Where else is it hiding?

[Vivien]

All right, thank you for letting me know :)

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

So what is that is not happening on its own?

I could not find anything what would not be happening on its own. It is however not exactly an everyday ordinary experience. I have to look on different experiences to see it, but also I feel it's easier and easier to see and more common during the day.

Is it possible that everything (with no exception) is just happening?

Yes. It is not that integrated into a default view, but I feel there is a progress in effortlessness of seeing this.

What do you do right now for this to be?

There is no doing I could see especially for THIS to be. By THIS I mean THIS all, here now experienced via senses. It just is.

Are you doing reading or reading is happening?

Reading is easy to see happening. Attention moves to sight of letters. Moves from left to right in line. Thought of those words appear instantly. It's very magical when observed closely. There is no process of "crunching letters", translating them to words, creating thoughts or anything like that.

Are you doing sitting or sitting is happening?

Sitting is a very passive per se and I cannot find any doing. It's like with being.

Are you doing seeing or seeing is happening?

This I found interesting. Seeing itself is happening. There is a whole field of sight with patterns and shapes and colors. All that being here on its own.

However I realised there is a sense of passive observing receiving "me". There is a thought concept of "me" being the central receiver of all those things happening. It's passive. Non-doer. Observer. When I realized this idea is there, it became way more "real". When I observe it and try to breakdown that "sense of me receiving" - there is an idea/though of me/center and then there are all experiences which give realness feeling to it. The REALNESS is definitely coming from actual direct experiences of sense. But there is idea of "me" receiving them passively link to it.

It's kind of relief I found this sense as I felt that my previous "deconstruction" of "me" is somehow not complete.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

I could not find anything what would not be happening on its own. It is however not exactly an everyday ordinary experience. I have to look on different experiences to see it, but also I feel it's easier and easier to see and more common during the day.

OK. Then please turn your attention to ordinary everyday experience. Whenever it feels like that you control something, then stop for a moment and investigate.

However I realised there is a sense of passive observing receiving "me". There is a thought concept of "me" being the central receiver of all those things happening. It's passive. Non-doer. Observer. When I realized this idea is there, it became way more "real". When I observe it and try to breakdown that "sense of me receiving" - there is an idea/though of me/center and then there are all experiences which give realness feeling to it. The REALNESS is definitely coming from actual direct experiences of sense. But there is idea of "me" receiving them passively link to it.

OK, let’s look at this.

Just sit and notice how thoughts come and go.
There is the knowing of the presence of a thought.
So the thought is known.

But, is there a receiver?
Is there someone who is receiving thought?
If yes, then where is this receiver?

In order to know the presence of a thought, does a receiver is needed?

Find the exact location of this ‘central receiver’.
Where is it?
How big it is?
What shape it has?
Color? Texture? Temperature?

What do you find?

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

OK. Then please turn your attention to ordinary everyday experience. Whenever it feels like that you control something, then stop for a moment and investigate.

I tried and will continue, but it's not easy to spot such moments.

But, is there a receiver?
Is there someone who is receiving thought?
If yes, then where is this receiver?

I'm not sure what to answer.

In order to know the presence of a thought, does a receiver is needed?

I don't know. Yes? No? You are suggesting no. Thoughts are floating around on their own here now. Yes, that is experience how I see it directly. Thoughts, sounds, bodily contractions. Appear, float and pop. No doing, no manipulating.

Find the exact location of this ‘central receiver’.
Where is it?
How big it is?
What shape it has?
Color? Texture? Temperature?

I cannot find a receiver and even if I find it it would not be "me" by definition. So how can I find it if everything I find in direct experience cannot be me? Where do I look? How do I know there is no hidden "me" which causes thought to be coherent, which is represented by patterns of behaviour learned and conditioned.

I guess I have a trouble to completely give up on thinking and simply accept only what is directly seen as only truth. 1+1 is 2. That is true pattern. It's completely constructed - thinking. Verifiable in experience. Replicable. How can I ignore it? I know perception is limited: seeing to visible light, hearing to certain sound frequencies. I also now thinking creates constructions which are made up. But there are some patterns which are reproducible. Not all thinking is wrong about what is. Why do I rely only on this direct experience? I feel like I should be clear as we agreed on the beginning me to look on what is here now, but this seems to be a major thing.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

So how can I find it if everything I find in direct experience cannot be me? Where do I look? How do I know there is no hidden "me" which causes thought to be coherent, which is represented by patterns of behaviour learned and conditioned.

By seeing clearly that all there is to the me is the STORY of me.
You discover that there is no hidden me by discovering what the me is exactly.
Since the me CAN be found. Just not in a way you might think.
Every time when there is a thought with the words of I/me/my/mine, the me is there.
The me is not hidden. It’s at a plain sight.
It’s there as the thought me/I/me/mine.
But it’s so simple that you miss it.
Since you are expecting to find something mysterious, something complicated, something that can stand up to the high standards of the intellect.

