, Olivier?
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I have now publicly published a post in this thread that while in progress was saved as a draft. It's a few posts up, the terribly long one. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I also wonder where the collapse between this side and that side comes in. I don't see any of that in your phenomenology, Chris. Or maybe I just don't understand your descriptions? Maybe that's the thing I need to see? I have sort of interpreted that collapse among other things as a possibility for two finger tips that touch to feel each other at the same time, as there is no subject and object - just sensations knowing themselves where they are. So instead of a pending back and forth of touch bips between the finger tips, one field of contact sensations* would arise, located at the exact spot where the contact is. I have sensed this happening while being in dondual absorption. Ni Nurta describes the very same thing. However, the way you describe things, it sounds like that's just bullshit. Is it?** 

*) edited to add: although "contact sensations" becomes a somewhat odd concept when the "sides" fall away. It's one field of sensations where there used to be two sides taking turns in sensing each other. 

**) edited to add: Honestly, I don't think it is. I have sensed this so many times and it just doesn't make sense that this duality of subject—object should be an absolute in a non-dual reality. 

It's funny that you and Ni Nurta can't seem to come to an agreement on this since you both seem rather hung up on brain processing models. Maybe I'm really going crazy, because I'm starting to think that the whole idea of having the processing go through a brain doesn't really fit into what I see anymore. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"Papa Che even interpreted this as you celebrating the Kazoo player. I do agree that it is amazing how the mind creates our entire experience, despite the Kazoo player getting in the way of appreciating how the whole symphony knows itself, without needing us to capture it."

Nope emoticon I did not interpret him "celebrating" the Kazoo player but only including that part of "kazooing " in Thisness emoticon as This can be myriads of shapes and forms and kazooing is just one of those shapes/forms. 

However no reason for taking my observations seriously emoticon Im in a funky place right now ...  emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon emoticon 


thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I also wonder where the collapse between this side and that side comes in. I don't see any of that in your phenomenology, Chris. Or maybe I just don't understand your descriptions?

What do you mean by "collapse between sides?" I don't understand.

It's funny that you and Ni Nurta can't seem to come to an agreement on this since you both seem rather hung up on brain processing models.

I don't have Ni Nurta's imagination.
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:

It's funny that you and Ni Nurta can't seem to come to an agreement on this since you both seem rather hung up on brain processing models.

I don't have Ni Nurta's imagination.
Me neither.
Rather than imagination I trained my eyesight. When eyesight is not driven by mind then what is being seen drives the mind instead and this in turn causes me to be able to experience minds of people I see. Another fun ability of right hemisphere other than experiencing colors. Left hemisphere is too focused on its current story to bother to decode other people, at least in objective way unrelated to the story playing in it. It only gets those informations which are useful in context of this story and left hemisphere minds assumed position assumed in it eg. if the so called self is taking some stand on some issue and its intended action is defending it then left hemisphere will decode only those informations from other people which would help the self to defend this position.

Of course especially if you use supermunane non-dual nonsense then it should possible to use right hemisphere to copy other people mind configurations... which I myself would of course never do... if there was any self to worry about emoticon

BTW. In previous post I said I am more Zen than you. I expect some reaction because I actually feel you as rather very Zen-y emoticon
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
I also wonder where the collapse between this side and that side comes in. I don't see any of that in your phenomenology, Chris. Or maybe I just don't understand your descriptions? Maybe that's the thing I need to see? I have sort of interpreted that collapse among other things as a possibility for two finger tips that touch to feel each other at the same time, as there is no subject and object - just sensations knowing themselves where they are. So instead of a pending back and forth of touch bips between the finger tips, one field of contact sensations* would arise, located at the exact spot where the contact is. I have sensed this happening while being in dondual absorption. Ni Nurta describes the very same thing. However, the way you describe things, it sounds like that's just bullshit. Is it?** 
If I touch my thumb and index finger in both my hands then (after I stop involountary Ommm...) I can perceive touch sensations in both hands at once... or separately (with switching) depending on which hemisphere drives consciousness. The switching and perceiving one hand action easily identifies left hemisphere. Both hemispheres have very distinctive color/taste and such practice of perceiving more than one things in mind can be used to recognize hemispheres, train either left or right and training synchronization. Left is yellow/gold and right is more dark magenta. Of course it is right hemisphere which feels/sees these colors because left has perception of only there colors: "like", "do not like" and "do not care" emoticon

