My present psychological situation

[Psalehesost]

I've thought before about writing a thread about my present, general psychological situation and some things of psychological importance leading up to it. Having a tendency to forget some of the things I had thought of as I go along writing a post here, I simply wrote down separately bits and pieces of text recently that I now put together with some additions to make this post.

This post will repeatedly go from covering one thing for a bit to covering another completely different thing, so covering various different subjects; feel free to discuss whichever parts you feel like - no need to focus on everything if you can't be bothered.



Why do I care about this self-development towards an STO ideal? As I wrote in my introduction: "Simply put, I now want to develop all the way for the heck of it. As far as I can see (from my limited 3D perspective), there is no other reason for anything. There are lessons, yes, and we are here to learn them. But why are we here to learn them? Why do these lessons even exist? The only answer I can find is this: For the heck of it. And the more I work, the more this motivates me. :)" I guess - as, from what I gather, it is pretty much supposed to be regarding our orientation - it's simply a basic preference of my nature. There have been inner stand-offs at times, when emotional factors (as in desires, various feelings, and ideals) of equal strength favoring both "sides" have emerged at the same time. Eventually, some inner "force" or "will" (my essence?) emerges and breaks the standstill by gradually gaining control, and the "inner stand-off" fades away, the positive side having "won". This hasn't happened recently, though, probably as a result of shaving off some of my negative emotional programming (which is not to say that more of it doesn't remain, particularly such that presently stays more or less hidden), meaning that the sum of my attitudes has "shifted".

From a reply to that bit in my introductory post, it seems the one replying interpreted my comment of there "being no other reason for anything" than "for the heck of it" as referring to no other reason to do anything. I agree about that, but what I meant when I wrote it was literally anything, as in no other reason for anything whatever to exist or happen. The All - from what I gather - simply exists, and sort of expanded in creation because it kind of felt like it, another part of the All at the same time trying to contract because it sort of felt like it. At the very very end of the evolutionary journey - where, for instance, the C's would be "going" "eventually" - 7D, the All, that's - I guess - how it is: pure consciousness just sort-of existing and sort-of doing something for the heck of it, and that (pun intended) is All.

And if the reason for learning lessons and "graduating" step after step is that it ended up that way for the heck of it, and that what will follow is for the heck of it, then the reason for us to learn those lessons is that we simply do so for the heck of it, ending up wherever we do because ultimately, so happens for the heck of it. Ultimately, the reason for everything is sheer whim. Everything follows from sheer whim, and therefore is sheer whim.

Thinking about what I read of the conscious side of the All - the final destination of STO - being the conscious "energy" that "plays" with the primal matter that is the final destination of STS, I came up with the following analogue: The conscious side of the All is a Silly Mad Hand, and the sleeping side is a big bunch of play-doh. In its infinite wonkitude, the Silly Mad Hand makes all manner of wonky shapes out of this play-doh, including us. We then - if we succeeed - eventually become this Silly Mad Hand and end up making the silly figures eventually to become what we then would be. Wohoo! We will become a Silly Mad Hand messing around for an eternity with a big bunch of cosmic play-doh that is simultaneously us!

The All is infinitely intelligent, infinitely stupid, infinitely sane, and infinitely nuts - not to mention infinitely schizophrenic! What else would you call a consciousness split into 7 simultaneous densities and an infinite amount of existence?

And what is the point of all this writing? I just sort-of realize that everything in the very, very end doesn't matter a toss, that everything is a silly bunch of nonsense and sheer whim, and that precisely all will amount to just that. Yet I go on because I just sort of do so - for the heck of it, I guess. Meh!

"Controlled folly", as don Juan put it, indeed! That's what all we can ultimately Do is!

"When you learn to see, you find yourself alone in the world with nothing but folly.", he said. I understand the feeling!

Ha ha ha!

Were I not so detached - were it so that I actually cared to - then I would laugh hysterically at precisely everything! But I don't, because I'm simply indifferent.



In my earliest school-years I had something of a fascination with numbers and was a few years ahead in my mathematical ability. Since then, more school years with the same style of numbing number-grinding gradually ground my curiosity and motivation into dust, and along with this came an increasing decline in my ability to remember the things I was supposed to learn and bring myself perform the tasks, and my mind eventually began to "rust shut" as regards this area, and now I'm just a mediocre schmuck. A bit of interest in mathematics has resurfaced recently, but things have to be learned in a very specific order, since there seems to be no comphrehensive guide to understanding particular things that you could consult to learn things in a freely chosen order, and so it will be impossible for me to make anything out of this interest in the following few years. Some "I" is sad about this, and other "I"s feel anguish at my mind and potential having been "crippled" by school, and cannot forgive this.



I wrote this (privately) before: "I have tremendous emotional constriction inside - when I begin truly to feel and try to push on and intensify this feeling, I push against something and feel like I am suffocating." Recently, I have come to understand this a bit better - firstly, there is a physical feeling of constriction, due to what my muscles do at these times; I slowly breathe in fully without being aware of it and hold my breath, and then when I try to breathe in, having already done so, I run up against the inability to do so and feel constricted, until I breathe out, only to try again to take an impossibly deep breath. Then, there is the mental and emotional aspect; something in me reacts against emotion - perhaps because it feels threatened - and puts a chokehold on my emotions, constricting them to the point where they fade away completely. Recently, at one time the onset of this was unusually delayed, and so I felt a quick burst of - unusually strong at the present time, though still not at maximum intensity - emotion before a distinct clampdown was felt. It feels strangely like the psychic impression of my emotion is "drifting" away when this happens, and this triggers a feeling of worrying of "losing" part of myself. This happens sometimes around some people who (often due to their voice as they talk, whether to me or others) happen to trigger automatic emotional reactions immediately accompanied by constriction - then I feel a little bit like "a leaf in the wind".



For many years - I don't quite remember how many, but it came gradually - I've been fairly disillusioned with the world at large. Perhaps you could say I've lived for years with one foot over the first Threshold before finding this material, coming to my "breaking point" and committing myself to sorting myself out and finally taking the rest of the step beyond it.

I've always been half-bored with, yet sometimes having a slight interest in simply detachedly observing, nature. Over all, however, I simply don't see what others see in the world (or rather, I have an idea of it and understand the concepts, but don't share any of the excitement or care - I'd say illusionment). I find the world somehow very "raw". Lately I have put my vague feelings into words and came up with the thought that the things in it that people find so amazing are just quaint imitations of some purer, abstract "concept". There is not even as simple a thing as a plain, flat surface in this world! Only mere approxomations.

