LFG

Welcome to the main forum. When you are ready to start a conversation, register and once your application is processed a guide will come to talk to you.
This is one-on-one style forum, one thread per green member.
User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:43 pm

Hi Giovanni,


my mistake with quotation
I mean this one from your previos message:
“There is only the thought that I end up thinking.”
Let’s find this, which seemingly end up thinking.
Here are you asking, who is doing the thinking?

Yes, who or what is doing the thinking?

Can a thinker be found in experience?

Where ecaxtly is located?



Much love,

Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:39 pm

Hi Luchana,
Yes, who or what is doing the thinking?

Can a thinker be found in the experience?

Where exactly is located?
No one is doing the thinking. There is just thinking. The thought just arises. I see that that is the case. And therefore I cannot pick and choose any thought.

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Wed Apr 29, 2020 1:50 pm

Hi Giovanni,

Please, don't bulk-reply, but reply to every question one-by-one. It’s important to reply every question individually, because each question is a pointer for you where to look.

And do you really look before reply?
I mean you have to look not just one or two quick times, but look and examine at least 50 and more times during the whole day.

The thought just arises. I see that that is the case.

What is it that sees this?

Where is the 'thing' exactly that sees that this is the case?

What is it that sees thoughts?

Where is the seer?

Can it be seen in the way the screen is seen?




It's good that you have an urge to reply quick, but it's essential to really look and check what is going on in experience.
This investigation is very simplе, and it's based on repetition. You have to look at the same thing again and again.



Much love,
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:03 pm

Hi Luchana!

Just so you know am still here. Looking :)
Had a busy two days, but will put together my response for tomorrow morning.

As always thank you for the help

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Fri May 01, 2020 8:14 am

Hi Giovanni,

thank you for letting me know.

All is good. Take your time.

Much love,

Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Fri May 01, 2020 1:42 pm

Hello Luchana,

Here goes :)

What is it that sees this?

There is no seer. Nothing that sees this. Just seeing. There is at points the feeling of an I that does the looking though it is seen to be just a feeling.

Where is the "thing" exactly that sees that this is the case?

There is no "thing" that sees that this is the case. There is only seeing.

As for the location of the seeing it feels tied to what is being looked at. When what is being looked at is a physical sensation of the body, it feels that the looking is occuring through or in the sensation.

Though when looking at something exterior, as a chair, it is not clear where the seeing is.

What is it that sees thoughts?

There is just awareness of the thoughts, awareness that they exist and that they happen.

Where is the seer?

There is no seer to point to, or identify. When looking that which is aware is not found.

Can it be seen in the way the screen is seen?

Here there is uncertainty.

When looking there is no self to point to, there is no self that is seen, unlike the screen which is seen.
Though I wonder if that is because what is seeing cannot see itself. In the same way that an eye cannot look at itself. If that is the case then could it be that there is a seer?

To summarize what I am trying to express in these answers is the following.

In the process of looking, there is no actor that is found. Even when looking for that which is looking, there is no looker to point to, to localize. And when trying to localize the looking itself, it seems to occur where the object of looking is, and with it. I am not sure "object" is the right word as the looking itself seems to so closely connected to what is being looked at.

In seeing all of this the question that arises is, the eye cannot see itself, though there is an eye. What if there is a seer/looker, but it cannot see itself? Forgive me for thinking here.

Thank you

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Sat May 02, 2020 2:50 pm

Hi Giovanni,

There is no seer. Nothing that sees this. Just seeing. There is at points the feeling of an I that does the looking though it is seen to be just a feeling.
Nice looking. When you look at experience you see that the feeling of an I, of a seer is exactly this - a feeling.

Though I wonder if that is because what is seeing cannot see itself. In the same way that an eye cannot look at itself. If that is the case then could it be that there is a seer?

This is an intellectual question, based on assumptions and not facts. And what we are doing here is to compare our beliefs/assumptions to reality, how things actually are to see if those assumptions can stand up to the scrutiny of experience.

So look again for the seer, like you did in your fisrt comment.

Is there a REAL seer in the experiece?

Or it is just a feeling of a seer?


In seeing all of this the question that arises is, the eye cannot see itself, though there is an eye. What if there is a seer/looker, but it cannot see itself? Forgive me for thinking here.

It would be very good if you could put aside ALL intellectualization and just check and observe the immediacy of experience.
Our whole investigation is about checking the validity of these kind of assumptions/beliefs.
We are NEVER relying on any theory, philosophy, speculation, assumption, imagination or thought speculation.
We are just simply look at the 'bare bones', the raw unadulterated experience.

