Sage

[Sage]

Hi Elad

Please look more at the "point" or "place" where the full visual experience is "received". This full visual experience includes the colors and shapes we would conventionally call "what is visible of my body and face". Now really look - can you actually find anyone or any place that recieves this total experience? Or it just IS?

It simply is.
When I observe carefully, I realize that what receives the entire visual experience doesn't appear as a defined "someone" or "place" in my field of vision. Yet, at the same time, there remains a subtle sense that something is receiving all this, as if there were an implicit, invisible presence.

Right. And are sensations "you"? Or are they just what they are, sensations?

What I experience are primarily sensations.
The sense of "I" comes later, like a recognition or definition that overlaps with experience.
Thus, I experience a double level: on the one hand, there are only sensations; on the other, there is the implicit sense of "me" that the mind adds. The "me" is not something separate from sensations, but a way in which they are interpreted and experienced.

Please look closer at this. Sit with attention. Notice when and how it moves. Every time it happens look, if there is actually a "you" that makes it happen, or if it just happens.

Sit still for 15 min minimum, or longer if it feels sustainable to you, and look at this. Let me know what is seen.

Attention moves on its own. Sometimes it seems to follow a thought, and in those moments I have the feeling that the thought is my expression, something emerging from me. Yet, looking more closely, I realize that I have no real choice about the thought: it arrives, it manifests, and attention follows it spontaneously. There is no real control over what emerges in the mind; I believe that what I feel as "mine" is the attention moving with the thought, but the origin of the thought itself does not depend on me.

Right so this "sense of self" is based on inference, not direct experience. In conventional life we have a sense of self that helps function normally in relationships, planning and so forth. This is the "inferred conventional sense of self". We are not looking to make it go away. It will not. We are just looking to make it absolute clear, that there is no real self in control of anything inside the conventional sense of self. That conventional sense of self is just a pragmatic idea within the whole, functioning on its own like other ideas and like the wind. These words will become clearer later, if not clear now.

Thanks for the explanation, I understand what you're saying even if I don't live from this point of view

[Elad]

Hi Sage,

Please look more at the "point" or "place" where the full visual experience is "received". This full visual experience includes the colors and shapes we would conventionally call "what is visible of my body and face". Now really look - can you actually find anyone or any place that recieves this total experience? Or it just IS?

It simply is.
When I observe carefully, I realize that what receives the entire visual experience doesn't appear as a defined "someone" or "place" in my field of vision. Yet, at the same time, there remains a subtle sense that something is receiving all this, as if there were an implicit, invisible presence.

What you call this subtle sense, an invisible implicit presence, is just a belief. If you really really believed a blue unicorn was behind you right now, and in a moment it might bump into you, you would also "feel" that. It is crucial to see that this is pure belief, backed by nothing.

Right. And are sensations "you"? Or are they just what they are, sensations?

What I experience are primarily sensations.
The sense of "I" comes later, like a recognition or definition that overlaps with experience.
Thus, I experience a double level: on the one hand, there are only sensations; on the other, there is the implicit sense of "me" that the mind adds. The "me" is not something separate from sensations, but a way in which they are interpreted and experienced.

Exactly, just a belief. Not "your" belief. A strong belief. A habitual pattern. Which "you" cannot change. It's just that when it is seen with sufficient clarity and no expectations of something special getting in the way of accepting reality, then reality is accepted.

Please look closer at this. Sit with attention. Notice when and how it moves. Every time it happens look, if there is actually a "you" that makes it happen, or if it just happens.

Sit still for 15 min minimum, or longer if it feels sustainable to you, and look at this. Let me know what is seen.

Attention moves on its own. Sometimes it seems to follow a thought, and in those moments I have the feeling that the thought is my expression, something emerging from me. Yet, looking more closely, I realize that I have no real choice about the thought: it arrives, it manifests, and attention follows it spontaneously. There is no real control over what emerges in the mind; I believe that what I feel as "mine" is the attention moving with the thought, but the origin of the thought itself does not depend on me.

Exactly, quite clear.

