Knock Knock

This is a read-only part of the forum. All threads where seeing happens are stored here and come from this forum, the Facebook guiding area and various LU blogs. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.
User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:44 am

LU is focused guiding for seeing there is no real, inherent 'self' - what do you understand by this?
I understand that its about seeing clearly that there is no an "I" inside the body driving the thought processes or actions, that its all just happening by itself. An experiential understanding, not an intelectual one.

What are you looking for at LU?
Im looking for clarity about the subject matter. I kind of "understand" intelectually but looking for making it a living reallity. Looking maybe for some sort of definitive or doubtless clarity about what i am... or am not... Its like since some questions were posed here.... they wont go till they have a conclusion. If there isnt an I living this life, well, "i" thinks thats kind of a big deal that needs to be clarified in this lifetime, dont know if will have another hehehehe and if its really like that.... like a crazy joke that is going on.... i am looking for a guided conversation that helps me look behind that joke heheh

What do you expect from a guided conversation?
I expect some questions that can make me keep my focus on this investigation.
A guide who be patient with my sticky points and at the same time confronts when its needed.
So maybe its funny, maybe its hard, maybe awfull dont know, just want to give it a try, kind of feel its the time of doing this.
I think that being honest, my whole search is driven by the notion that "im not sufficient" and at the time its driven by that notion its like an intent to get rid of that, get rid of that pattern. So if Im honest I expect that "shadow" of not being enough, of being uncomplete, stops following me whatever i do. I want to get rid of the notion Im a tiny an incomplete "someone".

Okay, I took the space to clarify here, Im not an enlish speaker, so i read it perfectly, write it maybe not that perfect (you tell me) but thats the reason my writting may be strange, hope that be okay, want to do the guidance in english

What is your experience in terms of spiritual practices, seeking and inquiry?
Oker, so ive been seeking a while now, maybe 4 or 5 years, practices all kind of meditation, if i have to be honest, never "acomplished" a damn thing, not big experiences whatsoever, but few years ago i suddenly had this urgency to "find enlightenment" and pop, i became a seeker and read lots, lots of books, went to some retrats, started practicing yoga. Yeah, "personality" has changed, and "interests" now are different, but fundamentally its like my relationship to the world its the same. Couple of times in this seeking i kind of "stopped" to see who the fuck was doing this searching (as i was adviced to do by some instructions) and that kind of shaked my psyque for a time, and then again this habit of seeking.
Think getting out of the point, practiced zen meditation couple of years, gurdjieff group a year or so- A year or so ago, i stoped most of this activity, and in terms of spiritual practice what remain is just sit down and shut up everyday, without structure, some books here and there, and the most lovely activity i found.... just walking and observing... Tried with the advaita approach of self inquiry asking "who am i", but its like if my seeking was about collecting and finding methods and never actually, ACTUALLY apply them, like allways "trying to" (meditate, inquiry, etc), but with an akward sensation of "the thay i can succed with this, THEN... something will be seen"
So thats the story here, or part of it...

On a scale from 1 to 10, how willing are you to question any currently held beliefs about 'self?
10

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:43 am

Hi Julian,

My name is Kay, and I am happy to assist you in exploring the illusion of the separate inherent self. I can only point the way but you have to see it for yourself. That is why we are described as guides and not teachers. This exploration is not about discovering what you are. It is about challenging concepts and beliefs so as to see and realise what you are not.

If you haven't already read the disclaimer, please read it now. Here is the link.

http://liberationunleashed.com/disclaimer-2/

Also please read “Liberation Unleashed is not …” in the FAQ’s of LU. Here is the link.

http://liberationunleashed.com/about/faq/#faq-1041

Please learn to use the quote function. When replying to a question, please use the quote function to highlight the question being answered. Instructions are located in the link below:

http://liberationunleashed.com/nation/v ... ?f=4&t=660

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fAToDNh9hQ&app=desktop

Just let me know that you have read the disclaimer and the other above links and we can then get this party started! :)

Love, Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:57 pm

Hi Kay!

Okay, I have read the links you send, lets try the quote function.
I can only point the way but you have to see it for yourself. That is why we are described as guides and not teachers.
Okay, got it.

So, let´s play

:)

Big hug, Julian

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:43 pm

Hey Julian!

Thank you for reading the link and using the quote function.

Some housekeeping guidelines:-
1. Post at least once a day or every second day. If you cannot post, or need more time, let me know.

