Thanks

[poppyseed]

Hi Bill

Please suggest an alternate reason for perceptions.

Let me remind you that I’m not here to give you answers but just to point where you can see for yourself. Any explanation that I give you will be the next belief you discard or accept. So let me ask you…Why should there be a reason for perceptions? Wouldn't that be just another thought about the senses?

What makes you 100 % sure in your assumption if you have to rely ONLY on the 5 senses?

I'm not at all sure. And I'd like very much to understand what you mean.

Well, do you have anything else BUT the 5 senses and thinking? So whatever is not in the first 5 is a thought ABOUT the first five. Is this thought 100% true? Or is it a conditioned way of describing the experience of the senses?

Where is the image of the object, is it inside or outside of you?

It arises from neuronal circuitry. That's undeniable.

Do you see this in your actual direct experience? Do you see these neurones firing? Or is this “knowledge”/thoughts about the mechanism of seeing? Do you see how seeing happens or it just happens?

Do you see flux in everything.

Look at your screen right now. Is that screen separate somehow of seeing? Is it outside of seeing? Are there many objects (colours) or just colour (flux) without thought content? What defines the border where one colour ends and the other starts? Could you show from where you are looking at it, and what is there? Is there a "you" in that direction? What do you see?

So which one of the following describes best DE:
1. I am seeing colour
2. seeing colour
3. seeing

No, what I've always called "I" simply can't be found. It's one of the many ways I've always had the wool pulled over my eyes. But it's persistent. How can I pound the truth more deeply into my head?

That sounds a bit like an oxymoron – there is no “you”, but “you" "can pound the truth more deeply into your head”. We’ll inquire into the nature of thoughts once you are crystal clear about DE and labels related to it...here's an exercise that you can try as many times throughout the day as you can. Label daily activities, objects and emotions simply as colour/image, sound, smell, taste, sensation, thought as per the apple example.
For example, when having coffee in the morning, become aware of:
Seeing a cup, simply= colour (seeing)
Smelling coffee, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling the warmth of the coffee cup, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting the coffee, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the spoon stirring the coffee, simply = sound (hearing)
Thought about drinking the coffee, simply = thought (thinking)

Break down daily activities into these categories (which are all Actual/Direct Experience) and report back with lists EXACTLY like the one above. Please write a few examples from your daily life.
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

Thank you so much, Rali. It's so kind of you to volunteer your time sharing your insights with others like me. I feel quite fortunate finally to have someone whom I can ask questions about things I've been thinking about for years.

So which one of the following describes best DE:
1. I am seeing colour
2. seeing colour
3. seeing

Number 3 is most correct. Seeing color takes a bit of thought. And of course, there's no seer involved.

Well, do you have anything else BUT the 5 senses and thinking? So whatever is not in the first 5 is a thought ABOUT the first five. Is this thought 100% true? Or is it a conditioned way of describing the experience of the senses?

Look at your screen right now. Is that screen separate somehow of seeing? Is it outside of seeing? Are there many objects (colours) or just colour (flux) without thought content? What defines the border where one colour ends and the other starts? Could you show from where you are looking at it, and what is there? Is there a "you" in that direction? What do you see?

Wow. Such insight. It will certainly take me some time to digest this. Thanks so much.

here's an exercise that you can try as many times throughout the day as you can.

A worthwhile exercise. Thanks so much, Rali.

Bill

[daytonabill]

Break down daily activities into these categories (which are all Actual/Direct Experience) and report back with lists EXACTLY like the one above. Please write a few examples from your daily life.

Making Breakfast
Seeing the frying pan, simply = color (seeing)
Smelling eggs cooking, simply = smell (smelling)
Hearing the sizzle of butter in the pan, simply = sound (hearing)
Feeling the warmth of the stove, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting the eggs, simply = taste (tasting)
Thinking about what to cook next, simply = thought (thinking)

Taking a Shower
Seeing water droplets on the glass, simply = color (seeing)
Smelling shampoo, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling warm water on skin, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting a drop of water by accident, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the water splashing, simply = sound (hearing)
Thinking about the day ahead, simply = thought (thinking)

Walking the Dog
Seeing the leash, simply = color (seeing)
Smelling fresh air outside, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling the leash in hand, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting a sip of water before leaving, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the dog panting, simply = sound (hearing)
Thinking about where to walk, simply = thought (thinking)

Driving to Work
Seeing traffic lights, simply = color (seeing)
Smelling the car’s air freshener, simply = smell (smelling)
Feeling the steering wheel, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting coffee while driving, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the engine hum, simply = sound (hearing)
Thinking about work meetings, simply = thought (thinking)

[poppyseed]

Hi Bill

Feeling the leash in hand, simply = sensation (feeling)
Tasting a sip of water before leaving, simply = taste (tasting)
Hearing the dog panting, simply = sound (hearing)
Thinking about where to walk, simply = thought (thinking)

Thank you for doing such wonderful looking! :) It is now to incorporate that looking into your everyday….make it a habit.