The world of intimate relationships that others seem to invest such huge involvement and attach such enormous subjective values to is something I've never entered. From my present perspective it simply seems pretty absurd how our (mine and some others' apparently excluded) demented meat-blobs get so worked up about each other. The nature of relationships as consisting of feeding was something I realized by myself before I stumbled upon this material, and it only added to my detachment and mild disgust at the idea of having an actual relationship with an actual person, though it didn't stop me from wasting tons of time and energy on sheer, pure fantasy for the purpose of plain, mechanically directed self-gratification.

To put it bluntly, just a few years ago I used to think of people who engaged in typical relationships as having a particular form of stupidity. I saw that often people engage in their (often mutually, but not always) parasitic relationships, deluded with extreme wishful thinking and ascribing the most fantastic qualities to their current relationship up and until the point where it collapses and ends in pain (sometimes long-lasting pain, sometimes even permanent woes of some kind). Then, after moping about for some time, they get caught up in another relationship, and the same thing happens. Rinse and repeat. And they never learned the to me obvious lesson about those (the vast majority of) relationships - that they are built merely on stupid, insipid imaginings and are far from constructive, that they are in fact full of feeding. Then I realized that these people, being hopelessly buzzed on their brain-chemicals and unable to think clearly, are of course going to do such stupid things, and that there is no point in blaming them for it. So I simply count myself lucky in not suffering from this particular malady, and now having a healthier psychological world view than I used to have, I can now emphasize better with those caught up in this issue.

These realizations concerning relationships - made during the latter part of my adolescence - followed an earlier realization (also during my adolescence) also of significance to my mental development around this particular area, namely one concerning the nature of sexual attraction, which then and now seems valid to me, though I've never as of yet had any feedback on this matter:

Through introspection, I realized that the object of attraction is not that looked at, but rather a more abstract ideal stored up somewhere in the brain that is loosely "matched" to what you see, and given a "match", "attraction" and unconscious association of that seen with this ideal is triggered. Thinking a bit more about this, I came to the conclusion that this means that whenever one is attracted to a person one looks at, one is, in fact, deluding oneself.

 

[RedFox]

Hi Csayeursost

I've thought before about writing a thread about my present, general psychological situation and some things of psychological importance leading up to it. Having a tendency to forget some of the things I had thought of as I go along writing a post here, I simply wrote down separately bits and pieces of text recently that I now put together with some additions to make this post.

This post will repeatedly go from covering one thing for a bit to covering another completely different thing, so covering various different subjects; feel free to discuss whichever parts you feel like - no need to focus on everything if you can't be bothered.

I am uncertain as to the reason for your post? I have read through it all and can find no question to the forum by yourself, just your thoughts.
As such, it appears (and I may be jumping the gun here) to be just noise.
Was there a Specific reason for posting these thoughts (such as desiring feedback on them?), or did you just do it for the 'heck of it'?
Also, to say 'no need to focus on everything if you can't be bothered' is quite a manipulative statement. Should we be bothered about reading your thoughts?

If you need somewhere to record your thoughts, perhaps a journal would be of more help? Just posting them here 'for the heck of it' is just noise and self importance disguised as a dismissive/deflective statement ('for the heck of it')

 

[Psalehesost]

Was there a Specific reason for posting these thoughts (such as desiring feedback on them?), or did you just do it for the 'heck of it'?

I wish I had something concrete to ask. I am somewhat "drifting", no greater "purpose", and I just sort of feel a bit "lost" deep down, though I chug along with my efforts - I just threw all that out because I sort of hope that perhaps, someone would know something to say that would turn out to be an answer of sorts, even though I really don't know the question.

Also, to say 'no need to focus on everything if you can't be bothered' is quite a manipulative statement. Should we be bothered about reading your thoughts?

Not meant to be manipulative. Just noting that I don't expect you (the community) to care about it all, and would be fine with getting input only on "that which matters", whatever that would be - if some (or even all, and if so, sorry for the noise) of it turns out to be pointless drivel, or you (the community) just can't think of something to say to it that wouldn't be a waste of time for you to write, then I don't mind it being ignored.

EDIT: And now I suddenly feel - more than I have for a long time. Something saddens me. I don't know what.

EDIT2: With this post, I put it in words for the first time - I feel lost. That is why I'm now sad - it's "broken through" to the surface. But the meaning of it I don't really know. How and why?

EDIT3: Now that I've calmed down for a bit - and find myself unusally un-tense internally - I realize I should thank you, RedFox, for at the very least (even if it just happened to be so) helping to lead me to whatever thoughts triggered in full strength what is probably my first real "shock" - if a relatively small one. And also, one thing that I should note is always welcomed in response to my posts (and for it to be otherwise would run against the purpose of the forum) including this thread is any observation or comment derived thereof that might help point out to me some programming I'm unaware of, or something I might have missed regarding such, or anything I say that might be wrong and/or nonsense.

 

[Smallwood]

I know the "feeling" you describe when you wrote about emotions and the problem of allowing yourself to just feel, atleast if I understood that paragraph correctly. I have pretty much the same problem of restricting emotion inwardly.

You may already know this technique (I don't know what it is called), but have you tried relaxing as comfortably as you can (maybe laying down on a bed), trying to relax all muscles in your body (not straining them AT ALL) and completely stop all conscious mental processes? In that you will feel rather than think or strain your body. It will take some time to be successful because whenever you try to not-think you'll strain your body and vice-versa, but with enough trying it will happen. When it did to me I felt a very loving, warm and electric feeling in my heart. I'm not sure would more senior members suggest practicing that, but in my case I found it lead to what felt a genuine feeling of happiness that lasted for two to three days. I'm not sure if that was what they would call the awakening of the emotional center but in my case it was the closest thing I've ever come to anything like that.

I wish I had something concrete to ask. I am somewhat "drifting", no greater "purpose", and I just sort of feel a bit "lost" deep down, though I chug along with my efforts - I just threw all that out because I sort of hope that perhaps, someone would know something to say that would turn out to be an answer of sorts, even though I really don't know the question.

I don't know any answer really. I can only say that I feel much of the same, just drifting and lost. Also, fear at times. A fear that perhaps I'm not cut out to be ultimately STO. But I guess the not knowing that can be due to atleast several reasons in my case, most likely which is that I've simply have had not enough of 3rd density lessons/experiences in my (hypothetical) lives. I think the C's have said something to the effect that STO souls evolve with the natural flow while STS tends to rush things and end up as primal matter. Of course, I could be totally off in that, it has been a while since I've come across that session

I hope that I was of some help to you.