2. There is no one judging answers given, so please be100% honest in your answers and inquiry.

3. ANSWER ONLY FROM ACTUAL EXPERIENCE (smell, taste, sound, sensation, colour and observed thoughts). Long-winded analytical and philosophical answers are best avoided and may even hinder progress. This is not a self-improvement process.

4. Put aside all other teachings, philosophies, rituals, practices, books/reading and so on for the remainder of this investigation. Really put all your effort and attention in to seeing this reality, as it is. If you have a daily and essential meditation practice, it is fine to continue that.

This exploration is based on questions and exercises. I will ask questions as a means of pointing, but the questions aren’t about finding something unknown. The questions refer to what is already actually known. And what is already known? Sound, smell, taste, thought, sensation and colour. So, questions are not answered through thinking/thoughts (theories) but by LOOKING. The key is that you really have to LOOK. Why? Because it’s the act of actually LOOKING and not finding an “I” that brings about the realisation of there being no separate self.

What is LOOKING? ‘LOOKING’ is just plain looking at what is here right now. It is moving from the conceptual to actual experience (AE). The term “Actual Experience” (AE) is used to refer to your current experience ‘right now,’ without the thought stories. So, actual experience (AE) is image/colour, sound, smell, sensation, taste and the simple knowing of thought at face value. What thought says ie, the content of thought in and of itself does not contain any experience. This is evidenced by the fact that you cannot taste the word 'sweet'. So, when looking at actual experience (AE), you are looking at raw experience WITHOUT what thought says ABOUT the raw experience.

To begin with, I would just like to know what your expectations are from having this exploration. So, in your own words (not from actual experience, but just honest answers about what expectations you have) could you please answer the 3 following questions:

How will life change?
How will you change?
What will be different?


Throughout this exploration I would like you to answer all questions that I have written in blue text. Please answer them individually, remembering to use the quote function to highlight the question being answered.

Love, Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:33 pm

Hi Kay,

Thank you for the guidelines, I will stick to them.

So, the questions regarding expectations,

How will life change?
Well, don´t think events going on in this life will change, I mean, they will, they allways change, but not as a result of seeing clearly the absence of "me". Probably the relationship to what´s happening will change, maybe there wont be so much movement toward the pleasant moments and thinking about them or so much going to go elswhere to find something else, maybe every experience are just wellcome. So there´s a hope that life presents itself fresh and new, and not living so much time "lost in history", in chattering and commenting everything. So hopefully life wont be all about "me" and "my" quest to a distant truth or experience. Now Im thinking thats kind of a mystery for me, how would life be if there wasn´t any other "truth" or "experience" to reach other than whats here? Fresh is all I can say..So searching and finding won´t be the main flavor of life, that sounds... sweet, and actually scarry too, I think that searching, that subtle activity, has been here since I can remember, so it´s kind of a scary "Oh my god, what will happen if I hadn´t got anything to search for!!!??"
So I dont say life will be holy and complete everywhere everytime but maybe wont be conceived as incomplete either...
How will you change?
Maybe I won´t. It´s kind of tricky to think about how "I" will change if i discover that there´s no "I" in here.... hehehe. Maybe the body feels kind of lighter of all the contractions imposed on it by all this activity of wanting to reach something somewhere. Activity borned out of this "incomplete-me subtle image" will change. Maybe the chattering of the mid won´t say Im not enough or Im not capable, so there wont be guilt, strong force here. Or if guilt and those patterns remain, if every reactions are still here, maybe there wont be fueled so hard by the thinking mind. Maybe the mind stops playing the role of "searching-suffering" maker in her free time :P
What will be different?
So now I define myself as a seeker that doesn´t know what is seeking or how to find it but loves seeking. That notion wont be here anymore. Don´t know what would be here, but not that. That will change. The suffering associated to being a "non finder" too. Maybe new ways reveal themselves. Don´t know what will happen, but kind of have a hope that something won´t happen, that "being a seeker" game. So, not hoping everything to be clear, but wont have this uncertainty of what truth is or isnt. Hopefully the doubt associated to enlightenment, awekening or whatever, wont be here. OMG, wont have to carry the cross of not being enlightened, (what a relief). And really dont know what could be when (and if) this mentioned things aren´t here, but a big hope too is to have a more solid foundation for the practice of living-discovering truth. Nowadays I kind of meditate or whatever just for inertia and dont know what im doing, maybe that clarifies a little bit, thats a strong expectation.


So, sorry for my poor english

:)
Big hug, Julian

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:24 pm

Hey Julian,

Thank you for your lovely open and honest responses. It is nice to see that you have no high expectations of what realising that there is no separate self will look like. Seeing through this core belief is a major realisation, however, it is only the beginning and not an ending, as looking must continue for other realisations to occur and for old programming to fall away.