I guess I have a trouble to completely give up on thinking and simply accept only what is directly seen as only truth. 1+1 is 2. That is true pattern. It's completely constructed - thinking. Verifiable in experience. Replicable. How can I ignore it?

You are thinking way too much about it :)
We are not saying that thoughts cannot speak of truth. Not at all.
Rather, that a thought content is never an experience.

A thought might say: “there is an apple on the table”.
And this could be a valid and true statement, IF there is an ACTUAL apple, on an ACTUAL table.

But the word ‘apple’ in that thought is not the ACTUAL apple. Just as the word ‘table’ is NOT the table itself.
These are just words, just symbols, but not reality itself.

Can you bite into the thought ‘apple’?
Can you put your plate on the word ‘table’?

Can you see that a thought is never the thing itself?

Can you see that a thought is just a symbolic representation for things, but by themselves they are not actual things, just symbols?

It’s very important that you don’t think about these answers, but actual check them in experience.
Literally bite into the thought ‘apple’.
Literally put your plate or a glass onto the thought ‘table’.
Literally do it.

I’m sending you a private message, please watch out for it.

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

I discovered one thing which was holding this back!

When I was investigating today with question "Is there any me - self here now in the experience", I concluded no I cannot find any. I had a feeling I had some problem to completely surrender to what is here and now. I explored what it is and there was a tension in body and I noticed a series of thought "reality is like this" .. "and it is also like that" ... and I had to laugh. There were thoughts about how reality is, which were kind of a barrier.

I had this idea on what THIS - REALITY is. I had an image in my head. A thought about what it is. How it is. As I investigated in previous days and weeks I created a new concept of what reality is. Somehow along the way, thinking is trying to re-build new concepts about THIS and experience, integrating what I'm seeing. Funny.

Can you see that a thought is just a symbolic representation for things, but by themselves they are not actual things, just symbols?

Yes I can absolutely see that. Thanks I think this is clear now, I probably just needed some reassurance I'm not getting lost :).

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

I had this idea on what THIS - REALITY is. I had an image in my head. A thought about what it is. How it is.

Nice discovery.

So you had glimpses how experience is, and then you switched back to thinking and imagining it, instead of staying with the experience itself.

So you reverted back to thought-land.
Experience is PRIOR TO thoughts.

As soon as you have thought or image of it, you made it into a concept, and lost touch with it.

Somehow along the way, thinking is trying to re-build new concepts about THIS and experience, integrating what I'm seeing.

Seeing cannot be integrated into concepts. Only just more concepts can be integrated to the realm of concepts (thoughts).

Seeing doesn’t need to be integrated, and it’s not possible to integrated into anything.
Seeing of experience stands on its own.

That’s the only thing that actually is.
Everything else is just a concept.

Now let’s go back to the notion of the central receiver.

Where is it?
How do you know that there is a central receiver?
How do you perceive this central receiver?

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

So you had glimpses how experience is, and then you switched back to thinking and imagining it, instead of staying with the experience itself. As soon as you have thought or image of it, you made it into a concept, and lost touch with it.

Exactly! Tricky.

Seeing doesn’t need to be integrated, and it’s not possible to integrated into anything.

Yes, I do understand this. It somehow happened on its own. I'm very analytical person, trained in analysis and always considered my strength to be able to make a story for a situation, lead others by giving them a story what is happening, what they should do, make a sense, make an order and convey it to others. Create a conceptual model and create order. It seems like what I considered my strength is now maybe a hindrance.

Now let’s go back to the notion of the central receiver.

Where is it?

When the attention moves to it, it feels here in the centre. Like in the center of body.

How do you know that there is a central receiver?

It is only in thinking as a thought. This is visible when I take time, calm down and try to move as much attention as possible to the senses, what is here now. Then I see that here and now there is no "me". It is only content of a thought.

How do you perceive this central receiver?

There is a thought. The realness are bodily sensations. Also the feeling of center comes from bodily sensations. In the chest, and head. Somehow it is linked. When I wait to see what comes up when attention is on the "me" thought, there are thoughts of past. What this "me" experienced in past. What "happened" to it. And then bodily sensations.

I think I need to spend more intensive time on doing this exercise, again and again. There is some resistance to give up to what is here and now.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

I think I need to spend more intensive time on doing this exercise, again and again.

Yes, please do so.

There is some resistance to give up to what is here and now.

Is this resistance your doing?
Are you make the thoughts of “I don’t want to give it up” happen?
Do you think this thought?

Is it possible that you have a resistance of letting go of the intellect since you have a strong identification with it (just as you explained your job)?

Is this intellectual quality or strength feels to be who you are?

When the attention moves to it, it feels here in the centre. Like in the center of body.

Please describe to me this center as precisely as you can, without any theory, analysis, just the raw facts of it.

Where is this center exactly in the body?
What is this center made of?
How big it is?
What shape it has?
What color? Texture? Temperature?

And how do you know that it’s a center and not something else, let’s say a muscle tension?