There is just awareness of the thoughts, awareness that they exist and that they happen.

And HOW do you know that?

How is this ‘awareness ot the thoughts’ is perceived exactly?

As a thought? As a sensation? As an imagination?

Can you even find this awareness?

Or you can only THINK of it, and IMAGINE it?


I know that many teachers out there speak about "awareness", but try to completely ignore all you've heard and read. Just explore with curiosity what is here in your direct experience.



Much love
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Sat May 02, 2020 11:21 pm

Hello Luchana :)
I hope you are doing well. Where in the world are you? I am in Kumasi, Ghana.
Is there a REAL seer in the experience? Or it is just a feeling of a seer?
In looking no seer is found, only the feeling of a seer. This is clear whenever looking for a seer occurs.
This is an intellectual question, based on assumptions and not facts.
You mentioned that my initial question is based on assumptions, I think you are right, can you help me figure out what those assumptions are? As at present I am struggling to let go of the question.

You asked me what is that sees the thoughts, and I answered:
There is just awareness of the thoughts, awareness that they exist and that they happen.
And HOW do you know that?
I understand awareness as I understand seeing.

No seer sees the thoughts. Though the thoughts are seen.

No seer sees the laptop. Though the laptop is seen. There is seeing of the laptop.

Nonetheless, when I look for the seeing of the laptop I cannot find it. Unless I accept that it occurs with or through the thing being seen. The seeing and the seen seem to be intertwined, I cannot experience them independently of each other. Though I know there is seeing because I see something.

Hearing in my experience occurs similarly. Hearing is only found in what is heard. And what is heard is only found in hearing.

I perceive the object of my existence, though I do not perceive the perceiving. Does that mean perceiving does not exist? That there is no hearing, no feeling, no perceiving? That would seem strange.
How is this ‘awareness of the thoughts’ is perceived exactly?
I am unsure. I want to say through the thoughts themselves. In the same way that seeing occurs through what is being seen. Though I cannot directly point to perceiving or to seeing, in the same way, that I can point at my foot.
As a thought? As a sensation? As an imagination?
As none of these really. How is seeing perceived? How is hearing perceived? Not as thought, nor as sensation, but maybe through sensation.
Can you even find this awareness?
I don't find it. Though it occurs with/through/in the things I perceive. Just as hearing seems to occur in the sounds.

Can you perceive perceiving? I do not seem to be able to. Does that mean perceiving does not exist? The contrary seems to be true. Perceiving seems to clearly exist. As I perceive things!!!
Or you can only THINK of it, and IMAGINE it?
Outside of this connection between awareness and what we are aware of, I agree I can only think and imagine it. Though in that sense I can only think and imagine seeing, hearing, feeling, and so forth, as well.

One last thing. Should I avoid using the word I when writing? I ask as I feel it helps maintain the solidity of the self, though communicating without it is pretty difficult :)

All the best

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Sun May 03, 2020 8:27 pm

Hi Giovanni,
I hope you are doing well. Where in the world are you? I am in Kumasi, Ghana.
Thank you for asking, yes, I'm good, everything is ok in this part of the world so far. I'm in Sofia, Bulgaria.
You mentioned that my initial question is based on assumptions, I think you are right, can you help me figure out what those assumptions are? As at present I am struggling to let go of the question.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing :-) You don't need to struggle, just check if this assumption/belief is true. For example if you have an assumption/belief that there must be something, which cannot see its self - you have to check if that is true in reality. Again and again. As I wrote in my prevous reply - all our work here is to compare our beliefs/assumptions to reality, how things actually are to see if those assumptions can stand up to the scrutiny of experience.
I understand awareness as I understand seeing. No seer sees the thoughts. Though the thoughts are seen.
We will come back later to this topic of awarenees.

Now let's pay attention to this:
Should I avoid using the word I when writing? I ask as I feel it helps maintain the solidity of the self, though communicating without it is pretty difficult :)
The using of the word I in communication is ok and usfull. And it is not such a big problem.
It's not ok if you leave out the words of I/me/my/mine while it's just an intellectual understanding, but you still feel that there is an I. If you leave these words out then you would give a false expression. I always based my comments and questions on your reply, and if you leave out these words, you would give the impression that you can actually see something experiential, while it's just an intellectual understanding. So my comments and questions could be not too useful.