Right so this "sense of self" is based on inference, not direct experience. In conventional life we have a sense of self that helps function normally in relationships, planning and so forth. This is the "inferred conventional sense of self". We are not looking to make it go away. It will not. We are just looking to make it absolute clear, that there is no real self in control of anything inside the conventional sense of self. That conventional sense of self is just a pragmatic idea within the whole, functioning on its own like other ideas and like the wind. These words will become clearer later, if not clear now.

Thanks for the explanation, I understand what you're saying even if I don't live from this point of view

Good. Now look:

What is it that doesn't live from this point of view? Can it be found? Or just an habitual belief refering to nothing?

Don't go for memories about how "your experience" is. That just recreates the pattern. Look NOW.


Also:

Write me your expectations of how it will be and what will change when it is realized that self is a fiction?

Expectations often get in the way, even when clarity is largely there. So the more you get ALL the expectations out in the open, the better.

[Sage]

Hi Elad,

What you call this subtle sense, an invisible implicit presence, is just a belief. If you really really believed a blue unicorn was behind you right now, and in a moment it might bump into you, you would also "feel" that. It is crucial to see that this is pure belief, backed by nothing.

Without thoughts, there is the body and perception.
These are immediately present.
At the same time, there is a recognition, an immediate and automatic superimposition that labels them as "me."
The difficulty lies in the fact that the body and perception are immediately called "me," without any verification, and even now that I see it and am telling you, it remains unchanged.

Exactly, just a belief. Not "your" belief. A strong belief. A habitual pattern. Which "you" cannot change. It's just that when it is seen with sufficient clarity and no expectations of something special getting in the way of accepting reality, then reality is accepted.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't see it clearly enough right now.
The sense of "me" continues to arise along with the sensations, and I still can't recognize it as a simple belief.

What is it that doesn't live from this point of view? Can it be found? Or just an habitual belief refering to nothing?

It's mental content; it can't be found outside of thought. Yet I still find it real. And I see that this last statement is also "just" a thought, but... the fact is that it's not yet "just" a thought. I don't know if I made myself clear..

Write me your expectations of how it will be and what will change when it is realized that self is a fiction?

Recognizing the self as a fiction should produce a distinct shift in perception. I expect it to be a clear, obvious, unmistakable transition, something that is "seen" without any doubt, like sunlight.
This shift is also expected to be recognizable as a specific event: before the self, after the non-self.
I expect to no longer take things "personally"
Perhaps I also expect to no longer experience life from the perspective of a center that suffers it, and to gain clarity about how things really are, about who I really am, and—even more painfully—about the responsibility for my mistakes (which I know are not my mistakes, since what happened, what is happening, and what will happen is simply an unfolding of events over which I had no choice—but despite this, the pain of my mistakes remains strong).
Also: Feeling a sense of unity with all things, feeling that only the present exists and that the past and future do not exist, feeling that everything is fine as it is without the need to change anything.

At the same time, I notice difficulty identifying ALL the expectations present. I sense there are others, probably absorbed from things I've read over time, but I'm unable to clearly distinguish them.

[Elad]

Hey Sage,

I am a little sick so short answer here.

1) Re expectations, it would be best you let go of all those, expect that seeing of self as illusion will feel clear as the sun on a cloudless sky. I am not saying your expectations are wrong or right, I am saying these are fantasies for you, and holding on to them just distracts and deters. So focus only on the truth in "your" direct experience.

2) This is simpler then "you" make it. This cannot be figured out, and it is not like "you" anticipate, in fact refined thinking about this can get in the way.

3) Here is an exercise for you:

Listen to the first 3 (out of 10) Enligthening Quotes videos. As you listen don't try to understand, don't try to get it, don't make it about agreeing or disagreeing, or getting it or not getting it. Instead just notice all the reactions that happens while you listen, and notice their spontaneous unchosen nature. You don't need to get anything, you cannot do this right, and also you cannot do this wrong. Whatever happens and is experienced, by itself, is "the way". Write me what is experienced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2UnnOb ... MJ4LRs2Yds_

[Elad]

expect => except

[Sage]

Hi Elad, I'm sorry you're feeling unwell. I wish you a speedy recovery!
As for expectations, that's fine. I'll do my best!
As for the video, unfortunately, I don't understand English; I'm using the translator.
Something written would be perfect.
When you're better and whenever you can, there's no rush.
Thanks 😊

[Elad]

Thank you!