 

[painter]

Csayeursost -- as someone who is new to this forum but 'old' to the ideas of Gurdjieff and 'old' to the incessant churning of the habitual associations and habitual emotions (particularly the negative ones) and the ways the energies of these two get mixed up -- and 'old' to the ways with which one habitually identifies with all that (I feel this, I feel that, I'm doing this or that or this and that are happening to me, etc.) -- I wish to offer you something to contemplate. I do so in the hope that it can be employed in a way that will actually help rather than becoming yet another source of suffering that is not intentional or conscious and therefore useless for our work on ourselves. The bold and underlining is my emphasis:

G. Began the next talk as follows:

“Man’s possibilities are very great. You cannot conceive even a shadow of what man is capable of attaining. But nothing can be attained in sleep. In the consciousness of a sleeping man his illusions, his ‘dreams’ are mixed with reality. He lives in a subjective world and he can never escape from it. And this is the reason why he can never make use of all the powers he possesses and why he always lives in only a small part of himself.

“It has been said before that self-study and self-observation, if rightly conducted, bring man to the realization of the fact that something is wrong with his machine and with his functions in their ordinary state. A man realizes that it is precisely because he is asleep that he lives and works in a small part of himself. It is precisely for this reason that the vast majority of his possibilities remain unrealized, the vast majority of his powers are left unused. A man feels that he does not get out of life all that it can give him, that he fails to do so owing to definite functional defects in his machine, in his receiving apparatus. The idea of self-study acquires in his eyes a new meaning. He feels that possibly it may not even be worth while studying himself as he is now. He sees every function as it is now and as it could be or ought to be. Self-observation brings man to the realization of the necessity for self-change. And in observing himself a man notices that self-observation itself brings about certain changes in his inner processes. He begins to understand that self-observation is an instrument of self-change, a means of awakening. By observing himself he throws, as it were, a ray of light onto his inner processes which have hitherto worked in complete darkness. And under the influence of this light the processes themselves begin to change. There are a great many chemical processes that can only take place in the absence of light. Exactly in the same way many psychic processes can take place only in the dark. Even a feeble light of consciousness is enough to change completely the character of a process, while it makes many of them altogether impossible. Our inner psychic processes (our inner alchemy) have much in common with those chemical processes in which light changes the character of the process and they are subject to analogous laws.

Fragments – pp 145-146

I believe Smallwood is right to offer the suggestion of physical relaxation. Generally speaking our machines keep themselves in whatever state of tension and inattention or distraction that is common for their functioning and in keeping with our identifications and 'self-image'. I don't know you but I suspect much of what you've related is precisely that: A vivid description of the complexity of your "ordinary state." If tension -- physical, emotional, mental -- is the habitual state of my machine then any conscious and intentional movement against that -- the intentional movement toward relaxation, for example -- is a form of "intentional labors" and "conscious suffering" and is a part of our work. In this instance, this movement toward relaxation is not to be confused with "self calming," which Gurdjieff often speaks against. "Self calming" is automatic, mechanical behavior, the automatic employing of buffers that prevent us from seeing or feeling or knowing or doing.

I've bolded and underlined parts of the quote above because I wish to emphasize something which is commonly overlooked in the Gurdjieff ideas, especially by those who do not have access to a direct connection to the work. And that is, as stated, self-observation rightly conducted itself is the beginning of growth and change. In other words, it isn't enough that I see, for example, all the comings and goings of my habitual thoughts, emotions and sensations -- if I do so only in the most ordinary way. If one follows Gurdjieff's ideas of "multiple 'I's," "wrong work of centers," and so on, all this becomes more clear. In my ordinary state one part may observe another, may form an opinion about the other part. One part says "I" -- and says, "I don't like this or that" about myself -- or perhaps the opposite, perhaps flatters one's self -- it doesn't matter. All this is equally mechanical. This is not self-observation rightly conducted, and this is what is not commonly understood.

Smallwood's suggestion of a relaxation exercise is good but it only goes so far. He/she, for example, notes that "trying not to think" creates stress in the body and stress in the body shows up as "thinking" (daydreaming, more like). So, what is missing here? Where am "I" (not mechanical)? What is there in me that can "observe myself" without engaging in any form of automatic or mechanical reaction to what is observed? This is a fundamental question that can not usefully be answered in the abstract. What I have to work with is my attention and "attention" is the fundamental key to everything. Everything. I can not so easily "fool myself" into believing things that are not true about myself if I am truly attentive; moreover, I can not be so easily deceived by the forces of the outer world which wish to perpetuate the corruption of my dual nature if I am truly attentive to what is transpiring within me at any given moment. So -- the question arises -- how do I begin to work?

So, my suggestion at this point is to let that last question above become a real, living question. It isn't about some mechanical feature of what is habitually referred to as "my mind" coming up with an answer that can be put into words and posted on a forum. Suffer that intentionally and let it go completely. This is YOUR life, your work -- and what is being offered to you through the teachings such as Gurdjieff has brought are real possibilities -- not of "change" (as in, "I" ought to do this or that or think this or that or feel this or that or be some way or other to gain respectability or to flatter my own ego or to cease my suffering, etc., etc.) but of transformation. Inner growth is transformation. You do not understand how by consuming food that food is transformed into your physical body and all the inner and outer manifestations that you habitually associate as "you". Nevertheless, this transformation takes place. Now what is being offered is another possibility that is your birthright: The transformation of your ordinary habitual existence -- such as it is -- into something greater, something more truly you than your mechanical habits and associations and identifications. For this, Gurdjieff maintains, is required a new kind of food -- the food of impressions. About this I will only say one thing further and that is that this "food of impressions," unlike the common food we eat or breathe, can not be either eaten or digested mechanically, unawares. It requires attention, understanding and intention.

 

[Laura]

I've bolded and underlined parts of the quote above because I wish to emphasize something which is commonly overlooked in the Gurdjieff ideas, especially by those who do not have access to a direct connection to the work. And that is, as stated, self-observation rightly conducted itself is the beginning of growth and change.

