Whether I work with allowing experience, inquire into beliefs, noticing whatever happening as awareness itself, or something similar, I can notice a tendency to take certain gestalts as more real than other.

Some gestalts serve as cues to take them as more substantial, more real, more true, and to act accordingly: to resist experience, take a story as true, take them as more solid than awareness itself.

At some point, it is helpful to become more familiar with these dynamics for ourselves. 

Which gestalts do I tend to take as more substantial? What are the cues? What happens when I shift into take them as more substantial? What happens when I shift out of taking them as substantial? What do I fear could happen if I don’t take them as substantial? 

(more…)

There are many ways to explore what I really am, such as headless experiments, the Big Mind process and exploring the sense fields.

For instance, when I explore the sense fields, I can…

• Bring attention to each sense field (sensation, sound, sight, smell, taste, mental field), one at a time, and ask myself:
  • Is what is happening - here now - within this field, content of awareness? Content of experience? (And maybe notice that That it is all content of awareness. Content of experience.)
  • Does it stay? Is it ephemeral? Even if it looks stable, is it really stable? (Notice that it all comes and goes, on its own time, living its own life.)
  • If it is content of awareness, is it I? If it comes and goes, it is I? (An invitation to notice that since there is a seeing of this content of awareness, there is no real “I” there. And although content of awareness comes and goes, something does not come and go.)
  • What is this sensation/sound/sight/smell/taste/mental field activity made of? Is it awareness itself? (Maybe notice that it is all awareness itself, taking the form of sensation, sound, sight, smell, taste and mental field activity.)
• I can find what I tend to identify with most readily.)
  • Maybe certain sensations, the head area (sensation/image gestalt), thoughts, a sense of being center, a sense of being on the inside of an I-Other boundary.
  • And then ask myself:
    • Is this too coming and going? Is it different from other content of the sense fields in this way?
    • Happening as content of awareness?
    • Is this content different from the content I don’t identify with- like the sound of a passing car?
    • What am I if this content was not around? What am I right now, if this human self is not here?

(more…)

What we are is of course state independent, and that is a great pointer for practice.

Independent of what is happening in content of awareness - dullness, bliss, clarity, tension, relaxation, anger, joy, confusion - can I notice what I already and always am? Can I find myself as that which all this happens within, to and as?

Having this as a basic practice throughout the day makes it all into an adventure, no matter what is going on.

And it also helps us release identification with whatever within form we tend to identify with, all these things that come and go.

Having worked with tension/stress as a pointer to when I believe a story, it is easy to think that when there is tension/stress, I can’t notice what I really am. But that is of course not true. That tension and stress is also just happening within, as and to what I am, and I can notice that as it happens. (And still inquire into those beliefs of course, the two are not at all mutually exclusive.)

I find two ways that I want to be right.

First, wanting my initial belief about something to be right. When I take a story as true, I identify with it and its perspective, and since it becomes an “I” I feel fuel other stories that prop it up, flesh it out, defend it, and make it look right to myself and sometimes others.

Then, wanting to find what is more true for me than the initial belief. What is the grain of truth in its reversals? What happens if I see all of those stories as just stories, with a limited practical value only?

So for instance, when I received the email from the Bernadette Roberts student, and he seemed to assign views to me that didn’t fit my familiar identity, the first impulse was to make me right and he wrong. I don’t have those views, and I’ll prove it to him.

But the signs of being caught up in beliefs are hard to notice (tension, wanting to protect and defend a position or identity), so it quickly shifted into wanting to find what is more true for me. How is he right? Can I find it, in a genuine way, right here?

What is the belief I got caught up in? (”He shouldn’t assign views to me I don’t have.”) What happens when I hold onto that belief? Who am I without it? What are the genuine truths in its reversals?

Now, having found - to some extent - what is more true for me around it, there is a release of that tension. There is less need to have to protect or defend a position or identity. I can find the truth in what he is saying, and also expand it so the fuller picture is more true for me than either of our initial positions. (As I tell myself those positions were.)

(more…)

It seems helpful to investigate stories before and after Ground awakening.

The benefits are perhaps most obvious before awakening, when we believe stories, take them as true. In this case, investigating beliefs invites in a healing and maturing of our human self, and also releases identification out of them so it is easier for what we are to notice itself.

