Fear decreasing

[Nameless1]

Hi Viven,

I am going to try again to really get back on track and look every single day, because i know it's the most important thing i can do.

But it’s all thoughts. Can you see this?
You are afraid of a story… Can you see this?

Yes, I can see this. I saw this last year when you really impressed upon me the need to look fresh every single time and never rely on a memory, and that the memory was always happening in the present moment, the now. And I can see how I believe the fearful story and that is what drives the other thoughts, feelings, and behaviors---especially the behavior of spending more time involved in trying to deal with the stories...that are believed.

Can you see that these fearful thoughts are recycled day-by-day, year-by-year, again and again, probably since childhood? The content might change a bit, but the foundation of the story, the projection of danger and thus the fear remains?This story is repeated again and again… and this is how suffering is built up. Thought by thought… suffering is created. Can you see this?

Yes, I can see how they are basically the same thoughts day after day and that if these thoughts were not present, there would be no suffering. When I stop and ask myself: Do I have a problem in this moment right now? The answer is always: No. Unless I'm getting assaulted or something of that nature, I would have to say I have no problem in this moment; but even in that situation, if there were no thoughts about what was happening, there would be no label such as "problem" so no problem would exist; pain might be present but it would not be a problem, it is only a problem if thoughts...words are put together that say it's a problem. I am very aware lately of thoughts that tell me if i am not thinking then i will really be in even more danger in the future, and of course those thoughts are believed.....they are not questioned in that moment; i need to question them every time they come up.

What would left of the fear if suddenly all your thoughts turned into the tweeting of birds? What happens if you replace your thoughts with ‘blah-blah-blah’? Is there fear then? Or fear is created by thoughts only? By one thought at a time?

If all of my thoughts turned into tweeting of birds or blah blah, fear would disappear. Fear is created by believing the thoughts that appear.

Sitting here looking now, i notice that i want to, or the mind wants to or thoughts say: I want to make meaning of what i see, I want to understand what i'm seeing or looking at. What wants to create meaning, or feels like it needs to understand, or thinks it's important to assign meaning to things? It's like it's boring if i can't assign meaning to things. And, sometimes it's frightening to see something and not 'know' what it is, and after it's labeled the fear goes away. I notice underneath that is the belief that there is someone here that could get hurt if something is not understood or known---known in the way most humans define knowing...which is just labeling/assigning words to images seen. So, it appears as though 'what' wants to understand or assign meaning is just another thought. But why does that thought appear over and over again? Why is it so strong...have an emotional charge (fear) to it? Conditioning? So used to labeling that to not label/not know in the conventional way of knowing goes into uncharted territory? The unknown is fearful to whom? Who believes all of these stories? Based on memory, I can say that believing is just happening, but memories are not helpful here, now. I want to see NOW. Who wants to see now? This damn circle!

I did read the blog post...and two other links in there, too. I found the one about what the present moment is especially helpful. Thank you for the link.

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

Yes, I can see how they are basically the same thoughts day after day and that if these thoughts were not present, there would be no suffering. When I stop and ask myself: Do I have a problem in this moment right now? The answer is always: No.

And this is the way to go. In this moment I’m fine, I’m safe. This is it. Everything else just a made up story, spinning itself endlessly, repeating itself as a broken record. It’s totally habitual.

You can ask yourself repeatedly during the day: “Am I safe NOW?”

Unless I'm getting assaulted or something of that nature, I would have to say I have no problem in this moment; but even in that situation, if there were no thoughts about what was happening, there would be no label such as "problem" so no problem would exist; pain might be present but it would not be a problem, it is only a problem if thoughts...words are put together that say it's a problem. I am very aware lately of thoughts that tell me if i am not thinking then i will really be in even more danger in the future, and of course those thoughts are believed.....they are not questioned in that moment; i need to question them every time they come up.

Yes, question every single thought. Never ever take any thought at face value.

If all of my thoughts turned into tweeting of birds or blah blah, fear would disappear. Fear is created by believing the thoughts that appear.

Exactly! Fear is woven by repeated thoughts playing as a broken record, day by day, year by year, decade by decade. It’s just the recycling of a past memory.

I want to see NOW. Who wants to see now? This damn circle!

Seeing now is to connect with the sensory experience what is always here, always available. Coming out of the head and just staying with experience of the five senses.