Painter, perhaps it would help if you read "The Wave" so that you could understand that our beginning point is NOT Gurdjieff, it is rather direct initiation via the Cassiopaean Experiment . We find Gurdjieff's work to be very full of rich and helpful concepts, but it is not the foundation here. You could say that it is more the layout of the rooms. We also utilize concepts from Mouravieff who, we clearly understand didn't have the whole cheese (neither did Gurdjieff, but he was a lot closer than Mouravierr), and Castaneda who, it is clear, borrowed a lot of his ideas from Gurdjieff and re-worked them. We also find many clues in modern psychological research.

In general, we have observed that a "direct connection to the work" can be a hindrance rather than a benefit. We do, in fact, have several members of QFS who have been long-time members of various Gurdjieff groups around the world and have discussed and analyzed how they operate. In The Wave, you will come across a discussion of my husband's meeting with Henri Tracol years ago and the result of their discussion. You might find it interesting.

The bottom line is: Gurdjieff's work is only part of the puzzle, though it is a large part.

Edit: I had originally placed here a collection of quotes from the Cs that include mentions of Gurdjieff and Mouravieff. I have moved this to it's own thread here: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11521

Edit: It should be said that my comment about Gurdjieff's work being a large part of the puzzle is my opinion based on all the other researches we have done - individually and as a group - over the years. There are also many overlaps between the Cs material and methods and the concepts of Ibn Al-Arabi.

 

[RedFox]

Hi Csayeursost

Not meant to be manipulative. Just noting that I don't expect you (the community) to care about it all, and would be fine with getting input only on "that which matters", whatever that would be - if some (or even all, and if so, sorry for the noise) of it turns out to be pointless drivel, or you (the community) just can't think of something to say to it that wouldn't be a waste of time for you to write, then I don't mind it being ignored.

You are making a lot of negative assumptions about the community here.
I cannot represent the community as a whole, but I do know from what I've learnt here is that they do 'care' about what is writtern on these pages. And by 'care', I mean that given the world is burning (to paraphrase anart) they take the job of waking themselves and as many others up as possible very very seriously.

EDIT: And now I suddenly feel - more than I have for a long time. Something saddens me. I don't know what.

EDIT2: With this post, I put it in words for the first time - I feel lost. That is why I'm now sad - it's "broken through" to the surface. But the meaning of it I don't really know. How and why?

I tried Smallwood's suggestion last night and it had the effect of bringing some old emotions to the surface.

Between you mentioning your own disassociation, and resistance to emotions (take a look at how you see couples and the emotions around them), I would say you are stuck in your head and fear/reject/are disgusted at your own emotions, and disassociate/project/over think to avoid them.
I am still working through my own ways of doing the same things as you.

You may want to have a look at Rain T's thread from here http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11292.msg81353#msg81353
and my responce to what he's writtern, as an example of the same thing.
Your thoughts and methods are slightly different, but your initial post has the same flavour.

What helped my understanding of this in myself (amongst other things) was reading The Myth of Sanity by Martha Stout. It deals with disassociation and the underlying emotional traumas.
I mentioned it already in your dream thread. Have you read it yet?
You can also read Deep Therapy in the Fast Lane on line at _http://home.comcast.net/~riversrages/DeepTherapy/chapter1.htm

EDIT3: Now that I've calmed down for a bit - and find myself unusally un-tense internally - I realize I should thank you, RedFox, for at the very least (even if it just happened to be so) helping to lead me to whatever thoughts triggered in full strength what is probably my first real "shock" - if a relatively small one.

Your welcome, the question now is given the energy released, what are you going to do with it?

 

[Psalehesost]

I think the C's have said something to the effect that STO souls evolve with the natural flow while STS tends to rush things and end up as primal matter. Of course, I could be totally off in that, it has been a while since I've come across that session

From what I remember, STSers ending up as primal matter would be the result of the contraction caused by a sufficient amount of self-serving behavior in general, reached at the end of an STSer's evolution. As for the session (I think that's the one, at least) concerning the other thing you mentioned (these STS-doings, though, are of quite a different scale and quality than just tending to "rush things". but all manner of sources also mention such people here on this level trying to use various "shortcuts", but this also is - to my understanding - a matter of fundamentally "wrong methods" such as chemical manipulation, ritual and plain old nonsense-teachings rather than just insufficient preparation for a challenge, which could bite about everyone once in a while):

Q: ... Okay, last session you brought up the subject of
Frequency Resonance Vibration. You suggested that there are certain STS forces who are
developing or creating or managing physical bodies that they are trying to increase the frequency
in so that they will have bodies that are wired so that they can manifest directly into 3rd density,
since that seems to be the real barrier that prevents an all-out invasion, the fact that we are in 3rd
density and they are in 4th. Now, I assumed that the same function could be true for STO
individuals. It seems that many individuals who have come into this time period from the future,
coming back into the past via the incarnational cycle so as not to violate free will, have carefully
selected bodies with particular DNA, which they are, little by little, activating so that there 4th
density selves, or higher, can manifest in this reality. Is it possible for those energies to manifest
into such bodies which have been awakened or tuned in 3rd density?

A: STO tends to do the process within the natural flow of things. STS seeks to alter creation
processes to fit their ends.

...

Q: Can you abduct yourself in an STO manner and help yourself in this way? Can that be STO?

A: It is not, because that is not STO.

Q: So, when that is happening, and if it is happening, it is occurring in the STS parameter?

A: Yes.

Q: How do the STO manage?

A: They do not concern themselves with such things.

Q: Well, if the STS guys are genetically tweaking themselves to have some kind of different
outcome for some reason that we do not perceive, don't you think there should be a balancing
action on the STO side of some sort?

A: You are thinking in STS terms. But that is natural, since human 3rd density is STS.

Q: You say they don't concern themselves with that. What do STO individuals coming back from
the future into the past concern themselves with?

A: Answering calls for assistance with knowledge.

Q: What do these STS individuals coming back into the past hope to do by genetically tweaking
their ancestors? What happened that they want to have happen differently?

A: Infinite number of possible answers to that question.

Q: So, they are coming from all different timelines with all different kinds of agendas - all
designed to serve themselves.

That technique for relaxation you mentioned is interesting, by the way. Will further try. (especially in light of the below:)

I believe Smallwood is right to offer the suggestion of physical relaxation. [...] If tension -- physical, emotional, mental -- is the habitual state of my machine then any conscious and intentional movement against that -- the intentional movement toward relaxation, for example -- is a form of "intentional labors" and "conscious suffering" and is a part of our work. In this instance, this movement toward relaxation is not to be confused with "self calming," which Gurdjieff often speaks against. "Self calming" is automatic, mechanical behavior, the automatic employing of buffers that prevent us from seeing or feeling or knowing or doing.