So I would suggest that you just write in a way that FEELS true in that moment of writing it.

I hope this works for you?


Now let's make an interesting exercise. Let’s do some more investigation in thought and especially thought about “me, “I”, self.

Get a sheet of paper and draw a line that divides that sheet in half. Label one half 'self' and the other side 'other'. Sit down and start a timer for 5 minutes. Every time you have a thought make a mark on the sheet. If that thought is about the self put a mark on the self side, if it’s about something else, mark the other side. If a thought about food occurs due to feeling hungry, mark that on the self side. Any thought that refers back to a self should go on the self side. (I'm bored, I'm tired, is the door locked (my safety) that video was funny (I was amused), my back hurts, I am frightened)

Take you time and let me know what you find.


Much love,
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Tue May 05, 2020 8:35 am

Hello Luchana,
I hope this works for you?
Yep works fine and makes perfect sense.
Take your time and let me know what you find.
I did the exercise and ended up with a sheet of paper with 21 thoughts I could mark on the self, and 9 in the other column.
The thoughts on self to be composed of the larger part. A lot of them being questions along the lines of "Should I do this or that", or expressing doubt as to whether a previous thought was other or self "I do not know".
The other thoughts mainly seemed to be labeling thoughts without judgment as to the quality of the object, for example, "Bird", "sound", as opposed to "beautiful bird", or "sound I like".

All the best,
John

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Tue May 05, 2020 7:01 pm

Hi Giovanni (or John?) :-)
I did the exercise and ended up with a sheet of paper with 21 thoughts I could mark on the self, and 9 in the other column.
The other thoughts mainly seemed to be labeling thoughts without judgment as to the quality of the object, for example, "Bird", "sound", as opposed to "beautiful bird", or "sound I like".
Good. Now let's investigate further these seemingly other thoughts. We are going to investigate that even these thoughts that are not about the self, infact are also about the self, but in the hidden way.

A thought about bird - I am the one seeing the bird.
A thought about sound - I am the one hearing the sound.
A thought about beautiful bird - I am the one that finds the bird beautiful.
A thought about sound I like - here you even mention that I am the one that likes the sound.


And it goes like this endlessly. Almost every thought, if not all, is about the self. Sometimes it might not be as obvious, but when looked at it a bit more closely, it turns out that these narrating thoughts are always about me (in some way or another).

Actually, these narrating thoughts create the illusion of the self.
These thoughts describes ‘what I am’.
They describe my past, present and future.
They produce a story of my life.
They describe how I feel, and what I have to do.
They describe what things in the world and others mean to me and can give to me.
These thoughts define who I am and what is my relationship to the world.

Please read carefully the above sentences. Look if they are really true. Let me know what you find.

So what you put to the other side is actual all about me.

Can you see that even these "other" thoughts are about me, although not overtly?


Much love
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Thu May 07, 2020 10:38 pm

Hi Luchana!
Still here. Had a lot of work this week, but am still looking. Will put my thoughts together tomorrow morning. Just wanted to update you.

Thank you as always

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Fri May 08, 2020 7:09 am

Thank you for letting me know, Giovvani.


Much love,
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.

User avatar
GioB
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 9:35 am

Re: LFG

Postby GioB » Fri May 08, 2020 12:28 pm

Hello Luchana :)

It is seen that the thoughts are all related to the sense of self. In that, they narrate "my" experience, and filter it through beliefs and preconceptions, whilst judging the different parts and choosing its preferences. In this sense, they are about me.

So I agree that these narrating thoughts create the illusion of the self. And that these thoughts describe 'what I am'. They describe my past, present, and future. They create a narrative and describe how I feel and what I have to do. They describe the world around me and give meaning to it. They define who I am and what is my relationship to the world. I agree with all of this.

Giovanni = John, I go by both depending on where in the world I am
All the best

User avatar
Luchana
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:23 pm

Re: LFG

Postby Luchana » Sat May 09, 2020 7:20 am

Hi Giovanni,

It is seen that the thoughts are all related to the sense of self.

Is this comming from experience or it’s rather intellectual?

Let’s dig deeper.

To whom or what do the thoughts appear to precisely?

Can it be found and locate in experience?

And where exactly?



You have to literally LOOK.
Search everywhere for any possibility.
Don't just agree, examine instead.



Much love,
Luchana
Remember. You're dreaming.


Return to “THE GATE”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests