first ever practice journal!

"
My personal belief, reflecting on my experience during this last retreat, is that 4th is actually just stream entry in the suttas, but I'm not going to explain or defend this position for now.

Details to follow, eventually."

EndInSight, I love your open-handed generosity in sharing your practice. And much of your analysis is brilliant and original. Still, I would resist the temptation to come to conclusions prematurely, both about your own level of development and how to interpret the traditional maps.

My own view is that stream entry is the least controversial of the landmarks; it lines up remarkably well across maps. While the ten fetters map and the Visuddhimagga/Mahasi map can be interpreted as diverging AFTER that point, stream entry is just stream entry. Attempting to shoehorn ten fetters stream entry into technical model 4th Path is wildly far-fetched, IMHO. It is also counter-productive. Turning useful maps into a sea of grey soup risks so thoroughly confounding beginners that they run screaming for the exit before giving the practice a chance.

Have to share a technique that is working really well for me!

Bodies are covered in affect. So much, that one often has only the barest experience of their actual body, though this isn't generally clear except in retrospect. Anyone who can discern the difference between tactile sensations and affects can use this technique to get more clarity about their actual body.

Method: find some unpleasant feeling that appears to be in the body, such as tension, headache, burning pain, nervousness, dis-ease, etc. Generate it if necessary. Then enter the 3rd jhana (minimal absorption) to the point that one notices sukha. Try to pervade the part that has the unpleasant feeling with tactile sukha. Notice that the tactile sukha and the unpleasant feeling don't cancel each other out, but are superimposed or interleaved. The sukha is the "outline" of the actual body; the unpleasant feeling is the affect. (The sukha may feel like it's in a slightly different place than the unpleasant feeling, "inside" or "outside" of where the unplesasant feeling is; affects are distortions, remember?) The affect may turn out on inspection to have other "weird" qualities (synaesthesia / etc.) depending on personal factors, but you'll see for yourself.

Give it at least a couple of hours once you get the hang of it, and stick with one body area at first. Compare and contrast actual and affect; this banishes the affect at first, and eventually seems to destroy it permanently (so that it doesn't arise in that area in the same form ever again).

You might be surprised to see what the dimensions of your body actually are.

When the affect stays away, this also illustrates very straightforwardly how much suffering is involved in affective experience. The peace left in the wake of this technique is incredible.

Good luck y'all.

Thank you for sharing this. From what I can already tell (I have so far only been able to try it at work), your instructions are very clear and, yes, it does work as advertized!

When the affect is "destroyed", is it just replaced with an subtle affective eqaunimity or are you truly apperceiving? I thought for a long time I was appercieving the arupa jhanas until one day I actually decided to look a little harder, closer and truly see if there was something I was missing. There was a sublte neutrality that I was not seeing through. It felt like I was seeing all there was and thus seeing all "being" drop away. The sense of "being" had just gotten so refined against the backdrop of gnarly sensations at the chest that I overlooked it, thinking I was "apperceiving". When I stopped doing that, and decided then and there that I would stay sitting till I saw what it was I may have been missing (as I was not yet AF), things began to appear with much, much more clarity.

Make sure you aren't resting on any subtle neutral affect.

Edited to say that I decided to look in the minutest detail at the arising and cessation of "being" when the day before an "out from controlnesss" concerning attentiveness to sensuousness was the default. This was also the case for many other people who were successful. Are you still being attentive to sensuousness so that it will then flip to being completely out from 'your' control?

"Then again, the disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'Sensuality here & now; sensuality in lives to come; sensual perceptions here & now; sensual perceptions in lives to come; forms here & now; forms in lives to come; form-perceptions here & now; form-perceptions in lives to come; perceptions of the imperturbable; perceptions of the dimension of nothingness: all are perceptions. Where they cease without remainder: that is peaceful, that is exquisite, i.e., the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.' Practicing & frequently abiding in this way, his mind acquires confidence in that dimension. There being full confidence, he either attains the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception now or else is committed to discernment. With the break-up of the body, after death, it's possible that this leading-on consciousness of his will go to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. This is declared to be the practice conducive to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.