I would expect you Linda to be more balanced than Chris thus naturally have easiest access to right hemisphere. Nothing personal, just natural differences between human sexes. Men naturally have stronger dominant hemisphere and more lateralization of brain functions. When I forced my right hemisphere awareness it felt like I had damaged brain, there were serious perception artifacts eg. in vision but also in things like music/rhythm perception and it took few years until right hemisphere learned to do these things. I would expect that if I was women and did the same set of practices there would be significantly less of such issues if any at all. Female brain naturally is used more evenly and have physically larger connections between hemispheres. It also means it should be harder to actually do one-hemisphere-only perceptions and differentiate between hemispheres, they are normally more cooperative, more synchronized.

I trained right hemisphere a lot. If from such perception I start using left hemisphere then there appears very strong impression of "normal mind" pointing to some object with "normal" meaning what was normal for me in the past. If I ignore it then it doesn't do anything and fade away. If I go deeper in to it then my hemisphere will switch. If I use it to analyze sensations then yeah, one thing at once. There also exists various synchronization modes, one hemisphere driving the other in different ways, etc. In last few years I typically do not care what the configuration is as long as it is pleasant and it likes to change from time to time. Recently I started thinking more about right hemisphere so I use it more. The right-based mind have this nice quality of there being no mind at all (if left hemisphere remains silent) and just pure perception. It is also good for experiencing colors - the main reason I trained it so much in the past.

It's funny that you and Ni Nurta can't seem to come to an agreement on this since you both seem rather hung up on brain processing models. Maybe I'm really going crazy, because I'm starting to think that the whole idea of having the processing go through a brain doesn't really fit into what I see anymore.
My right hemisphere dominant experience is more Zen and I assume Chris has more Theravada based outlook on world which is result of doing left hemisphere based practices. Though I am not sure actually what Chris practiced and just assume it was something like practices from MCTB, especially given Chris posts which do point to conclusions one would have after doing these practices.

I even do not have any objections to myself using left hemisphere in completely normal self-based way which people point at times. Not real quote but would present the idea nicely: "This guy seems as unenlightened as they push them out of the factory" emoticon The difference is that I use this normal mind for a while and the next moment I do not use it. Normally people are stuck with what they have got and this cause them dukkha and it doesn't even matter if they are left hemisphere dominant, or right or whatever really. The way out of dukkha is more variety and not clinging to own mind. Neither perception is ultimately bulletproof.

That is also why I am against in the ideas like there existing some non-dual perception which is perfect. Neither synchronization states I tested were percect, and clinging to them revealed limits of applicability. Some are almost perfect I won't lie but even over-relying on them still caused dukkha developing somewhere in the nervous system given enough time. It is good to have more variety in own experience, even if to experience world in more than single taste. Failure to do so consciously will cause this different activation modes happen during emotional outbursts and the last thing one want is to be driven by emotions when one should remain calm.

BTW. I am like very Zen. So much Zen that I always have my stick and my hand is always ready to use it emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Ni Nurta:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
I also wonder where the collapse between this side and that side comes in. I don't see any of that in your phenomenology, Chris. Or maybe I just don't understand your descriptions? Maybe that's the thing I need to see? I have sort of interpreted that collapse among other things as a possibility for two finger tips that touch to feel each other at the same time, as there is no subject and object - just sensations knowing themselves where they are. So instead of a pending back and forth of touch bips between the finger tips, one field of contact sensations* would arise, located at the exact spot where the contact is. I have sensed this happening while being in dondual absorption. Ni Nurta describes the very same thing. However, the way you describe things, it sounds like that's just bullshit. Is it?** 
If I touch my thumb and index finger in both my hands then (after I stop involountary Ommm...) I can perceive touch sensations in both hands at once... or separately (with switching) depending on which hemisphere drives consciousness. The switching and perceiving one hand action easily identifies left hemisphere. Both hemispheres have very distinctive color/taste and such practice of perceiving more than one things in mind can be used to recognize hemispheres, train either left or right and training synchronization. Left is yellow/gold and right is more dark magenta. Of course it is right hemisphere which feels/sees these colors because left has perception of only there colors: "like", "do not like" and "do not care" emoticon