A distinction I'd missed - that is quite helpful.

Most of the rest of what you said I've read and thought of and even - to my understanding - put into practice, though my understanding is not yet really "in sync" across all parts of myself ("I know!", said an "I" in my mind immediately your post - and gave itself away). Sometimes I do Know (or so I think) - and implement 4th Way ideas in practice - and sometimes I "know" - and think a whole lot about them without actually doing much - and sometimes neither.

Especially when - but also otherwise - I think of my old ideas and mental functioning of years past, I enter areas wherein old "I"s and/or new programming derived from the old sometimes take over the thought process, and these are often not aware of these concepts. Then, unless reminded, I simply forget about them until another set of "I"s take over or I "wake up" (relatively speaking) for a short while.

In my ordinary state one part may observe another, may form an opinion about the other part. One part says "I" -- and says, "I don't like this or that" about myself -- or perhaps the opposite, perhaps flatters one's self -- it doesn't matter. All this is equally mechanical. This is not self-observation rightly conducted, and this is what is not commonly understood.

I've often caught such reactions (and know they are not the "real thing", though temporarily - when not at my best in terms of being "awake" - they may get the better of me), sometimes just after the response. (and indeed there are some interesting ones sometimes active in me. for example, an "I" often responds to observed neuroticism in my thinking by stating something along the lines of: "I am hogwash!" or "I am nonsense!" - which would be perfectly accurate if only it referred not to me but to itself) And likings and identifications with thought and behaviors, indeed. Much is discovered after the fact. For instance, I realized a few weeks ago (to my amusement) that I (or rather emotional "I") was emotionally attached to the idea of emotional detachment!

So, what is missing here? Where am "I" (not mechanical)? What is there in me that can "observe myself" without engaging in any form of automatic or mechanical reaction to what is observed? This is a fundamental question that can not usefully be answered in the abstract. What I have to work with is my attention and "attention" is the fundamental key to everything. Everything. I can not so easily "fool myself" into believing things that are not true about myself if I am truly attentive; moreover, I can not be so easily deceived by the forces of the outer world which wish to perpetuate the corruption of my dual nature if I am truly attentive to what is transpiring within me at any given moment. So -- the question arises -- how do I begin to work?

So, my suggestion at this point is to let that last question above become a real, living question. It isn't about some mechanical feature of what is habitually referred to as "my mind" coming up with an answer that can be put into words and posted on a forum. Suffer that intentionally and let it go completely. This is YOUR life, your work -- and what is being offered to you through the teachings such as Gurdjieff has brought are real possibilities -- not of "change" (as in, "I" ought to do this or that or think this or that or feel this or that or be some way or other to gain respectability or to flatter my own ego or to cease my suffering, etc., etc.) but of transformation. Inner growth is transformation. You do not understand how by consuming food that food is transformed into your physical body and all the inner and outer manifestations that you habitually associate as "you". Nevertheless, this transformation takes place. Now what is being offered is another possibility that is your birthright: The transformation of your ordinary habitual existence -- such as it is -- into something greater, something more truly you than your mechanical habits and associations and identifications. For this, Gurdjieff maintains, is required a new kind of food -- the food of impressions. About this I will only say one thing further and that is that this "food of impressions," unlike the common food we eat or breathe, can not be either eaten or digested mechanically, unawares. It requires attention, understanding and intention.

The "mechanical feature" of "my mind" coming up with an answer happened immediately as I read (that answer being "the essence", though knowing the moniker, I know, is of course not the same as knowing what it represents). I'll try to be as attentive as I can as I write this: I know that this personality is to die, that during the past in-a-few-months-to-be-a-year, it has happened little by little, though much remains; this is very clear in my mental activity of the very recent past. Many of the known parts of this personality for whatever reason do not mind the idea of this happening to it. "It" likes the idea of leaving something better behind. Because a part that is more is felt. It is incomplete, but it is there. Sometimes it is very active in observing. Sometimes it "takes over" the mind for a bit. And often it is forgotten. There is also the problem of many other parts - "I"s - not knowing that there is much more - acting as though they are the whole of me, very insanely and in opposition to all the rest. But the amount of parts that know they are only part of a whole is gradually increasing.

This is one of my best moments. No inner monologue. This won't last long.

Didn't. My awareness changes constantly. Sleep of many kinds - I float in and out.

My biggest problem is I cannot maintain my relative awakenness. At times I do well. I was sound asleep when writing the initial post of the thread. Tomorrow I may go about half the day or even more rather asleep. Or maybe it will be a "good" day - when I wake up a lot quickly and maintain it much of the time, though with lapses.

(notice the variations in this reply? things were written at different times. this was the last)

Not meant to be manipulative. Just noting that I don't expect you (the community) to care about it all, and would be fine with getting input only on "that which matters", whatever that would be - if some (or even all, and if so, sorry for the noise) of it turns out to be pointless drivel, or you (the community) just can't think of something to say to it that wouldn't be a waste of time for you to write, then I don't mind it being ignored.

You are making a lot of negative assumptions about the community here.
I cannot represent the community as a whole, but I do know from what I've learnt here is that they do 'care' about what is writtern on these pages. And by 'care', I mean that given the world is burning (to paraphrase anart) they take the job of waking themselves and as many others up as possible very very seriously.

I didn't assume that the community would care about the whole of what I wrote, nor that it wouldn't - so I don't see where there is an assumption. I was uncertain - and knowing that "the world is on fire", I thought that perhaps there'd be something more important to spend the time on than a posting that I then had no perspective on as to what would turn out to be meaningful to address and what would not out of what I wrote.

EDIT: And now I suddenly feel - more than I have for a long time. Something saddens me. I don't know what.

EDIT2: With this post, I put it in words for the first time - I feel lost. That is why I'm now sad - it's "broken through" to the surface. But the meaning of it I don't really know. How and why?

I tried Smallwood's suggestion last night and it had the effect of bringing some old emotions to the surface.

Between you mentioning your own disassociation, and resistance to emotions (take a look at how you see couples and the emotions around them), I would say you are stuck in your head and fear/reject/are disgusted at your own emotions, and disassociate/project/over think to avoid them.
I am still working through my own ways of doing the same things as you.