Oh and there is absolutely nothing wrong with your English :)
How will life change?
Well, don´t think events going on in this life will change, I mean, they will, they allways change, but not as a result of seeing clearly the absence of "me". Probably the relationship to what´s happening will change,
Yes, perception about life changes, therefore the relationship to life does change. But it doesn’t happen overnight and as I wrote above, it is up to you to continue to look after having the realisation of ‘no self’ for old programming etc to happen.
..So searching and finding won´t be the main flavor of life, that sounds... sweet, and actually scarry too, I think that searching, that subtle activity, has been here since I can remember, so it´s kind of a scary "Oh my god, what will happen if I hadn´t got anything to search for!!!??"
Yes, that intense seeking, that is suffering in itself, falls away…and yes, it is sweet! :)
How will you change?
Maybe I won´t. It´s kind of tricky to think about how "I" will change if i discover that there´s no "I" in here.... hehehe.
Exactly!. There has never been a separate self and there isn’t one now who is reading this and there won’t be one tomorrow!
What will be different?
So, not hoping everything to be clear, but wont have this uncertainty of what truth is or isnt. Hopefully the doubt associated to enlightenment, awekening or whatever, wont be here.
The realisation itself will be seen clearly, however, doubt and confusion will appear during and after the seeing…that is why it is important to continue looking after the realisation has happened for as long as it takes for everything to be clear, and there is no time frame on that…it happens when it happens.

Okay, so let’s begin this exploration by looking at what actual experience is.

Image

Have a look at an apple. When ‘looking at an apple’, there's colour; a thought saying ‘apple’; and maybe a thought saying, "I'm looking at an apple."

What is known for sure? Colour is known and thoughts are known.

What about the content of thoughts, what they describe?
Actual experience does not refer to thoughts ABOUT something…because that is only just more thought. Actual experience is sound, thought, colour, smell, taste, sensation.

Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only colour and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’?
Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?


While these thoughts are known, what they talk ABOUT can't be found in actual experience.

This is what is meant by ‘looking in actual experience ‘. What you know for sure, and, is always here.

Taste labelled ‘apple’ is known
Colour labelled ‘apple’ is known
Sensation labelled ‘apple’ is known (when apple is touched)
Smell labelled ‘apple’ is known
Thought about/of an ‘apple’ is known
However, is an apple actually known?


Please remember to use the quote function when answering the questions in blue text.

Love, Kay
xx
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:42 pm

Hi Kay!!

Ok, its being interesting


Im finding that thoughts can appear as words and images, and maybe both at the same time, is that so?

Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only colour and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’?
There´s just colour and thoughts "There´s an apple there" "Its ugly" "Its shining" etc..
Also there´s like an imagined "border", guess more thought.

Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?
No. Not the entity "apple", but the word "apple" appears here and there. The word "apple" is listened (actually the word "manzana" wich is apple in spanish).
Okey I tried to grab this red-yellow thing and didn´t find an apple, just a cold sensation.

However, is an apple actually known?
No, apple exists only in the thought describing the experience.
Knowing colour, coldness, sound when i scratch it or move it, smell, thoughts "wont eat that apple".

An apple is not found to be causing the sensations. There is just acces to the sensations mentioned in AE.

Will keep looking with other things.

Big hug, Julian
:)

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:23 pm

Hey Julian,
Im finding that thoughts can appear as words and images, and maybe both at the same time, is that so?
Yes, nice noticing….thoughts can appear as words and ‘mental’ images. We will be looking at thought more indepth a little later.
Is there really an ‘apple’ here, or only colour and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’?
There´s just colour and thoughts "There´s an apple there" "Its ugly" "Its shining" etc..
Also there´s like an imagined "border", guess more thought.
Can you tell me more about what you mean by the “imagined border” please.

Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?
No. Not the entity "apple", but the word "apple" appears here and there. The word "apple" is listened (actually the word "manzana" wich is apple in spanish).
Okey I tried to grab this red-yellow thing and didn´t find an apple, just a cold sensation.
So when you tried to grab the ‘apple’ there was just sensation labelled ‘cold’. Nice LOOKING! :)
However, is an apple actually known?
No, apple exists only in the thought describing the experience.
Knowing colour, coldness, sound when i scratch it or move it, smell, thoughts "wont eat that apple".
Terrific! Yes, colour, sensation (labelled coldness), sound and thought is known but 'apple' is not.
An apple is not found to be causing the sensations. There is just acces to the sensations mentioned in AE.
Brilliant! :)

Here's an exercise that I would like you to try as many times throughout the day as you can. Label daily activities simply colour/image, sound, smell, taste, sensation, thought.