I would expect you Linda to be more balanced than Chris thus naturally have easiest access to right hemisphere. Nothing personal, just natural differences between human sexes. Men naturally have stronger dominant hemisphere and more lateralization of brain functions. When I forced my right hemisphere awareness it felt like I had damaged brain, there were serious perception artifacts eg. in vision but also in things like music/rhythm perception and it took few years until right hemisphere learned to do these things. I would expect that if I was women and did the same set of practices there would be significantly less of such issues if any at all. Female brain naturally is used more evenly and have physically larger connections between hemispheres. It also means it should be harder to actually do one-hemisphere-only perceptions and differentiate between hemispheres, they are normally more cooperative, more synchronized.

I trained right hemisphere a lot. If from such perception I start using left hemisphere then there appears very strong impression of "normal mind" pointing to some object with "normal" meaning what was normal for me in the past. If I ignore it then it doesn't do anything and fade away. If I go deeper in to it then my hemisphere will switch. If I use it to analyze sensations then yeah, one thing at once. There also exists various synchronization modes, one hemisphere driving the other in different ways, etc. In last few years I typically do not care what the configuration is as long as it is pleasant and it likes to change from time to time. Recently I started thinking more about right hemisphere so I use it more. The right-based mind have this nice quality of there being no mind at all (if left hemisphere remains silent) and just pure perception. It is also good for experiencing colors - the main reason I trained it so much in the past.

It's funny that you and Ni Nurta can't seem to come to an agreement on this since you both seem rather hung up on brain processing models. Maybe I'm really going crazy, because I'm starting to think that the whole idea of having the processing go through a brain doesn't really fit into what I see anymore.
My right hemisphere dominant experience is more Zen and I assume Chris has more Theravada based outlook on world which is result of doing left hemisphere based practices. Though I am not sure actually what Chris practiced and just assume it was something like practices from MCTB, especially given Chris posts which do point to conclusions one would have after doing these practices.

I even do not have any objections to myself using left hemisphere in completely normal self-based way which people point at times. Not real quote but would present the idea nicely: "This guy seems as unenlightened as they push them out of the factory" emoticon The difference is that I use this normal mind for a while and the next moment I do not use it. Normally people are stuck with what they have got and this cause them dukkha and it doesn't even matter if they are left hemisphere dominant, or right or whatever really. The way out of dukkha is more variety and not clinging to own mind. Neither perception is ultimately bulletproof.

That is also why I am against in the ideas like there existing some non-dual perception which is perfect. Neither synchronization states I tested were percect, and clinging to them revealed limits of applicability. Some are almost perfect I won't lie but even over-relying on them still caused dukkha developing somewhere in the nervous system given enough time. It is good to have more variety in own experience, even if to experience world in more than single taste. Failure to do so consciously will cause this different activation modes happen during emotional outbursts and the last thing one want is to be driven by emotions when one should remain calm.

BTW. I am like very Zen. So much Zen that I always have my stick and my hand is always ready to use it emoticon
Words are so limited, so I still cannot tell whether or not we are actually talking about similar experiences. I wouldn't exactly say that I feel both fingers touching the other one at the same time, because that subject-object relationship is not there. There sort of is no I there when it happens. Maybe it's actually no longer relevant to talk about different fingers. I need to check this phenomenology again to see the order of things. I know that at a certain point, it's an energy field rather than fingers. The distinction between the fingers is gone at that point. I need to check if those threedimensional blobs of knowing contraction start arising before or after that shift - or those shifts. It's not linear, which complicates things. I tend to go back and forth between having a solid body and being a buzzing energy field, subjectively speaking. It also includes many instances of partly being solid and partly being an energy buzz.

Personally I'm wary about making generalizations about gender-related differences in the brain. Also, I'm not very feminine. I identify as gendervague, if I have to identity as anything gender-related, mainly because when people assume that I share specific outlooks or experiences as a woman, that's usually far off the map. If brain differences are involved, I think my neurodivergent wiring is much more relevant. Those diagnoses do affect sensory processing. Maybe there's a neglected diversity aspect here. If there are gender-related differences of relevance, they can come in under that umbrella too. 