When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One: "There is the case, lord, where a monk, having practiced in this way '” 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. Now, would this monk be totally unbound, or not?"

"A certain such monk might, Ananda, and another might not.'

"What is the cause, what is the reason, whereby one might and another might not?"

"There is the case, Ananda, where a monk, having practiced in this way '” (thinking) 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. As he relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it, his consciousness is dependent on it, is sustained by it (clings to it). With clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is not totally unbound."

"Being sustained, where is that monk sustained?"

"The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception."

"Then, indeed, being sustained, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance."

"Being sustained, Ananda, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance; for this '” the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception '” is the supreme sustenance. There is [however] the case where a monk, having practiced in this way '” 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. He does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it. As he does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it, his consciousness is not dependent on it, is not sustained by it (does not cling to it). Without clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is totally unbound."

www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.106.than.html

@Nikolai: which means that we could start with 3rd jhana to "get rid of" the gross affect and then use the formless jhanas to erase the remaining subtle affective equanimity? I guess, neither perception nor non-perception is the jhana that finely highlights the subtlest affect, leading to the final uprooting of the illusory sense of being.

It seems that what's left in the end is apperception. One starts with the gross negative affect (because it's easiest to contrast this with tactile sukha), but after that's removed, one moves onto the next layer of affect (which may be pleasant or neutral), revealing more and more of the actual sense objects.

That apperception is all that remains, and that no affect is missed, is my best guess; I'm not done. (The more that I use this technique, the more layers of affect I see, and the more I recognize that I'm much farther from done than I thought.) I'll let y'all know in a couple of days or so how it looks at that point. But, for instance, when I was doing this last night, and simply took a walk, the quality of space (without cultivating that jhana) was much stronger and clearer than usual; I was working on affect in my head, and that seems to have cut away the affective distortion of space quite a bit.

But the non-affective peace, the kind that is unrelished and unrelishable by 'me', is INCREDIBLE.

SERIOUS POSTING HIATUS THIS TIME.

(I did tell you guys that I'm a bad yogi / meditator. Also undisciplined!)

"
@Nikolai: which means that we could start with 3rd jhana to "get rid of" the gross affect and then use the formless jhanas to erase the remaining subtle affective equanimity? I guess, neither perception nor non-perception is the jhana that finely highlights the subtlest affect, leading to the final uprooting of the illusory sense of being.
"

It would seem that this may be so. But in my experience, it is not neccessary to "get rid of" the gross effect before seeing through the subtlest of refined "being". However, we could speculate for example with my time spent cultivating the state of wellbeing/felicity to a very high degree having had some major impact on "gross affect". There is no set sequence I think, as I didn't bother with the lower jhanas. This was the advice I recieved:

"Don't worry about the rupa jhanas if you don't need them to enter and abide in any of the arupa jhanas. Keeping this in mind will probably make clear why: rupa is primarily concerned with '˜being', arupa is concerned with both '˜being' and actual, and the supramundane (1) is the actual. so within these three classifications of jhana'”keeping in mind the goal of eliminating the defilements (which is a move '˜toward' the supramundane)'”rupa jhana is a bit indirect to the point. If the goal is perfect supramundane jhana, then the stepping stone to that is the arupa jhanas (with the supramundane aspect as '˜object')."

(1) Supramundane jhanas here are considered the jhanas without any "being" arising and attaching at all. The 'actual' jhanas so to speak, which are more "perspectives" than absorptions. There is nothing ("being") to have to get absorbed in order to bypass manifesting as the 5 hinderances. When there is no "being', there is no absorption quality. Just the actual aspects of the jhana remain. This is how the term 'supramundane' is used in the advice above.

I would like to add a warning. The use of language is a powerful tool in propping up subtle beliefs which may go unquestioned and perhaps aid in continuing the flow of becoming. The use of terms like "get rid of", "eliminate", "destroy" or anything similarly "destructive" in connotation may or may not influence how one approaches their practice. What I noticed when using such terminology to describe my practice while practicing, to myself and to others, was that such use of a certain meaning of words would push my tendencies towards one of the wrong directions according to the Buddha.

1/ Desire for becoming
2/ Desire for nonbecoming.