But the benefits are there also after (stable) awakening, when we already see stories as just mental field creations. As tools of practical value only, an aid for our human self to function in the world, and as pointers for what we are to notice itself.

If we don’t continue to investigate stories here, we tend to stick with the ones we already know the practical value of and dismiss the rest. We have a quite limited repertoire of stories we recognize as having practical value. (This is maybe most easily noticed in teachers who come out of a particular tradition, and have a hard time recognizing/acknowledging the value in how other traditions and teachers do it. Or teachers/awakened ones who come from a specific culture, and have trouble appreciate the norms and customs of other cultures.)

And if we continue to investigate stories, we can find the practical value in each of them and our repertoire expands. There is a sense of universal appreciation of stories, independent of their content. And also a lightly-held sense of when and how - in daily life and practice - each of them may be helpful. (I see this most easily in Byron Katie and Adyashanti, and also - growing into it through the Big Mind process - Genpo Roshi.)
(more…)

I have looked more into Bernadette Roberts‘ take on the different traditions, and am as baffled as ever. She seems to consistently use a straw man argument, present the traditions in ways people familiar with them would not agree with, and use examples that seem like bizarre caricatures.

It is of course easy to just say that, well, she is obviously awakened, yet still acts out of some conditioned patterns playing themselves out this way. It may alienate quite a few people, but seems to work for others, so that is fine. Why not?

But I would like to go a little beyond that. For instance, I can ask myself if this was a conscious teaching strategy, coming from infinite wisdom and kindness, how would I see it?

If it came from infinite wisdom and kindness, I would see it as an invitation for each of us to investigate for ourselves.

In what ways do the people in these traditions themselves see it? What is the grain of truth in what she is saying? What is the gold there, in the practices and pointers she dismisses? What happens when a teacher uses the same teaching strategy as her? How does it feel for me when I assign to those views? How would I do it differently? What happens if I come more from a genuine appreciation of the different traditions and their pointers? Can I make the same points, yet in a way that invites in receptivity in myself and others?

I find the conscious teaching strategy question very helpful for myself, and I can apply it to any situation - and especially those my personality doesn’t immediately like or agree with. Of course, in most cases it doesn’t really come from infinite wisdom and kindness, in a conscious way at least, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is the shift that is invited in for myself, in how I receive the situation.

Note: See this post for how I continued working with my hangups around this.

One of the questions that come up for many is how do I relate to thought? Or how do I relate to stressful thoughts?

I can try to push them aside, or even learn to set them aside through certain practices, but that only gives a temporary relief. They have a habit of coming back, and with them, my tendency to get caught in them.

I am aware of two especially helpful ways of relating to (stressful) thought.

One is to shift identification out of them, even as they continue to go about their business. I can do this through the Big Mind process, headless experiments, choiceless awareness and other practices. Here, I shift into that which is witnessing thought and other content of awareness, or into that which content of awareness happens within, to and as. There is an increasing familiarity with seeing thought as thought, and not getting caught up in them as if they were anything else.

Another is to inquire into them in different ways.

I can inquire into the content of them. Is it true? What happens when I believe it? What happens if I don’t have that thought? What are the truths in its turnarounds? In this way, I become more familiar with some of the dynamics around thoughts, what happens when they are believed in and not, and what is more true for me than the initial story.

Or I can explore it through the sense fields. I can see discursive thought as a creation of the mental field. I can explore what happens when it combines with the other sense fields, creating gestalts. I can explore what happens when I take those gestalts as substantial and real, and what happens when I see them as just gestalts - created by an overlay from the mental field on the other fields.

One of the things we may notice, doing either of these practices, is thoughts as innocent.

They are awareness itself, ephemeral, insubstantial and transient.

They appear in verbal form, one at a time, and usually noticed as thinking. And they appear in wordless form - for instance as images - and are then often not noticed.

(The wordless thoughts function as source and guide for the verbal thoughts. They are stories, just as the verbal ones. For instance, there is a sound and then a mental image of a car placed where the sound seems to come from. And they can be taken as true or not, just as verbal stories.)

They are questions about the world. Stories created in the mental field to help our human self function and navigate in the world.

They appear stressful (stress inducing) only when they are taken as true, when we try to make them into something they are not.

Beliefs are shoulds that clash with our stories about how the world is, was, or may be, and this creates stress.