Reflecting critically about all modes is probably a very sane approach. I recently had what felt like a huge backlash at the time, when I was stuck in a superdualistic mode which felt like an octopus clinging to my face because of the tensions the attentional system involved. During that phase I just wanted the attention to stop and let any perspectival perception come to an end. Of course that was not realistic at all. I do want to flip that switch that Daniel talks about, though, whatever it is. 
thumbnail
Ni Nurta, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 774 Join Date: 2/22/20 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

Personally I'm wary about making generalizations about gender-related differences in the brain. Also, I'm not very feminine. I identify as gendervague, if I have to identity as anything gender-related, mainly because when people assume that I share specific outlooks or experiences as a woman, that's usually far off the map. If brain differences are involved, I think my neurodivergent wiring is much more relevant. Those diagnoses do affect sensory processing. Maybe there's a neglected diversity aspect here. If there are gender-related differences of relevance, they can come in under that umbrella too. 
Sorry for assuming anything about anything
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Ni Nurta:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

Personally I'm wary about making generalizations about gender-related differences in the brain. Also, I'm not very feminine. I identify as gendervague, if I have to identity as anything gender-related, mainly because when people assume that I share specific outlooks or experiences as a woman, that's usually far off the map. If brain differences are involved, I think my neurodivergent wiring is much more relevant. Those diagnoses do affect sensory processing. Maybe there's a neglected diversity aspect here. If there are gender-related differences of relevance, they can come in under that umbrella too. 
Sorry for assuming anything about anything

As we are all appologizing to each other and making sure that we are okay, I just want to say no worries to this too. I wasn't bothered. Just wanted to be honest.

I think I may have neglected to reply to one of Papa Che's appologies too. No worries there either. 

emoticon

And to Angel, yeah, thankfully we all noticed it this time. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 4073 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I'm not sure I have anything to add here at this point, and if I did add something it might bring the reconciliation happening here crashing down around me. No thanks!

Group hug!!!
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:


Group hug!!!

emoticon emoticon emoticon 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
I'm not sure I have anything to add here at this point, and if I did add something it might bring the reconciliation happening here crashing down around me. No thanks!

Group hug!!!

Hehe, well, I really appreciated the discussion. Thankyou for your contribution! And I'm happy to join the group hug. 
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 2173 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"Choice is not an option"

Choice as an option is also part of this beautiful-boring-horrific-magnificent sensory dance emoticon but then again I dont know what I am talking about emoticon 

I do salute you for honoring the good auld Kazoo Player emoticon and not making THIS sound "all-nondual and transcending into fragrant jhanic farts" emoticonemoticonemoticon 

Oh boy I think I ate too much for dinner ... burp! sorry emoticon 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:

In the example of the kazoo player, the whole symphony that is already there and that doesn't need the kazoo player to keep track of it, what would you say that is? 

I need to rephrase that to clarify what I’m asking. I do understand that the kazoo player stands for the conceptualizing of the other sensations, sort of a name tag that can be confused with the sensations that it thinks it adresses. But those other sensations that aren’t such tags, sometimes they synch up. I mean really synch up, which is not the same thing as just not realizing how fast the mind moves. Chris, would you call that synched up holistic thing one sensation even though it is much richer than the name tag? And would you agree that it is not the same thing as the name tag? If you would, then I guess we agree. There are posts in this thread that seem (to me) to implicate that it's either one tiny little separate unit at a time or that name tag, which would mean that the richness of that synch is just a glorified name tag. I find that to be bullshit. 
thumbnail
Angel Roberto Puente, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 281 Join Date: 5/5/19 Recent Posts
Thank you for the link. Daniel is very knowledgeable of Buddhist concepts and uses them well to explain things.  I'm slowly going through my hard copy of MCTB2, I have to admit most of the time I don't know what he's talking about. But from my experience, I get it when he says,  "If we manage to flash onto the experience of true centerlessness, luminosity, and agencylessness, even for a moment, we will have had a taste of a world free of the deeper dharmic meanings of clinging and craving. If we manage to stabilize this, we will truly know the depths of what those concepts are referring to and what it is like to have them vanish."  This is the top of the funnel, the center of the mandala.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Angel Roberto Puente:
Thank you for the link. Daniel is very knowledgeable of Buddhist concepts and uses them well to explain things.  I'm slowly going through my hard copy of MCTB2, I have to admit most of the time I don't know what he's talking about. But from my experience, I get it when he says,  "If we manage to flash onto the experience of true centerlessness, luminosity, and agencylessness, even for a moment, we will have had a taste of a world free of the deeper dharmic meanings of clinging and craving. If we manage to stabilize this, we will truly know the depths of what those concepts are referring to and what it is like to have them vanish."  This is the top of the funnel, the center of the mandala.