So for example, when having breakfast, become aware of:

The colour labelled 'cup' simply= colour
The smell labelled 'coffee', simply = smell,
The sensation labelled 'warmth' (of the coffee cup), simply = sensation.
The taste labelled 'coffee', simply = taste
The sound labelled 'tinkling' (spoon stirring the coffee), simply = sound
Thoughts ABOUT cup, coffee, spoon, making a cup of coffee and drinking the coffee etc, simply = thought.

Just break down daily activities into these categories (which are all actual experience) and report back how you go.

Love, Kay
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:51 pm

Hi Kay!!!

Can you tell me more about what you mean by the “imagined border” please.
Will try

Actually, looking now, can´t find that border, cant pinpoint it. Just when thought points to the colours and say "apple", its like it is pointing to an object. It´s like if the visual experience is a summatory of a looot of separated objects, for wich the only evidence is colour and the labels the thought imposes on them.
Label make it seem that there are forms, tridimentional forms. You know, I have only vision on one eye, so I´m pretty sure mi vision is on 2D. When things are labelled, take apple here in the desk, they kind of seem separated, but when they are not (the only experience of that is when im too lost on thought to pay attention to whats happening), just they don´t look like "a lot of things" (in the exaple dont even know "what is happening")
So what I mean is that thought its not just saying "apple", its like its creating the mental sensation of a thing, an object there. There is no need to the verbal thought "apple" to be here in order to kind of "know" that what is there is an apple. But actually really sticking to AE, the verbal labell "apple" is much more evident than "mental apple form". Am I making this up?


Just break down daily activities into these categories (which are all actual experience) and report back how you go.
Kind of impressive, didn´t find any experience that couldn´t fit in one of these categories.

So, thoughts don´t allways talk about the sense impressions, they can talk about, and mostly with image-toughts, a totally different scenario, maybe some hipotetic future chat with someone (all of this in form of image and sound). Curiously enough some thoughts vanish when remembering to do the labeling thing, specially this "future scenario" thoughts.
Thought is maybe allways comenting on whats happening in sense perceptions, making a story, or imagining something that doesnt even have a "basis" in AE.

Kind of scary was seeing other people and noticing that they´re made of... "colour, sound", thought arises "no, they are here, that´s your mom!!! its not just colour and sound", and thoughts like that.

So, found that its kind of impossible to point to a colour, no matter if you labell it colour, or green, the EXPERIENCE of the colour is ungraspable by any indicator. The only way to know what a colour is is just looking at it. The ACTUAL green colour is an AE, and the words "colour" is just another AE, but they are not even close to be similar. No matter how, I couldn´t point a colour to a blind guy, he wouldn´t even have a clue of what Im talking. Also with sound, taste, sensations. They are available already. Sometimes it´s like I do an extra effort, as if you were asking me to perceive something that Im not perceiving now, but colours and sounds are here allready!!!! Its like a sily mental game of "trying to" perceive AE. So, that happened couple of times. Think i had to mention that.

Moods are sensations too right? Face is everithing sensation. Smiling --> sensation + image-thought abot a face.
"Sensations" is a huge universe, like tactile sensations right now typing, and bodily sensations too.

By the way, also would like to mention that, although there are a LOOOOT of sense impressions and thoughts happening right now, attention only goes to some of them. Eg, when I mentioned bodily sensations, a lot of new sensations, became evident.
So any time there are colours sounds sensations thoughts and maybe smell and ocasionally taste, but only pinpoint and highlight some of them.

So lots of curious things, lot of forgetting to do the excercise too.

Sometimes a thought appear in a form of an image to do something, or a verbal remembering, and before even realising how or why, the body moves. Sometimes this thoughts don´t make it an action happen, just flying by.

Also, just labeling every visual experience colour, doesn´t make that I perceive that every experience is a fluid movement of colours, it gets organized, don´t know how, in to a lot of objects (mentioned this on the question above), but the actual experience is allways colour and thought-


Asked to report, writed lots of things :P

Big hug, Julian.