And beliefs differ from what is more true for us, which is also stressful. (What is more true may be the truth in each of its reversals, and the limited truth in each of those stories.)

In becoming familiar with thoughts in this way, there is a natural compassion and kindness for myself and what happens when they are taken as true. There is an appreciation of thought, for what they are and their inherent innocence. There is an easier noticing of when stories are taken as true, and the tension and sense of having to protect something (a view, position, role) that goes with it. There is a familiarity in how to relate to and work with them. And there is a deepening into a trust in the whole process.

Trigger: An email where someone mentioned a practice of setting aside thought. And also Jill Bolte Taylor’s video which could be misunderstood and taken as anti left-brain/thought.

(more…)

I have been curious lately about people who seem bitter about spiritual practice. First, I found some sites talking about Byron Katie as a cult leader (!) and then the email from someone with a bone to pick in regards to nondual traditions.

So this is a good opportunity to come up with some projections to explore for myself.

The first thing that comes to mind is that there is always some truth to whatever folks are saying, so it is good to find it.

Then, why the bitterness? Well, if we go into anything thinking that we will actually get something out of it, we set ourselves up for disappointment. This may be especially true for spiritual practices, which are not at all aimed at getting us anything, quite the opposite.

I guess this goes back to the recent post on motivations for practice: If what we need and are looking for is to feel better about ourselves, it is more than sufficient to practice with the aim of maturing and finding more of our wholeness as a human being, and find practices aimed at that. But if we are drawn by a quiet love for truth or existence itself, then spiritual practice - with the aim of waking up - may be appropriate.

Also, whatever practice we do - whether aimed at feeling better about ourselves or waking up - it is helpful to also work with beliefs and projections directly. And these include any beliefs and projections we may have about teachers, teachings or whatever we think we may get out of it.

Can I find what I see out there also in here? If I hope to get something out of it, is it true that it is not already here? What are the truths in the reversals of the stories I go to as true?

Spiritual teachings/stories have several different functions.

First, they function as bait to get people interested, usually by triggering a variety of projections. We take ourselves as an I with an Other, and with a particular identity. The stories reminds us of what we are on the other side of those boundaries, and we are attracted to it.

Then, they invite a reorganization of the stories people use as guidelines for how to live their lives. They become new beliefs, which has an important practical function in keeping people out of trouble. This is the social aspect of stories/teachings.

For those interested in the practice part, they are pointers for practice, questions for us to investigate on our own. Each statement is a question only, to take to inquiry.

And finally, and most importantly, they offer tools for practice, for instance for investigating beliefs and finding what is more true for us. (The teachings and tools themselves are of course included as material for inquiry.)

(more…)

Some flavors of doing it for myself…

If I investigate, I find that whatever I am doing, I am already doing it for myself.

If I don’t see it, and tell myself I am not doing it for myself, there can easily be various forms of unease and struggle, such as resentment, anger, jitteriness, hopelessness or fatigue.

I do something, tell myself I don’t want to do it (which is partly true), so get in conflict with myself and the word.

That is one flavor of doing it for myself. I already do it for myself, but don’t see it.

When I investigate, I find - as mentioned above - that I am already doing it for myself.

A simple way of noticing this is to first write down a have to statement, and then change it to a want statement. I have to pay taxes to avoid trouble > I want to pay taxes to avoid trouble. I find for myself that the latter is more honest and more true. (This one comes from Marshall Rosenberg.)

Another is to trace my motivation for what I am doing back to its seed. What do I hope to get from paying taxes? I get to avoid trouble, such as fines and prison. What do I hope to get out of avoiding trouble? I get to avoid suffering. What do I hope to get out of avoiding suffering? I hope to experience happiness. (Inquiry suggested by Adyashanti.)

Seeing this more clearly, I am not in struggle or conflict with myself anymore. I may choose to change my behavior, or not, but now from being more aligned with myself.

Finally, do it for myself can be a pointer.

I am doing something, it feels a little uncomfortable, and I notice it is because I try to live up to a certain image or impress someone. Doing it for myself is then a pointer to shift into consciously doing it for myself, not for others. And when this happens, there is a sense of comfort, wholeness, being home, and honesty.

I went swimming yesterday, and noticed that I felt a little rushed as I did my laps, there was a hint of discomfort there. I then saw a hint of a motivation of trying to impress others (as if anyone were interested!), remembered do it for myself, and immediately shifted into a deeper relaxation and sense of comfort. From the outside, there may not have been much of a shift, but my experience of it was quite different - and from there, my movements were more relaxed and effortless.