One thing is clear to me; it used to be even worse (and the thoughts on relationships come from a few years ago when this was strongly the case; some of the "coloring" of that text seems to me to be from program-remnants - but the basic idea, sans what remains of the old emotional "judgments" still seems valid to me), and then I was very limited to my head. Gradually with "work", it's felt more as if I'd become less limited to my head (and a week or so ago something changed - which now comes and goes - regarding my moving functions: every movement I made deliberately used to be "punctuated" by a brief "thought"-impulse. now I often move about without the thinking center being involved in nearly as much - and it has a distinctly "smoother" feel, and definitely makes for a reduction in tenseness), but that there were exceptions in the form of "sealed-off" areas - particularly one regarding emotion.

Since that small "shock", my ability to feel seems less "clogged", and though there's plenty of inhibition and other programming (some rather old) to overcome, now the whole thing doesn't just "disappear" anymore. Trying just now, I was able to focus on and feel for a bit without that emotional "stranglehold" clamping down.

You may want to have a look at Rain T's thread from here http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11292.msg81353#msg81353
and my responce to what he's writtern, as an example of the same thing.
Your thoughts and methods are slightly different, but your initial post has the same flavour.

Rereading my post, I must acknowledge that in particular the second section of it does indeed have a rather funny flavor. Originally, only the two first paragraphs of the second part were there, but before posting - some time after the previous writing time - I wrote the rest. Interesting how I could end up writing something that was so contrary to the idea I started out with (it hardly seems, in retrospect, to have been a constructive addition, to say the least), yet without noticing any difference whatever at the time of writing it. The impression from reading it is completely different than what I remember from writing it.

Now it is also very obvious to me why you replied originally as you did.

What helped my understanding of this in myself (amongst other things) was reading The Myth of Sanity by Martha Stout. It deals with disassociation and the underlying emotional traumas.
I mentioned it already in your dream thread. Have you read it yet?
You can also read Deep Therapy in the Fast Lane on line at _http://home.comcast.net/~riversrages/DeepTherapy/chapter1.htm

EDIT3: Now that I've calmed down for a bit - and find myself unusally un-tense internally - I realize I should thank you, RedFox, for at the very least (even if it just happened to be so) helping to lead me to whatever thoughts triggered in full strength what is probably my first real "shock" - if a relatively small one.

Your welcome, the question now is given the energy released, what are you going to do with it?

Not read it yet, but did just [yesterday, when I wrote this part of the reply before going to bed] order it. Will put the other books I'm currently reading on hold once it arrives.

Did read "Deep Therapy in the Fast Lane" (as I once noted in my introduction), and found there some insight regarding the emotional "split" I mentioned in my last post in the dream thread.

What I did with the shock was to somehow not react much while it was felt, and after a while try to relax and simply let it be for some time. I also later tried Smallwood's suggestion, though I kept shifting back and forth between detachedly observing random thought-gibberish that did not stop and losing focus and getting caught up in it. Also I tried to gain some perspective on all this.

 

[painter]

The "mechanical feature" of "my mind" coming up with an answer happened immediately as I read

Yes. This is seen, observed for oneself. Thus it is not theoretical but knowledge based on self observation.

(that answer being "the essence", though knowing the moniker, I know, is of course not the same as knowing what it represents).

Again this is accurate. Parts of myself within the intellectual center are satisfied with "thinking" "I" "know", satisfied with having read words and "thinking" "I" "understand" them or "know what they mean" without any question, without any attention that calls me to search, to look, to observe, to see that this "thinking I know" is a mechanical habit, an identification within the lower part of the intellectual center. Without a question that rises above this and becomes a wish to observe directly for myself, "I" remain such as I am, identified with this mechanical feature.

I'll try to be as attentive as I can as I write this: I know that this personality is to die, that during the past in-a-few-months-to-be-a-year, it has happened little by little, though much remains; this is very clear in my mental activity of the very recent past. Many of the known parts of this personality for whatever reason do not mind the idea of this happening to it. "It" likes the idea of leaving something better behind. Because a part that is more is felt. It is incomplete, but it is there. Sometimes it is very active in observing. Sometimes it "takes over" the mind for a bit. And often it is forgotten. There is also the problem of many other parts - "I"s - not knowing that there is much more - acting as though they are the whole of me, very insanely and in opposition to all the rest. But the amount of parts that know they are only part of a whole is gradually increasing.

You are trying something here, trying "to be as attentive as I can as I write this." However, note that what follows is a stream of associations that you have typed out for all the world to read. This is what "you" "think". What the words convey is the current level of understanding of the "you" that "thinks" this. It may be accurate so far as it goes. But can "what I think I know" be any more complete or objective than my level of being? Something sees that there is fragmentation, sees that this awareness of fragmentation is itself fragmented. This seeing is "objective" so far as it goes.

What I'm suggesting here is a grain of caution that I do not fall into the trap of identifying with "what I think I know". It isn't that "what I think I know" is false but it may be incomplete, limited by my level of being. Learning means observing, seeing for myself. So through observation I see that this fragmentation exists -- this is my condition -- and indeed it is the human condition and seeing it is a step toward objectivity. Seeing the state I am in is a step above not seeing it. I don't see it when I am identified with my mechanical reactions of thought, feeling, movement, sensation, etc. But then if some energy of attention appears in myself this state is seen.

Note what follows this inner effort to be attentive:

This is one of my best moments. No inner monologue. This won't last long.

Can we understand this as a result of this inner effort to be attentive? I mean "result" in the alchemical sense. In Gurdjieff terms your effort to be attentive is a "conscious shock" which produces a "higher hydrogen" that supersedes the mechanical associations; a new level of awareness independent of associative thought comes into being. For an instant "I" am "whole," "awake," "aware," "conscious." Immediatly the thought arises "This won't last long," and with this thought this result vanishes from my presence:

Didn't. My awareness changes constantly. Sleep of many kinds - I float in and out.

That is exactly right. This is our situation -- the horror of it all. Something is tried, an inner effort is made, a gesture toward freedom and escape from my mechanical prison and what I believe is called here STO being. Perhaps a result manifests in my presence (no guarantees, yet) and a new state appears -- one which more properly could be called "I am" -- but then, immediately, it is lost. "I" am taken by all the fragmentation within my mechanical (STS) nature, the sensations of the physical body, my reactive emotions, my mechanical associations (that do not deserve the designation "thought"). Knowing this, seeing this, studying this with the objectivity of a scientist attempting to understand a phenomena or an artist attempting to render what is seen for others to contemplate is the beginning of real work.

