Pay Attention

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

I don't know that there must be. I only know that there are experiences - physical sensations and thoughts. Some of the thoughts are telling me that there must be something.

“thoughts are telling me” – Are thoughts talking to someone?
Where is this me that thoughts are talking to?
Is there a me sitting somewhere, probably in the head or in the chest, listening to what thoughts are telling him?

Firstly, it seems to be behind my eyes somewhere, then in some sensation in the body, then in the body, then in my heart, then it is a point a centre of awareness. These are all ideas, thoughts. I cannot find a thing that experiences outside of the experience itself.

Let’s look at what happens here.

What we are doing is to investigate what it is exactly that is being mistake as a me.
So there is something actual, real here, which is being mistaken as a me.

Just notice, all those areas of the body you mentioned… when it seems that there is a me behind the eyes, then that ‘innocent’, plain sensation of the eyes are being mistaken as an I. And how does this mistake happen? It happens by thoughts making the claim, that ‘it seems like, or feels like that there is a me being my eyes’. And since we never investigate the validity of thoughts, but we accept them at face value… BUMMM! the appearance of an I emerges. Can you see this?

The sensation is real, it's there. But it's NOT the feeling of an I. That's just a wrong label.

It's as big as the experience that's happening, or an invisible point in the centre of the experience. It can't be separated from the experience. Even "as big as the experience and an invisible point" are thoughts about how big it is they are not an experience of it.

Can you notice that this is just another imagination about a supposed experiencer?
What if there is no experiencer whatsoever?

Notice, that language always suggest that there must be a subject and an object. Language even personifies rain :)

It is raining – yes raining is happening, but is there an IT making the rain happen? Is there a rainer?
The wind is blowing – Is there an actual entity called wind, which is doing the blowing?

Experience happen, yes… - but is there someone experiencing it? Or there is only experience happening?

I cannot find any shape or colour for an experiencer, only the shape(s) and colour(s) of the experience, and the felt experience or mood of the experience. What is it that feels happy, sad, cold?

How do you know that there is anyone feeling happy, sad or cold? Do you see that this question is based on the assumption that there must be someone feeling?

Focus on the sensations of the hands.
Sensations are there… but is there a feeler? Where?
Are the sensations are received by someone? Is there a receiver?
Or there is only the sensation… but without happening to anyone or anything… just a free-floating experience?

When there is an emotion, is there anything feeling it?

It is not perceived directly. It's inferred from thoughts and emotions. The emotions seem closer to "me" than the thoughts, more personal.

It seems like = I think that…

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 the I is here." appears as content of a thought.

"I feel like" = "I think that…"

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 closest I come to it is emotions which are experienced and which feel personal to a me, or I think feel personal to me.

How do you know that emotions are personal? What is the experience of ‘something being personal’?
What I am asking here is to check what the word ‘personal’ points to experience. What do you find?

Can actually something to be FELT to be personal... or it's just a thought only with the word 'feels' in it?

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivian,

Are thoughts talking to someone? Where is this me that thoughts are talking to? Is there a me sitting somewhere, probably in the head or chest, listening to what thoughts are telling him?

I can’t find anyone that thoughts are talking to, outside of the thoughts themselves. There are sensations in the front of the head.

...when it seems that there is a me behind the eyes, then that ‘innocent’, plain sensation of the eyes are being mistaken as an I. And how does this mistake happen? It happens by thoughts making the claim, that ‘it seems like, or feels like that there is a me being my eyes’. And since we never investigate the validity of thoughts, but we accept them at face value..BUMMM! The appearance of an I emerges. Can you see this?

I understand it, and I get glimpses of there being just experience with thoughts of an I added. I haven’t yet seen it.

Can you notice that this is just another imagination about a supposed experienced?

Yes I can notice that. Whatever I say about it is going to be imagined in thought.

What if there is no experiencer whatsoever?

Then there is just experience and consciousness is undivided. No subject, no object and nothing in between them.