How does it feel to see what actually is?

Please give me a single example with each of your replies to keep the looking going throughout the day. Of course, it should be an observation and not imagination.

Please answer all questions in blue. If you see a “?” or any "?", you answer it by looking first. Which leads me to – please don’t answer in bulk. The questions are pointers where to look and each one of them shows a slightly different side. Answering in bulk is a story – a summary. We are not interested in stories but an impact, and only looking can achieve that. Does that make sense?

Looking forward to the rest of your answers…
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

It is now to incorporate that looking into your everyday….make it a habit.

How does it feel to see what actually is?

It's eye opening, and feels much deeper and inclusive than usual. Most often, I'm lost in thought.

Does that make sense?

Yes, certainly. Thank you, Rali

[poppyseed]

Hey Bill

I'm still waiting for the answers of all in my questions from my reply from Feb the 5th... :)
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

Thanks so much for your help, Rali. You taught me a bit. :)

Bill

[poppyseed]

Hey Bill
Are we still doing the inquiry?

Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

Are we still doing the inquiry?

LOL. Thanks for checking, Rali. No, not if answering all of your questions is a requirement. But thanks for the help you've given me so far! :)

Bill

[poppyseed]

Hi Bill

LOL. Thanks for checking, Rali. No, not if answering all of your questions is a requirement. But thanks for the help you've given me so far! :)

If it is the the volume of the questions, I can try and reduce them a lot, but if it is the content of questions that you are resisting, this inquiry will be very difficult. That's why we ask in the beginning how willing you are to challenge your beliefs. If your beliefs were worth keeping, you wouldn't have been here, right? You can ask yourself, what are these beliefs protecting??

Please let me know!
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

right? You can ask yourself, what are these beliefs protecting??

Indeed, yes. I endeavor to discard all of my beliefs, no matter how seemingly justified. So you're quite right, then, to recognize my beliefs and challenge them. If you're still interested, then, in proceeding with the project (and thank you so much, Rali!) then please, let's continue.

Why should there be a reason for perceptions? Wouldn't that be just another thought about the senses?

Just my belief, was all. But as such, it's to be discarded without question. Thank you, Rali.

Do you see this in your actual direct experience? Do you see these neurones firing? Or is this “knowledge”/thoughts about the mechanism of seeing? Do you see how seeing happens or it just happens?

Another belief requiring dismissal. I want to learn and I'm not going to let *any* beliefs get in the way.

I think those were the only two questions I ducked, right?

You're awesome, Rali, thanks so much. :)

Bill

[poppyseed]

Hi Bill
I’m really happy you changed your mind! I appreciate your willingness to see through all beliefs :)
With that out of the way, let's explore thinking, where most of indentification happens...
For the next exercise I want you to sit somewhere quiet and observe thoughts.
A thought appears.
In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?
Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?
Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear? Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?
Where do thoughts appear from? Where are they coming from and going to? Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

Are thoughts 100% true?
What are you, when you don't think about what you are?
Please answer all questions individually as each answer gives me an idea of what is SEEN. As usual honesty is vital, there are no medals at the end ;)
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

I’m really happy you changed your mind! I appreciate your willingness to see through all beliefs :)

You’re so very sweet, Rali, thanks so much. 😊

In that moment is there anyone or anything which recognises the thought or is being aware of it?

I want to say that I’m aware of it. Or, removing myself, that there’s an awareness of the thought. But can awareness exist without an object? A Google search for “is naked awareness possible” reveals affirmative answers, mostly from Buddhist sites, but I’m skeptical. I can’t see how it’s possible.

Can you see anything that is separate from the thought and does the thinking?

Nothing at all, no. But the thought exists. I’d have to read about what it is.

Did you do anything to make a particular thought or thoughts appear?

No, they just appear. You can’t will them away either. But they quickly leave if you don’t feed them.

Could you have done anything to make a different thought appear at that exact moment instead?

Yes, I can consciously decide to think about a certain subject, or you can ask me to think of something specific.

Where do thoughts appear from?

Nowhere that I can immediately perceive. But they must arise from somewhere or something. Refer to Kurzban “Why Everyone (else) is a Hypocrite” and Wright “Why Buddhism is True”.

Where are they coming from and going to?

They just poof in and out of existence. There’s no directionality.

Do they appear randomly or in a structured way? Watch like a hawk.

They’re quite random. At least it seems that way to me. But again, re Kurzban and Wright. I mean, they usually appear to be random. But if I’m in the woods and see a bear, I’ll be thinking about that bear, for obvious reasons. In cases like that, they wouldn’t even appear to be random. And there are probably similar triggers for all thoughts, although we’re not aware of them.