The use of such words influenced sublte unquestioned beliefs that 'I' had to destroy affect ('me"), that 'I' had to be eliminated. Now in a way it can be done and explained like so, but be wary of how this use of language is not influencing sublte beliefs that that is what 'you' have to do. Beliefs are locked in thought loops that keep actuality at bay. The actualists go on and on about having 'me' on board and willing to walk into oblivion for a reason. The Buddha talked of the two wrong directions and how to go about bypassing them.

An 'I' that craves destruction and annihilation is a frustrated and sad 'I'. Be wary of how you approach this practice and the language you use to describe it. It may well influence how you approach it. Are you leaning towards one of the wrong directions? 24/7 attentiveness to sensuousness as a lifestyle will by pass these dead ends. Discernment will result naturally as well.

This was my own experience.

"
@Nikolai: which means that we could start with 3rd jhana to "get rid of" the gross affect and then use the formless jhanas to erase the remaining subtle affective equanimity? I guess, neither perception nor non-perception is the jhana that finely highlights the subtlest affect, leading to the final uprooting of the illusory sense of being.
"

It does not have to be strictly the 8th jhana were the door to release is opened. There are many different doors. One fellow went through the door of actualizing the feeling of the flow of time, and another through actualizing agitation. Another, through actualizing the 7th's nothingness. But this doesn't mean you have to pick a door and stick with it, you don't know in advance which your door will be, so that means actualize all of the arupas, and even when out of them, actualize whatever state is dominating. You might get release out of jhana for all you know as someone did in their sleep waking up to find no puppet master to the ownerless hands moving in front of them. Woah!

What you are doing by applying attentiveness to sensuousness to the arupa jhanas is upping the odds of release in those jhanas and maybe upping the odds of release outside of them too. Apperception is key, for any state. Make it the default!

@Nikolai - thank you very much for your advice. I realize that I consciously or not, I was still trying to get rid of something and now see that it is just a matter of seeing things are they are. (I will continue on my practice thread to avoid turning EndinSight's thread into a private discussion).

So much for a posting break. For a variety of reasons, it's not really helping me. So, I will continue to post, but only about practice. Some of the reasons are selfish and self-aggrandizing ('I' like to talk and write), some are selfish and practical (it helps me to look at what I did in the past to remember stuff that was useful but I forgot about), some are selfish and benevolent ('I' think it can be helpful for others to read about what I'm doing), and some are simply benevolent (it can be helpful for others to read about what I'm doing). Good decision, bad decision...whatever it is, it speaks to my own limitations, and I suffer the consequences, whatever they are.

About desire for non-becoming: there was a point in my practice (on retreat) where things changed for me. After that point, I have always been happy, and 'I' have always felt happy, 24/7, no matter what. So 'I' don't despise 'me' or have a strong desire for 'me' to go anywhere. 'I' feel happy being here, but prefer that 'I' weren't here just the same. The preference is mostly just a preference; very little feeling is behind it. Very calmly, with little investment in the process, I just compare and contrast actuality and affect, and destroy the affect, and it makes things even better.

At this point I have mostly given up dry insight as I used to practice it. It was *really* effective when there was an opening for it; I could be in the deepest, craziest cycle mode, see something that needed to be analyzed it, blast it with everything I had, and suddenly experience would be 99% of a PCE. Then, eventually, back to cycle mode. 10 steps forward, 9 steps back. That was most of my retreat. During the retreat, *everything* was low-hanging fruit. But there isn't any low-hanging fruit anymore, so that practice is just spinning my wheels. (cont)

(cont) So I'm keeping it in reserve as a special tool for special occasions, one which will not be brought out under any other circumstance.

My mind is scattered in ways that most people's minds are not, and without a specific task (e.g. dry insight) there is no way I can attend to sensuousness for more than a short time without getting lost. So, my default practice is HAIETMOBA. I forgot about how good this was until I reread my practice thread. I ask the question, the answer is my current experience, this is automatically attending to sensuousness with very little "looking around" to muddy things up.

HAIETMOBA is much more effective than ever before after having liberated my body from so much affect. My body is there, as an actual experience, and easy to notice. It's a permanent and clear attentional anchor. I can always attend to it if I'm in doubt.