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

I tried to stay as much with here and now as possible today. I realized that it is important to fully sink into it to see unreality of thinking and how "me" exists only there. I've seen the difference between reality of sensations/experiences and unreality of thinking and especially thoughts about those sensations much more clear. That was confusing me in past. I still see I can sink into here and now more. Surrender to it fully. Hence I will continue. I've seen how "me" is only in thinking and there is nothing here and now to be "me". But I want to see it more, I'd like to experience it more clearly.

There is some resistance to give up to what is here and now.

Is this resistance your doing?

No, I'm not seeing anything I would be doing. It happened on its own.

Are you make the thoughts of “I don’t want to give it up” happen?
Do you think this thought?

Yes I've seen this is a made up story. A post-mortem conceptualisation. But all of this writing is - in a way.
Thought just appeared.

Is it possible that you have a resistance of letting go of the intellect since you have a strong identification with it (just as you explained your job)?

Is this intellectual quality or strength feels to be who you are?

Yes I think it's true. I've considered analytical thinking be part of "me". But I've seen this "me" is only in thinking same as the whole story, including "analytical thinking".

Where is this center exactly in the body?
What is this center made of?
How big it is?
What shape it has?
What color? Texture? Temperature?

As I looked I realized that the feeling of center is a thought. Not a true feeling of body like I thought before. Size is also a thought, I've seen how it's imagined like some space within centre of head and chest. There is no sensation in body corresponding to it. There are various bodily sensations, but that's all they are. There is no thought of shape or color or texture or temperature.

And how do you know that it’s a center and not something else, let’s say a muscle tension?

Yes the realness definitely is coming from bodily sensations. Nothing to do with those thoughts.

I've noticed that feeling of "realness" is a good indicator if I'm with actual experiences or lost in thinking.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

You did a nice investigation.

I realized that it is important to fully sink into it to see unreality of thinking and how "me" exists only there. I've seen the difference between reality of sensations/experiences and unreality of thinking and especially thoughts about those sensations much more clear. That was confusing me in past. I still see I can sink into here and now more.

So if the me is just a concept, then what is it that is sinking into the here-and-now?
What is it that is moving between thinking and experiencing?

As I looked I realized that the feeling of center is a thought. Not a true feeling of body like I thought before. Size is also a thought, I've seen how it's imagined like some space within centre of head and chest. There is no sensation in body corresponding to it. There are various bodily sensations, but that's all they are. There is no thought of shape or color or texture or temperature.

Nice looking.

I've noticed that feeling of "realness" is a good indicator if I'm with actual experiences or lost in thinking.

What I sit than that can be with experience or be lost in thought?
Where is this one that is moving between states?

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

you ask great questions.

So if the me is just a concept, then what is it that is sinking into the here-and-now?
What is it that is moving between thinking and experiencing?

To describe experience - either there are experiences of senses, here, now - or there are thoughts."Sinking into here-and-now" is simply that most experiences are of senses and there are few thoughts only. Nothing is necessarily moving between thinking and experiencing when I look. It's more that this experiencing is more about senses and what is going on here OR more about content of thoughts. Most of the time it's content of thoughts.

What is it than that can be with experience or be lost in thought?
Where is this one that is moving between states?

Nothing I can identify. "Being lost in thought" was a bit puzzling. Sometimes it is like an automatic playing of some recording of what happened. Like reliving what happened again. Completely automatic. Other times it is like playing some fictional story of what could happen. I looked and I do not see anyone moving. It's more like there are experiences of senses now or experiencing content of thoughts.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

You did a nice investigation.

Here is an exercise to investigate control a bit more.

Go and make a cup of tea or coffee. As you do this notice whether a 'self' does it. Also notice if there are many or any moments in the whole procedure of going to the kettle, switching it on, getting the cup (etc) when you control the process?

How the decision is made what to make a cup of tea or coffee?
Do you choose putting or not putting milk or suggar into the tea (or coffee)?
Is there a moment of choice or it happens automatically?
Do you 'make the cup of tea (or coffee) happen' or it just happens?
Can a chooser be located?

Vivien

[cojetoto]

Hi Vivien,

This is a good Exercise. In fact I’m playing with this for some time. It’s still only glimpses but when I look on any step, movement it’s always just happening.

How the decision is made what to make a cup of tea or coffee?

There is simply a thought about making a tea.

Do you choose putting or not putting milk or suggar into the tea (or coffee)?

Thought did not occur at all to put there anything.

Is there a moment of choice or it happens automatically?
Do you 'make the cup of tea (or coffee) happen' or it just happens?
Can a chooser be located?

All thoughts appeared on their own and then actions. But I will continue with this exercise as I think this can be seen more clearly as all this happens.

Thanks,
Peter

[Vivien]

Hi Peter,

All thoughts appeared on their own and then actions. But I will continue with this exercise as I think this can be seen more clearly as all this happens.

Yes, please look at this more. You can investigate all sorts of actions, like doing the dishes, washing your hands, walking, ect.

Let me know what you find.

Vivien