My biggest problem is I cannot maintain my relative awakenness.

Of course you cannot and if you thought you could you would be in a state of self delusion, self deception, self aggrandizement, choosing STS in the mistaken believe that you were choosing STO influences. This is our conditioning, our condition. This is our level of being and our prison. I cannot become free if I cannot perceive the prison I have accepted and, indeed, chosen as my "home". I have not yet learned and do not yet understand how this choice happens, how over and over again I "fall" into the trap of choosing to remain asleep, imprisoned, a slave to the forces of this 3rd Density world. This direct impression is the food spoken of earlier. EDIT to add: Perhaps it would help to not label this a "problem". It is bigger than that, more profound than that: It is what is as we are. As I am I can not "solve" this "problem," can not "fix" it and "make it go away." We must face it as a fact and yet at the same time not fall into "resignation". The very fact that this is seen is the beginning of real hope.

At times I do well. I was sound asleep when writing the initial post of the thread. Tomorrow I may go about half the day or even more rather asleep. Or maybe it will be a "good" day - when I wake up a lot quickly and maintain it much of the time, though with lapses.

Study this carefully. Do not fall into the trap of "believing" that you "understand" this. We do not and cannot so long as we remain as we are. I'll point you to chapter XXVIII of The Wave series. Read it carefully and try to be aware of what is taking place in yourself as you do so. Observe yourself as you read Laura's description of arriving at that place where the choice is seen for what it is. This choice is a revelation, it is the real hope that operates against the false hope, the false believe that my fragmentation can do anything other than create more fragmentation and further imprisonment.

(notice the variations in this reply? things were written at different times. this was the last)

Yes. We are not constant through time, that is precisely the point. All of this would be hopeless, absolutely hopeless, if it weren't for the possibility of being in a new way, seeing in a new way, understanding in a new way. Your moment of insight above is a key that shows that the situation is not completely hopeless. There is help. Something is possible for us, even if it is very small, as is said, "no bigger than a mustard seed." This wish to be can grow -- if we learn to feed it in ourselves and others.

 

[Psalehesost]

Now once again to get to addressing this mess-up of mine. I started a thread on "My present psychological situation", but as anyone reading the first post knows, I hardly did a good job - save perhaps the part regarding emotional constriction - of intelligently describing said subject. (I guess this post has ended up partially filling in that) What I did describe - through the way I wrote - was the fact that I'd fallen asleep and then fell into emotional confluence (the former facilitating the outward expression of the latter) at the time of posting.

In a recent post replying to someone else, anart said that "Mistakes are one of the most useful and powerful ways to learn - as long as one is sincere in their desire to learn." Well, this mishap has been educational, indeed. (and may perhaps even continue to be so, if there is more to be said) Regarding the making of mistakes, I find lately that I lack the self-importance to be embarrassed, but I (or rather some "I") do feel (though not as much anymore) somewhat uncomfortable about what they might lead to, in terms of (should they occur too much) messing up the likely unique chance I have here.

My feeling does seem slightly more unclogged since that minor shock I noted, as I noted in the previous reply. I've since briefly experienced once again the emotional state (not the same as the sadness involved in the shock, but rather something of a more "feverish" flavor) that influenced the writing of the initial post, though now it is something I seem to have a better grip on. I noticed (before my previous reply) in that text that all the while expressing disillusionment with the whole of the universe, I somehow in my mind assigned some sort of value to the lack of meaning in everything. The ridiculousness of this should be obvious. (and it goes to show that one is - or at least I am - never done getting disillusioned)

Going on to emotional realizations, I had a thought that seemed strange to me at first. I had seen someone noting emphasizing with someone else on this forum, which brings me to some strange programming I found. Somehow, while knowing that normal people have empathy, I at the same time somehow thought that such things as people genuinely emphasizing simply do not occur in reality - at least not so long as there is some degree of personal association, in this case regarding me and this forum and its community; if I'd read an account of someone genuinely emphasizing that was free from any such association, as in some random book, then this idea would not have been triggered - and so, when without any prior noticeable reaction the impression of reading this came up in my mind, it somehow led me to the thought: "What if they [you, the community] emphasize/would emphasize [hypothetically, given something to emphasize with] with me?" - and the thought simply seemed "strange", almost silly, to me. "No." or "Why would we unless we had a reason to?", I imagined a plain and simple answer that I'd get if hypothetically I posed such a question. And then I felt on the other hand an affirmative hypothetical answer to this question along with a realization contrary to this idea I carried, and so I came to think of it, after some time realizing that this idea I'd carried for some years and unconsciously applied to each and every of my expectations of people more or less "around me" was a piece of ponerized programming.

On another note, I just read again the second part of the initial post in my present state, and right at this moment, I seem to understand the text more as I did when I wrote it. Before upon rereading it, emotional impressions not (at least not consciously) originally there became part of my perception of the text, but now I read it without any such occurring; this makes the hysterical flavor largely disappear and the text appear more as-is at "face value", but with a hint of that peculiar feeling readily discernible (I would describe it as a relatively calm, collected and even "glow" of a slightly feverish excitation. it gradually increased in strength with the ongoing writing of that part of the initial post). Which would be more objective? To perceive the "cues" as others generally also perceive upon reading it, or to perceive it more in light of the mental state involved in writing it?


Having said (and asked) that, I guess I'll finally get on with replying specifically (though input on the following is welcomed from others as well) to painter:

Firstly, painter, you seem to be aiming at a general introduction of the concepts and their understanding. Given the initial post of the thread as well as the thread not including anything stating or strongly hinting at such, I guess it's no surprise you address me as someone new (though relatively speaking, I very much am in comparison to you!) to the 4th Way. However, much of what you now write are things that I really should know by now, and - while certainly not as well since I am not as experienced, as well as (I think) a difference in the level of emotional (in particular) being - as far as I can see, do know since earlier. (though much of my knowledge and prior insight can go poof during times of intense confluence, such as when I wrote the initial post)

For some more perspective on where I come from in relation to "work", (feel free to comment on it right here in the thread if you find it appropriate) I guess I could point you to, firstly, a relatively recent thread of mine, another one more or less of a mess-up. Perhaps with your experience you'd be able to glean something more from it in observing my "workings" and not-workings? (no need to hold back if so - as far as I am concerned, if I can be scared away, then I'd already be a failure to begin with. this goes for all potential repliers to all I write) Then there is this post - my very first, written in early March of 2008 quoted and commented on by myself a few months later. (it is relevant here mostly in the descriptions of how I "saw" - rather than interpreted - in observing myself, since it gives somewhat of an idea of how my "mental perception" works - and I have little perspective of how this compares to that of others) By the time of the original posting, I hadn't yet read any particular 4th Way material (I was in the process of doing so when I quoted and commented on the original posting), and was very new to the idea of, which was the full extent of what I then understood, working on getting rid of programs, which immediately "rang a bell".