HAIETMOBA is also a powerful concentration exercise. As I stick with it, I notice jhanas arising effortlessly, even walking around.

Playing around with the 3rd jhana technique I mentioned, I find that what really happens is that the affect is not destroyed in some mysterious way, but I eventually am able to notice the actual sensation that the affect is a distortion of, and that is what puts an end to the affect. However, this wasn't clear to me before because there isn't a sign over the actual sensation that says "THIS IS WHAT THE AFFECT WAS A DISTORTION OF". I have to look around with that in mind to see what happened, and there is some kind of intuitive recognition that the actual experience matches the affective experience somehow.

I've refined the 3rd jhana technique like so: if I notice clear affect in some part of my body, I put my hand on top of the area, and contrast the warmth / coolness / whatever with the affect, until the actual sensation underlying it reveals itself. No jhana needed. (cont)

(cont) Nick talks about some fundamental thing underlying the sense of being. As things stand now, I simply can't see it. I see particular actual experiences being revealed to give rise to particular affects. When the fundamental thing becomes clear to me, that will be good. Until then, it's just HAIETMOBA and the actual / affect comparison technique. Not much else I can do. But, the more I do it, the better things get, and the more clearly I see new stuff, so I'm confident that it's working well.

I notice, as Nick says, that the arupa jhanas correspond to certain everyday perspectives. Certain ways of regarding objects correspond to space (and I observe that I advert to that jhana whenever I regard objects that way). Other ways correspond to consciousness. A certain way of letting things hang corresponds to nothingness. What corresponds to signlessness, I'm not sure yet; I haven't noticed any times that I've spontaneously adverted to that jhana.

And that's my practice at the moment.

"(cont) Nick talks about some fundamental thing underlying the sense of being. As things stand now, I simply can't see it. I see particular actual experiences being revealed to give rise to particular affects. When the fundamental thing becomes clear to me, that will be good. Until then, it's just HAIETMOBA and the actual / affect comparison technique. Not much else I can do. But, the more I do it, the better things get, and the more clearly I see new stuff, so I'm confident that it's working well.
"

In my own experience, the fundamental "thing" is sensations. The sense of "being" seemed (in my experience) to be the mental sense of existing overlaying specific sensations. Those sensations that acted as a sort of support for the compounding of the whole sense of "being" are what you need to see as just sensations apperceptively, rather than as a trigger for a mentallly overlayed sense of exisiting. That overlaying will cease when apperception of said sensations takes hold.

"Playing around with the 3rd jhana technique I mentioned, I find that what really happens is that the affect is not destroyed in some mysterious way, but I eventually am able to notice the actual sensation that the affect is a distortion of, and that is what puts an end to the affect. However, this wasn't clear to me before because there isn't a sign over the actual sensation that says "THIS IS WHAT THE AFFECT WAS A DISTORTION OF". I have to look around with that in mind to see what happened, and there is some kind of intuitive recognition that the actual experience matches the affective experience somehow.

I've refined the 3rd jhana technique like so: if I notice clear affect in some part of my body, I put my hand on top of the area, and contrast the warmth / coolness / whatever with the affect, until the actual sensation underlying it reveals itself. No jhana needed. "

Excellent! I'd keep actualizing like this as much as possible again and again until it's out from 'your' control and automatic! Also try the other jhanas if you can to see if there is any clinging attaching to something unconsidered.

I had a stressful, tiresome workday, but also had the rather novel experience of recognizing that state of affairs without feeling it much. It looks like all the actual / affective comparisons I've done have made it so that most of the feeling of being stressed automatically manifests as sensations. The sensations themselves aren't unpleasant, just informational. So I was tired and stressed, but mostly oblivious to feeling that way, and happy.

I don't remember doing actual / affective comparisons in the past in which I recognized that these sensations corresponded to the feeling of stress (I was sort of surprised to be confronted with these sensations, apparently for the first time today), so it seems the explicit recognition of the sensation that underlies affects is not important; if one does the comparison and if the affect goes away, one may assume the actual sensation has been implicitly recognized.