Experience happens, yes... but is there someone experiencing it? Or is there only experience happening?

I can’t find an experiencer outside of thoughts about experience. I haven’t found an experiencer of those thoughts either.

Focus on the sensations in the hands. Sensations are there... but is there a feeler? Where?

There is tingling, which is felt... only in thoughts as far as I can see.

Are the sensations received by someone? Is there a receiver?

No the are just there.

Or there is only sensations...but without happening to anyone or anything... just a free-floating experience?

Yes, there is just the experience.

How do you know that emotions are personal? What is the experience of ‘something being personal’?

It is when there is a strong reaction to something either liking or disliking.

...check what the word ‘personal’ points to in experience. What do you find?

Liking or disliking.

Can actually something be FELT to be personal... or is it just a thought only with the word ‘feels’ in it?

It is thoughts about ‘I’ liking or not liking something.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

V: How do you know that emotions are personal? What is the experience of ‘something being personal’?

K: It is when there is a strong reaction to something either liking or disliking.

OK. So thoughts ABOUT liking or not liking sometimes appear… but how could thoughts about liking or not liking be personal? In order to be personal, there has to be a person who is ACTUALLY liking or not liking things, and then thinks those thoughts. But is there a person / Keith?

Is there a person, a real entity who has likes and dislikes?

Are the thought of likes and dislikes are thought by someone?

What/what is the thinker of thoughts? Is there one, or only thoughts suggest so?

Is Keith thinking thoughts, or Keith only ever appear AS a thought?

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivien,

Ok, So thoughts ABOUT liking or not liking something appear... but how could thoughts about liking or not liking be personal? In order to be personal, there has to be a person who is ACTUALLY liking or not liking things, and then thinks those thoughts. But is there a person / Keith?

There is attraction to some things and moving away from others e.g. moving away from cold towards heat. This is instinctive, a reflex. Then there are thoughts such as “I am cold... I sat outside for too long... I want to get warm”. The person Keith is made up from thoughts about thoughts. When I look for him in “my” experience there is just experience. Thoughts divide experience into things being experienced and an experiencer. Thoughts label sensations in the body e.g. tightness behind the forehead, or tingling in the belly as “me”.

Is there a person, a real entity who has likes and dislikes?

I keep coming back to there being a unique or particular point of view which includes likes and dislikes that will be different from others, that has different experiences to others. I am aware that these are thoughts about experience, I am not sure how to look at them?

Are thoughts of likes and dislikes thought by someone?

Thoughts arise and thoughts arise from thoughts and stories arise from thoughts about thoughts about thoughts, and central to the stories is the hero, the protagonist, the story-teller. When I look for the story-teller in experience there are sensations and thoughts. The stories are told without anyone telling them, or anyone hearing them. They are endless and beginning less stories.

What/ what is the thinker of thoughts? Is there one, or only thoughts suggest so?

The thinker of thoughts is a product of thought.

Is Keith thinking thoughts, or Keith only ever appear AS a thought?

Keith is not thinking thoughts, Keith is being thought up from thoughts.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

Thoughts divide experience into things being experienced and an experiencer. Thoughts label sensations in the body e.g. tightness behind the forehead, or tingling in the belly as “me”.

Yes. So notice that all division, all separation only ever comes as a thought. In reality / experience there is no division, no separation. There is only a seamless experience as a whole. No parts, no experiencer, just a whole experience.

V: Is there a person, a real entity who has likes and dislikes?

K: I keep coming back to there being a unique or particular point of view which includes likes and dislikes that will be different from others, that has different experiences to others. I am aware that these are thoughts about experience, I am not sure how to look at them?

You look if there is an owner to those likes and dislikes… or they are just conditioned habits, just patterns of thoughts repeatedly coming up in loops? Or maybe there is an owner? Or just thought patterns in loops? Recycled thoughts?