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:30 pm

Good morning Julian,

Wow! I absolutely loved reading your post. The LOOKING you have done is awesome and you have noticed so much by looking with such intent and focus. Thank you!
Can you tell me more about what you mean by the “imagined border” please.
Will try
So what I mean is that thought its not just saying "apple", its like its creating the mental sensation of a thing, an object there. There is no need to the verbal thought "apple" to be here in order to kind of "know" that what is there is an apple. But actually really sticking to AE, the verbal labell "apple" is much more evident than "mental apple form". Am I making this up?
We will look at thoughts shortly and you can see for yourself.
Just break down daily activities into these categories (which are all actual experience) and report back how you go.
Kind of impressive, didn´t find any experience that couldn´t fit in one of these categories.
Nice! So, instead of just going with what thought says is appearing or happening, check it with AE and see if thought is pointing to AE or just pointing to thoughts about thought or thoughts about AE ie story/fiction!
Thought is maybe allways comenting on whats happening in sense perceptions, making a story, or imagining something that doesnt even have a "basis" in AE.
YES! Great LOOKING! As I said above…keep checking to what thought is saying with AE to see if it is pointing to what IS ie actual experience or thought stories about AE.
Kind of scary was seeing other people and noticing that they´re made of... "colour, sound", thought arises "no, they are here, that´s your mom!!! its not just colour and sound", and thoughts like that.
Okay, however, there is no Julian either. All Julian is, is thoughts about colour, sound and sensation, but luckily ;) you are not Julian! :)
So, found that its kind of impossible to point to a colour, no matter if you labell it colour, or green, the EXPERIENCE of the colour is ungraspable by any indicator. The only way to know what a colour is is just looking at it. The ACTUAL green colour is an AE, and the words "colour" is just another AE, but they are not even close to be similar. No matter how, I couldn´t point a colour to a blind guy, he wouldn´t even have a clue of what Im talking.
Exactly! Actual EXPERIENCE is indescribable. Colour, sound, taste, smell, sensation and thoughts are indescribable. How do you describe taste, for example?

You can describe the taste of ice-cream ie what it is made from, and that it is cold, tastes creamy, vanilla, chocolate, and you can describe what the word ‘taste’ refers to, however, can you actually describe the experience of taste?
Also with sound, taste, sensations. They are available already. Sometimes it´s like I do an extra effort, as if you were asking me to perceive something that Im not perceiving now, but colours and sounds are here allready!!!! Its like a sily mental game of "trying to" perceive AE. So, that happened couple of times. Think i had to mention that.
Nice! Listen to sound for 10 minutes. Just like the previous exercise, notice that there is no control whatsoever over the sounds that appear. Keep asking, "could I have stopped that sound from appearing?" and "did I do anything to make that exact sound appear at that exact moment?" and "could I have made a different sound appear in that moment?"

After a bit of that, it should be pretty obvious that there is nothing controlling the sounds that appear either

do the same with colours...
and with sensations...
and even with smells...

Are you able to control what appears and when?
Moods are sensations too right? Face is everithing sensation. Smiling --> sensation + image-thought abot a face.
"Sensations" is a huge universe, like tactile sensations right now typing, and bodily sensations too.
Yes!
Asked to report, writed lots of things :P
Beautifully reported and I love it! Thank you! :)


Love, Kay
xx
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Tue Oct 10, 2017 9:53 pm

Hi Kay,

It´s being really enjoyable this guiding :) It feels as if you are guiding me to see from a new perspective, and its kind of an unexplored territory, really really sticking with what is Actually percieved. (Have to remember throghout the day that that´s the main point, kind of forgot sometimes :P) Thanks :)


Well, let´s see...
YES! Great LOOKING! As I said above…keep checking to what thought is saying with AE to see if it is pointing to what IS ie actual experience or thought stories about AE.
Rarely thought points to AE, not even the label "lamp" appearing now is pointing to the black and white colours over there. But then, the label "black" kind of points to that blackness over there. However that colours are there and are not affected by what thoughts say or do not say. They can call it camel and it won´t make the minimun difference to the AE. Well then thought says "I am seeing only half the lamp", and then it goes on thoughts about other thougths.
Saying this, I consider that if the labells describe what is actually experienced like "that red colour", it kind of "point" to the experience, but then thought adds a layer and says "that is a red binder", and binder is not the direct experience of that redness over there. Thought creates lots of things based only in colours sounds and labells apearing, and then tells histories about what that things can do or did or will do or how are they composed, etc.



So you say that thought is an AE but the content of thought is not, don´t think that is entirely clear, ie the difference between "thought" and "content of thought".
You can describe the taste of ice-cream ie what it is made from, and that it is cold, tastes creamy, vanilla, chocolate, and you can describe what the word ‘taste’ refers to, however, can you actually describe the experience of taste?
That case the best i could do is buy you an ice cream :P

Just happen to be drinking something now.