I did recognize something funny; the comparison technique seems to work "locally" only. There are spots on my body that I missed when I was looking around for affects to destroy, and they stand out almost comically, like I'm wearing a patchwork quilt of stress and ease. And I paid way too much attention to the front side of my body (where most feelings manifest: head / throat / chest / solar plexus / stomach), so my back has very little in the way of clear actual sensations.

If I lose attentiveness to sensuousness, and some affective feelings come up, and I suddenly ask HAIETMOBA, there tends to be this string of "popping", mini-cessations corresponding to actualizing those feelings in the areas in which the sense objects are clearest, as if they automatically contrast with the affects. Those areas being the ones I worked on before. So there's a kind of snowball effect. (cont)

(cont) To get to attentiveness to sensuousness that's out from 'my' control, I imagine I need a good baseline ability to perceive actual sensations in every sense modality and everywhere in my body, and I have to make attentiveness to sensuousness a habit that's so ingrained that 'I' don't need to be involved in it for it to run.

To handle the first part, I'm going to work on actualizing sensations in the back of my body, so I have full-body perception of sense objects at a reasonable level of clarity, since right now, as I said, I have very little clarity there. This should help the snowball effect I mentioned before. NOTE TO SELF: do this symmetrically, or one side will feel ridiculous compared to the other (as is beginning to happen now). Also, I'll work on my legs, arms, and shoulders, which I've done a little work on so far but not much.

To handle the second part...HAIETMOBA as close to 24/7 as possible.

Last night I had a non-lucid dream in which I asked HAIETMOBA and meditated the whole way through. I imagine stuff like that is a sign that attentiveness to sensuousness is slowly becoming my default, at least if dreams like that (non-lucid but doing the practice anyway) keep happening regularly.

EDIT: It occurs to me that HAIETMOBA is just a gate to direct mode, which appears to be one of the most effective for me, because the technique (asking the question) never changes. Obvious-but-useful tip...you know what question you're going to ask before you get past "how...", so don't waste any time, and answer the question wordlessly even while you're still asking it.

Quick notes.

At least since I reported affective experience breaking up into infinitesimally tiny moments approx. a week ago, the type of feelings that manifest to me are very limited in range. They all seem to be variants of tension (dis-ease, restlessness, negative stomach feelings, pressure in the head, "physical" illness) or pleasure ("feeling good"). It's as if every other type of feeling gets broken up into its constituent pieces before it arises by the ultrafast noticing that has become my default state, and the constituent pieces of every type of feeling are a kind of generic dissatisfaction with things that differs mainly by valence. It sounds related in a way to what Kenneth seems to have in mind with his stage 6; gross emotions would be felt in the body, except that before the sensations glom into anything recognizable as a gross emotions (whether felt in the body or not), ultrafast noticing smashes them into pieces, and so they aren't felt in the body *as gross emotions*.

If I observe my body unmindfully, I get all sorts of pleasant affects from distorting the sensations of the body, but it's hard to say what particular affects they are because of this smashed-into-pieces quality.

It's nearly impossible to maintain any sort of interest in seeking out "smashed-into-pieces" feelings, because it seems so obviously pointless and unsatisfying, so I haven't been able to discern any fundamental attraction to that kind of experience. There is a preference for positive over negative (wrong escape from affect), so I do have a tendency to seek out positive instances of these feelings for that specific reason (to plaster over any tension that manifests). (cont)

(cont) Apart from that. I keep track of approximately how long it takes me to remember mindfulness when I wake up in the morning. On retreat, it was almost instantaneous, less than a second. Right now, it's perhaps 15 seconds. I'm trying to get the number down to 5 seconds or less. The only way seems to be to remember mindfulness as much as possible during the day so that it becomes the default thing-to-do, so I think it's a good index of commitment to the practice during waking life.

The major difficulty I'm struggling with is that I am so happy, and 'I' feel so damn good, that there's very little extrinsic motivation to practice. If I were born this way I might never have taken up meditation, as life is simply so good. I realize that so much of my dry insight practice worked because I would focus in a way that specifically generated all kinds of unpleasantness, and I used that unpleasantness to drive the unrelenting efforts that I made...it was a crutch, but an effective one. Now, I can't even do that if I wanted to. Nick is right, attentiveness to sensuousness has to be a lifestyle choice, has to be something that I recognize is preferable for its own sake (intrinsic motivation) in every single moment no matter what experience is like in that moment. I recognize explicitly that this is true, and suppose that to get to the point where practice is out-from-'my'-control I have to be implicitly convinced that it's true also.