And yes, thoughts label experience as boring…. Buy hey, what does a thought know about experience? Nothing! A thought is utterly clueless of what is going on. That’s why it finds it boring or even dangerous :)

Just notice thoughts; how much narration is going on. Whatever is happening thought has something to say about it. It’s constantly weaving stories about everything and everyone.

The story is so well run; the mechanisms are all in place. Thoughts have the tendency to appear as solid truths and it is so enticing to believe each and every one of them.

But are all of our thoughts depicting what is?

Some thoughts point to something, like ‘seeing something’ but other thoughts just point to more thoughts, exploding in a thought merry-go-round. :)

What if instead of thoughts offering solid truths, those explanations are nothing but assumptions? Theories at best?

Vivien

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

Thank you for your response; very helpful, as usual. :)

But are all of our thoughts depicting what is?

When thought says: sound in response to a noise, it depicts what is. When thoughts say: 'seeing,' thoughts depict what is. Thought just said, "cold," as I looked out the window...some people do not consider 50 degrees cold, so I would have to question this one. What if in response to feeling an ice cube thought said, "cold." Would that even be true? Is it only a depiction if the thought said, "sensation?" When thought just said, "breathing" I feel like on one level that is true, but on another level, that is just another label. I would have to say that most of my thoughts do not depict what is; they talk about things that happened in the past, or talk about what will happen in the future--neither of which are depicting what is in this moment.

What if instead of thoughts offering solid truths, those explanations are nothing but assumptions? Theories at best

When thoughts make self disparaging statements, or talk about how others think and feel, these are assumptions...that are believed in the moment. Right now, going from watching thoughts of an unpleasant memory to what is right now--what could be felt and heard...was going from distress to peace! Beautiful. ...and right back to thoughts of yesterday, not necessarily bad thoughts, but NOT what is right here, right now. I will continue working on coming back to what is in this moment. I make that effort mostly to get something 'in the future.' I know i get nothing in the future, nothing happens in the future, things only happen now, but effecting happens in this moment only. Sometimes the intention is pure, ie., looking for the sake of seeing what is here, but often, it starts out for the purpose of 'attaining Self realization.'

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

You did a nice investigation :)

Sometimes the intention is pure, ie., looking for the sake of seeing what is here, but often, it starts out for the purpose of 'attaining Self realization.'

That’s all right. As long as the self is believed in, there will be desires on behalf of the self to attain self realization.
But what if there is no self to realize? What if there is no any kind of self in any shape or form? What if all there is to the self is the idea/thought of a self?
What if the self only ever exists in the story, but never in reality?

Now let’s get back to thoughts.

Generally there seem to be two kinds of thoughts:
1. thoughts which content point to something which is directly experienced, now in the moment.
2. thoughts which content point to nothing in DE (direct experience), rather to other thoughts content.

#1 would be ‘There is a table’, or ‘my hands are wet’, or ‘the flower is blooming’ - since something is SEEN at the moment, the thought points to something, even though table / hand / flower is just a label for something SEEN / EXPERIENCED.

#2 would be "I had dinner last night”, or “she said something nasty to me”, or “I want to be free”, or “I am going to do some shopping tomorrow”, etc.

Now please, gently observe your thoughts, noticing how do their thing, chatting about this and about that, labelling, interpreting, giving meaning to events and things, analysing how things could have done differently, and so on.
While noticing the dance of thoughts, how they go around in loops trying to find verification for their own self-appointed truth…. check for yourself if the above given statement is true.

Are there two ways of thoughts or do you find more? If yes, please do give an example.
Does one set of thoughts point to something in DE and does the other one really points to another thought only?

Please spend a whole day looking at this. Check this again and again throughout your day.

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

But what if there is no self to realize? What if there is no any kind of self in any shape or form? What if all there is to the self is the idea/thought of a self? What if the self only ever exists in the story, but never in reality?

It has been seen in the past (I get that it needs to be seen now, :) just isn't happening) that there is no self, and that Nameless is actually a thought. In this state I am currently in, the thought of no self is both scary and has an element of liberation to it. I know that when Nameless is not present, peace is here.

Are there two ways of thoughts or do you find more? If yes, please do give an example. Does one set of thoughts point to something in DE and does the other one really points to another thought only?

I spent the day looking, of course not as often as I would have liked to because remembering happened when it happened, but it was more than I thought it would happen. I see only two 'kinds' of thoughts: those that talk about what is right here in my immediate surrounding/sensations/DE and those that talk about memories, other thoughts, fantasy/wanting/wanting things to be different, or projections into the future---just thoughts about thoughts. But if still feels like Nameless is the one experiencing these thoughts.