No I can´t.
I would unsuccessfully try to say that is the qualitness of taste. But there isn´t even a word to point to the "qualia" (wow that´s maybe one) of the experience. However, that doesn´t actually describes anything!! In order to describe the experience I would need the experience to occur to someone else and say "That!!! Precisely that!" Well, I have acces to the experience occuring here so I know what you point to when saying "experience of taste". This ungraspable....... yummi

Are you able to control what appears and when?
Absolutely no. No control over what happens whatsoever. This excercises made me reallise that, as you point, there isn´t anything causing the sounds, or colors, or taste. The experience is the taste, sound, colour. The "thing" that is causing that, that is a thought-created thing. WIth sounds this is beautifully and effortlesly perceived. There are no "birds" experienced chanting brbrbrbrbr, there is brbrbrbr and then a "thought" of a bird. There is no dog making that breathing sound, just fshhhh and a thought about a dog. There are no cars passing by, rrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrr. Rrrrrrrrram. There is no chair on wich a body (there isn´t one either) is seated, Strangely enough, the imput needed for thought to make "chair on wich im sitting" interpretation, is just sensation, it creates "two" things out of that no-well-defined hardness. Curious.


So, big hug Kay, thank you a lot for your dedication. Its a great thing what all of you are doing here in LU.

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:30 pm

Hello Julian,


It is such a pleasure to read your posts…thank-you! <3
It´s being really enjoyable this guiding :) It feels as if you are guiding me to see from a new perspective, and its kind of an unexplored territory, really really sticking with what is Actually percieved. (Have to remember throghout the day that that´s the main point, kind of forgot sometimes :P) Thanks :)
Yes, as beliefs/thoughts are seen through a new perspective of every ‘thing’ arises and life is seen for what it really is.

“Forgetting” seems to happen. But are you not aware of all thoughts that appear, even the thought about an “I” who is “forgetting”?

Can you find a someone/something that is forgetting?
What is the AE of forgetting?

YES! Great LOOKING! As I said above…keep checking to what thought is saying with AE to see if it is pointing to what IS ie actual experience or thought stories about AE.
Rarely thought points to AE, not even the label "lamp" appearing now is pointing to the black and white colours over there. But then, the label "black" kind of points to that blackness over there. However that colours are there and are not affected by what thoughts say or do not say. They can call it camel and it won´t make the minimun difference to the AE. Well then thought says "I am seeing only half the lamp", and then it goes on thoughts about other thougths.
Yes! Great noticing of thought and how thoughts operate! :) Does it matter if the camel has one hump or two? :P ;) :D

Here is an interesting exercise in how labels do not have a one-to-one correspondence with reality:

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?

If the label
‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?

Saying this, I consider that if the labells describe what is actually experienced like "that red colour", it kind of "point" to the experience, but then thought adds a layer and says "that is a red binder", and binder is not the direct experience of that redness over there. Thought creates lots of things based only in colours sounds and labells apearing, and then tells histories about what that things can do or did or will do or how are they composed, etc.
Yes….exactly! So the word ‘binder’ is AE of thought…right? And the content of the thought ‘binder’ is the “histories about what that things can do or did or will do or how are they composed, etc”.
So you say that thought is an AE but the content of thought is not, don´t think that is entirely clear, ie the difference between "thought" and "content of thought".
“The binder is red” is the thought. The ensuing thoughts of what that means is the content. So all the thoughts that arise ABOUT the red binder – what it does, what it is for, the description of it, what it is made from etc are the content of the thought “the binder is red”.
Is this clear?