Again, what I am doing may or may not change, but my relationship to it changes.

Several of my friends- myself included - were as sick as we had ever been this winter and spring, typically with some form of pnemonia. It turns out that there was a surprising number of shared experiences among us.

For instance, we all felt death very close and got to see how we relate to our mortality.

Another thing that happened is something I have seen for while. When the body-mind gets exhausted, for whatever reason, there is less energy for resisting experience. Whatever is habitually resisted in daily life tends to come up.

Knots line up and come through wanting to be seen, felt and loved. Knots made up of shoulds clashing with my stories of what is, and their associated emotions and supporting stories.

For me, it is an invitation to see it, feel it, and this may gradually shift into a sense of appreciation.

Illness and exhaustion is an opportunity for knots to surface. If I continue to resist them, the discomfort only deepens. But if I welcome them, as long lost relatives, it all shifts.

It is easier to inquire into the beliefs behind the knots, and fully allow and be with the emotions and experiences associated with them, inviting in a healing and softening of the knots and my relationship with them.

(more…)

One of the beautiful things about inquiry is that it meets people where they are. It is a gentle, organic process, working with what is there in terms of content and dynamics.

This is easily seen in The Work.

I have a knot. A belief with its associated emotions and behaviors.

It clashes with my stories of what is, and there is stress.

I notice this stress in whatever form I tend to most easily notice it. For me, it is often a sense of contraction and tension of body and mind. A sense of unease and discomfort. A sense of something (an identity, position) to protect.

I find the story behind the stress.

I inquire into it.

I find answers that are more true for me than the initial story.

I notice who I am without that belief.

I take my new insights into daily life. This includes the validity in the reversals of the initial story, and I hold all of those in whatever way that makes most sense to me right now.

And all of this changes over time. It changes as I heal, mature and notice more what I really am. As knots unravel, the knots behind them surface and I can inquire into them.

It works only with what is here. With what surfaces naturally, in daily life. With the answers and insights that are true for me here now. It all unfolds in a very gentle and organic way, working with the material present.

“The single thing that comes close to a magic bullet, in terms of its strong and universal benefits, is exercise.”

“The data show that regular moderate exercise increases your ability to battle the effects of disease,” Dr. Moffat said in an interview. “It has a positive effect on both physical and mental well-being. The goal is to do as much physical activity as your body lets you do, and rest when you need to rest.”

The New York Times has a great little article on the universal benefits of exercise: You Name It, and Exercise Helps It.

When I look at the effects of exercise, I see that the benefits seem to come through flow and capacity. Exercise get things moving and builds capacity.

And that is true for exercise at any level.

At the thought/mental field level, inquiry into beliefs gets things unstuck. It also builds capacity for inquiry, and for seeing a story as only a story.

At the emotional level, being with and allowing experience allows the content of experience to flow and move on. And it builds capacity for being with and allowing experience.

At the energetic level, exercise - such as different forms of yoga - again invites flow and capacity. The energies get moving, and it builds capacity for working with and holding energies.

At the body level, aerobic and non-aerobic exercise obviously gets things moving and unstuck, at all levels, and also builds capacity.

And the same is also true for relationships. Working consciously with relationships invites them to flow and unstick, and it builds capacity for working with relationships and allowing them to flow.

When I explore space, I find two quite distinct ways space appears.

One is how the mental field creates a sense of space. When I close my eyes, the mental field can easily produce a visualization of space and its content. It can easily visualize this body, the various body parts and their relationships to each other, the room, the relationships between the objects in the room, how my body moved and was positioned in the past and may be in the future, and so on. And when I open the eyes again, I can get a quite clear sense of this mental field overlay on top of the visual field.

Space does not seem inherent in any field, and only appears through an overlay of the mental field. An overlay that helps map whatever happens in each field (visual, sound, sensation, smell, taste) in space. Even the mental field itself is mapped in space, giving a sense of thoughts happening in/around the head/body area.

This overlay of a visualized space is crucial for our human self navigating in the world. And also, it is crucial for creating a sense of a separate I. Without space, no I with an Other. A sense of a separate I is anchored here, in and around this body, and the rest of the world is out there, in the periphery.