Thoughts arise and thoughts arise from thoughts and stories arise from thoughts about thoughts about thoughts

Can a thought arise from another thought? Or this cause and effect relationship just another story presented by a thought?

It is a closely knit story, isn't it? Language, habits, tendencies, conditions, cause and effect.
If you look at it closely again you will find that all is product of thought, all told and happening in thoughts.

Just notice that thoughts provide all sorts of explanation. They love to explain. They love to give meaning to everything. They love to establish a cause and effect relationship. The babble about all sorts of things.

And we are happy to accept these explanations at face value, since ‘knowing’ how things are gives a (false) sense of security for ME.

Is there a causality in experience?
Is there such a thing as cause and effect?

Despite our impressions, it's evident from experience that we only ever have one thought 'at a time', always meaning right now. Is this clear?

So any association with previous thoughts can only ever be in 'this' thought, rendering any true connection or association between the present thought and others that have already disappeared impossible. Do you see this?

The thinker of thoughts is a product of thought.

Yes, one could that say that. But if we want to be more precise then maybe a thinker not an actual product of a thought, rather there is just thoughts ABOUT a thinker, is that so?

Keith is not thinking thoughts, Keith is being thought up from thoughts.

Can one thought think another thought, like thinking up the thought of Keith?
Can a thought think?
Are thoughts thinking thoughts?

Or this is just another story presented by thoughts to try to explain how things are and trying to establish a case and effect relationship?

What if there is no thinker at all? Not even as a thought?
What if thoughts appear on their own, without anything (not even another thought) making that happen?

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivian,

You look if there is an owner to those likes and dislikes… or they are just conditioned habits, just patterns of thoughts repeatedly coming up in loops? Or maybe there is an owner? Or just thought patterns in loops? Recycled thoughts?

There are thoughts in loops and emotions which are pleasant or unpleasant arising with contact (real or imagined) with things that are liked or not liked.

Can a thought arise from another thought? Or this cause and effect relationship just another story presented by a thought?

A thought can arise in dependence on another thought without being caused by it. If I think I might miss the bus, I might then think that I will be late for work. The thought “I will be late for work” may have arisen without the thought “I might miss the bus” and it might not have arisen even with the thought “I might miss the bus”.

Is there a causality in experience?
Is there such a thing as cause and effect?

I’ve spent some time with these questions. Some things arise in dependence on other things. If I touch a hot stove I feel pain for example. If I close my eyes I no longer see the room. Opening my eyes does not cause the room to be it provides one of the conditions for me to see it.

Despite our impressions, it's evident from experience that we only ever have one thought 'at a time', always meaning right now. Is this clear?

Yes that is clear.

So any association with previous thoughts can only ever be in 'this' thought, rendering any true connection or association between the present thought and others that have already disappeared impossible. Do you see this?

I am not sure that this follows. I see that this thought was not “in” the previous thought and was not an inevitable consequence of it. But if I think about a chair and then I think about sitting in that chair there is an association between those thoughts.

Yes, one could that say that. But if we want to be more precise then maybe a thinker not an actual product of a thought, rather there is just thoughts ABOUT a thinker, is that so?

Yes, that is so.

Can one thought think another thought, like thinking up the thought of Keith?
Can a thought think?
Are thoughts thinking thoughts?

No one thought can not think another thoughts, it cannot think up the thought Keith. “Thinking up the thought Keith” is just a thought.

No a thought cannot think.

And thoughts are not thinking thoughts. It is just another story presented by thoughts to try to explain how things are and to establish a cause and effect relationship.

What if there is no thinker at all? Not even as a thought?
What if thoughts appear on their own, without anything (not even another thought) making that happen?

