I've been reading some of Daniel's book and posts here, and wondering if/how to enter the pool of discussion.   Finally just decided to do a cannonball in the deep end and see what happens.   Or maybe I'm in the shallow end and will hit the bottom in a second.   

I'm mainly interested in exploring/understanding my experience, some shifts that occurred, and a major one a couple of years ago which resulted in a permanent sense of seeing the false nature of the sense of identity with a body, idea, sensation, etc.   (recognition of no self, or "not-self"?).     I come from a self-inquiry, "non-dual" approach to practice.  Many years of sitting and walking meditation, deeply investigating everything that seem to make up the sense of "me" (body, thoughts, spatial locations, imagery, etc.) 

In particular, I'd be very interested in anyone sharing their direct experience of their inner terrain in regards to what appears to be a ceasing of the process of identification.      

What I find in my experience are several key landmarks.   There is a persistent change in beliefs structures around identity based on what is actually here.   The conviction that I am not identical to/identifiable as any conventional appearances or sensed objects, nothing separate in experience, seems complete and to reflect the "obvious".   And this conviction is based on direct experience, just what is here (as oppose to theoretical).   I would not say that I don't exist, however.   This was an important question to ask, so to speak, upon recognizing I do not exist as a body, thought, sensation, etc.    Existence is also quite obvious, but it's just not clear what this existence IS.   I've got some ideas though.........     Then there is the "integration" of all this that seems part of a process that continues on (not having a sense of "doing" it, no doer, lot's of things, everything, goes on, on it's own).    

Anyway, interested in any comments.

I would read Nagarjuna to get used to Buddhist analysis of the middle path between permanent existence and nihilism.

http://www.amazon.com/Nagarjuna-Richard-H-Jones/dp/1451539797/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1407382476&sr=8-3&keywords=Nagarjuna

Richard, I'd be more interested in your experience related to this point.

Looking at experience I would find that the thinking mind has layers of clinging (which is perceiving that something is wrong with the present moment and then going into stories of what you want or what you dislike).  The first layer is simply long stories (I like this because, because, because...I dislike this because...etc).  

This obscures our understanding of the existence of objects totally.  Objects appear to be things that are worth attaching to.

Once you peel back this gross level you can notice the consciousness/awareness/knowing aspect of mind and prior gross level of thinking is looked at as objects for awareness.  Awareness appears to be an object.

At this point objects appear to go through the three characteristics.

When consciousness is investigated then objects appear to be what consciousness needs to be conscious.  The three characteristics apply to the knowing aspect as well because it's a strobing knowing that quickly moves intention to pay attention to objects for liking or disliking.  There's plenty of memory and projection into the future relating to objects so there's still some subtle level of clinging.

What I'm working on now is looking at how thinking is involved in remembering and projecting into the future.  Even the present moment is conceptual in that if you look for the present moment all you'll find is ungraspable fleetingness.

The objects in front of you have no staying power.  That staying power/clinging requires short-term and long-term memory and stories of continuity to bolster it's existence.  

So finally objects are simplifications of the mind to find differences in the universe for survival purposes.  They don't exist indefinitely and neither does the body and mind.  All things break down into smaller parts and go through time as entropy.  So things exist but detail is over-simplified by the mind and conceptual thinking.

The best way to see this is to meditate and look at objects, your body, and mind activities and find it in the present moment.  Any duration is a thinking process that makes things more and more solid.  The more goneness you find the more insubstantial everything appears.

Here's the thing.   When there is no "self" at the center of all these appearances, no objectifiable, separate character, then what ever appears is not a problem.   If the appearance of layers of "clinging" occurs, what does it matter?    When there is no one subject to it, what's actually at stake?    What happens to the thought, "something is wrong with the present moment", when it has no believed "me" to tether to?   It comes, it goes, no matter.    

Let me ask you this:   What exactly is this "you" that is "working on looking at how thinking is involved in remembering and projecting into the future"?  

You say, "Even the present moment is conceptual in that if you look for the present moment all you'll find is ungraspable fleetingness".    Yes, a mirage, a flash of light on a pond.   And so also are YOU, the core of you-ness, right now.   The essence of "Richard" is "ungraspable fleetingness".    

Yes?