The imagined separate I depends on visualized space to exist. And when I don’t notice how the mental field combines with the other fields to create a sense of space, space and the sense of a separate I seems solid, real and substantial. When I notice it, the sense of a separate I softens and fades.

The other seems to be free from an overlay from the mental field. This is just a sense of spaciousness absent of any end, inherent in awareness itself.

The first type is essential for mapping the sense fields in space. The second may be just an inherent property of awareness, existing independent of the first one.

In inquiry, we put the mental field to good use.

We bring attention somewhere, guided by the mental field.

And we filter content of awareness in different ways, also through the mental field.

For instance, in exploring sense fields, we use the mental field to filter out what is sensation, sound, sight, taste, smell and mental field, and we also use the mental field to guide attention to different parts of these.

This filtering itself can be investigated.

How does it happen? How is sensation filtered out from everything else? Do I find an visualized/imagined boundary in the mental field, telling me where to look? A memory of sensations from the past that I compare whatever is happening with, so I can decide what is a sensation? Does the imagined boundary look real and solid, or ephemeral and an overlay without substance? What happens if it is taken as real and solid? If it is seen as an overlay without substance?

What is attention? How is the mental field used to guide attention? Is there a visualized/imagined boundary there too, with attention brought to what is inside of it, and the rest going into the periphery?

There is doing. Can I find a doer? Who or what is observing? If I have an image of a doer or an observer, is that too in the mental field? Can I find it outside of the mental field? What is left if this doer is seen as just a creation of the mental field?

During the retreat, I also explored how intention shows up in the sense fields.

What I find, as so often, is a sensation and a mental image.

In general, intention shows up as a slight tightening of certain muscles in the throat. And a mental image related to the intention, either a direction, a goal, or some intermediate stages.

When I explored intention of moving parts of the body, I noticed how attention goes to the limbs I want to move, and specifically sensations in the areas closest to where I intend to move them. Almost like where imaginary puppet strings would be fastened.

I also noticed how intention seems to be the easiest and most effective way of honing a stable attention. When it is distracted to some extent, sharpening up the intention seems to help.

There is of course a lot more to the effects of intention - such as how it helps align the different parts of us in a certain direction - and some of it is explored in other posts.

In everyday language, we sometimes talk about doing doing something fully, such as being fully responsible.

But what does that really mean?

For me, I can find three quite distinct meanings.

First, doing it fully in the meaning of wholehearted. I do it as fully as I can here and now, where I am, with what is available to me. I am wholeheartedly responsible, in the ways available to me here now.

Then, it means a deepening and maturing over time. What is available to me in terms of being responsible evolves over time, it deepens and matures for me. What appeared fully mature to me then, is not what fully mature means to me now.

And finally, it is the completeness that comes when what we are notices itself. In terms of being responsible, there is a completeness in seeing that there is no I with an Other here, and that everything arising is this I without an Other.

The first one has to do with what is possible for this human self right now, the second one with the maturing and development of this human self, and the third one with what we always and already are noticing itself.

And all three can be at play simultaneously.

I can be fully responsible in the conventional ways. Taking responsible for how I relate to myself and the wider world. Taking responsibility for my actions and their consequences in the world. Work with projections, and see right here what I see in others. Own disowned parts of me. Examine my beliefs, and find what is more true for me. Fully allow experience, as it is.

I can invite in and be receptive to this maturing and evolving over time. What responsible means to me now is not how it will look tomorrow, or in a year.

And I can invite what I am to notice itself, as that which content of experience happens within, to and as. As that which has no Other, so is free from being a victim - and also from (the idea of) being responsible.

Finally, it may be helpful to examine my beliefs around being responsible. I need to be responsible. It is better to be responsible. I need to be fully responsible. Is it true? Could it be that clinging to those beliefs makes me less responsible in certain ways? Less aligned with what is?

What is the difference of taking these stories as practical guidelines only and familiarizing myself with the truths in their reversals, and identifying with them and denying or being unaware of the truths in their reversals?

Trigger for this post: Two excellent posts by Vince on being responsible.

We can have trust in something, but if we do we depend on whatever we have trust in being available to us, and we are also likely to be disappointed.

Another approach is to realize that this trust awakened in us by something in the world, is right here now. It can be found independent on circumstances. And it is really just trust. Not in anything in particular. Or maybe, in life, existence, what is.