Okay, another path for you then :)

Take periods aside where you attend to what is actually here, what is "awakening-proces" now, and what is imagination? Write it down. Pay close attention if what you write directly describe what is experienced or covers it with habitual thoughts. Don't jump quickly to a conclusion that all description cover, some descriptions can feel more alive and descriptive then others. So pay close attention. Share with me how it goes.

[Sage]

Thanks :)
Here's the first part:
If this is okay and it's what you asked for, I'll continue with other moments of the day tomorrow.

I am sitting at the kitchen table, and right now what is really here is:

What is experienced ⇒ Sounds
Thoughts about the sounds ⇒ the stove, the clock, my fingers typing on my phone, traffic outside, the dog’s approaching steps.

What is experienced ⇒ Sensations
Thoughts about the sensations ⇒ physical (warmth, fingers on the phone, sitting on the chair, hand touching the head).

What is experienced ⇒ Thought
Thoughts about the thoughts ⇒ thoughts that arise on their own, even though there remains the sensation of having ownership of them.

What is experienced ⇒ Images / colours
Thoughts about the images / colours ⇒ the kitchen, the view outside the window, the dog, my visible body.
.
What is the “awakening process”:
What is experienced ⇒ thoughts
Thoughts about the thoughts ⇒ a very believable and fascinating story.

What is imagination?
Thought.

[Sage]

What I notice:
Perceptions come first and have no name or identity. Then comes thought, which labels everything.
Sometimes I notice that it all seems to be stories of thought; this awareness appears for a moment, but then identification with thought returns and I can no longer see it clearly.

[Elad]

What I notice:
Perceptions come first and have no name or identity. Then comes thought, which labels everything.
Sometimes I notice that it all seems to be stories of thought; this awareness appears for a moment, but then identification with thought returns and I can no longer see it clearly.

Good start.

1) Do this exercise some more and report back.

2) When the thought "I cannot see it clearly" comes, look into: What/where is this I that cannot see it clearly? How exactly is this I experienced?

[Sage]

Hi Elad, sorry for the delay

) Do this exercise some more and report back.

Walking down the street right now, what's really here is:
What is experienced ⇒ Sounds
Thoughts about sounds ⇒ cars passing by, the wind, distant voices, footsteps on the sidewalk, a bird singing.
What is experienced ⇒ Sensations
Thoughts about sensations ⇒ feet touching the ground, the movement of the legs, air on the skin, breath coming in and out, the weight of the body as one walks.
What is experienced ⇒ Thoughts
Thoughts about thoughts ⇒ thoughts that arise spontaneously, comments about where I'm going or what I see, still feeling like they're "mine."
What is experienced ⇒ Images/colors
Thoughts about images/colors ⇒ trees, sky, buildings, people passing by, colors and shapes in motion.

The observations for this exercise are the same as the other one I did; it's quite clear that what's really present is only direct experience: sounds, sensations, images, and thoughts.
I notice that sounds are simply heard, while labels like "machines," "wind," and "voices" come later, as thoughts about sounds. The same goes for sensations: there's the contact of the feet with the ground, the movement, the breathing, and then the thought that describes them.
I also see the thoughts themselves as an experience that arises on its own, like sounds and sensations. They appear unbidden and uncontrolled. Yet the feeling that these thoughts are "mine" is still present, even if, observing them, I can't find an author who produces them.
Images and colors are simply seen; "trees," "people," and "buildings" are labels that emerge as thoughts about what I see.
However, I must make an effort to "separate" the perception from its label.

When the thought "I cannot see it clearly" comes, look into: What/where is this I that cannot see it clearly? How exactly is this I experienced?

Clearly, this "I" appears as the object of a thought and is perceived as very real.
Although, when I look into direct experience, I can't find it anywhere.
There is a strong sense of reality attached to this idea of ​​"me," but that reality seems to come only from the thought that affirms it, not from anything directly seen, touched, or felt.
I may say it is "just mental content," but that remains a logical conclusion.
There is no vivid recognition, no taste, no experiential evidence that clearly says "it doesn't exist."
What is really there is:
– the thought that speaks of an "I"
– the sense that that thought is true
– but no direct experience of a separate entity
So a discrepancy remains:
logically it seems not to exist,
but experientially the sense of reality of the "I" is still present.