Are thoughts 100% true?

Of course not. Our thoughts are what keep us in our dreamworlds. Even when we think of something that seems to be true, it’s always worthwhile to regard it with some suspicion.

What are you, when you don't think about what you are?

What I call “me” is a label given to a collection of things. As such, it doesn’t exist when nobody is thinking about it.

[poppyseed]

Hi Bill

I appreciate your honesty, but how about sticking to just observations. There is a LOT of information out there, but is that truly your experience? How would you ever know if you don’t see for yourself? It will just be more beliefs added to the existing already or replacing the old ones… Let’s agree to leave all “sources” behind – science, religion, philosophy, teachings, etc. These are someone else’s beliefs, narration that you are trying to fit within your experience. The only way is to see for yourself,how it is right now. If you can’t, you cannot describe it in your own words (but you can attempt to describe it using someone else’s words, the way you did). It is only this simple LOOKING (not thinking) that can bring a shift in perception. There are no right or wrong answers, only what rings true at the moment… Do we have an agreement? Use your own words to desribe what is SEEN, and when you start struggling for words maybe we'll be getting somewhere, as no description is true ;)

I want to say that I’m aware of it. Or, removing myself, that there’s an awareness of the thought. But can awareness exist without an object? A Google search for “is naked awareness possible” reveals affirmative answers, mostly from Buddhist sites, but I’m skeptical. I can’t see how it’s possible.

Good inquiry.
Can awareness exist without an object? Or does there always need to be something to be aware of?
Right now, instead of thinking about it, try this:
Turn attention backward—not toward any object, but toward the “awareness” itself.
Does awareness itself have a shape, a location, or a boundary? Is it an entity?
Look directly. What do you find? Can the “awareness” be separated/isolated from the thought?

Nowhere that I can immediately perceive. But they must arise from somewhere or something. Refer to Kurzban “Why Everyone (else) is a Hypocrite” and Wright “Why Buddhism is True”.

Yes—thoughts appear, but from where?
If you watch closely, do you see a source, or do they just arise on their own?
If a thought is not chosen, not controlled, and simply appears—who/what is the thinker?
Look now, directly, for yourself—before the next thought arises, where will it come from?

Yes, I can consciously decide to think about a certain subject, or you can ask me to think of something specific.

Yes, you can decide to think about something specific.
But look closer—where does the decision itself come from? Or was it just another thought suggesting that?
Did you create the urge to think about a subject, or did the urge simply arise on its own, followed by a thought of “I decided”?
Try this: before your next thought, watch carefully. Can you predict what it will be? Can you control its exact form before it appears?
Who, or what, is actually in charge?
If you write down a sequence of 5 thoughts in the order that they appear, even if they are “on the same subject”:
Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

Enjoy! :)
Love
Rali

[daytonabill]

but how about sticking to just observations. There is a LOT of information out there, but is that truly your experience? How would you ever know if you don’t see for yourself?

Yes, the only other way to "know" is to read what someone else says about it. But that isn't my experience, you're right.

The only way is to see for yourself,how it is right now. If you can’t, you cannot describe it in your own words (but you can attempt to describe it using someone else’s words, the way you did). It is only this simple LOOKING (not thinking) that can bring a shift in perception. There are no right or wrong answers, only what rings true at the moment… Do we have an agreement?

Yes, certainly.

Can awareness exist without an object? Or does there always need to be something to be aware of?

No, not from anything I can see. Naked awareness appears to be just a nonexistent ghost that ppl want to believe in.

Does awareness itself have a shape, a location, or a boundary? Is it an entity?

Or does it even exist without an object. Right, it's hardly an entity. Nothing I can sense in any way.

Look directly. What do you find? Can the “awareness” be separated/isolated from the thought?

No, not from what I can tell.

Yes—thoughts appear, but from where?
If you watch closely, do you see a source, or do they just arise on their own?

Thoughts just bubble up randomly, apparently from nowhere. That's my experience.

If a thought is not chosen, not controlled, and simply appears—who/what is the thinker?

There's no thinker. Descartes, brilliant though he was, somehow couldn't see that he assumed his conclusion in his premise.

Look now, directly, for yourself—before the next thought arises, where will it come from?

Heh, it will just arise from nowhere discernible.

But look closer—where does the decision itself come from? Or was it just another thought suggesting that?
Did you create the urge to think about a subject, or did the urge simply arise on its own, followed by a thought of “I decided”?

Exactly. The decision to think about something is just another thought, so it doesn't count. But if you ask me to think of something specific, then my next thought will be predictable.

Can you predict what it will be? Can you control its exact form before it appears?
Who, or what, is actually in charge?

No. No. Apparently there's nobody "in charge".

Could you predict the order of their appearance?
Did you know which will be the second or the fourth?

Of course not.