One way it may emerge is through certain explorations, such as wholeheartedly allowing any experience, and being open to investigating any belief.

When I wholeheartedly allow what I am experiencing right now, especially those experiences that seem the most scary, I find that it is OK. I can be with it, allow it, as it is, as if it would never change. It may be more than OK.

Even as the content of experience stays much the same, there may also be a shift into a sense of nurturing fullness and a quiet joy. A quiet joy in just experiencing, independent of the content of experience, revealed when I don’t struggle against it.

And when I investigate beliefs, including those that seem most untouchable or create the most stress for me, I find that the belief, and what it refers to, also are OK. And again, it may be more than OK. I may find the gifts in the reversals of the initial belief, a release of identification out of the initial story and its reversals, and clarity.

In both cases, I may find a genuine appreciation for what is, as it is.

There is a receptivity of the heart and mind, and this invites in a sense of trust in nothing in particular, or in what is, as it is.

And this trust eventually is experienced in the belly center. It becomes a deeply felt trust. A sense of nurturing fullness of the belly center, and in experience in general.

What does it mean to be fearless?

Going into danger while throwing caution to the wind? Pushing away fear and pretending it is not there? Manipulating experience so fear will not arise? Acting in spite of fear?

For me, it has to do with going directly into that which I fear the most.

To fully allow any experience, no matter how scary it seems. To be with it, independent of its content, including the resistance itself, as if it would never change.

And to investigating any belief and story that comes up for me, however dear it may be to me and however much the world may tell me it is true, and find what is more true for me.

Through this there is a growing trust.

A trust that comes through seeing that any experience is OK, no matter how scary it may seem when I resist it.

And a trust that comes from thoroughly investigate any belief, including the most scary and apparently true ones, and find the complete innocence and freedom that is already there, waiting for the investigation.

A trust that comes from receptivity of heart and mind.

Finally, it has to do with finding myself as that which any experience, and any story, happens within, to and as, independent of the particulars of its content.

The facilitation sheet for The Work has some excellent subquestions to help us look at beliefs in a more detailed way.

If you are familiar with The Work, what additional subquestions do you find helpful? Please share by leaving a comment.

Below are some additional subquestions I have found helpful, one - at least - from Byron Katie, and a couple from other facilitators.

1. Is it true?
   • What is your evidence?
2. Can you absolutely know it is true?
3. How do you react when you think that thought?
   • What are you not able to appreciate when you hold onto that belief?
   • What feelings do you get to avoid when you hold onto that belief?
4. Who would you be without the thought?
   • What are you able to appreciate?
   • From this space of […], are you ready to go to the turnarounds?

Stories are really questions about the world, which means they are an invitation for inquiry.

The story of lila, of God playing hide and seek with itself, is just such a story, as Alan Watts so elegantly shows in this talk on Hinduism.

Just as a thought experiment, say that each night I dreamt a full human life, from birth to death, in great detail. And say I could choose the content of these dreams, with no limitations.

What would I do?

Maybe we would start with a few months of dreams that fulfills all our most immediate desires. Then, it may get a little boring, so why not add some drama? And to spice it up, why not forget within the dream that it is a dream? And to really make it juicy, why not take it to an extreme?

I just watched Groundhog Day for the first time (better late than never), and that story too is really a question for ourselves, an invitation to inquiry. If I lived the same day over and over, how would I live that day? How would I, eventually, want to live that day?

(more…)

It is sometimes helpful to notice that whatever I am doing, I am doing it for myself. It brings me back into my own business, as Byron Katie would say.

A simple way of exploring this is to follow the chain of what do I hope to get out of it? For me, this usually leads back to something very simple such as happiness, and avoiding suffering.

(more…)

I read a great post from Vince on how to relate to accusations.

One thing I would like to add to the list is gaining insight from the content of the accusations. In this way, we benefit from the content, and the other person benefits from feeling heard and acknowledged.

(Few things are as annoying as being caught up in reactivity and sharing it with someone who just goes into equanimity without relating to the content of what we have to say.)

Anything anyone has to say about us has, inevitably, some grain of truth in it.

How can I find it in myself? Can I find three or more examples in my own life where it is genuinely true for me, maybe even in how I relate to this person right now?

Why is it better that this person said this in exactly this way? Can I find three genuine examples of why it is better?