I then had a problem which drove me to try very hard to do this. Gradually, over somewhat less than a year, I'd developed a neurotic issue. In short, images, thoughts and psychic impressions (as in what some refer to as sensing "energy") of a disagreeable nature got "stuck" in the back of my mind and random associations - particularly to me and whatever I did - would form. The "theme" of the issue would shift periodically. If I wrote something and the impression of a nasty person was stuck in my mind, for example, then some "I" would begin to associate my writing with said person, and it would start to feel psychically "dirtied" and I'd be prompted to rewrite it. An "I" could also identify directly with some person, group, action, or some such. My mind became a mess, it disturbed my ability to do things I really cared for, because they did seem to get psychically contaminated (checking later, the immediate perception of this would often be found to have been exaggerated, but to a variable extent it did occur - provided of course that I am actually perceiving something and not just to this very day absolutely bonkers, though the consistency of my perception makes me doubt this. in time, I've become fairly able at sorting out what is "reliable" in it and the "overlaid" perception that seems to come about due to shifting inner factors, as they can be distinguished by a slight difference in "quality". the mental "breaking point" that eventually made me throw myself into trying to sort myself out came about due to being somewhat shocked at really "energetically" gooing things down at one occasion a bit less than a year ago as a result of a spectacular attack of this issue)

So, I began trying very hard to stop these demented processes in me, and observe how they functioned. Sometime thereafter, I began reading the proper theory of Work, which became of increasing help. Following what in about a month will have been a year of sometimes rather intense inner struggle and many, many ongoing reminders and "awakenings" due to my neuroticism making for an excellent "alarm clock", so to say, beginning to poke me increasingly hard until I made sufficient efforts whenever I fell somewhat deeper into "waking sleep", it has almost completely been rid of, and my mind - it seems to me - somewhat "rewired".

[EDIT: Reading about certain nasty sorts (and of things such as psychic attacks described by some people) around here - and before I went to the site, the C's transcripts I'd been linked to, which was how I found the place, as told in my introduction - "supercharged" the neuroticism, you could say. Plenty of things for a buggy mind to obsess and worry over! While it lasted, it kept the "alarm clock" going strong, for sure!]

One one hand, this is a good achievement - or so I think - and on the other hand, with the many remaining "I"s, I am now able to sleep far more comfortably (before, "waking sleep" made for many nightmares) than I used to, meaning that I now have to think of new things to remind me to make efforts to stay as awake as possible. This lack of having a good "alarm clock" is one of the things I thought of when I wrote in my previous reply that "My biggest problem is I cannot maintain my relative awakenness.", though I hadn't yet connected the gradual decline of this particular neuroticism I've had (there are of course other neuroticisms - wrong work of centers - remaining, but none with the "qualities" of the one I used to have) with increasing comfort of "sleep" and thus with the kind of lapses in awareness resulting in the posting of the initial post of this thread. I realized this when I thought of what used to keep me going in my efforts at a steady pace, compared to my present situation.

The "work" I've been doing, anyhow, is certainly more "specialized" than proper Work, I realize now - more one-sided, though I've used my gradually gained understandings to tackle any other thing I've coming across in me which they've allowed me to understand. (and also used the thereby gained experience to tackle things relating more directly to the original problem - which has gradually decreased in emphasis as it declined)

I think that is enough to - hopefully - explain my background a bit better. Going on to the below:

I'll point you to chapter XXVIII of The Wave series. Read it carefully and try to be aware of what is taking place in yourself as you do so. Observe yourself as you read Laura's description of arriving at that place where the choice is seen for what it is. This choice is a revelation, it is the real hope that operates against the false hope, the false believe that my fragmentation can do anything other than create more fragmentation and further imprisonment.

This time (several days ago when you posted your reply), upon rereading this chapter, I did understand it in a bit more emotional depth. There were not however particularly much in the way of strong or significant reactions going on as I read it, as far as I could see.

I did gain something important, though, particularly from reading and taking some time to reflect on (that's where things got interesting) Ark's description again. This time, much of me could feel the truth to being a "device" - a thing - and no more. It did result in further disillusionment with "what I am", or what "I"s believe "I" am, though at first resisted by reactions stemming from remaining self-importance.

I also understood Laura's comments on trying to form in oneself, then truly live and so manifest the ideal in oneself as something a bit better. This as well as previous further disillusionment means that I have no more concerns (as of now, at the very least) regarding existence itself.

Now to make sure I follow my own advice from the past (another posting): "Always be on the watch for comparisons of incoming impressions with fantasy."

 

[Psalehesost]

"I" think this might be relevant to my ongoing involvement with this community, so here follows:

There are two old programs of significance that have been influencing my subjective "self-image" and so tinting my thoughts and writings, generally triggered at times of social involvement or mechanical thinking of self such as posting here.

A program of inflated self-image (mild variety of superiority complex - superior to what actually is, that is. not to the community - such a level of delusion has thankfully not been reached), and a program of downward-adjusted self-image (mild variety of inferiority complex. other side of the coin)

These were not always active, and when active, at varying strength and proportion, one of them on the surface and the other below. This might perhaps be identified in my writing.

This, mainly, and other recent involvement of mine in this forum has made clearer - by laying it out plainly to a group of people, and my awareness of this - the reality of the situation. The upwards-adjusted self-image has been disproven. Upon it first being threatened, this began to trigger the deflated self-view and mild fears and worries, until the disprovement of the upwards-adjusted self-image recently sank in and seems to have killed it, and I realized that this interaction of mine does not damage my prospects at this forum, but only the "I" that overestimated "myself"/itself.

On a final note (written first), this text is not wholly "new" - the inner monologue actually composed several previous versions of this post before I sat down at my computer. For a while, was the sole track of significant (and automatic) program activity. This "device" has got to stop hallucinating.

That concludes this thread, unless someone responds.

 

[PepperFritz]

I realized that this interaction of mine does not damage my prospects at this forum, but only the "I" that overestimated "myself"/itself....

That's a very significant realization.
Congratulations on getting there.

:)