I think making this transition is going to be the hardest thing for me, and will draw out the time until I find the peace that I want so much more than is necessary. I'd like to find time for another retreat, but I don't know if it's possible in terms of my life circumstances. If I had no responsibilities, I would go on retreat right now, and stay indefinitely.

I looked very closely at the moment after cessation and, lo and behold, there *is* something interesting going on there! This moment, "fruition," for one infinitesimally brief period of time, seems not to have any affective experience! It's too short for me to really get a grasp on what's going on there with respect to whether it's a PCE, but *something* is going on. The best description I can give is Bhante G's "soft-focused" moment (preceding affective experience).

I can't extend the experience beyond a brief moment.

I can call up a whole string of cessations, but this sheds no additional light; they don't build on each other.

The best use I can find for it is to look at a particular experience I'm having, call up the cessation, and observe which part is affective and which part is actual. This works OK. But as of now it seems pretty ineffective for anything other explicitly learning which is which. And that isn't good for much (it doesn't seem to make it any easier to get rid of the affective part, just by the bare fact of knowing which the affective part is).

This yogi tool seems like the kind of thing you get as a special gift after making some as-seen-on-TV infomercial purchase. It's supposed to be valuable, but I can't for the life of me figure out what to do with it.

Re-read Bhante G's discussion of fruition, and the claim that one experiences fruition at whatever level of rupa jhana that one attained the last path at (arupas being 4th jhana), and (in my reading) that one can only attain the fruition of one's last path. The dry insight worker, according to him, experiences fruition at the level of the 1st jhana.

Calling up strings of cessations, I have no idea what jhana level my fruition is at. I notice no piti; I notice no more sukha than is present during normal life. So, is that 4th jhana? That would be surprising, as I hardly ever have been practicing jhana during any major shift I experience and would not imagine I was in 4th jhana at any of those times. On the other hand, very mild jhanic perspectives are arising all the time for me, and (I realize now) have always been arising all the time for me. So it's possible these "mild" perspectives count as jhana nonetheless.

(The equanimity nana in particular is obviously a form of the 4th jhana, and with high concentration is self-evidently a jhana. The DN, with my default level of concentration since about a week or so ago, has always been manifesting as the 3rd jhana [it's surprising how pleasant that state can be, albeit much of it is affective happiness]. As I said before, certain ways of looking at objects correspond to the arupas for me. I found that a kind of dazed "doing nothing, thinking nothing, not attending" corresponds to signlessness, which happens quite a lot when I'm not paying close attention, and surprisingly, often right before a shift.)

If true, this leads to the question of what it truly means to be a "dry insight worker". Someone quickly recognizing the truth of "in the seeing just the seen, in the hearing just the heard, in the thinking just the thought?" I can't really imagine. Not going to pursue the question, though. (cont)

(cont) I stayed up late last night to meditate, and before bed I ran through all the things I had to do over the next few days for work. There are a lot, and many are difficult / time-consuming / requiring precision. I noticed a lot of sensations corresponding to worry and overwhelmed-ness, but hardly any feeling of it. As sensations are always unproblematic, I was perplexed at how I could worry without feeling almost any negativity.

I'm not really a morning person. This morning I woke up and noticed a lot of sensations corresponding to tiredness, dislike for being awake, and inertia, but hardly any feeling of them. Again, almost no negativity whatsoever.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this psychologically and adapt to this new, better way of going through life.

I'm profoundly grateful to everyone I've spoken to or worked with or debated with in any capacity related to the dharma, because it has transformed my life in such a wonderful way. Kenneth, Nick, Chris, Alex, Adam, Ron, Antero, Orasis, and many others. Every time I recognize a way that it's transformed me, I'm amazed anew. Many thanks.

What is gratitude? Some kind of sensations, plus a feeling in my chest. How strange!