Then experience would keep rolling on. I don’t know if this is relevant, but I’ll mention it anyway. My dreams have been more vivid to me recently, and the character I take for me in my dreams has been in my thoughts. There are other characters who I take for other people in my life who are obviously not those people. So, neither is the character I take for me, and yet he “feels” like me. Last night I dreamt I was looking in the mirror at myself, and I had a full head of long and curly blond hair (I am bald and my head is shaved). I was looking in two mirrors so I could see the back of my head, and there was no bald patch, which puzzled me, as I have had a bald patch at the back of my head for years. There was a strong sense of dissonance between thinking that I was looking at myself and yet the image not looking like me.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

There are thoughts in loops and emotions which are pleasant or unpleasant arising with contact (real or imagined) with things that are liked or not liked.

So, is there an owner of likes and dislikes, OR.. there are only thoughts ABOUT a me having likes and dislikes?

I am not sure that this follows. I see that this thought was not “in” the previous thought and was not an inevitable consequence of it. But if I think about a chair and then I think about sitting in that chair there is an association between those thoughts.

Your example is a logical reasoning which is coming from analysing the CONTENT of those thoughts. The only seeming link between those thoughts are their contents (what they are about: chair, sitting).

But when we investigate thoughts we don’t analyse the content, rather we are looking for an OBSERVABLE link between the two, not a logical one.

Analysing the content is logical, which is just more thought.

But what I ask you here is something else. You don’t need thoughts for looking. It’s rather the opposite. You just ignore any thought analysis and you just simply look at the gap between the two thoughts to see if you can literally observe a link.

Is there some kind of chain, or rope linking one to the other? Or the seeming link ever come from analysing the content of them, with the conclusion that they are about the same topic?

And thoughts are not thinking thoughts. It is just another story presented by thoughts to try to explain how things are and to establish a cause and effect relationship.

Exactly. And this is where I am pointing at. All cause and effect is just trying to grasp something, and provide a meaning, an explanation to something that is not explainable in reality.

Can you see that all explanation can ever come in a form of a thought?

And what about cause and effect? Is there an EXPERIENCABLE cause and effect, or there are only ever thoughts ABOUT causality?

So, neither is the character I take for me, and yet he “feels” like me.

yes… so a FEELS like might not how it actually is…

There was a strong sense of dissonance between thinking that I was looking at myself and yet the image not looking like me.

This dream is telling. Showing that this inquiry has a deeper effect. It’s gradually sinking in :)

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivien,

So, is there an owner of likes and dislikes, OR.. there are only thoughts ABOUT a me having likes and dislikes?

I can’t find an owner of likes and dislikes in direct experience. There are a lot of thoughts, and associated feelings about likes and dislikes.

Is there some kind of chain, or rope linking one to the other? Or the seeming link ever come from analysing the content of them, with the conclusion that they are about the same topic?

I am trying to observe the gap between thoughts, and I am finding it difficult not to get caught up in the content. The story is, as you said earlier, very close knit. I find it hard (impossible) to experience a thought without its content. Yes the links between thoughts do come from analysing their content and retrospectively grouping or ordering them, and I find it hard to stay with the just looking. I am reminding myself to stay with it and be gentle.

Can you see that all explanation can ever come in a form of a thought?

Yes I can see that, or at least glimpse it. Logically I know that explanation is a thought process, and I am still attached to it.

And what about cause and effect? Is there an EXPERIENCABLE cause and effect, or there are only ever thoughts ABOUT causality?

This I need to sit with for longer. You are talking about direct experience rather than what has been learned from what has been noted as happening (which can also be called experience) and which amounts to thoughts about causality. In any given moment there can only be experience free of all conditions. I get that and I don’t.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

I find it hard (impossible) to experience a thought without its content.

We are not trying to experience a thought without its content. That is impossible, as you’ve discovered. We are just ever noticing that no matter what the thought is about, that is still just a thought, and not reality/experience.

Can there be a thought without a content?

Are thought and content something different? Are there 2 things there?

Yes I can see that, or at least glimpse it. Logically I know that explanation is a thought process, and I am still attached to it.

Who/what is attached to thought based expectations?

Is there a real Keith outside of thoughts, outside of the story, being attached to expectations in the story?