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

But if still feels like Nameless is the one experiencing these thoughts.

Yes, it can SEEM that way… but, there is an important thing to mention here… we often think or say the phrase “it feels like” or “it seems like”. These phrases usually point to a thought not to a sensation. A sensation would be when you pinch yourself and then you really bodily, physically feel something.
So the "It feels like Nameless is the one experiencing thoughts" appears as content of a thought.

What we are investigating here that what is it exactly that we take for an I. Since intellectually we already know that there is no real I outside of the realm of thoughts, and yet it can SEEM like as if there were an I. So there must be something or several different things that we mistake for an I.

We are looking at the SEEMS TO BE and have a look if that's true, we do look how the story is created and maintained and why it is so credible.

the thought of no self is both scary and has an element of liberation to it.

When it seems to be scary, then isn’t this just a habitual thought playing itself out at the millions of time by now?

Just notice, being afraid is just a conditioned habit, which is just going in circles, without any actual danger in the vicinity :)

In this state I am currently in

But what is it that is currently in a state? Is this really happening? Is there really someone is a state? Or only thoughts are babbling about states and an I who is in a state?

Can you see that thoughts don’t depict what is? Rather they offer stories, theories and fantasies instead?

I know that when Nameless is not present, peace is here.

There is a misunderstanding here.

Nameless is never ever present, since it’s always just an idea. So it’s not possible for Nameless to be present now, but not be present at other times.

Nameless is like a character in a book or in a movie.
Is there any time when there is a real character outside of the story?
Or Nameless not being present is just another story?

Who or what is writing the story? Is that Nameless? Can a character in a book or in a movie be the author of the book / movie?

What is the difference between Nameless and Batman? Is there any?

Vivien

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

I spent a lot of time this morning answering all but the last three questions, then mistakenly closed out so I'm starting from scratch. ugh.

When it seems to be scary, then isn’t this just a habitual thought playing itself out at the millions of time by now?

Yes, it is a story made up of individual thoughts/statements. It looks like because the story is believed, the heart beats faster and that 'proves' it's real, but in reality, those are only sensations happening in a moment that i am perfectly safe in.

But what is it that is currently in a state? Is this really happening? Is there really someone is a state? Or only thoughts are babbling about states and an I who is in a state?

There is no state, it is only physical sensations occurring in the moment that are triggered by and perpetuated by thoughts that talk about things that are not happening in this moment.

Can you see that thoughts don’t depict what is? Rather they offer stories, theories and fantasies instead?

Yes, i can see that thoughts don't depict what is, even when they talk about things in the 'now,' unless it's something like, 'sound, or hearing.' If thoughts say, 'bird chirpping,' then that is not absolute reality, it is just another label.

Is there any time when there is a real character outside of the story? Or Nameless not being present is just another story?

There is not a time when Nameless is outside of the story. Nameless not being present is just another thought/story.

Who or what is writing the story? Is that Nameless? Can a character in a book or in a movie be the author of the book / movie?

Nameless can't not write the story---she has no control of things in this world, and it has been seen, not this moment, but that she doesn't even exist. No, the character can not be the author of the movie or book.

What is the difference between Nameless and Batman? Is there any?

Thought says, "I can feel Nameless's pain. ...who is I that is separate from Nameless? Something here identifies with Nameless, but not with batman. Now, thought say, "I am Nameless." Where is this 'i' that says that? That's just another thought, and so is that thought. Lots of thoughts appearing. I'm reminded of what Nisargadatta said, "Fluids come together and the I AM appears." ...i'm stuck, i believe i'm this body right now, the longer i sit here, the more identified i'm getting. I'm tired, too. This question will stick with me, i believe. I will be looking at this again.

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

Nameless can't not write the story---she has no control of things in this world, and it has been seen, not this moment, but that she doesn't even exist. No, the character can not be the author of the movie or book.

Are you saying that you are not seeing this right now, but you saw it in the past?

Dear Nameless, it’s essential that you only write what you can see now.
Otherwise it’s just a belief that you are repeating for yourself.

Thought says, "I can feel Nameless's pain. ...who is I that is separate from Nameless?

Just look.. thoughts say all sorts of things… but just because a thought is offering an explanation, it doesn’t mean that that thought is true!