Look this is a really difficult practice.  The sense of self is a gradation that is subtly there.  Even if you believe there's an object in front of you and a consciousness self attending to it.  Any measurement or preferences (including in meditation) can cause stress.  Anatta as you describe it is good in accepting the mental habits already there so you don't add stress reacting to the stress thinking that is a habit.  That's a good realization but people will still find some stress there because consciousness could be construed as a self and the concept of the realization can be clung to (by constantly rehearsing the concept of realization in your mind).  The purpose of the practice is to get rid of greed, hatred and delusion (belief inherent existence of objects) in daily life.

Habits are addictions.  Another analysis could be actual behavior.  If you have habits that get in the way of your major goals then the eradicating of those habits would be a good litmus test for freedom.

So what you're doing with the reasoning is good but it's a mixture of reasoning, and meditation in daily life.  If the brain is not reacting with desire and aversion I would suspect you are an arhat.

I think a good way to look at your reasoning is to see that there was no "self" in the first place but there is a reactivity that feels like a self and deconditioning that to lower levels so you can function better.  In the book Clarifying the Natural State you would welcome the habitual thinking impulses but not act on them.  You would then watch the impulses naturally pass away and then cultivate something skillful like the brahmaviharas etc. This is a gentle for of Right Energy/Effort.  Habits get reconditioned to something you aim towards by constantly replacing behaviors with new intentions. Eg. A person who has craving for smoking should be able to tolerate withdrawal symptoms by not acting on any habitual impulses to smoke.  Over time they should stop being a smoker.

Make sense?

I understand the logic of what you are saying but what's happening is you seem to be remaining on a conceptual level with all this.    For one, your not really able to understand that I'm describing what I see, not using a mental reasoning process to present a point.  That seems like a big waste of time as two theories can completely miss eachother til the end of time.   Each is just a story.   I'm simply looking at what is here, now, investigating it with attention, and attempting to describe what I see in simple terms, and asking you to tell me what you see, keeping the interpretation to an absolute minimum.      Can you just look directly at your own experience and simply describe what you really know directly?   Let's compare on that level, ok?

Here is one point to address.    Sense of self.    Yes, it is subtly there at times, and yes there never is or was an actual self, just belief in and thoughts regarding one.  I know each of these points with complete certainty.   The result is, in spite of the arising of thought about a self, even one that says, "I am presence", or "I am consciousness", the experience of life as being without a separate self remains clear.    It's not a deconditioning to function better, but a radical shift in seeing how things actually are.     So thoughts about "me" seem to come and go quickly, and have no "growth" into any type of alternative understanding.   But they do continue to arrise.

 I'm also interested in general conditioning of various types, and my interest in "Buddhist" descriptions is to give some structure to my on going investigations of behaviour and underlying thought patterns.   For example, "right speech" as it relates to work in the world.....
 
Look forward to hearing about your experiences!

What I notice is that consciousness is aware of all the senses + thinking.  I can feel intentions with my consciousness and it appears like a mirror registering all these impressions.  Thinking of a mirror is also registered.  I also notice how thoughts about the past and future can be let go of leading to a dismantling of conceptual time.  I can also sense the last bit that needs to be let go of is pursuing preferences without holding them. Reactivity towards preferences is greatly reduced since I started meditation in 2007.  When the mind wanders there's no aversion to it wandering which reduces again the self-split further.  

Now there's still just the smaller clinging to preferences and time that has to be dealt with by deconditioning those attachments.  By seeing the three characteristics and by using concepts to further understanding of inherent existence I can ask questions like "this thing I want...when I get it will it make me permanently happy?"  Using imagination and concepts to realistically assess the value we put on activities is helpful.  Recognizing perceptions and objects without holding absolute reality in them is the goal.  One cannot be in the absolute all the time but one can bring the understanding into life by continuous reminders.  It's the middle path where things exist but undergo the 3 characteristics.  It's not permanent but it's also not nothing.   

Ok, so my understanding of your description of your experience is, conscousness seems to be registering impressions like a mirror (and you realize this interpretation is just another reflection in the mirror).   And your practice is to let go of concepts like that of time, and to work on deconditioning attachments by referrencing the "3 characteristics" (impermanance, etc).   And you have goals of practice like recognizing objects as not having absolute reality.  

By "reducing the split further", I assume you mean you feel your practice is reducing the sense of you being a separate self, identification with this "self sense", is that correct?  