[Elad]

"no experiential evidence that clearly says "it doesn't exist.""

What would be a more clear experiential evidence then repeatedly not finding?

What is the experiential evidence that there is no unicorn always right behind your back?

Isn't the experiential evidence the same for both, i.e. not findning? Only difference is that one of the beliefs, there is a lot conditioning maintaining against all experiential evidence?

You seem to conflate "experiential evidence" with "it really feels that way". The later is not "evidence". It is belief. All kinds of bullshit can "feel very real". It doesn't mean it has "experiential evidence".

---------

Continue to this exercise:

Introductory Body Exercise

Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:
Can it be known how tall the body is?
Does the body have a weight or volume?
In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?
Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing? Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?
Is there an inside or an outside?
If there is an inside - the inside of what exactly?
If there is an outside - the outside of what exactly?
What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?
Look very carefully, especially with the last question. Take your time, don’t rush. You can look several times during the day while doing other things (like washing hands, showering, having a short break from work, walking, etc) before replying.

[Elad]

You also seem to conflate "seeing clear evidence/seeing clearly what is there and what isn't without having a sense of emotional affirmation" with "only intellectual".

That is not the same. Intellectual means based on thought and speculation, not based in direct experience.

It would be like saying I have only an intellectual experience og gravity, if we don't have some strong experience that "wow gravity is there". No, when we repeatedly can see how gravity functions, even if we have no "wow" experience and maybe our head keeps repeating the story "but I am not truly experiencing gravity", the reality is still that we are already experiencing gravity, not just intellectualy.

You already have direct experience every time you look, not just intellectual The only thing that is still missing is that trust is being given more to the story about how it feels than to what is already experienced with every moment of attending.

--------

In any case, there is no you who can effort this to change. Just keep seeing. Including keep seeing all the thoughts that argue for and believe in "I am not seeing it". Sooner or later trust will shift from what you are thinking to what you are already experiencing. In its own time.

[Elad]

Another pointer:

This process is essentially about seeing beliefs as just beliefs, and most importantly, with the ones that are held onto strongly.

For you the stickly beliefs that are held onto strongly right now, seem to be the beliefs in what you see/don't see, how it is for you.

They are not properly questioned. See if it is possible to allow the humbleness and openness of: I don't know what I really see, what I really don't see, I don't know what is missing or not, maybe my belief that I know is the last sticking point.

Just see beliefs as beliefs. Again and again. Without drama. Without any fireworks. With genuine humbleness, curiosity and openess. And see what happens.

[Sage]

Yes, actually, I'm now realizing that when I look, I almost immediately check whether what I see corresponds to my idea of ​​how it should be or how I should feel.
This comparison is very automatic and often takes over, and from there comes the thought that it's not the right thing or that something is missing. (Comments like this still come in.)
But if I just look without adding anything else, there's always experience: perceptions, sensations, thoughts that appear. Doubt and the confrontation with the idea are also things I see.
There's no particular clarity or sense of change.
I'm especially noticing this mechanism of continuous verification and how much I trust my beliefs about how the experience should be... and i don't know how to stop to do it, in some way is like i can't be openfull to experience

Introductory Body Exercise

Sit with eyes closed for about 15 minutes.
Paying attention only to the pure sensations, without relying on thoughts or mental images:
Can it be known how tall the body is?

No

Does the body have a weight or volume?

no. there are neutral sensations labeled as weight and volume

In the actual experience does the body have a shape or a form?

No

Is there a boundary between the body and the clothing? Is there a boundary between the body and the chair?

No and no

Is there an inside or an outside?

No

What does the word/label ‘body’ ACTUALLY refer to? What is the ACTUAL experience of the body?

The real experience of the body is made up of sensations and colors. This is very, very clear. Nevertheless (and I see I'm repeating my problem with comparison) I can't experience the body as an "illusion" (as I've often read written by people who have seen it) because the body remains an extremely real object for me, whole as it is.
So the feeling of "something's missing, I didn't do it right" remains.