Where is the proof for this thought explanation “I can feel Nameless’ pain’?

If Nameless is nothing else than a word, just a concept, then how can a concept / word feel pain?
Are you sure that it’s totally clear that Nameless is just an idea, and not a real entity?

What is the difference between the I and Nameless?

And how do you know that the words of I and Nameless are pointing to two different things? Just because another thought is offering this story?

What do thoughts KNOW about Nameless?
What do thoughts know about the I?
What can a thought know?

I'm reminded of what Nisargadatta said, "Fluids come together and the I AM appears." ...i'm stuck, i believe i'm this body right now, the longer i sit here, the more identified i'm getting. I'm tired, too.

Don’t go to stories. Whatever Nisaargadatta said is just a thought here now. Don’t take anybody’s words for granted, that would be just more learned knowledge.

We are doing the opposite here. We are unlearning…

Always check what only happens in thought and what is really direct experience.

Vivien

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

Are you saying that you are not seeing this right now, but you saw it in the past?

I can see now, most times, if not all times--when looking, that Nameless can't write the story; that I saw again before i typed my response yesterday, sorry for the confusion. The fact the she doesn't exist is what was not clear yesterday, that can not be experienced/seen every time when looking.

Where is the proof for this thought explanation “I can feel Nameless’ pain’?

Well, first, i would have to identify/show proof of 'I' and i can only say that 'i' or something exists, i can not show you. Secondly, i would have to then identify Nameless as a separate thing, and i can not locate or show proof of Nameless. Well, on second looking, i would not have to show Nameless as separate from 'i,' but would still have to prove she exists as the same thing that could feel 'her' pain. Looking: is it MY pain? I can not say that it is mine, physical sensations are present that can be felt and then labeled as pain--i'm off topic now. I can not show you, 'me/Nameless,' I can show you a body, but I can not show you 'I' or Nameless.

If Nameless is nothing else than a word, just a concept, then how can a concept / word feel pain? Are you sure that it’s totally clear that Nameless is just an idea, and not a real entity?

It is not totally clear, not as clear as it's been in the past, but I've been on this question alone, like the last one, for over 30 minutes. Not sure it's going to become totally clear in the next 30, 60, 90 etc...I can see thoughts about Nameless but those are not me. Well, who is this 'I' that can see thoughts? Is THAT Nameless? Well, the hearer of the sounds are coming 'in' a second or two AFTER the sound is heard and not sure if it comes in at the same time as or after it is labeled. So hearing happens without a hearer; seems like when words appear, identifying happens, but who or what identifies with the words? Where's the one that identifies? When looking, thoughts say, 'right here, i'm right here,' but those are just thoughts....thoughts that are believed, by whom? For about one second it was seen that believing is just happening, no believer.

What is the difference between the I and Nameless?

Looking, nothing. Looking again, it seems like I am the observer of the thoughts that talk about Nameless--another thought. but 'I' still feels like me...whoever or whatever that is--i can not say. I am personifying 'I' again. 'I' can see 'I' as a thought, but it still feels like a personal I that see this. I know it takes more time to sit and look and eventually it will be seen again that there is no personal I. I have been at this all day, off and on so I will move on to the next question.

And how do you know that the words of I and Nameless are pointing to two different things? Just because another thought is offering this story?

Sometimes thoughts say they point to the same thing and at other times, thoughts say they are two different things. I do not know anything except that something(s) is/are here.

What do thoughts KNOW about Nameless?

Looking....thoughts are made up of words and words do not know anything, they are labels.

What do thoughts know about the I?

Looking...thoughts do not have eyes, ears, senses of any kind, nor do they have a brain so they can not know anything about the 'I'

What can a thought know?

looking, it looks like thoughts speak/talk/...well, no, thoughts/words are just appearing. A memory just came up. Thought said, thoughts know things because that really did happen. It seems like my mind is really fighting hard to stay blind to the truth. These felt like really difficult questions today, more so than usual.

Thanks, Vivien.

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

Looking, nothing. Looking again, it seems like I am the observer of the thoughts that talk about Nameless--another thought. but 'I' still feels like me...whoever or whatever that is--i can not say. I am personifying 'I' again. 'I' can see 'I' as a thought, but it still feels like a personal I that see this.

Careful with assumptions, the "it seems like...".

