Fetter 1, 2 & 3
To begin, when exploring the first layer of experience, the prevailing sense of personhood, I’ll ask you to turn your attention inward to investigate the familiar feeling of being a distinct 'person', looking to see what this sense of 'I' or 'me' is actually made of. Please be warned that if you continue any further, you may experience a fundamental shift in identity, and along with it various degrees of mental and emotional upheaval, both positive and negative.
As you continue reading, please be receptive to your bodily sensations and notice any doubts, fears, or any sense of uncertainty. As soon as you notice them, stop reading, notice the thoughts and be right there with the raw sensation – that’s really important. It’s helpful to be aware of some of the doubting narratives, which might follow these familiar themes:
“I’ve stumbled upon an arcane region of the web; this is some crazy shit that’s not worth exploring”
"How can this be right if it feels so unsettling?
"I'm probably not getting this right."
"Maybe I'm not capable of understanding this."
"I'll never really see through these things; I'm too…."
"What if I'm fooling myself?"
”Is this website/person actually true or reliable?"
"This doesn't make sense with what I already believe."
"Perhaps this approach isn't for me; maybe there's a better/easier way."
Usually, a sensation or feeling tone will accompany these narratives. The key is to notice the narrative alongside the sensation. Right in that spot will occur a dualistic strain, where the doubts simply says “no” – yet the curiosity, the fundamental drive towards wholeness, says “yes”. Stay right there in that dualistic strain, no matter how uncomfortable it might feel.
Bouncing on the Surface
One of the main characteristics of self inquiry is this flip-flopping (or bouncing) between the conceptual and the non-conceptual. The flip-flopping happens because the long-term regularity of the self structure cannot yet reconcile with non-conceptual reality. When challenging your prevailing identity, it doubts, fears and entertains various uncertainties about moving into the non-conceptual reality, similar to a gatekeeper, and it’ll use some of the excuses I mentioned above. Therefore, bouncing on the surface usually involves some measure of doubting, fear and uncertaintnty, before actually penetrating deeper. This is fetter 2 - described above as bouncing on the surface.
By the way, the conceptual framework is still available in the non-conceptual reality, as it should be. The major difference is in how – or to what degree - that conceptual framework is identified with. That’s really important, because all types of self-inquiry methods, spiritual, traditional religions, and non-dual practices can be turned into a convenient bypass tool. Even this appraoch can be used as a bypass. Read here to get more clarity on that.
Before doing some direct inquiry, let’s dig a little deeper into the difference between identification and the non-conceptual reality…
The conceptual framework is like the map that represents your established beliefs, your regular sense of self (the long-term regularity of the self-structure or the blueprint). It's ordered, predictable and provides a sense of security and understanding based on known and familiar symbols, routine behaviours and boundaries. It essentailly describes fetter 3.
The non-conceptual reality, which is the actual landscape, is not a product of linear, dualistic rationality. Therefore, it is counter-intuitive to our normal mode of operation, which always follows the contours of time, space and matter.
Initially, most inquirers constantly flip-flop between staring intently only at the map (staying within concepts, feeling the "me" trying to understand or control the materialistic or conceptual world) and glancing nervously up at the actual, overwhelming landscape – touching the non-conceptual at fleeting moments.
Some people are just not aware of the larger reality at all. They are totally and utterly consumed in their ego-centric identity. Any notion of living selflessly is tottally incomprehensable to them, and actually very frightening. If that’s you, keep reading!
There's fear and doubt about putting the map down and trusting your ability to navigate the real territory directly – sometimes called spontaneity. The familiar structure of the map feels safer than the unpredictable chaotic vastness of direct experience. The ego/map-reading self resists letting go of its primary tool – and quite rightly.
As you gain confidence, you realise you don't have to discard the map entirely when looking at this vast landscape. The conceptual framework is still available to consult within the experience of the non-conceptual reality. You can orient yourself using the map when needed, but it you know it doesn't define the whole experience.
Now, crucially, the major difference lies in identification. Initially, you might strongly identify with being the map reader – your reality is the map. The shift occurs when you realise you are the explorer in the landscape, who uses the map as a helpful tool but isn't confined to it or identical with it. You are no longer solely identified with the conceptual framework; it becomes one available function within a larger experiential reality.