What do you mean, "it's not permanent, but it's also not nothing".   What are you referring to?   Your practice?  Your understanding?

Any aversion creates a split.  If you dislike a wandering mind which most meditators condition themselves unknowingly via concentration and noting practices, you create a separation that you can feel.  Then it becomes a "meditator" that's trying to get to enlightenment in some future, which in the end is just thinking about the future.  If the meditation doesn't go where the ego wants it to go then you get aversion.  When you want the mind to achieve enlightenment then it's desire again.  It's the way the amygdala works in that it's bipolar like a carrot and a stick. Because the carrot (dopamine/oxytocin/serotonin etc) undergoes impermanence we end up getting the stick (cortisol) in many different manifestations, including in measuring and rating our meditation attainments.  I was stuck in there for some years as I got to equanimity. Equanimity feels narrow when there's still too much aversion hanging out where the meditator is not looking.

The middle path I'm referring to has to do with my understanding and my experience.  Anyone who looks at the 3 characteristics will see impermanence but at some point they might get nihilistic views that nothing matters which isn't the case because cause and effect will still happen and we still get emotional over outcomes.  The permanence view is not really a view that people have when you ask them, but they do treat likes and dislikes with the gravity of objects being permanently, and undestructibly real.

This is why I linked to the Nagarjuna book because these understandings can be read and then added to the meditation so we don't fall into either extreme.  I met an old lady after watching a movie that liked Hinduism and I mentioned I liked Buddhism.  She immediately went into how Buddhists are nihilists and are always in "states" because she had Buddhist friends that were probably stuck in their practices.  Trying to explain the middle path was impossible as she would interrupt me and repeat they are nihilists.

A simple way to look into it is impermanence.  Is everything in the universe impermanent (even if slowly so)? Yes.  But is everything nothing? No because experience still happens.  Treating things as inherently existing is terminology that means when we act as if objects exist without cause and effect.  Because everything is conceptual to some degree in our senses and thinking process we have to remind ourselves that objects are constantly touching something and involved in cause and effect.  A tree needs sunlight, CO2, water, and soil, but what we see is a shape of a tree.  This is why understanding is important because my senses and thinking won't go beyond what they can (noticing objects as inherently real) but I can cling less to "things" because I know they aren't permanent, can't satisfy permanently, and because of the former they can't be owned by a self because even the body mind complex is under the same conditions.

Quoting myself above:

So I want to understand the perception of traffic lights and their use but I don't want to start chasing lights to beat a red light or accidently go through a red light because I cling to not wanting to stop.  We need to recognize perceptions with less reactivity instead of not recognizing them or being full of desire and aversion towards them.

Here's some talks that will help you with Nagarjuna and emptiness:

http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/11929/
http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/9553/

Things are empty of permanent form but they are not so empty that they don't exist.

I don't want to be offensive here, but you don't seem to be able to write about real time, here and now experience.   Or to carry on an exchange, a natural back and forth dialogue about what is happening in your experience.   That's really what I mean by showing up in a "Nondual" area of the website and inviting exploration together.  You keep wanting to teach me something, or express your Buddhist concepts.   What I see are that these comments your making are just concepts, abstractions about existence.   I'm familiar with alot of these ideas, but once you get them, why not put them aside and dive into this experience and see what's here?        

My direct experience of the inner terrain is similar to yours but more stage based than you describe.
The self is a process, not a thing. The selfing process is made up of several subprocess that work together to create a selfing gestalt the interferes and obscures the experience of reality clearly cleanly and when operating there is an added stress that goes along with the process.
The stages of selfing process that were shut down happened in this order-

• The rule set of external reality (things are solid, unchanging, etc) were seen thru and the possession or ownership of the rules were shut down
• The 5 physical senses were seen thru and the possession or ownership of them were shut down
• Thoughts including the mental echo of the 5 senses were seen thru and the possession or ownership of them were shut down
• Proprioception/ sense of self in space was seen thru and the illusion of possession or ownership of a center point, outside diameter and personal bubble as mine was shut down.
• The sense of a doer/selector of experience was shut down. Internal sensations no longer had any priority over external sensations. All sensations had an ordinary and stressless quality. (*caveat- This was not a permanent shift....still investigating this)