It can be very helpful to explore the chains leading up to reactive emotions, rigid views, and desires.

One at a time, asking the question and waiting for an answer to come up.

When I do this, I find that whatever beliefs are there, whatever stories I am identified with, go back to the central belief, or sense of, a separate I, an I with an Other.

I find that whatever reactive emotions are there lead back to fear. Fear for the survival of this human self. Fear for pain and suffering.

I find that whatever surface desire is there leads back to a desire for happiness, and freedom from suffering.

And I find that all of this goes back to love. Love for this human self and whatever is within its circle of us.

And I see that all of this is pure innocence. An innocence in adopting beliefs from my surroundings. An innocence in the fear that is there naturally when there is a sense of a separate I. An innocence in the desire for happiness and freedom from suffering. An innocence in the love we already are, filtered through the boundary of us. And an innocence in where this boundary of us is placed, coming from culture and maturity.

The risk in writing this is that this too becomes another belief. Another place we go in our stories to create a sense of security, of having figured it all out.

And one remedy is in taking the time for the questions to sink in and the answers to surface. Going through one at a time, not knowing where it will lead. Trusting what comes up.

Sincerely exploring this for ourselves, inviting in curiosity and receptivity. Inviting in an open heart. Inviting in a bodily felt sense of the questions and the answers that surface. Allowing experience in a wholehearted way.

Seeing that any answer is really a question, even if the question mark initially seemed to be left out.

And also investigating our beliefs around all this, including the belief of I know, through The Work or another form of inquiry.

I took the time to read some integral blogs today, and found some of the usual comments about “radical relativism” which I am sure many would apply to The Work. It helped me differentiate something that is pretty obvious, and we all know, but it may be good to clarify it for ourselves as well.

There are two ways of relating to and working with stories.

One is inquiry, such as The Work. I find a belief, or actually any story would do, and investigate it using the four questions and the turnarounds. And in the turnarounds, I find the genuine truth for me in each of them, with at least three examples of how it is already true in my own life. These stories then are equal to me, in that I can find the truth in each of them, I see they are all stories, and I also notice the inherent neutrality of the situation behind the stories.

And all of this has one purpose: to invite in a release of identification with any of these stories. To see that each of them are tools of practical value only. To not get blindly caught up in them and the drama of right and wrong and identification with them.

The other way of relating to stories is as tools. Tools of practical value for this human self, living its life in the world. Here, of course, the stories are not equal. Although there is some truth in each one, and each one can be useful in a particular situation, some have more explanation power than others, some are more compassionate than others, some are more elegant and gets the work done more effectively than others. Which one is a better tool depends on the situation, and also on where I am and what is available to me in terms of insights, experience, skills and so on.

Together, there is a freedom from identification with stories, which helps us live our lives with more clarity, kindness and insight. And there is a freedom in which stories we use, for practical purposes.

In the first case, there is an equality of the stories. It has to be, if we are honest with ourselves, and if we are to invite identification to release out of the stories.

In the second case, there is clearly not an equality among the stories. Some are more appropriate than others in any given situation, and we choose the best we can based on what tools  are available to us currently.

As I said initially, this is pretty obvious. Anyone who has done The Work or similar inquiries knows this at some level, even if they have not clarified it for themselves in this way. Using stories as tools of practical value, whether we identify with them or not, is what we naturally do. We cannot help it.

(more…)

A slightly different take on attachments…

Attachment to anything - situations, people, things, roles - is what causes suffering. Our stories about what should be and what is clash. Which is fine. It is just part of the human condition. But after a while, and if we act from kindness towards ourselves, we may want to explore this further. What is really going on? Is there another way?

One of the first things we may notice is that any attachment is really an attachment to a story. The story of I with an Other, and then all the other stories that flesh out the identity of this separate I.

I am an object in the world, so want what supports this object and do not want what does not support it. I am alive, so don’t want to be dead. I believe in fairness, so want to see fairness in how I and others are treated.

We may also notice that an attachment to a story is really an identification with this story. We have a story of an I with an Other, and take ourselves to be this separate I. We have a story of being a particular gender, age, of a particular ethnicity, having certain values, and take ourselves to be all of that.

Another thing we may notice is that it is all completely innocent. We are all dealing with this life as best as we can, and often from lack of clarity.

And then, that behind all of it is fear. Fear for what may happen to this human self. We attach to stories to deal with this fear, and try to avoid what we are afraid may happen to it.

And that behind this fear is love. A love for this human self and whatever is within its circle of concern. All attachments to stories come from love. From wanting the best for what we take as I and us.

So how do we explore attachments, or identifications with stories?

A simple and direct way is to investigate the beliefs themselves, and find what is already more true for us. I can use a sense of discomfort as a guide to discover when my stories of what is and should be clash, and then investigate one or both of these. Is it true? What happens when I believe that thought? Who would I be without it? What is the truth in its turnarounds?

Another is to investigate impermanence in the five sense fields, to see impermanence directly here and now. This helps us reorganize and find stories more aligned with this impermanence. And it also helps us see that no story is absolutely true, which invites a release of identification with these stories.

We can also include each of the three centers: head, heart and belly.

We can find ourselves as that which is already free from identification with stories, for instance through the headless experiments, the Big Mind process, and finding ourselves as what does not change in the midst of the constantly changing content of awareness.

We can invite our heart to open through various heart centered practices, or just a focus on the heart and its qualities.

And we can invite in a deep body sense of trust and nurturing fullness through various body and hara centered practices, such as Breema.

Each of these tends to invite in an opening in the two other centers, especially if we bring attention to it. An open heart invites in an open mind and a nurturing fullness. An open mind invites in an open heart and a felt-sense of trust. A body feeling of trust and nurturing fullness invites in an open heart and mind.

We may also discover that resisting experience tends to close each of the centers. That this happens only when there is an identification with this resistance.

And that fully allowing experience, independent of what it is, tends to invite in a receptivity and opening of each center. And that this is also an allowing of the resistance, which is a release of identification with it and the content of experience in general.

(more…)

The last few days have reminded me of the importance of inviting in the body when there are shifts in view. Staying with the shifts in view, taking the time to allow the rest of me to realign too. Feeling it with all of me.

Most recently, these shifts have happened through dreams, on topics I have investigated in terms of view earlier. I have explored the beliefs around it, and now, invited in by the dreams, the body followed. The felt-sense of it shifted as well. (And continues to shift and deepen as I stay with it.)

In terms of the three centers, the view shifted first (head), then the feeling of it (belly), both inviting in an opening of the heart.

And it can of course go any of the other ways as well. The shift can happen first at the heart, then the view and belly. Or the belly, followed by the view and heart.

(more…)

Some common and less common stories about The Work, and how they are not true, true, and true about me.

The Work… is pollyannish, superficial, cognitive therapy, rationalization, affirmations, pacifying, makes you into a doormat, and is heartless.

• The Work is pollyannish
  • The Work is not pollyannish: No, it helps me discover what is already more true for me. If anything, it is sobering. It helps me look at situations from many different angles, including some I have resisted in the past, and get a fuller and more nuanced picture.
  • The Work is pollyannish: It is in that it reveals the complete innocence behind any story and belief. It does also help find the good in anything, but only as part of a bigger picture, and only as one story overlaid on an inherently neutral situation.
  • I am pollyannish: Well, yes. When I believe a story I am pollyannish in the sense of being naive. I naively take that story to be true, accurate, substantial, and act as if it is. Also, I am pollyannish/naive if I believe things about The Work or any other practice, if I rely on preconceived ideas of what I will find, and if I go to those ideas instead of what is alive here now.

(more…)

Byron Katie said somewhere that any statement is really a question, and when I look, that is what I find as well.

Any statement is really an innocent question about the world. And it is also very useful to take any statement as a question.

Any statement is a question. Any answer is a question.

A starting point for inquiry. For exploration. For discovering what is already more true for us than the initial story.

And then that becomes our new question.

This is the case whether we work on our human self or on discovering what we are: it is a process of pulling the rug out from under ourselves.

It is a process of going outside the familiar. Allowing what appeared as true for us to go. Be willing to be wrong. Allowing familiar identities to go. Exploring the truth in the reversals of our habitual beliefs and identifications.

We pull the rug out from under ourselves, find what is already more true for us, stay with that for a while, getting more familiar with it, and then repeat.

At our human level, we discover and embrace disowned sides, embracing more the fullness of the evolving wholeness of who we are.

As what we are, we notice ourselves through inviting beliefs and identifications with stories and identities to fall way, revealing ourselves as what we always and already are.