You are welcome. It is so worth it going through those pages again and again.

I have had such moments, or at least something that reminds of it; the glimpses still change character so there is probably more to see, or to stop seeing. I will stabilize it or die trying. Most of what he talks about in the book it feels to me like I have had moments when I knew exactly what he was talking about, if that makes any sense. Outside those moments, the advanced level stuff is but a skeleton tentatively put together from fragments to estimate what a primordial creature might have looked like, except I know that I have seen it whereas the paleontologist hasn't. 
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I also wonder, does one sensation at a time include what goes on subconsciously? 
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 116 Join Date: 12/1/20 Recent Posts
Considerable and unhelpful intellectualization that is not backed up by direct experience happening in here. Haven't fully read the whole thread, but Chris Marti seems to be one of the only people who is addressing this appropriately. Most of the replies are, not to put too fine a point on it, mental masturbation. Not a criticism of anyone specifically, merely an observation of the flow of conversation.

As to your question, Jazz, I'd like to give my two mongolian togrogs on it and hope that it's helpful.
I've noticed that typically in my vipassana practice, I am not noticing a single sensation at a time. In fact, the field of awareness that I am perceiving is very wide (although the width and depth changes, which I think has to do with the PoI), and is made up of many many many sensations. These all come and go quite rapidly.

Without knowing more about the specifics of your practice or where you're 'at', I can only speculate. 

Shifts in width/depth of perceptual field like those described, combined with the speed of sensations noted suggest 4th ñana/2nd jhana; field seems to spread out in the four directions, before becoming more toroidal/inside-of-a-donut-shaped as you move into 3rd jhana/5th-10th ñana. I'm sure Daniel can get more into the minutia and clarify if required, but I'm guessing you're cycling up to 4th ñana and back down without fully 'crossing the threshold'.

Again, purely guessing based on information available here: It sounds like you actually are noticing individual sensations, but the lack of one-pointed focus developed in 1st jhana/lack of khanika-samadhi is sort of 'smearing' attention across the whole field rather than really getting down and dirty with specifics.

Is Daniel refering to how each individual sensation disappears before the "replacement" for THAT particular sensation arises, or is it more like the "one electron" theory where there is just one electron moving so fast it seems to appear everywhere?
Knowledge of the Arising & Passing Away points to something fundamental about the nature of experience itself. Perhaps think of it slightly differently: Attention is the "one electron moving so fast it seems to appear everywhere", not the phenomena being noted although the two don't arise as separate occurrences.

In actuality, there is no arising, abiding or passing away of anything; only Suchness...but that doesn't help your practice right now. Instead, consider how the arising and passing away of conditioned phenomena is like a fractal of the whole of human experience. Birth, life and death, played out at the microcosmic and macrocosmic scales simultaneously.

If you can really zero in on a specific sensation - the breath being probably the best and easiest to establish - then you can begin to observe for yourself, directly and experientially how Knowledge of the Arising & Passing Away fits in the bigger picture.

Hope this helps, but feel free to ask if it doesn't make sense.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: One Sensation at a Time?

Posts: 5922 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Parts of me think that it's collective magick that makes our world manifest as solidly as it does, with natural laws and everything, because when you open up to not believing in it, it seems less solid, and when you let go of your beliefs entirely for a moment, it collapses. Those beliefs go deep, though. It's not like I can just decide to stop believing on command.