We often think or say the phrase “it feels like” or “it seems like”. These phrases usually point to a thought not to a sensation. A sensation would be when you pinch yourself and then you really bodily, physically feel something.
So the "It feels like I am the observer of thoughts." appears as content of a thought.

What we are investigating here that what is it exactly that we take for an I. Since intellectually we already know that there is no real I outside of the realm of thoughts, and yet it can SEEM like as if there were an I. So there must be something or several different things that we mistake for an I.

We are looking at the SEEMS TO BE and have a look if that's true, we do look how the story is created and maintained and why it is so credible.

Is there a distinction between an observer and the observed? Are these two things? Or just two different labels on the same happening?

I am personifying 'I' again.

Is there a doer who is personifying the I? Or this is just another thought taken for granted?

but it still feels like a personal I that see this.

Are you sure that this is a feeling and not just another thought?

Sometimes thoughts say they point to the same thing and at other times, thoughts say they are two different things. I do not know anything except that something(s) is/are here.

Yes, something exists. Existence is. Experience is.

The question is, is there an experiencer which experience happen TO?

It seems like my mind is really fighting hard to stay blind to the truth.

So there is not just a mind, but MY mind? Can you actually observe a mind kicking and screaming as it fights?

How does this mind looks like when you observe it?
How big it is?
What shape it has?
Color? Texture?

Vivien

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

Is there a distinction between an observer and the observed? Are these two things? Or just two different labels on the same happening?

During the last hour of looking, there were a number of times that it was like you can't have one without the other...something was different, but the seeing wasn't as deep as it was last year.

Is there a doer who is personifying the I? Or this is just another thought taken for granted?

IN the moment, the seeing of the thought and the thought are one thing. :) I'm confused; why don't i see this all the time? Rather, why isn't this seen all the time?

The question is, is there an experiencer which experience happen TO?

Almost immediately it was seen for about a second, that the answer to this question is, no. It's like the brain is late..something is late...labeling is late, the chatter is late.

Are you sure that this is a feeling and not just another thought?

It is definitely another thought and not a feeling. Thank you for pointing that out, again. I 'seem' to forget, especially when talking about this, that feelings are not thoughts.

The question is, is there an experiencer which experience happen TO?

Looking, no; however, I can say that is seen after about one second, and then again, Nameless THINKS she's back...rather, thoughts say she is here and those thoughts are believed...but by whom? Just taken for granted to be true until investigated.


How does this mind looks like when you observe it? How big it is? What shape it has? Color? Texture? I can not see any mind, nor have i ever seen a mind. Mind is a word someone made up...i guess to describe something we can't explain, and it was taught and i just accepted what was taught without looking.

Thank you for the questions, Vivien.

Nameless

[Vivien]

Hi Nameless,

How does this mind looks like when you observe it? How big it is? What shape it has? Color? Texture? I can not see any mind, nor have i ever seen a mind. Mind is a word someone made up...i guess to describe something we can't explain, and it was taught and i just accepted what was taught without looking.

Yes, the mind is totally made up. It’s only an idea in thought :)

I would like to ask you to stay with the same questions for another day or two, since you say that you had small glimpses. It could be good to look at these more. Write what comes up.

Warmly,
Vivien

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

I did not take advantage of the time I had this morning to look for more than about 20 minutes, not long enough for me. . I just got home from work, late---for me, I'm really tired. I will look tomorrow and get back tomorrow.

Thank you for your patience with me, Vivien.

Nameless

[Vivien]

All right, thank you for letting me know.

[Nameless1]

Hi Vivien,

Is there a distinction between an observer and the observed? Are these two things? Or just two different labels on the same happening?

After an hour sitting here: There are different experiences happening--going back and forth. At times, there does not appear to be an observer, just a knowing of taste, sound, sensation; then other times, it seems...but that does not mean this is true, it seems that there is a separate identity observing these things, but i can not find this entity.

Is there a doer who is personifying the I? Or this is just another thought taken for granted?

This is another thought taken for the truth.

Are you sure that this is a feeling and not just another thought?

A feeling is a physical sensation in the body; this is just another thought.

The question is, is there an experiencer which experience happen TO?

Sometimes it seems--not necessarily the truth, that there is an experiencer, but that experiencer doesn't seem so intense as before. And, other times, it seems pretty clear--not crystal clear, but seems like there is no experiencER.

How does this mind looks like when you observe it? How big it is? What shape it has? Color? Texture?

I have no proof of any mind, never saw one.