You can describe the taste of ice-cream ie what it is made from, and that it is cold, tastes creamy, vanilla, chocolate, and you can describe what the word ‘taste’ refers to, however, can you actually describe the experience of taste?
That case the best i could do is buy you an ice cream :P
haha! Only if it is a chocolate ice-cream ;)
Just happen to be drinking something now.
No I can´t.
I would unsuccessfully try to say that is the qualitness of taste. But there isn´t even a word to point to the "qualia" (wow that´s maybe one) of the experience. However, that doesn´t actually describes anything!! In order to describe the experience I would need the experience to occur to someone else and say "That!!! Precisely that!" Well, I have acces to the experience occuring here so I know what you point to when saying "experience of taste". This ungraspable....... yummi
Yes….NICE LOOKING!
Are you able to control what appears and when?
Absolutely no. No control over what happens whatsoever. This excercises made me reallise that, as you point, there isn´t anything causing the sounds, or colors, or taste. The experience is the taste, sound, colour. The "thing" that is causing that, that is a thought-created thing. WIth sounds this is beautifully and effortlesly perceived. There are no "birds" experienced chanting brbrbrbrbr, there is brbrbrbr and then a "thought" of a bird. There is no dog making that breathing sound, just fshhhh and a thought about a dog. There are no cars passing by, rrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrr. Rrrrrrrrram. There is no chair on wich a body (there isn´t one either) is seated, Strangely enough, the imput needed for thought to make "chair on wich im sitting" interpretation, is just sensation, it creates "two" things out of that no-well-defined hardness. Curious.
Lovely, Julian! So, we can look at content of thought here as well. When sound ‘brbrbrbrbr’ appears, a thought appears saying that “that is a bird”. The content of that thought are further thoughts about what the bird is, where the bird is sitting in a tree, the colours of the bird, etc.

Love, Kay
xx
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:30 pm

Hi Kay !!!
Good morning (pretty sure we have really different timezones)
What is the AE of forgetting?
"Forgetting" is the same experience pointed to with the words "Getting lost in thought"
Thoguhts appearing is the AE. It´s when the thought content is emphasized and it´s the only appearance attended to. Guess it´s an attention matter. However can´t experience some "thing" named attention either, just thoughts being known talking and imagining something completely inexistent. Yes, it´s an experience and yes, there´s awereness of whats happening all the way long.
Can you find a someone/something that is forgetting?
No. The moment the experience of forgetting, there are just those thoughts, probably a lot of sensations of tension in the body too. And after that, there comes thought saying "I was lost in thought", what that thought is pointing to, is to the experience of thought being emphasized over the rest of imputs. And then "I have to attend more" etc etc. Story of an I who gets lost and can do this right and have to find the way or stick to AE. Sometimes, this whole circus ends in just shutting up and looking, ore more story and thoughts other times :P

So, don´t know if it´s important to mention but yesterday felt some strange lightness after being really looking for a while. Tried not to make a story of that.

When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
So, the actual experience of colour is redness. And there´s also an audible experience of "green", the sound of the word when its being read. The colour is red. The sound is the sound of the word. It´s happening too, it has nothing to do with colour experience.
Is the colour red experienced, or is the colour green experienced as the label suggests?
Red-
Do the labels have a one-to-one correspondence with ‘reality’?
Guess you´re talking about the example above. Not it doesn´t have the slightest correspondence. If the label were "Red", experience would also be the colour red and the sound would be the sound produced when the word "red" is readed, but those case there would be a correspondence.
Or do the labels suggest something else other than what is here and now (red colour)?
The label says green, whats here is red colour, it suggest other thing.
Is green-ness inherent attributes of the experience of the colour red, or is green just a word label on the experience of the colour red?
Green-ness is not experienced in this case. Just a word. The sound "green" is listened.
If the label ‘GREEN’ is replaced with the label ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’, is the redness affected in any way as the labels suggests?
Does redness become ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or do the labels have no effect whatsoever on ‘reality’?
It is affected one way!!!! When you write "BAD" the redness is smaller than in the word "GOOD", occupies less space.

No, label have no effect.
“The binder is red” is the thought. The ensuing thoughts of what that means is the content. So all the thoughts that arise ABOUT the red binder – what it does, what it is for, the description of it, what it is made from etc are the content of the thought “the binder is red”.
Is this clear?
Okay, guess I got this.
So, "binder is red" is an AE meaning is a thought-sound being known. I mean, it´s an evident thought (with sound thoughts dont find any difference between thoughts and sounds) that it´s listened. What it points to can´t be found, ie, the binder. Only redness can be found (not the word red but the actual qualia of the redness experience), other thoughts about the binder also can be an AE, just now, looking at the binder eg the thought "What is it on that binder anyway?" appeared, so, its an AE of a thought, but what it points to (a binder, and something inside the "binder") is not an AE.

Will take birds again.
Fck there are not birds sounds now :P Ok will go outside a bit hehehehe

Okay, here again.

So, lots of sounds.
Brr brrr brr + the verbal thought of "there´s a bird" + the mental image of a bird in a tree located somewhere up and 20 meters left.
So, that image is an appearance, but it´s not an experience of a "bird" whatsoever, it´s a mental image. That is the thought content right? Cant see that "bird" or take a photo or whatever you can do with a bird :P It´s a fiction-bird. So, there´s no "real" bird to be found, just the sound and sometimes the colour. The sound "bird" when label names it, is not a bird either, and the thought-image of that cute little thing, is not a bird either, its a a thought content.