Or being attached to expectations is just another plot in the story/novel where the main character is called Keith?

I can’t find an owner of likes and dislikes in direct experience. There are a lot of thoughts, and associated feelings about likes and dislikes.

Yes. Likes and dislikes only ever appear as content of thoughts. These are part of the story about a character, called Keith.

But is there a real Keith in reality? Is Keith more real than Santa?

What is the difference between having a story about Santa, and thoughts/story about Keith? Is there any?

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivien,
Just a quick question:

Who/what is attached to thought based expectations?

Is there a real Keith outside of thoughts, outside of the story, being attached to expectations in the story?

Or being attached to expectations is just another plot in the story/novel where the main character is called Keith?

Did you mean expectations or explanations? Maybe it doesn’t make much difference.

Keith

[Vivien]

yes, you mentioned explanation, so yes, I should have written explanation

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivien

Can there be a thought without content?

No

Are thoughts and content something different?

No

Are there 2 things there?

No there’s just thoughtscontent.

Who/what is attached to thought based explanations?

Nobody they just keep happening.

Is there a real Keith outside of thoughts, outside of the story, being attached to explanations in the story?

No

Or is being attached to explanations just another plot in the story/novel where the main character is Keith?

Yes it is a part of the story of me/I Keith.

But is there a real Keith in reality? Is Keith more real than Santa?

There is no real Keith outside of the story of thoughts, anymore than there’s a real Santa. There’s a lot more emotional charge around the story of Keith than the story of Santa (these days at least).

What is the difference between having a story about Santa , and thoughts/story about Keith? Is there any?

Just the emotional charge.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,
There is no real Keith

outside

of the story of thoughts, anymore than there’s a real Santa.
And how does it feel to see this? To see that Keith is nothing else than a fiction?

There’s a lot more emotional charge around the story of Keith than the story of Santa (these days at least).

Ok. So with the Keith-story there are associated emotions.

But the question is: Is there someone FEELING those emotions?
What does an emotion happen TO?
Where is the FEELER?

Or the feeler is also just an appearance of a thought… just how the story of the ‘life of Keith’ is built… one thought at a time?

Vivien

[Purpleturtle]

Hi Vivien,

There is on real Keith outside of the story of thoughts anymore than a real Santa. And how does it feel to see this? To see that Keith is nothing else than a fiction.

It is by turns disconcerting and a relief.

Is there someone FEELING those emotions?

Not outside of the thought “I” or “me” e.g. when I ask the question the answer comes “me”. When I look at who or what that is it is a thought about an experience.

What does an emotion happen to?

It just happens without happening to anything. Being in touch with that changes the quality of the experience. It is not being stoical it is just that there is less resistance to what is.

Where is the FEELER?

In thoughts about the feeling.

Or is the feeler also just an appearance of a thought... just how the story of the “life of Keith” is built one thought at a time.

Yes, and the story keeps changing according to the current thought. The thought that it is a story about the same Keith is just another thought, as is the thought that there are multiple Keiths.

Keith

[Vivien]

Hi Keith,

It just happens without happening to anything. Being in touch with that changes the quality of the experience. It is not being stoical it is just that there is less resistance to what is.

Yes! You did a nice investigation :)

V: Where is the FEELER?

K: In thoughts about the feeling.

Is there an actual, real feeler in thoughts, OR.. there is only thoughts ABOUT a feeler?

Just notice that the feeler is only ever appear as a thought assumption, and never as a real entity, not even in thoughts. Can you see this?

Yes, and the story keeps changing according to the current thought. The thought that it is a story about the same Keith is just another thought, as is the thought that there are multiple Keiths.

Aha :)

There is no real Santa outside of stories ABOUT Santa. Then what about Keith? Is there a real Keith outside of stories ABOUT Keith?

Is there any difference between Keith and Santa?

Is Keith more real than Santa?

Or both are just the figment of imagination and both only ever appear as a mental fabrication, as a concept only?

Vivien