The early shifts took years to do as I was not obsessed enough with meditation. Since doing a daily practice the later shifts sped up to about 8 months or so between.
It's kinda hard to describe what the deletion of a process is like as the only difference is after the fact comparison. You can't see the process as it is before....and after it's gone you can only talk about the difference....which is mostly like saying a 5 pound bag o invisible stress was dropped....and there might be more of it.
I have enjoyed the book "The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self [Thomas Metzinger]" Fun stuff that pins down some of the processes and speculates what parts of the brain is involved.
Hope this was what you were looking for. If not feel free to re-describe what aspect you are particularly interested in.
~D

On this forum I try to teach people (with concepts obviously) and they can meditate on their own.  I also post a practice log with my experiences.  If you want a non-dual experience in real time with people you can use the following app Buddha Pong:

https://itunes.apple.com/app/id897707690?mt=8

I think most people are going to write about their experiences in the past tense.  For most people who have developed some realizations a Buddha Pong app will be more efficient use of time than a traditional posting website.  I've never done ping-pong noting before and I don't know how it could be used better than the app.  Skype is another way and some posters have made skype meetings to meditate with others doing ping-pong noting and concentration practices.

Have fun!

Metta 

Hey Dan !!

Good Subject!  The "self" is there when and if one is thinking about it during life , or the mind is caught up in the stories about life and phenomonenon.  But, when one is free of the mind's storytelling , the whole "self" issue is absent, there is existence where it just does't come up anymore.  There definetely are processes, both mental and physical occurring, the brain sets protein markers which enables clinging, neurns form neuron circuits which allow for the process of mental formations and habits.  These processes can be moved, pushed and , shifted in wholesome directions, enabling a more harmonious flow within our mind/body environment and also outside of our sacks of skin.
But back to the "self", when one is just here, where is the "self"?? The self is only here when one ponders from a viewpoint of a self, or rather the self is a mental construct requiring the Ego support system.  Who is writing this anyway, where are my words coming from, my fingers are just typing what is arising in the mind, where is the self that is actually creating these words?  What about the Rabbits? Why didn't my self think of Kangaroos?  Why did this so-called "I' think up kangaroos?  Actually I can trace back my thoughts and what they were associated with, so there really isn't a self thinking thoughts , just associated neurons linking and forming, and typing, etc, all processes within processes.

But to sum up, IMHO, Self is a mental fabrication that works as a delayed response, descibing internal and external phenomenon after the fact, but since this happens so quickly, and the brain "buffers" the information from the senses, and that most minds are cluttered and not able to stay within the present moment , a delusion from the above factors arises and thus most of humanity thinks "they" are seeing, thinking, feeling,  when actually the sensations are there, THEN, the recognition occurs.

So, one would suppose that to type this reply out, the "self" as a concept is/was used, and it seems so, but under closer scrutiny even that idea of a self collapses.

Going back to my "resting" mind state, thinking is a kind of dukkha...

Peace

Psi Phi

Adios amigo.

not looking for help friend, just fellow explorers, so to speak.

Just remembered something else to add:

Sometimes, People want to make the whole self , no-self thingy a meta-physical , or supernatural, or philosophical, or even a scientific debate,  it seems it is none of that, it is not that complex, or even a big deal.  "Thinking" about no-self, or self can help, but mostly hinder the mind with a thorny thicket of ideas and concepts)so, what is there? there is observing phenomenon that gives rise to an experience, then understanding that experience gives rise to wisdom.   Is there any indiviually experienced phenomenon that arises and fades away that can be held down and called a core self?  If there isn't then what is left is the truth, there is no core self, but the mind is stubborn and patterns in the mind are engraved.  It is akin to the task of a person sanding down a rock, sanding sanding, getting it smooth, then keeps sanding, and sanding, until one day there is nothing left to sand, no rock at all left. Though, it seems some minds just cast aside the rock, and skip the sanding process.

There do seem to be stages within daily life though, sometimes I am still sanding the rock, sometimes I have to laugh when I forget and find I am carrying the rock, and sometimes I just leave the rock and move along.

Rock on

Thanks D,

To restate my proposal simply, and putting all description of the process to get here and speculation on various constructs aside, the recognition of "no separate self" (for lack of a better term) is clearly a significant occurrance.   In the nondual traditions it's something of a crown jewel.   This recognition is alive, here and now in "my" experience.  (I will also allow for the possibility that there may be some level of delusion present as well, however there are some significant insights present which are perfectly clear).    

Now, I'm assuming there are some who have been involved in an all-out assault on the sense of self and achieved some significant breakthroughs that effect present views of what they are, what they are not, and how life looks with a space at the center of "you".    I'd like to discuss our present views of how things look NOW.  

So, given the shut down of the stages of the "self process" you describe, I'm assuming some new functioning/point of view is in place now.    What's that like for you.   Let's just talk in regular language, even though it's really not very accurate in describing things (like positing an "I" when there is not such thing, etc).  

Some things I might mention as present considerations in view of present experience of "no self" have to do with a complete disconnect with being a "doer", there being a sort of empty space at center, how thoughts move freely without a thinker, what it means in relationship, what happens in making a living, etc.   All real life areas where this "no self" event changes the whole layout.    This is the discussion I was looking for.

Hi Psi,

Well, I would say you do have things to say about this "no self thingy".   Quite a bit perhaps.   What about those "stages within daily life" you mentioned?   Sounds like an interesting exploration for us there!    

I do find it very interesting,  and enjoy talking about how things seem in the moment, in real life, with this no self recognition thing.   I mean, it feels like being a kid again, life is a mystery and wonderful, bursting with newness, discoveries.   The sense of freedom is awesome, really!    Even just here, now, hands are typing, thoughts are moving, I'm witnessing it all and I'm no where at all, or everywhere.  I imagine your out there reading, but what does that even mean?   Out there, in here, does it really matter?

Don't you just find this all so damn amazing, how it all rolls on without a you?  How wild is that?

So I'm just the new kid down the block wandering up to your porch and saying, "hey, want to come out and play, check out the neighborhood together?"

Why not start things off ? With some examples from your own experience. That will make it clearer what sorts of things you are interested in sharing.

In my experience it takes time and intention for habitual patterns for day to day life to change. 

Afflictive emotions are more rare. And I don't remember the last time I felt them with the same sort of primal intensity.

That helps with relationships, work etc. But I still have concerns about those areas of my life. Habit patterns, and subconscious beliefs etc take time to change.

Traumatic events from the past, various repressed insecurities, etc can no longer be buried in the deep recessiss of the body mind. They create a tightness in the body. It can be quite painful and get in the way. Over time I have learned to work with this energy and release it. This is the bulk of my practice.

I don't expereince anything that could be described as a space at the center of 'me'. Do you ?

How does it feel in terms of your sensory reality to experience this ? For eg. do you feel spaciousness within your head ? Or something else entirely ?

Sure, some personal examples.   While I think to have a conversation you need to use some conceptual memory content, I tend to want to confirm whatever I'm dialoguing about, as much as possible, by checking to verify with my present experience.   Checking our interpretations/thoughts about any particular subject for accuracy.   What you are saying about habit patterns, or conditioning, seems similar to my own case.  Changes happening slowly over time, and part of the conditioning being the experience of "concern".  But then there are other "layers" to this, a parallel recognition of no separate presence or personal connection to either the habit or the conditioned response of like or dislike.  The intent to strategize around conditioning collapses on itself when experienced in isolation (no self supporting it).   

A live example would be something like this:    I just got a call from the auto repair place while writing this and my car is ready to pick up.  Parallel to seeing my body typing away, thoughts about this subject, and images of hopping on my bike and riding over, there is a sense that this body, thoughts, and sensations are all just impersonal appearances, that I'm everywhere/no where, that awareness is present.  I also notice how much words and phrases refer to "me" and I recognize there isn't one, and also that this is just the way it is.    There is alot of peace and space around the whole affair, a thrill at exploring and describing it to the unknown "listener", and lots of tangent doors, opportunities for probing deeper into any element of this description.    Like, is there any physical reality beyond this moment?   Isn't the moment just unfolding rather than that "I am going on my bike somewhere" (so the auto shop will just show up here at some point as the body does it's things and mind does it's thing, etc.)?   

This is pretty choppy but something of an example.

My point about "space at the center of me" relates to my thinking at that moment of a conventional idea of self, and the relative sense of bodymind location.   Writing at the time, what I was referring to as "I" felt empty, the body shell like, thoughts and feelings passing by, no center "me" holding it all up.   At this moment there is an awarenss of being unboundaried, all of that body/mind stuff is "in me", what I am is sort of a space with appearance suspended in it.  

So that's a little about me, what's happening there?