That´s it for now.

Big hug

User avatar
forgetmenot
Posts: 5660
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Knock Knock

Postby forgetmenot » Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:14 pm

G’day Julian!
Good morning (pretty sure we have really different timezones)
And what is the AE of ‘timezones’ ;) :D

[
quote]What is the AE of forgetting?
"Forgetting" is the same experience pointed to with the words "Getting lost in thought"
Thoguhts appearing is the AE. It´s when the thought content is emphasized and it´s the only appearance attended to. Guess it´s an attention matter. However can´t experience some "thing" named attention either, just thoughts being known talking and imagining something completely inexistent. Yes, it´s an experience and yes, there´s awereness of whats happening all the way long.[/quote]

Lovely! So let’s break ‘forgetting’ down into AE

The label/word ‘forget’ is AE of thought and not AE of forgetting
The thoughts ABOUT forgetting is AE of thought and not AE of forgetting
The sensation (if any) labelled ‘forget’ is AE of sensation and not AE of forgetting
The image labelled ‘me/I/body’ is AE of colour and not AE of forgetting.

So, forgetting is not known. What is known (AE) is label/thoughts + sensation + colour.
When you look at the word label ‘GREEN’, what is the actual experience?
So, the actual experience of colour is redness. And there´s also an audible experience of "green", the sound of the word when its being read. The colour is red. The sound is the sound of the word. It´s happening too, it has nothing to do with colour experience.
How is it known that the sound is the sound of “the word”?
“The binder is red” is the thought. The ensuing thoughts of what that means is the content. So all the thoughts that arise ABOUT the red binder – what it does, what it is for, the description of it, what it is made from etc are the content of the thought “the binder is red”.
Is this clear?
Okay, guess I got this.
So, "binder is red" is an AE meaning is a thought-sound being known. I mean, it´s an evident thought (with sound thoughts dont find any difference between thoughts and sounds) that it´s listened.
Nice observation about finding no difference between thought being a sound.
Is thought an actual sound, like a ‘bird’ when the sound ‘bird’ appears, if not then how is thought a sound? Thought is known, but is it actually ‘heard’?
What it points to can´t be found, ie, the binder. Only redness can be found (not the word red but the actual qualia of the redness experience), other thoughts about the binder also can be an AE, just now, looking at the binder eg the thought "What is it on that binder anyway?" appeared, so, its an AE of a thought, but what it points to (a binder, and something inside the "binder") is not an AE.
YES! You got it!
So, lots of sounds.
Brr brrr brr + the verbal thought of "there´s a bird" + the mental image of a bird in a tree located somewhere up and 20 meters left.
So, that image is an appearance, but it´s not an experience of a "bird" whatsoever, it´s a mental image. That is the thought content right? Cant see that "bird" or take a photo or whatever you can do with a bird :P It´s a fiction-bird. So, there´s no "real" bird to be found, just the sound and sometimes the colour. The sound "bird" when label names it, is not a bird either, and the thought-image of that cute little thing, is not a bird either, its a a thought content.
As Ron Weasley says in Harry Potter……bloody brilliant!

Okay, so let’s take a closer look at thoughts, although I think you have pretty much seen the nature of thought!

Here is a thought exercise. Sit quietly for about 30 minutes and notice the arising thoughts. Just let them appear as they appear. Try your best to COMPLETELY ignore what they are saying and just notice how they appear, without you doing anything at all.

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 are they coming from and going to
Can you predict your next thought?
Can you select from a range of thoughts to have only pleasant thoughts?
Can you choose not to have painful or negative thoughts?
Can you pick and choose any kind of thought?
Is it possible to control any thoughts?
Is it possible to prevent a thought from appearing? Including the thought 'I'?
It seems that thought has some logical ordered appearance, but look carefully and just notice if there is an organised sequence? Or is that just another thought that says ‘these thoughts are in sequence’ or “they take content from previous thought”, or that ‘one thought follows another thought’?


Look carefully when doing this exercise and do it several times if necessary. Please answer each question individually.

Love, Kay
xx
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
https://freedomalreadyis.com/

User avatar
JulianS
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:41 am

Re: Knock Knock

Postby JulianS » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:26 pm

Hi Kay :)


Just writting to tell you I will take another day with this one.

Big big hug :)


Return to “ARCHIVES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests